NormalizeHEAD main

author: nfenwick <nfenwick@pglaf.org> 2025-01-22 04:56:12 -0800
committer: nfenwick <nfenwick@pglaf.org> 2025-01-22 04:56:12 -0800
commit: 102d55b0692f40ad1b5e87d42880e094699e2181 (patch)
tree: c6f32e30934b47016369c8d995f179123f76c3b8
parent: d60f9f601144bea2b9d9820265ea072d85595639 (diff)
329 files changed, 17 insertions, 26726 deletions
diff --git a/.gitattributes b/.gitattributes
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d7b82bc
--- /dev/null
+++ b/.gitattributes
@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+*.txt text eol=lf
+*.htm text eol=lf
+*.html text eol=lf
+*.md text eol=lf
diff --git a/LICENSE.txt b/LICENSE.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6312041
--- /dev/null
+++ b/LICENSE.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+This eBook, including all associated images, markup, improvements,
+metadata, and any other content or labor, has been confirmed to be
+in the PUBLIC DOMAIN IN THE UNITED STATES.
+
+Procedures for determining public domain status are described in
+the "Copyright How-To" at https://www.gutenberg.org.
+
+No investigation has been made concerning possible copyrights in
+jurisdictions other than the United States. Anyone seeking to utilize
+this eBook outside of the United States should confirm copyright
+status under the laws that apply to them.
diff --git a/README.md b/README.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..dd9232e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/README.md
@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
+Project Gutenberg (https://www.gutenberg.org) public repository for
+eBook #67419 (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/67419)
diff --git a/old/67419-0.txt b/old/67419-0.txt
deleted file mode 100644
index 1e26148..0000000
--- a/old/67419-0.txt
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,11653 +0,0 @@
-The Project Gutenberg eBook of The English Home from Charles I. to
-George IV., by John Alfred Gotch
-
-This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
-most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
-whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
-of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at
-www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you
-will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before
-using this eBook.
-
-Title: The English Home from Charles I. to George IV.
-       Its Architecture, Decoration and Garden Design
-
-Author: John Alfred Gotch
-
-Release Date: February 16, 2022 [eBook #67419]
-
-Language: English
-
-Produced by: MWS, Karin Spence and the Online Distributed Proofreading
-             Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from
-             images generously made available by The Internet
-             Archive/American Libraries.)
-
-*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE ENGLISH HOME FROM CHARLES
-I. TO GEORGE IV. ***
-
-
-
-
-
-    THE ENGLISH HOME
-    FROM CHARLES I. TO GEORGE IV.
-
-  [Illustration:
-
-      FRONTISPIECE
-
-  YORK BUILDINGS, ADELPHI STAIRS AND WATERWORKS.
-
-  (_from a water-colour drawing by Thomas Sandby, R.A._)]
-
-
-
-
-                                  THE
-                             ENGLISH HOME
-
-                     FROM CHARLES I. TO GEORGE IV.
-
-                           ITS ARCHITECTURE,
-                              DECORATION
-                           AND GARDEN DESIGN
-
-                                  BY
-                  J. ALFRED GOTCH, F.S.A., F.R.I.B.A.
-
-        AUTHOR OF “ARCHITECTURE OF THE RENAISSANCE IN ENGLAND,”
-      “EARLY RENAISSANCE ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND,” “THE GROWTH OF
-                       THE ENGLISH HOUSE,” ETC.
-
-                WITH UPWARDS OF 300 ILLUSTRATIONS FROM
-                 PHOTOGRAPHS, DRAWINGS, AND ENGRAVINGS
-
-                          _SECOND IMPRESSION_
-                          _With Corrections_
-
-
-                                LONDON
-                 B. T. BATSFORD LTD., 94 HIGH HOLBORN
-
-
-                    _First Impression, August 1918_
-                    _Second Impression, April 1919_
-
-
-                      PRINTED IN GREAT BRITAIN AT
-                      THE DARIEN PRESS, EDINBURGH
-
-
-
-
-                         LIST OF SUBSCRIBERS.
-
-                  HER MOST GRACIOUS MAJESTY THE QUEEN
-
-
-   The Most Hon. The Marquis of Ailsa
-
-   The Rt. Hon. The Countess of Ancaster
-
-   The Rt. Hon. The Countess of Antrim
-
-   Capt. The Rt. Hon. Viscount Althorp
-
-   The Architectural Association, London, per F. R. Yerbury, Esq.,
-   Secretary
-
-   The Society of Architects, London, per C. McArthur Butler, Esq.,
-   Secretary
-
-   J. R. de M. Abbott, Esq., Acton, W.
-
-   Peter Adam, Esq., J.P., Cairndhu, Kidderminster
-
-   Philip L. Agnew, Esq., J.P., Farthingstone, Northants
-
-   Messrs. Ahrend & Zoon, Booksellers, Amsterdam
-
-   Akademiska Bokhandeln, Helsingfors
-
-   Bryce Allan, Esq., Wemyss Bay, Renfrewshire
-
-   Messrs. E. G. Allen & Son, Ltd., Booksellers, London, W.C.
-
-   J. A. O. Allan, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., Aberdeen
-
-   Arthur Acland Allen, Esq., M.P., L.C.C., London, S.W.
-
-   Walter C. Alston, Esq., Newmarket
-
-   Chas. Ambler, Esq., Bradford, Yorks
-
-   John Ambler, Esq., Baildon, Yorks
-
-   S. Ambler, Esq., Harrogate, Yorks
-
-   Victor Ames, Esq., Thornham, King’s Lynn
-
-   J. A. Amschell, Esq., London, S.W.
-
-   Cecil Bruyn Andrews, Esq., Hove, Sussex
-
-   Messrs. Angus & Robertson, Ltd. Booksellers, Sydney, N.S.W.
-
-   F. H. Anstruther-Gough-Calthorpe, Esq., J.P., Winchfield, Hants
-
-   Lieut.-Col. W. Anstruther-Gray, M.P., Kilmany, Fife
-
-   Harold D. Arbuthnot, Esq., Worplesden
-
-   Messrs. James Archibald & Co., Ltd., Booksellers, Hull
-
-   Mrs. H. R. Armitage, Walton Lea, Warrington
-
-   Chas. Armstrong, Esq., Cambridge
-
-   T. M. E. Armstrong, Esq., Limpsfield, Surrey
-
-   Army & Navy Co-operative Society, Ltd., Book Dept., London, S.W.
-
-   Chas. A. Ashe, Esq.
-
-   The Rev. Dr. Dukinfield Astley, M.A. East Rudham, King’s Lynn
-
-
-   His Grace The Duke of Buccleuch
-
-   The Most Hon. The Marchioness of Bute
-
-   The Rt. Hon. Earl Bathurst
-
-   The Rt. Hon. Earl Beauchamp, K.G.
-
-   Major The Rt. Hon. Lord Blythswood
-
-   The Rt. Hon. Sir John Brunner, Bt. D.L., LL.D.
-
-   Belfast Public Library
-
-   Birmingham University Library, per W. H. Cope, Esq., Librarian
-
-   Bootle Public Library, per C. H. Hunt, Esq., Librarian
-
-   Bradford Public Library, per Butler Wood, Esq., Librarian
-
-   Brighton Public Library, per Henry D. Roberts, M.B.E., Director
-
-   Mrs. J. T. Babington, Great Durnford, Salisbury
-
-   W. St. Clair Baddeley, Esq., J.P., Painswick, Glos.
-
-   Mr. James Bain, Bookseller, London, W.C.
-
-   Mr. Edward Baker, Bookseller, Birmingham
-
-   Messrs. J. Baker & Son, Booksellers, Clifton, Bristol
-
-   Mrs. A. H. Shorland Ball, Burton, Westmorland
-
-   C. H. Barber, Esq., Chelford, Cheshire
-
-   S. Barker, Esq.
-
-   Messrs. Barnicott & Pearce, Booksellers, Taunton
-
-   Captain F. Jardine Barnish, Appleton Cross, nr. Warrington
-
-   Stanley G. R. Barratt, Esq., Totteridge, Herts
-
-   F. C. W. Barrett, Esq., London, S.W.
-
-   Thomas Barrett-Lennard, Esq., D.L. J.P., Horsfold Manor, Norwich
-
-   Ernest R. Barrow, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., London, W.C.
-
-   J. M. Barwick, Esq., Yeadon, nr. Leeds
-
-   C. F. Bates, Esq., Newport, Mon.
-
-   Messrs. Battiscombe & Harris, Ltd., London, W.
-
-   Señor M. Bayes, Bookseller, Barcelona
-
-   A. Chester Beatty, Esq., London, W.
-
-   W. Gedney Beatty, Esq., New York
-
-   J. W. Beaumont, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., Manchester
-
-   A. Stuart Beazley, Esq., Reigate
-
-   George Lord Beeforth, Esq., F.S.A., D.L., J.P., Scarborough
-
-   Walter P. Belk, Esq., Sheffield
-
-   The Rev. Randolph Berens, M.A., London, S.W.
-
-   Mrs. Berkeley, Cotheridge Court, Worcester
-
-   Mrs. Berkeley, Spetchley Park, Worcester
-
-   H. F. M. Berthon, Esq., R.N., H.M.S. Warspite
-
-   The Rev. E. Best-Dalison, M.A., Boxley, Maidstone
-
-   R. A. P. Bevan, Esq., J.P., Cuckfield, Sussex
-
-   Messrs. Bickers & Son, Ltd., Booksellers, London
-
-   Mr. J. G. Bisset, Bookseller, Aberdeen
-
-   George Blackall-Simonds, Esq., Goring Heath, Oxon
-
-   Norman A. Blackburn, Esq., Dewsbury, Yorks.
-
-   Mr. B. H. Blackwell, Bookseller, Oxford
-
-   Thomas R. Blampied, Esq., Samares, Jersey
-
-   Frank Ed. B. Blanc, Esq., Edinburgh
-
-   Edw. T. Boardman, Esq., F.R.I.B.A. Norwich
-
-   Percy Bois, Esq., Godalming, Surrey
-
-   The Rev. Canon Bonney, Sc.D., LL.D., F.R.S., F.S.A., Cambridge
-
-   The Bon Marché, Book Dept., Liverpool
-
-   J. A. N. Booker, Esq., D.L., J.P., Woodfield, nr. Ross,
-   Herefordshire
-
-   John Borie, Esq., London, W.
-
-   F. K. Borrow, Esq., Haslemere, Surrey
-
-   Señor Agustin Bosch, Bookseller, Barcelona
-
-   Hubert S. M. Bourke, Esq., Harlow, Essex
-
-   Messrs. Bowes & Bowes, Booksellers, Cambridge
-
-   Frederick Bradbury, Esq., Sheffield
-
-   R. F. Brain, Esq., Chatham
-
-   Mr. T. A. Braithwaite, Bookseller, Wakefield
-
-   W. R. Branagan, Esq., Fairfield, Liverpool
-
-   Major Leonard Brassey, M.P., Peterborough
-
-   John C. E. Bridge, Esq., J.P., Aylesbury
-
-   Harry Bridson, Esq., M.A., Bolton
-
-   T. R. Bridson, Esq., London, S.W.
-
-   Walter H. Brierley, Esq., F.S.A., F.R.I.B.A., York
-
-   Messs. Bright’s Stores, Ltd., Booksellers, Bournemouth
-
-   Miss Mary Brindle, Polperro, Cornwall
-
-   Messrs. Brintons, Ltd., Kidderminster
-
-   Mrs. G. O. Broms, Dormans Park, Surrey
-
-   The Rev. C. C. Brookes, M.A., Lillington Vicarage, Leamington
-
-   Mrs. Brooks, Clifton, Bristol
-
-   C. W. Wilsone Broun, Esq., Rugeley, Staffs
-
-   W. Langdon Brown, Esq., M.D., London, W.
-
-   W. Talbot Brown, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., Wellingborough
-
-   Mr. William Brown, Bookseller, Edinburgh
-
-   Messrs. Browne & Browne, Ltd., Booksellers, Newcastle-on-Tyne
-
-   Mr. Charles E. Brumwell, Bookseller, Hereford
-
-   John M. Bryce, Esq., Glasgow
-
-   Miss Bulley
-
-   Messrs. J. & E. Bumpus, Ltd., Booksellers, London, W.
-
-   Alfred W. N. Burder, Esq., J.P., F.S.A. Belcombe,
-   Bradford-on-Avon
-
-   Rowland Burdon-Muller, Esq., London, W.
-
-   Messrs. Burleigh’s Library, Booksellers, London, S.W.
-
-   J. W. Stanley Burmester, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., Westminster, S.W.
-
-   Messrs. Burnside, Ltd., Booksellers, Blackheath, S.E.
-
-   Jas. E. Bush, Esq., Melksham, Wilts.
-
-   G. C. Bushy, Esq.
-
-   Mrs. A. J. Agard Butler, Church Langton Rectory, Market
-   Harborough
-
-
-   The Most Hon. The Marquis of Crewe, K.G.
-
-   The Rt. Hon. Earl Curzon of Kedleston, G.C.S.I., G.C.I.E.
-
-   Lady George Campbell
-
-   The Rt. Hon. Sir Fairfax Cartwright, G.C.M.G., G.C.V.O.
-
-   The Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge
-
-   Cardiff Public Libraries, per Harry Farr, Esq., Librarian
-
-   Charterhouse School Library, Godalming, per J. L. Stokes, Esq.,
-   Librarian
-
-   Chelsea Public Libraries, per J. Henry Quinn, Esq., Librarian
-
-   J. T. Cackett, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., Newcastle-on-Tyne
-
-   Frank R. Calburn, Esq., Effingham Manor, Surrey
-
-   Arthur Card, Esq., St. Albans
-
-   Miss M. Smith-Carington, Ashby Folville Manor, Melton Mowbray
-
-   W. D. Caröe, Esq., M.A., F.S.A., F.R.I.B.A., Westminster, S.W.
-
-   B. Carpenter, Esq., London, W.
-
-   Walter J. Carter, Esq., Oxford
-
-   Walter Cave, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., London, W.
-
-   A. Cay, Esq., Leigh Woods, Bristol
-
-   H. E. Chafy, Esq., Rous Lench Court, Evesham
-
-   E. Beresford Chancellor, Esq., M.A., Wargrave, Berks.
-
-   Wm. J. Checkley, Esq., London, N.W.
-
-   Frederick Clark, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., Darlington
-
-   Messrs. Clarke & Satchell, Booksellers, Leicester
-
-   Mrs. C. E. Clayton, Henfield, Sussex
-
-   H. M. Cleminson, Esq., Writtle, Chelmsford
-
-   Messrs. Coates & Bairstow, Booksellers, Huddersfield
-
-   S. Pepys Cockerell, Esq., Kensington
-
-   J. W. Cockrill, Esq., A.R.I.B.A., M.I.C.E., Gt. Yarmouth
-
-   Mons. E. Coenen, Sous-Intendant Militaire Belge, Bourbourg,
-   France
-
-   Marcus E. Collins, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., London, E.C.
-
-   Messrs. Combridge, Ltd., Booksellers, Dublin
-
-   Mr. J. G. Commin, Bookseller, Exeter
-
-   R. C. de la Condamine, Esq., Chelsea
-
-   The Rev. A. H. Coombes, M.A., Hurstpierpoint College, Sussex
-
-   Edwin Cooper, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., London, W.C.
-
-   Mr. Ernest Cooper, Bookseller, Bournemouth
-
-   L. A. Cooper, Esq., Ealing, W.
-
-   G. Wilfred Copeland, Esq., Basford, Stoke-on-Trent
-
-   Ronald Copeland, Esq., Tittensor Chase, Stoke-on-Trent
-
-   Messrs. Cornish Bros., Ltd., Booksellers, Birmingham
-
-   Messrs. James Cornish & Sons, Booksellers, Liverpool
-
-   Messrs. J. E. Cornish, Ltd., Booksellers, Manchester
-
-   Reginald Cory, Esq., Duffryn, nr. Cardiff
-
-   Country Life, Ltd., London, W.C.
-
-   Alfred W. Cox, Esq., Glencarse, Perthshire
-
-   Frank Crawley, Esq., M.D., Dublin
-
-   G. A. Crawley, Esq., London, S.W.
-
-   Miss Natalie de M. Croft, Ware, Herts
-
-   W. J. Croome, Esq., Feltrim, Weston-super-Mare
-
-   Fred. H. Crossley, Esq., Chester
-
-   John K. Currie, Esq., Billingham, Stockton-on-Tees
-
-   Laurence Currie, Esq., M.A., J.P., Farnborough, Hants
-
-   Mrs. Cuthbert, Beaufront Castle, Hexham
-
-
-   His Highness Prince Frederick Duleep Singh, M.V.O.
-
-   The Most Hon. Flora, Marchioness of Dufferin and Ava
-
-   The Rt. Hon. Earl of Donoughmore
-
-   Lady Eva Dugdale
-
-   The Rt. Hon. Lady D’Abernon
-
-   The Rt. Hon. Lord Desborough, K.C.V.O.
-
-   Sir Thomas L. Devitt, Bt.
-
-   Deptford Public Libraries, per F. J. Peplow, Esq., Librarian
-
-   National Library of Ireland, Dublin
-
-   Dundee Public Library, per A. H. Millar, Esq., LL.D., Librarian
-
-   Hylton B. Dale, Esq., London, W.C.
-
-   T. W. Dannatt, Esq., Blackheath
-
-   T. J. Daniel, Esq., Moseley, Birmingham
-
-   William J. Dargan, Esq., M.D., Dublin
-
-   Francis Hastings Dauney, Esq., Ryde, I. of W.
-
-   Edward O. Davey, Esq., Dunmow, Essex
-
-   E. Guy Dawber, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., London, W.
-
-   The Rev. William Dawson, M.A., Loughton, Essex
-
-   Messrs. Wm. Dawson & Sons, Ltd., Booksellers, London, E.C.
-
-   W. M. Dean, Esq., Sunningdale, Berks
-
-   Messrs. Deighton, Bell & Co., Ltd., Booksellers, Cambridge
-
-   Messrs. A. & F. Denny, Booksellers, London, W.C.
-
-   H. Llewellyn Dent, Esq., Kew
-
-   Devonshire Library, Ltd., Booksellers, Buxton
-
-   T. F. G. Dexter, Esq., B.A., B.Sc., Perranporth, Cornwall
-
-   Edward Percival Dickin, Esq., Brightlingsea
-
-   Messrs. B. Diver & Son, Booksellers, Cambridge
-
-   Mrs. Dodsley, Mansfield, Notts
-
-   Mrs. Donaldson-Hudson, Market Drayton
-
-   Messrs. Aitken Dott & Son, Booksellers, Edinburgh
-
-   Messrs. Douglas & Foulis, Booksellers, Edinburgh
-
-   Mrs. Edward Douty, Clifford Manor, nr. Stratford-on-Avon
-
-   Ernest Dunkels, Esq., Maidenhead
-
-   James B. Dunn, Esq., A.R.S.A., F.R.I.B.A., Edinburgh
-
-   Ralph S. Dutton, Esq., Alresford, Hants
-
-   Mr. W. Dymock, Bookseller, Sydney, N.S.W.
-
-
-   Royal Scottish Museum, Edinburgh
-
-   Major Cyril Earle, T.D., Hull
-
-   The Rev. H. V. S. Eck, M.A., Ardeley Vicarage, Hertfordshire
-
-   Colonel Robt. W. Edis, C.B., Great Ormesby, Norfolk
-
-   The Educational Depository, Booksellers, Dublin
-
-   Mr. Francis Edwards, Bookseller, London, W.
-
-   Major J. Edward Elin, London, W.
-
-   The Rev. Prof. Henry Ellershaw, M.A., Durham
-
-   Mr. Andrew Elliott, Bookseller, Edinburgh
-
-   Colonel W. Elliott, Sutton Valence, Maidstone
-
-   Geoffrey Ellis, Esq., St. Leonards-on-Sea
-
-   H. C. Ellis, Esq., Hemel Hempstead
-
-   Captain H. C. Ellis, Jarvis Brook, Sussex
-
-   John Every, Esq., Lewes, Sussex
-
-
-   Miss M. Fairholme, Mitchelstown Castle, Co. Cork
-
-   A. Douglas Farmer, Esq., Windham Club, St. James’, S.W.
-
-   Miss Margaret Farnley-Smith, Sherborne, Dorset
-
-   Lionel Faudel-Phillips, Esq., Braintree, Essex
-
-   J. E. Fawcett, Esq., J.P., Farnham, Knaresborough, Yorks
-
-   Major Guy Feilden, Witney, Oxon
-
-   Miss V. M. Feilden, Bebington, Cheshire
-
-   P. H. Feilding, Esq., Chiddingly, Sussex
-
-   F. Fenwick, Esq., Wolsingham, Durham
-
-   Ivor A. B. Ferguson, Esq., London
-
-   Lieut. F. E. Fetherstonhaugh, R.N.V.R., North Berwick, Scotland
-
-   E. Willoughby Firth, Esq., J.P., Hope, nr. Sheffield
-
-   Major Benton Fletcher, Cobham, Surrey
-
-   Miss M. Fletcher, Newnham College, Cambridge
-
-   Messrs. Flooks & Manning, Booksellers, Melksham
-
-   Mrs. Follett, Thetford, Norfolk
-
-   Chas. W. Forbes, Esq., D.L., J.P., of Callendar, Falkirk,
-   Scotland
-
-   Mrs. James Forman, Nottingham
-
-   Mr. Robert Forrester, Bookseller, Glasgow
-
-   George Fottrell, Esq., Dublin
-
-   Mr. E. S. Fowler, Bookseller, Eastbourne
-
-   T. Musgrave Francis, Esq., D.L., J.P. Quy Hall, Cambridge
-
-   Herbert Freyberg, Esq., F.S.I., M.S.A., London, S.W.
-
-   Mr. C. E. Fritze, Bookseller, Stockholm
-
-   T. W. Fry, Esq., J.P., F.S.A., Darlington
-
-   Major Robert F. Fuller, J.P., Great Chalfield, Wilts
-
-
-   Lady Henry Grosvenor
-
-   Sir Ernest Goodhart, Bt.
-
-   Sir William Garforth, LL.D.
-
-   Galignani Library, Booksellers, Paris
-
-   Messrs. Galloway & Porter, Booksellers, Cambridge
-
-   Arthur Galton, Esq., M.A., Bourne, Lincs.
-
-   Ewan Cameron Galton, Esq., J.P., Eynsham, Oxon
-
-   Miss Clare Galwey, Monkstown, co. Dublin
-
-   Mr. Alex. Gardner, Bookseller, Paisley
-
-   Mrs. Garnett, Leckhampton, Glos.
-
-   Major S. H. Garrard, Daventry, Northants
-
-   Francis N. A. Garry, Esq., London
-
-   MM. Georg & Co., Librairie, Geneva
-
-   Messrs. William George’s Sons, Booksellers, Bristol
-
-   Edward M. Gibbs, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., Sheffield
-
-   Lt.-Colonel George A. Gibbs, M.P., Bristol
-
-   H. Martin Gibbs, Esq., J.P., Flax-Bourton, Somerset
-
-   John Gibson, Esq., London, E.C.
-
-   Messrs. H. M. Gilbert & Son, Booksellers, Southampton
-
-   Messrs. Godfrey Giles & Co., London, W.
-
-   Francis V. Gill, Esq., Bradford, Yorks
-
-   Henry Neville Gladstone, Esq., J.P., Burton Manor, Chester
-
-   Maurice Glyn, Esq., J.P., Much Hadham, Herts.
-
-   Walter H. Godfrey, Esq., F.S.A., London, S.W.
-
-   Messrs. W. E. & J. Goss, Booksellers, Kettering
-
-   Mr. H. J. Goulden, Bookseller, Canterbury
-
-   Prof. Chas. Gourlay, Esq., B.Sc., A.R.I.B.A., F.S.A. Scot.,
-   Glasgow
-
-   W. V. S. Gradwell-Goodwin, Esq., J.P., Silverdale, Staffordshire
-
-   Mrs. Robert Grant, Lingfield, Surrey
-
-   Trevor Grant, Esq., London, W.
-
-   H. St. George Gray, Esq., Taunton Castle, Somerset
-
-   T. Grazebrook, Esq., The Dene, nr. Stourbridge
-
-   Frank Green, Esq., F.S.A., Treasurer’s House, York
-
-   Benson Greenall, Esq., Lt. Cheshire Regt., London, E.C.
-
-   O. W. Greene, Esq., Beckenham, Kent
-
-   Messrs. Greene’s Library, Dublin
-
-   Hubert J. Greenwood, Esq., J.P., L.C.C., F.S.A., London, S.W.
-
-   Mr. George Gregory, Bookseller, Bath
-
-   John R. Gregory, Esq., London, W.
-
-   Major L. Gregson, London, S.W.
-
-   E. Hyla Greves, Esq., M.D., Bournemouth
-
-   Geo. J. Gribble, Esq., J.P., London
-
-   J. Henry Griffith, Esq., Llanbedr, Merioneth.
-
-   Percival D. Griffiths, Esq., Sandridge, Herts.
-
-   W. H. Grinstead, Esq., Eastbourne
-
-   Mrs. Gerald Guinness, Chippenham, Wilts.
-
-   Lieut. R. S. Guinness, R.N.V.R., H.M.S. “Monarch”
-
-   Mr. N. J. Gumperts, Bookseller, Gothenburg
-
-   Dr. Gunther, Hampton Wick, Kingston-on-Thames
-
-   Mrs. Reginald Gurney, Norwich
-
-
-   The Rt. Hon. Viscount Halifax, M.A., F.S.A.
-
-   The Rt. Hon. Lord Hastings
-
-   The Rt. Hon. F. Leverton Harris, M.P.
-
-   Sir William St. John Hope, Litt.D., D.C.L., M.A.
-
-   The Rev. Andrew Halden, Inverkeilor, Forfarshire
-
-   Charles A. H. Hall, Esq., J.P., Basingstoke
-
-   Ernest B. Hall, Esq., Market Drayton, Staffs.
-
-   John Hall, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., Sunderland
-
-   Mr. Fred. Hanna, Bookseller, Dublin
-
-   George Hampton, Esq., Lingham, Wimborne, Dorset
-
-   Mrs. Hargreaves, Bury St. Edmunds
-
-   R. L. Harmsworth, Esq., M.P., London, W.
-
-   W. H. Harrison, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., Westminster, S.W.
-
-   Mr. W. Harrison, Bookseller, Ipswich
-
-   Messrs. Harrison & Sons, Booksellers, London, W.
-
-   Ernest Hartland, Esq., M.A., F.S.A., J.P., Chepstow, Mon.
-
-   Messrs. Hatchards, Booksellers, London, W.
-
-   Lt.-Colonel Hawkshaw, Liphook, Hants.
-
-   E. S. Haynes, Esq., London, W.
-
-   A. R. Hayward, Esq., Misterton, Somerset
-
-   Messrs. Aldam Heaton & Co., Ltd., London, W.
-
-   Messrs. W. Heffer & Sons, Ltd., Booksellers, Cambridge
-
-   Andrew G. Henderson, Esq., A.R.I.B.A., Glasgow
-
-   Mrs. A. Heneage, Prestbury, Glos.
-
-   Claud W. Heneage, Esq., London
-
-   Messrs. John Heywood, Ltd., Booksellers, Manchester
-
-   Mrs. Hicks-Beach, Witcombe Park, nr. Gloucester
-
-   G. Higgs, Esq., London, W.C.
-
-   E. D. Hildyard, Esq., Kirby Moorside, Yorkshire
-
-   Chas. H. Hill, Esq., J.P., Woodborough Hall, Notts.
-
-   Mr. F. R. Hockliffe, Bookseller, Bedford
-
-   Victor T. Hodgson, Esq., F.S.A., Harpenden, Herts.
-
-   Mrs. George Holdsworth, London, W.
-
-   Mrs. Jaqueline Hope-Nicholson, Chelsea, S.W.
-
-   Donald Hopewell, B.A., LL.B., Old Basford, Nottingham
-
-   Mr. Hugh Hopkins, Bookseller, Glasgow
-
-   Chas. H. Hopwood, Esq., F.S.A., Stamford Hill, N.
-
-   Mrs. Horan, Lamberhurst, Kent
-
-   P. Morley Horder, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., London, S.W.
-
-   Percy P. Hore, Esq., M.Inst.C.E., Streatham, S.W.
-
-   C. H. St. John Hornby, Esq., London
-
-   A. B. Horne, Esq., Balcombe
-
-   E. J. Horniman, Esq., J.P., London
-
-   J. P. Hornung, Esq., J.P., Horsham, Sussex
-
-   T. C. Horsfall, Esq., Swanscoe Park, nr. Macclesfield
-
-   Mr. Bertram Hosier, Bookseller, Sheffield
-
-   H. W. Paget Hoskyns, Esq., J.P., Crewkerne, Somerset
-
-   F. T. S. Houghton, Esq., Birmingham
-
-   Messrs. Edward Howell, Ltd., Booksellers, Liverpool
-
-   George Hubbard, Esq., F.S.A., F.R.I.B.A., London, E.C.
-
-   H. A. Hubbersty, Esq., J.P., Buxton, Derbyshire
-
-   Mr. E. F. Hudson, Bookseller, Birmingham
-
-   C. Lang Huggins, Esq., J.P., Hadlow Grange, nr. Uckfield
-
-   Maurice Hulbert, Esq., J.P., A.R.I.B.A., Ealing, W.
-
-   Sydney Humphries, Esq., Lamport Hall, Northamptonshire
-
-   Mrs. F. J. C. Hunter, Bystock, Exmouth
-
-   Jas. Kennedy Hunter, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., Ayr
-
-   John Hunter, Esq., Belper
-
-   Messrs. Hunter & Longhurst, Booksellers, London, E.C.
-
-   W. Hutchinson, Esq., Liverpool
-
-
-   Mrs. Florence H. S. Iliffe, Foxcombe Hill, Oxford
-
-   Mrs. Alfred Illingworth, Daisy Bank, Bradford
-
-   Major Douglas Illingworth, Eastcote, Middlesex
-
-   Mrs. Harry Illingworth, Wydale, Brompton, Yorks.
-
-   W. L. Ingle, Esq., Morley Grange, Churwell
-
-   Ernest Innes, Esq., London
-
-   Captain A. Linton Iredale, Newhaven
-
-
-   Lady Jenner
-
-   Col. Sir Herbert Jekyll, K.C.M.G.
-
-   Mr. Richard Jackson, Bookseller, Leeds
-
-   W. Geoffrey Jackson, Esq., Witley, Surrey
-
-   Messrs. Jackson & Fox, Halifax
-
-   W. A. James, Esq., Maidenhead
-
-   George Jameson, Esq., Raheny, Co. Dublin
-
-   Messrs. Jarrold & Sons, Ltd., Booksellers, Norwich
-
-   Mrs. Jarvis, Doddington Hall, Lincoln
-
-   Mrs. Leo Jenner, Avebury, Wilts.
-
-   Walter Johnston, Esq.
-
-   Lieut. C. A. Johnstone, K.S.L.I., Oswestry, Shropshire
-
-   C. Sydney Jones, Esq., Princes Park, Liverpool
-
-   E. Peter Jones, Esq., J.P., Greenbank, Chester
-
-   Frederick Jones, Esq., East Hoathly, Sussex
-
-   H. E. Jones, Esq., Mayfield, Sussex
-
-   Ronald P. Jones, Esq., M.A., London, W.C.
-
-   W. Campbell Jones, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., London, E.C.
-
-   Messrs. Jones & Evans’ Bookshop Ltd., London, E.C.
-
-   W. Joynson-Hicks, Esq., M.P., London, S.W.
-
-
-   The Rt. Hon. Lord Kenyon
-
-   The Rt. Hon. Lady Kinloch
-
-   Sir Charles Knightley, Bt., D.L., J.P.
-
-   Kensington Public Libraries, per Herbert Jones, Esq.
-
-   Walter K. Kaye, Esq., M.I.Mech.E. Harrogate
-
-   James Kent, Esq., Edenbridge, Kent
-
-   John Keppie, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., Glasgow
-
-   Kettering Book Club, per The Rev. A. K. Pavey, M.A.
-
-   Harold C. King, Esq., Westminster
-
-   Captain Sydney D. Kitson, F.S.A., F.R.I.B.A., Kirklington, Notts.
-
-   Frederick A. Konig, Tyringham, Bucks.
-
-   Messrs. H. A. Kramers & Son, Ltd., Booksellers, Rotterdam
-
-   M. Kundig, Libraire, Geneva
-
-
-   Major The Rt. Hon. Viscount Lascelles, D.S.O.
-
-   The Rt. Hon. Lady Leconfield
-
-   The Rt. Hon. Lord Leith of Fyvie
-
-   The Rt. Hon. Lord Leverhulme
-
-   The Hon. Claud Lambton
-
-   The Hon. Mrs. Archibald Langman
-
-   The Hon. Irwin B. Laughlin
-
-   Sir Edwin L. Lutyens, A.R.A., F.R.I.B.A.
-
-   The Leeds Library, Leeds
-
-   Leeds Public Libraries, per Thomas W. Hand, Esq., City Librarian
-
-   Leeds & West Yorkshire Architectural Society, per G. J. Coombs,
-   Esq., A.R.C.A.
-
-   Leicestershire Society of Architects, per F. B. Cooper, Esq.,
-   A.R.I.B.A.
-
-   Leicestershire Book Society, per Major W. J. Freer, V.D., D.L.,
-   F.S.A.
-
-   Liverpool Public Libraries, per G. T. Shaw Esq., Librarian
-
-   The London Library, per C. T. Hagberg Wright, Esq., LL.D.
-
-   Charles E. Lamb, Esq., Kettering
-
-   R. E. Lambert, Esq., Battle, Sussex
-
-   Messrs. Lamley & Co., Booksellers, Kensington, S.W.
-
-   Mrs. Laycock, Wiseton, Bawtry, Yorks.
-
-   Stanley H. le Fleming, Esq., D.L., J.P., Ambleside
-
-   Frank H. Lehany, Esq., London, N.E.
-
-   Mrs. Gerard Leigh, London, W.
-
-   Walter L. Levett, Esq., Monmouth
-
-   Walter Lewis, Esq., Redditch
-
-   Messrs. Liberty & Co., Ltd., London
-
-   Captain C. O. Liddell, Chepstow
-
-   Mrs. Linley-Howlden, Freshford, Somerset
-
-   F. H. Livens, M.Inst.C.E., Lincoln
-
-   Nathaniel Lloyd, Esq., O.B.E., Great Dixter, Northiam
-
-   James Lochhead, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., Hamilton
-
-   Mr. Morton Loder, Bookseller, Woodridge
-
-   London Literary Lounge, London, W. per James Truslove, Esq.
-
-   The Rev. A. M. Luckock, M.A., Titchmarsh, Thrapston
-
-   G. D. Lumb, Esq., F.S.A., Leeds
-
-
-   The Rt. Hon. The Countess of Mount-Edgcumbe
-
-   The Rt. Hon. Lady Monk Bretton
-
-   The Hon. Lady Miller
-
-   The Rt. Hon. H. D. McLaren, M.P.
-
-   Sir Kenneth Matheson, Bt., D.L., J.P.
-
-   A. C. Macdonald, Esq., J.P., Ipley Manor, Marchwood, Hants.
-
-   J. W. Macfie, Esq.
-
-   James McLachlan, Esq., Edinburgh
-
-   Messrs. James Maclehose & Sons, Booksellers, Glasgow
-
-   S. A. Macleish, Esq., Liverpool
-
-   George A. Macmillan, Esq., D.Litt., J.P., London, S.W.
-
-   Messrs. Macniven & Wallace, Booksellers, Edinburgh
-
-   Donald D. Macpherson, Esq., Radbrook Hall, Salop
-
-   Major F. Maitland, R.G.A., Nodes Point Battery, St. Helen’s, I.
-   of W.
-
-   Lieut. S. Mallinson, Leeds
-
-   Colonel E. W. Margesson, Worthing
-
-   A. E. Marlow, Esq., Preston Deanery Hall, Northampton
-
-   Mrs. Henry W. Marsh, Warwick Castle
-
-   R. T. Marsh, Esq., J.P., Kenyon, Lancs.
-
-   Messrs. Marsh, Jones & Cribb, Leeds
-
-   Messrs. H. H. Martyn & Co., Ltd., Cheltenham
-
-   T. P. Marwick, Esq., A.R.I.B.A., Edinburgh
-
-   H. R. Maunsell, Esq., Dublin
-
-   Messrs. Mawson, Swan, & Morgan, Booksellers, Newcastle-on-Tyne
-
-   Medens Bokhandels, A.B., Gothenburg
-
-   Melville & Mullen Propty, Ltd., Booksellers, Melbourne
-
-   Claude Miller, Esq., London, W.
-
-   James Miller, Esq., A.R.S.A., F.R.I.B.A., Glasgow
-
-   Lt.-Col. David Milne-Home of Wedderburn, D.L., J.P.,
-   Berwick-on-Tweed
-
-   Messrs. Minchin & Gibbs, Booksellers, Gloucester
-
-   Messrs. Minshull & Meeson, Booksellers, Chester
-
-   Major Charles Mitchell, J.P., Cornhill-on-Tweed
-
-   F. C. Montague, Esq., Oxford
-
-   F. Frankfort Moore, Esq., Lewes, Sussex
-
-   William Mordey, Esq., King’s Acre, Newport, Mon.
-
-   Reginald Morphew, Esq., Polperro, Cornwall
-
-   J. H. Morrison, Esq.
-
-   William J. Moscrop, Esq., F.R.I.B.A. Darlington
-
-   Thomas Muddiman, Esq., London
-
-   Messrs. Wm. Mullan & Son, Booksellers, Belfast
-
-   D. L. Murdoch, Esq., Mauchline, Ayrshire
-
-   Mrs. Evelyn Murray, London, W.
-
-   John Murray, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., London, S.W.
-
-   H. E. C. Murton, Esq., Jesmond, Newcastle-on-Tyne
-
-
-   The Rev. The Most Hon. The Marquis of Normanby, D.L., J.P.
-
-   Lady Henry Nevill
-
-   The Rt. Hon. Lady Newborough
-
-   The Hon. Harold Nicholson
-
-   Newcastle-upon-Tyne Public Library per Basil Anderton, Esq.,
-   M.A.
-
-   Northampton Public Library, per Reginald W. Brown, Esq.
-
-   Nottingham School of Art, per Joseph Harrison, Esq., A.R.C.A.
-
-   Miss C. Clare Nauheim, London, N.W.
-
-   Mrs. Nelson, Sandford St. Martin, Oxon
-
-   The Rev. Hugh Nelson-Ward, M.A. Wicken, Stony-Stratford
-
-   Captain T. N. C. Nevill, Bramall Hall nr. Stockport
-
-   Arthur C. Newsum, Esq., Lincoln
-
-   Messrs. Nicholls & Jones, High Wycombe
-
-   Monsieur Edouard Isidore Niffle, U.P.A. Lg., London, E.C.
-
-   Mr. Martinus Nijhoff, Bookseller, The Hague
-
-   Nordiska Kompaniet, Booksellers, Stockholm
-
-   E. Norkett, Esq., Art Metal Works, Maidenhead
-
-   Simeon H. Norman, Esq., Burgess Hill, Sussex
-
-
-   Lady Beatrice Ormsby-Gore
-
-   Lady Christian Ogilvy
-
-   Sir John R. O’Connell, M.A., LL.D.
-
-   The Ven. Archdeacon of Oakham, Uppingham
-
-   George H. Oatley, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., Bristol
-
-   Maurice A. Ockenden, Esq., M.I.Mech.E., F.G.S., London
-
-   John A. O’Connell, Esq., Cork
-
-   John H. Oglander, Esq., D.L., J.P. F.S.A., Brading, I. of W.
-
-   Basil Oliver, Esq., A.R.I.B.A., Dunfermline
-
-   Mr. S. Opdenberg, Bookseller, The Hague
-
-   H. Ormerod, Esq., Brighouse, Yorks
-
-   Mr. John Orr, Bookseller, Edinburgh
-
-   Joseph Oswald, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., Newcastle-on-Tyne
-
-   Mrs. E. Grace Outhwaite, Roxford, Marton, Yorks.
-
-   Mr. George E. Over, Bookseller, Rugby
-
-   Segar Owen, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., Warrington
-
-   Captain Tudor Owen, London, W.
-
-
-   Her Grace The Duchess of Portland
-
-   The Rt. Hon. The Earl of Powis
-
-   Paisley Public Library, per John Renfrew, Esq., Librarian
-
-   F. E. Pagniez, Esq., Leigh-on-Sea
-
-   Messrs. Parker & Son, Booksellers, Oxford
-
-   Edmund Parsons, Esq., Tyhurst, Andover
-
-   Messrs. E. Parsons & Sons, Booksellers, London, S.W.
-
-   Mrs. Paynter, Amlwch, N. Wales
-
-   James Bernard Paynter, Esq., Yeovil
-
-   Messrs. Percival Pearse, Ltd., Booksellers, Warrington
-
-   Herbert Pearson, Esq., Wokingham, Berks.
-
-   Mrs. Albert J. Pell, Bury St. Edmunds
-
-   Herbert S. Pepper, Esq., Birmingham
-
-   F. Thorpe Perry, Esq., Carcolston, Notts.
-
-   Mrs. J. M. Perry, Nottingham
-
-   J. T. Perry, Esq., Nottingham
-
-   Messrs. Perry & Co., London, W.
-
-   Charles H. Petter, Esq., Ilfracombe
-
-   Mrs. Petty, Crosshills, nr. Keighley
-
-   Messrs. Philipson & Golder, Booksellers, Chester
-
-   S. Perkins Pick, Esq., F.S.A., F.R.I.B.A., Leicester
-
-   Robert Young Pickering, Esq., Conheath, Dumfries
-
-   H. H. Pillans, Esq., Edinburgh
-
-   Ernest Pitman, Esq., London, W.C.
-
-   Francis W. Pixley, Esq., J.P., F.S.A. Wooburn House, Wooburn,
-   Buckinghamshire
-
-   Walter Plomer-Young, Esq., London, S.W.
-
-   John Poland, Esq., F.R.C.S., Seal, Kent
-
-   Lt.-Col. D’Arcy Power, R.A.M.C. (T.), F.S.A., London, W.
-
-   Mr. Fred. Power, Bookseller, Bradford
-
-   Mr. G. A. Poynder, Bookseller, Reading
-
-   E. R. Pratt, Esq., J.P., D.L., C.C., Downham, Norfolk
-
-   Messrs. Christopher Pratt & Sons, Ltd., Bradford
-
-   A. N. Prentice, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., London, W.C.
-
-   Mrs. Price, Coggeshall, Essex
-
-   L. L. Price, Esq., M.A., Fellow of Oriel College, Oxford
-
-   B. C. Prichard, Esq., Cambridge
-
-   J. Sutcliffe Pyman, Esq., London, W.
-
-
-   Messrs. Bernard Quaritch, Ltd., Booksellers, London, W.
-
-   C. H. B. Quennell, Esq., F.R.I.B.A. Westminster, S.W.
-
-
-   The Rt. Hon. The Earl of Rocksavage
-
-   Sir Herbert Raphael, Bt., M.P., J.P.
-
-   Royal Institute of British Architects, per Rudolf Dircks, Esq.,
-   Librarian
-
-   Mrs. Ratcliffe, Prestbury, Glos.
-
-   Willingham Franklin Rawnsley, M.A., J.P., Shamley Green
-
-   Thomas Rayson, Esq., A.R.I.B.A., Witney, Oxon
-
-   R. Charles Reed, Esq., Bourne End, Bucks.
-
-   Messrs. Hugh Rees, Ltd., Booksellers, London, W.
-
-   Herbert K. Reeves, Esq., Leatherhead
-
-   The Rev. Oswald J. Reichel, M.A., F.S.A., Lympston, Devon
-
-   Captain F. H. Reynard, Bedale, Yorks.
-
-   Mrs. Reynolds, Bloxham, nr. Banbury
-
-   E. F. Reynolds, Esq., Lic.R.I.B.A., Birmingham
-
-   Mrs. H. Davis-Richter, London, S.W.
-
-   Messrs. J. Rimell & Son, Booksellers, London, W.
-
-   Mr. Jacs. G. Robbers, Bookseller, Amsterdam
-
-   Vernon Roberts, Esq., Kincardine Castle, Auchterarder
-
-   Messrs. G. Robertson & Co. Propy. Ltd., Booksellers, London, E.C.
-
-   Robert Burns Robertson, Esq., F.S.A. (Scot.), Windsor Castle
-
-   Miss D. C. Robinson, Dalston, Cumberland
-
-   W. H. Romaine-Walker, Esq., A.R.I.B.A., London, W.
-
-   Miss Rooke, Mealsgate, Cumberland
-
-   W. Roscoe, Esq.
-
-   Messrs. Wilson Ross & Co., Ltd., Booksellers, Edinburgh
-
-   Miss Roughsedge, Hoylake, Cheshire
-
-   Mr. Walter Ruck, Bookseller, Maidstone
-
-   C. D. Ruding-Bryan, Esq., Clifton, Bristol
-
-   Captain C. E. A. L. Rumbold, Godminster Manor, Bruton
-
-   Barrie Russell, Esq., Gloucester Hotel, Weymouth
-
-   S. B. Russell, Esq., Broadway, Worcestershire
-
-   Charles T. Ruthen, Esq., O.B.E., Lic.R.I.B.A., Swansea
-
-
-   The Most Hon. The Marquis of Salisbury, G.C.V.O.
-
-   The Most Hon. The Marchioness of Sligo
-
-   The Rt. Hon. The Earl of Stafford
-
-   Lady Octavia Shaw Stewart
-
-   The Rt. Hon. The Viscountess St. Davids
-
-   The Rt. Hon. Lady Sackville
-
-   The Rt. Hon. Lord Sheffield
-
-   The Rt. Hon. Lord Sherborne
-
-   Sir Henry Samuelson, Bt.
-
-   Sir Edward Stern
-
-   Sir Frank Swettenham, G.C.M.G.
-
-   Sheffield Public Libraries, per Samuel Smith, Esq., Librarian
-
-   Sheffield University Library, per W. S. Purchon, Esq., M.A.
-
-   Somersetshire Archæological Society per H. St. George Gray, Esq.
-
-   Atkinson Free Library, Southport per F. H. Mills, Esq., Librarian
-
-   Juán E. Sackman, Esq., London, S.E.
-
-   S. G. Stopford Sackville, Esq., M.A., D.L., J.P., Thrapston
-
-   Julian Sampson, Esq., London, W.C.
-
-   Mrs. Mahlon Sands, Campden, Glos.
-
-   Messrs. Sands & McDougall Propy., Ltd., London, E.C.
-
-   V. G. Santo, Esq., A.R.I.B.A., Coddington Hall, Newark
-
-   A. Sassoon, Esq., for Clifton College Library
-
-   Octavius Satchell, Esq., London, W.
-
-   H. N. Savill, Esq., London, W.C.
-
-   Mr. Henry B. Saxton, Bookseller, Nottingham
-
-   John Scott, Esq., Ilkley, Yorks
-
-   Allen W. Seaby, Esq., University College, Reading
-
-   H. Gordon Selfridge, Esq., London, W.
-
-   Mrs. Arthur Shephard, Kensington
-
-   Messrs. Sherratt & Hughes, Booksellers, Manchester
-
-   R. D. Shirley, Esq., Burlesdon Rectory, Southampton
-
-   Coningsby C. Sibthorpe, Esq., D.L., J.P., Canwick, Lincoln
-
-   Mr. S. W. Simms, Bookseller, Bath
-
-   Messrs. Simpkin, Marshall, Hamilton, Kent & Co., Ltd., London,
-   E.C.
-
-   Jonathan Simpson, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., Bolton
-
-   J. J. Simpson, Esq., Cotham Park, Bristol
-
-   Messrs. Sinclair & Woolston, Ltd., Booksellers, Nottingham
-
-   Messrs. Walter Skull & Son, Ltd., High Wycombe
-
-   Major E. H. Sleigh, The Curragh, Kildare
-
-   H. Sutcliffe Smith, Esq., Baildon, Yorks.
-
-   J. P. Smith, Esq., Barrow-in-Furness
-
-   Messrs. John Smith & Son, Ltd., Booksellers, Glasgow
-
-   R. Freeman Smith, Esq., Hampstead
-
-   Messrs. W. H. Smith & Son, Booksellers, London, W.C.
-
-   Messrs. W. H. Smith & Son, Ltd., Booksellers, Harrogate
-
-   Messrs. W. H. Smith & Son, Ltd., Booksellers, York
-
-   Mrs. Aldwin Soames, Moor Park, Farnham
-
-   Messrs. H. Sotheran & Co., Booksellers, London, W.
-
-   Messrs. Spottiswoode, Ballantyne & Co., Ltd., Eton
-
-   Wm. Barclay Squire, Esq., Kensington, W.
-
-   H.M. Stationery Office, London, S.W.
-
-   Messrs. G. E. Stechert & Co., Booksellers, London, W.C.
-
-   H. Steel, Esq., Skellow Grange, nr. Doncaster
-
-   Albert J. Stephens, Esq., Gloucester
-
-   Prof. J. E. A. Steggall, M.A., J.P., University College, Dundee
-
-   Capt. William J. Stephens, R.A.M.C. Newquay
-
-   R. H. Stephenson, Esq., Leicester
-
-   Messrs. B. F. Stevens & Brown, Booksellers, London, W.C.
-
-   Henry Stewart, Esq., Lieut., R.G.A., Kelvinside, Glasgow
-
-   J. Hutton Stott, Esq., Southport
-
-   Philip Sidney Stott, Esq., Broadway, Worcestershire
-
-   Mrs. John C. Straker, Hexham
-
-   Arthur Stratton, Esq., F.S.A., F.R.I.B.A., London, W.C.
-
-   W. G. Strickland, Esq., Dublin
-
-   Charles W. Stringer, Esq., Kettering
-
-   Mr. F. Sturt, Bookseller, Farnham, Surrey
-
-   Canon A. F. Sutton, F.S.A., Newark-on-Trent, Surrey
-
-   Col. M. A. W. Swinfen-Broun, Swinfen Hall, Lichfield
-
-   Commander Harold Swithinbank, Denham, Bucks.
-
-
-   The Rt. Hon. Lord Triowen
-
-   The Hon. Mrs. Townshend
-
-   Sir A. Brumwell Thomas, F.R.I.B.A.
-
-   Travellers’ Club, London, S.W., per Sir Almeric Fitzroy, K.C.V.O.
-
-   The Rev. Prebendary Talbot, M.A., Newport, Salop
-
-   Mrs. J. M. Tankard, Baildon, Yorks
-
-   Henry Tanner, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., London, W.
-
-   W. G. Tarrant, Esq., Byfleet, Surrey
-
-   Sydney Tatchell, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., Westminster, S.W.
-
-   Captain Hurford Tatlow, M.C., London, W.
-
-   Mrs. Tempest, Skipton-in-Craven, Yorks.
-
-   A. H. Ryan Tenison, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., London, W.
-
-   William C. Terry, Esq., Clapton
-
-   Mr. James Thin, Bookseller, Edinburgh
-
-   Mr. Charles E. Thomas, Bookseller, Worthing
-
-   P. A. Thomas, Esq., M.A., Malvern
-
-   Miss Amy H. Thompson, Bromley, Kent
-
-   C. W. W. Thompson, Esq., 2nd Lieut. R.E., A.R.I.B.A., Rochester
-
-   Edward P. Thompson, Esq., J.P., Whitchurch, Salop
-
-   H. D. Thompson, Esq., Lincoln
-
-   W. Stuart Thompson, Esq., Peterborough
-
-   T. Thornton-Berry, Esq., Bishop’s Hull, Taunton
-
-   E. Thornton-Smith, Esq., London
-
-   Messrs. Thornton-Smith, Ltd., London, W.
-
-   Messrs. Thurnam & Sons, Booksellers, Carlisle
-
-   Messrs. Frederick Tibbenham, Ltd., Ipswich
-
-   Times Book Club, London, W.
-
-   Cecil Torr, Esq., Yonder Wreyland
-
-   W. Charles Tozer, Esq., London, W.
-
-   Messrs. Truslove & Hanson, Ltd., Booksellers, Clifford Street, W.
-
-   Messrs. Truslove & Hanson, Ltd., Booksellers, Oxford Street, W.
-
-   Messrs. Truslove & Hanson, Ltd., Booksellers, Sloane Street, S.W.
-
-   Mrs. F. Cecilia Tubbs, St. Leonards-on-Sea
-
-   Grahame B. Tubbs, Esq., London
-
-   Mrs. Tuke, Chiswick, W.
-
-   W. Gladwin Turbutt, Esq., J.P., Ogston Hall, Alfreton
-
-   Mrs. Warner Turner, Mansfield
-
-   John Tweedy, Esq., Howth, Dublin
-
-   Mr. G. H. Tyndall, Bookseller, Ely
-
-
-   University College, London, Dept. of Architecture
-
-
-   The Hon. Mrs. Douglas Vickers
-
-   Sir Richard V. Vassar-Smith, Bt., D.L., J.P.
-
-   Sir Harry Vernon, Bt., D.L., J.P.
-
-   Sir Arthur Vicars, K.C.V.O., F.S.A.
-
-   J. J. Van Alen, Esq., New York
-
-   Messrs. H. A. Van Winsum & J. Ver Wymeren, London, W.
-
-   Lt.-Colonel T. T. Vernon, Chester
-
-
-   The Royal Library, Windsor Castle, per The Hon. John Fortescue,
-   F.S.A.
-
-   Her Grace The Duchess of Wellington
-
-   The Rt. Hon. The Countess of Winchilsea & Nottingham
-
-   The Rt. Hon. Lady Wenlock
-
-   The Hon. Mrs. Edward Wyndham
-
-   Sir Aston Webb, R.A., F.S.A., F.R.I.B.A.
-
-   Wallasey Library, per The Rev. A. E. Parry, Librarian
-
-   Warrington Municipal Museum
-
-   Westminster Public Libraries, per Frank Pacy, Esq., Librarian
-
-   Weston-super-Mare Public Library, per Miss Alston
-
-   Chas. Wade, Esq., Forest Gate, Essex
-
-   Philip K. Wake, Esq., J.P., Handsworth Grange, Sheffield
-
-   Mr. Henry Walker, Bookseller, Leeds
-
-   J. Reid Walker, Esq., J.P., Shifnal, Salop
-
-   Captain J. W. Walker, F.S.A., Chapelthorpe, Wakefield
-
-   Colonel W. Hall Walker, M.P., D.L. Gresford, Denbigh
-
-   Pickford Waller, Esq., Boscombe, Hants.
-
-   Colonel Horace Walpole, Winchfield
-
-   Miss E. M. Walters, Long Stanton, nr. Cambridge
-
-   Mrs. Warde-Aldam, Hooton Pagnell Hall, Doncaster
-
-   S. J. Waring, Esq., London, W.
-
-   Messrs. Waring & Gillow, Ltd., Lancaster
-
-   Messrs. Waring & Gillow, Ltd., London
-
-   Messrs. Waring & Gillow, Ltd., Manchester
-
-   Bertrand J. Waterhouse, Esq., Sydney, N.S.W.
-
-   Vernon Watney, Esq., M.A., J.P., F.S.A., Cornbury Park, Oxon
-
-   Humphry Watts, Esq., Clent, Stourbridge
-
-   Hugh Weguelin, Esq., London, S.W.
-
-   R. W. S. Weir, Esq., London, W.C.
-
-   R. Douglas Wells, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., Kensington, W.
-
-   Adolph H. C. Wenger, Esq., Trentham Priory, nr. Stoke-on-Trent
-
-   Arthur Whereat, Esq., Clifton, Bristol
-
-   Messrs. J. Whitehead & Sons, Ltd., London, S.E.
-
-   Lt.-Col. Henry Wickham, C.M.G., J.P., Cotterstock Hall, Oundle
-
-   Chas. Wicksteed, Esq., J.P., C.A., Kettering
-
-   Mrs. Wigan, Windsor
-
-   Mr. J. M. Wigley, Bookseller, Lancaster
-
-   The Rev. H. J. Wilkins, D.D., Redland Vicarage, Bristol
-
-   Chas. Williams, Esq., Cheltenham
-
-   Messrs. Clement Williams & Sons, Halifax
-
-   H. Williams, Esq., London, E.C.
-
-   Sidney Herbert Williams, Esq., St. Leonards-on-Sea
-
-   Henry Williamson, Esq., Maryport
-
-   J. Bertram Wills, Esq., A.R.I.B.A., Bristol
-
-   Mr. D. Wilson, Bookseller, Bradford
-
-   W. B. Winckworth, Esq., Taunton
-
-   E. Ernest Winterbotham, Esq., Hampstead, N.W.
-
-   F. Arthur Wodsworth, Esq., Nottingham
-
-   P. W. Wood, Esq., Emmanuel College, Cambridge
-
-   G. Grey Wornum, Esq., Nottingham
-
-   George Wragge, Esq., Kensington
-
-   Wm. Wright, Esq., One Ash, nr. Loughborough
-
-   The Rev. W. Wykes-Finch, M.A., J.P., Chaddesley Corbett
-
-
-   York Public Library, per A. H. Furnish, Esq., City Librarian
-
-   Edward Yates, Esq., London, E.C.
-
-   Thomas Charles Yates, Esq., Kensington, W.
-
-   H. S. Young, Esq., Crosby, Liverpool
-
-   Messrs. Henry Young & Sons, Ltd., Booksellers, Liverpool
-
-
-   J. M. Zarifi, Esq., London, W.
-
-               _Agents for the United States of America_
-                        CHARLES SCRIBNER’S SONS
-                        FIFTH AVENUE, NEW YORK
-
-
-
-
-                                PREFACE
-
-
-The following pages take up the story of the English House at the point
-to which it was carried in my former work on _Early Renaissance
-Architecture in England_, and carry it to the beginning of the
-nineteenth century. Between them the two books present the history of
-domestic architecture from the time when houses were becoming homes
-instead of fortresses, until a period well within the recollection of
-our grandfathers.
-
-During the three centuries thus covered, houses were built and
-decorated in successive styles, which were universally accepted at the
-time. The prevailing character of these styles was derived from classic
-sources, as distinguished from our native Gothic traditions, and it
-owed its origin to the Renaissance style of Italy. The earlier efforts
-towards the change are visible in the work of the sixteenth century and
-of the first quarter of the seventeenth.
-
-With the advent of Inigo Jones, however, a further impulse was given
-to the desire for a classic treatment of architecture; and it is this
-impulse and its consequences which form the basis of the present
-inquiry.
-
-There are two views as to English architecture of the seventeenth and
-eighteenth centuries. On the one hand, it is held that in the days
-of Elizabeth architectural design shows a freshness, vivacity, and
-originality which express the genius of the time, and result in a truly
-national style, albeit one which never quite fulfilled its promise;
-and that in later periods designers became more and more imitative,
-and thereby lost from their work, however correct and refined, those
-qualities which make for supreme achievement. On the other hand, it
-is held that the designers of Elizabeth’s time were hampered in their
-efforts at architectural expression by a lack of knowledge; that
-they discarded many of the old ideas without appreciating the full
-significance of the new ideas which they were anxious to adopt; and
-that as they gained wider knowledge, so did their architecture improve.
-
-Much can be said for either of these views, which indeed are not wholly
-inconsistent with each other; but it is my desire in the following
-pages to avoid controversy, and to present the domestic side of the
-subject throughout the period under review in a sympathetic spirit.
-
-During the nineteenth century an increase of acquaintance with the past
-led to the adoption of so many different phases of style as almost to
-eliminate the interest derived from historical continuity. But the
-study of the past need not necessarily have this effect; if rightly
-directed, the inventive genius of the present will find in the past a
-great help for the future.
-
-I have to express my thanks to many persons who have assisted by
-supplying material for the illustrations, and especially to the
-owners of the various houses who have kindly permitted them to be
-photographed. Of the numerous drawings which have been reproduced,
-some, connected with Inigo Jones, are from the collection at Chatsworth
-House, by the kindness of the Duke of Devonshire; and others by Jones
-and John Webb are from the Burlington-Devonshire Collection, in the
-possession of the Royal Institute of British Architects, by permission
-of the Council. For leave to include other contemporary drawings I have
-to thank the Provost of Worcester College, Oxford; the Warden of All
-Souls College, Oxford; and the authorities of the Bodleian Library;
-while the illustrations selected from the Smithson Collection are
-reproduced by the kind permission of the owner. The drawings by Thomas
-Sandby and Edward Dayes are from the British Museum and the Victoria
-and Albert Museum, South Kensington, respectively.
-
-The proprietors of _Country Life_ have kindly furnished Figs.
-162–63, and the Publishers have supplied illustrations from various
-works issued by them, including reproductions of two of Mr. Triggs’
-drawings from “Formal Gardens in England and Scotland,” and some of Mr
-Tanner’s drawings from “Inigo Jones” and “Interior Woodwork.”
-
-I am indebted to the following photographers for permission to include
-photographs taken by them:--Messrs Bedford, Lemere & Co., Figs. 141,
-143–44, 318; Messrs F. Frith & Co., Figs. 4, 5, 56, and 255; Messrs
-Hills and Saunders, Fig. 155; and Mr. H. Evans, Fig. 52. A number of
-photographs have been contributed by Mr. Montague Cooper, Mr. F. H.
-Crossley, Mr. Horace Dan, and Dr. G. Granville Buckley. Other subjects
-have been furnished by Mr. A. E. Walsham, Messrs Thos. Lewis Ltd.,
-of Birmingham, and the late Mr. W. Galsworthy Davie, while those not
-otherwise mentioned are from negatives taken by myself.
-
-I must also acknowledge with thanks the kindness of Mr. E. R. M. Pratt,
-of Ryston Hall, Norfolk, in placing at my disposal the contents of his
-ancestor’s note-books mentioned in the Appendix.
-
-                                                         J. A. GOTCH.
-
-    KETTERING,
-      _April 1918_.
-
-
-
-
-                               CONTENTS
-
-
-    CHAP.                                                       PAGE
-
-    I. INTRODUCTION
-
-    Evolution of the Modern House--Elizabethan Domestic
-      Arrangements--First Signs of Transition--Gradual
-      Disappearance of Jacobean Features--Predominance
-      of the Classic Style--The Gothic Revival                     1
-
-    II. THE CHANGE IN STYLE
-
-    The Native _versus_ the Italian Method--Change in the
-      Status of the Architect--The Influence of Architectural
-      Books--The Smithson Drawings                                25
-
-    III. INIGO JONES
-
-    Jacobean Design still Prevalent--Significance of the
-      Banqueting House, Whitehall--The Early Life of
-      Inigo Jones--His Drawings and his Authentic Executed
-      Work--His Pupil and Assistant--Work Attributed
-      to Jones--Characteristics of his Genius                     41
-
-    IV. THE DRAWINGS OF INIGO JONES AND JOHN WEBB
-
-    The Whitehall Designs and their Authorship--John Webb:
-      his Relation to Jones and Subsequent Career--Contemporary
-      Evidence on the Drawings--Webb’s Executed
-      Work                                                        63
-
-    V. THE TRANSITION IN MINOR BUILDINGS AND INTERIORS
-
-    Lingering Jacobean Detail--Some Country Houses of the
-      Transitional Period--Curious Blending of the Old
-      and New Styles--Charm of some of the Successful
-      Examples--Remodelling of Domestic Fittings                  99
-
-    VI. SIR CHRISTOPHER WREN
-
-    His Life and Early Work--First Design for St Paul’s
-      Cathedral--The Work of Building--Other Work,
-      including Greenwich and Hampton Court--Contemporary
-      Esteem--His Influence on the Subsequent Course of
-      Architecture--Domestic Work Attributed to him              141
-
-    VII. SOME FURTHER WORK OF THE TIME OF CHARLES II.
-
-    Sir Balthazar Gerbier’s “Counsel to Builders”--“Captain
-      Wynne” and his Work--Hamstead Marshall and Old
-      Buckingham House--London after the Great Fire--City
-      Halls and Churches--Some Smaller Houses
-      Outside London                                             161
-
-    VIII. GREAT HOUSES AND GARDENS OF THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY
-
-    Houses of the Nobility--Grandeur of the Designs and
-      Lay Outs--Boughton House, Dyrham Park, and
-      Chatsworth--Nicholas Hawksmoor and his Work at
-      Easton Neston--Lord Burlington and Sir John
-      Vanbrugh--Castle Howard and Blenheim--Formal
-      and Landscape Gardens                                      195
-
-    IX. GEORGIAN HOUSES
-
-    The Character of Eighteenth-Century Houses--Campbell,
-      Gibbs, and other Designers--Interior Design and
-      Decoration--Typical Georgian Mansions: Houghton
-      and Wentworth Woodhouse--The Woods of Bath and
-      Contemporary Town-Planning--William Kent and
-      Holkham--The Brothers Adam                                 237
-
-    X. SMALLER HOUSES, TOWN HOUSES, AND
-    EXTERIOR FEATURES
-
-    Charm of the Smaller Georgian House--Streets and
-      Market Places of Country Towns--Inns and Shops--London
-      Houses of the Period--Their Interior Planning--Growth
-      of the Suburbs in the Nineteenth Century--Exterior
-      Features of Smaller Georgian Houses: Chimneys, Gates,
-      Doors, and Porches--Cupolas, Lantern Lights, Date-Stones,
-      and Sundials--Garden Ornaments--Ornamental Iron and Lead
-      Work                                                       287
-
-    XI. DECORATION AND INTERIOR FEATURES OF EIGHTEENTH-CENTURY
-            HOUSES
-
-    Evolution of the Staircase--Its Treatment in Wood and
-      Stone--The Classic Over-Door--Decoration of Walls:
-      Wood Panelling and Carving, Moulded Plaster, Wall
-      Paper, and Tapestry--The Chimney-Piece, the Fire-Grate
-      and its Accessories--Modelled and Painted
-      Ceilings--Gradual Decline of the Personal Note in
-      Craftsmanship--Conclusion                                  351
-
-    APPENDIX I.--SIR ROGER PRATT                                 395
-
-    APPENDIX II.--THE ARCHITECTS OF COLESHILL, BERKSHIRE         399
-
-    INDEX TO ILLUSTRATIONS AND TEXT                              401
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 1.--VIEW OF WHITEHALL PALACE AS IT WOULD
-  HAVE APPEARED IF COMPLETED.
-
-  (_from a water-colour drawing by Thomas Sandby, R.A._)]
-
-
-
-
-            =THE ENGLISH HOME FROM CHARLES I. TO GEORGE IV.=
-
-
-
-
-                                   I
-
-                             INTRODUCTION
-
-
-In England, more than in any other country, the affections of people in
-all ranks of life have clung round their homes; and to learn something
-of how those homes have changed in disposition and appearance with the
-changing times is an occupation not only fascinating in itself, but one
-which leads into regions of that personal interest which lends life and
-colour to the pictures of the historian.
-
-So far as our present conception of a home is concerned, the time of
-Elizabeth may be held to have seen its birth; for, although the English
-house has an ancestry which goes back to the Conquest, yet it was
-in Elizabeth’s days that houses were first built almost exclusively
-for pleasure and delight. Hers was a great age of house building.
-Peace, wealth, and security from serious turmoil led men in all parts
-of the country to reconstruct their old homes or to build new ones;
-and records remain, either in actual buildings or in old plans, of
-houses of every size, from the great palaces of Burghley or Hatton
-wherein they entertained their sovereign, down to the little house,
-not forty feet square, which was devised for Sir Walter Raleigh in
-St James’s. Much pains and great skill were expended in contriving
-these houses so that they should be convenient and well-looking. The
-planning of them was in the nature of a new experiment, for there was
-no precedent, either of extent or disposition, which was exactly to
-the point. The treatment of the exterior--in other words, their style
-of architecture--was also something fresh; for it became the fashion,
-gradually increasing in extent, to seek inspiration in this direction
-from Italy, a country which for more than a century had produced most
-marvellous buildings, both as to conception and as to the lovely detail
-with which they were embellished.
-
-This new demand in regard to style was partly met by inviting foreign
-workmen to this country, and partly by sending English designers to
-study in Italy; but the knowledge thus acquired was utilised by our
-native craftsmen in their own way. It influenced them, but did not
-enslave them. At first it puzzled them, with the result that much
-hybrid work was done which would have astonished both their Gothic
-forefathers and their Italian contemporaries, but which nevertheless
-has an attractive piquancy of its own.
-
-This tentative stage lasted well into the seventeenth century, until
-the knowledge and genius of Inigo Jones, most ably seconded by John
-Webb, gradually wrought a revolution, and English architecture freed
-itself from the pleasant inaccuracies of its earlier exponents.
-
-It is at the time when the old order was beginning to give way to the
-new that the story of the English House is taken up in the following
-pages. It will be pursued through the next two centuries. We shall
-see how the crude ideas of Elizabethan and Jacobean architects were
-mellowed under the influence of Inigo Jones; how John Webb carried on
-his master’s teaching through the disturbed years of the Civil War; how
-wealthy men, following the lead of the Earl of Arundel, indulged their
-growing taste for collecting antiques, pictures, and other works of
-art. Houses will be described and pictured in which Evelyn and Pepys
-must have watched many of the events which they record in their pages.
-
-In due course will come the great homes of the great nobles of William
-and Mary, of Anne and the Georges; homes which express in a vivid way
-the social distinctions of the times, and indicate the vast interval
-which lay between the duke and the merchant--more particularly in the
-opinion of the duke. It was at this period that domestic architecture
-reached the zenith of its splendour, aided, as it was, not only by the
-patronage of noblemen like Lord Burlington, but by their participation
-in the work of design. That they were able so to participate was
-largely owing to the publication of books on architecture, both
-ancient and modern. The point of view from which architecture was
-then regarded, largely determined by this literature, is of great
-historical interest, although the march of events has been adverse to
-its continued acceptance.
-
-Contemporary with these great efforts in design were innumerable
-smaller houses, essentially English in expression, and charmingly
-simple. In them lived men and women who helped to make the eighteenth
-century famous--Addison and Cowper, Reynolds and Garrick, Mrs
-Thrale and Frances Burney. But all through the eighteenth century
-the artificiality which marks much of its sentiment becomes every
-now and then apparent in its houses and their lay outs, wherein are
-sometimes to be found manufactured ruins and strange attempts at Gothic
-temples. Yet always is perceptible an earnest attempt at design. If in
-architecture itself the sense of design became somewhat dulled, it was
-still acute in the smaller matters of decoration, of furniture, and of
-articles for household use; the ornament which prevailed towards the
-close of the long period under review is quite admirable of its kind.
-
-Such, very briefly indicated, is the ground to be traversed in the
-following inquiry. Some of it must be trodden with a light and hasty
-step; but it is hoped that the journey may not be without interest,
-and may perhaps induce the reader to explore at his leisure parts of
-the country of which here he will possibly catch but a glimpse. In the
-meantime let us return to our starting-point, where the old order began
-to give way to the new.
-
-The history of English houses, from the time of James I. onwards, is
-a record of development on lines that were laid down in the time of
-Elizabeth. It was in her days that the great change from mediævalism
-took place, and houses were built for comfort and pleasure without
-any serious thought of defence. Such houses are still habitable;
-there are plenty of people living to-day in Elizabethan houses,
-but the enthusiasts are comparatively few who live from choice in
-the ill-lighted, vaulted rooms of the Middle Ages. Spaciousness,
-cheerfulness, dignity, and often magnificence, were the qualities aimed
-at in houses of the end of the sixteenth century; and these qualities
-are appropriate in the present day. Convenience is another matter; it
-is a relative term, and its significance varies with the varying wants
-of mankind, changes with their changing habits and customs.
-
-An Elizabethan house provided admirable rooms for the common use of the
-family and guests--reception rooms as they would be called now. It also
-provided an adequate number of bedrooms. Further, so long as the great
-hall was the customary place for eating, the kitchen was conveniently
-situated, and the food was cooked within a reasonable distance of
-where it was consumed. In these respects, therefore, a house of that
-period fulfilled some of the chief requirements of the present day. The
-direction in which it failed when measured by modern standards was in
-its sanitary arrangements, which, indeed, judged by our own ideas, did
-not exist at all. But we must be careful not to argue backwards, and
-conclude that because things were lacking which we consider essential,
-therefore houses were found uncomfortable at the time. The better way
-is to accept what existed as satisfying the wants of the period, and to
-argue from that, if we please, how vastly we have improved in our own
-habits upon those of our ancestors.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 2.--ASTON HALL, NEAR BIRMINGHAM
-  (FINISHED 1635).]
-
-In tracing the changes which took place in the arrangement and
-disposition of rooms during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries,
-therefore, it will be found that not much was done which made houses
-essentially more comfortable, according to modern notions, than they
-had been in the late sixteenth century. Indeed, during much of the
-time comfort was very little studied, and it is one of the reproaches
-levelled at the architects of the early eighteenth century, more
-especially those who were concerned with houses of vast size, that
-their first thought was for display and their last for comfort. Pope’s
-exclamation about Blenheim palace, “’Tis very fine, but when d’ye sleep
-and where d’ye dine?” crystallises much of the criticism that might be
-bestowed upon the large houses of that period, which, however, only
-reflected the spirit of the age. In these houses the most striking
-change that occurred was the abolition of homeliness. When the great
-Elizabethan house was planned, the household was in the nature of a
-large family. It is true that the members of the actual family grouped
-themselves in one wing and the servants in another, but the great hall
-was their common meeting ground, and the relations between the heads
-of the household and their servants were more affectionate than they
-became in later years. All the rooms, moreover, were intended for
-daily use, however finely they were decorated. The whole effect was
-one of stately homeliness. When the Queen Anne mansion was planned,
-much of it was devoted to state functions as a first consideration,
-and was intended for occasional use only; apartments suitable for this
-purpose having been provided, the rest of the space was allotted to
-the ordinary use of the family, and the servants were relegated to the
-basement (which they sometimes shared with their employers) or to a
-detached wing. Stateliness, not homeliness, was now the keynote. The
-nobleman stood on a pedestal of grandeur, round which his dependants
-grouped themselves as best they could, and among them struggled the
-parson, the poet, and the man of letters. The glorification of the
-individual found expression in his house and his gardens which were all
-designed with theatric magnificence.
-
-The changes here indicated will be dealt with at length in subsequent
-chapters; the first step towards them was taken when the hall ceased to
-be a living-room and became a vestibule, as the result of an alteration
-in domestic habits, an alteration which rendered easy the adoption
-of a house-plan more closely related than was formerly possible to
-those Italian models to which architects had been approximating their
-designs for half a century. So far, the models had been copied but
-halfheartedly, partly because of the conservatism of English habits,
-partly from incomplete knowledge of Italian methods of design.
-But as knowledge increased, both from the study of books and from
-the first-hand investigations of travelling students, so was the
-Italianising of English buildings accelerated; and a great obstacle
-to this progress was removed when the ancient use and position of the
-hall--which had a tradition of three centuries behind them--were no
-longer preserved. The movement indicated was by no means regular; it
-was quicker in some places than in others, and in some hands than in
-others: much depended upon the architects employed. Those who were
-learned, those who had travelled, and again those who were influenced
-by the cultured few, departed more completely from old-fashioned ways
-than did those who had not enjoyed the same advantages. The main stream
-of architectural development is fairly well marked and continuous; but
-there are innumerable backwaters in which the impetus of the current
-is hardly perceptible. As a consequence there are to be found as late
-as the end of the seventeenth century buildings which look almost
-contemporary with those of the beginning.
-
-The man who did more than anyone else to bring learning to bear on
-design, and to introduce into England a true and correct knowledge
-of Italian detail, was that great artist, Inigo Jones. His first
-architectural work of importance was the Banqueting House at Whitehall,
-which was finished in 1622. It has no trace of traditional English
-design about it (see Fig. 22). To us it appears a beautiful building,
-but by no means abnormal, because we can see many others of the same
-type. But to those who saw it when it was just built, it was something
-entirely novel, something in which they sought in vain for any of the
-customary devices for producing architectural effect. Doubtless it was
-a stimulant, but it did not revolutionise English architecture. Indeed,
-it was only Inigo Jones, and after him his pupil John Webb, who could
-pretend to work on such learned lines. The ordinary surveyors--of
-whom there must have been a large number, although their names have
-not survived--still worked in the hybrid style in which they had
-been trained, with the result that such a house as Aston Hall, near
-Birmingham, which was completed in 1635, is thoroughly Jacobean in
-character (Fig. 2), although of sufficient importance to have warranted
-the adoption of the latest ideas in design, had they been at all
-widespread.
-
-There is one point, however, in which Aston Hall shows the impending
-change in house-planning, and that is the disposition of the great
-hall. It is entered in the middle of one side, instead of through
-screens at the end, thus making a large vestibule of it instead of a
-living-room. The same treatment is to be found in some of the plans of
-John Smithson, an eminent architect of the time; and an examination of
-his drawings will presently be undertaken, in order to illustrate the
-steps which led from the Jacobean style to the more fully developed
-classic.
-
-Nothing illustrates this change more aptly than a comparison between
-Smithson’s drawings and those of Inigo Jones and John Webb. The
-first are Jacobean, the second are classic. In the Jacobean are seen
-efforts to sever the ties which ancient traditions still imposed; a
-striving after Italian detail, which was never thoroughly achieved; a
-mixture of a little old-fashioned romance, with a little new-fashioned
-learning. In the classic are seen an ignoring of tradition; a mastery
-of Italian methods; a mixture of sound knowledge with a feeling for
-good proportion. As an illustration of the first large building in
-England conceived in the fully developed classic style, nothing could
-be better than the drawing made by Thomas Sandby about the middle of
-the eighteenth century, showing how the great palace designed for
-Charles I. would have appeared (see Fig. 1). It is also interesting in
-connection with the inquiry into the Jones and Webb drawings, which
-will be fully dealt with in Chapter IV.
-
-Incidentally a study of the drawings by Jones and Webb forces the
-inquirer to reconsider the relations of those two men as hitherto
-accepted, and compels him to readjust his ideas as to some of the work
-he had been taught to attribute to Jones.
-
-With the seventeenth century we get into much closer touch with the
-designers of buildings than was possible in earlier times: in many
-cases we can get behind the buildings to their architects. But the
-chief purpose of the following pages is to trace the changes that took
-place in the houses themselves and their accessories, and although it
-would be neither possible nor desirable to omit all mention of the
-architects, the latter will be subsidiary to the main theme, and will
-be dealt with not so much biographically as by way of showing how their
-training, their opportunities and their idiosyncrasies affected the
-buildings with which they were concerned.
-
-The present and immediate purpose is to give a brief and broad outlook
-over the period dealt with in detail in subsequent chapters; and to
-that end a series of houses has been selected, separated from each
-other in point of date by intervals of some twenty or thirty years.
-
-The first of the series is Aston Hall (Fig. 2), which may be
-considered an example of how the old order lingered on. It has all the
-characteristics of Jacobean design, with its two pronounced wings, its
-curved gables, its fine chimney-stacks, and its mullioned windows:
-not to mention an open arcade and a forecourt with garden houses at
-the two outlying corners. These characteristics were gradually to
-disappear from houses. The plan became more compact, and wings were
-discarded, except that version of them which became fashionable later
-on, and which consisted of a separate block on either side of the main
-building, connected to it by a colonnade. Gables disappeared, the only
-approach to such features being the flat pediments which were often
-employed as central ornaments to the façades. Chimney-stacks became
-plainer, and the flues were massed into solid blocks, instead of rising
-in separate shafts from a common base. Mullioned windows lingered on
-for some years, but the mullions were of wood, and were insignificant
-compared with their stone predecessors. They were merely part of the
-wood window frame, and they disappeared almost entirely after the
-advent of the sash-window in the last quarter of the seventeenth
-century.
-
-In the meantime, greater attention was paid to the cornices which made
-the circuit of the buildings; more especially was the topmost cornice
-emphasised--that from which the roof sprang. The general proportions
-of the building were more closely studied, and in particular the
-proportion of the window openings to the plain wall space.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 3.--Broadfield Hall, Hertfordshire.
-
-      From a Drawing by Buckler, 1832.]
-
-Broadfield Hall, in Hertfordshire (Fig. 3), illustrates the advance
-along these lines. There are no wings and no gables. Stone mullions
-are still retained; a bold cornice marks each story, the boldest being
-that on which the hipped roof rests. The flues are massed in two large
-stacks, and their existence is duly acknowledged, no attempt being
-made, as was sometimes the case in later times, to conceal them among
-irrelevant ornament. The dormer windows rise from the roof, and are
-no longer placed in portions of the main wall carried up for their
-reception. The unbroken cornice at the eaves necessitated this change.
-The old love of light still shows itself in the size of the windows,
-which are not yet subordinated to the claims of proportion.
-
-The exact date of this house has not been ascertained, but the style
-is characteristic of the middle of the seventeenth century, a period
-when no great amount of building was undertaken, owing to the disturbed
-state of the country consequent upon the Civil War. The time of
-Shakespeare is marked by a distinct style represented in hundreds of
-houses, but no such wealth of illustration enriches the time of Milton.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 4.--Moyles Court, Hampshire.]
-
-With the return of Charles II. a more settled state of affairs came
-about, and once more the stream of architecture flowed steadily
-onwards. Such houses as Moyles Court, in Hampshire (Fig. 4), were built
-in considerable numbers. There is nothing pretentious about them; they
-depend for their effect upon the regular spacing of the windows, and
-upon the strong shadow cast by the eaves cornice. The intermediate
-cornices of Broadfield have given way to a plain string. The windows
-are, many of them, sashes; but it would be rash to assert definitely
-that originally they were all so, because sashes had only recently been
-introduced. The chimney-stacks are large, and have a certain amount
-of character about them. This particular example has two projecting
-wings, which may indicate that the house followed the lines of an
-earlier one, or they may merely be a survival of old ways; in either
-case they are not of the essence of the period. The date of the house
-is not recorded, but it was probably built between 1670 and 1680, by
-that Dame Alice Lisle who suffered death in 1685 at the hands of Judge
-Jeffreys for sheltering a Nonconformist minister and a fugitive from
-Sedgemoor.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 5.--HANBURY HALL, NEAR DROITWICH,
-  1701.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 6.--HAMPTON COURT.
-
-  PART OF THE RIVER FRONT, 1689.]
-
-Of much the same character, but loftier and more dignified, is Hanbury
-Hall, near Droitwich, built in 1701 for a certain Thomas Vernon (Fig.
-5). The façade is here emphasised by a pediment, which professes to
-be partly carried on two columns. Ornament goes but a little way
-towards producing the pleasing effect, which, in fact, is obtained by
-the windows (including the dormers), the quoins, and the bold eaves
-cornice. The cupola adds a note of interest; it is a feature which had
-been used by Inigo Jones, and before him, although designed on other
-lines, by Jacobean architects.
-
-But a greater figure than the men who designed Moyles Court or Hanbury
-Hall occupied the stage at this time. This was Sir Christopher Wren,
-the greatest architect that England has produced. His work, however,
-lay for the most part outside the scope of the present inquiry which is
-chiefly concerned with domestic architecture. It was largely the city
-churches, and especially the noble cathedral of St Paul, that occupied
-and developed Wren’s uncommon powers. Of ordinary domestic work, but
-little can be put to his credit with certainty. However, at the palace
-of Hampton Court (Fig. 6), he showed the same strong hand, the same
-virility of design which appear in his churches. Wren had mastered the
-medium in which he worked, and he used it with freedom, unfettered by
-slavish obedience to the rules which kept his less gifted successors in
-leading strings, and induced them to tread the paths of safety rather
-than those of adventure.
-
-There was, perhaps, one exception to this slavery in the person of
-Sir John Vanbrugh, who had a singular gift for grandiose design.
-Kings Weston, near Bristol (Fig. 7), is one of his simpler and more
-restrained efforts, but even here the scale is large and the detail
-verging on coarseness. But it is neither the personal note nor the
-minutiæ of design which concerns us at present. Kings Weston is
-advanced as illustrating, not so much Vanbrugh’s style, as the complete
-departure from the old ways which architectural design had by this time
-taken. The date of Kings Weston is about 1715. It is not only in the
-external appearance that this departure is noticeable, but also in the
-plan, and in the internal embellishments. These points will be dealt
-with fully in due course, but even on looking at the outside of Kings
-Weston, it is obvious that it is disposed on lines widely different
-from those of a Jacobean house.
-
-These differences are still more apparent in the next illustration
-of the series, Wolterton Hall, in Norfolk (Fig. 8). This house is
-attributed to Ripley, and its date is put at 1736. It is staid and
-eminently respectable, but there is none of the picturesqueness of
-the Jacobean methods about it, none of those unexpected human touches
-which help us to condone the ignorance of classic detail exhibited by
-Jacobean designers; no “accident,” as Sir Joshua Reynolds puts it,
-which might lead to variety or intricacy. In making the circuit of its
-walls, the visitor knows exactly what he is likely to find. The appeal
-is to narrower sympathies than of old, to sympathies which spring
-from an acquired feeling for proportion, and are not merely roused by
-quaint personal incidents attractive to all alike, whether trained in
-architecture or not. The dignified effect is produced by the stone
-base, the proportion of the windows in relation to the wall space, and
-the bold cornice at the eaves. The chimneys are symmetrically placed,
-but they have had no design worthy of the name bestowed upon them.
-
-At Fonthill House, in Wiltshire, built about 1760 (Fig. 9), there is a
-reversion to a type of plan which had almost died out, a central block,
-namely, with detached wings connected to it by curved colonnades. This
-type had been frequently adopted in the earlier part of the eighteenth
-century, and was still advocated in some of the text-books on house
-design. But its obvious inconveniences in dissipating the forces of
-domestic service instead of concentrating them, so far outweighed
-the advantages of stateliness and grandeur which it bestowed, that
-it fell into disuse. Fonthill House was built by Alderman Beckford
-in succession to a house which was burnt in 1755, and it is doing
-the alderman no injustice to suppose that he strove to make his new
-house a very splendid affair, and accordingly adopted a striking,
-if inconvenient, plan. He succeeded to such an extent that the result
-of his labours has been referred to as “Fonthill splendens.” His son,
-the author of “Vathek,” is said to have been born at Fonthill in
-1759, possibly in the new house, but there is no record of the actual
-date of its erection. The son eventually sold it for £9,000, a mere
-bagatelle in comparison with its cost, which was nearly a quarter of
-a million. He was then, about 1795, building on a vast scale, with
-the help of Wyatt, one of those freaks in which the late eighteenth
-century delighted, a mansion in the guise of a sham abbey, costing
-another quarter of a million. This wonderful edifice had but a short
-life, for in 1825, two years after he had sold the estate, the great
-tower fell and started the decay of the whole structure. So famous were
-Fonthill Abbey and its contents that half England had flocked to the
-sale, filling every inn for miles around, and eating the countryside
-bare. Beckford the younger, like many of his contemporaries, was a man
-of great wealth and of considerable culture; a great collector of art
-treasures, and one who spent large sums in building in an ancient style
-of which neither he nor anyone living knew the rudiments. Reynolds,
-however, may be held to have countenanced the practice, for he says
-that the imagination being affected by the association of ideas, and we
-having naturally a veneration for antiquity, whatever building brings
-to our remembrance ancient customs and manners, such as the castles of
-the barons of ancient chivalry, is sure to give delight.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 7.--KINGS WESTON, NEAR BRISTOL,
-  _cir._ 1715.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 8.--WOLTERTON HALL, NORFOLK,
-  1736.]
-
-It is often very difficult to determine the date of old country
-houses; no records of the building of them survive, or if they do they
-are stowed away in unexplored muniment rooms. Tradition is vague or
-unreliable. Additions may have been made from time to time of which no
-precise account remains. The lapse of years may have toned everything
-down to the same antique appearance, rendering the disentanglement of
-the various periods a laborious task, and the results uncertain. The
-work of a later period may, perhaps, predominate to such an extent as
-to overwhelm what remains from an earlier, and cause the whole house
-to be dated half a century later than it ought to be. This is the case
-at Normanton Park, in Rutland, where such considerable alterations
-were made about 1780 that the house is held to be of the Adam period,
-whereas its main disposition was almost certainly settled fifty years
-before that time. Enough of the earlier work remains in various
-parts to support this idea, and to show that the plan adopted--that
-of a central block with detached wings connected by colonnades--was
-the production of the beginning of the century rather than of the end.
-At the later period, however, many of the external walls must have
-been recased if not rebuilt, and the garden front (Fig. 10) is a good
-example of the time. The circular bay is a characteristic feature,
-and so are the attic stories of the wings, although the placing of a
-plainly treated attic over a more majestic substructure was by no means
-a novelty. The real touch of the Adam period is to be found in the
-detail, which has all the delicacy and refinement connected with the
-name of the accomplished brothers Adam. That it is useless to argue
-about matters of taste is a dictum as old as the time when thoughts
-were usually expressed in the Latin tongue. Whether the delicacy of
-Adam or the vigour of Vanbrugh is to be preferred is a matter of
-individual liking. Some people admire Ganymede, others regard Hercules
-as a finer type; yet others admire both. With such predilections we
-need not be concerned; all that is necessary at present is to point
-out the change that had taken place in architectural treatment during
-the course of the eighteenth century.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 9.--FONTHILL HOUSE, WILTSHIRE,
-  _cir._ 1760.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 10.--Normanton Park, Rutland, _cir._
-  1780.]
-
-As the century grew older the severance from the traditions of mediæval
-times grew wider. Those traditions, indeed, were lost, and although a
-few attempts were made--by Horace Walpole and others--to revive the
-late Gothic style, they only served to show how superficial was the
-current knowledge of Gothic architecture, and how futile it is to
-apply imitations of a departed style, merely by way of ornament, to
-buildings which have no affinity to those from which inspiration is
-sought. These attempts at revival were not numerous, they lay outside
-the normal course of design, which steadily followed the classic lead
-which had been first given whole-heartedly by Inigo Jones. But the
-virility of Jones, Wren, and Vanbrugh had gradually declined, and
-domestic architecture had become correspondingly tame. It was highly
-respectable, much of it was refined, all of it was safe and rather
-uninteresting. To us it is so correct and well-meaning that it escapes
-the fate of much that succeeded it--the exciting of violent dislike.
-Indeed, after the lapse of more than a century, interest in it is
-reviving, and it bids fair to acquire enthusiastic admirers. It was
-otherwise when it was in full possession of the field, for in spite of
-its excellent qualities it roused the fury of Pugin and his followers,
-and was overwhelmed by the Gothic revival.
-
-[Illustration: FIG. 11.--Gwydyr House, Whitehall, London, 1796.]
-
-There was no essential change in the general treatment of houses
-all through the last half of the eighteenth century, as may be seen
-by comparing Gwydyr House, Whitehall (Fig. 11), which was built
-in 1796, with Wolterton Hall (Fig. 8), built in 1736; that is,
-the general effect is obtained by the same means. The windows are
-carefully proportioned, and the eaves cornice is the only important
-shadow-producing feature. At Gwydyr House the attic story is a
-later addition. The windows in both cases are plain, unornamented
-oblong openings. In the house No. 32 St James’s Square (Fig. 12),
-which was built in 1815, and is the last of this particular series
-of illustrations, while the main effect is the result of the window
-proportion and the eaves cornice, some additional interest is given by
-the form of the first floor windows, by the arches in which they are
-placed, and by the balconies.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 12.--No. 32 ST. JAMES’S SQUARE, LONDON,
-  1815.]
-
-Although there was no great originality in the manner in which
-the bulk of the houses was handled at this time, there was much
-ingenuity bestowed upon the detail and ornament. The brothers Adam,
-who were busy during the last quarter of the eighteenth century,
-have given their name to a particular style of decoration, marked
-by much delicacy and refinement, but they did nothing of first-rate
-importance in architecture itself, nothing that set men building in
-a fresh way. After them came the Greek influence, which affected a
-number of designers. The ambitions of Napoleon absorbed the attention
-of nearly the whole of Europe, but Greece was at that time exciting a
-considerable amount of interest, which was fostered to a certain extent
-by the poetry of Byron. But although he hymned the Isles of Greece and
-burning Sappho, but little of her fire found its way into the forms
-which her country lent to England. Then there followed the Age of
-Romance, inaugurated by the great Wizard of the North; all the world
-fell in love with ancient castles and old houses. Scott’s magic wand
-lifted the veil from the past, and disclosed scenes of bygone manners,
-affecting, amusing, and exciting, thus making easy the advent of the
-Gothic Revival.
-
-This revival broke the thread of classic tradition in house building,
-a thread already attenuated. It brought about the chaos of style which
-marks the nineteenth century. But it set men thinking; it gave them a
-fresh start; it led them to attack problems in a logical way, to adapt
-their designs to circumstances instead of insisting that circumstances
-must conform to established laws of design. In a word it produced the
-wide outlook and the reasonable attitude of adapting means to the end,
-which are the hope of architecture to-day.
-
-Having thus given a bird’s-eye view of the course followed by house
-builders during the whole period under consideration, we will now
-proceed to an examination in detail of the various stages of its
-development.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 13.--BOLSOVER CASTLE, DERBYSHIRE.
-
-  ENTRANCE DOORWAY TO THE GALLERY.]
-
-
-
-
-                                  II
-
-                          THE CHANGE IN STYLE
-
-
-During the seventeenth century a very significant change took place in
-architectural design. All through the mediæval period design seems,
-so far as our knowledge enables us to form an opinion, to have been
-impersonal, the result of a number of men working together, each
-concerned with the portion affecting his particular trade. It is
-probably true that some one individual controlled the general scheme,
-and gave an oversight to the work of the others; but not in such a
-sense as to have been entitled to be called the “architect,” as we
-understand the term. To us the architect is the individual who not only
-provides the plan, not only puts into practicable form the ideas of the
-employer, but also designs most of the details. He not only informs
-the various artificers that particular work is required in particular
-places, but he also provides them with drawings showing what the work
-is to be, and how it is to be fashioned. His influence to-day is much
-wider and much more intimate than it was in the Middle Ages, the ages
-which produced our cathedrals, our ancient churches, castles, and
-manor-houses.
-
-The term “architect” occurs very seldom either in literature or in
-documents previous to the seventeenth century. Shakespeare uses the
-word once; in contracts of Elizabeth’s time it appears seldom, if
-ever; although the documents refer to the provision of design as well
-as workmanship. In the numerous books published for the guidance of
-designers in building matters during the reigns of Elizabeth and James,
-it appears now and then: but the appeals which these books made on
-their title-pages and in their prefaces to those for whom they were
-written, were addressed primarily to artificers and only incidentally
-to architects, who seem to have been included in order to catch a
-possible purchaser. The reason for the absence of the term is obvious:
-there were hardly any people who called themselves architects.
-
-The publication of these books is itself a sign of the change which was
-coming over the methods of design. Hitherto design had been a matter
-of tradition, preserved by guilds, handed down from father to son or
-from master to man. The horizon of a mediæval workman was limited: he
-neither knew nor cared much for what was being done in distant lands.
-His style was influenced by local considerations, and although he
-conformed to the general changes which affected the whole of Gothic
-architecture, there was usually a local flavour about his work. The
-difference in character between the work in Norfolk, Northamptonshire,
-and Somerset is obvious at first sight: but a closer scrutiny will
-often reveal local variations in those districts themselves.
-
-Why were these books published, and what kind of architectural style
-did they illustrate? Did they bring before the eye of the designer
-masterpieces of Gothic architecture, or details of Gothic work? Not at
-all: no book illustrating Gothic architecture was published till the
-end of the eighteenth century.[1] There was, in truth, no need for such
-a book: the mediæval workmen had their own traditional knowledge, and
-it concerned them not at all to learn how the workmen in Germany or
-southern France or Spain differed in method from themselves. They gave
-no thought to such matters, nor did they think of themselves as being
-concerned with architecture; they merely built in the manner of their
-fathers.
-
-But although the successors of the mediæval craftsmen in the
-mid-sixteenth century shared their predecessors’ apathy in respect of
-what was being done abroad, it was otherwise with those for whom they
-worked--the great men who were building fine houses all over the land.
-To these had come new ideas in relation to their buildings. They had
-heard of the splendid work that for years had been executed in Italy:
-some of them had seen it; monarchs and wealthy nobles had even brought
-foreign craftsmen over to exercise their skill in the northern parts
-of Europe. The Italian manner was a novelty in this land of Gothic
-traditions, it was unlike anything to which England was accustomed. But
-the new fashion became popular. Employers demanded the novel detail
-in their houses; the foreign artists were not numerous, and so the
-English workmen had to supply the best imitation they could contrive
-on a scanty training. Here came the opportunity for the bookmakers.
-They showed the way in which Italian buildings were designed; they
-illustrated the “Orders” which gave those buildings their distinctive
-character so far as appearance went; they showed how classic detail
-might be applied or perverted to meet the exigencies of buildings which
-had a Gothic parentage. The books, therefore, were published in order
-to help designers who aimed at working in the new classic style.
-
-The effect, of course, was to foster that style at the expense of the
-native Gothic. It is true that books were not widely distributed; there
-was not in those days the rapid dissemination of ideas that there
-is in our own. But if anyone wanted a book about building, he could
-only find such as dealt with classic architecture. Hence in a short
-time the operations which had hitherto been thought of as building,
-began to be thought of as Architecture, and the only architecture that
-was formulated was classic architecture. The idea of that art became
-inseparably connected in the minds of men with classic expressions of
-it. Thus it came about that in the course of half a century people of
-culture regarded all Gothic buildings--even the noblest--as barbarous,
-and not worthy the name of Architecture.[2] The “Gothic order,” as it
-was called, was merely a “fantastic and licentious manner of building.”
-
-It was only a small proportion of the actual workmen who were able to
-study books; the rest picked up the new manner from such foreigners
-as they met, from work which they saw as they moved about, and
-occasionally, perhaps, from verbal description. Some worked all their
-lives on the old lines. One result of the difficulty of imbuing the
-workmen with the requisite knowledge was that some of the men whose
-duty it was to overlook buildings--the surveyors--made a point of
-studying the new style either through books or by foreign travel or
-both. They rendered themselves familiar with classic detail, and were
-thus enabled to give the desired character to the buildings under
-their charge. They gradually became more and more responsible for
-design in the various branches of the building trades, and thus grew
-to be architects as well as surveyors. The inevitable tendency was for
-architectural design to become more personal, and for its results to
-become less like a spontaneous growth of the land.
-
-The number of architectural books published was not in reality very
-great; they were mostly of foreign production, and probably few
-copies found their way into England. The earliest were printed in
-Italy during the closing years of the fifteenth century. By the
-middle of the sixteenth century there were, perhaps, half a score in
-existence, some in Italian, some in French. These were obviously of
-no use to unlettered workmen, but they were appreciated by men of
-learning, and were studied by some of the surveyors of the time. One
-or two Englishmen had produced treatises on architecture by the end
-of the century, but their direct effect on English design can hardly
-be traced. It is, indeed, unwise to look to any of the books of the
-time for direct and immediate influence; their effect seems to have
-been gradual. As may be supposed, it would be the illustrations which
-would have the greatest weight, for they would be intelligible to
-men unacquainted with the language of the text. The more important
-treatises confined themselves largely to drawings of the orders, but
-a few smaller books, published by Germans and Dutchmen, gave many
-illustrations of particular features such as doorways, windows, and so
-forth, and these appear to have appealed more powerfully to English
-workmen and to have influenced in some degree the appearance which they
-imparted to their details.
-
-In another and different direction some of the French books would seem
-to have had an interesting effect. Philibert de l’Orme and Androuet
-du Cerceau had published remarkably fine illustrations of the more
-important buildings then recently erected in France. It is certain
-that John Thorpe, who was the most accomplished and ingenious of the
-English surveyors of his time, had studied du Cerceau’s books, and it
-is quite conceivable that, fired by such an example, he may himself
-have contemplated a similar production for England, and that to this
-idea is owing the very interesting collection of drawings now preserved
-at the Soane Museum. But however this may be, it is clear that some of
-the men who were concerned with the design of large houses thought it
-worth while to preserve their drawings, for, in addition to the Thorpe
-collection, there is that other collection by Thorpe’s contemporary
-and successor, Smithson; while in later years are those connected
-with the work of Inigo Jones, John Webb, and Wren; and in still later
-times Campbell, Gibbs, and other architects made a point of publishing
-illustrations of the buildings which they and their contemporaries had
-designed.
-
-  [Illustration:
-
-      Ground Floor.      Upper Floor.
-
-  FIG. 14.--MY LORD SHEFFIELD’S HOUSE.
-
-      From the Smithson Collection.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 15.--GROUND AND UPPER PLANS OF A HOUSE,
-  NOT NAMED.
-
-      From the Smithson Collection.]
-
-But although we may perhaps see in the books of the sixteenth century
-the genesis of our own English architectural publications, their
-immediate interest lies in the fact that whatever was published
-about the beginning of the seventeenth century dealt with classic
-architecture, and that anyone who sought in books for information
-about building, found nothing about the old Gothic detail, but only
-instructions how to design in the classic style.
-
-The Thorpe collection of drawings is well known, and belongs to the
-order of things which was passing away. But the Smithson collection is
-but little known, and as it forms a link between what was passing and
-what was approaching, it will be of interest to say a few words about
-it, and to give a few illustrations from it.
-
-Of Smithson, as of his predecessors in his calling, very little is
-actually known. He seems to have belonged to a family of architectural
-designers, the members of which have been rather confused by Walpole
-and other writers who have referred to them. The facts seem to be
-that of his parentage there are no records, although chronology would
-admit of Robert Smithson, of Wollaton, being his father; his own
-name was John, he had a son named Huntingdon, a grandson named John
-and a great-grandson named Huntingdon. He himself died in 1634, and
-his son Huntingdon in 1648. They were both buried at Bolsover, in
-Derbyshire, and an inscription over the grave of the son speaks of
-his “skill in architecture.” The two have been confused with each
-other, but their separate identity has recently been made clear.[3]
-According to Walpole, in his “Anecdotes of Painting,” “John Smithson
-was an architect in the service of the Earls of Newcastle. He built
-part of Welbeck in 1604, the riding-house there in 1623,[4] and the
-stables in 1625; and when William Cavendish, Earl and afterwards Duke
-of Newcastle, proposed to repair and make great additions to Bolsover
-Castle, Smithson, it is said, was sent to Italy to collect designs.
-From them I suppose it was that the noble apartment erected by that
-duke, and lately pulled down, was completed, Smithson dying in 1648.[5]
-Many of Smithson’s drawings were purchased by the late Lord Byron from
-his descendants who lived in Bolsover.” On Lord Byron’s death the
-drawings were purchased by the Rev. D’Ewes Coke, and they are now in
-the possession of his descendants at Brookhill Hall.
-
-Many of the drawings have no title or other means of identifying them;
-but such as have go to show that Smithson, who, it would seem, was not
-only buried but also lived at Bolsover on the north-east border of
-Derbyshire, had a considerable local practice, as well as a certain
-amount of work in London. The riding-house and stables at Welbeck,
-mentioned by Walpole, are both in the collection, and there are also
-several drawings relating to Bolsover Castle.
-
-The buildings which go to make the “castle” may be divided into three
-groups: First, there is the castellated portion, built on the site of
-the old keep and begun in 1613: this part is still in good repair.
-Then there is a long range on the terrace--the “noble apartment”
-mentioned by Walpole. This was built by Sir William Cavendish,
-afterwards Duke of Newcastle, who presumably found the older building
-too small. Its principal apartment was a magnificent gallery, but, so
-far as its ruinous state permits the other rooms to be made out (and
-among them was a kitchen), it would appear to have been a completely
-equipped residence. On the view of the castle which adorns the Duke
-of Newcastle’s book on Horsemanship, this building is called “La
-Gallerie.” The third group comprises the riding-house and its adjuncts,
-which adjoin the gallery at its western end.
-
-The few drawings in the Smithson collection which refer to Bolsover
-are all, except one, connected with the castellated portion, and they
-go to prove that John Smithson must have been concerned with that
-particular building. But there is one drawing of a large doorway (No.
-40) which closely resembles the central doorway on the terrace front of
-the gallery, and the general detail of this building, which is large in
-scale, heavy and rather spoilt by laboured freaks, is akin to much else
-that is to be found among the Smithson drawings. This gallery block
-is evidently of two dates. The eastern portion has a certain amount
-of detail in the simpler style of the Jacobean period, while that of
-the western half is more laboured and contorted. At the eastern end
-are five small projecting stones bearing initials and dates; one of
-them has on it H. S. 1629, and may conceivably commemorate Huntingdon
-Smithson. But as it has four neighbours with other initials and the
-dates 1629, 1630, it would appear that in any case he was only one
-out of five persons entitled to recognition. However, the evidence
-of tradition, the date-stone and the drawings clearly point to the
-Smithsons being responsible for the design of the buildings generally,
-and it may well be that the influence of the father is visible in the
-earlier and simpler work, and that of the son in the grandiose gallery,
-with which he may have been busy at some time between his father’s
-death in 1634 and the outbreak of hostilities in 1642. The riding-house
-is much quieter in treatment than the gallery, and its detail is more
-refined. In spite of the tradition that the designs were collected in
-Italy, the work shows more affinity to Dutch models than to Italian, as
-may be gathered from the illustrations (Figs. 13, 16).
-
-The riding-house at Welbeck (Fig. 20) follows the established lines in
-its treatment; it has steep gables with finials, mullioned windows, and
-an open hammer-beam roof: the very heavy pediments over the doors are
-in keeping with those at Bolsover, and with many other details in the
-collection, and they show how crude Smithson was in his treatment of
-classic features. It is important to bear this in mind, because he may
-be considered (although he had an uncommonly heavy hand) as typical of
-the majority of English designers before the influence of Inigo Jones
-began to be felt.
-
-Smithson’s house-plans are of great interest, inasmuch as they belong
-to the order of things which was shortly to pass away. Some of them
-follow the traditional lines which made the hall the principal
-apartment of the house, placing it between the family rooms and the
-servants’ quarters. The plan “for My Lord Sheffield’s house” is an
-example of this arrangement (Fig. 14). It shows the rooms grouped in
-the old way round a courtyard, which had to be traversed in approaching
-the hall from the front door. The hall itself was entered through the
-screens at its lower end, and was flanked at its upper end by the
-parlour and other family rooms, and by the grand staircase. On the
-opposite side of the court were the kitchen, pantry, and other rooms
-for the service of the house. In the four corners of the court were
-square turrets containing subsidiary staircases. On the upper floor
-(Fig. 14) the chief rooms were the dining-chamber, placed as far from
-the kitchen as the limits of the house would allow, and the long
-gallery. The fact of a special room being set apart for dining itself
-indicates a fairly late date in respect of this ancient type of plan.
-As my Lord Sheffield was created Earl of Mulgrave in 1626, the plan
-must be prior to that year, but the house was probably not more than
-ten years old when the change of title took place.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 16.--Bolsover Castle, Derbyshire. The
-  Riding-House.]
-
-The other specimen of Smithson’s planning is one of the H type,
-with the hall in one of the wings (Fig. 15). This is a departure
-from the old arrangement, which would have placed the hall in the
-central block, and thus have brought the buttery (which opens from
-the screens) into close touch with the kitchens. The hall becomes
-here more of a passage-room and less of a living-room than under
-the ancient disposition. There are no sitting-rooms for the family
-on the ground floor, but the principal staircase leads to the great
-chamber on the upper floor, thence to the long gallery and a distant
-“withdrawing-chamber,” as well as to the chapel and several bedrooms.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 17.--Elevation of a House, not named.
-
-      From the Smithson Collection.]
-
-Both these houses are rigidly symmetrical in their external treatment,
-and it is interesting to note how, in addition to preserving such
-old-established rooms as the great chamber and long gallery, they
-depend for their external effect upon old features, such as mullioned
-windows, arcaded entrances, turrets, and the breaking up of the various
-fronts with substantial projections and large bay-windows. These
-devices were customary among the designers of the time of Elizabeth and
-James I., but they were gradually to be superseded by other methods.
-
-There are no elevations preserved which fit these plans, but Smithson
-has left a number of specimens of his way of dealing with the exterior
-of his buildings. The most important in size is illustrated in Fig. 17.
-It follows the usual lines of the period with its mullioned windows,
-large horizontal cornices, arcaded entrance, balustraded parapets, and
-curly central gable; but it is rather clumsy compared with most of John
-Thorpe’s elevations. So, also, is the elevation of “My Ladye Cookes
-house in Houlborn” (Fig. 18) to which additional interest is lent by
-the fact that it is dated 1619. This front, with its large dominating
-pediment and circular-headed window has a later touch about it, and has
-lost most of the light-hearted piquancy which characterises the work of
-the preceding fifty years.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 18.--Lady Cook’s House in Holborn, 1619.
-
-      From the Smithson Collection.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 19.--PERSPECTIVE OF PALACE, WHITEHALL.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 20.--THE RIDING-HOUSE AT WELBECK, 1622.
-
-      From the Smithson Collection.]
-
-  [Illustration:
-
-     FIG. 21.--The Italyan grate over the Watter. A newe
-     Italyan wyndowe, the gallerye at Arrundell house. The newe
-     Italyan gate at Arrundell house in the garden there, 1618.
-
-      From the Smithson Collection.]
-
-The hankering after Italian detail which had affected English designers
-in an increasing degree for many years finds expression in the Smithson
-drawings, among which are several “Italyan” windows and doors, an
-“Italyan” gate (Fig. 21), and one or two “pergulars.”
-
-The Thorpe and Smithson drawings are closely allied both in
-architectural style and in methods of draughtsmanship, although the
-latter collection is obviously later in feeling. There is a vast
-difference in both respects between them and the drawings prepared by
-Inigo Jones and John Webb, which will presently be described. There
-are comparatively few details in the Thorpe and Smithson collections,
-especially in the former. The designers concerned themselves primarily
-with the mass of the building rather than with its particular features.
-The plans in all the collections, both early and late, are drawn with
-much care and many of them with singular neatness. But the elevations
-and perspective views are not of equal excellence. The latter are
-generally drawn by Thorpe as bird’s-eye views. They are in the nature
-of diagrams. There are, it is true, hardly any perspectives among
-the architectural drawings of Jones and Webb, but in the one notable
-instance--the view of a front for Whitehall Palace, at the British
-Museum--the spectator is supposed to be standing on the ground and
-not floating in the air (Fig. 19). In Jones’s designs for the scenery
-of masques there are many interesting architectural compositions,
-and these are perforce drawn to satisfy the eye of a spectator on the
-floor of the theatre. They show great skill in perspective drawing. The
-difference between the two methods is best indicated by describing the
-earlier as archaic and the later as modern. Indeed with the advent of
-Inigo Jones we enter upon a new phase in architectural design; we are
-leaving the ancient ways and turning into the modern.
-
-
-
-
-                                  III
-
-                              INIGO JONES
-
-
-The accession of Charles I. to the throne in 1625 marks a convenient
-date in the development of architectural design to consider briefly
-its condition and tendencies. The king and his court still exercised
-an enormous influence over the life and habits of the people in
-directions other than political. In mediæval times the king was the
-centre of public affairs, the pivot upon which the State turned. His
-own will, even his whims and fancies, counted for much. But for the
-last three-quarters of a century this influence had been gradually
-lessening, and the king’s personal power had been curtailed. It was
-in opposing this tendency, in endeavouring to reassert his personal
-ascendancy, in re-establishing his prerogatives, that Charles came
-into conflict with his subjects and ultimately succumbed. But bearing
-this state of things in mind, it will be more readily understood that
-the influence of the king in relation to architecture, for instance,
-would be very considerable; vastly more so than the influence of any
-individual in the present day. Charles was a man of culture, and
-without crediting him with an intimate knowledge of architectural
-design, we may well believe that he would foster the growth of a
-refined and scholarly version of the style at which English designers
-had been aiming for many years. That is to say, since the tendency was
-to adopt Italian ideas he would like to see them adopted thoroughly
-and with full knowledge. The man to do this for him was there in the
-person of Inigo Jones, who had already been employed by his father, and
-who was the only man in England possessing really competent knowledge
-of Italian detail. Here then was another powerful influence at work
-tending to divert English design from the old traditional channels.
-
-No doubt had Charles been blessed with leisure to gratify his refined
-tastes, and to devote himself to the encouragement of the arts, had he
-been in possession of funds commensurate with his artistic ambitions,
-the Italianising of English architecture would have been more rapid
-than it actually was. But his time was occupied with sterner matters,
-and the huge palace at Whitehall which he is said to have contemplated
-(and his father before him, according to many writers), but of which
-the true history will be presently outlined, never went further than to
-be committed to paper. What he did do, however, was to foster the seed
-which had been sown by his father, and which bore fruit later in the
-century.
-
-The love of Charles for the fine arts was shared by many of his court.
-Thomas Howard, Earl of Arundel, caused not only the marbles which
-still bear his name, but many other fine relics of antiquity, to be
-brought to England. Inigo Jones was frequently employed by the nobility
-to purchase pictures and other treasures, and to see them suitably
-displayed in the houses they were to adorn. John Webb made it one of
-his claims to consideration that he had been commissioned by the “great
-nobility and eminent gentry” to acquire for them medals, statues, and
-other works of art.
-
-Meanwhile, in the country generally, and outside the circle influenced
-by Inigo Jones, the old habits still prevailed, and many houses
-were built, including such important buildings as Aston Hall, in
-Warwickshire, already mentioned, in which the old arrangements of plan
-were retained, and all the old devices for obtaining architectural
-effect were used--mullioned windows, steep or curved gables, large
-and lofty chimney-stacks, turrets and bay-windows, with a strong
-infusion of Italian detail in the form of cornices and pilasters; just
-such devices indeed as had been employed by John Smithson and his
-contemporaries.
-
-When this is borne in mind, when it is remembered what Smithson stands
-for, and that he lived until 1634; that Aston Hall, where Jacobean
-methods were still paramount, was not completed until 1635; it will
-be easier to grasp the significance of Inigo Jones’s Banqueting
-House at Whitehall (Fig. 22), designed in 1619 and finished in 1622,
-in which there is no trace of traditional English design, which
-in fact approaches nearer to Italian models than any building of
-the seventeenth century. No wonder, considering the goal at which
-all designers were more or less aiming, that it was quoted as a
-masterpiece, as the finest flower of modern architecture in England.
-This position it held all through the century, and indeed still
-holds in the opinion of many competent judges. At the time it was
-built it was unique, and for thirty years afterwards travellers might
-have searched England in vain for anything so thoroughly Italian in
-treatment, unless they happened to see the Queen’s House at Greenwich,
-or one or two other buildings by the same architect, such as Sherborne,
-in Gloucestershire, between Northleach and Burford, which was described
-in 1634 as a “stately, rich, compacted Building all of Free-stone,
-flat, and couer’d with Lead, with Strong Battlements about, not much
-unlike to that goodly, and magnificent Building the Banquetting House
-at Whitehall.”[6]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 22.--The Banqueting House, Whitehall,
-  1619–22.]
-
-The Banqueting House must not be regarded as a step in the normal
-development of English design; it was something outside, the work of a
-specially trained and exceptionally gifted man, who achieved in 1619
-what less learned and less skilful men were striving after, consciously
-or unconsciously, for nearly half a century afterwards.
-
-The ultimate influence of Inigo Jones on English architecture was so
-important that it is desirable to know something of his training and
-of his history. He was born in 1573, the parish of St Bartholomew,
-Smithfield.[7] The church register records his baptism: “Enego Jones
-the sonne of Enego Jones was christened the xixth day of July 1573.”
-His father was a cloth-worker in good circumstances at that time, but
-when the lad was sixteen years old, the father was obliged to compound
-with his creditors. There were other children, but it would seem that
-only Inigo and three sisters survived their father, who died in the
-early months of 1597; as he left his property to be divided among his
-four children, he must, to a certain extent, have recovered from his
-financial embarrassments. In any event it would appear that Inigo the
-younger was left to make his own career. It is not known where he
-received his education, nor how thorough, or otherwise, it was: but it
-was apparently up to the average bestowed upon youths of his condition,
-and probably of much the same character, _mutatis mutandis_, as
-would be acquired by boys of the upper middle class to-day.[8] That he
-was a man of culture is indicated by a copy of rhymes in Latin written
-by Thomas Cariat (Coryat) of Brasenose College, Oxford, in 1611, and
-preserved among the State Papers.[9] They describe a philosophical
-feast, among the guests at which was Inigo Jones. There is a tradition,
-but without evidence to support it, that he was apprenticed to a joiner
-in St Paul’s Churchyard. If this were so, it would at least give him
-an amount of practical knowledge which would be of material assistance
-in his later career. But his early training is really a matter for
-conjecture. He says in the preface to “Stone-Heng Restored”: “Being
-naturally inclined in my younger years to study the arts of design, I
-passed into foreign parts to converse with the great masters thereof
-in Italy; where I applied myself to search out the Ruins of those
-ancient Buildings, which, in despite of Time itself, and violence of
-Barbarians, are yet remaining. Having satisfied myself in these, and
-returning to my native country, I applied my mind more particularly to
-the study of Architecture.”
-
-At whose expense he passed into foreign parts, or in what year he first
-did so, there is no record. But it is agreed that he paid two visits to
-Italy, the first somewhere about the year 1600; the second in 1613–14.
-Of the first visit little or nothing is known;[10] but of the second
-there are definite records in the shape of his sketch-book preserved
-at Chatsworth, and of his marginal notes on a copy of Palladio which
-he carried with him from place to place, and which is now in Worcester
-College, Oxford.
-
-During his first visit he seems to have achieved such a reputation that
-Christian IV., King of Denmark and brother of the queen of James I.,
-invited him to enter his service. Here, again, there is no reliable
-information as to his achievements; the only evidence indeed is of a
-negative character and consists of the remark of a Danish gentleman to
-the effect that “your great architect left nothing to my country but
-the fame of his presence.”
-
-On his return to England he seems to have been occupied chiefly in the
-devising of masques and plays, among the earliest of which were some
-given at Christ Church, Oxford, to entertain James I. Oddly enough the
-comment of the chronicler in this case is that he “undertook to further
-them much and furnish them with rare devices, but performed very little
-of that which was expected.”[11] That this failure must have been an
-exceptional case is sufficiently proved by the numerous drawings of
-scenery by him preserved at Chatsworth.
-
-Soon after his return to England he was appointed surveyor to the
-queen (Anne of Denmark), and in the year 1610 surveyor of the works to
-Henry, Prince of Wales, but there is no record of these appointments
-having resulted in any architectural work. Prince Henry died in 1612,
-and in 1613 Jones secured the reversion, after Simon Basil, of the
-office of surveyor of works to the king.[12] In the same year he went
-to Italy for the second time, where he studied the work of celebrated
-painters and architects, as well as the splendid remains of ancient
-architecture which were even more abundant in those days than in these.
-His intercourse with living architects and painters shaped his own
-methods of study and design, and there can be no doubt that he returned
-not only fully equipped to undertake any work that might fall to his
-lot, but deeply imbued with the spirit of Italian art and the prevalent
-Italian methods of design.
-
-He walked on a high plane, his outlook was wider than that of any of
-his contemporaries at home. He had acquired conceptions of architecture
-nobler than those engendered by its application to the ordinary needs
-of daily life. He has left us very little record of his own opinions
-on any subject; it is all the more interesting, therefore, to find in
-his sketch-book, under the date, “Friday y^e 20 January 1614” (1615 new
-style), a page of reflections of which the following is the gist. “In
-all designing of ornament one must first design the ground plain as it
-is for use, and then adorn and compose it with decorum according to its
-use. To say true, all this composed ornament resulting from abundance
-of design, such as was brought in by Michael Angelo and his followers,
-does not in my opinion suit solid architecture but is more appropriate
-to gardens, the ornaments of chimneys, friezes and the inside of
-houses, where such things must of necessity be used. For as outwardly
-every wise man carries himself gravely in public places, yet inwardly
-has imagination and fire which sometimes flies out unrestrained, just
-as Nature sometimes flies out to delight or amuse us, to move us to
-laughter, contemplation, or even horror; so in architecture the outward
-ornament is to be solid, proportionable according to rule, masculine
-and unaffected.”
-
-No epithets more suitable than the two last--masculine and
-unaffected--could be applied to Jones’s own work.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 23.--St Paul’s Church, Covent Garden. West
-  Front.
-
-      From an Engraving by Thomas Sandby.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 24.--The Piazza, Covent Garden.
-
-      From an Engraving by Thomas Sandby.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 25.--Ground Plan, Queen’s House,
-  Greenwich, 1635.]
-
-The amount of Jones’s own work in architecture is scarcely so large as
-has hitherto been supposed. In regard to the various buildings with
-which he has been credited, some of the attributions are supported
-by contemporary evidence in the shape of drawings or of references in
-letters and documents; others by the direct enumeration of his staunch
-admirer, John Webb, who was his pupil and assistant, who married a
-kinswoman of his, and was the executor of his will. Others rest upon
-tradition or upon the opinions of critics. Tradition is not altogether
-reliable, owing partly to a natural tendency to attribute any
-outstanding piece of work to the most celebrated artist of the time,
-and partly to the natural desire of owners to attach a well-known name
-to their possessions. The value of a critic’s opinion obviously depends
-upon that uncertain factor--the ability and equipment of the critic for
-his task, and although the opinion of a competent critic will always
-count for much, it cannot count for so much as direct evidence. The
-evidence in this case consists of allusions in contemporary letters,
-not very numerous or helpful; of architectural drawings by Jones, which
-are helpful but not numerous; and of the testimony of Webb, who was
-in the best position to know what his master actually designed. Webb
-has occasion in his “Vindication of Stone-Heng Restored,” to mention
-Jones’s principal works, which he thus enumerates: The west portico
-of St Paul’s Cathedral, and the reducing-of the body of it “from
-the steeple to the west end, into that order and uniformity we now
-behold”;[13] St Paul’s, Covent Garden (Fig. 23), “built likewise with
-the porticoes about the Piazza there by Mr. Jones” (Fig. 24)[14]; the
-royal chapels at Denmark House and St James’s;[15] the Banqueting House
-at Whitehall; the royal house at Newmarket;[15] and the queen mother’s
-new building at Greenwich.[16] The inscription on Jones’s monument
-which was put up by Webb, designated him as “architectus celeberrimus,”
-and recorded merely that he built the Royal White Hall (Aul. Alb. Reg.)
-and restored the Cathedral of St Paul.[17]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 26.--The Queen’s House, Greenwich,
-  1619–35.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 27.--Elevation.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 28.--Coleshill, Berkshire, 1650. Ground
-  Plan.]
-
-This list need not necessarily be considered as complete, but Webb
-evidently regarded the buildings he mentions as the most noteworthy
-of Jones’s productions, inasmuch as he advances them as proofs of
-his skill in architecture, upon which his fame would rest much more
-securely than upon his literary and antiquarian effort in “Stone-Heng
-Restored.”[18]
-
-The authority for the attribution to Jones of other buildings, such
-as the enlargement of Somerset House, the chirurgeon’s theatre, and
-King Charles’s block at Greenwich, rests upon the Worcester College
-and Burlington-Devonshire drawings, but these buildings should more
-properly be credited to Webb, by whose hand they were drawn.
-
-  [Illustration: COLESHILL HOVSE:
-
-  FIG. 29.--ELEVATION OF COLESHILL.]
-
-The largest design by far which has hitherto been ascribed to Jones is
-that for the great palace at Whitehall, but it will be presently shown
-that the ascription is wrong, and that here also the chief credit ought
-to be given to John Webb.
-
-But although in the interests of historical accuracy it is necessary
-to throw doubt upon much of the work with which Inigo Jones has been
-credited, what remains is sufficient to establish his fame, and it
-is beyond controversy that he was regarded as the “Vitruvius of his
-age.” What he undoubtedly did was to introduce into England a refined
-and scholarly rendering of that Italian manner at which all designers
-had been aiming for half a century. As Webb says in addressing Dr
-Charleton, “I must tell you that what was truly meant by the Art
-of Design was scarcely known in this kingdom, until he, under the
-protection of his late Sacred Majesty, and that famous Mœcenas of Arts,
-the Right Honourable Thomas Earl of Arundel and Surrey, brought it in
-use and esteem among us here.” We can also agree with him when he says
-that “Mr. Jones was generally learned, eminent for Architecture, a great
-geometrician, and in designing with his pen (as Sir Anthony Vandike
-used to say) not to be equalled by whatever great masters in his time,
-for boldness, softness, sweetness, and sureness of his touches.”[19]
-Of the buildings ascribed by Webb to Inigo Jones there remain but
-three--the Banqueting House, St Paul’s, Covent Garden, which has been
-much altered, and the Queen’s House at Greenwich, which was begun in
-1619 and finished in 1635. It is quite as far removed as the Banqueting
-House from the traditional type of English design. It is essentially
-Italian both in plan and elevation (Figs. 25–27), and it indicates how
-completely Inigo Jones had departed from the old ways. The original
-drawings for the house itself have not been preserved, but there exist
-several sketches by Jones’s hand of chimney-pieces and other details
-connected with it.[20]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 30.--COLESHILL. THE STAIRCASE.]
-
-Another house attributed to Jones on fairly good evidence is Coleshill,
-in Berkshire, which stands on a steep hillside facing westwards across
-the valley to Highworth. It is a striking embodiment of that cultivated
-manner in architecture which was begun by Jones, continued by Webb,
-and was destined gradually to supersede the traditional methods of the
-countryside. Although thoroughly English in feeling it could never
-have been devised without an intimate knowledge of Italian detail. It
-is simple, dignified, and regular, depending for its effect upon nice
-proportion and skilful detail, not at all upon picturesque variety
-or broken grouping. It is a plain oblong in plan, without wings or
-projections (Fig. 28); it is lofty in elevation, without gables or even
-a pediment (Fig. 29); the corners are emphasised with bold quoins,
-the roof springs from a widely projecting cornice, and is crowned
-with a stout balustrade surrounding a spacious lead-covered flat, out
-of which rises a large central cupola. The slopes of the roof are
-diversified with dormers; the massive chimney-stacks are accurately and
-symmetrically placed, each answering to each. There is nothing about
-it haphazard or unexpected, nothing quaint or piquant; everything is
-correct, regular, and stately. It cannot, however, be deemed, like
-Tennyson’s Maud,
-
-    “Faultily faultless, icily regular, splendidly null,”
-
-for its effect is both striking and attractive; it is noble without
-being oppressively grand.
-
-The simplicity of the exterior arises from the simplicity of the plan.
-The ground floor, which is mainly occupied by the reception rooms and
-the great staircase, is raised high above the ground, thus leaving
-space for the windows of the basement, which is devoted to the kitchens
-and servants’ quarters. The upper floor contains the grand saloon
-and bedrooms; in the roof are commodious attics; a staircase in the
-cupola leads on to the flat roof, whence fine views are obtained of the
-distant Marlborough Downs.
-
-Although the house is of considerable size, the accommodation is
-not ample in proportion; the bedrooms are large and lofty, but few
-in number. Homeliness is somewhat sacrificed to stateliness. It is
-inevitable that these fine, regular houses should have the defects of
-their qualities.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 31.--COLESHILL. CEILING OF THE
-  HALL.]
-
-The plan is as different from the traditional plan of English houses
-as are those in Kent’s “Designs of Inigo Jones,” a collection which
-will be dealt with more particularly later on. There is no great hall
-connecting the parlours with the kitchens, and serving itself as one
-of the chief living-rooms. The servants are relegated to the basement,
-the whole of the ground floor is given up to the family, the hall is
-more of a vestibule than a living-room. In former times the staircase,
-although often handsomely treated, consisted of a single series of
-flights occupying a compact space. At Coleshill a vast hall is devoted
-to the staircase, or rather to two staircases, each equally eligible,
-starting from the same place and terminating at either end of the same
-landing (Fig. 30).
-
-Although the servants were sent half underground, some of the
-stateliness followed them, and the approach to the back door is flanked
-by two massive pillars, each of which contains a coved niche.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 32.--Raynham Park, Norfolk. Ground Plan.]
-
-The building is attributed to Inigo Jones on the testimony of a tablet
-in the house, and its date, according to the same authority, is 1650.
-In the absence of any other evidence this assertion, although not
-contemporaneous with the building, may be accepted;[21] but it should
-be remembered that Jones died in 1652, and that the last years of his
-life, or almost the last, were spent in the turmoil of the Civil War.
-So much did the unrest disturb his life that he appointed John Webb
-to be his deputy in the office of surveyor of the works.[22] In any
-case it must have been either Jones or Webb who designed Coleshill,
-for there was nobody else who had at that time received the training
-necessary to produce it.
-
-There are several fine ceilings (Fig. 31) wrought in Jones’s bold
-fashion, which was as different from that which produced the busy and
-slender patterns of Elizabethan work, as was the general treatment
-of plan and elevation from that of an Elizabethan mansion. It is
-interesting to find one of the smaller rooms panelled in an earlier
-style, Jacobean in character, with panelling designed for its position,
-not imported from elsewhere; and as it is difficult to suppose that
-Jones would have departed from his usual manner in this particular
-case, it is probable that the room was left to the unaided skill of
-some local craftsman, who relied on his own traditions.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 33.--RAYNHAM PARK, NORFOLK,
-  _cir._ 1636. GARDEN FRONT.]
-
-Of Jones’s connection with Raynham Park, in Norfolk (Figs. 32, 33),
-there is no evidence beyond tradition and the style of the work itself;
-but much of this has touches about it which are quite in his manner.
-There are indications that the house was built at two periods, and
-these make it difficult to attribute the whole work to one designer.
-But the treatment of the front, with its two wings of decided though
-slight projection, and its rather heavily-curved gables, serves to make
-it a connecting link between the old and the new styles. The date of
-this house is generally stated to be 1636, but further investigation is
-required in order to arrive at its true history, and to account for the
-two periods of building.
-
-At Wilton, in Wiltshire, is some of the finest of Jones’s internal
-work, and his connection with this house is established by a series
-of designs for the ceilings preserved among the Worcester College
-drawings. The south front, of which there is a sketch in the R.I.B.A.
-collection, would hardly have served to make his reputation, but the
-splendid suite of state rooms is unrivalled in any English house. One
-of these is a double cube, being 60 ft. by 30 ft. by 30 ft. high, and
-another is a single cube of 30 ft. The double cube, with its stately
-panelling filled with Vandyke’s portraits of the family, deserves
-its reputation as the finest room in the country (Fig. 34). A plain,
-double cube of these dimensions would be unpleasantly lofty (as may be
-realised by visiting one at St James’s Palace), but here at Wilton the
-great height is lessened to the eye by the introduction of a large cove
-which springs from a bold cornice some 9 ft. below the ceiling, thus
-reducing the height of the walls to 21 ft.
-
-The double cube and such precise proportions were quite new in English
-architecture; so also were the careful proportions of the windows and
-their relation to the wall space, the pervading refinement of the
-mouldings, and the simplicity (almost amounting to baldness in some
-cases) of the general treatment. These factors inevitably influenced
-the plan of the house, which became much less elastic than of old, and
-less adaptable to the wants of English life. They tended towards the
-glorification of the house at the expense of its inhabitants and to
-subordinate household comfort to architecture.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 34.--WILTON HOUSE, WILTSHIRE. THE
-  DOUBLE CUBE ROOM. About 1649.]
-
-A small but admirable piece of work which may safely be assigned to
-Jones is the water-gate of York House (Fig. 35). Its present rather
-forlorn situation at the bottom of Buckingham Street, Strand, gives no
-indication that it was an adjunct of the town house of the princely
-Villiers, Duke of Buckingham, the “Steenie” of Charles I. York House,
-for so the place was called, had belonged to the Archbishops of York,
-but when it came into the hands of Buckingham, he pulled it down and
-built a large and temporary structure, apparently for the purpose of
-using it for state occasions. Within its walls he housed a magnificent
-collection of pictures and other works of art, purchased from
-Rubens.[23] Gerbier (who will be mentioned again later) was employed by
-the duke to design some of the new work at York House, and hence the
-water-gate has been attributed to him. But the fact that a drawing of
-it by Webb is included among the “Inigo Jones” drawings precludes this
-idea, for it is hard to imagine either Jones or Webb condescending to
-delineate any work of Gerbier’s. Apart from this it is improbable that
-Gerbier could have designed anything so good. That excellent mason and
-sculptor, Nicholas Stone, was employed upon its execution, and he put
-in a claim to the design, but Webb’s drawing is a sufficient answer to
-this pretension also.
-
-York House was sold in 1672 by the second duke, the “chymist, fiddler,
-statesman, and buffoon” of Dryden, to a syndicate who pulled down the
-house, and covered the site with new buildings, leaving the water-gate
-as practically the sole relic of the old palace. Its appearance, backed
-by its newer neighbours, is well indicated in a drawing by Thomas
-Sandby, made about 1760 (reproduced as the frontispiece).
-
-Inigo Jones died in June 1652.[24] His will is dated the 22nd July
-1650, when he was “aged seaventy-seaven yeares.” He left in specified
-sums the amount of £4,150, and he bequeathed the debt owing to him
-from the late king and queen, of which the amount is not stated, in
-equal shares to his executor, John Webb, and one Richard Gammon, a
-carpenter, after deducting £50 for the paymaster of the works payable
-within a month after the discharge of the debt. He disposes of one half
-of his wearing apparel, but does not mention the other half, nor does
-he dispose of the residue of his estate. He mentions no collection of
-drawings (as did John Webb) nor any books. On the face of it he can
-hardly be considered a wealthy man at his death. A really exhaustive
-account of his life has yet to be written; one which shall be free
-from the undemonstrable attribution of work to him; free from baseless
-eulogy on the one hand and detraction on the other; one which shall
-fairly balance tradition and evidence; which shall take account of him
-as an artist and scene-painter, as a surveyor dealing from day to day
-with prosaic details, and as an architectural designer. It has been no
-part of the present purpose to enter minutely into these particulars;
-it was outside the scope of this work to marshal all the evidence for
-or against his authorship of every building with which he has been
-credited. The aim has been to indicate the general influence he had
-upon English architecture, particularly in respect of house design.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 35.--The Water-Gate of York House, London.]
-
-He was the most notable figure that had hitherto appeared upon the
-stage of English architecture, the most refined and scholarly, with an
-exquisite sense of proportion. He was at heart an artist, just as Wren
-was at heart a man of science.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 36.--Drawing by Inigo Jones for the
-  Banqueting House, Whitehall. This drawing was carried out, but with
-  slight modifications; the pediment was omitted, the roof being flat,
-  with a balustrade.
-
-      From the Chatsworth Collection, by kind permission of the Duke of
-         Devonshire.]
-
-
-
-
-                                  IV
-
-               THE DRAWINGS OF INIGO JONES AND JOHN WEBB
-
-
-                            WEBB’S OWN WORK
-
-Reference has been made more than once to the design for an immense
-palace at Whitehall. The drawings for this, which are, most of them,
-preserved at Worcester College, Oxford, were first introduced to the
-public by William Kent, the architect, in the year 1727, under the
-title of “Designs of Inigo Jones.” There are two volumes of this book,
-the first occupied chiefly with the great palace; the second with
-miscellaneous designs, principally houses. The drawings used by Kent
-were in the possession of Lord Burlington, the well-known dilettante;
-at any rate, some of them were, while others seem to have belonged to
-Dr. Clarke of All Souls College, Oxford, who subsequently left them to
-Worcester College.
-
-The history of the drawings is not altogether free from obscurity,
-but it appears to be as follows. John Webb had in his possession a
-large number of drawings, mostly done by himself, but including some
-by his old master, Inigo Jones. At his death in 1672 Webb left all
-his “library and books, and all his prints and cuts and drawings of
-architecture” to his son William, with strict injunctions that they
-were to be kept together.[25] This injunction was not respected, and
-it is said that the widow of William Webb disposed of the collection.
-John Aubrey, writing between 1669 and 1696, says that “Mr. Oliver, the
-City Surveyor, hath all his [Jones’s] papers and designs, not only of
-St Paul’s Cathedral, etc., and the Banqueting House, but his designs
-of all Whitehall suitable to the Banqueting House; a rare thing, which
-see.”[26] It is almost certain that the drawings mentioned by Aubrey
-were those left to William Webb by his father, for it is extremely
-unlikely that there would have been two collections of the kind. There
-is no record of how Mr. Oliver obtained them, nor of how he disposed of
-them; the next thing that is known is that Lord Burlington had acquired
-the larger half and Dr. Clarke the smaller, but in some respects the
-more important. Lord Burlington’s portion descended to the Dukes of
-Devonshire, and the seventh duke made a gift of a great part to the
-Royal Institute of British Architects, in whose library they are
-preserved. Some, however, he retained at Chatsworth, including a series
-entitled “Designs for Whitehall,” which are, as a matter of fact,
-mostly preliminary sketches by Webb for the various versions of the
-great palace; and a large number of designs by Jones for the scenery,
-setting, and costumes of masques, as well as some by Webb. Dr. Clarke
-bequeathed his portion to Worcester College, Oxford, on his death in
-1736. It is practically certain that the Burlington collection and
-that at Worcester College were originally one collection, inasmuch as
-each contains drawings which supplement some of those in the other.
-At Worcester College are the “designs for all Whitehall suitable to
-the Banqueting House,” together with a large number of miscellaneous
-drawings. At Chatsworth are designs of the Banqueting House itself,
-together with many preliminary drawings for the palace at Whitehall.
-At the Royal Institute of British Architects is a drawing of the west
-front of St Paul’s, together with many others, notably those of the
-King Charles block at Greenwich, and almost the whole series which Kent
-used for his second volume of “Designs of Inigo Jones.”
-
-Besides these drawings there are yet others attributed to Jones at
-the British Museum. Some of these are the originals of the design for
-Whitehall Palace published by Campbell in his “Vitruvius Britannicus,”
-which is quite different from that published by Kent. Others are
-sketches of figures and drapery undoubtedly drawn by Jones. The
-drawings used by Campbell were in 1717 in the possession of William
-Emmett, of Bromley, an architect, but it is not known how he became
-possessed of them, nor whether they once formed part of Webb’s
-collection, but their style links them up with the rest of the drawings
-of the palace.[27]
-
-The whole of these drawings have until quite recently been regarded
-as the work of Jones himself. Aubrey mentions them as his; Kent
-published many of them as his; Campbell attributed to him those which
-he used, presumably on the authority of Emmett. All subsequent writers
-have taken the authorship for granted, although some have agreed that
-Jones’s hand is not visible in the finished designs of the palace,
-preserved at Worcester College. This acquiescence in established
-opinion is not surprising. The drawings had not been thoroughly
-examined and catalogued, and in particular those at one library had not
-been collated with those at the others. But when recently the various
-collections came to be catalogued and definitely arranged, when, by the
-aid of photographs, they were brought together and compared one with
-another, very interesting results were obtained. It soon became easy to
-differentiate between Jones’s draughtsmanship and Webb’s. The result
-was that it became apparent that nearly the whole of the drawings
-should be assigned to Webb and very few to Jones. Nor would logic allow
-a halt to be called there, and suffer us to say that Webb may have been
-the draughtsman, but Jones was still the designer. For many of the
-drawings are sketches with notes in Webb’s writing, which go to show
-how he developed his ideas as he went along. It would be impossible in
-the space at command to indicate fully which drawings are by Jones,
-which are by Webb inspired by Jones, and which are of Webb’s own
-design. But in the latter category the evidence constrains us to place
-the designs for the palace at Whitehall, the designs in the second
-volume of Kent, and those for King Charles’s block at Greenwich.[28]
-
-Although the pursuit of truth compels us to credit Webb rather than
-Jones with the bulk of the designs in both of Kent’s volumes, admirers
-of the great master will probably not only survive the shock, but will
-eventually be grateful to find that the indifferent pieces of design
-which mar many of those excellent conceptions need not be attributed to
-him.
-
-It would be impossible to pursue the subject fully here, but the branch
-of it which refers to the palace of Whitehall is sufficiently curious
-to justify a brief account.
-
-The generally received opinion was that two designs were prepared for
-the palace, one of which was published by Campbell in 1722, and the
-other by Kent in 1727. Authorities have differed as to which was the
-earlier to be devised, but both are attributed to Jones. Both designs
-include the well-known Banqueting House, and it has been taken for
-granted that they must have been designed before that building was
-erected. The date of its erection is on record. It was begun on 1st
-June 1619, and completed in March 1622. The assumption, therefore, was
-that James I. contemplated either the vast palace illustrated by Kent,
-or the smaller version of Campbell, but that the only portion actually
-built was the Banqueting House.
-
-As a matter of fact, James can have had nothing to do with either of
-these designs. Campbell states that the design which he published
-was submitted to Charles I. by Inigo Jones in 1639. The accuracy of
-this statement has been questioned, but it was evidently made on the
-authority of a formal inscription written by Emmett on one of the
-drawings. If true, it disposes of the idea that this design was made
-prior to the building of the Banqueting House. But that idea is in
-any case not tenable, for the Banqueting House was built to replace
-an older building which was burnt down in January 1619; it was built
-immediately after that catastrophe, and built on the same site. As only
-some three months elapsed between the destruction of the old building
-and the completion of the design for the new one, any idea of the
-conception of so vast a scheme as the new palace in that space of time
-must be abandoned. Moreover, there are preserved at Chatsworth Jones’s
-own drawings for the new Banqueting House, which is there shown as
-an isolated structure (Figs. 36, 37). Further, although the accounts
-for the new Banqueting House are preserved, together with a detailed
-description of it, and a record of a payment to Inigo Jones for the
-“model” of it, there is no mention of any other buildings in connection
-with it, contemplated or otherwise. Nor is there any contemporary
-reference to the projected palace of any kind until the one presently
-to be mentioned.
-
-In the Smithson collection there is an interesting drawing which shows
-a plan of the old Banqueting House previous to its destruction, and an
-elevation of the ground story of the new Banqueting House (Fig. 38).
-They are obviously not drawn to the same scale, inasmuch as the new
-building was 100 ft. long as against 120 ft. for the old. The fact
-that Smithson thought it worth while to draw the ground story, so far
-as then built, suggests that he was struck by its novel treatment.
-The rusticated stonework, the flat arched openings, and the unmoulded
-plinth and stringcourse were unfamiliar features.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 37.--Drawing by Inigo Jones for the
-  Banqueting House, Whitehall. A preliminary sketch, subsequently
-  modified. The annexes were omitted.
-
-      From the Chatsworth Collection.]
-
-  [Illustration:
-
-     FIG. 38.--Plan of the Old Banqueting House which was
-     burnt down. Below is an Elevation of “The First Storye of the
-     Newe Banketinge house.”
-
-      From the Smithson Collection.]
-
-There is so far nothing to connect Jones with the designs for the
-palace, as distinguished from the Banqueting House, except the
-assumption of Kent and Campbell. An examination of the various
-drawings serves further to dissociate him from them. At Worcester
-College are the finished drawings for the scheme published by Kent: but
-in addition to those which he used are others which have not hitherto
-been elucidated; some of them are, in fact, the elevations and sections
-of a different scheme, while one is the isolated plan of a third. The
-key to this part of the puzzle lies at Chatsworth in the shape of
-the collection of drawings and sketches, bound together and entitled
-“Designs for Whitehall.” These turn out to be almost entirely the work
-of Webb, among them being, however, the drawings of the Banqueting
-House by Jones himself. The drawings by Webb are the preliminary
-sketches for the finished set at Worcester College, as well as some
-for yet other schemes, and among them are the elevations, as well as
-a plan, corresponding to the isolated plan at Worcester College. The
-writing and the drawing, the thumb-nail sketches, the alterations,
-variations, and corrections all go to show that here we have the
-inception of several schemes, all by Webb, the ultimate outcome of
-which was the well-known design published some eighty years afterwards
-by Kent.
-
-There are, in fact, not two, but at least seven different schemes for
-the palace, more or less worked out. Of these two are by Webb, and are
-preliminary to the third, which was published by Kent; a fourth is a
-variant of the third; the fifth and sixth are undoubtedly by Webb; the
-seventh is the British Museum design published by Campbell.
-
-The conclusion forced upon the inquirer by a prolonged examination
-of the drawings--that Webb was the real author of the designs for
-the palace--is curiously confirmed by a document preserved in the
-“State Papers,” an important passage in which has hitherto escaped the
-attention it deserves. This is a petition, signed by Webb, presented
-soon after the restoration of Charles II., wherein he seeks the office
-of surveyor of the king’s works, which was about to be bestowed upon
-Mr. Denham, afterwards Sir John.[29] The whole document is interesting,
-but is too long to quote in its entirety. In the petition itself, Webb
-says that he was by the especial command of “your Majesty’s Royal
-Father of ever blessed memory brought up by Inigo Jones, Esq., your
-Majesty’s late surveyor of the works, in the study of architecture, for
-enabling him to do your Royal Father and your Majesty service in the
-said office. In order whereunto he was by Mr. Jones, upon leaving his
-house at the beginning of the late unhappy war, appointed his Deputy
-to execute the said place in his absence, which your petitioner did,
-until by a Committee of Parliament in the year 1643 he was thrust
-out.” He then goes on to say that in preparing the royal houses for
-His Majesty’s reception he has engaged his own credit to the amount
-of £8,140. 5s. 4d., of which he has only received £500, and prays the
-king to “settle upon him the surveyor’s office of your majesty’s work,
-whereunto your Royal Father assigned him, and to that end only ordered
-his education.” In the “Brief of Mr. Webb’s Case,” attached to the
-petition, occurs the remarkable piece of testimony alluded to: “That he
-was Mr. Jones’s Deputy and in actual possession of the office upon his
-leaving London, and attended his Majesty in that capacity at Hampton
-Court and at the Isle of Wight, where he received his majesty’s command
-to design a palace for Whitehall, which he did until his majesty’s
-unfortunate calamity caused him to desist.”
-
-This striking statement supplies an explanation of the whole intricate
-series of drawings, including those at the British Museum. It is the
-culminating proof that they were the work of Webb and not of Jones.
-It accounts for the absence of any reference in earlier documents to
-a project which would have been vast enough to attract much attention
-in court circles had it been in contemplation; and indeed it goes to
-show that the project never had any real vitality, but was merely
-an exercise on paper. Incidentally, it illustrates the inability
-of Charles I. to perceive the real trend of events, for he gave
-instructions for this huge palace when already the shadow of death had
-almost enveloped him.
-
-Webb’s petition did not serve to divert the gift of the coveted office
-from Denham to himself, but it may have suggested to Charles II. the
-idea of resuscitating the project of a palace at Whitehall; for there
-is a block plan by Webb of a scheme differing from all the others,
-dated 17th October 1661, and there are notes in Webb’s hand on some of
-the drawings which show that he submitted to the second Charles some
-of the designs which he had prepared for the first, and that they were
-“taken,” or accepted. It is certain that Charles II. did entertain for
-a time the idea of rebuilding the palace, for Evelyn relates, under
-the date 27th October 1664, that being at Whitehall, the king took him
-aside into a window recess, and having borrowed from him a pencil and
-paper, proceeded to draw, using the window-sill as a table, a plan for
-the projected palace, with the rooms of state and other particulars.
-But in Webb’s case, as in so many others, the bright hopes inspired by
-the Restoration were overclouded; the projected palace went no further
-than to be a design on paper; the surveyorship was given to Denham, and
-on his death, in spite of a promise of its reversion, Webb suffered the
-mortification of seeing the young and wholly inexperienced Wren, who
-was at that time not even an architect, passed over his head.
-
-With regard to the design of the palace much has been written in
-praise, something in dispraise. Nearly all that has been said has been
-founded upon Kent’s version. The vastness of the scheme and the
-belief that Jones devised it have acted and reacted upon each other in
-stimulating admiration. Had the project been of ordinary dimensions,
-or had not Jones been credited with it, it is conceivable that less
-eulogistic language might have been employed.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 39.--PLAN FOR THE PALACE AT WHITEHALL.
-
-      From the Worcester College Collection.
-
-     This is the plan utilised by Kent, but reversed by him in the
-     printing of it. The Charing Cross front is at the top, the
-     Westminster front at the bottom, the River front on the right,
-     the Park front on the left. The Banqueting House, then already
-     built, was to have been incorporated in the scheme. It lies
-     between the large court and the small court in the right-hand
-     bottom corner.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 40.--SKETCHES FOR PARTS OF THE PALACE AT
-  WHITEHALL, INCLUDING TWO FOR THE “PERSIANS.” The sketches and
-  writing are by Webb’s hand.
-
-      From the Chatsworth Collection, by kind permission of the Duke of
-          Devonshire.]
-
-The scheme, however, is truly remarkable.[30] It is of vast size;
-the buildings and courts would have covered an area of some 23 acres
-(Fig. 39). They would have extended from the Charity Commission’s
-offices, south of the Banqueting House, to within a hundred feet of
-Craig’s Court on the north; and from Whitehall Court on the east, right
-across the Horse Guards parade and up to the enclosure of the park
-on the west. They are skilfully disposed, with great architectural
-magnificence. The noble Banqueting House was to be incorporated, but
-it was to be one of the minor features. There were to be seven courts;
-the largest, in the middle of the building, was 732 ft. long by 370
-ft. wide; the four corner courts, each 280 ft. by 180 ft.; one of the
-courts was to be circular, 220 ft. in diameter, and its columns were
-to be fashioned in the likeness of venerable men in flowing draperies,
-called Persians, as distinguished from the female figures which,
-fulfilling a similar purpose, were called Caryatides.
-
-All these particulars can be gathered from Kent’s published version.
-He gives plans, elevations, and sections, but he gives no internal
-features save the insignificant matters inherent in the sections.
-Webb’s drawings, on the other hand, include not only sketches for
-the general plan and for detailed portions of it, not only sketches
-for external features, and among them several alternatives for the
-Persians, but also the working out of lobbies, staircases, chapels and
-the like (Figs. 40, 41). It is true that these details are part of
-one of the preliminary schemes, but they show how seriously he took
-his work, and how thoroughly he had mastered the details of classic
-design. These sketches are unmistakably Webb’s; there are none by Jones
-relating to the designing of the palace. It is interesting to compare
-Webb’s large plan for Whitehall with Philibert de l’Orme’s plan for
-the Tuileries, which has two oval courts set within larger ones. Webb
-may have got his idea of the circular Persian court from this source,
-and indeed the whole plan may have been a help to him, possibly; but
-his scheme is far larger and more elaborate than De l’Orme’s and is
-treated in a different style.
-
-The appearance which the building would have presented from the river
-is well shown in Thomas Sandby’s drawing (Fig. 1), hitherto unknown.
-The view is supposed to have been taken from the gardens of old
-Somerset House previous, of course, to the erection of Waterloo Bridge.
-It is the most poetic rendering of the great scheme which has been
-attempted. It is founded on the version published by Kent, so far as
-the river front is concerned, and on one of the other seven designs
-in respect of the front facing to the right of the spectator. On the
-original drawings this front is considerably longer than Sandby makes
-it, the lower portion being more than half as long again; a good idea
-may thus be obtained of the magnitude of the conception.
-
-Admitting to the full the great skill and knowledge which the designs
-display and which prove that Webb was not unworthy of the august
-influence which placed him under the tuition of Inigo Jones, it is
-nevertheless no great matter for regret that the palace was never
-built. It can hardly be held that the complete design maintains the
-high standard of the Banqueting House. Much of it indeed verges on
-the commonplace. So vast a building would have been a burden on any
-monarch; it would inevitably have fallen from its high estate, and
-would probably have drifted to being put to such ignoble uses as was
-the much smaller palace of the Louvre in Paris. If fate had been less
-relentless it might eventually have been devoted to some public use for
-which it was ill-contrived--public offices or a museum. Architecture,
-although apparently the most permanent of all the arts, suffers most
-from change. Buildings may remain, but the uses for which they were
-designed either cease or are so modified that the buildings become
-unsuitable. Then follows degradation, decay, or even destruction: at
-the luckiest, a diversion from the original purpose. The Banqueting
-House itself is a case in point; for who among those who inspect the
-interesting collection it now contains have any notion of why it was
-built, or can picture, even faintly, the scenes enacted within its
-walls?
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 41.--SKETCHES FOR PARTS OF THE PALACE AT
-  WHITEHALL, BY WEBB.
-
-      From the Chatsworth Collection.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 42.--ELEVATIONS OF A HOUSE, BY INIGO
-  JONES.
-
-      From the Burlington-Devonshire Collection at the Royal Institute
-         of British Architects.]
-
-In addition to the direct evidence which goes to show that Jones was
-not the designer of the palace at Whitehall, there is the evidence of
-such architectural drawings as are either actually signed by him, or
-such as can almost certainly be attributed to him. All told, these
-amount to comparatively few, and they exhibit curious inconsistencies.
-Some are almost puerile, although drawn when he was mature in years.
-Others (and these are more numerous) are strong, simple, and noble,
-full of restraint, and depending chiefly upon proportion for their
-effect (Fig. 42). They are large in scale, and are mainly drawn with
-a free hand. Indeed it is characteristic of Jones to draw to a large
-scale and with little aid from instruments. He appears to have been
-impatient of petty details, and it is extremely doubtful whether he
-could have brought his wide-sweeping hand down to the working out of a
-complicated plan on the small scale actually employed in the Whitehall
-drawings.[31]
-
-In the collections of earlier date, John Thorpe’s and Smithson’s, the
-bulk of the drawings may safely be attributed to Thorpe and Smithson
-respectively; which makes the absence of drawings by Jones all the
-more remarkable. And it must be remembered that although there are few
-architectural drawings by him there are many of other kinds, notably of
-the scenery for masques and of the human figure.[32] Indeed, to judge
-only by his drawings one would regard him as a painter rather than an
-architect. His surviving architectural drawings may be reckoned by
-dozens; those for masques, figure studies, and drapery by hundreds.
-His figure studies and drapery are executed with great vigour and a
-masterly touch. His sketches for the numerous masques, of which he
-designed the setting, are spontaneous and bold (Fig. 43). Many of them
-have an architectural character, and, needless to say, the architecture
-is always classic in style. There is one, however, which represents a
-scene near London; the wings are composed of old houses, the backcloth
-is a distant view of London itself with old St Paul’s as the principal
-feature.[33] It is interesting to see that the houses in the foreground
-are Jacobean in treatment, yet Jacobean with a larger infusion of
-classic detail than houses of the period actually exhibited. The
-artist’s hand instinctively sought a classic expression.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 43.--Masque by Inigo Jones.
-
-      From the Burlington-Devonshire Collection at the R.I.B.A.]
-
-Jones, indeed, designed most of the masques presented at court during
-the reigns of James I. and his son, and collaborated with several
-of the different poets who wrote the words of these fanciful plays;
-with Ben Jonson, Samuel Daniell, Thomas Campion, George Chapman, and
-Aurelian Townshend. One of his efforts was less successful than could
-have been wished, although it was for an occasion when expectation was
-particularly high--the masque on Twelfth Night 1618, when the prince
-was to take a part for the first time. Gossiping letters dubbed it
-poor, said that Inigo Jones had lost reputation, and that it was indeed
-so dull that the poet, Ben Jonson, ought to return to his old trade of
-brick making.[34]
-
-But in spite of the gossips Jones was a skilful scene-painter, and owed
-much of his facility in the art to the months he had spent in Italy
-conversing, as he says, with the great masters in design. To him we
-owe the first introduction of movable scenery into English theatres.
-He was also a practical surveyor of some ability; already in 1613 he
-had been appointed surveyor of his majesty’s works, and although in
-those days it was not necessarily a practical man who was appointed to
-such a post, yet a clever man, even if ill-equipped at first, would
-soon acquire experience. The State Papers show that he was kept busy
-with the duties of his office, duties which included many matters of
-dull routine. It is perhaps worthy of note that in matters requiring
-detailed reports and estimates he was generally commissioned along
-with one or two others who may (or may not) have had more practical
-knowledge than himself. It is also interesting to find that in several
-cases where repairs or alterations were under consideration, special
-stress was laid in the reports upon the probable result on the beauty
-of the buildings they affected. This particular and uncommon touch may
-certainly be credited to Jones.
-
-In order fully to understand the subject of the so-called Inigo Jones
-drawings and their influence on English architecture, it will be
-advisable to set out again what and where they are.
-
-Firstly, there are those for the palace at Whitehall. Of these the
-finished designs, utilised by Kent, are at Worcester College, Oxford,
-and the preliminary drawings are at Chatsworth. These, as already
-shown, must be credited to Webb. There is also at the British Museum
-another and much scantier set, utilised by Campbell.
-
-Secondly, there are at Worcester College a number of miscellaneous
-drawings, mostly by Webb, but including a few by Jones.
-
-Thirdly, there are in the library of the Royal Institute of British
-Architects a large number of miscellaneous drawings, also mostly by
-Webb, but also including a few by Jones. The most important of these
-are the series of designs utilised by Kent in his “Designs of Inigo
-Jones,” and the drawings for the Charles II. block at Greenwich
-Hospital. Practically all these are by Webb.
-
-These drawings were unknown to the public until Kent published the
-“Designs” in 1727. His two volumes comprise, as already mentioned, the
-designs of Whitehall Palace, and a series of houses, large and small.
-It was not until they were published that the public generally knew
-anything about them, and it was accordingly not till then that they
-affected architectural design. Walpole makes this quite clear: “It
-was in this reign,” he says--that of George II.--“that architecture
-resumed all her rights. Noble publications of Palladio, Jones, and the
-antique recalled her to true principles and correct taste; she found
-men of genius to execute her rules, and patrons to countenance their
-labours.”[35]
-
-But apart from their effect upon the public, the insight which these
-drawings give into the inner working of the designers’ minds is of
-great interest. Besides the finished drawings there are innumerable
-sketches for plans, elevations, and details, as well as many scraps
-copied from Italian books on architecture, notably from Serlio.
-Comparing these and Jones’s own sketches with similar memoranda and
-sketches by Italian architects of the period, it is curious to find
-how thoroughly he adopted their particular methods of work, and after
-him Webb likewise. Everything is classic in style, all the proportions
-are carefully worked out. The lengths and heights of buildings are not
-the result of caprice, or chance, or even primarily of convenience,
-but of systems of proportion. So also in the plans: these are largely
-adaptations of Italian models, not only in their formality and
-symmetry, but also in the disposition of the rooms. There is nothing
-haphazard, fortuitous, or rambling about them: they are the result of
-carefully considered proportion. Every house was complete in itself,
-and to be altered or enlarged afterwards was to be spoilt.
-
-This sort of precision had a natural tendency to become mechanical, and
-in later years, notably in the early part of the eighteenth century,
-the tendency asserted itself strongly. But it is interesting to find
-that the foibles of Campbell, Gibbs, and their contemporaries had their
-justification in the work of Jones and Webb.
-
-It was more particularly Webb who founded himself so carefully on
-definite proportions. Jones had a natural instinct for good proportion.
-His studies of the human figure and of drapery, his construction
-of scenery for masques, gave him freedom of touch and sureness in
-achieving the result at which he aimed not to be found in Webb.
-Jones’s youth had been passed in that atmosphere of freedom and
-joyous fancy in house design which was characteristic of Elizabethan
-days. The intelligent ignorance with which Italian detail was treated
-he set himself to correct; but he did not altogether crush out its
-light-heartedness. His own work, although purer and more severe than
-that of his predecessors, retained something of their freedom.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 44.--DESIGN FOR A HOUSE, BY JOHN
-  WEBB.
-
-      From the Burlington-Devonshire Collection at the R.I.B.A.]
-
-The same, but in a less degree, may be said of Webb. Immersed though
-he seems to have been in his endeavours to saturate himself with the
-true rules of proportion, when he came to put his ideas into execution,
-he showed a pretty play of natural fancy, and much of his detail has a
-freshness and individuality sadly lacking in the work of fifty years
-later.
-
-Apart entirely from the question as to the authorship of the Inigo
-Jones drawings, the ideas embodied in them are of the first importance.
-For the purpose of grasping these, the second volume of Kent’s “Designs
-of Inigo Jones” will answer almost as well as the originals. Comparing
-them with Elizabethan or Jacobean houses, a complete change will be
-seen to have taken place, both in the plans and the elevations (Fig.
-44). There is no resemblance to the older manner. The time-honoured
-arrangement which placed the great hall centrally between the
-family wing and the servants’ wing has been superseded by one which
-places the kitchens in a basement, devotes the ground floor to the
-principal living-rooms, abolishes the great hall as a living-room,
-and substitutes for it a central saloon of great height, which not
-infrequently reaches from the ground floor to the roof. The orderly
-straggling of the ancient plan has given way to a trim compactness in
-the new. The plan, of course, controls the elevation, which is more
-precise and far less picturesque than of old. There are few, if any,
-gables; the chimneys are solid and staid; the windows consist each of
-one large opening, instead of being a group of small lights formed by
-mullions and transoms. It does not need an examination of the elaborate
-proportions tabulated by Webb on many of the original drawings to
-realise that here the old instinctive and even haphazard methods have
-been superseded by a system of carefully calculated design. The change
-is apparent at a glance, and one feels at once that the source of
-inspiration is not English but Italian. Very few of these designs
-appear to have been actually carried out, but they had a considerable
-influence on domestic architecture after their publication. They
-include practically none of the houses attributed to Jones or Webb
-which still exist.
-
-John Webb has hardly received his due as an architect, either from his
-contemporaries or from posterity. Evelyn spoke of him as “Inigo Jones’s
-man.” Most modern writers have regarded him as merely a pale shadow
-of his master. But from what has just been said about his share in
-the “Inigo Jones” drawings, this estimate of his position ought to be
-revised, for there can be no doubt that he was the actual draughtsman
-of the designs for the palace at Whitehall; of nearly all those in the
-second volume of Kent inscribed “Inigo Jones, architectus”; and of
-King Charles’s block at Greenwich (Fig. 45). It may be said, indeed
-it has been said, that even if that be so, he was only carrying out
-ideas which had been already devised in the rough by the older man.
-To which the reply is that there is no evidence of this among the
-drawings themselves, and that the evidence of contemporary documents,
-preserved among the State Papers, confirms the presumption that Webb
-was the designer of the Whitehall Palace and of the Greenwich block.
-With regard to the series of house designs in Kent’s second volume,
-no extraneous evidence is likely to be found, for they can only be
-regarded as exercises in design; to transfer these works from Jones’s
-account to Webb’s is to do no injustice to the former’s reputation,
-it is rather to enhance it. It relieves a first-rate artist from the
-weight of work which is not quite first-rate: and the same may be said,
-as already pointed out, of the Whitehall drawings. With regard to the
-Greenwich design, it has, with justice, been highly extolled; but
-this is the less surprising when it is remembered that it is a clever
-adaptation of an excellent Italian design to be found in the pages of
-Palladio.[36]
-
-Webb’s drawings of the Greenwich designs are fairly numerous, and they
-include a plan for a complete scheme, as well as plans, elevations and
-many details of King Charles’s block. They are dated 1663, 1665, 1666,
-and one 1669–70. It is interesting, therefore, to find in the Audit
-Office Enrolments[37] a warrant dated “the 21st day of November 1666,”
-and directed “To Our Trusty and Wellbeloved John Webb, of Butleigh,
-in Our County of Somerset, Esq^{re},” which begins thus: “Charles
-R. Trusty and wellbeloved, wee greet you well. Whereas wee have
-thought fit to employ you for the erecting and building of Our palace
-at Greenwich, Wee doe hereby require and authorize you to execute,
-act, and proceed there, according to your best skill and judgment
-in Architecture, as our Surveyor Assistant unto S^{r.} John Denham,
-K^{nt.} of the Bath, Surveyor General of Our Works, with the same power
-of executing, acting, proceeding therein, and graunting of Warrants
-for stones to be had from Portland, to all intents and purposes, as
-the said Sir John Denham have or might have....” The salary is to be
-£200 per annum with travelling charges. This appointment, together with
-Webb’s drawings and the absence of any preliminary drawings or sketches
-by Jones, seems to establish Webb as the actual designer.
-
-It is not at all probable that Webb destroyed any sketches that might
-have been in existence, with a view to his own reputation. For he
-preserved several slight sketches by Jones, and whereas he nowhere
-publicly pushes himself, he was extremely jealous of Jones’s fame, as
-appears on page after page of his “Vindication of Stone-Heng Restored.”
-Indeed, he subordinates himself completely to his old master, and
-posterity appears to have taken him at his own valuation.
-
-He must have been, nevertheless, a very clever man, an apt pupil, and
-a most painstaking student, judging by the voluminous notes as to
-proportions, and so forth, which he wrote on his drawings. He went
-to Jones in 1628 at the age of seventeen; and according to the brief
-attached to his petition, already mentioned, “he was brought up by his
-Unckle Mr. Inigo Jones upon his late Maiestyes command in the study of
-Architecture, as well that w^{ch} relates to building as for masques
-Tryumphs and the like.” It will be remembered that Mr. John Denham, as
-he then was in the year 1660, had been granted the post of surveyor of
-the king’s works, although he had received no suitable training; the
-brief concludes with the following apt remarks: “That Mr. Denham may
-possibly, as most gentry in England at this day have some knowledge in
-the Theory of Architecture; but nothing of ye practique soe that
-he must of necessity have another at his Mai^{ties} charge to doe
-his business; whereas Mr. Webb himself designes, orders, and directs,
-whatever given in command w^{th} out any other man’s assistance.
-His Mai^{tie} may please to grant some other place more proper for
-Mr. Denham’s abilityes and confirme unto Mr. Webb the Surveyors place
-wherein he hath consumed 30 years study, there being scarce any of the
-greate Nobility or eminent gentry of England but he hath done service
-for in matter of building, ordering of meddalls, statues and the like.”
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 45.--ELEVATION OF THE RIVER FRONT,
-  GREENWICH PALACE, BY JOHN WEBB.
-
-      From the original Drawing in the Library of the R.I.B.A.]
-
-  [Illustration:
-
-      North-East View.      North Front.
-
-  FIG. 46.--THORPE HALL, NEAR PETERBOROUGH, 1656.
-
-      From Engraving by Hakewill, 1852.]
-
-The common sense of this contention, although not flattering to Mr
-Denham, was vindicated by the appointment of Webb as assistant surveyor
-at Greenwich. But the petition and brief are interesting in other
-ways. They assert that Charles I. expressly caused Webb to be trained
-in architecture and the preparation of masques, in order to succeed
-Inigo Jones and carry on his work. They confirm roughly the date of his
-apprenticeship: and the brief states that he had worked for most of the
-great nobility and eminent gentry, thereby showing that he was a man
-of large independent practice, and not merely “Inigo Jones’s man”--a
-conclusion to which his drawings had already led.
-
-The fact that Webb was actually trained in the preparation of masques
-as well as in architecture has hitherto escaped notice, but recent
-researches show that he made drawings for the scenery of some of those
-devised by Inigo Jones, particularly in the case of the pastoral of
-“Florimene” in 1635, and D’Avenant’s “Salmacida Spolia” in 1640. A
-year or two after the death of Jones, namely in 1656, D’Avenant again
-sought Webb’s help, and got him to design the scenery for his “Siege of
-Rhodes,” the first opera produced in England. Webb’s drawings for this
-work are preserved at Chatsworth.[38]
-
-The illustrations in the second volume of Kent’s “Designs of Inigo
-Jones,” give a good idea not only of Webb’s powers as a designer, but
-also of the kind of house which was becoming fashionable. But it is
-worth while to supplement them by others which were actually carried
-out.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 47.--Thorpe Hall, near Peterborough.
-  Ground Plan.]
-
-The best known of the houses attributed to Webb is Thorpe Hall, near
-Peterborough (Fig. 46). It was built for Oliver St John, Lord Chief
-Justice of Common Pleas, and a kinsman of Oliver Cromwell,[39] about
-the year 1656, which date is on the stables. It is a fine massive house
-of oblong shape, and, like Coleshill, it is without wings, gables, or
-dominating pediments; the detail is large and simple, the principal
-effect being gained by a widely projecting cornice at the eaves. The
-roof is hipped at the four corners, and its slopes are broken by
-dormers. The windows are carefully spaced, the angles of the building
-are emphasised with bold quoins, there is an open columned porch in the
-middle of each of the two principal fronts, and on one of the short
-fronts there are two square bay-windows. These are the means adopted to
-give interest to the design, and slight as they are, they achieve their
-purpose. A plinth, and a bold string over the ground floor windows help
-the general proportions, and a little liveliness is imparted by the
-introduction of pediments over some of the windows. The whole effect
-is refined and severe, widely different from the picturesque variety
-of Elizabethan work. The open porches are probably the first examples
-of their kind to be found in England. The bay-windows, it must be
-confessed, are poor and meagre; they would not be out of place in a
-suburban villa; they are a disappointing substitute for the noble bays
-of earlier times. They appear to be original, but they may derive some
-of their character from the restoration which the house underwent in
-the middle of last century. The chimneys are well designed, massive
-features, of the somewhat plain type which was supplanting the more
-varied and ingenious designs of fifty years before.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 48.--Thorpe Hall. Panelling in
-  Dining-Room.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 49.--THORPE HALL. THE STAIRCASE.
-
-      Henry Tanner _del._]
-
-The plan of the house, as given by Hakewill (Fig. 47), is of the
-modern order, although faintly reminiscent of the ancient arrangement
-in respect of the hall, which is approached from the entrance passage
-through a screen. The ground floor, containing the hall, library,
-and dining-room, is raised well above the ground, and the servants’
-quarters are in the basement. Subsequent to the making of Hakewill’s
-plan, certain alterations were made which did away with the necessity
-of passing through one room to get to the next, but they did not affect
-the main dispositions.
-
-Much of the detail inside is quite charming, especially the ceilings,
-the panelling of the dining-room and the staircase. The sober yet
-fanciful treatment of the dining-room is delightful (Fig. 48) and
-strongly resembles that of some of Webb’s designs at Worcester College.
-Indeed the detail throughout abounds in touches such as are to be found
-in his drawings, and it has a freedom from pedantry which is quite
-refreshing, and may be regarded as a legacy from his less learned
-predecessors. The staircase has a carved and pierced floral balustrade
-of a type which had a considerable vogue in England during the second
-half of the seventeenth century (Fig. 49). The carving is particularly
-vigorous, especially in the newels and the great scroll at the foot of
-the stairs. The carved work is in lime, while the framework is in oak,
-but time has coloured the whole to one tone. The newels are crowned
-with fanciful vases full of flowers, another feature characteristic
-of the period. Some of the doors have panels over them, filled with
-painted landscapes, one of the earliest instances of a method of
-treatment that became very general in later years. The fireplaces, with
-one or two exceptions, are not fine examples of their kind.
-
-The lay out is quite formal. The house stands in the midst of a large
-oblong enclosure, some 700 ft. long by 350 ft. wide, containing between
-five and six acres. The stables and garden houses occupy part of this
-space, the remainder being devoted to a forecourt and gardens. The
-enclosing wall is pierced with gateways of which the piers are of
-varied and interesting design (Fig. 50). The stables themselves are
-less formal and more picturesque than the house, but the same strong
-and masterful treatment prevails throughout (Fig. 51). As within the
-house so without, the detail has more individuality than was possible
-in later times when the continued study of Italian models appears to
-have made designers too fearful of committing solecisms to allow them
-to give free play to their fancy.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 50.--Thorpe Hall. Gate-Piers.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 51.--Thorpe Hall. The Stables.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 52.--Lamport Hall.]
-
-The attribution of Thorpe Hall to Webb rests on tradition and the
-character of the work. His connection with another Northamptonshire
-house, Lamport Hall, is vouched for by Bridges, the county historian,
-who says (writing in the early years of the eighteenth century): “Sir
-Justinian Isham ... hath here a very elegant seat; part of which is
-old, and part new built in his father’s time, by John Webb, son-in-law
-to Inigo Jones. He hath several drawings of mouldings, architraves,
-and freezes, made in the years 1654 and 1655, with some letters from
-Mr. Webb dated in 1657, relating to the gate, and pilasters, and the
-execution of an intended depository.” Owing to alterations which have
-been made from time to time, there is little of the original work
-left except the front (Fig. 52), which exhibits the simple, dignified
-yet interesting treatment characteristic of Webb’s manner. Here the
-whole of the architectural detail is in stone, there are two principal
-stories which stand on a windowed basement; there are no strings nor
-cornices between the basement and the main cornice which crowns the
-walls; above this is a parapet which seems to have been altered from
-its original design. The wall space is occupied by windows carefully
-proportioned, and in the centre of the façade is a slight projection
-according to Webb’s custom. The angles of the building are emphasised
-with quoins. The whole design is simple in the extreme, but its
-excellent proportions give it dignity and charm.
-
-  Illustration: FIG. 53.--RAMSBURY MANOR, WILTSHIRE.]
-
-It must surely have been the old house to which the epithet “vile”
-was applied by the charming Dorothy Osborne in one of her letters
-to her future husband, Sir William Temple. The elder Sir Justinian,
-forty-two years old and a widower, was a persistent but unwelcome
-suitor of Dorothy’s, just about the time when he altered his house. He
-was esteemed, according to a biographer, one of the most accomplished
-persons of the time, and, doubtless, it was in that capacity that he
-employed the hardly less accomplished Webb. But Dorothy put a different
-reading on his character, and considered him a self-conceited, learned
-coxcomb. Her letter, wherein she speaks of “a vile house he has in
-Northamptonshire,” is assigned to January 1653, so it is just possible
-that during the course of his wooing she may have indicated her
-opinion of his home, and thus have been an unintentional agent in its
-improvement.
-
-Ramsbury, in Wiltshire, is another house attributed to Webb,[40] but
-no date is given in connection with it. Its admirable proportion and
-simplicity of detail ally it with other work of his (Fig. 53). Like
-Thorpe Hall it is a simple oblong in plan, but the front and side are
-broken by slight projections which give the opportunity of breaking
-the roof with pediments as well as with the customary dormers. The
-effect depends primarily upon the spacing of the windows, the extent of
-roof in relation to the walls, and the bold cornice at the eaves. The
-detail is refined, and a welcome change from uniformity of treatment
-is afforded by the introduction of twin doorways in the middle of the
-shorter front. The ground floor is kept up above the ground, as was
-customary with Webb, and the servants are placed in the basement. The
-drawbacks of this disposition are less than would appear from the front
-view, as the ground at the other end is so much lower that the basement
-floor is on the same level with it, and there is easy access from the
-kitchen department to the outbuildings which are grouped some distance
-away on the lower level.
-
-The detail inside is not of striking interest; much of it looks rather
-later than Webb’s time, especially the ceiling (Fig. 54); but the way
-in which the cupola, which is almost buried between the roofs, is
-made to light the attic landing, and, by means of a ceiling light, the
-landing also of the floor below, is quite ingenious, and incidentally
-produces a charming feature in the ceiling of the principal landing.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 54.--RAMSBURY MANOR. THE SALOON.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 55.--Ashdown House, Berkshire.]
-
-These are some among the houses that are attributed to Webb. Ashdown
-House (Fig. 55) is another, a rather gaunt place, built high on the
-downs in the extreme west of Berkshire, far away from everywhere, so
-that the builder, it is said, might run no risk of infection from the
-plague. Taken in conjunction with his dated drawings--such as ceilings
-at Wilton in 1649; designs for Durham House, London, in the same
-year; the Physicians’ College in 1651; a chimney-piece for Drayton
-in Northamptonshire in 1653; and another for Northumberland House in
-1660--they show that Webb was tolerably busy all through the time of
-the Commonwealth. But it is probably the fact, confirmed by the absence
-of dated drawings between 1638 and 1649, that he was not doing much
-work, beyond the Whitehall designs, during the course of the actual
-hostilities. This is only what might be expected, and indeed it is
-likely that beyond what Webb did, there was very little important work
-carried out during the period of twenty years from 1640 to 1660.
-
-The consideration of Inigo Jones’s work and that of Webb has taken the
-story down to about 1670; it is necessary now to go back a little in
-order to look at work by less distinguished designers.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 56.--Pepysian Library, Magdalene College,
-  Cambridge.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 57.--The Latin School, Warminster,
-  Wiltshire, 1707.]
-
-
-
-
-                                   V
-
-            THE TRANSITION IN MINOR BUILDINGS AND INTERIORS
-
-
-There are numberless buildings in all parts of the country which
-show in their external treatment how gradual was the supersession of
-the old style by the new and more correct treatment, and how limited
-in range was the influence of even so eminent an architect as Inigo
-Jones. Indeed, throughout the seventeenth century it would appear
-that architectural design followed two paths; one was that trodden
-by trained architects who aimed at correctitude; the other was that
-taken by less learned designers, whether architects or (as of old)
-masons and artificers, who had not mastered the niceties of classic
-design, and therefore mixed ancient methods with such of the new as
-they could compass. The mullioned window was one of the old features
-to which they long held fast. The new idea of large window openings
-such as prevailed in the Banqueting House they seem to have disliked.
-Their reluctance had, no doubt, a constructional basis, for the narrow
-lights of a mullioned window are easily bridged, whereas a wide opening
-requires either a deeper head to carry the weight above it, or else
-an arch. The introduction of an arch or a deep head involved a more
-serious departure from ancient ways, and a more complete committal to
-new design than the ordinary man could face. He did not mind pilasters,
-and he did not mind a heavy cornice, and consequently there are plenty
-of instances in which the old mullioned windows are accompanied by the
-more stiff and straight arrangement which a heavy cornice involves.
-Such an instance is to be seen in the free school at Warminster,
-founded as late as 1707 (Fig. 57).
-
-Another feature to which designers clung was the gable. This, of
-course, had been from time immemorial a dominant feature of English
-houses; it was the simplest and most natural way of closing the end
-of a roof, and as roofs were nearly always of a steep pitch, so, too,
-were the gables. But there was no place in classic architecture for
-steep gables, nor indeed for gables of any kind; the nearest approach
-to them was the pediment. It was only by a determined effort that the
-English architect could get rid of gables, and this effort was too much
-for any but the most resolute to make. Gables survived even longer
-than mullioned windows, and as our climate, with its rain and snow, is
-better encountered by steep roofs than by flat, the roofs continued to
-be steep.
-
-An interesting example of the mixture of mullioned windows, gables, and
-classic details is to be found in the Pepysian Library at Magdalene
-College, Cambridge (Fig. 56). The precise date of this building is not
-known. In many of the colleges accounts have survived from which may
-be gathered the date, the cost, and even the names of the designers of
-the various buildings which make both Cambridge and Oxford so extremely
-interesting to architects. But unluckily in this instance there are no
-accounts left, and it is only inferentially and vaguely that a date
-can be suggested. Subscriptions for a new building were being asked
-for in 1640,[41] and again in 1679, and the building was apparently
-finished, or nearly so, in 1703 when Pepys made his will, by which he
-left his library (after his nephew’s death) either to Trinity College
-or Magdalene, but preferably to the latter, in which case it was to be
-in the “New Building,” where, in fact, it was eventually placed.
-
-It would appear from the plan, and also from the external treatment,
-that the design was made when the project first started in 1640;
-but if Professor Willis’s suggestion be accepted that the Civil War
-interrupted the scheme and that, in view of the change in taste, a
-fresh design was adopted on the resumption of effort in Charles II.’s
-time, the survival of the old method’s becomes still more striking. But
-a close examination of the work strengthens the supposition that the
-front was designed as a whole when the project was started in 1640; and
-that the pediments and cornices over the windows, together with the
-carving, were inserted at the close of the century. The later mouldings
-are larger and bolder in scale than the earlier.
-
-When it is remembered that in 1640 John Webb was drawing none but
-classic buildings, and that by 1679 St Paul’s Cathedral was already
-rising above the ground, and that it was designed on fully developed
-classic lines, the significance of the mixed taste in this building at
-Magdalene College will be the more readily appreciated. But it must
-be borne in mind that Webb and Sir Christopher Wren were members of
-a learned confraternity, while the unknown designer at Magdalene had
-evidently not had the same opportunities as they enjoyed for acquiring
-familiarity with classic detail.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 58.--Doorway at Stanway, Gloucestershire.]
-
-Stanway House, in Gloucestershire, belongs in its general treatment
-to the Jacobean period, but there are numerous late touches about it;
-among them are the front door and the window above it (Fig. 58). The
-latter appears to be a later insertion, but the doorway is probably
-original, as it agrees in its general character with the arch of the
-fine gate-house, which is contemporary with the mullioned windows by
-which it is encompassed. It was quite a usual custom to adhere to the
-old ways in the general design of a house, but to treat some special
-feature, such as a doorway, in the more modern and correct fashion.
-This is easily intelligible when it is remembered that the books on
-classic architecture confined themselves largely to details, and dealt
-but sparingly with the designs of entire buildings. At this time, that
-is about 1637, there was probably no one who gave himself up entirely
-to the pursuit of consistent purity of detail, except Jones and his
-pupil Webb.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 59.--Gateway at Astwell, Northamptonshire,
-  1638.]
-
-At Astwell, in Northamptonshire, there are the remains of some gates
-dated 1638 which were fitted into an old Gothic opening (Fig. 59). They
-have traceried heads of a sort, in imitation of mediæval work, but the
-mouldings are allied more nearly to the ordinary work of the time, and
-the whole is an interesting example of the mixture of old and new ideas.
-
-Swakeleys, near Uxbridge, which carries its date, 1638, on some of its
-rain-water heads, is a good example of late Jacobean work, in which the
-old treatment is more apparent than the new (Fig. 60). It has mullioned
-windows and many gables, but the flat pediments which crown the latter
-are evidence of its having been built towards the close of the Jacobean
-period. The actual roofs behind the gables are quite steep and are
-so complicated that some difficulty was found in getting rid of the
-rain water. Part of it is taken in a trough in the thickness of the
-attic floor; and in order to lessen the number of down-pipes, much of
-it is collected into lead troughs which are carried along the inside
-of the attic walls to the few pipes which are provided. The result of
-these arrangements is that every heavy storm or fall of snow entails
-an inspection by the plumber in order to prevent the accumulation of
-debris and the risk of spoiled ceilings and walls. The whole of the
-cornices and pediments are worked in cement, and not, as might be
-supposed, in stone.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 60.--SWAKELEYS, NEAR UXBRIDGE,
-  1638.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 61.--NEW WING AT SOMERSET HOUSE, 1638,
-  BY WEBB.
-
-      From the Worcester College Collection.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 62.--The Chapel, Burford Priory,
-  Oxfordshire.]
-
-If this house is compared with Webb’s drawing of a proposed new wing at
-Somerset House (Fig. 61), made in the same year, 1638, the difference
-becomes strikingly apparent between the style of the ordinary designer
-and that of the learned student; and yet Swakeleys was less than
-twenty miles from London, where the new methods were being sedulously
-cultivated.
-
-Perhaps the most remarkable attempt to weld Jacobean and classic
-design into one consistent whole is to be found in the charming chapel
-attached to Burford Priory, in Oxfordshire (Fig. 62). There is much
-more here than a mixture of separate features, some in one style, and
-some in the other. The general treatment is reminiscent of Jacobean.
-There is a lofty story crowned with a cornice and an attic above it.
-There are shafts at the angles round which the cornice breaks, and they
-are terminated at the top with obelisks as pinnacles; there are also
-curved gables. But the shafts are fashioned into classic pilasters;
-the cornice not only breaks round them, but jumps up to make way for
-a door. The traceried windows have a novel disposition of curves, and
-the rose window is not a mere travesty of ancient methods, but has a
-vigorous individuality of its own, and is set in a classic framework.
-The whole work is consistent throughout, and the detail is refined and
-carefully handled. It is the successful attempt of a clever designer
-to solve old problems in new ways, and it is a pity that neither his
-name nor any other work from his hand is known. The chapel, as well
-as the house to which it is attached, was built by Speaker Lenthall,
-subsequent to his acquiring the property in 1634.
-
-  [Illustration:
-
-      Side of Chapel.      End of Chapel.
-
-  FIG. 63.--BRASENOSE COLLEGE, OXFORD, 1656–66.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 64.--Oriel at Brasenose College, Oxford.]
-
-The chapel and library of Brasenose College, Oxford, have escaped the
-full amount of attention which they deserve, probably because they
-lie outside the range of books dealing with the accepted division of
-architecture into Gothic and classic. But for that very reason they
-are of interest to the present inquiry. The detail on the whole is
-more classic than Gothic, but it is dealt with in a manner reminiscent
-of Gothic; the cornices break forward over the pilasters, and round
-the slight projections caused by the advancing of alternate windows;
-the windows have Gothic tracery; pilasters are used in the place of
-buttresses (Fig. 63). Indeed the general design is Gothic in its
-arrangement, but classic detail has been applied to it, which in its
-turn has modified the Gothic handling. The whole effect is interesting.
-The designer has not merely made a Gothic design carrying it out with
-classic detail, nor has he made a classic design, giving his windows
-Gothic tracery. But each style has influenced the other. The Gothic
-treatment has modified the classic detail, the classic detail has
-modified the Gothic treatment The detail itself is quite refined,
-it is not the work of an ignorant man; the ornament is judiciously
-introduced, and applied with knowledge and skill. The oriel window on
-the external front (Fig. 64) adjoining the east end of the chapel is
-a charming piece of design, and the work generally is so well done
-that it has been attributed to Sir Christopher Wren; but although
-the attribution is erroneous it shows that popular opinion held the
-building worthy of being coupled with a great name. It would appear
-that a Mr. John Jackson superintended the building operations, and as he
-made a model for the chapel roof,[42] he may fairly be credited with
-the whole design. The first stone of the chapel was laid on the 18th
-June 1656, and the work was practically finished by 1666, in which
-year, on the 17th November, the dedication took place.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 65.--House in Southgate, Gloucester, 1650.]
-
-The old house in Southgate, Gloucester (Fig. 65), until recently the
-City Tea Warehouse, is a curious mixture of the old and new styles.
-According to the date on a chimney-piece it was built in 1650. The
-projecting stories, the panels and brackets below the windows of the
-top floor, and, indeed, the general treatment of the whole front,
-belong to the order of things that was passing away. The wide windows
-with their pediments, some straight and some curved, and the stiff
-floral pendents are indicative of the new style then coming into vogue.
-If the sash-windows were adopted from the outset, they would be a still
-more decidedly modern note. But if, as in all probability was the case,
-they merely replace the original mullions the native aspect of the
-front would have been less classic.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 66.--Houses at Ipswich.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 67.--Nixon’s Grammar School, Oxford, 1658
-  (now destroyed).]
-
-Another type of the quaint mixture of the old and the new is to be seen
-at Ipswich in the well-known Sparrow’s house, and in the less ornate
-example shown in Fig. 66. Here the ancient practice of overhanging
-the upper stories is utilised to obtain the strong horizontal lines
-which are characteristic of the classic style; but instead of the
-walls being full of windows, their blank spaces are larger in extent
-than the windows, and they are panelled in a simple fashion. Above
-the bold cornice spring three sharply pointed gables, which give
-an old-fashioned appearance to the house. The original windows are
-mullioned, but some of them (and probably all at first were alike) have
-an arched central light of double the width of the others. No doubt
-this treatment was introduced in order to vary the monotony of a series
-of windows composed entirely of small rectangular openings. It was
-very generally adopted, but the curved side lights are a variation not
-often found; the more frequent form is that employed in the picturesque
-Grammar School at Oxford (Fig. 67) which was built in the year 1658 for
-the education of freemen’s sons, on the foundation of Alderman John
-Nixon. The steep gables appear to be later additions, the original
-arrangement was the flatter and more carefully devised gable over the
-middle window. The arcade on the ground floor is quite Jacobean in
-feeling.
-
-At Saffron Walden, in Essex, there is a row of houses of ancient
-aspect, with projecting corbelled gables. One of them is dated 1676,
-which probably gives the period when the modelled plasterwork was
-applied to an existing front, for some of the woodwork is Gothic in
-character. They are interesting examples of the ornamental plasterwork
-which at one time abounded in the eastern counties (Figs. 68 and 69).
-
-The red brick inn at Scole, in Norfolk (Fig. 72), is another example of
-the mixture of classic cornices and quasi-pilasters with curved gables,
-and it gives a good idea of how local designers strove to modernise
-their buildings and were yet unable to shake off the old fetters
-which bound them to the traditions of their youth. There used to be,
-stretching across the road, a very substantial and picturesque sign
-attached to this inn, a wonderful piece of allegorical design.[43] It
-was dated 1655, which may be taken as the date of the building itself.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 68.--House at Saffron Walden, Essex,
-  showing Ornamental Plasterwork.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 69.--Saffron Walden. Detail of
-  Plasterwork.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 70.--School at Witney, Oxfordshire, 1660.]
-
-Another good example of the transitional stage between Jacobean work
-and classic is the school at Witney, in Oxfordshire (Fig. 70). The
-wings are still part of the main structure; the windows are mullioned,
-but the larger ones have an oval light in the uppermost compartment;
-the chimneys have square detached shafts set angle ways on their
-base. All these are features of the earlier type. On the other hand,
-the absence of gables, the widely projecting coved eaves, and small
-detached dormers are characteristic of the new methods of design. The
-date of the building, as stated on the panel over the principal door,
-is 1660.
-
-Of such houses as the farmhouse at Stanton Harcourt, in Oxfordshire
-(Fig. 71), there are plenty of examples to be found. Here the mullioned
-windows are still retained; but the absence of gables, the straight
-front, the marked cornice at the eaves, the hood over the door, and
-the plain, severe outline are all in keeping with the more pronounced
-classic treatment which was being gradually adopted, even in remote
-places, by the end of the seventeenth century.
-
-Such are some of the smaller houses built during the years in which
-Inigo Jones and Webb were working; links between the Jacobean style
-and that purer version of Italian to which those eminent men devoted
-themselves.
-
-It has been shown how the general character of houses had changed
-during the period between the accession of Charles I. and the
-Restoration in regard to their arrangement and appearance; it will
-be well now to show briefly how their decoration had also altered.
-But before doing so, it will be useful shortly to recapitulate the
-principal changes that had taken place.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 71.--House at Stanton Harcourt,
-  Oxfordshire.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 72.--Inn at Scole, Norfolk, 1655.]
-
-The old idea of the house-plan, derived from mediæval times, was to
-provide a great hall for the daily use of the whole household, and
-to supplement it by a group of rooms at each end, one for the use of
-the family, the other for the servants. The relations between the
-family and their retainers were then closer than they became in later
-times. Gradually the custom of dining all together died out; the
-family secluded themselves in their own apartments, the servants in
-theirs. The great hall was deserted as a living-room and degenerated
-into a vestibule leading to the rooms where the daily life was led.
-The distinction between the family and the servants was emphasised
-somewhat to the disadvantage of the latter; for when sacrifices of
-comfort had to be made for the sake of architectural effect, it was the
-servants upon whom discomfort was laid with the least scruple. They
-were frequently relegated to a basement during the day, and to attics
-during the night. The ground floor and the floor above it were reserved
-for the use of the family and for state occasions. The increase in the
-subdivisions of household work may be realised from Swift’s satirical
-“Advice to Servants,” addressed to persons whose duties (many of them)
-had not been specialised, even if they had come into vogue, in the old
-days.
-
-It is interesting to compare the names of the rooms on the plans in the
-Thorpe collection, which dates from 1570 to 1620, with those on Webb’s
-plans for Durham House, dated 1649. Many of them are identical, such
-as the hall, the dining-room, the great chamber, the withdrawing-room,
-the gallery, and the servants’ rooms--kitchen, pastry, larder, buttery,
-and so forth. But Webb has a few new designations, such as the
-secretary’s room, the apothecary’s lodging, the housekeeper’s room,
-and the under-housekeeper’s, the baker’s and cook’s rooms, the page’s
-room, the master of the horse, the receiver-general, and the surveyor’s
-chamber. Then there are rooms of state, a presence chamber, a private
-dining-room to serve both his lordship’s and lady’s apartments, his
-lordship’s cabinet and his wardrobe, a dressing-room, and various
-back stairs serving both his lordship’s rooms and those of his lady.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 73.--STAIRCASE AT ASHBURNHAM HOUSE,
-  WESTMINSTER.]
-
-From this it will be seen that the tendency was to increase the
-subdivision of duties and the general convenience of arrangement (by
-means of back stairs, among other things), and to allot more rooms
-to the principal servants. At the same time special provision was
-made for state occasions in the state rooms and presence chamber.
-It must be remembered that these plans of Durham House were made in
-1649, although they were never carried out. They indicate a desire to
-increase at once the convenience and the stateliness of the house, and
-although it was designed on strictly classic lines, everything was not
-yet subordinated, as in later years, to the supposed necessities of
-architectural grandeur. In some of his other plans, many of which were
-studies in design rather than practical work, Webb was almost as great
-a sinner as his successors of the early eighteenth century.
-
-The external appearance of houses had changed even more than their
-plans. Gables had almost disappeared; dormer windows no longer
-rose from the walls, wrought in stone or brick, but from the roofs
-and made of wood; the roofs themselves assumed a flatter pitch and
-generally started from widely projecting eaves. Windows were no longer
-mullioned and transomed into many small lights, but consisted of one
-large opening enclosing a wooden frame, which at first was divided
-by wood mullions, but later was filled with sliding sashes. The
-general appearance of the house was more compact than of old but less
-picturesque; it was more regular, and depended largely upon the nice
-spacing of the windows, upon its proportions, and its more scholarly
-detail.
-
-This scholarly detail gradually ousted the naive design of the
-Jacobean craftsmen. To be scholarly you had to be correctly Italian,
-and therefore the quaint mixtures and the quaint native growths that
-sprang from an imperfect acquaintance with the true gospel of Italian
-design were discountenanced. Fancy was to be smothered by knowledge.
-Nevertheless it is odd to find how long the strapwork _motif_
-survived, which we are apt to think of as Dutch; it is found in work of
-Charles II.’s time and even later; Webb made use of it, and even Jones
-himself did not disdain it, as may be seen from some of his designs for
-chimney-pieces (Figs. 91–94).
-
-Staircases had also changed in the character of their detail; they
-were still arranged in straight flights, but we have already seen at
-Coleshill that they sometimes formed a more imposing feature than in
-Jacobean days; in that instance the staircase is doubled, each portion
-being of equal importance, and they occupy a considerable part of the
-entrance hall. This double arrangement was by no means of universal
-adoption, it depended upon the space at command, and at Ashburnham
-House, Westminster, for instance, where space was restricted, a single
-staircase was ingeniously planned, but was treated in a monumental
-manner. The design is attributed by some to Inigo Jones, and it is
-almost certain that it must be either by him or by Webb. The house was
-originally fashioned out of some of the old monastic buildings, and had
-been used as a dwelling for many years before the time of Elizabeth.
-It was known as the Dean’s House, and was occupied by a succession of
-tenants. In 1621 a lady became the tenant; she was succeeded in 1628 by
-Sir Edward Powell, who obtained a lease in 1629. The question of the
-tenancy is important as it sets limits to the number of those who would
-be likely to embark on considerable alterations. In 1640 the house was
-transferred to trustees for the benefit of Sir Edward’s wife. Then came
-the Civil War, and the next tenant who appears is William Ashburnham,
-who, already in occupation, obtained a forty years’ lease in 1662. As
-he was an ardent royalist, it is supposed that he could not have taken
-the house previous to the Restoration.[44]
-
-The choice of the individual who caused the new work to be done appears
-to lie between Sir Edward Powell and William Ashburnham, for Lady
-Powell’s trustees of 1640 would not be likely to undertake anything of
-such magnitude, and it is improbable, although not impossible, that it
-was done during the Civil War or the Commonwealth. The reasonable dates
-lie, therefore, between 1629–1640, and 1662–1672, in which latter year
-Webb died. On the whole, the character of the work points to the later
-period; it looks as though it were the outcome of longer experience
-than the earlier period could have supplied. It should be borne in
-mind that the treatment of the ceiling, with the open cupola above it,
-resembles that of one or two drawings made by Jones and Webb for Wilton
-and elsewhere.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 74.--ASHBURNHAM HOUSE. CEILING OVER
-  STAIRCASE.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 75.--“Cieling of y^e passage Roome in to
-  y^e Garden,” at Wilton, by Inigo Jones.
-
-      Worcester College Collection, i. 14.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 76.--“Ffor y^e Seeling of y^e Cabinett
-  Roome, 1649, Wilton,” by Webb.
-
-      From the Burlington-Devonshire Collection at the R.I.B.A.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 77.--CEILING AT GREENWICH PALACE, BY
-  WEBB.
-
-      From a Drawing in the Burlington-Devonshire Collection at the
-         R.I.B.A.]
-
-In any case, and whoever designed it, the detail of the work is of
-interest as showing the departure from Jacobean ideals. The staircase,
-it is true, retains the solid newels, the massive handrail, and the
-stout balusters hitherto in vogue (Fig. 73); but the ornament has
-changed, and the balusters are almost as stout as if intended to be
-of stone. The panels on the wall are larger in size and in scale than
-those of Jacobean design, and they are marshalled with more pomp. The
-ceiling has no affinity with the busy and intricate ceilings of the
-departing style. The framework is large, and its members are adorned
-with foliage in high relief; the open cupola, with its balustrade and
-detached columns, is a new idea in English work (Fig. 74). If it was
-executed between 1629 and 1640, it would be the first example of its
-kind; if between 1662 and 1672, it would have had predecessors among
-the drawings of Jones and Webb. It is perhaps worthy of note that in
-Jones’s designs of ceilings the ornament is usually confined to the
-ribs, the intermediate spaces (that is, the ground of the ceiling
-itself) being plain. Here the ground is covered with foliage as well
-as the ribs, and curiously enough, those of Jones’s designs which
-include cupolas are similarly treated. His drawing for the “cieling of
-y^e passage Roome in to ye Garden” (at Wilton) is illustrated in Fig.
-75. and Webb’s drawing “ffor y^e Seeling of y^e Cabinett Roome, 1649,
-Wilton,” in Fig. 76. Although the perspective treatment of the cupolas
-is a somewhat special feature, the general design of these and of that
-at Ashburnham House gives a good idea of the manner in which ceilings
-of the period were managed.
-
-Another and more ambitious design for a ceiling by Webb is that for
-“his Majesty’s Presence at Greenwich, 1666” (Fig. 77), preserved at
-the Royal Institute of British Architects. The outer border represents
-a bold cove filled with modelled plasterwork in high relief; the four
-angles are occupied by lions and unicorns, emblematic of England and
-Scotland. If this design was ever carried out, it has disappeared, and
-there is no example to be found of modelling treated on so large a
-scale; the cove would have been some eight feet on the curve, and the
-effect of its plaster ornament would have been rather overwhelming.
-
-Returning to the consideration of staircases, there is one at Can
-Court, in Wiltshire (Fig. 78), which is earlier in feeling, if not
-in date, than the Ashburnham House staircase. It retains many of the
-characteristics of Jacobean work, particularly in the stoutness of
-the newels, the handrail and the string. In the balusters, however, a
-later touch is apparent, as well as in the upper part of the newels. It
-is obvious, nevertheless, that the two staircases belong to the same
-type.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 78.--CAN COURT, WILTSHIRE.
-  THE STAIRCASE.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 79.--Staircase at Dawtrey Mansion,
-  Petworth, 1652.]
-
-An interesting staircase both as to date and detail is one at Dawtrey
-Mansion, Petworth (Fig. 79). It is dated 1652, and while it retains
-the Jacobean form of finial, not gracefully designed, it has twisted
-balusters of the kind usually associated with work of fifty years
-later. It is one of the numerous links which connect the old and the
-new forms.
-
-Of the same type as these in essence, although differently treated,
-is that kind of balustrade already mentioned in connection with Thorpe
-Hall (Fig. 49), where the balusters are replaced by scrolls of foliage.
-There was a very interesting example of this fashion at the Castle Inn,
-Kingston, now destroyed (Fig. 81), and there is another at Ham House
-(Fig. 80), where, however, the panels display flags, armour, guns, and
-other martial emblems, which may perhaps have some reference to Thomas
-Talmash, a brother of Lord Dysart (the owner) and a general in the time
-of William III.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 80.--Ham House, Surrey. The Staircase.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 81.--The Staircase, Castle Inn,
-  Kingston-on-Thames.]
-
-There was an ancient house at Greenwich called the “Old Palace,” but
-distinct from the building which was at one time the royal residence,
-sometimes known as Crowley House. It has been destroyed, but some
-sketches by C. J. Richardson of the interesting work it contained have
-survived, and among them is one of a staircase with foliated balustrade
-(Fig. 82). The character of the detail suggests a date in the middle
-of the seventeenth century, and the general treatment recalls the work
-which was being done by Webb at that period. There is a slight survival
-of the earlier style, but the design is handled in a more refined
-spirit than was usually the case with sumptuous examples of Jacobean
-work. This is particularly observed in the door (Fig. 83).
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 82.--The Staircase at the “Old Palace,”
-  Greenwich (now destroyed).
-
-      From a Sketch by C. J. Richardson.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 83.--“OLD PALACE,” GREENWICH.
-  STAIRCASE DETAILS AND DOOR.]
-
-In the hands of Inigo Jones and Webb both doorways and windows assumed
-a correct Italian appearance, but in less learned hands there were
-intermediate stages of development between the Jacobean type and the
-full classic. Such a one may be seen in the library door at St John’s
-College, Oxford (Fig. 85), and in an external door at Brasenose College
-(Fig. 84), part of the work already referred to. The library at St
-John’s was built in 1631 by Archbishop Laud, who was at that time
-Bishop of London and Chancellor of the University of Oxford. It is said
-that he obtained the help of Inigo Jones, but the detail of the work
-is so unlike anything which remains of Jones’s own draughtsmanship,
-that the correctness of the attribution is very doubtful. The stonework
-of this particular door, however, is not unlike some of the doorways
-with which the name of Jones is connected, now preserved at the Royal
-Institute of British Architects. The woodwork has no counterpart among
-his designs.
-
-If we want to see the scholars idea of what a doorway should be, we
-must turn to Jones’s drawing of one for the Banqueting House (Fig.
-86), or to Webb’s design for one in the palace at Greenwich, the block
-which he designed for Charles II. (Fig. 87). The former is entitled in
-Jones’s writing, “Scitzo for the Great Doore Ban. Ho. 1619.” It has the
-logically indefensible broken pediment, making room for an unfinished
-cartouche which was doubtless to receive the royal arms. On the panel
-in the frieze is indicated an inscription commencing with the first
-letters of Jacobus Rex Magnæ Britanniæ; below it is an ornament in
-which the strapwork _motif_ lingers. The whole effect is strong,
-handsome, and well proportioned. If it was ever actually carried out,
-it has now disappeared. Webb’s drawing is entitled in his own writing,
-“Greenwich, ffor the dore going out of the Cabinet into the gallery
-1663.” The whole composition is not unlike Jones’s, but it is larger,
-although the door itself is smaller. The draughtsmanship in both is
-somewhat alike, but the difference is just that which distinguishes
-the work of the one man from that of the other. Jones’s is the more
-virile and direct. The figures on the pediment at Greenwich are named
-as “Liberality and Magnanimity,” at the other end were to be “Religion
-and Justice.” It must be admitted that their different attributes are
-not clearly indicated. A note at the side shows that this doorway was
-Webb’s own design; it reads “M^e I must alter these measures and make
-them thus,” then follow the altered dimensions.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 84.--Doorway at Brasenose College, Oxford,
-  1656.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 85.--Doorway at St John’s College, Oxford,
-  1631.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 86.--Banqueting House, Whitehall. “Scitzo
-  of the Great Doore, Ban. Ho., 1619,” by Inigo Jones.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 87.--Doorway at Greenwich Palace, 1663, by
-  Webb.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 88.--Banqueting House, Whitehall, “The
-  upper windowe of y^e Modell,” by Inigo Jones.]
-
-It has already been pointed out how the mullioned window was gradually
-altered by the introduction of a wider light surmounted by an arch
-(Fig. 66), or by the introduction of an elliptical light (Fig. 70). But
-the mullioned window in any form was out of place in a truly classic
-design. Jones has an early drawing of 1616 in which he makes use of it,
-as well as of other Jacobean features, but it is doubtful whether any
-executed work of his can show a stone mullioned window. The type
-employed in the Banqueting House is that which he favoured, and it is
-probable that a drawing entitled “The upper windowe of y^e modell”
-(Fig. 88) is a sketch by him for the windows in the upper story of this
-building. By comparing this sketch with that of the Banqueting House
-(Fig. 36) the similarity will be apparent. Jones, like Webb after him,
-was a student of Serlio, and he has a sheet of sketches of windows
-taken from Serlio with notes of his own appended. He and Webb do not
-seem to have concerned themselves with the filling of the window space,
-all they troubled about was the proportion and embellishment of the
-main opening. Yet the filling is of considerable interest. Mullioned
-windows were filled with lead lights, which only required glass of
-small size. Their successors, where the main opening was large, appear
-to have been filled with wooden frames having mullions and transoms
-of the same material, which reduced the actual openings to a size
-suitable for glazing in the old way. Later on the lead which held the
-glass was replaced by thick wooden bars holding glass of a larger size.
-But the opening part of all these windows was a casement, that is a
-framework (generally of iron) which was hung at the side and opened
-like a door. Then, from somewhere--but nobody knows exactly whence
-or when--came the ingenious sliding sash, which was hung with cords
-and counterbalanced by concealed weights, so that it could be moved
-up and down. This was really a remarkable change, although we are so
-accustomed to sash-windows as to take them for granted as part of the
-universal scheme of things. Their effect on the architectural treatment
-of windows was of the first importance. They made mullions impossible,
-they compelled window spaces to be of large size, and these large
-spaces necessarily influenced the design. They also rendered small
-bay-windows impossible, as well as large bay-windows with a narrow
-canted side. They practically put an end to any attempt at modified
-versions of the Jacobean style, but they were excellently adapted to
-the larger, plainer, and more regular classic. Considering the effect
-they had on design it is to be regretted that we know nothing of
-their origin, or the date of their introduction. At present only one
-authenticated instance of their use can be cited before the time of
-William III. If they appear in earlier buildings caution would have
-to be exercised to ascertain whether they were not later insertions.
-Anyone who can settle this point would render a singular service in the
-byways of architectural history. The instance mentioned above occurs
-in the accounts for work done at Windsor Castle in 1686–88:--[45]
-
-   Sarah Wyatt for a Sash Window and Frame with Weights Lynes and
-   Pullyes and a Wainscott Window-board done in the Governor of the
-   Castles Secretaryes office                                  70^s
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 89.--ST JOHN’S COLLEGE, OXFORD.
-
-  THE PRESIDENT’S DRAWING-ROOM.
-
-      Henry Tanner, _del._]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 90.--Chimney-Piece in the Jerusalem
-  Chamber, Westminster.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 91.--A Chimney-Piece for the Queen’s
-  House, Greenwich, 1619, by Inigo Jones.
-
-     From a Drawing in the Burlington-Devonshire Collection at the
-     R.I.B.A.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 92.--A Chimney-Piece for the Queen’s
-  House, Greenwich, by Inigo Jones.
-
-      From a Drawing in the Burlington-Devonshire Collection at the
-         R.I.B.A.]
-
-The kind of panelling which covered the walls of Jacobean houses was
-retained in the houses of less importance till about the middle of the
-century, but there was a tendency for the panels to grow larger. Inigo
-Jones and Webb generally used large panels, and discarded the small
-oblongs still favoured by local joiners. In the detail of woodwork
-generally greater refinement and simplicity became apparent, and more
-successful endeavours were made to adapt classic profiles. At St John’s
-College, Oxford, the work of 1631 illustrates this tendency (Fig. 89).
-The wood chimney-pieces in the same building are also handled with more
-restraint than in earlier examples, and a similar kind of treatment
-marks the fine chimney-piece in the Jerusalem Chamber at Westminster
-(Fig. 90), which must have been the work of John Williams, Bishop of
-Lincoln, who was Dean of Westminster during a large part of the
-reign of Charles I. The excellent panelling by Webb at Thorpe Hall has
-already been illustrated (see Fig. 48). It embodies a still greater
-departure from the old manner.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 93.--A Chimney-Piece for “D^{rs} Price his
-  Great Chamber,” by Webb.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 94.--Chimney-Piece at Drayton, by Webb.
-
-      From the Burlington-Devonshire Collection.]
-
-This departure is also very noticeable in the designs of chimney-pieces
-which Jones and Webb have left behind them. Fig. 91 shows one of those
-designed for the Queen’s House at Greenwich in 1637: in the panel below
-the pediment is inscribed “Henrietta Maria Regina.” Fig. 92 is “for
-Greenwich,” and bears the cipher H.M.R. It is very characteristic of
-Jones’s way of sketching his details; he has bestowed more care (and
-more affection) upon the little children at the side than upon the
-principal object itself. It is evident that the large panel over the
-chimney-piece was to be occupied by a picture, as also perhaps was that
-in the preceding example. In Jacobean times such a space would have
-contained the owner’s arms. Webb’s chimney-pieces follow those of his
-master in general conception, and they are the precursors of the type
-prevalent in the eighteenth century, largely used by Kent, who had
-access to these very drawings. Of the examples selected, one was for
-Drayton House, in Northamptonshire, and it is signed by Webb and dated
-1653 (Fig. 94); the other was for “D^r George Price his great chamber”
-(Fig. 93). The whole series affords a good idea of the style of the
-period as compared with that of earlier times.
-
-It is interesting to compare with these drawings of Jones and Webb a
-contemporary chimney-piece at Ford Abbey, in Dorset, attributed to
-Jones (Fig. 95). It must be confessed, however, that the treatment is
-widely different in the two cases. This is not to say that the Ford
-Abbey example has no merit; on the contrary, there is a refreshing
-playfulness about the way in which the staid classic detail is bent
-from its usual austere lines.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 95.--CHIMNEY-PIECE IN THE DINING-ROOM,
-  FORD ABBEY, DORSET.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 96.--BELTON HOUSE. THE CHAPEL.]
-
-
-
-
-                                  VI
-
-                         SIR CHRISTOPHER WREN
-
-
-When Charles II. was restored to his inheritance in 1660, he evidently
-contemplated indulging in the royal pastime of fine building. At this
-time John Webb was not only the veteran of architecture, but the
-most notable exponent of the art then living in England. His claims
-on the favour of the king were founded on his long and intimate
-connection with Inigo Jones, a name to conjure with both in relation
-to architecture and to the less stable factor of court influence.
-They were supported on the practical side by the work he had done,
-although fruitlessly, for Charles’s father in the preparation of the
-great schemes for the palace at Whitehall, and by the assistance he
-had given both in architecture and the artistic hobbies of the time
-to many of the nobility and gentry. They were supported on the human
-side by personal services rendered to the late king, especially in
-furnishing to him, while at Oxford, full designs and particulars of
-all the fortifications round London, with instructions how they might
-be carried; and in conveying to the king, whilst at Beverley, his
-majesty’s jewellery, which he took, concealed in his waistcoat, through
-the enemy’s quarters, suffering, in consequence of the fact being
-discovered, close imprisonment for a month.
-
-These claims, as we have seen, failed to gain for him the coveted
-post of surveyor to the king’s works, but Charles employed him in
-resuscitating the idea of a new palace at Whitehall, which never came
-to fruition, and in actually erecting a considerable part of the
-projected palace at Greenwich.
-
-Webb never succeeded in obtaining the official appointment for which
-he longed, for which he appears to have had the best qualifications,
-and of which he was actually promised the reversion on the death of
-Sir John Denham, who was preferred before him at the Restoration. The
-reasons for his failure are obscure, but it may be that his active
-employment during the Commonwealth told against him, for his clients
-of that period were obviously not such devoted adherents of the royal
-cause as to be in exile, or suffering other great hardships. It may
-be that he lacked the support and patronage of John Evelyn, whose
-influence with Charles II. in all matters of culture was enormous.
-It may be that his age was against him, for when Wren was appointed
-on the death of Denham, Webb was fifty-seven years old. But whatever
-the cause, his failure was complete, and he eventually retired to his
-home at Butleigh where he died in 1672. Although he missed the goal
-of his ambition, although the men who have had the ear of the world
-have not sounded his name in high notes, he was a remarkable man. The
-work conceded to him by general consent is noteworthy, and he probably
-did more to influence domestic architecture in England than any other
-man of his time, Inigo Jones not excepted. For any student, divesting
-himself of established prejudices, who will examine his original
-drawings, can hardly fail to come to the conclusion that it was his
-imagination and his hand which developed and prepared most of the
-designs which, published as the work of Inigo Jones, had so wide an
-effect upon English houses in the eighteenth century.
-
-Charles II.’s interest in the pastime of building was but fitful. The
-Whitehall Palace got little further than Webb’s old designs, nor did
-that at Greenwich go beyond the one block called after the king. He
-was preoccupied with matters of more personal interest, and what money
-he had for his own purposes was spent in directions other than that
-of architecture. Nevertheless incidental to the kingly rôle was the
-patronage of the arts, and when the necessity arose he bestowed his
-attention upon them and upon those, who were engaged in their pursuit.
-It was in this way that Wren was brought to his notice, and thereby
-obtained that official position which led to the development of his
-extraordinary powers. That Charles had no special acquaintance with
-architecture nor any consuming love for it, is sufficiently proved by
-his sanction of that design of Wren’s for St Paul’s Cathedral known
-as the “warrant” design, and by the spasmodic way in which he sought
-to house himself in regal fashion; for another abortive attempt at a
-palace was made in 1683, this time at Winchester and with the help of
-Wren.
-
-Wren is even better known to the public as an architect than Inigo
-Jones, largely owing to the fact that he left behind him many more
-buildings which can be seen to-day than did his predecessor. But the
-admiration he has received, whether founded on knowledge or not, is no
-more than his due, for he was a truly remarkable man. He had achieved
-a European reputation as a man of science before he was thirty, and
-although, when he became officially connected with building for the
-first time, he had apparently received no practical training in
-architecture, he soon made up his deficiencies on the scaffold itself,
-amid the ring of the trowel and the thud of the hammer.
-
-He came of good and cultured stock. His father, Dr. Christopher Wren,
-was Dean of Windsor; his uncle, Matthew, was Bishop of Ely. His father
-was a man of considerable attainments in literature and science, and
-had a superficial knowledge of architecture. Christopher, who was born
-in 1632, was his only son, and received a good education. His natural
-abilities enabled him to profit by his opportunities to such a degree
-that at the age of thirteen he invented a new astronomical instrument
-and a pneumatic engine, both of which he introduced to his father in
-elegant Latin, the one in verse, the other in prose. A year later he
-was entered as a gentleman-commoner at Wadham College, Oxford, where he
-continued to distinguish himself. It would be tedious to recount his
-juvenile essays in astronomy, mathematics, gnomonics, and Latin, but so
-great a reputation did he achieve that when Evelyn (who took a genuine
-interest in anything remarkable) went to Oxford in 1654, he made a
-point of going to see “that miracle of a youth, Mr. Christopher Wren,
-nephew of the Bishop of Ely.”
-
-The youth was then twenty-two, and was already a Master of Arts and
-a Fellow of All Souls; three years later he was chosen Professor of
-Astronomy at Gresham College in London, and subsequently, in 1661,
-Savilian professor of the same subject in the University of Oxford.
-In the same year he was made D.C.L. by both Oxford and Cambridge.
-During these years he was one of the most active of those “virtuous and
-learned men of philosophical minds” who, along with Dr. Wilkins, Warden
-of Wadham, laid the foundations of the Royal Society. A whole page of
-the “Parentalia”--memoirs written by his son, and the chief source
-of information concerning his life--is occupied with a catalogue of
-the New Theories, Inventions, Experiments, and Mechanic Improvements
-exhibited by Mr. Wren at the meetings in connection with the great
-movement. One or two examples will serve to show the wide range of his
-investigations: a weather clock; an artificial eye, with the humours
-truly and dioptically made; several ways of graving and etching; divers
-improvements in the art of husbandry; divers new musical instruments;
-easier ways of whale-fishing; ways to perfect coaches for ease. Indeed
-there seems to have been nothing in the heavens above, or the earth
-beneath, or the waters under the earth, about which he did not know
-something.
-
-These things may be regarded as the by-products of a great imagination,
-an imagination which made him a skilled astronomer and a profound
-mathematician. He had an extraordinary aptitude for scientific
-research, and he was the first who experimented in the infusion of
-foreign liquid into the blood of animals, a process which, modified to
-the transfusion of blood from one person to another, has had remarkable
-results in medicine. He also established, by experiment, before the
-Royal Society in 1668, the Third Law of Motion; and no doubt his study
-of the laws of motion subsequently stood him in good stead in his
-daring feats of architectural construction.
-
-The remarkable thing about these studies and experiments is that, amid
-all their variety, not a word is said about architecture. He was a fair
-draughtsman, but he was primarily a man of science and a virtuoso,
-in other words, a man accomplished in the arts and sciences, but who
-had no need to bring his knowledge to any practical test involving
-responsibility. He was, however, soon to become more than a virtuoso,
-for in the year 1661 he was appointed deputy surveyor of his majesty’s
-works and buildings under Sir John Denham, and, after the latter’s
-death in 1668, he succeeded him in the office to the exclusion of the
-more experienced Webb.
-
-Wren’s early efforts in architecture show, as might be expected,
-considerable immaturity. One of his first was the Sheldonian Theatre
-at Oxford, on which he was engaged between 1663 and 1668. It is
-interesting as the work of a man young in design, but it cannot be
-regarded as a masterpiece; its shape is ungraceful, and its detail
-crude. One of its principal claims to attention was its roof, which
-covered (with a flat ceiling) what was then considered a very wide
-span, namely, 70 ft. Here Wren’s scientific training must have helped
-him; he was also probably helped by his carpenter, one R. Frogley. The
-roof itself has been renewed, but drawings of it were published by Dr
-Plot in his “Natural History of Oxfordshire,” and were reproduced in
-“Parentalia.” Its most remarkable feature was the long tie-beam of the
-principals, which being too long for one piece of timber, was made up
-of three pieces ingeniously jointed, or “scarfed,” together. There are
-still tie-beams to the roof, but they are hidden in the thickness of
-the attic floor, and it is impossible to say whether they are Wren’s
-or not. But as the disposition of all the visible timbers is quite
-different from those shown by Plot, the inference is that there is
-nothing left of Wren’s ingenious roof. With the old roof went Wren’s
-ugly dormers as well as his turret, which was replaced by that which
-exists to-day.
-
-The other work at Oxford, attributed to Wren, rests its claims,
-except in the case of the Tom Tower of Christ Church, on little or
-no evidence. Even in the case of Trinity College, where letters show
-him to have been consulted, he appears to have done nothing beyond
-sending, in 1664, to his friend, Dr. Bathurst, the president, a letter
-with alternative plans and an elevation; and in criticising, in 1692,
-a design for the chapel. There is no evidence that he actually carried
-out any work here in the formal capacity of architect. About so notable
-a feature of Oxford as the Tom Tower it would be rash to say anything
-in disparagement. But this much may perhaps be said without offence.
-It is at least doubtful whether the designer of the lower part, which
-is the original Gothic work, would have been satisfied with Wren’s
-completion. The scale is different, the detail is different; the whole
-conception is out of harmony with Gothic ideas. Yet it is still less
-allied to anything classic; the fact is that Wren was working in a
-style which he did not understand, and which he frankly disliked. We
-get much nearer to the heart of the man by studying another aspect
-of his work at Oxford, his drawings preserved in the library at All
-Souls. There are four large volumes of them, comprising designs for
-various works, including alterations to one or two large houses; but
-the most interesting are those connected with St Paul’s Cathedral. In
-these volumes can be seen his weakness and his strength, and, taken in
-conjunction with other of his drawings preserved at St Paul’s, they
-show how he felt his way in architectural design. They also indicate
-that the old system still survived under which the architect relied in
-great measure upon his subordinates for the detail of his work; at the
-same time they prove that Wren worked out his general conceptions much
-more thoroughly than such men as John Thorpe and Smithson had done a
-century earlier.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 97.--Model of Wren’s first Design for St
-  Paul’s Cathedral.]
-
-The history of the reparation and rebuilding of St Paul’s is too long
-and intricate to be set out in detail in this place, apart from the
-fact that it is outside the category of domestic architecture; but
-it stands for so much in Wren’s life that a few words about it may,
-perhaps, be allowed.
-
-During the years following the restoration of Charles II. much
-consideration had been given to the old cathedral, which was in a
-neglected and ruinous condition. The commissioners, of whom Wren was
-one, were divided in opinion as to the course to be pursued; some were
-for preserving it, others for rebuilding. Inigo Jones had already put
-a new classic west front to the Gothic building; it was held to be
-one of the finest pieces of architecture of modern times. Wren’s idea
-was to continue the classic casing and to replace the lofty spire by
-a classic dome. Some of the drawings at All Souls embody this idea,
-which fortunately was never carried out. Then came the great fire in
-1666, and the problem was simplified, for the fire had left but little
-to deal with, and it was decided to rebuild.
-
-The fire wrought a great change in Wren: he was no longer the
-professor, the virtuoso, but the architect; for to him fell the duty
-of rebuilding not only the cathedral, but the numerous city churches
-which had been destroyed. It is fortunate that old St Paul’s was so
-completely shattered as to compel its demolition, for although the
-force necessary to remove the ruins was such as would have elicited
-vigorous protests in the present day (gunpowder had to be employed,
-to the terror of adjacent occupants), yet it resulted in providing
-Wren with a vacant site whereon he could place a new building, instead
-of attempting either a mixture of Gothic and classic such as he had
-formerly contemplated, or his own version of Gothic which would have
-been even more unpalatable.
-
-The new St Paul’s is one of the finest and most impressive buildings
-of its kind in Europe; its dome is unrivalled for purity of outline
-and aptness of composition. How did a man, who had no practical
-acquaintance with architecture until he was thirty years old, conceive
-such a masterpiece within a few years from that time? Probably nobody
-but Wren could have done it: he had an extraordinary aptitude for
-mastering any subject to which he turned his attention. But even he did
-not produce this great result at one stroke; he felt his way through
-many attempts. There were two complete preliminary designs, neither
-of which had much in common with the other or with the building as
-erected, beyond the fact that the dominating feature was to be a dome.
-The first of these is known as Wren’s favourite design, the other as
-the “warrant” design.
-
-The first was worked out with much care and completeness, and a large
-model of it was made, which is now preserved in one of the towers of
-the cathedral (Fig. 97). The plan, however, was so great a departure
-from the type sanctioned by tradition, that it was rejected by the king
-and his advisers. Wren thereupon produced the “warrant” design, one
-of the most extraordinary ever made by a serious man, and one of the
-worst to which a great architect ever set his name. This is a mystery
-to which no satisfactory solution has yet been found. That a man with
-the capacity of producing St Paul’s as we see it, should have produced
-the “warrant” design, and seriously submitted it for acceptance, is
-astonishing; but apparently Wren knew his clients, for it was approved
-and ordered to be carried out under the warrant of the king, dated the
-14th May 1675, wherein it is described as “very artificial, proper, and
-useful.” The slight change which time has introduced into the meaning
-of the first of these adjectives lends, for modern ears, a spice of
-humour to the description.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 98.--GREENWICH PALACE, FROM THE RIVER.]
-
-Fortunately, nothing more was heard of this design; it reposes among
-the drawings in the All Souls library, and there is nothing to show
-that any attempt was made to develop it. How Wren managed to drop it
-completely has not been explained. He had the king’s leave to vary it
-in minor points; he varied it altogether. It is probable that, the
-matter being left in his hands, he quietly proceeded, as the years went
-by, to improve upon his early ideas. The dome of the “warrant” design
-is its ugliest feature; among Wren’s drawings are many sketches of
-domes, none of them so bad as this, nor any so good as the final one,
-nor is there any special sequence of steps to show how the ultimate
-result was obtained. But it is easy to see that the result was his
-own work, and that it was only after numerous trials that he at last
-achieved it.
-
-The building of St Paul’s took many years. The first stone was laid on
-21st June 1675; the last stone of the cupola was laid by his son in the
-old man’s presence in 1710. During this period of thirty-five years
-Wren practically rebuilt the city churches, and was thus continually
-gaining experience. The great cathedral will always be his chief
-monument, but the fifty-three churches which he carried out would
-themselves have made his reputation. The sites were mostly irregular,
-but of so much value that it was essential to utilise them completely.
-Wren covered them to the last inch, and yet contrived to get that
-classic treatment in which symmetry plays so important a part. In many
-hands symmetry would have meant extravagance in space and materials.
-The problem in planning was new in another respect, for the churches
-were all designed for the Protestant form of worship, requiring an
-arrangement different from that of mediæval churches, and, among other
-things, a suitable auditorium.
-
-To his skill in planning he added a constant variety of treatment,
-both inside and out; and, given a departure from the simple straight
-lines of a Gothic spire, nothing could exceed the happy ingenuity and
-fertility of design exhibited in Wren’s steeples.
-
-Wren did not pass his whole time in designing ecclesiastical buildings.
-He had the chief share in the shaping of Greenwich Hospital which,
-originally intended for a palace, was begun and continued in a palatial
-manner, although diverted from its first purpose and made into a home
-for worn-out sailors (Fig. 98). He also began the rebuilding of Hampton
-Court, but happily did not proceed, as was at one time contemplated,
-to sweep away the whole of the older portions of that fascinating
-place. These are both in a sense domestic work, but they are not
-domestic in the way that appeals to the ordinary person. People who
-live in palaces may well afford some sacrifice to grandeur. Wren’s
-was the grand manner. His churches involved fairly simple planning.
-Their requirements lent themselves to this treatment much more readily
-than those of an ordinary house with its complicated demands, where
-an uncomfortable plan is not atoned for by splendour of appearance.
-If it be asked how Wren would have faced the difficulties of ordinary
-domestic planning, there is but little material for an answer. The work
-he did in the Temple does not help us much. Several houses in different
-parts of the country are attributed to him, but without much reliable
-evidence. At All Souls, however, there are a few drawings, either of
-new houses or of alterations to old ones, and these do not go to prove
-that he had his usual masterful grip of the subject. Doubtless, had
-the necessity arisen, he would have acquired it, but his energies took
-another direction, and he has left no solution of how to build a house
-at once convenient, comfortable, and grand.
-
-He lived to be an old man--he was ninety-one when he died in 1723--yet
-he lived a strenuous life till within a few years of his death. He not
-only devised his own buildings, but superintended their erection, and
-it was largely on the scaffold that he gained his experience. This did
-much to sober his judgment and make his work reasonable and sensible,
-more so than that of his immediate successors. Although at first an
-amateur, he became practical through being in constant touch with his
-work: they remained amateurs all the way through.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 99.--Elevation of a House.
-
-      From the Wren Collection, All Souls College, Oxford.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 100.--Elevation and Section of a House.
-
-      From the Wren Collection, All Souls College, Oxford.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 101.--Elevation of a House.
-
-      From the Wren Collection, All Souls College, Oxford.]
-
-A slight but vivid picture of him at work was drawn by the lively
-Duchess of Marlborough, who, when expostulating with Vanbrugh for
-demanding £300 a year for looking after Blenheim, declared that Wren
-had been “content to be dragged up in a basket, three or four times a
-week to the top of St Paul’s, and at great hazard, for £200 a year.”
-
-All through his busy years as an architect he maintained his interest
-in science, and was not only President of the Royal Society in 1680,
-but continued to submit all sorts of inventions and suggestions for
-the consideration of its members. Curiously enough, these things had
-but little practical value, not even that one which showed how smoky
-chimneys might be cured: indeed none but futile specifics have yet been
-offered to the public with this end in view.
-
-His later years were clouded by the intrigues of his opponents at
-court, who not only contrived to oust him from his office of surveyor
-to the royal works, but endeavoured to attack his character for
-probity. The latter attempt failed of course; but when he was already
-eighty-six and had held his office for nearly fifty years, he was
-superseded by an unknown and incompetent person.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 102.--Sketches for the Front of Two
-  Houses, by Wren.]
-
-Wren’s influence on architecture was powerful while he lived, but
-he can hardly be said to have founded a distinctive school of
-domestic architecture which long survived him. Soon after his death
-new publications, amongst which the most influential was Kent’s
-“Designs of Inigo Jones,” changed the trend of design. His influence,
-however, continued to be felt in the treatment of interior decoration,
-particularly in regard to panelling and ornamental woodwork, down to
-the middle of the century. The exteriors of many small Georgian houses
-may owe something to him, but such houses as are obviously reminiscent
-of his manner were built during his lifetime.
-
-Most of his successors, while carrying on the style in which he worked,
-failed to impart to their work that vigour and reasonableness which
-distinguished his. The rules and regulations which served as guides
-to him became masters to them, and we look in vain among them either
-for his scientific equipment or his intuitive perception of what was
-fitting. The grandeur of manner which suited admirably the buildings
-with which he had to deal, was out of place when applied to ordinary
-houses; and the artificiality which sprang from the way in which
-architecture was then regarded, but which his genius enabled him to
-avoid, settled down heavily after his death.
-
-Among the drawings at All Souls are the examples of house design
-illustrated here (Figs. 99–102). They are not named, and have not been
-identified; it is not even certain that they were ever carried out. But
-they give some idea of Wren’s notions as to the appearance he would
-have given to houses. In general disposition they conform to the type
-adopted by Jones and Webb, but they have touches about them reminiscent
-of French architecture,[46] more particularly those in Figs. 99, 101.
-The others are two rough sketches for the front of a building (probably
-a house), drawn on a piece of waste paper, and apparently they show two
-methods of treating the same façade (Fig. 102). They are characteristic
-of Wren’s manner as displayed at Hampton Court (see Fig. 6), more
-so than the other examples illustrated, and they are certainly more
-pleasing in their proportions and in the simplicity of their handling.
-The design for part of a front for the new palace at Whitehall (Fig.
-103) is interesting in two respects; it is a specimen of Wren’s
-treatment of domestic architecture on a grand scale; and it proves
-that Charles II. still harboured the idea of a great new palace at
-Whitehall, an idea which fructified as little under Wren’s direction as
-it had done under Webb’s. As a piece of design this is no advance upon
-what had already been tried before. There is a weediness and crudity of
-ornament about it which is out of keeping with Wren’s actual work; but
-of him it may be said, as of Inigo Jones and other great architects,
-that his designs are less happy on paper than in execution. Indeed
-a study of all the important collections of architectural drawings
-inclines one to take the negative side in the interesting controversy,
-“Is fine drawing necessary to fine architecture?”
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 103.--ELEVATION OF PART OF THE FRONT OF A
-  PROPOSED PALACE AT WHITEHALL.
-
-      From the Wren Collection, All Souls College, Oxford.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 104.--BELTON HOUSE,
-  LINCOLNSHIRE.]
-
-The indications of French feeling alluded to above may be accounted
-for by the fact that in the early days of Wren’s connection with
-architecture, in 1665, he went to France for a few months. He was
-already enthusiastic in his new vocation, and like many an enthusiast
-in the same cause before him and after him, he wanted to see what
-was being done in foreign lands. He spent his whole time there in
-interviewing eminent architects and in visiting the most noteworthy
-buildings of Paris and its neighbourhood. He made so many sketches that
-he said in one of his letters that he bid fair to bring back “almost
-all France on paper.” He had indeed caught the architectural fever; and
-every architect knows that thenceforward it would never leave his veins.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 105.--Belton House. Ground Floor.]
-
-Among the houses attributed, on insufficient grounds, to Wren is Belton
-House, near Grantham, one of the seats of Earl Brownlow (Fig. 104);
-it was built in the year 1689 for Sir John Brownlow. There is nothing
-particularly novel about it; it follows the type of what may be called
-the Webb house, both as to plan (Fig. 105) and external treatment. It
-has the bold cornice, the hipped roof, and the balustraded flat out of
-which rises a cupola, which Webb had rendered familiar. In spite of its
-good proportions, however, it hardly hits the mark so fully and truly
-as Webb’s work, and it lacks in many respects the masculine vigour of
-Wren’s. Nevertheless it is a notable building, and an admirable example
-of a dignified yet unpretentious country house, quite comfortable to
-live in.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 106.--IRON SCREEN AND GATES, BELTON HOUSE.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 107.--BELTON HOUSE. CARVING IN THE
-  GREAT HALL.]
-
-The screen of ironwork which runs from the house to a subsidiary range
-of buildings contains a fine gateway (Fig. 106) and encloses a court of
-some architectural interest and one which strikes a pleasing note,
-as it brings some of the minor accommodation into close relationship
-to the house. It is approached through an archway in the side opposite
-to what is now the front door. Being enclosed on one side by the open
-screen already mentioned, it has a cheerful outlook over the park. The
-present front door, with its porch, has been squeezed in among the
-windows; it probably replaces an original exit of small importance
-which led into the court for the sake of convenience. The principal
-entrance was formerly up the broad flight of steps in the middle of
-the façade; but the present access, although not so stately, is better
-adapted to modern requirements.
-
-The interior has excellent decorative work of the period. In addition
-to the panelling there is a considerable amount of carving attributed
-to Grinling Gibbons (Fig. 107); and there are a few ceilings executed
-in high relief, with admirably modelled detail, of which the treatment
-corresponds with that associated with Gibbons’ name. So charming are
-the figures and foliage that they prompt a desire to see them at close
-quarters, instead of on the inaccessible heights of a ceiling.
-
-The chapel (Fig. 96) is interesting as an example of classic treatment
-applied to sacred purposes, and as one among the last survivals of the
-mediæval idea that it was necessary for a large house to have a chapel
-within it. In the days when a household might be cut off for weeks from
-the parish church and when a daily exercise of religious observances
-was of the first importance, a chapel always accessible and close at
-hand was necessary. But the time was approaching, if it had not already
-arrived, when the religious fervour of distinguished people could
-easily be satisfied by attendance at places of public worship.
-
-
-
-
-                                  VII
-
-              SOME FURTHER WORK OF THE TIME OF CHARLES II
-
-
-It is needless to insist upon the fact that there was a large amount
-of work executed during the seventeenth century by men other than
-Jones, Webb, and Wren. Some of this has already been considered, in so
-far as it illustrates the gradual change of style in small buildings.
-But during the reign of Charles II. important work was done by men
-little known to fame, and much else by others whose names have either
-not survived or have not yet been disinterred from the ruins of the
-past. So few architects contemporary with Jones are known that it will
-be of interest to mention one who, if not intimately connected with
-architecture himself, wrote a book about it, and trained a pupil who
-merits more attention than his master.
-
-This individual was Sir Balthazar Gerbier, to whom Horace Walpole
-devotes several pages in his “Anecdotes of Painting,” where he treats
-of him as a painter. But Gerbier does not appear to have pursued any
-art with much application. He hung on the fringe of state affairs, and
-was a versatile adventurer of indifferent character, if Walpole does
-him no injustice. Among other things he dabbled in architecture. He
-was surveyor to the Duke of Buckingham, for whom he is said to have
-designed a temporary house on the site of old York House in the Strand.
-According to Gerbier’s own account, in a letter to the duke dated 2nd
-December 1624, Inigo Jones came to see this house, and “was like one
-surprised and abashed ... he is very jealous of it.”[47] It may have
-been so, but it is certain that Gerbier was jealous of Jones, for he
-makes several slighting references to him in the little book which he
-published, “Of Counsel and Advice to all Builders.” It is, indeed,
-this book which gives him a claim to be mentioned in connection with
-architecture, and that because of incidental allusions to matters of
-interest. In his dedication to Charles II. (the book was published in
-1664) he advises the king to set the main body of his contemplated
-palace on the side of St James’s Park, and the gardens along the river.
-This, no doubt, refers to the schemes upon which Webb, as already
-mentioned, was then engaged. Gerbier has several oblique as well as
-one direct thrust at Inigo Jones. He carps at those “who have marshald
-colombs,” and have made them “like things patcht or glewed against a
-wall, and for the most part against the second Story of a Building ...
-as if their intent were, that the weight of the colombs should draw
-down the Wall on the heads of those that passe by.” Doubtless this was
-an allusion to the Banqueting House, about which he makes further and
-more definite criticisms. After cavilling at the elaboration of stage
-effects in masques, he roundly states that “Inigo Jones (the late
-surveyor)” found the Banqueting House unsuitable for such purposes, and
-that he “was constrained to Build a Wooden House overthwart the Court
-of _Whitehall_.” He then takes exception to the height of the
-room, alleging that the king and his retinue were lost in it because of
-its vastness; and goes on to say that he does not undervalue any modern
-works, “every good Talent being commendable,” including, presumably,
-even the late surveyor’s. At the same time there were some alive who
-knew that the king of blessed memory had graciously avouched, in the
-year 1648, that a room near York Gate not above 35 ft. square (which
-was the one Gerbier had designed himself) was as apt for masques as the
-Banqueting House itself. Moreover judicious persons would not deny that
-the excellence of the Triumphal Arches erected in London (which Gerbier
-is said to have designed for the entry of Charles II.) consisted not in
-their bulk.
-
-The book abounds in malicious and egotistical touches of this kind,
-both in the two treatises into which it is divided, and in the forty
-dedicatory epistles which he deemed necessary to the launching of
-his venture. But amid a deal of skimble-skamble stuff, he says a few
-things worth noting. Chimneys need only be carried about 2 ft. above
-the ridge; large and lofty stacks he deems unsightly and dangerous.
-Staircases should be easy of ascent and wide. Anyone who has sound
-limbs and a “gallant gate” naturally lifts his toes at least 4 inches
-in walking; if, therefore, stairs be only 4 inches high and 18 from
-front to back, the ordinary person can walk up them as easily as he
-can walk on the level. His reasons for these proportions are hardly
-convincing, but in regard to the width of staircases he is probably
-nearer the mark, when he says they ought to be so wide that the
-attendants on each side the noble person who is ascending may not be
-straitened for room.
-
-His advice to persons contemplating building, that they should employ
-an architect and should not be constantly interfering with him, is
-undoubtedly sound: and one reason advanced for employing an architect,
-namely, that “the several Master-workmen may receive instructions by
-way of Draughts, Models, Frames, etc.,” is interesting as showing
-that architects were now accustomed to provide more minute details
-than in the time of Elizabeth and James. One more reference and
-this curious book, with its few noteworthy observations buried in
-pages of involved verbiage, may be left. In speaking of such as were
-concerned with building he says, “they may perchance have heard of
-rare buildings, nay, seen the Books of the _Italian_ Architects,
-have the Traditions of _Vignola_ in their Pockets, and have heard
-Lectures on the Art of Architecture.” It is interesting to learn that
-in addition to books on architecture there were opportunities, so long
-ago, to hear lectures on the subject; but it is probable that, in his
-usual egotistical way, Gerbier is here referring to lectures which he
-himself had given at an academy which he founded in Bethnal Green,
-in imitation, Walpole suggests, of another established by Charles I.
-for instruction in arts and sciences, foreign languages, mathematics,
-painting, architecture, riding, fortification, antiquities, and the
-science of medals.[48]
-
-The “Counsel” concludes with a lengthy schedule of prices at which all
-kinds of building work could be executed.
-
-Little, if any, architectural work can with safety be attributed to
-Gerbier. Hamstead Marshall, which is said to be his, is more probably
-due to his pupil, Wynne, to whom, as Master William Wine, he addresses
-one of his numerous dedications.
-
-Walpole says that Wynne, or Winde as he calls him, finished the house
-which had been begun by his master, making several alterations in
-the plan; but the history of the owner and of the house, as well as
-the character of the work, renders it doubtful whether Gerbier could
-have had anything to do with it. The house was one of the seats of
-William, Lord Craven; it has been destroyed with the exception of some
-fine gate-piers and part of the lay out, but Kip has an engraving of
-it in “Britannia Illustrata” (Fig. 108). There are also a few drawings
-of details in the Bodleian Library, including windows, gate-piers,
-doors, and a ceiling. The windows and piers can be identified on
-Kip’s engraving, as also can the general lay out, thus confirming the
-accuracy of Kip’s view. His illustration shows the house with a front
-of Jacobean design as to its two lower stories, but of later character
-as to the third story and the return front. The windows of this later
-work agree in general appearance with the drawing at the Bodleian,
-which shows festoons above the windows and panels between them,
-decorated with Lord Craven’s cipher, W. C., and a baron’s coronet (Fig.
-109).
-
-By examining Kip’s view in the light of the principal facts of Lord
-Craven’s life, and of the dates on the Bodleian drawings, a shrewd
-guess can be made as to the history of the house. In his youth William
-Craven achieved such honour through “valiant adventures” in Germany
-and the Netherlands under Henry, Prince of Orange, that in the year
-1626, when he was eighteen years old, he was knighted by Charles I.
-at Newmarket and was immediately afterwards created a baron, with the
-title of Lord Craven of Hamstead Marshall. In 1631 he returned to the
-scenes of his early glories, and continued to reside abroad until the
-Restoration. Although absence prevented him from fighting for Charles
-I. he was a staunch loyalist, and helped the king with considerable
-supplies. This brought him under the notice of the Parliament, and his
-estates were confiscated in 1651, and sold to different persons.[49]
-After the Restoration, however, Charles II. created him an earl in
-recompense for his services, and he must previously have regained
-possession of Hamstead Marshall, since the drawings for the new work
-bear a baron’s coronet and various dates, of which the earliest is 1662.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 108.--HAMSTEAD MARSHALL,
-  BERKSHIRE.
-
-      From Kip’s “Britannia Illustrata.”]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 109.--Hamstead Marshall. “The Ornament of
-  the Windows,” by Wynne.
-
-      From a Drawing in the Bodleian Library.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 110.--“The North Piers at Hamstead
-  Marshall, 1663,” by Wynne.
-
-      From a Drawing in the Bodleian Library.]
-
-It would appear, then, that the original house was a Jacobean building,
-and from the fact that Lord Craven was a bachelor and was resident
-abroad for the greater part of his life previous to the Restoration,
-it is highly improbable that he did any building during that period;
-he had neither family nor leisure to induce him. On the sale of the
-property in 1651, it is quite possible that the house was partly
-dismantled,[50] as were many others in similar circumstances, notably
-Holdenby House. On his return in 1660, or as soon afterwards as he
-could, he set about restoring his home. He preserved the Jacobean
-front, but added a new top story and new sides. The drawing of the
-portico, which would be at the back of the house shown by Kip, is
-dated 1662; that of the gate-piers in the front wall is dated 1663
-(Fig. 110), and those in the circular wall at the rear 1673; a ceiling
-is dated 1686. The baron’s coronet indicates that the work was done
-before the earldom was bestowed, which was in 1663. The dates on the
-drawings suggest what one might expect, that the house itself was first
-taken in hand, then the garden walls and lay out, and subsequently the
-embellishment of some of the chief rooms.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 111.--Gate Piers at Hamstead Marshall.]
-
-If the history of the house is rightly conjectured, there would be
-no room for Gerbier in its design, for he is said to have died in
-1662 when he was at least seventy years old, and there is no trace
-of senility in the Bodleian drawings. They are vigorous in design as
-well as drawing; the gate-piers (Fig. 111) are still in existence,
-some scattered, as it were, in a field, others still leading into a
-walled garden. It is only when the imagination restores the walls
-that once connected them that an idea is formed of the size of the
-original enclosures to which those piers were the noble entrances. The
-ceiling (Fig. 112), dated 1686 on the drawing, is of the type prevalent
-throughout the greater part of the seventeenth century, and usually
-employed by Jones, Webb, and Wren.
-
-As Wynne--“the learned and ingenious Captain Wynne” Campbell calls
-him[51]--is the only other person whose name is connected with the
-designing of Hamstead Marshall, the credit may fairly be placed to his
-account. The character of the new work, as shown by Kip, accords with
-the treatment usually adopted by Webb; that is to say, the walls are
-fairly plain, there is a wide cornice at the eaves. The height of the
-roof is proportioned to the walls (not merely determined by the span of
-the building), it is crowned by cupolas and broken by dormers, and the
-chimneys are short and solid--perhaps, in this case, in consequence of
-the teaching of Gerbier, Wynne’s master.
-
-It is evident that the restoration of Charles II. gave a great impetus
-to building. Charles himself revived the project for a new palace at
-Whitehall; he built a large wing of another at Greenwich; Lord Craven
-was among those who endeavoured to redeem the time; and Gerbier thought
-the occasion opportune to publish his “Counsel” to those who were
-contemplating new houses.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 112.--A CEILING AT HAMSTEAD MARSHALL,
-  22ND JUNE 1686. “THIS DRAAFT FOR THE DINEING ROOME ATT
-  HAMSTEAD MARSHALL, MARKED A, ALLOWED OF BY ME W. WYNDE.”
-
-      From a Drawing in the Bodleian Library.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 113.--BUCKINGHAM HOUSE IN ST JAMES’S PARK,
-  1705.]
-
-Too little is known of this learned and ingenious Captain Wynne.
-Campbell credits him with old Buckingham House in St James’s Park, for
-the Duke of Buckingham, in 1705. This duke must not be confused with
-either of the Villiers, Dukes of Buckingham. He was the first duke
-of a new creation, his family name being Sheffield. He was, in fact,
-the grandson of that “my lord Sheffield” whose house has already been
-illustrated in Chapter II. as one of the designs of John Smithson.
-To Wynne is also assigned Cliefden House for the same nobleman,
-and Newcastle House in Lincoln’s Inn Fields, as well as certain
-additions to Combe Abbey for Lord Craven.[52] Hardly anything remains
-of all this work, but if it was of a standard equal to the remnants
-of Hamstead Marshall, Wynne would take a high place among English
-architects. Newcastle House, originally called Powis House after
-William Herbert, Viscount Montgomery and Marquis of Powis, for whom
-it was built in 1686,[53] still stands at the north-west corner of
-Lincoln’s Inn Fields, but it has been considerably altered; the loss
-through fire of the original fine wooden cornice has much diminished
-its effect.
-
-Buckingham House (Fig. 113) stood where Buckingham Palace now is, and,
-judging by Campbell’s elevation,[54] was of much greater architectural
-interest than the present building before it was refronted. It was
-considered “one of the great beauties of London, both by reason
-of its situation and its building.”[55] It fronted the Mall--the
-noblest avenue in Europe, according to Campbell--and at the back
-was a fine garden and a noble terrace, whence the eye roamed over a
-wide rural prospect, so free from obtrusive buildings as to justify
-the inscription placed by the duke on this front, “Rus in Urbe.” The
-description of the entrance court is interesting as giving a good idea
-of the kind of lay out that went with all large houses of that time.
-“The courtyard which fronts the Park is spacious; the offices are on
-each side divided from the Palace by two arching galleries, and in the
-middle of the court is a round basin of water, lined with freestone,
-with the figures of Neptune and the Tritons in a water-work.”
-Campbell’s plan agrees with this description save that he makes the
-basin octagonal. The “arching galleries” were by this time a very
-usual feature which will be further described presently. His plan also
-conveniently illustrates the duke’s own description of the entrance
-into the house itself. “After crossing the courtyard,” he says, “we
-mount to a terrace in the front of a large Hall, paved with square
-white stones mixed with a dark-coloured marble; the walls of it covered
-with a set of pictures done in the school of Raphael. Out of this on
-the right-hand we go into a parlour 33 feet by 39 feet, with a niche 15
-feet broad for a Bufette, paved with white marble, and placed within
-an arch, with Pilasters of divers colours, the upper part of which as
-high as the ceiling is painted by Ricci.” The roof of the house was
-flat and gave opportunity for obtaining a fine prospect: on the parapet
-fronting the park were four statues of Mercury Secrecy, Equity, and
-Liberty, and fronting the garden were the four Seasons. This particular
-enumeration gives a touch of life and reality to the endless figures
-which break the skyline of Campbell’s elevations, and of John Webb’s
-before him. The view reproduced in Fig. 113A shows the house
-as it appeared in 1790, when it was about a hundred years old. It not
-only suggests the rural surroundings, but gives a lively idea of the
-groups which frequented the Mall, down the length of which this front
-faced. The Mall, it will be remembered, was the principal walk in the
-royal park of St James, and apparently enjoyed the formality of being
-guarded by sentries.
-
-Cliefden House, in Buckinghamshire, was another of these noblemen’s
-“palaces,” with “arching galleries” joining the offices to the house.
-It stood upon an enormous terrace described by Campbell as 433 ft. long
-and 24 ft. high, the front of which consisted of a series of alcoves
-or niches, flanked at either end by a flight of steps (Fig. 114). The
-original house has entirely disappeared, and has been replaced by one
-of excellent design by Charles Barry. Merely the terrace, somewhat
-altered, and the dwarf walls of the lay out remain, and Wynne’s work
-can only be judged from Campbell’s elevations and from old prints.
-
-The consideration of these two houses brings vividly before the mind
-the completeness of the change that had come over domestic architecture
-during the course of the seventeenth century. The description of
-Buckingham House from contemporary pens (one of them that of the owner
-himself) gives an air of _vraisemblance_ to Campbell’s cold
-illustrations. The “arching galleries” indicate a disposition of plan
-which was being adopted in many large houses, and was for another half
-century employed in order to impart stateliness to what otherwise might
-have been a rather bald design.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 113a.--BUCKINGHAM HOUSE, _St. James’s
-  Park_.
-
-  (_from a water-colour by Edward Dayes._)]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 114.--CLIEFDEN, IN BUCKINGHAMSHIRE.
-
-      From an Engraving by Luke Sullivan.]
-
-The idea of this arrangement was to have a central block containing
-the principal rooms, and to flank it at some distance on each side
-by a subsidiary block connected to the main structure by curved
-colonnades--the “arching galleries” of Buckingham House. These
-outlying blocks contained the offices, which were sometimes the
-kitchens, sometimes the stables, and occasionally the library or
-chapel. The inconvenience of the arrangement is obvious; under it
-compactness was sacrificed to appearance. If these outliers looked out
-on to the approach, their windows embarrassed the access to the front
-door. If they looked the other way, they turned their dull backs upon
-the main approach. Windows suitable for a kitchen had to be balanced
-by similar windows in the stables which were not suitable; or, as an
-alternative, sham windows were employed. Designers found themselves
-obliged to resort to devices of one kind or another, which sacrificed
-the convenience of one block in order to assimilate it in appearance
-to the other. Nor did the sacrifice stop here; it affected more or
-less the whole house. The mistaken claims of “architecture” led to the
-external appearance being considered as of the first importance; the
-internal convenience was modified to suit it. Not infrequently rooms
-were wrongly placed, wrongly lighted, awkwardly shaped, given a bad
-aspect, or otherwise ill-handled, in order to preserve the symmetry and
-proportion of the exterior. The placing of the kitchen in a distant
-block, connected perhaps by an open colonnade, must have been a great
-inconvenience both to the family and the servants. But inconvenience
-counted for little so long as an imposing edifice was secured.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 115.--Plan of Stoke Bruerne,
-  Northamptonshire.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 116.--VIEW OF BETHLEHEM HOSPITAL.]
-
-The introduction of this particular form of plan, with a central
-block, two outlying wings, and connecting colonnades, is associated
-with the name of Inigo Jones and the house of Stoke Bruerne, in
-Northamptonshire. According to Bridges, the county historian, “the
-house was built by Sir _Francis Crane_, who brought the design
-from _Italy_, and in the execution of it received the assistance
-of _Inigo Jones_. It consists of a body and two wings, joined
-by corridores or galleries (see plan, Fig. 115). The pillars which
-support the galleries leading to the wings, are red and of a different
-colour from the house.... The house was begun about the year 1630 and
-finished before 1636, during which interval he gave an entertainment
-here to the King and Queen.”[56] Colin Campbell, however, says that
-the building was begun by Inigo, who made the wings, colonnades, and
-all the foundations, and that owing to the interruption caused by
-the Civil War the front was designed by “another architect.” He puts
-the date at 1640. Bridges’ account is circumstantial, and he was a
-careful historian; but Campbell’s elevation shows the body of the house
-treated in a different manner from the wings, and so far supports his
-statement. Unfortunately this part of the building was burnt down in
-1886, and the opportunity of comparing the differences in the work
-itself is lost.
-
-Both authorities concur in placing the date as early as somewhere
-between 1630 and 1640, which was quite half a century before this type
-of plan became at all popular. Nevertheless among Webb’s drawings,
-which cover at least thirty years of the half-century, there are
-several instances in which it is employed; and even the practical
-and level-headed Wren has a plan of this type among his drawings
-at All Souls College, Oxford (see Fig. 100). The genesis of this
-particular form is of interest inasmuch as it was widely adopted in the
-eighteenth century; so much so that Isaac Ware in his “Complete Body
-of Architecture,” published in 1756, lays down various rules for its
-disposition and proportions, and recommends its adoption as raising
-a house out of the commonplace and making it handsome without being
-necessarily pompous.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 117.--CATHERINE COURT, TOWER HILL, LONDON.
-
-      Drawn by F. L. Emanuel.]
-
-Among the more notable examples of this type of plan may be mentioned
-Burley on the Hill, in Rutland, where a low curved colonnade is thrust
-out on each side to a great distance without serving any particular
-object beyond that of obtaining an appearance of grandeur; this was
-one of the earlier applications of the idea, dating from late in the
-seventeenth century: Easton Neston, in Northamptonshire, dated 1702,
-which will be described presently; Cottesbrooke, in the same county,
-built in the early part of the eighteenth century; Kelmarsh, a not very
-distant neighbour of Cottesbrooke, designed by Gibbs and replacing a
-picturesque Jacobean house;[57] Seaton Delaval, in Northumberland,
-designed by Vanbrugh about 1720, of which the two wings alone remain
-in use; Houghton, in Norfolk, begun in 1722; Holkham, in the same
-county, begun in 1734; and Kedlestone, in Derbyshire, dating from 1761;
-the last three of which will be referred to at greater length in a
-subsequent chapter.
-
-Wren was not the only man of science of his time who became an
-architect; there was his acquaintance, Robert Hooke, three years his
-junior, and, like himself, the son of a parson. Hooke was almost as
-versatile a genius as Wren, but it was as a mathematician that he
-achieved most reputation. He was connected with the Royal Society at
-its inception, and was appointed curator of experiments. The great
-fire of London appears to have turned his attention to architecture;
-indeed that event, owing to the necessity it imposed of a vast amount
-of urgent rebuilding, seems to have led into the paths of architecture
-men whose previous training, although not architectural, qualified them
-even slightly for the work. Doubtless Hooke’s mathematics pointed him
-out as being not unsuitable to become a city surveyor, besides which he
-had submitted a plan to the Royal Society for the rebuilding of London,
-which received much commendation from the lord mayor and corporation,
-who asked that it might be submitted to the king. In this direction,
-however, he had been forestalled by Wren with his fine scheme. In the
-end nothing came of either of the suggestions.
-
-Hooke appears to have made a considerable fortune as a surveyor, and
-he is credited with the design of three important buildings, all of
-which have disappeared. One of these was Montagu House, in Bloomsbury,
-for Ralph, Lord Montagu, whose country house at Boughton is presently
-to be described. Hooke’s house did not last long; it was begun in 1675
-and burnt down in 1686, its successor being designed by the French
-architect, Puget, whom Lord Montagu may have known during his long
-residence in France. The second building ascribed to Hooke is the old
-Bethlem Hospital, likewise begun in 1675 and pulled down in 1814 (Fig.
-116); and the third is Aske’s Hospital at Hoxton, begun about 1688.
-Engravings of the last two buildings (there is no record of the first
-Montagu House) do not lead to the opinion that Hooke was a great master
-of architecture, although it is true that the long front of Bethlem
-Hospital is handled in a simple, straightforward manner. He was far
-behind Wren, but he is interesting as being another whose training led
-him, under the special conditions of the time, into active practice.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 118.--SOUTH OR PRINCIPAL FRONT OF
-  ALBEMARLE HOUSE, LONDON, 1664.
-
-      From an Engraving by R. Sawyer, Jun.]
-
-Lord Chancellor Hyde, Earl of Clarendon, built a fine house during
-the heyday of his prosperity, on a site in Piccadilly, opposite the
-top of St James’s Street (Fig. 118). It was highly extolled by Evelyn
-(especially when writing to Lord Cornbury, the chancellor’s eldest
-son), and after him by Pepys, who went to see it, “hearing so much from
-Mr. Evelyn of it.” He declared it to be the finest pile he ever did see,
-and on a subsequent visit he climbed with some trouble to the top, and
-there found the noblest prospect that ever he saw, Greenwich being
-nothing to it. The engraving hardly bears out this extravagant praise,
-but it must have been a stately house. The architect was Roger Pratt,
-afterwards knighted, another of the men whom the great fire appears to
-have brought into the service of architecture.[58] Evelyn mentions him
-more than once; he was a fellow commissioner of his in the inquiry as
-to the rebuilding of St Paul’s, and Evelyn had met him years before in
-Italy. The house was begun in 1664, and was approaching completion in
-November 1666. But misfortune dogged it from the outset. The populace,
-with whom Clarendon was no favourite, dubbed it Dunkirk House, in
-allusion to his supposed connection with the sale of that town to the
-French. The chancellor occupied it but a single year before he fled the
-country; his son occupied it for another year or two, and it was then
-let on lease to the Duke of Ormond. After Clarendon’s death at the end
-of 1674, it was sold to the second Duke of Albemarle, and became known
-as Albemarle House; he again sold it some three years later to a kind
-of building syndicate, who in a few years pulled it down and laid out
-its site and the surrounding land in streets, one of which was called
-Albemarle Street, and another Bond Street, after Sir Thomas Bond who
-was one of the principals concerned in the transaction. The house was
-regarded as an unwarrantable extravagance, and Clarendon himself is
-reported to have eventually looked upon the building of it as a “vanity
-and folly.” But after all it only cost £50,000, which was a small sum
-compared with the cost of many houses both before and since. It is
-interesting because of its short life--less than twenty years from
-foundation to demolition--and from the character of the design, which
-follows the lines laid down by Jones and Webb.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 119.--Staircase of a House between Love
-  Lane and Botolph Lane, London (demolished in 1906).]
-
-Apart from the large houses which were built for wealthy persons,
-the new London which sprang up after the fire must have been widely
-different from the old. The houses which were burnt down were, many
-of them, built of wood and plaster--relics of mediæval times. Their
-fronts leaned across narrow lanes, each story projecting over the one
-beneath it, after such a fashion as may still be seen, though ever less
-frequently, in some of our ancient country towns. The houses which
-replaced them followed in most cases the old frontage lines, but their
-fronts were vertical and admitted as much light and air as the width
-of the street allowed. Nevertheless, the width was frequently but
-little, and houses of great size and finely treated within, were built
-in streets and lanes which in the present day we should regard as mere
-alleys, and which, indeed, would not be permitted under any modern
-by-laws. London still preserves many of these old houses (Fig. 117),
-although they are gradually being improved away. They are generally
-built of brick, with very little relief to their fronts save a good
-doorway and a good cornice, and perhaps a few touches in some ironwork.
-The same general treatment prevailed for half a century or more, with
-a tendency, however, to even greater simplicity; the result was that,
-although in the city where the narrow lanes were crooked and had here
-and there unexpected projections, the effect was interesting, yet
-where the same plain treatment was applied to long straight streets,
-the effect became dull and monotonous. Most of these houses had
-interesting detail within them, many of them were actually sumptuous,
-and of a richness suitable to the merchant princes who dwelt there.
-They had fine staircases and ceilings like those in a house in Botolph
-Lane (Figs. 119, 120), and good doorways and panelling like that in a
-house in College Hill (Fig. 121).
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 120.--Ceiling in a House between Love and
-  Botolph Lanes.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 121.--HOUSE IN COLLEGE HILL.
-  DETAILS.
-
-      Lawrence Furniss, _del._
-
-  Illustration reproduced by permission of Messrs Technical Journals,
-  Ltd.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 122.--THE GREAT HOUSE, LEYTON.
-
-      Edwin Gunn, _del._]
-
-A fine example of the treatment, prevalent at this period, of a
-staircase and hall was to be seen, before its destruction, at the
-Great House at Leyton, in Essex, not far from London (Fig. 122). It is
-designed in a broad, simple, yet monumental manner, which, however,
-has led to the dividing of the lower part of the staircase into two
-separate flights, which merge into a single flight of the same width at
-the half-landing. The treatment is not quite logical, but--which was
-held to be more important--it is symmetrical. The Great House was built
-by Sir Fisher Tenche, Bart., whose father was an Alderman of London,
-and it is a good example of the houses built by wealthy citizens out in
-the country, but within reach of the city.[59]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 123.--ST LAWRENCE, JEWRY. DETAIL OF
-  CARVING IN VESTRY ROOM.
-
-      Silver Medal Drawing by David Wickham Ayre.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 124.--ST LAWRENCE, JEWRY. DETAIL OF
-  SIDE OF VESTRY ROOM.
-
-      Silver Medal Drawing by David Wickham Ayre.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 125.--BREWERS’ HALL.]
-
-Although, strictly speaking, rather outside the subject of domestic
-architecture, the city halls and churches should not be overlooked,
-as they contain splendid specimens of decoration in wood and plaster
-of the same kind as those to be found in houses. At the period under
-consideration, as in former times, the same sort of embellishment
-was applied to churches as to houses; it is quite a modern idea,
-born of revivals and restorations, to consider it necessary that a
-church should be Gothic in style; to think of Gothic as essentially
-ecclesiastic and of Classic as secular. Accordingly in Wren’s churches
-there are admirable bits of woodwork, which illustrate the methods of
-design then in vogue in houses. So, too, in the halls of the great city
-companies. All this work was the consequence of the destruction of
-the older buildings by the great fire. The new church of St Lawrence,
-Jewry, was begun in 1671, Wren being the architect, and it was opened
-in 1677. The woodwork of the interior is as fine as anything that this
-age of fine woodwork produced, and that of the vestry is designed
-after the same fashion as the panelling and doorways of a large house
-(Fig. 124); it is, if anything, more superb. The carving (Fig.
-123) is almost certainly the work of Grinling Gibbons. St Lawrence is
-one of the best furnished of Wren’s churches, but many others possess
-admirable fittings such as pulpits, pews, organ-cases, galleries, and
-doorways, boldly designed and richly decorated, which show what a high
-excellence the joiner’s art had achieved under Wren, Gibbons, and their
-chief craftsmen.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 126.--Brewers’ Hall.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 127.--Girdlers’ Hall, London.]
-
-One of the most interesting of the city halls is that of the Brewers’
-Company, in Addle Street. It has undergone restoration and some amount
-of alteration, but the principal floor, which contains the hall and
-council chamber, still retains much of its original flavour. The walls
-are panelled in large panels (Fig. 125), the hall is entered through
-a screen with a splendid doorway (Fig. 126), and the council chamber
-has a fine fireplace. This is as good an example as could be found of
-the manner of panelling and decorating large rooms which prevailed at
-the time it was built, namely, 1673. The Stationers’ Hall has as fine
-a screen and doorway as those of the Brewers, and indeed most of the
-city halls, in spite of modern renovations, retain good work of this
-period, among the less known examples of which is the rich panelling at
-Girdlers’ Hall, in Basinghall Street (Fig. 127).
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 128.--The Deanery, Wells.]
-
-Outside London there was a large amount of work done during this
-period, much of it fresh and interesting. Stapleford Park, in
-Leicestershire, a house with a long history and possessing some unusual
-detail of the date of 1633, was considerably altered and enlarged about
-the time of Charles II. by Bennet, Lord Sherard, who was in possession
-from 1640 to 1700. The exterior is plain, but in the interior are
-two rooms, with charming woodwork; the door of the dining-room is
-illustrated in Fig. 130, and that of the library in Fig. 129. The two
-doors differ, but they are alike in that each is placed on a slight
-projection which causes a break in the main cornice of the room. The
-dining-room has large panels with a boldly carved bolection moulding.
-The door has a broken pediment in the gap of which is placed a shield
-connected by heavy swags to the surrounding work. This was a common
-feature of the period. The library door is of much the same type, but
-instead of a shield there is a bust. The panels on the walls are formed
-by a bold moulding, which is broken backwards and forwards into a
-pattern that recalls the busy treatment of Jacobean work.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 129.--Stapleford Park, Leicestershire.
-  Doorway in the Library.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 130.--Stapleford Park, Leicestershire.
-  Doorway in the Dining-Room.]
-
-In the Deanery at Wells is a fine panelled room attributed to Sir
-Christopher Wren, and certainly wrought after his style if not actually
-designed by him. The walls are divided into bays by heavy Ionic
-pilasters, the spaces between which are filled with large panels.
-Here, too, the bolection moulding is carved, as well as several other
-members, the whole effect being rich and handsome (Fig. 128).
-
-Melton Constable stands in a park amid the undulations of the western
-part of Norfolk. It is a fine simple house of about the year 1680
-(Fig. 131). The eaves cornice gives it its chief character; the rest
-of the detail is correct, but strikes the modern eye as being a little
-hackneyed; but this is the fault, not of the original architect but of
-his successors, who, if they did not copy this actual work, drew, one
-after the other, upon the same well of inspiration.
-
-These examples serve to illustrate the progress of house design
-during the later years of the seventeenth century; they show how the
-fully developed classic manner had superseded the homely treatment of
-Jacobean times. Its further career of grandeur and stateliness demands
-a fresh chapter for its consideration.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 131.--MELTON CONSTABLE, NORFOLK.]
-
-
-
-
-                                 VIII
-
-       GREAT HOUSES AND GARDENS OF THE EARLY EIGHTEENTH CENTURY
-
-
-Twenty-five years after his restoration Charles II. died; James II.
-passed uneasily across the scene to his inglorious exit, and William
-and Mary succeeded him on the throne. But it is not to the sovereigns
-that we must look as pioneers in house building, although at Greenwich
-and Hampton Court fine work was accomplished. It is rather to the
-great nobles, or at least to aristocratic and wealthy families, that
-we owe the most notable specimens of domestic architecture of the
-time. At this period the gulf between the upper and lower classes was
-wide and deep: its widening was perhaps one of the reactions from the
-conditions of the Commonwealth when many persons of humble origin
-fought their way to eminence. The distance between the heads of a
-great household and their retainers had been increasing all through
-the century; the increase has already been indicated in the type of
-plan adopted by Jones and Webb. The great hall, where the whole family
-used to meet on common ground and with common objects, had disappeared.
-The great noble of Elizabeth’s time lived among his retainers; the
-grandee under William and Mary relegated his servants to a distant
-part of the building or to the basement. The great ones of the land
-now housed themselves in splendid buildings, and surrounded themselves
-with splendid gardens. Nobody grumbled; the whole community concurred
-in this exaltation of birth combined with wealth. Men whose names to
-us are household words sought the patronage of others whose names and
-doings are hardly recorded outside the pages of the “Complete Peerage.”
-Manners, customs, dress emphasised this condition at the time;
-architecture reflects it to-day.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 132.--Boughton House, Northamptonshire.
-  Plan of the Upper Story, 1736.
-
-      From a Plan preserved in the house.
-
-     The front at the bottom of the plan faces north. The house lies
-     to the right of the plan, the stables to the left. The entrance
-     to the house is between the two wings on the north front.
-     Remains of the original house are to be found in the great hall
-     situated at the north end of the oblong court, and in the two
-     sides of the same court.]
-
-Boughton House, near Kettering in Northamptonshire, is a good example
-of a home of one of the great nobles of the time of William and Mary.
-Ralph Montagu (afterwards Duke of Montagu) succeeded his father as Lord
-Montagu of Boughton in 1681. In 1669 he had been appointed ambassador
-extraordinary to France, and during his stay in that country he lived
-for a considerable period at Versailles. One of his biographers[60]
-says that “here it was his Grace formed his idea of building and
-gardening, erecting his seat at Boughton, in Northamptonshire, after
-the pattern, and as his Dimensions would allow, after the very model
-of Versailles.” In 1695 he entertained King William and Queen Mary
-at Boughton for fifteen days. He had been created Earl of Montagu by
-William in 1689, and in 1705 he was created Duke of Montagu by Queen
-Anne. He was, therefore, a great personage, and he made his house and
-its surroundings of a magnificence suitable to his dignity.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 133.--Boughton House. North Front of
-  House, with Stables beyond.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 134.--Boughton House. A Corner of the
-  Entrance Front.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 135.--Boughton House. One of the State
-  Rooms.]
-
-An ancestor had already, in the middle of the sixteenth century,
-built a fine house at Boughton, with a great hall covered by a roof
-of unusual beauty and excellence, and with wings and adjuncts of
-considerable extent. Ralph, Lord Montagu, proceeded to overlay this old
-house with his new work so completely (see plan, Fig. 132) that it is
-only here and there, on the removal of panelling, or in the course of
-some minor alteration such as must from time to time occur in these old
-houses, that traces of the original building can be found. Fortunately
-the roof of the hall was preserved, but it was hidden, and remains
-hidden, by a new plaster ceiling on which Cheron painted a large and
-elaborate composition. The old house was taken as the nucleus of the
-new, but it was extended in various directions, especially on the
-north side, where a range of state rooms was erected with two boldly
-projecting wings (Fig. 133). It is this part of the house which is
-reminiscent of Versailles, if the lofty windows and Mansard roofs can
-really be said to remind one of that vast and much more ornate palace.
-But the style of this particular work bears a certain resemblance to
-the grand stable buildings at Versailles; it is large in scale, sober
-and dignified in treatment (Fig. 134). Indeed, it is so severe as to be
-thought dull by the casual visitor.
-
-This reproach is not brought against the interior. The rooms are large
-and stately; their walls are panelled with the great, boldly moulded
-panels of the period (Fig. 135); their ceilings are painted with the
-gay mythological subjects of Verrio and his school (see Figs. 310,
-311); the floors are filled with the tables, chairs, settees, cabinets,
-and bedsteads of the time. Portraits of the family[61] hang on the
-panelling, there are mirrors in which their glories were reflected,
-and knick-knacks which they handled. In other wings are rooms of less
-stateliness, intended for daily use; in the attics are long rows of
-still plainer rooms intended for the servants.
-
-At the time it was built the house, no doubt, answered its purpose
-admirably; but times change and we change with them; and eventually the
-rooms were found to be cold, draughty, and inconveniently arranged--one
-leading, as a rule, out of another. There was space enough, but there
-were none of the comforts of modern life; no baths nor even any supply
-of water laid on; it all had to be carried long distances. The house
-became less constantly in use, and to this fact is largely owing the
-preservation of its ancient character. Nothing brings home to the
-mind the changes that have taken place in manners and customs during
-the last two centuries so forcibly as an attempt to live in an old
-unaltered house, where even the cooking appliances, although on a grand
-scale, are ill-adapted to modern needs; and it is only by drastic
-alterations in some of the less notable rooms that Boughton has been
-fitted for modern occupation.
-
-Ralph was succeeded in 1708 by his son John, the second duke, who
-carried on such work as his father had left unfinished. He is
-responsible for several fireplaces, among other things, on which he
-made a considerable display of heraldry. The difference between the
-_motif_ of Duke John’s heraldry and that of a hundred years
-earlier is that in the earlier work the aim was as much decorative as
-historic, while in the latter it was mainly historic. In James I.’s
-time the family arms were found to be excellent objects for ornamenting
-important panels, and if at the same time they ministered to family
-pride, so much the better. In Duke John’s case the aim of the heraldry
-is not so much to provide decoration as to set forth the descent of
-the ducal family and its alliances, especially the last alliance of
-all, the marriage of the Duke of Montagu with a daughter of the great
-Duke of Marlborough. It not inaptly illustrates the attitude of mind
-of the nobles of the time, their assumption of qualities which placed
-them on a plane above the rest of mankind, where “grandeur hears with
-a disdainful smile the short and simple annals of the poor.” The rest
-of mankind, however, concurred in the assumption, especially those
-who stood in need of patrons, and the literature of the eighteenth
-century makes it clear that noblemen and persons of quality wielded an
-influence which made their goodwill worth cultivating.
-
-It was only fitting that such notable personages should be worthily
-housed, and at Boughton the first two dukes surrounded themselves with
-suitable magnificence. The splendour was not confined to the house,
-it pervaded the surroundings as well. The first duke planted a grand
-double avenue as wide as the whole façade of the house. He laid out the
-gardens on a large scale with parterres and wildernesses, long canals
-and _jets d’eau_ (Fig. 136). The water of the canals fell over a
-cascade of five stages into an ornamental pond. Intricate walks, some
-curved and some straight, were left among the young trees. Statues gave
-point to the vistas. The second duke carried on the work both inside
-and outside the gardens. He planted a network of avenues extending for
-many miles in all directions; some of them centred on the house, others
-pointed to neighbouring churches, yet others converged upon an ancient
-oak marking the spot where, according to tradition, the last wolf in
-England was killed. They all linked up the ancient woods, remnants of
-the old forest of Rockingham. Many old plans are preserved at the house
-showing the growth of the scheme. There is also an ancient plan of
-St Cloud in France showing the forests and avenues with which it was
-enclosed, and from the strong likeness between the English maps and the
-French, it is not difficult to guess whence the duke’s inspiration was
-derived.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 136.--BOUGHTON HOUSE. _Bird’s-Eye View
-  of the Gardens and Lay Out, about_ 1735.
-
-      From a Drawing preserved at Boughton.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 137.--DYRHAM, GLOUCESTERSHIRE,
-  1698.]
-
-The grandeur of the gardens has long been dismantled; the statues
-have disappeared, and some may be seen adorning other people’s fields.
-The parterres are obliterated, and the intricate walks can no longer be
-traced; indeed time alone would have rendered them an overgrown tangle.
-But the great avenues still remain, still centre on the house, still
-point to the churches, still converge on the ancient oak, still link up
-the ancient woods. The canals are there, and would yet fall over the
-cascade were the floodgates lowered. Many of the little trees which
-formed curious patterns on the plans have grown into giants. Here and
-there a path survives, following part of its allotted route, enough to
-show that the original design was not merely a visionary scheme but was
-actually carried out.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 138.--Plan of the Ground Floor of Dyrham.]
-
-Dyrham, in Gloucestershire, is another but somewhat smaller house of
-this period; it was built in 1698 from the designs of “the ingenious
-Mr. Talman,” as Campbell calls him, for William Blaythwayt, who was
-Secretary of State to William III. The property had come to him some
-thirty years before by a marriage with the heiress of the Wynters,
-whose ancient house was removed to make way for the new one. The site
-lies towards the base of a steep hill down which the road winds through
-a park, presenting a bird’s-eye view of the house for some time before
-it is reached. The buildings stand on a level platform contrived among
-the declivities of the park, and from a terrace at the back a fine
-flight of steps leads down to the gardens. The entrance front (Fig.
-137) is lengthened by the adjoining orangery, forming a façade of some
-220 ft., of which the house itself occupies 130 ft. In the middle of
-this part is the front door, which opens into a hall (see plan, Fig.
-138). Immediately opposite is the door into the saloon, beyond which is
-a second hall, which leads out to the terrace. A vista is thus formed
-through the house and on to the gardens. The terrace is flanked on one
-side by the stable buildings and on the other by a corridor leading
-to the ancient church. The whole arrangement is symmetrical, stately,
-and interesting. Being on a reasonable scale the effect is dignified
-without being overpowering. Time has dealt kindly with the place, and
-there are no modern restorations to interfere either with the tone or
-the sentiment of the surroundings.
-
-There is nothing particularly striking about the architecture of the
-interior, charming though this is; most of the rooms are panelled with
-the large and boldly moulded panelling of the period (Fig. 139), and
-there is one in which the effect is very happily enhanced by rich,
-though subdued gilding. The unusual charm of the house springs from the
-fact that very few alterations have been made, and that it retains its
-old furniture, books, and pictures, which combine to produce a fine
-feeling of old-fashioned comfort and culture.
-
-From the plan (Fig. 138) it will be gathered that many of the rooms
-communicate with each other and are, in fact, thoroughfare rooms; and
-in this respect it must be granted that the comfort of those days
-differed from that of our own. It will also be seen that the saloon is
-lighted from one end only, an arrangement which, although rendering the
-room by no means dark, yet detracts somewhat from its cheerfulness and
-deprives it of all prospect.
-
-An important point in the external treatment, differentiating this
-house from most of those hitherto mentioned, is that the roof is not
-visible. Webb made his roofs an important feature, bestowing much care
-upon their proportion and pitch; here the cornice is surmounted by an
-open balustrade, and the chimneys, instead of being made to attract the
-eye, are as inconspicuous as possible.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 139.--DYRHAM, GLOUCESTERSHIRE.
-  THE SMALL DINING-ROOM.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 140.--CHATSWORTH HOUSE,
-  DERBYSHIRE, 1687–1706.]
-
-Talman had adopted the same treatment at Chatsworth, which was being
-built at this time[62] for the first Duke of Devonshire (Fig. 140).
-Chatsworth is on a much larger scale than Dyrham, and is far better
-known to the public. Indeed to many persons it presents itself as the
-model of what a great nobleman’s seat should be. This is owing to its
-simple and dignified treatment, and to its admirable situation and the
-lordly nature of its lay out. When examined closely, it lacks interest
-and variety in its detail. Some of the rooms, however, are finely
-proportioned and are decorated with beautiful woodwork and plasterwork;
-and there are two or three doorways with alabaster mouldings and
-pediments of remarkable interest. Much of the wood carving, from its
-style and workmanship, was ascribed for many years to Grinling Gibbons,
-but the building accounts show that it was in fact executed by a
-Derbyshire man of the name of Samuel Watson, of Heanor. This is another
-illustration of the tendency to attribute, in the absence of definite
-knowledge, any remarkable work to the best known master of the time.
-
-It might have been expected that Wren’s manner would have been
-continued in the work of his assistant, Nicholas Hawksmoor, and to
-a certain extent it was; but Hawksmoor was influenced largely by
-Vanbrugh, who infected him with some of his own passion for the
-grandiose. The most notable work of Hawksmoor in domestic architecture
-is Easton Neston, in Northamptonshire, built for William, Lord
-Lempster, of which a plan (Fig. 142) and elevation are given in
-“Vitruvius Britannicus.” The principal block, containing the state
-rooms, is flanked on the plan by outlying wings occupied by the stables
-and offices, and beyond them the court is widened out, and eventually
-completed by a monumental arcade or corridor, which obviously could
-never have been of any practical use. There are no less than five
-important approaches to the courtyard, through the wings and the
-arcaded portion; the whole arrangement is designed for stateliness.
-It is said that the wings were designed by Wren, and that Hawksmoor
-added the house itself in 1702, some twenty years later.[63] Campbell’s
-elevation certainly does not confirm the idea that Wren’s hand was
-employed; there is nothing of his gracious dignity about the portion of
-the wings there shown. Campbell says that the building was finished in
-1713, and that he was indebted to Hawksmoor himself for the original
-drawings of the house; he does not mention Wren. The central building
-itself bears the date “A^o Sal. MDCCII” on the frieze, so there is
-evidently some confusion as to the wings. These might have been built
-after the house and finished in 1713, but in that case they could
-hardly have been the work of Wren.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 141.--EASTON NESTON,
-  NORTHAMPTONSHIRE, 1702.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 142.--Plan of Easton Neston.]
-
-It is noteworthy that the whole of the wings and courtyard were
-subsequently pulled down,[64] and nothing remains of the original house
-but the central block. The reason of this destruction was presumably
-that they were found to be useless and extravagant, as indeed might
-be expected. The effect has been somewhat spoiled, for the house,
-unsupported by anything but some buildings wholly unworthy of it,
-looks gaunt and abrupt; it seems too grand for its size (Fig. 141).
-It suffers in fact from its grandeur; the large windows are suitable
-enough for the large rooms, but where the exigencies of the plan
-bring them into small rooms or passages, they are overwhelming. It
-is interesting to find that Hawksmoor felt this himself, and that in
-the two ends of the house he departs from the large scale of the main
-façades. He has collected as far as possible his small rooms at the two
-ends, and has given them smaller windows, contriving two floors here
-in the height of one along the front. The plan of the house follows
-the stately ideas of the time, which took little count of domestic
-comfort. The hall was treated in an unusual way; it was formed of three
-portions, but whereas the middle bay was carried up to the height of
-two stories, the two end bays were of but one story. The effect was
-rather fine, as may be seen from the view in Fig. 143. A large floor
-space was obtained, and also the effect of noble height without the
-overpowering result which would have followed from carrying the whole
-of the hall to the height of two stories. But even this restraint left
-a greater void than suits modern comfort, and the more lofty portion
-has now been divided by a floor at the level of the cornice. Other
-alterations, both of disposition and of decoration, have been made.
-The original hall has become the dining-room, and a new hall has been
-fashioned to the left of the entrance. The drawing-room, however,
-retains much of its original treatment, including the elaborate ceiling
-with figures in high relief in the middle panel, and the walls, which
-are occupied by panels with rather extravagant frames (Fig 144).
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 143.--Easton Neston. The Dining-Room (now
-  altered).]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 144.--EASTON NESTON. THE
-  DRAWING-ROOM.]
-
-The bulk of Hawksmoors work was concerned with churches, and therefore
-lies outside the scope of the present inquiry. He was a trained and
-skilful architect, but contemporary with him figure others who had
-not received the practical teaching which he enjoyed.
-
-Almost ever since the publication of books on architecture had begun,
-a certain number of wealthy Englishmen had taken an interest in the
-subject. Lord Burghley had procured books from abroad in the time
-of Elizabeth; and as the years went by more and more people studied
-such publications as were procurable. Webb, it will be remembered,
-referred to the fact that “most gentry in England at this day have
-some knowledge in the theory of architecture,” and by the end of the
-seventeenth century, it had become the fashion among the great and
-wealthy to take an interest in the subject--that is, in the classic
-architecture of the books. It is hardly necessary to say that the
-interest was somewhat superficial, and concerned itself with appearance
-more than with convenience; it was still the theory rather than “ye
-practique,” as Webb phrases it, that was studied. The pursuit of
-the most technical and utilitarian of the arts was thus taken up by
-amateurs. Wren himself was an amateur when he first began to design.
-His chief, Sir John Denham, was reckoned by Evelyn “a better poet than
-architect,” but to do Sir John justice, he does not appear to have
-advanced a claim to be an architect of any kind. Evelyn was a patron
-of the arts, and especially of architecture, about which he wrote a
-book. After him, in the eighteenth century, came Lord Burlington,
-the most distinguished patron of architecture of that age. He was a
-patron of architects, too; many of the best known men of the century
-owed their start in life to the earl. He dabbled in design himself.
-We are probably justified in calling it dabbling, but it was not so
-considered at the time, and Horace Walpole, himself a dabbler, speaks
-of him as a distinguished architect. It was through the munificence of
-Lord Burlington that many designs of Palladio were published, as well
-as those drawings left behind him by Webb, which, under the title of
-“Designs by Inigo Jones,” had so great a vogue at this period.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 145.--A HALL OR PUBLIC ROOM, BY
-  WEBB.
-
-      From the Worcester College Collection, i. 37.]
-
-Of the work usually attributed to Lord Burlington, it may fairly be
-surmised that the practical part was done by one or other of the men
-who were profiting by his generosity in their endeavours to become
-architects. The theoretical part was really not very difficult,
-for designers had a short way with architectural problems in those
-days. The general purpose of a building having been considered,
-its external appearance was then more or less suitably designed.
-When the elevation was perfected according to the rules of art,
-the plan was made to fit it, and if the plan did not answer all
-the purposes for which it was intended, those concerned had to put
-up with the deficiency. The oft-quoted saying of Lord Chesterfield
-illustrates this, for when Lord Burlington had designed a beautiful
-but inconvenient house for General Wade, Lord Chesterfield advised
-the latter if he could not live in it to his comfort, to take a house
-opposite and look at it. It should not have been difficult for Lord
-Burlington to design this particular house, for he had all Webb’s
-drawings to help him, and among them many examples of this type.
-So with the Assembly Rooms at York; the large hall is a crib from
-Palladio’s illustration of a hall after the Egyptian manner, but
-influenced by a rendering of the same subject by Webb. Webb’s version
-consists of an oblong room, having a row of columns set some eight feet
-from the walls, thus forming an aisle all round the room (Fig. 145).
-The columns carry a wall which is pierced with windows, and which in
-its turn carries the roof. The outside walls of the ground floor stop
-short below the windows, and are crowned with a balustraded parapet
-masking the flat roof over the aisle. Lord Burlington adopted this
-idea wholesale (Fig. 147), but he made his room much narrower than
-Webb’s, although of about the same length, and he kept to the general
-proportions of Palladio. When, however, the treatment of the end of
-the hall (which was the source of inspiration) was lengthened nearly
-fourfold to do duty for the sides, the effect became monotonous and
-poverty-stricken; this is apparent on Burlington’s section (Fig. 146).
-To the main room he added others of less account, but they are nearly
-all too long and too narrow, whether for appearance or for use.
-
-Another well-known work of his is his villa at Chiswick (Fig. 148),
-which was copied from a design of Palladio’s for a villa near Vicenza,
-but spoilt in the process. Here again there is no originality, and the
-practical drawbacks are so great as to arouse even Walpole’s criticism,
-to which, however, he adds the illuminating observation that its
-faults were condoned by the fact that here, without any trouble, might
-be obtained picturesque views better worth seeing than many of those
-fragments of ancient grandeur which travellers sought with infinite
-labour--an interesting testimonial to scenic architecture.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 146.--Section of the Assembly Room, York.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 147.--Plan of the Assembly Room, York.]
-
-The other works attributed to Lord Burlington are the dormitory at
-Westminster, a school and almshouses at Seven-oaks, both illustrated by
-Kent in his “Designs of Inigo Jones,” and Burlington House, Piccadilly.
-Of these the dormitory at Westminster was a bald and mutilated version
-of a design by Wren, and Burlington House was probably designed by
-Campbell.[65]
-
-But although Burlington cannot be regarded as an architect who did
-anything great in design, he was a munificent patron of the art and of
-those who pursued it more practically.
-
-Contemporary with him, and indeed starting a little before him, was
-another well-known but more skilful amateur, the witty dramatist, Sir
-John Vanbrugh, who has left behind him some of the largest and most
-ponderous houses ever built in England. His patrons and friends among
-the nobility were all esteemed good judges of architecture, and to
-their judgment he submitted at least one of his largest designs.
-
-Among the noblemen who employed him was the third Earl of Carlisle,
-who conceived the idea of making himself a magnificent home at Castle
-Howard, in Yorkshire, to replace the ancient castle of Hinderskelf,
-which had been brought into the family by marriage with one of the
-co-heiresses of Lord Dacres. The scheme embraced not only a new palace,
-but a large lay out of plantations, vistas, lakes, temples, obelisks,
-lodges, and other objects of interest, such as had been employed by
-Le Nôtre at Versailles and elsewhere. The completion of his scheme
-is recorded in verses too bald (one would imagine) to be any but his
-lordship’s, engraved on an important obelisk. They give the date of
-commencement as 1702, the inscription is dated 1731, so that year may
-be held to have witnessed the fulfilment of the main project.
-
-But the house had been occupied long before this; for in 1714 Lady Mary
-Wortley Montague wrote from Yorkshire to her husband, professing to
-be “in a great fright” about attempts from Scotland in favour of the
-Pretender. “The four young ladies at Castle Howard,” she says, were
-as much alarmed as she was, for their father had gone away and was
-not likely to return for months. They had asked her to join them, a
-suggestion which she was inclined to comply with, since Castle Howard
-would be a safe retreat, although rather like a nunnery, as no mortal
-man ever entered its doors in the absence of the father.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 148.--Lord Burlington’s Villa at Chiswick.
-
-      Drawn by A. C. Bossom.]
-
-It must have been early in the year 1699 that the earl called Vanbrugh
-to his assistance, for the latter writes on the 25th December that he
-had been that summer at Lord Carlisle’s, and had visited most of the
-great houses of the North. Amongst others he had been to Chatsworth,
-where he stayed four or five days, and had shown to the duke all the
-designs for Castle Howard, which he “absolutely approved.” Since then
-they had been submitted to a great many other critics, and as no
-objection had been raised to them, the stone was already being quarried
-and the foundations were to be laid in the spring. A model of the house
-was being prepared in wood, which was to be sent to Kensington for the
-criticism of the king.[66] Thus fortified with general approval the
-design was carried out, the works extending over some thirty years. The
-cost must have been very great, and in a later letter Vanbrugh tells
-how it was met in part, for in July 1707 he says that Lord Carlisle
-had “£2,000 from the Sharpers, and is gone down to lay it out in his
-buildings.”[67]
-
-Although the whole of Vanbrugh’s design was not carried out the house
-is of great size and of palatial magnificence (Fig. 150). Indeed no
-modern person can be incessantly as grand as the grandeur of the
-building demands. It requires innumerable servants to keep it in order,
-innumerable guests to make it cheerful. It involves a great drain upon
-the owner’s resources, both of temperament and of purse, to fill it
-with enough people to prevent its being dull, and to maintain it in
-suitable repair and tidiness. From a practical standpoint the corridors
-are too many and are out of all proportion to the rooms they serve.
-There are indeed no rooms of a size commensurate with the outside
-grandeur; most of them appear small and narrow, their height is as
-great as their width (Fig. 152), and this must have tended, before the
-introduction of modern heating, to make them cold. The finest apartment
-is the hall (Fig. 151), so large and lofty as to occupy an undue
-proportion of space compared with what is devoted to domestic use. Its
-effect is more nearly allied to what we are accustomed to associate
-with a large museum or other public building than with a house.
-
-The view in “Vitruvius Britannicus” does more justice to Vanbrugh’s
-conception than does the building itself. The house is there shown with
-a subsidiary court on each side, one being devoted to laundries and
-so forth, and the other to stables. In front there was to have been a
-forecourt enclosed by a monumental fence with the main entrance gates
-on the axial line. Actually but one of the side courts was built, and
-the forecourt was not carried out. The road, instead of approaching the
-house directly opposite to the centre of the façade, thus giving the
-visitor a _coup d’œil_ of the whole vast composition, approaches
-it laterally, close to the end of one of the wings, and it is only on
-passing the corner of the wing that the visitor is suddenly aware at
-close quarters of the recessed entrance front.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 149.--Castle Howard. View from the
-  Mausoleum.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 150.--Castle Howard, Yorkshire. The Garden
-  Front, 1702.]
-
-The one subsidiary court which was built contains the laundries, and
-it is in the nature of a shock to see laundry-maids at work amid
-surroundings almost massive enough for Diocletian himself.
-
-The lay out is of corresponding scenic magnificence. From one direction
-the house is approached along a far-stretching avenue, which leads up
-hill and down dale, then beneath a gateway in a long, symmetrically
-designed range of building crowned with a sturdy pyramid, and so
-onwards towards a lofty obelisk, the meeting-point of several roads,
-one of which leads to the house. The formal gardens close to the house
-surround a large basin, in the midst of which is Atlas bearing up the
-world, amid the encouragements of four huge tritons who raise great
-horns towards him across the water. The broad gravel walk along the
-garden front leads in one direction to the walled fruit gardens; in
-the other to a smooth grass track which slopes upwards to a copse of
-beeches. Curving away from this is another grass track which, passing
-an ordered row of lead figures, comes eventually to a classic temple.
-Beyond are undulating fields skirting an artificial lake, across
-which is flung a massive bridge which deserves, even more than that
-at Wilton, Walpole’s epithet of “theatric,” for it serves no purpose
-but to adorn the landscape. It spans a sheet of water contrived for
-little else than to provide the opportunity to build it. Its roadway,
-deep-grown in grass, leads from nowhere to nowhere. The Palladian
-bridge at Prior Park, near Bath, illustrated in Fig. 154, is almost an
-exact replica of that at Wilton.
-
-Still further on, crowning an eminence, stands a huge mausoleum, a
-noble building designed by Hawksmoor (Fig. 153). It rests on a lofty
-and spacious platform of irregular symmetry, whereon the friends and
-tenants of deceased earls may have gathered to await the arrival of
-the funeral procession as it made its slow way along the grass walks,
-and after halting at the temple, wound across the rolling fields. Long
-stone benches suggest the scores of horsemen who dismounted and left
-their horses to be tended on the ample spaces of the platform. The
-mausoleum itself is a circular domed building, surrounded by disengaged
-columns; within it are two chambers; the lower level with the platform,
-contains the vaults; the upper is the chapel. The latter is approached
-by long flights of steps, and is itself circular and covered at a great
-height with a coffered dome. The sweep of the walls within is relieved
-by eight recesses for an altar, the clergy, and the chief mourners.
-The vaulted apartment below is massively constructed, and in the
-thickness of the masonry are contrived many recesses for the reception
-of coffins. But few have been utilised, and, as the visitor discovers
-by the light of his taper cavern after cavern still unoccupied and
-unlikely ever to be filled, as he stands in the chilly spaces of the
-chapel with its dome soaring far overhead, as he gazes from an angle
-of the platform across the fields and the grass-grown bridge on to the
-distant house (Fig. 149), he realises how vastly things have changed,
-how entirely this fine conception has lost its point, how empty is the
-pomp of architecture when the habits to which it ministered have ceased.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 151.--CASTLE HOWARD. THE HALL.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 152.--CASTLE HOWARD. THE TAPESTRY
-  ROOM.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 153.--The Mausoleum at Castle Howard, as
-  seen from the Platform on which it stands.]
-
-Castle Howard was a private undertaking. Immense though it was--its
-total length was to have been 660 ft. had both its courts been
-built--it was exceeded in size by the palace of Blenheim, which was a
-national monument to the glory of the British arms, although actually
-a gift to the Duke of Marlborough. Here Vanbrugh must have been in
-his element. There was presumably to be no unreasonable limit to the
-cost; the result was to be monumental. Convenience of arrangement,
-internal effect, the amenities of daily life were minor considerations.
-The nation wanted a monument; it should have something which should
-impress the thousands who would see the exterior, rather than the
-scores who might possibly see the interior. The house itself was
-flanked, as at Castle Howard, by two huge courts, one for the stables,
-the other for the kitchens; the total façade was 850 ft. in length.
-The approach was along the axial line over a splendid bridge, finer
-in every way than that at Castle Howard; indeed, it is the most
-satisfactory piece of design at Blenheim. The house is overwhelmed
-by its own size (Fig. 155). The eye cannot grasp it in its entirety,
-and when it studies isolated portions they do not suggest thoughts of
-domestic pleasures; the colonnades and the turrets are not consecrated
-by daily use, they are there for scenic effect; the statues are cold
-abstractions, they are no more germane to Blenheim than to any other
-grand house. How different is this effect from that of even the largest
-of the Elizabethan palaces. There grandeur itself was homely. The
-difference cannot be attributed to increase in size; the absence of
-homeliness springs not even from the inevitable difference between
-a palace and a manor house. It is inherent in the changed views
-prevalent both as to life and as to architecture. The aloofness of the
-great noble accounts for something, but the desire to produce scenic
-architecture in preference to creating a home, accounts for more. It
-underlay nearly all Vanbrugh’s efforts, as indeed it did those of his
-contemporaries and successors. At Stowe House, near to Buckingham, it
-is apparent in the sacrifice of the bedroom windows on the south front
-to the desire for an appearance of solidness and simplicity; it is
-still more obvious in the treatment of the gardens, presently to be
-described. Seaton Delaval, in Northumberland, is perhaps Vanbrugh’s
-most pleasing production, but even here convenience and common sense
-gave way to display, and the house itself, having been burnt down some
-few years after it was built, no one has thought it worth while to
-reinstate it. No one could be comfortable in it if he did.
-
-In one of his houses, at any rate, Vanbrugh did not resort to his
-usual devices for producing his effects. This was Kimbolton Castle,
-in Huntingdonshire, which, except on one front which has a great
-columnar portico, is as gaunt and plain as anyone could desire; and
-it was made so of set purpose, for Vanbrugh writes to his client, the
-Earl of Manchester, in July 1707, “I thought it was absolutely best to
-give it something of the castle air, though at the same time to make
-it regular, ... so I hope your Lordship will not be discouraged
-if any Italian you may shew it to, should find fault that it is not
-Roman; for to have built a front with pilasters and what the orders
-require, could never have been done with the rest of the castle. I am
-sure this will make a very noble and masculine show.” And again in
-the following September, “I shall be much deceived if people do not
-see a manly beauty in it, when it is up, that they did not conceive
-could be produced out of such rough materials; but it is certainly the
-figure and proportions that make the most pleasing fabric, and not the
-delicacy of the ornaments, a proof of which I am in great hopes to shew
-your Lordship at Kimbolton.”
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 154.--THE PALLADIAN BRIDGE, PRIOR PARK,
-  NEAR BATH.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 155.--BLENHEIM VIEW.]
-
-There is much sound sense in all this, and every architect will agree
-that no amount of ornament can redeem a badly proportioned building;
-but Vanbrugh’s reason for the omission of pilasters, and what the
-orders require, would have had more point if there had been anything
-preserved of the ancient castle beyond its name. So far as can be seen
-there is nothing older than the house itself, and although it was built
-of the old stones, as Vanbrugh says (and this may be the real reason
-for so plain a treatment), there is no evidence of earlier working
-visible upon them.
-
-A casual remark in another letter is of interest, as showing what
-people thought of some of these large houses. He is speaking of
-Blenheim in a letter of July 1708. “He (Sir John Coniers) made mighty
-fine speeches upon the building, and took it for granted no subject’s
-house in Europe would approach it, which will be true if the Duke of
-Shrewsbury judges right in saying, ‘There is not in Italy so fine a
-house as Chatsworth,’ for this of Blenheim is, beyond all comparison,
-more magnificent than that.” He is certainly right as to magnificence,
-if not also as to the general pleasurable effect.
-
-Vanbrugh’s houses may be taken as the highest manifestation of the
-spirit of the age in house building; the exaltation of social grandeur,
-the scenic magnificence of architecture. That they rather missed the
-mark in respect of comfort and convenience, as we understand those
-qualities, was not held to be a great drawback. Yet even contemporary
-voices were raised in protest, as may be gathered from Pope’s verses
-on “The Duke of Marlborough’s House at Woodstock,” wherein, after
-listening to an admirer’s description of its splendour, he suddenly
-interrupts him:--
-
-    “Thanks, Sir, I cried, ’tis very fine,
-    But where d’ye sleep, or where d’ye dine?
-    I find by all you have been telling,
-    That ’tis a house, but not a dwelling.”
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 156.--STOWE, BUCKINGHAMSHIRE.
-  VIEW OF QUEEN’S THEATRE, FROM THE ROTUNDA.
-
-      From an Engraving by Jean Rigaud.]
-
-Sir Joshua Reynolds, in the thirteenth of his admirable Discourses,
-remarks that Vanbrugh “was defrauded of the due reward of his merit by
-the wits of the time”; and we can heartily concur in his opinion as a
-painter, that Vanbrugh, “had originality of invention, he understood
-light and shade, and had great skill in composition.”
-
-In all these great houses the lay out helped the general effect; the
-gardens and the groves were designed in the same spirit as the houses
-which they surrounded. Those at Stowe were the most famous of their
-time. There was but little formality about them, although they were
-traversed by a few straight walks and vistas (Fig. 156). They embodied,
-indeed, the new idea which eschewed formality, and sought to gain
-the help of nature without apparent effort (Fig. 157). They covered
-a considerable amount of space, and were diversified by undulations
-of varied steepness, and by great masses of trees. The landscape thus
-provided by nature was improved by art. A stream was made to fall
-here, to wind there, to broaden out into a lake elsewhere. Paths were
-contrived to pass through thickets, to descend a dell, to curve beneath
-a lofty mound crowned with a “temple,” to undulate along the edge of
-a copse and overlook meadows sloping down to the lake. The whole was
-studded at intervals with buildings, each of which had a character of
-its own. There were grottoes, temples, arches, rotundas, and columns,
-designed by Vanbrugh, Leoni, Kent, and others. They were so placed amid
-the trees, the meadows, and the water as to remind the spectator of
-pictures of Italian scenery. Half Italy was squeezed into two hundred
-acres of English countryside. A Corinthian arch admitted the principal
-approach from Buckingham. There were many temples; among them one to
-Venus, one to Bacchus, others to the Ancient Virtues, to the Modern
-Virtues (in ruins--a costly piece of satire which must speedily have
-palled), to British worthies, to Concord and Victory, to Friendship and
-to other deities and abstractions. There was Dido’s cave in one place,
-and St Augustine’s in another, a Fane of Pastoral Poetry elsewhere;
-there were monuments to people of more or less eminence, archways
-commemorative of royal visitors, artificial ruins, bridges over
-artificial waters, a Gothic temple, and a large tablet to a dead dog.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 157.--STOWE, BUCKINGHAMSHIRE.
-  A VIEW FROM CAPTAIN GRENVILLE’S MONUMENT TO THE GRECIAN TEMPLE.
-
-      From an Engraving by G. Bickham.]
-
-Most of these buildings were furnished with inscriptions on which were
-bestowed much ingenuity, scholarship, and neatness of versification.
-For thirty or forty years monuments were added as occasion arose,
-either to commemorate the death of a distinguished acquaintance, or the
-visit of some royal personages. Horace Walpole was half repelled, yet
-wholly attracted by this curious panorama. The modern visitor is filled
-with much the same emotions. The mere catalogue sounds inane, yet the
-whole idea is carried out with so much skill, the buildings themselves
-are so charming that, once we accept the artificial atmosphere of
-the place, we wander from point to point with unabated interest and
-admiration. Nowhere else can we gain so vivid an insight into the
-laborious elegance of the age.
-
-Walpole’s lively account of his visit to meet the Princess Amelia, in
-July 1770, gives an excellent idea of the impressions the place made
-upon him. The view through the archway, erected in honour of her royal
-highness, he describes as “a tall landscape framed by the arch and the
-embowering trees, and comprehending more beauties of light, shade, and
-buildings, than any picture of Albano I ever saw.”[68] “Twice a day we
-made a pilgrimage to almost every heathen temple in that province that
-they call a garden; and there is no sallying out of the house without
-descending a flight of steps as high as St Paul’s.” He describes an
-_al fresco_ supper, which they attended in state, in one of the
-grottoes on a cold evening. It reduces to very human dimensions the
-lordliness of the great scheme. A large concourse of people from
-Buckingham and the district came to behold the distinguished company
-at their revels. Before this crowd the house party descended the vast
-flight of steps leading from the house. “I could not help laughing as
-I surveyed our troop, which, instead of tripping lightly to such an
-Arcadian entertainment, were hobbling down by the balustrades, wrapped
-up in cloaks and great-coats for fear of catching cold. The earl, you
-know, is bent double, the countess very lame; I am a miserable walker,
-and the princess, though as strong as a Brunswick lion, makes no figure
-in going down fifty stone stairs.”
-
-Stowe, and Hagley in Worcestershire, which both owe much of their
-character to the taste and judgment of Lord Chatham, are perhaps
-the best examples of lay outs which are not so much gardens, as a
-collection of landscape pictures to which interest was imparted by
-the introduction of classic buildings, and from which symmetry and
-formality were excluded.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 158.--In the Gardens of Wrest,
-  Bedfordshire.]
-
-In contrast to the free treatment at Stowe, which brought a tract
-of countryside into the curtilage of the house, is the formality at
-Bramham Park, some ten miles from Leeds, which carried the ordered
-symmetry of the house into the gardens. Of the two methods, the formal
-was the earlier, but during the eighteenth century it gradually gave
-way to the other.
-
-The gardens at Bramham are among the most satisfactory of the large
-lay outs of the period (Figs. 162, 163). They were devised for Robert
-Benson, afterwards Lord Bingley, about the year 1710.[69] There are the
-usual vistas converging upon the house; there are various buildings
-in imitation of the antique, both classic and Gothic; there are
-memorials to pet animals; but the number is reasonable, and the scheme
-is more easily grasped than that of Stowe. The principal walk runs
-parallel to the garden front of the house, near which it ends against
-a “temple,” which is the chapel of the mansion. In the opposite
-direction it merges into an avenue which leads the eye across the
-park to a distant monument. Just before quitting the garden the vista
-crosses an elaborate arrangement of ornamental water, comprising a
-large basin flanked by subsidiary pools and cascades, all symmetrically
-planned. The walk is led from one level to another by monumental steps,
-producing picturesque groups of garden architecture, and the large
-water basin is the starting-point of fresh vistas.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 159.--The Gardens at Drayton House,
-  Northamptonshire.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 160.--Plan of the Gardens at Drayton
-  House, Northamptonshire.
-
-      H. Inigo Triggs, _del._]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 161.--Garden House at Croom’s Hill,
-  Greenwich.]
-
-The garden buildings form an interesting commentary on the
-architectural literature of the time, for whereas those in the classic
-style are quite good, owing to the numerous examples in books, those in
-the Gothic style are lamentable, since there was nothing to guide the
-designer but his own study and observation; and nobody at that period
-had any but the merest nodding acquaintance with Gothic work.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 162.--BRAMHAM PARK GARDENS,
-  YORKSHIRE.]
-
-The adoption of a dignified lay out, large or small, to every house of
-any pretensions at this period, is exemplified in many contemporary
-prints and books, notably in Kip’s “Britannia Illustrata” and
-Campbell’s “Vitruvius Britannicus.” Many of these formal gardens have
-been destroyed, submerged by the wave of landscape gardening, on which
-“Capability” Brown floated to fame; but there still remain admirable
-examples besides those already mentioned. There are the placid canals
-of Wrest, in Bedfordshire (Fig. 158); the sloping vistas of Melbourne,
-in Derbyshire; the terraces of St Catherine’s Court, in Somerset; and
-the pleached walks and broad parterres of Drayton, in Northamptonshire
-(Fig. 159), where the forecourt with its beautiful gates and screen
-of ironwork, the steps from one level to another, and the lead vases,
-placed on the terrace walls, or raised on pedestals as a dominating
-part of the scheme, all combine to render the lay out one of the most
-fascinating of its kind (see plan, Fig. 160). Indeed, examples may
-be found in every county, although not a tithe of what once existed;
-and on their terraces, amid their canals and straight walks may be
-found groups of figures, delightful temples, monuments, urns, and
-garden houses, like that at Croom’s Hill, Greenwich (Fig. 161), which
-are not only charming in themselves, but give point to the whole
-conception. And those conceptions are the most satisfactory which are
-on a scale moderate enough to enable the mind to grasp them on the
-spot, without the aid of a plan.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 163.--Bramham Yew Hedge.]
-
-
-
-
-                                  IX
-
-                            GEORGIAN HOUSES
-
-
-Reference was made in the last chapter to the influence of
-architectural books in stimulating the interest of wealthy amateurs
-in the matter of building. The eighteenth century saw a considerable
-increase in the number published, and of these two of the earliest
-and most important were Lord Burlington’s, or rather Kent’s, “Designs
-of Inigo Jones,” and Colin Campbell’s “Vitruvius Britannicus.” Kent
-put his name to the former, and no doubt rightly, as being the
-collector and editor of the materials comprised in the two volumes;
-but Lord Burlington was the “only begetter” as well as the paymaster
-of the venture. The first volume is devoted almost entirely to one
-of the designs for the palace at Whitehall, which have already been
-dealt with in Chapter IV. The second volume consists of designs for
-houses of all sizes, nominally by Inigo Jones, but actually by Webb.
-Plans, elevations, and some sections are given, but there is an air
-of unreality about them, and, as a matter of fact, very few of them
-were actually built. They are mostly exercises in design in which
-the convenience of the plan is a secondary consideration. The Thorpe
-collection is very different in this respect. There most of the plans
-have the rooms named, a genuine effort being made to get a workable
-design, with all its parts suitably related one to the other. In Kent’s
-book none of the rooms are named; there appears to be no effort to
-achieve a workable result. The space enclosed within the outside walls
-is divided into rooms, and the rooms are carefully proportioned; but so
-far as the designer is concerned any room might be put to any purpose
-at the fancy of the occupant. The relation of the dining-room to the
-kitchen, for instance, is held of no account: aspect and prospect
-are alike neglected. Sanitary provision there is none. Bath-rooms,
-of course, were unknown: indeed, from the few allusions to such
-matters as occur in the literature of the time, it is evident that
-our ancestors of the eighteenth century had deplorable ideas as to
-cleanliness and sanitation; and the provisions now made in these
-respects, which are one of the pivots upon which a modern plan turns,
-were then undreamed of. When all practical considerations were left to
-take care of themselves, planning a house was a very simple matter, and
-one which an amateur could undertake with a light heart. The principal
-aim of designers was to achieve a scenic success. The rooms were to be
-well proportioned, and so arranged as to produce a stately effect, both
-in themselves and in the passing from one to the other. They were also
-so disposed as to result in a fine exterior, where the length should be
-duly proportioned to the height, the windows should be regularly placed
-and of a size agreeable to the eye. Every part was to be symmetrical,
-and the whole was to be a neat piece of architecture. There seems, in
-looking through these designs, to be no essential reason why one should
-have differed from another, except for the sake of variety. Yet every
-modern architect knows that a house properly planned to meet one set
-of circumstances can never be utilised for another without drastic
-alterations; that every fresh house presents a fresh problem. But this
-springs from the modern way of looking at house designing, namely, that
-a house ought to satisfy the wants and even the idiosyncrasies of the
-owner, and that its disposition must be modified by considerations of
-aspect, prospect, soil, surroundings, and a score of other things.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 164.--DESIGN FOR A HOUSE.
-
-      From Gibbs’s “Book of Architecture,” pl. 57.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 165.--DESIGN FOR A HOUSE, BY
-  GIBBS.
-
-      From the Gibbs Collection in the Radcliffe Library, Oxford.]
-
-But the outlook of the eighteenth century being what it was, the
-designers were successful in compassing their object, and they produced
-many charming houses, often stately and always dignified. This result
-was owing in a large degree to a study of Kent’s “Designs of Inigo
-Jones.”
-
-Campbell’s “Vitruvius Britannicus” is an epitome of the more important
-houses of the last twenty years of the seventeenth century and first
-twenty of the eighteenth.[70] The ideas underlying it are those which
-have already been mentioned. There is a short descriptive account of
-each subject. In these, Campbell dwells on the proportions of his
-rooms, on the truly classic treatment of the elevations; he explains
-how one subject is treated in the “palatial” style, another in the
-“temple” style; another in the “theatrical.” The principal rooms are
-all stately, the family rooms in some cases are in the attics,
-lighted from the leads. In one design he plumes himself on not having
-his windows “crowded”; and indeed the amount of wall space between
-the lower and upper windows is so ample that either the lower must be
-far below the ceiling, or the upper far above the floor. It would be
-tedious to multiply instances; anyone can find them for himself by
-looking through his volumes. The point is that many important houses of
-that time were built for state and show, rather than for comfort and
-convenience; and they afford a striking commentary on the difference in
-outlook on daily life between that period and our own among the wealthy
-classes.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 166.--DESIGN FOR THE FOUR SIDES OF A ROOM.
-
-      From the Gibbs Collection in the Radcliffe Library.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 167.--DESIGN FOR THE FOUR SIDES OF A ROOM.
-
-      From the Gibbs Collection in the Radcliffe Library.]
-
-These particular manifestations were not merely a passing fashion;
-they were too widespread and too lasting for that; yet that they were
-in fact the outcome of fashion is proved by Pope’s Epistle to Lord
-Burlington (the fourth of the “Moral Essays”) which is in effect a
-vindication of common sense as opposed to extravagance in buildings,
-gardens, and entertainments. Pope credits Lord Burlington with the
-qualities he commends, yet in none of the buildings attributed to that
-nobleman is common sense very conspicuous.
-
-Another book on architecture was published by James Gibbs, a
-contemporary of Hawksmoor and Vanbrugh, but somewhat younger, and who
-was one of the numerous architects encouraged by Lord Burlington. He
-deservedly enjoyed a large practice, and designed many churches and
-houses. He was skilful and ingenious, and showed more originality than
-most of his contemporaries, particularly in his churches; his houses go
-very little outside the lines which were universally accepted as being
-appropriate for gentlemen’s residences. Like several of his fellows he
-commended himself to the public by publishing (in 1728) a large folio
-volume of his designs. These are well worth study, for they were all
-either actually built or were intended to be built, the erection of
-some being prevented by the death of the client or by some other cause.
-They have therefore a more vital interest than most of those in Kent’s
-“Designs of Inigo Jones.”
-
-His Introduction is interesting. The work was undertaken, he says,
-at the instance of several Persons of Quality, who were of opinion
-that it “would be of use to such Gentlemen as might be concerned in
-Building, especially in remote parts of the Country, where little
-or no assistance for Designs can be procured.” He suggests that,
-furnished with his book, these remote gentlemen can employ any workman
-who understands lines to build them a house, and even make alterations
-in his designs if guided by a person of judgment. But he (very
-rightly) warns his readers against employing only ignorant workmen in
-the management of buildings of great expense, lest they undergo the
-mortification of finding the result condemned by persons of taste,
-entailing even the drastic remedy of pulling the building down. He also
-warns them against extravagant and misapplied ornament, “for it is not
-the Bulk of a Fabrick, the Richness and Quantity of the Materials, the
-Multiplicity of Lines, nor the Gaudiness of the Finishing, that give
-the Grace or Beauty and Grandeur to a Building; but the Proportion of
-the Parts to one another and to the Whole, whether entirely plain, or
-enriched with a few Ornaments properly disposed.” It is to be feared
-that his readers must have felt that what he gave with one hand in
-offering them his book, he took away with the other by showing how
-hazardous it was to use it without training and experience.
-
-He concludes by saying that his designs had been done in the best taste
-he could form upon the instructions of the greatest masters in Italy,
-supplemented by his own observations upon the ancient buildings there
-during many years’ study; adding, as a sly dig at the amateurs, “for a
-cursory View of those August Remains can no more qualify the Spectator,
-or Admirer, than the Air of the Country can inspire him with the
-knowledge of Architecture.”
-
-It is a characteristic pronouncement, with its reliance on the
-authority of the Italian masters, its insistence on proportion, its
-omission of any reference to domestic comfort, its intention that
-the book should help the unlearned, coupled with the warning that
-unless the user had taste and judgment of his own, he must seek those
-qualities in an expert.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 168.--DESIGN FOR A STAIRCASE.
-
-      From the Gibbs Collection in the Radcliffe Library.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 169.--DESIGN FOR A STAIRCASE, WITH
-  PAINTED ARCHITECTURE.
-
-      From the Gibbs Collection in the Radcliffe Library.]
-
-The illustrations give a good idea of what was expected in a country
-house in those days. The plans are all symmetrical, and each front is
-regular and intended to be seen; there was no thought of giving the
-house a back for the use of servants and tradesmen. Indeed there were
-hardly any tradesmen to be considered. Every house was self-sustaining
-and provided its own bread, meat, and vegetables. This is an important
-point to bear in mind; it accounts for the numerous outbuildings
-which form part of old houses, inasmuch as places had to be provided
-for storing most of the things which are now retained by the shopkeeper
-until his carts take them to his customers. It also partly explains how
-it was possible to have each side of the house a show-front, for there
-was less outside traffic when there were no tradesmen’s carts, although
-there was always a staff of servants going in and out. The servants are
-placed either in a basement or in an outlying wing, never in proximity
-to the principal rooms; at the same time, in order to gain their rooms
-in the attics, they generally had to cross either the hall or one of
-the rooms intended for the family. The effect of this was that they
-were less conveniently placed for service than they are in the present
-day, and yet they could not gain their bedrooms without the risk of
-intruding on the family.
-
-In many instances the kitchen with its dependencies occupied an
-outlying wing, and the food had to be brought a long distance, and
-frequently through an open corridor. The inconvenience of this
-arrangement must have outweighed the advantage of getting the smells
-and noise of the kitchen away from the house. The family rooms were the
-chief concern of the designer, and his aim was to make them stately.
-The arrangement most often adopted was to have a large entrance hall,
-and beyond it a dining-room; on either side were two or more rooms with
-a staircase between them. The hall occupied two stories in height,
-being as much as 30 ft. or 36 ft. high, and it must have been cold and
-cheerless, if grand. The principal rooms were lofty, and over each
-was another of the same size; in some instances small rooms of less
-height were placed next to the staircases, thus enabling others over
-them to be reached from a landing half-way up--“intersoles,” as Gibbs
-calls them. The same device had already been adopted by Hawksmoor at
-Easton Neston. The symmetrical disposition of the rooms favoured the
-placing of their doors in a straight line so that long vistas could
-be obtained, and although Gibbs prides himself on providing passages
-which rendered every room private, there were usually doors of
-intercommunication, and many of the rooms suffered from a multiplicity
-of entrances. The passages were evidently a concession to modern ideas,
-and were often ill-lighted from openings into the hall. The observance
-of strict symmetry sometimes led to the provision of two equally
-important staircases where one would have been enough for practical
-purposes. It also resulted in the stairs crossing windows, the outside
-harmony of which was held to be sacred; and a further consequence was
-the introduction of many sham windows for the sake of uniformity.
-
-In spite of such drawbacks, which sprang from the formality of the
-treatment, Gibbs’s plans are ingenious and well devised. He attaches
-great importance to privacy, and frequently introduces a number of
-“apartments,” as he calls them, each apartment comprising a bedroom and
-dressing-room, with occasionally a third or ante-room. The demands of
-those times were, of course, far simpler than our own, and Gibbs was as
-skilful as any of his contemporaries in satisfying them. He was able to
-do this within walls which were treated in a strictly classic manner,
-founded on instructions of the Italian masters. Whether he could have
-met the complex wants of the present day in so simple a fashion is open
-to question.
-
-Many of Gibbs’s original drawings are preserved in the Radcliffe
-Library at Oxford, some of these being included in his “Book of
-Architecture.” Two of them are reproduced here, one (Fig. 164) is plate
-57 of his book, the other (Fig. 165) has not been published. The first
-is an example of a house with a forecourt and wings connected by open
-corridors to the central block; in the left-hand wing are the kitchens,
-in the right the stables. The house is entered through a large hall
-beyond which is a gallery, with small rooms at each end. To the left
-of the hall is presumably the dining-room, as it lies nearest to the
-kitchens, to the right is a room of the same size. There are two large
-staircases resembling each other in all respects, that on the left
-being probably the back stairs. Grouped on each side of the staircases
-are small rooms over which might have been the “intersoles,” although
-Gibbs does not expressly mention them. In this instance the hall was
-but one story in height with a room over it, and there were three rooms
-over the gallery. The same disposition obtained on the top floor, which
-may have been devoted to guest chambers, as it would appear that the
-servants were lodged in the kitchen wing, judging by the size of the
-staircase.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 170.--A CHIMNEY-PIECE, BY GIBBS.
-
-      From the Gibbs Collection in the Radcliffe Library.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 171.--No. 75 DEAN STREET, SOHO. PART
-  OF THE PAINTED DECORATION OF THE WALL OF THE STAIRCASE.]
-
-The other and unpublished design (Fig. 165) is of a somewhat different
-type. The centre of the house is occupied by a vast and lofty staircase
-mainly lighted from a cupola. Round this is a broad corridor
-giving access to the various rooms, which are of fine dimensions.
-The same disposition appears to apply to all three floors, save that
-on the topmost the corridor is omitted, and thus an open space is
-provided which gives light to the hall on one side and to a passage
-on the other, which is taken off the width of the rooms. There is no
-indication where the kitchens lie; the section shows no basement, and
-there are no indications of separate wings.
-
-The section gives an adequate idea of the internal treatment; it
-shows the great hall and its lighting, as well as the very simple
-decoration of the rooms, far plainer in this case than in most of
-those published in his book. The rooms are usually panelled somewhat
-after the manner shown in Figs. 166 and 167. This gives an air of
-distinction to them, but it severely limits (and perhaps not unhappily)
-the number of pictures and prints which can be hung on the walls. A
-very similar treatment is applied to the staircases (Fig. 168). In one
-instance the walls were apparently to be painted with an architectural
-composition, which introduces a touch of poetry into the practical
-prose of Gibbs’s ordinary handling (Fig. 169). There is a house in
-Dean Street, Soho (Fig. 171), where the staircase walls are decorated
-with figure subjects by Hogarth, somewhat after the fashion of Gibbs’s
-drawing, but more elaborate in design. The decoration of the rooms
-already illustrated includes in each case the chimney-piece, but a
-further example, to a larger scale (Fig. 170), will serve to show the
-kind of design which was widely adopted, not only by Gibbs but by most
-architects during the first half of the eighteenth century.
-
-Campbell was also a practising architect as well as an illustrator of
-the art, and he was consulted in the erection of Houghton Hall, in
-Norfolk, which is one of the finest examples of the great houses of its
-period, a period when nobles and wealthy gentlemen were vying with one
-another in building fine homes in the fashionable Italian manner, and
-surrounding them with equally fine gardens. It was the celebrated Prime
-Minister, Sir Robert Walpole, who built Houghton; and Colin Campbell
-supplied him with the design in the year 1722.[71] It would appear,
-however, that Campbell did not carry out the work himself, but that his
-designs were handed over to Ripley, who altered them in many respects
-while following the general idea pretty faithfully. The sizes and
-disposition of the rooms were varied, both in the central block and in
-the wings. The proportions of the windows were altered, and Campbell’s
-projecting portico was omitted, the columns being attached to the wall
-instead of standing some fifteen feet in front of it. The attic stories
-of his corner pavilions were also changed into domes. On the whole
-these slight alterations tended to improve the appearance, but in spite
-of these variations, Campbell must have the credit for the design (Fig.
-173).
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 172.--Houghton, Norfolk. Plan of Principal
-  Floor, 1722.]
-
-The whole arrangement is of the prevalent type. There is a noble main
-building flanked on each side at some distance by a subsidiary block,
-connected to the house by colonnades which are curved on one face and
-rectangular on the other. The south wing contains the kitchen and
-servants’ quarters; the north wing is occupied by a picture gallery and
-chapel, but much of this particular building has been destroyed by fire.
-
-The house itself is of three stories, including the basement, which is
-used in part for domestic purposes, but serves in the main to raise
-the principal floor well above the ground. This floor (see plan, Fig.
-172) contains the fine stone hall, a cube of 40 ft., a saloon somewhat
-smaller and less lofty, a dozen fine rooms and some staircases, of
-which the chief one is magnificent. All these rooms are symmetrically
-arranged, and the doorways are so disposed as to produce long vistas
-when the whole series is opened. The four rooms in the corners can
-only be gained by passing through other rooms. The whole effect is
-stately both inside and out, and although in the present day there may
-be a certain lack of comfort, yet the house fully met the needs of the
-time when it was built, and it provided the atmosphere of splendour
-which was demanded by all great persons of the period. The whole
-façade is over 500 ft. long, the central block has a frontage of 165
-ft., and the wings 110 ft. These are handsome dimensions; they are
-indeed so large that it is not easy for the eye to include the whole
-group at once from any ordinary viewpoint. The illustration (Fig. 173)
-only shows the house and its colonnades, beyond which the reader’s
-imagination must add the wings, which are strictly subordinated in
-height to the main building.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 173.--HOUGHTON, NORFOLK.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 174.--HOUGHTON. THE STONE HALL.]
-
-The interior decorations are attributed to Kent, who was assisted in
-the plasterwork by the Italian, Artari. But the stone hall (Fig. 174)
-follows Campbell’s drawing in the main, as may be seen by comparing
-it with his sections in “Vitruvius Britannicus.” The ceiling is a
-remarkable _tour de force_, and the cove, with its children disporting
-themselves among the wreaths, is much admired. There is plenty of
-movement and variety in it, but the figures are a little inclined to
-obesity. The whole work perhaps suffers from being in too high relief,
-but its vigour and freedom of design are incontestably admirable.
-One of the principal rooms is called the marble dining-room, and
-it was intended to be lined with marble throughout, but one side
-only was carried out in this manner (Fig. 175). It includes a fine
-chimney-piece, characteristic of the grander type then in vogue; on
-either side of it are marble-lined recesses in which are placed marble
-sideboards to correspond with their surroundings. The panel of the
-chimney-piece contains a figure subject, a sacrifice to Bacchus, carved
-by Rysbrach, and the decoration, both here and in the ceiling, consists
-largely of grapes, a form of ornament highly appropriate to a room
-devoted to entertainments in which deep drinking played an important
-part. The woodwork throughout is exceedingly handsome; it is executed
-for the most part in mahogany, a precious wood which had not previously
-been used in great abundance. The doorway of the green state room is an
-example of a rich treatment (Fig. 176), and Sir Robert’s dressing-room
-one of a plainer handling (Fig. 177). The principal staircase has an
-exceedingly massive mahogany balustrade (Fig. 178), and the walls are
-decorated with figures and subjects in monochrome, by the hand of Kent
-himself. Sir Robert is said by Walpole, in his “Anecdotes of Painting,”
-to have purposely restricted the artist to this vehicle, having lively
-misgivings as to Kent’s exploits in brighter and more varied pigments.
-
-Another of the imposing houses of the eighteenth century is Wentworth
-Woodhouse, in Yorkshire, a seat of the Earl Fitzwilliam, which must
-not be confused with Wentworth Castle, near Barnsley, a smaller house,
-but still a fine one, built by Thomas, Earl of Strafford, in 1730.
-Wentworth Woodhouse was designed in the year 1740 by Henry Flitcroft
-for Thomas, Earl of Malton, who succeeded some six years later to the
-barony of Rockingham, and was thereupon created Marquis of Rockingham.
-His biographer[72] says that he “rebuilt the ancient family seat, now
-called Wentworth House, in a very elegant manner, where he died on 14th
-December 1750.” His eldest daughter, Anne, married Earl Fitzwilliam,
-and carried Wentworth House into her husband’s family in 1769.
-Flitcroft published a drawing of the principal front of the house at
-the end of the 1770 edition of Kent’s “Designs of Inigo Jones,” and in
-the main this design was carried out. The central and chief part of the
-façade was executed as drawn, but the two wings, while preserving their
-original disposition, were considerably improved.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 175.--Houghton. The Marble Dining-Room.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 176.--HOUGHTON. THE GREEN STATE
-  ROOM.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 177.--Houghton. Sir Robert Walpole’s
-  Dressing-Room.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 178.--HOUGHTON. THE UPPER PART OF
-  STAIRCASE.]
-
-The stately front (Fig. 179) is some 600 ft. in extent, and is the more
-striking in that it is a continuous façade, and not broken up into the
-usual three parts, consisting of the house and two outlying wings.
-The memory of the old curved colonnades is preserved in the convex
-portions which connect the end towers with the front. The central block
-is not so much an adaptation as a copy of Campbell’s second design for
-Wanstead (“Vit. Brit.,” i. 24, 25), with the omission of the cupola and
-of one window in the length of the wings. It is rendered personal to
-the builder by the introduction of his arms in the pediment, and the
-Wentworth motto, “Mea gloria fides,” in the frieze. To whatever extent
-Flitcroft may have borrowed his materials, it cannot be denied that he
-has blended them together with noble results.
-
-In the interior there is a fine saloon (Fig. 180), which recalls
-Campbell’s stone hall at Houghton. Its variety of treatment is in
-strong contrast to the cold-looking hall which contains the staircase
-(Fig. 181). Both these apartments have the defect of their qualities.
-There is so much architecture that there is scarcely room for those
-homely touches which endear a house to its occupants. The architect is
-more in evidence than the family. The splendour which stimulates the
-admiration of the stranger palls upon the eye that sees it daily; the
-feelings cease to answer to the stimulus. Grand rooms like these seem
-to demand an impossible series of grand functions, or at the least that
-old-fashioned custom of keeping open house which once prevailed at
-Wentworth Woodhouse.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 179.--WENTWORTH WOODHOUSE,
-  YORKSHIRE, 1740.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 180.--WENTWORTH WOODHOUSE. THE
-  SALOON.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 181.--Wentworth Woodhouse. The Staircase
-  Hall.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 182.--PRIOR PARK. THE HALL.
-
-  The ceiling of the hall was opened up by Goodridge, who added the
-  balustrade in 1829.]
-
-Another of the great mansions built about the same time as Wentworth
-Woodhouse was Prior Park, near Bath, and here again the result would
-appear to owe something to Campbell’s second design for Wanstead in so
-far as the great hexastyle portico is concerned. The architect was John
-Wood, of Bath, who designed it in 1736 for Ralph Allen, an extremely
-capable man, who, from being a clerk in a Bath post office, became
-one of the wealthiest men of his time. He established a lucrative
-system of posts, and he exploited the quarries of the district. It
-is said, indeed, that Prior Park was built in order to advertise
-the excellence of Bath stone; if true, it was a noble form of
-advertisement. The house stands high up on a hillside, and is flanked
-at a distance by stables and other buildings to which it is joined by
-low rusticated arcades of the same height as the basement story (Fig.
-183). The whole façade is slightly curved concavely in order to follow
-the conformation of the ground. From the terrace on which the house
-stands a fine flight of steps, partly straight and partly curved, leads
-down to a lower level, but this is a later addition, carried out by H.
-E. Goodridge, of Bath, in the year 1825.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 183.--Prior Park, near Bath, 1736.]
-
-It is interesting to find so splendid a house built for a self-made
-man, but as Allen left no family, it has not acquired the intimate
-charm of most great houses; it was for many years a Roman Catholic
-college, but has now been taken over for purposes connected with the
-war. The interior has suffered from fire, but the great hall retains
-its imposing appearance (Fig. 182). Like most halls of the period, it
-is, perhaps, too grand to be home-like, but it is admirably suited for
-the present uses of the house. If, as is said, Allen was the prototype
-of Fielding’s Mr. Allworthy, he must have been an amiable as well as
-a capable man. The man himself may have stood for the portrait, but
-Fielding placed Allworthy in circumstances of his own invention. He
-was made of ancient descent, and although his seat was in Somerset,
-and occupied a site comparable to that of Prior Park, the house itself
-was a noble product of the Gothic style; “there was an air of grandeur
-in it that struck you with awe, and rivalled the beauties of the best
-Grecian architecture; and it was as commodious within as venerable
-without.”
-
-Do we not see in this description signs of a revolt from the prevailing
-worship of the classic type? Fielding published “Tom Jones” about 1744,
-but there were still many years to run before the classic idea ceased
-to dominate domestic architecture.
-
-Wood himself certainly did nothing to divert architectural design from
-its accustomed channel. He, and his son after him, stamped Bath with
-its particular character, and made it the finest city in England.
-It had become a fashionable resort early in the eighteenth century,
-largely owing to the exertions of Beau Nash, and it is a fortunate
-circumstance that when it had to expand there was so accomplished a
-man as John Wood on the spot to control the expansion. He it was who
-first designed streets and squares and rows of houses as definite
-architectural conceptions. There is much to be said for this idea,
-especially when the work is new and the design still retains the colour
-and disposition intended by the architect, and while the buildings are
-occupied for the purposes for which they were built. But with the lapse
-of time inevitable changes occur. The property falls into different
-hands; each owner treats his portion after his own will. It may be that
-one paints his part of the façade one colour, while another paints his
-of a different tint, the lines of demarcation having no relation to
-the architectural treatment. Some of the tenements may become business
-premises, with large indications of their purpose exposed to catch
-the public eye. Others may even be rebuilt in a fashion wholly out of
-keeping with the original design. In short, although a square may be
-built as one architectural conception, it is impossible to preserve it
-as such in perpetuity, and when once the original idea is destroyed
-by the march of events, the effect is worse than if it had never been
-conceived.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 184.--Pulteney Bridge, Bath.
-
-      From an Aquatint by Thomas Malton.]
-
-Town-planning on architectural lines can be studied at Bath better,
-perhaps, than anywhere, but all towns are not equally fortunate in
-preserving the original character of their buildings. Pulteney Street,
-attributed to Thomas Baldwin, was laid out about 1780 with good
-residences, and to close its vista there was a carefully designed
-house, pleasant to look upon. Eventually, however, this house fell into
-decay, the character of the street changed, and its general aspect,
-instead of being fine, became depressing. Its very virtues emphasised
-its decline. The house has now been restored, and the whole street has
-once more become cheerful. But local enterprise is not everywhere so
-vigorous as at Bath, and decay in a scheme of this kind cannot always
-be arrested. Pulteney Bridge, which leads to the street of the same
-name, carries a row of narrow shops on each side, and presents much the
-same appearance as shown in Fig. 184. But the shops are necessarily
-small, low, and shallow, and they can have no chance of expanding
-or of keeping pace with other premises not thus restricted. Their
-relative importance is therefore much smaller than it was at the time
-when they were built. An example of a row of houses dealt with as a
-piece of architecture, and one which has suffered little, if at all,
-from change, is the Royal Crescent (Fig. 185). It was designed by the
-younger Wood in 1769.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 185.--The Royal Crescent, Bath, 1769.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 186.--REDDISH MANOR, BROAD CHALK,
-  WILTS.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 187.--WIDCOMBE MANOR HOUSE, BATH.]
-
-The abundance and excellent quality of the stone in the Bath district
-greatly facilitated the erection of new houses both in the city and
-the neighbourhood. It was susceptible of delicate detail, and lent
-itself admirably to the classic work then in vogue, which indeed
-could never have obtained a footing save through the medium of stone.
-Throughout the district there are to be found good houses of the time
-of the Woods, houses which are not large, which have no pretensions
-to vie with Prior Park, yet which are handsomely treated, and have
-had considerable skill and some learning bestowed upon their design.
-Such a one is Widcombe Manor House (Fig. 187), of which, however, it
-must be observed that it would be useless to undertake such a house
-unless one were prepared to spend a considerable amount for the sake
-of architectural effect. It is interesting to contrast with this
-product of the stone district a house in the adjoining county of
-Wilts.--Reddish Manor, Broad Chalk (Fig. 186). The walls here are of
-brick and the ornament is of stone, but apparently either the stone or
-the money gave out by the time the roof was reached, for the cornice
-and the pediment are of brick, and it is seen at once how impossible it
-was to carry out classic detail in the ordinary brick of the district,
-and with the limited skill of the ordinary workman. Nevertheless
-the result is attractive, and it prompts the somewhat disconcerting
-question, whether the fancy is not as much tickled by the efforts of
-the obscure and half-educated designer, as by the correct and skilful
-handling of the trained architect? Accidents of colour and situation,
-the effects of time and weather, and above all, individuality of
-treatment, are as potent factors in impressing the imagination as
-book-learning and careful adherence to rules of proportion; and in
-admiring the great houses of the eighteenth century, and Campbell,
-Gibbs, and the hierarchy of architects who produced them, one longs to
-meet some unexpected difficulty successfully surmounted, some state of
-things not contemplated in the books, which should prove that the man
-had an invention, an imagination, one might almost say a soul, of his
-own.
-
-The custom of building large houses with detached wings survived well
-into the middle of the eighteenth century. It will be remembered that
-Isaac Ware, in his “Complete Body of Architecture” (1756), gives
-elaborate rules for the proportions and disposition of such edifices;
-Holkham Hall, in Norfolk, designed by Kent about 1734, and Kedleston
-Hall, in Derbyshire, designed by James Paine in 1761, are two notable
-examples still in existence.
-
-Holkham is the most important piece of domestic work of the fashionable
-architect, William Kent, who was the favourite protégé of Lord
-Burlington. Like most of his contemporaries, Kent passed several years
-in Italy before doing any work in England. He was of lowly origin, as
-were many architects of the time. As a start in life he was apprenticed
-to a coach-painter; Ripley walked to London at the onset of his career,
-and obtained work with a journeyman carpenter; Carr, of York, began as
-a working mason; all three were Yorkshire men. Kent early impressed
-men of position with his unusual capacity, and it was through their
-kindness that he was enabled to study in Italy, where he appears to
-have lived from 1710 to 1719. At this time he was studying painting, a
-pursuit in which, by general consent, he achieved no distinction--at
-any rate no enviable distinction. Sir Robert Walpole’s opinion of his
-powers in this direction has already been indicated (p. 256). During
-his stay in Rome he became acquainted with Lord Burlington, who,
-according to Horace Walpole, “discovered the rich vein of genius that
-had been hid from the artist himself.” He came back to England with his
-new patron, and thenceforward his success was assured. An apartment was
-assigned to him in Burlington House as long as he lived, and on his
-death “he was buried in a very handsome manner in Lord Burlington’s
-vault at Chiswick.”[73]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 188.--Holkham Hall, Norfolk, 1734. Plan of
-  the Principal Floor.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 189.--HOLKHAM HALL. THE SOUTH
-  FRONT.]
-
-Endowed with natural abilities above the average, which had been
-cultivated during nine years in Italy, and fortified by the most
-powerful patronage of the age, it is no wonder that Kent was able
-to cut a good figure in the world of art. He became the fashionable
-decorator of the time in many directions, especially in relation to
-great houses and their surroundings. Walpole had a poor opinion of
-him as a painter, admired him as an architect, and praised him highly
-as a garden designer. To us in the present day he appears as a man of
-considerable ability and culture, who seldom rose above mediocrity,
-especially in his architecture, which, however sound and correct, is
-wanting in vivacity. Holkham is a case in point. There is nothing
-novel about the plan (Fig. 188), save that the wings are closer to the
-main building than usual; but in spite of this the kitchen is a long
-way from the dining-room. The rooms are not particularly striking: the
-finest are the entrance hall, and the sculpture gallery or “statue
-gallery,” as it is called on the plan in “Vitruvius Britannicus.” The
-house was designed for the reception of the numerous works of art
-which the owner and builder, Thomas Coke (afterwards created Earl of
-Leicester), collected in Italy. The collection of pictures, statues,
-antiques, books, and manuscripts ranks among the finest in England.
-The opinions of critics on the house are by no means unanimous. Sir
-William Chambers, for instance, remarks how difficult it is to give
-pleasing proportions to rooms of differing sizes, but which are all of
-the same height, and so to arrange the smaller as to contrive suitable
-mezzanines above them. “Holkham,” he says, “is a masterpiece in this
-respect, as well as in many others. It deserves much commendation,
-and does credit to the memory of Mr. Kent, it being exceedingly well
-contrived both for state and convenience.”[74] Ferguson, on the other
-hand, says: “We are left to conjecture whether the noble host and
-hostess sleep in a bedroom 40 ft. high, or are relegated like their
-guests to a garret or an outhouse, or perhaps may have their bedroom
-windows turned inwards on a lead flat.” He goes on to say that although
-the house may be “a monumental whole, yet the occupants would probably
-prefer rooms of appropriate dimensions, where they could get fresh air
-and a view of the park.”[75]
-
-Both opinions are, or were, probably right. At the time it was built,
-and for the wants of that period, Holkham was no doubt both convenient
-and stately. But Ferguson’s criticisms find a ready echo in our own
-bosoms, and they are a measure of the difference between the ideas of
-the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries as to domestic comfort.
-
-The exterior of Holkham (Fig. 189), although a departure from the
-customary treatment, is hardly an improvement upon it. It is a little
-monotonous, and the large extent of plain wall above the windows of
-the principal floor has a dull effect. The plain turrets and the thin
-cornice of the wings impart a meagre appearance, which is heightened by
-the fact that the walls are of white brick, a material which remains
-_triste_ to the end, although centuries may have endeavoured to
-mellow it, as they have in vain at Hengrave Hall, in Suffolk.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 190.--The Horse Guards, Whitehall.]
-
-Kent’s versatility is evidenced at Holkham in the furniture, most
-of which was designed by him. It is characterised by a solidity and
-massiveness, both of construction and decoration, in striking contrast
-to the attenuated elegance of his successors.
-
-Kent died in 1748, long before the house was finished; the Earl of
-Leicester died in 1759, still leaving much to be completed. The manner
-of his death brings home to us the changes which have taken place
-in habits and customs even more vividly than does his house. Lord
-Leicester had spoken slightingly of the militia at his own table, a
-topic of general comment at the time; his remarks were taken ill by
-George Townshend, his neighbour at Rainham, who challenged him to a
-duel. Townshend was young and a practised duellist; Lord Leicester was
-a staid gentleman of sixty-five. The result was a foregone conclusion,
-and the older man died of his wound.[76]
-
-Lady Leicester carried on the works at Holkham with the help of Matthew
-Brettingham, of Norwich, who had been a pupil of Kent’s and had acted
-as his assistant and clerk of the works. After the work was ended he
-published the plans and elevations of the house in a book dedicated
-to Lady Leicester, and claimed the whole credit of the design. But it
-belongs in reality to Kent, and Holkham is an interesting example of
-the work of one man, alike as to the house, its decoration and its
-furniture.[77]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 191.--Kedleston, Derbyshire, 1761. Plan of
-  the Principal Floor.]
-
-Although Holkham is his most notable achievement--unless we except the
-Horse Guards, which has some resemblance to it in general treatment
-(Fig. 190)--Kent was fully employed during his thirty years of active
-work. He designed many houses and many gardens. One of the most
-pleasing of the buildings at Stowe, the Temple of Ancient Virtues, was
-his. His help was obtained in directions other than architecture, and
-Walpole tells us that he designed birthday gowns for two ladies,
-to which he gave a decidedly architectural turn. He must have spent
-much time in producing “The Designs of Inigo Jones,” and it is not
-improbable that he was the power behind the throne in respect of the
-architectural efforts of Lord Burlington.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 192.--KEDLESTON HALL, DERBYSHIRE.
-  THE HALL.]
-
-Brettingham had a certain connection with Kedleston, as he seems to
-have designed and built one of the wings. He was succeeded by James
-Paine, to whom the general design is attributed, which followed the
-lines started by Brettingham. The house was to have had four outlying
-wings, much after the fashion of Holkham, but only two were carried
-out. The original plan looks very striking on paper (Fig. 191), but
-it is one further proof of the way in which comfort was sacrificed to
-grandeur by the architects of that time. All the principal rooms are
-noble, those, that is, which were to be used on grand occasions; the
-others are quite subordinate. The basement, which contains rooms in
-daily use, seems overweighted by the superstructure, and is in fact too
-low to allow the light to penetrate freely to the remoter parts of the
-entrance. The bedrooms were, in the opinion of Dr. Johnson, who visited
-the house with Boswell in September 1777, “but indifferent rooms.” The
-hall is a lordly apartment with a row of lofty columns down each side
-(Fig. 192). Some of the columns are monoliths, and one is of alabaster
-from the locality. Dr. Johnson thought the house “would do excellently
-for a town-hall; the large room with the pillars would do for the
-judges to sit in at the assizes; the circular room for a jury-chamber;
-and the room above for prisoners.” It is quite true that many of these
-large houses produce an impression similar to that created by public
-buildings.
-
-The situation of the house is in keeping with the ideas prevalent at
-the time. It is not, as of old, the centre of a formally disposed lay
-out, with vistas stretching away from its principal windows. It stands,
-indeed, askew with all points of view, on a slope of the park, backed
-by a long range of trees which crowns the summit of the hill; behind
-another group of trees lie the stables, connected to the house by a
-sunk way. A contemporary bridge in the park, over which the approach
-is carried, lies in haphazard relation to the house. But this was
-all part of the design, which aimed not at any formal lay out, but
-at a result which should convey the impression that everything was
-unstudied, and that skill was bestowed not in making an effect, but
-merely in seizing on the effects supplied by nature and using them to
-the best advantage.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 193.--ELEVATION OF SIR WATKIN WYNN’S HOUSE
-  IN ST JAMES’S SQUARE, LONDON.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 194.--Houses in Portland Place, London.]
-
-  Illustration: FIG. 195.--ADELPHI TERRACE, LONDON.]
-
-Paine did not finish the house. Before it was completed he was replaced
-by the brothers Adam, who carried out all the decoration of the
-interior and also designed much of the furniture.
-
-Of the brothers Adam (there were four of them), Robert was the most
-gifted, and it is his work which gave rise to the well-known “Adam”
-style. He, too, had a training of several years in Italy (from 1754
-to 1758), but, more adventurous than other students, he paid a visit
-of some weeks’ duration to Spalato in Dalmatia, where he occupied
-himself, with the help of companions, in taking measurements and
-making drawings of Diocletian’s palace. According to one authority[78]
-these studies were the foundation of his future style. Much of the
-furniture at Kedleston, however, is more nearly allied to the type
-established by Kent than to that which we are accustomed to associate
-with Adam; presumably he had not yet established his own individuality.
-In his architectural work he had a great idea of obtaining “movement”
-by giving rhythmical projections to a façade, and a picturesque but
-ordered variety to the skyline. This was his intention, and the
-adoption of the word is his own; it is doubtful whether observers and
-critics would have discovered enough of the one to have adopted the
-other of their own accord. Indeed the exteriors of his buildings are
-often tame. He broke away, it is true, from the conventions of the
-preceding half-century, but although the result was to a certain extent
-novel, it can hardly be deemed more attractive. The fact is that he
-laboured under the same drawback which beset all the architects of the
-eighteenth century, the glorification of architecture at the expense
-of practical building. Instead of making his architecture reflect
-the requirements of the persons who were to use the edifice, he made
-the interior arrangements to fit the preconceived exterior. This is
-exemplified in a small instance in the fact that, having designed two
-houses to form one architectural composition, he was obliged to make
-the party wall cut a window in two, a mutilated half of which lighted
-a room in each of two separate houses. We have already seen how the
-same sort of difficulty beset Wood’s houses in Bath; and exactly the
-same fault in regard to windows is to be found in Grainger’s work at
-Newcastle. The absurdity is only fully realised when one of the houses
-has to be remodelled or rebuilt, when, among other odd results, it is
-found that a window has to be shorn in two, one half removed and the
-other left.
-
-Adam’s excellence lies in his eye for proportion, in the refinement
-of his detail, and in the fastidious handling of his ornament. A
-house in St James’s Square (Fig. 193) and another in Portland Place
-(Fig. 194) are characteristic examples of his work. At first sight
-they appear insipid, and might easily escape the eye; but when the
-attention is once caught it is arrested by the detail which appeals to
-the cultivated taste; the intellect is charmed with the extreme care
-bestowed upon every part of the ornament, or rather, considering the
-enormous amount of work which occupied Adam’s time, by the wonderful
-intuition which produced such harmonious results.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 196.--Doorway in Mansfield Street, London.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 197.--Entrance and Porch at 20 Portman
-  Square, London.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 198.--WINDOW AT SUTTON COURT.]
-
-He can hardly be said to have made a permanent mark in his
-large architectural conceptions. With the help of his brothers he
-rebuilt a whole district of London which was called after them,
-“the Adelphi.”[79] The long terrace on an arcaded basement was much
-admired, and it has been claimed for him that he planted by the side
-of the Thames a worthy version of the splendours of Spalato, but the
-building (Fig. 195) hardly bears out this contention. It is Spalato
-much diluted. The lesson to be learnt from this as from most of the
-architecture of that period is that no reproduction of ancient glories,
-whether direct or modified, can be of abiding interest. Architecture
-to be interesting must meet certain definite wants, must reflect the
-needs of the hour and of the individual, and as these must of necessity
-be ever changing, so must architectural expression. Each work of every
-architect presents a fresh problem which ought to be solved in its own
-way.
-
-It is in particular features, such as doorways, windows, balustrades,
-and panels, that Adam’s gift of design shows to the best advantage. A
-doorway in Mansfield Street (Fig. 196), with its large fanlight, is
-characteristic of one treatment; the projecting porch from Portman
-Square (Fig. 197) is equally so of another. The window from Sutton
-Court (Fig. 198) would be a prosaic affair, but for the fanlight and
-the detail imparted to the surrounding woodwork. It should be noticed
-that, in keeping with his delicate mouldings, the sash-bars are thin,
-in complete contrast to the more vigorous handling of his predecessors.
-
-The delicacy of his detail was more appropriate to the inside of a
-house than to the outside, and nothing pleased him better than to
-design the whole decoration of a room--doors, chimney-piece, ceiling,
-plaster wall panels, lockplates and door handles, grate, and the whole
-of the furniture. Pretty, graceful, and refined, but rarely virile, his
-work appeals to the less tumultuous emotions; indeed he made his mark
-not so much by his architecture as by his decoration, which exhibits
-extraordinary fecundity and fertility of design.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 199.--Vicarage at Puddletown, Dorset.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 200.--House in St Giles, Oxford.]
-
-
-
-
-                                   X
-
-            SMALLER HOUSES, TOWN HOUSES, EXTERIOR FEATURES
-
-
-In the large houses which have been described in the preceding
-chapters, it has been impossible to avoid passing a certain amount of
-adverse criticism upon the manner in which comfort and convenience were
-often sacrificed to the claims of fine architecture, as the term was
-understood during the eighteenth century. When we turn to the smaller
-houses this drawback is much less in evidence; not because better
-architects were employed, for doubtless the unknown designers of these
-smaller buildings would have sinned equally with their more famous
-brethren, had the opportunity to do so come their way, but because the
-occasion demanded no great display, and there was no money wherewith
-to make it. Nothing more was wanted than a handsome-looking house
-with rooms of suitable size and number. It was very seldom that any
-great ingenuity was required of the designers. Two, three, or in the
-larger houses, four sitting-rooms, a hall and staircase, a kitchen,
-back kitchen, and pantries usually completed the accommodation of the
-ground floor; the floor above was occupied by bedrooms, which, if
-insufficient, were supplemented by others in the attic. There were no
-bathrooms, cloak-rooms, or other sanitary conveniences; it was not
-necessary to provide a fireplace to each room. The problems of design
-were therefore much simpler than those of the present day. There was
-no group of small rooms requiring a convenient yet inconspicuous
-situation: there was no need to struggle with single flues from
-isolated bedrooms, which could not be led to the main stacks;
-this difficulty was met by leaving the rooms without a fireplace.
-Nothing is commoner in old houses than to find two or perhaps three
-chimney-stacks, the position of which is determined by that of the
-sitting-rooms and kitchen, and to find that the bedrooms adjoining
-these stacks have fireplaces, while those away from them have none. As
-to sanitary conveniences, with the crude means of sewage disposal then
-in use, it was impossible to have them in the house; it was only after
-the introduction of water carriage that this could be done. In the
-ancient days of fortified houses it was of course necessary for them
-to be within the walls, and considerable skill was often displayed in
-placing them so as to be as innocuous as possible. On Elizabethan plans
-they were sometimes retained indoors, but they were obviously a source
-of annoyance and danger; in later times, they were removed outside,
-and in old houses, here and there, may still be found evidence of the
-handsome treatment provided for the family as distinguished from the
-servants. The bedrooms, as many old houses still testify, were provided
-with some variation of the _chaise percée_.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 201.--The Court, Holt, near
-  Bradford-on-Avon.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 202.--The Church House, Beckley, Sussex.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 203.--House in the High, Oxford.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 204.--House at Shrivenham, Berkshire.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 205.--House (now the “Seahorse” Inn) at
-  Deene, Northamptonshire.]
-
-The rooms, therefore, which had to be provided, could all be of a
-fair size, and they could be so disposed as to allow their windows to
-fall into the symmetrical arrangement, which the exterior treatment
-required. The results can be seen in most of our old-fashioned villages
-and towns: small manor-houses and parsonages in the former; houses for
-the doctor, the lawyer, the well-to-do tradesmen in the latter. The
-vicarage at Puddletown, in Dorset (Fig. 199), is an example of the
-early years of the century. It has one large chimney-stack in the main
-part of the house, and two smaller, and probably later stacks in the
-adjoining wing; its wide eaves give it its distinctive character, and
-further touches are added by the cut brickwork under the window-sills
-and the circular panels in the end. Beyond these there is nothing to
-raise emotions either of praise or blame. There is considerably more
-attempt at design in the Court at Holt, near Bradford-on-Avon (Fig.
-201). This place is in the midst of a district abounding in stone, and
-the builders availed themselves of the opportunity to impart a more
-pretentious character to their work. The older methods make themselves
-felt in the manner in which the eaves cornice is bent up to form a
-gable, steeper than classic handling usually permits. Here, again,
-there are but two chimney-stacks, one at each end of the house.
-
-The house in St Giles, Oxford (Fig. 200), is rather more imposing.
-It is of the period of Wren, and is, indeed, attributed locally to
-him. The treatment is large, simple, and dignified, and the effect is
-enhanced by the handsome gate-piers which give access, up a few steps,
-to the front door. It is evident that here, at any rate, more rooms
-have fireplaces than those at the ends of the house. There is another
-house at Oxford, in the High Street (Fig. 203), of a later date, which
-is quite admirable in its simplicity and careful proportions, and the
-front is relieved from baldness by the slight projections at each
-end. Compared with the more famous pieces of architecture by which it
-is surrounded, this house is insignificant, and may well escape the
-attention it deserves. Dating from early in the century is the dower
-house at Deene, in Northamptonshire (Fig. 205), now occupied as a
-public-house under the sign of the sea-horse, which is the crest of the
-family owning the village. It presents a quaint combination of the
-steep coped gables of the district prevalent in earlier times, with the
-wide eaves, sash-windows, and dormers fashionable when it was built. It
-has quite a large number of chimneys, but the dowagers who came from
-the great house no doubt looked for the comforts to which they had
-always been accustomed. Several of the rooms are decorated with good
-panelling and plasterwork, and have had skill and knowledge bestowed
-upon their proportions and design.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 206.--House at Ely, Cambridgeshire.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 207.--Rectory at Church Langton,
-  Leicestershire.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 208.--House at Petersham, Surrey.]
-
-The Church House at Beckley, in Sussex (Fig. 202), has no projecting
-eaves, but above the cut-brick cornice rises a parapet which
-effectually blocks the outlook from the dormer windows. The usual plain
-treatment of the walls is here varied by the introduction of a pilaster
-at each end of the front, and by carrying up a slight projection from
-the keystone of the middle window. The pilasters are surmounted by a
-piece of architrave and frieze of the same width as the pilaster, a
-device which displays a misconception of classic features. The two main
-chimney-stacks are placed at the back of the principal block instead
-of at the ends, thus giving them an opportunity to serve rooms behind
-as well as those in the front.
-
-The house at Shrivenham, in Berkshire (Fig. 204), is of the more
-ordinary type. It has a good eaves cornice, and the usual two
-chimney-stacks; the projecting porch forms a pleasing variation, and
-the whole house gives the impression of comfort and respectability. So,
-too, does the house at Ely (Fig. 206) which faces the green opposite
-the west end of the cathedral. It has a chimney-stack at each end,
-and a pediment of unusually steep pitch. Like several of the other
-examples, it has five windows along the front; the middle one lights
-the landing, and the two on each side light the rooms with fireplaces.
-Additional importance is given by the large gate-piers, and the
-whole effect is dignified and restful, eminently in keeping with the
-atmosphere of an old cathedral town. The house at Petersham (Fig. 208)
-is of larger size, having seven windows along the front; the three in
-the middle are placed in a slight projection round which the cornice
-breaks. This projection, together with the bold cornice, the rather
-large front door, and the wide window margins, is all there is in the
-way of design to give interest to the house. The rectory at Church
-Langton, in Leicestershire (Fig. 207), is of somewhat later date,
-probably about the beginning of the nineteenth century. Here there is a
-decided attempt at architectural effect in the ornamented pediment, the
-central arched recess, and the low buildings at the side; but the house
-itself is not more commodious inside, nor has it larger rooms than
-other houses of the same type. The adjuncts, too, are added for effect
-rather than for use.
-
-Houses such as these abound in country districts. There is nothing
-particularly notable about them, and very little effort at design. But
-as a rule their proportions are pleasing, and the very absence of any
-attempt to achieve striking effects is itself one of their charms. They
-seem the natural expression of the quiet, uneventful lives led by the
-inhabitants, who, like the Vicar of Wakefield, had no adventures save
-by the fireside, and no migrations save from the blue bed to the brown.
-Their interest varies not so much through difference in design as by
-reason of their surroundings, and the variety of creepers which climb
-up their walls, and are the less objectionable in that they hide no
-architectural detail.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 209.--THE TUESDAY MARKET-PLACE, KING’S
-  LYNN.]
-
-In the towns, of course, the surroundings did little to help the
-appearance of houses; there they had to rely on their own merits.
-Nevertheless the disposition of the streets often lent picturesqueness
-to the houses that formed them. It is one of the charms of most English
-towns that their appearance is the result of fortuitous causes, or
-of some necessity which is no longer obvious. In some towns, like
-Marlborough or Dunstable, it is the width of the main street which
-gives character to the place; in others, like York, Canterbury, and
-(in a less degree) Warwick, it is the narrowness which strikes the
-visitor. In the one case the open spaces of the country are embodied in
-the town; there is room enough and to spare. In the other it is clear
-that every foot of room was utilised. Yarmouth has a very interesting
-lay out, evidently the result of premeditated design and not of chance.
-The river upon which it is built turns suddenly to the right as it
-approaches the sea, and runs for some distance parallel to the sea
-front, leaving a certain space between itself and the shore. Upon
-this restricted space the town was built; streets of no great width
-were formed parallel with the river, next to which was a broad quay;
-then at right angles to the streets a series of narrow passages were
-formed, called “rows.” Although these “rows” are not more than 4 or 5
-ft. wide, they were formed of good houses, and it is surprising, in
-traversing them to-day, when they have become degraded into slums, to
-find remains of houses which must have been the residences of wealthy
-people. But the circumstances of Yarmouth were peculiar. At King’s
-Lynn, another ancient port in the same county, although most of the
-old streets are narrow, judged by modern standards, there is a very
-fine open space known as the Tuesday market-place, which still retains
-much of its old-world flavour. The old print of it which is reproduced
-in Fig. 209 rather exaggerates its size, owing to the perspective
-of the draughtsman; the market hall and its circular adjuncts have
-disappeared, but the Georgian buildings in the front and on either side
-still remain, and that on the left retains its steps and obelisks.
-Another old print--one of Chelmsford (Fig. 210)--gives a good idea of
-that town in Georgian times. Most of the houses are of the eighteenth
-century, and must have been quite modern at the time when the print
-was published; others are of an earlier date. Their disposition is the
-result of a long period of growth, and could never be achieved under a
-scheme of town-planning. One of the most prominent objects in the
-view is the inn sign, a good solid structure, thrust well out into the
-public way; it is characteristic of the times, both in its size and in
-the wrought-iron scroll-work which surrounds the swinging lion; indeed
-bits of fanciful ironwork such as this were prodigally used during the
-eighteenth century, and give interest to a house or a street which
-otherwise would attract no attention. In the middle distance is another
-sign typical of many which used to exist, but which are seldom found in
-the present day. Here it stretches across a large part of the public
-road, but in many cases these signs were made to span the whole width
-of the street. An example of an elaborate sign may be seen at the Swan
-Inn, Market Harborough (Fig. 212), and an unpretentious but effective
-specimen is shown in Fig. 213.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 210.--Chelmsford, Essex.
-
-      From an Old Print.  ]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 211.--Somerset Buildings, Milsom Street,
-  Bath.
-
-      From an Engraving by Thomas Malton.  ]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 212.--SIGN OF THE SWAN HOTEL, MARKET
-  HARBOROUGH.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 213.--The Sign of an Inn at Salisbury.]
-
-In most of the county towns the gentry of the district used to have
-their winter residences, to which they repaired when the state of
-the roads rendered locomotion difficult. It must be remembered that
-the roads in those days, except the most important, were little more
-than tracks across the country; nothing was done to make them hard or
-permanent--they merely traversed the natural soil. “Where there is good
-land there is foul way,” was a saying of the time; and conversely,
-where the ground was stony the roads were fairly hard. Horace Walpole,
-among other writers, recounts the difficulties he experienced on
-country roads in bad weather, and this condition of things accounts for
-the number of horses which, according to old prints, were harnessed to
-family coaches. These in their turn were built in a strong and heavy
-fashion, in order to withstand the shocks to which they were inevitably
-subjected. When the wet weather came on, families who lived in country
-houses betook themselves to the town for society and amusement. In
-places like Nottingham and Derby there still remain a fair number of
-houses which were built for county magnates, but in every instance they
-have been diverted from their original purpose and have become business
-premises. This affords another proof, if such were needed, that no lay
-out can be expected to retain in perpetuity its original character.
-Half the squares of London point the same moral.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 214.--RALPH ALLEN’S HOUSE AT BATH.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 215.--The Aylesford Hotel, Warwick.]
-
-No doubt the house at Warwick, which, for the time being, is the
-Aylesford Hotel (Fig. 215), was built for some such purpose as has
-just been indicated; it is a handsome and interesting example of the
-early part of the eighteenth century. Just outside the east gate is
-the house where Walter Savage Landor was born in 1775. Another house
-of the same kind is that of Ralph Allen at Bath (Fig. 214), which is
-an architectural composition of much greater pretensions, now almost
-hidden from public view. It will be remembered that his country house
-was Prior Park.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 216.--Shops at Cirencester.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 217.--Shops, Montpellier, Cheltenham.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 218.--Shop in East Street, Wareham,
-  Dorset.]
-
-Bath, of course, is full of good examples of town houses; but Bath was
-much more than a town to which the neighbouring gentry resorted for
-the winter. It was a fashionable watering place, and provision had to
-be made for visitors throughout the year. Some of its buildings have
-already been mentioned, but the accompanying engraving of Milsom
-Street (Fig. 211) gives a good idea of its street architecture, devoted
-partly to residential purposes and partly to business premises. This
-mixture of dwellings and shops is still met with in old-fashioned
-towns, where the principal streets are made up of houses--some large
-and some small--interspersed with shops and inns. But in places where
-factories are introduced and the population increases, the universal
-tendency is towards the multiplication of shops and the diminution
-of houses. Every growing town experiences this change. As the houses
-part with their tenants, whether through death or otherwise, they
-are either converted into shops and offices, or they are pulled down
-to make room for tradesmen seeking the best situations for their
-business; the tradesmen themselves seek the cheaper and larger spaces
-of the suburbs for their own dwellings. The intentional combination
-of shop and dwelling, such as those at Cirencester (Fig. 216) or
-Cheltenham (Fig. 217), seldom occurs in the present day, when by-laws
-require for a house a certain amount of open space which can be more
-profitably used for business pure and simple. In the example from
-Cirencester the ground story, if not actually of the same date as the
-superstructure, has been skilfully designed to harmonise with it, and
-appears sufficiently sturdy to support it. But most tradesmen of the
-present day require so much room for the display of their goods, that
-they grudge every inch given to the purposes of support, and they would
-regard with equal disfavour the columns employed at Cirencester and
-the caryatides at Cheltenham.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 219.--Shop Front at Dorking, Surrey.]
-
-Needless to say, the little old-fashioned shop fronts with small panes
-are quite out of the question in the present day, except for a very few
-trades. They would fill a modern shop fitter with contempt, yet there
-is something quite refreshing about such a front as that at Wareham
-(Fig. 218) or that at Dorking (Fig. 219). The outward curve, according
-to the simple ideas of the time, brought the goods into prominence, and
-when as yet it was unnecessary for rivals to shout each other down,
-the modest depth of the frieze was sufficient to display the name and
-calling of the occupier. The delicate ornament in the cornice is
-in scale with its surroundings, but it would be out of place on the
-top of a sheet of plate glass two or three hundred feet in area, or
-surmounting a name board with letters two feet high.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 220.--Houses at Bristol.]
-
-Bristol still retains many interesting old houses, some dating from
-the early seventeenth century, and bearing witness to the wealth of
-its inhabitants at that period. These are to be found within a short
-distance of the quays, where the trade of the town centred. As the
-town spread further out more good houses were built, and there are
-still to be found in the outlying parts of the old town such houses as
-that shown in Fig. 220. It has a handsome, substantial front treated
-with more than usual richness; but if the pediments over the windows
-and the pilasters were removed, the residue would resemble one of the
-ordinary plain brick houses of the time. That is to say, the ornamental
-features are merely applied, and have no vital connection with the
-structure. The house is set a little way back from the street, thus
-leaving a narrow forecourt, which is enclosed by a railing abutting
-at each end on a handsome stone pier; two similar piers carry a pair
-of elaborate iron gates in the middle of the front. The piers lend an
-air of dignity to the whole. In some instances, where a good house was
-built in a crowded street, it was set back some sixteen or twenty feet,
-thus forming a forecourt; and high walls were built at the sides of the
-court from the house up to the street, thus providing screens to mask
-the ends of the adjoining houses, which were built on the actual street
-front. There is such a case in Eastgate, Gloucester, but the forecourt
-is now filled with a shop, above which can be seen the front of the
-house and the screen walls. Nearly all our old towns retain relics of
-ancient grandeur such as this, but they are gradually disappearing
-before the march of modern improvements.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 221.--Houses in Bedford Square, London,
-  1780.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 222.--Houses in Finsbury Square, London,
-  _cir._ 1780.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 223.--Plan of a London House.]
-
-London, as may well be supposed, has innumerable examples of late
-eighteenth-century houses in such districts as Bloomsbury and
-Piccadilly. Bedford Square was built about 1780, and presents to
-the world some inoffensive, although not very exciting fronts. The
-central feature of one side is shown in Fig. 221; there is nothing of
-striking originality in its design, but enough to break the monotony
-of the general treatment, and give a little interest to this rather
-dull though highly respectable square. Contemporary with this is
-Finsbury Square, which was laid out by George Dance, the younger,
-between 1777 and 1791.[80] A part of it is illustrated in Fig. 222. By
-simple expedients the designer has imparted variety to his front, and
-has emphasised the principal floor, where, according to custom, the
-drawing-room is placed. The difficulty attending on the ornamenting
-of a row of houses with architectural features is illustrated here by
-the fact that one of the pilasters, which belongs in common to two
-houses, has been painted of two colours, which meet in a vertical
-line down the whole length of the pilaster--an effect certainly not
-contemplated by the architect. All these London houses have their
-kitchens in the basement, which is lighted from a sunk area between
-the house and the pavement. The plan generally adopted consisted
-of two rooms on each floor, one lighted from the front, the other
-from the back. Alongside the front room on the ground floor was the
-entrance passage, and next to the back room was the staircase, with
-its gangway of communication from flight to flight (Fig. 223). On the
-first floor the drawing-room occupied the whole of the front, behind
-it was a bedroom; the other floors repeated the arrangement. Sometimes
-the drawing-room included the space elsewhere devoted to the bedroom,
-thus making a large L-shaped room. This plan was used for houses of
-fair size and also for artisans’ dwellings; it is still the staple
-plan for houses in the long streets which make up the modern extension
-of growing towns, with the important exception that the kitchen and
-scullery are not in a basement, but on the ground floor, occupying the
-back room and the annexe. Of the London examples here illustrated this
-arrangement applies only to the houses in Finsbury Square; the others
-are double-fronted. It is said to have been brought from Holland with
-William III., and this at least is tolerably certain, that no plan of
-this type is to be found in any collection of English drawings before
-this period, although there are plenty of plans with underground
-kitchens and offices. Thorpe has some plans for small houses in the
-city, with four rooms on the ground floor, one of which is a kitchen;
-he also has a house occupying the space of “three ordinary tenements,”
-from which we gather that an ordinary tenement had a frontage of 17 ft.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 224.--House at the Corner of Stratton
-  Street, Piccadilly, London.]
-
-The house at the corner of Stratton Street, Piccadilly (Fig. 224),
-is typical of many of its contemporaries in London. It is plain
-to baldness, the most interesting things about it being the iron
-balustrades. This appears to be an early example of that method of
-designing which works on the supposition that the various faces of a
-building are as distinct in execution as they are on the drawings,
-and that a rich treatment of the front need not be continued along
-the side, nor even find an echo there, although the side is equally
-visible.
-
-At the beginning of the nineteenth century a much plainer and duller
-type of house was in vogue than had been the case at the beginning of
-the eighteenth. The trend of design had been always in this direction,
-always towards a more severe treatment. This severity was endurable in
-large buildings where variety could be obtained by a skilful grouping
-of the masses, but in rows of small houses, or even in small detached
-houses, it resulted in a baldness that can only rouse admiration when
-other means of enjoyment are exhausted. Tennyson’s “long unlovely”
-street consisted of buildings thus plainly treated. Another cause
-of this lack of interest was the erection of houses by speculative
-builders and owners. Such houses had of necessity to be cheap, and
-where cheapness is the first consideration the amenities of design are
-generally the last. Design indeed had lost itself; the traditions which
-had been its guides were worn out; in looking for help it appealed for
-a time to Greece, and with its assistance planted a copy of the Temple
-of Erectheus in St Pancras and of the Choragic Monument of Lysicrates
-in Regent Street. Upon many a country garden it bestowed a Grecian
-temple, set amid winding shrubberies, towards which some heroine of
-Jane Austen would steal to indulge her love-sick fancies.
-
-Such pagan architecture eventually roused protests in this Christian
-country, and Pugin initiated the Gothic revival. But the consideration
-of this development is beyond our present scope, and it is only
-mentioned in order to show how completely design had lost its way.
-Its last effort in the old paths was to cover in part the plain front
-of a small house with a verandah enclosed by trellis-work, in which
-originality is still to be found. There is a good example in Finsbury
-Circus (Fig. 225), which was built about 1814. Others may be found
-in Kennington Park Road (Figs. 226, 227), somewhat more elaborate in
-treatment. Kennington Park was at that time a common, and was the place
-where malefactors from this part of Surrey expiated their crimes on
-the gallows. The progress of civilisation has not only reduced the
-number of crimes for which the penalty was paid on Kennington Common,
-but has withdrawn the last scene from public gaze. Doubtless, however,
-balconies such as these were often crowded by persons eager to watch
-the irrevocable punishment of offences now adequately purged by a few
-months’ imprisonment.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 225.--No. 18 Finsbury Circus, London,
-  1814.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 226.--From a House, No. 272 Kennington
-  Park Road, London.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 227.--From a House, No. 282 Kennington
-  Park Road, London.]
-
-With the improved methods of road making which were adopted at the end
-of the eighteenth century, there came greater inducements for citizens
-to retire to the suburbs of London after finishing their labours in
-town. Probably no great city had such beautiful suburbs as those which
-surrounded London a hundred years ago. They were full of fine trees
-embowering large houses which stood in their own spacious grounds. But
-year by year these remains of the past are disappearing, and their
-sites are being covered with dwellings of a humbler kind, towards which
-an immense population gravitates every evening. Yet in spite of these
-changes there still remain, along most of the great roads which lead
-out of London, houses of moderate size dating back to some period of
-the eighteenth century or the early years of the nineteenth.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 228.--House in the High Street, Lewes,
-  Sussex.]
-
-During the eighteenth century, especially as it grew older, the play
-of fancy which marks the work of earlier times diminished more and
-more. Consequently less interest attaches to particular features than
-was the case in the days of Elizabeth, James, and the Charleses.
-Chimneys and parapets had but slight variety, and so also the windows,
-for the sash-window has very little elasticity compared with the
-mullioned. Baywindows went almost out of fashion, so unyielding were
-the sashes with which they would have had to be fitted. In small
-houses a bay-window is sometimes to be found, such as those in a house
-in the High Street at Lewes, in Sussex (Fig. 228). Chimneys grew
-plainer and plainer, and came to be regarded rather as a necessary
-evil than as a means of adorning the house. Nearly all those on the
-houses illustrated in this chapter are of the simplest character, far
-removed, for instance, from that on the north front of Kirby Hall, in
-Northamptonshire (Fig. 230), which is part of the work attributed to
-Inigo Jones. The dormer window included in the same group is allied
-to the Jacobean type, inasmuch as it is in effect part of the wall,
-whereas from Webb’s time onwards dormers were part of the roof, and
-were susceptible of very little variety of treatment. The stone chimney
-from a house at Wansford (Fig. 229, 2) dates from the end of the
-seventeenth century, and although much plainer, it is clear that pains
-have been taken with its design. So, too, with the four brick examples
-in Fig. 229; they are all interesting, though not elaborate. In later
-years even the touches which gave these their character were withheld,
-and chimney-stacks became mere oblong masses with the scantiest of
-caps.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 229.--EIGHTEENTH-CENTURY CHIMNEYS.
-
-      1. Meopham, Kent.
-      2. Wansford, Northamptonshire.
-      3. Sturmer, Essex.
-      4. Silchester, Hampshire.
-      5. Bignor, Sussex.  ]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 230.--Chimney and Dormer Window at Kirby
-  Hall, Northamptonshire.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 231.--The Stables, Neville Holt,
-  Leicestershire.]
-
-Some compensation was afforded, however, by the introduction of the
-cupolas or lantern lights which were prevalent during the last half
-of the seventeenth century and the first few years of the eighteenth.
-There is an interesting drawing of such a feature for Whitehall by
-Inigo Jones in the Worcester College collection (Fig. 232). It is
-entitled in Jones’s writing--“June 1, 1627, for the Cloke house Whight
-hall.” Webb made use of the same kind of feature, and so did Wren and
-his contemporaries. There is a fine example on the stables at Neville
-Holt, in Leicestershire (Fig. 231), a building of great interest,
-possessing doorways of curious seventeenth-century detail; and another
-good specimen is at Trinity Hall, Cambridge (Fig. 233). The old hall
-was altered about the year 1742, when it was described as “very gloomy
-and dark,” and as being “roofed with old Oak Beams, very black & dismal
-from y^e Charcoal w^{ch} is burnt in y^e middle of y^e Hall; and over
-it in y^e middle of y^e Roof was an old awkward kind of Cupulo to let
-out y^e Smoak.”[81] The new cupola was considered, presumably, more
-elegant and less awkward than the old one. The reference to the ancient
-method of warming the hall by a fire in the middle of the floor is
-interesting, as showing how long the old practice lingered in places
-where those in authority were averse to change. A further example is
-shown in Fig. 234.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 232.--Clock Turret, Whitehall.
-
-      From a Drawing by Inigo Jones, dated 1st June 1627.  ]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 233.--Cupola at Trinity Hall, Cambridge.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 234.--Cupola at Caius College, Cambridge.]
-
-While fancy still played a part in the work of local masons, the little
-date-stones shown in Fig. 235 were built into some unpretentious houses
-in the Midlands; but a hundred years later the diligent pursuit of
-correctitude had banished such touches from the work of architects, and
-masons had lost the feeling which gave rise to them. They are, however,
-quite suggestive, and provide ideas for the perpetuation of the owner’s
-name and the date of his work--facts which are of interest in respect
-of all buildings. The example from Amersham is rather more ambitious,
-but hardly more successful (Fig. 236).
-
-Another feature of interest to be found on many an eighteenth-century
-house is the sundial. A specimen from High Wycombe is shown in Fig.
-237, but almost every market town, and not a few villages, can produce
-examples as good. Sometimes an appropriate sentiment or an apt
-quotation was inscribed on the dial, but the number of cases where this
-occurs is not quite so great as the literature on the subject would
-lead one to suppose. In those days, when no cheap watches were to be
-had, when indeed a watch was handed down from one generation to another
-as a valuable possession, sundials were of real use, even though they
-told none but sunny hours. “The Art of Dialling” was a recognised
-branch of polite learning, and an intricate subject it was; dealing not
-only with horizontal and vertical dials, but with those which faced
-in some other direction than due south. Dial stones may sometimes be
-seen with one side brought slightly forward, so that the face is not
-quite parallel with the wall in which it is set. This is an expedient
-to make the face look due south, in order to simplify the setting out
-of the lines. Needless to say that when the sun was relied on to tell
-the hour of the day, the introduction of “Summer time” would have been
-impossible; for the power to set back the shadow on the dial, as it was
-set back on that of Ahaz, has never been given to man.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 235.--Seventeenth-Century Date-Stones.
-
-      1. Bulwick, Northamptonshire.
-      2. Drayton, Leicestershire.
-      3. Moulton, Northamptonshire.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 236.--Date-Stone from Amersham,
-  Buckinghamshire.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 237.--Sundial from High Wycombe,
-  Buckinghamshire.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 238.--GATE-PIERS AT CANONS ASHBY,
-  NORTHAMPTONSHIRE.
-
-      Drawn by H. Inigo Triggs.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 239.--Wooden Gates, Canons Ashby.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 240.--Design for Temple Bar, London, by
-  Inigo Jones, 1636.
-
-      From the Burlington-Devonshire Collection at the R.I.B.A.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 241.--Drawing of Gateway by Inigo Jones.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 242.--Gate-Piers at Coleshill, Berkshire.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 243.--Gate-Piers at St John’s College,
-  Cambridge.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 244.--Gate-Pier at Hampton Court.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 245.--GATEWAY AT BURLEY-ON-THE HILL,
-  RUTLAND.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 246.--Lion Lodge, Ince Blundell,
-  Lancashire.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 247.--Gateway at Castor, Northamptonshire.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 248.--Gate-Piers at Rundhurst, Sussex.
-
-      J. A. Gotch, _del._]
-
-From the earliest days it had been customary to give importance to the
-entrance of a house. When means of defence were a necessity, the access
-was through a portion of the main building, and so into a courtyard.
-The portal was flanked with turrets which at first were devised for its
-protection, but in later times were retained as handsome architectural
-features. Then came the period when defence was no longer necessary,
-and the forecourt was merely surrounded by a wall. Access to this
-court was generally obtained through a gate-house, and Elizabethan and
-Jacobean houses have innumerable examples of these charming buildings.
-In the smaller houses an archway replaced the gate-house, and in
-course of time the archway gave place to gate-piers. But through all
-the changes, the desire to give emphasis to the entrance remained,
-and every house with architectural pretensions had gate-piers more
-or less handsome. At Canons Ashby, in Northamptonshire, there are
-several good types (Fig. 238); those between the green court and the
-park have a Jacobean flavour about them, while those at the bottom
-of the garden are surmounted by the family crest in the shape of a
-demi-lion holding a sphere. The gates which formerly hung between these
-piers (Fig. 239) are probably the earliest example of garden gates in
-wood which survive, but they are so unconstructional in design that
-they threatened to fall to pieces, and were replaced by something
-plainer, but more convenient. Among the drawings by Jones and Webb
-are many of gateways, some rich in appearance, and some quite plain.
-The finest which remains is the well-known York water-gate at the
-foot of Buckingham Street (Fig. 35). There are some careful drawings
-of this by Webb in the Burlington-Devonshire collection at the Royal
-Institute of British Architects. In the same collection is a design
-for Temple Bar by Jones (Fig. 240), never carried out; a drawing of
-the constructional brickwork for the same, signed by him and dated
-1638; and a drawing by Webb dated 1636. The two large circular panels
-represent “Lætitia Publica” and “Hylaritas Publica.” If this design
-had been carried out, there would have been a grim irony in the custom
-of exhibiting rebels’ heads just above roundels of such cheerful
-intention. Among the numerous designs for gateways is the original by
-Jones of the little doorway which was once at Beaufort House, Chelsea,
-but is now at Chiswick, and an unnamed example illustrated in Fig.
-241. By the same master, in all probability, are the splendid piers
-at Coleshill, in Berkshire (Fig. 242). Next in order of date are the
-gate-piers at Thorpe Hall, in Northamptonshire, by John Webb, shown
-in Fig. 50, and shortly after them is the fine series at Hamstead
-Marshall, of which some have already been illustrated in Figs. 110,
-111. These bring us down to the time of Wren, and at Hampton Court is
-the lordly pier shown in Fig. 244. At St John’s College, Cambridge, the
-piers shown in Fig. 243 form part of the bridge built between 1696 and
-1712. They perpetuate to some extent the feeling of Tudor work in the
-rose, the portcullis, and the heraldic animals on their summits. All
-the large houses of the early eighteenth century, and many of the
-small ones, had noteworthy gates and gate-piers. There are hundreds of
-examples up and down the country, and that at Burley-on-the-Hill, near
-Oakham (Fig. 245), is typical of the larger kind. This treatment, with
-lofty stone piers and iron gates of more or less elaborate design, is
-more frequent than that adopted at Ince Blundell Hall, in Lancashire,
-where an archway forms the main entrance, and is flanked on each side
-by a length of wall containing gates for foot traffic (Fig. 246).
-Many smaller examples might be cited, but their general effect can
-be gathered from the three illustrations in Figs. 247, 249, and 250,
-one of which is at a house at Castor, in Northamptonshire, another
-at a little house in Barrow Gurney, Somersetshire, and the third at
-one of the delightful houses in the Close at Salisbury. They are all
-quite unpretentious, but they impart a pleasant amount of interest and
-a certain degree of dignity to the houses which they serve. Another
-simple example is taken from a derelict house at Rundhurst, in Sussex
-(Fig. 248), and at Uffington, in Lincolnshire, is the more important
-example in Fig. 251, one of a pair of stone piers which support some
-good iron gates, through which, standing on the village road, a glimpse
-of the hall gardens can be obtained.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 249.--Gateway at Barrow Gurney, Somerset.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 250.--Gateway in the Close, Salisbury.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 251.--Gate-Pier at Uffington, near
-  Stamford.
-
-      J. A. Gotch, _del._]
-
-The tendency being, as already pointed out, towards a plain treatment
-of the exterior, largely owing to the substitution of sash-windows
-for mullioned, some amount of relief was imparted by a rich treatment
-of the principal door, but there came a time when even this modicum
-of decoration was abandoned, and the exterior of a house was dealt
-with on purely utilitarian principles, the necessary openings being
-provided, but devoid of any attempt at ornament. But before this last
-stage of imaginative poverty, or inertia maybe, was reached, doorways
-were provided which gave a touch of fancy to an otherwise bald front.
-The form of circular hood, supported by carved brackets and filled with
-a fluted cove, usually described as a shell, is a common feature of
-the work of the end of the seventeenth century and twenty years later.
-An example from Castle Combe, in Wiltshire, is shown in Fig. 252. The
-centre from which the flutings radiate is here occupied by a small
-shield of arms. There is a rather plainer rendering of the same idea
-at Oundle, in Northamptonshire (Fig. 253). Another rich form of hood,
-with straight outlines, may still be found in out-of-the-way streets
-and lanes in London, where the necessity for radical changes has not
-yet arisen. A simple form of this idea is shown in Fig. 257, where
-one hood covers two contiguous doorways. A treatment very commonly
-adopted was that shown in the example from York (Fig. 255), where
-the circular-headed doorway is covered with a pediment supported by
-pilasters; the semicircular space over the door is filled with a
-fanlight divided by thick bars. In this case the bars are simple in
-form, but they were often curved into curious patterns, surprising
-in their variety, and suggesting that the designers of the time had
-no lack of ingenuity had circumstances allowed them to display it.
-The extinguisher to the left of the doorway should be noted. It is a
-reminder of the times when there was no public lighting of the streets,
-when indeed the casual illumination from shops and from houses, private
-and public, was of the feeblest, and citizens had to find their way
-home through thoroughfares where no scavenger was employed, by the
-light of torches, which they extinguished as they entered their
-houses.[82]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 252.--DOORWAY AT CASTLE COMBE,
-  WILTSHIRE.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 253.--Doorway at Oundle, Northamptonshire.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 254.--Doorway in Mark Lane, London.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 255.--A Doorway in York.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 256.--Doorways at Norwich.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 257.--Nos. 16 and 18 Fournier Street,
-  London.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 258.--Door, 22 Buckingham Street, Strand.]
-
-Of the same type as the last is the doorway at No. 33 Mark Lane,
-London (Fig. 254), but it is far more elaborate, and served as the
-entrance to one of the fine private houses which lined Mark Lane, but
-which now are utilised as offices, if by chance they have escaped the
-wholesale demolition and rebuilding which expanding commerce entails.
-Another good example is to be seen in Buckingham Street, Strand (Fig.
-258). Of later date is the double porch at Norwich (Fig. 256), which is
-simple and dignified, and will so remain as long as the two occupants
-are of the same mind as to the colour it should be painted. It will
-be noticed that in all these examples the doorway is the only feature
-of interest; the surrounding work is quite plain. At the Stationers’
-Hall, in London (Fig. 259), we get a still later treatment, dating from
-the year 1800, when Robert Mylne cased the building with stone. The
-iron standards were probably devised to carry lamps, which shed enough
-light to help incomers up the steps; but all things are relative, and
-doubtless, at the time, two oil lamps were considered a brilliant
-illumination.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 259.--Doorway at Stationers’ Hall, London.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 260.--House at Yarmouth.]
-
-Here and there in old towns are to be found two-storied porches
-projecting from the face of a house like that at Yarmouth (Fig. 260),
-which is the central feature of a front rather more elaborately
-treated than usual. In this case the porch stands on its own ground,
-but occasionally porches were built over part of the pavement, and
-the public traffic passed through them. It would be impossible for a
-private owner to take such liberty in the present day, when plans have
-to be submitted to the local council; but in those far-off times men
-of influence did many things which nobody was bold enough to stop; and
-while heartily agreeing that private interests must be subordinated to
-public, we may, perhaps, indulge in feelings of secret gratification
-that among our ancestors individuality had more play than is possible
-in these well ordered times. Another picturesque but, strictly
-speaking, intolerable effort at design is to be seen at The Martins,
-Chipping Campden (Fig. 261). The great truncated corner pilaster, the
-porch with its cornice running into the window, can be defended on no
-grounds save that there they are. But so imperfect is our nature that
-this bit of haphazard composition gives more pleasure than many a more
-correct attempt at design; a pleasure allied, perhaps, to that cynical
-satisfaction we experience in watching shortcomings in our friends from
-which we ourselves are free.
-
-The ironwork of the early eighteenth century is one of its most
-remarkable productions. In England ironwork design seems to have burst
-suddenly into full splendour, without any gradual preparation. There
-are no elaborate specimens to be found throughout the seventeenth
-century until its close, nor are there any drawings by Thorpe,
-Smithson, Jones, or Webb, which lead one to suppose that they treated
-ironwork in any but the simplest way. But with the advent in 1689 of
-Jean Tijou, a native of France, who was probably brought over from
-the Netherlands by Queen Mary, consort of William III., the whole
-aspect was changed, and a school of clever blacksmiths grew up who
-filled the country, and more especially London and its suburbs, with
-beautiful bits of design in gates, fences, sign-boards, mace-holders
-in churches, balustrades of staircases, screens, and other objects
-where iron could be employed. Their work is marked by great judgment
-in varying the sizes of the iron bars and scrolls, by the variety and
-elaboration of the design, and by the judicious introduction of thin
-sheet iron, hammered and modelled into foliage or some heraldic device.
-The craftsmen seem to have known exactly how to handle their material
-so as to combine strength with lightness, vigour with delicacy, the
-open effect of scroll-work with the solid effect of foliage. The due
-mixture of the curved line with the straight, the growth of one from
-the other, the repetition of straight lines in suitable positions,
-all seem to have come to them by intuition which seldom erred. Of the
-immense amount of work which still survives, the proportion of weak,
-unmeaning, or ill-adapted design is infinitesimal. Something, no doubt,
-they owed to France, but they worked largely on their own lines, and
-established a school of design which is essentially English.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 261.--The Martins, Chipping Campden, 1714.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 262.--Part of Iron Screen, Hampton Court
-  Palace.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 263.--Iron Gateway, Stoneleigh Abbey,
-  Warwickshire.]
-
-Tijou worked for Queen Mary at Hampton Court, where he placed some of
-the richest screens and gates which the country can boast. A portion
-of his work is illustrated in Fig. 262. He also executed some splendid
-ironwork at Chatsworth, Burghley, and St Paul’s, London. The balustrade
-to the king’s staircase at Hampton Court (Fig. 264) may also in all
-probability be assigned to him. He must have had assistants, among whom
-Huntingdon Shaw, of Nottingham, has been reckoned the chief, and indeed
-the actual work on the screens at Hampton Court has been claimed as
-his; but recent investigations show conclusively that the claim cannot
-be sustained.[83] Another of Tijou’s assistants was Robert Bakewell,
-who settled in Derby and was widely employed in the Midlands. To him,
-perhaps, we owe the gates at Stoneleigh Abbey, illustrated in Fig. 263,
-although tradition says that these were brought here from Watergate, a
-dismantled mansion beyond Southam.[84] The ironwork in and round London
-may be largely attributed to Thomas Robinson and his successors, and
-it would appear that skilful smiths settled in different centres in
-England, round which they influenced the work over a wide area. Bristol
-was the home of such a man, William Edney by name, and that he was an
-accomplished craftsman is proved by the magnificent gates at St Mary
-Redcliffe (Fig. 265), which date from 1710.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 264.--Balustrade to the King’s Staircase,
-  Hampton Court.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 265.--IRON GATES AT ST MARY REDCLIFFE,
-  BRISTOL.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 266.--Gateway formerly at Quenby Hall,
-  Leicestershire.
-
-      Museum, Leicester.]
-
-Examples without number could be produced of English ironwork of this
-period, but space forbids any but a few specimens being cited. There
-was a splendid gateway at Quenby Hall, Leicestershire, with elaborate
-iron piers, now in front of the museum at Leicester (Fig. 266).[85]
-The four examples shown in Figs. 268–271 are of far simpler design,
-but they are worth careful study, and are typical of the ordinary work
-of the time. In the gate from Acton the solid work is aptly introduced
-and gives it richness and importance; the others exhibit a judicious
-combination of simplicity and richness which is quite admirable. Indeed
-the ironwork of the early part of the eighteenth century has never been
-bettered either in design or execution.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 267.--Lead Cistern in the possession of Mr
-  L. A. Shuffrey.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 268.--Gate at Elm Hall, Snaresbrook.
-
-      A. H. Ough, _del._]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 269.--Gate at Acton, now demolished.
-
-      Launcelot Fedder, _del._]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 270.--Gate at Lawn House, Woodford Road, London.
-
-      A. H. Ough, _del._]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 271.--Gate at Romford Road, Stratford,
-  near London.
-
-      G. G. Poston, _del._]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 272.--Lead Rain-Water Head, High Street,
-  Birmingham.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 273.--Lead Rain-Water Head at the
-  Aylesford Hotel, Warwick.]
-
-Ornamental leadwork was a characteristic feature of English houses as
-early as the time of Elizabeth, and many beautiful rain-water heads
-of that period still survive. They had worthy successors all through
-the seventeenth century and well into the eighteenth. Some of the
-rain-water heads at St John’s College, Oxford, of the time of Charles
-I., are splendid things of their kind. Many houses built during the
-next hundred years retain fine examples of similar features (Fig.
-272), and indeed, as long as it was necessary to fashion such things
-by hand, the craftsman imparted character to his work even if it
-was of a simple and unobtrusive kind (Fig. 273); but with the advent of
-the speculative builder, the number of such things required, and the
-necessity of a rapid and cheap supply, led to more expeditious methods,
-and with the advent of cast-iron heads a general level of dullness
-and monotony was reached. The scope of lead ornament was necessarily
-restricted, it was only here and there that it was applicable; the
-other direction in which it was largely used was in cisterns or
-troughs of which examples occasionally occur, but lead being always a
-marketable commodity, most of these objects, when once out of use, were
-sold for melting and re-use. Some good examples dated 1728, 1714 and
-1755 are shown in Figs. 267, 274.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 274.--Two Examples of Lead Cisterns.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 275.--THE STAIRCASE, KING’S WESTON,
-  GLOUCESTERSHIRE.]
-
-The English craftsman has always been able to do good work when he has
-had the opportunity. Even during the period when house design may be
-held to be void of interest, there are numberless examples of fittings,
-or furniture, or household articles which show his skill, and if a free
-and reasonable view of design is maintained, there is every prospect of
-his doing as good work in the future as he has done in the past.
-
-
-
-
-                                  XI
-
-                INTERNAL FEATURES (EIGHTEENTH CENTURY)
-
-
-The internal decoration of houses of the seventeenth century has
-already been described, and incidentally a considerable number of
-examples have been given of the treatment of later houses; but it
-is desirable to treat the subject a little more fully than has been
-possible in former chapters.
-
-In entering an eighteenth-century house the visitor found himself
-in a large vestibule or hall--not the old-fashioned hall of the
-early seventeenth century, which was itself one of the principal
-living-rooms, but a hall which was merely a vestibule or ante-room
-leading to the living-rooms. Sometimes it had a fireplace, but
-sometimes not; in either case it was not regarded as a room for
-constant use. In houses of the middle size it contained the staircase,
-and the same held good in many of larger size; but in the largest the
-hall was frequently the most striking apartment in the house, as for
-instance at Houghton (Fig. 174) and Prior Park (Fig. 182).
-
-The staircases were always handsomely treated. As a rule they were of
-wood, but a few instances occur of marble steps and balustrades, and
-of stone steps with iron balustrades. The typical English staircase
-is of wood, with turned wood balusters. For a short time during the
-seventeenth century foliated balustrades had been the fashion (see
-Figs. 80–82), but towards its close the turned baluster reasserted
-itself. Massive handrails and solid strings were still retained, as
-in the example from the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford (Fig. 277); and many
-examples of simple staircases of this type are to be found in the
-Temple, London, and the surrounding neighbourhood.
-
-An important development in design occurred when the old-fashioned
-solid string was abandoned, and the balusters rested upon the steps
-themselves. This change took place about the beginning of the
-eighteenth century, and there is an early example at King’s Weston,
-in Gloucestershire (Fig. 275). The steps are very deep from back to
-front, so much so that each step overlaps the second one above it.
-The nosings are carried along the end of every step and returned
-back to the wall under the step above; the bottom edge of this is
-finished with a moulding which returns and rests on the nosing of the
-step below. A very similar treatment is adopted at Boughton House,
-in Northamptonshire (Fig. 276), but here the edge of the soffit has
-a moulding like the nosing, but reversed: the junction of the two is
-masked by a wood block. These blocks are all painted with arms of the
-Montagus and their alliances, which prompted Horace Walpole to inquire
-whether the chief staircase at Boughton was intended for the “descent
-of the Montagus.” Another point to be noticed in the King’s Weston
-example is that the two bottom steps are carried out sideways beyond
-the others and rounded off with a bold sweep, and that the handrail
-is wreathed round instead of finishing against a large newel. This
-is a treatment which only became possible on the abandonment of the
-old-fashioned newels and strings.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 276.--Staircase at Boughton House,
-  Northamptonshire.
-
-      J. A. Gotch, _del._]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 277.--Staircase, Ashmolean, Oxford.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 278.--Staircase in a House in Queen
-  Street, Salisbury.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 279.--Staircase at Melton Constable,
-  Norfolk.]
-
-A variation of the treatment adopted at Boughton may be seen in an old
-house in Salisbury (Fig. 278), where the nosings are still carried back
-some distance, but are supported by carved brackets. It will be seen
-that the old stout newels have been replaced by small columns slightly
-larger than the balusters, and that the handrail is continuous, being
-bent upwards in a ramp where it has suddenly to attain a higher level.
-It is curved at the bottom in a large sweep similar to those at Kings
-Weston. At Melton Constable (Fig. 279) the same ideas are adopted, but
-here the risers of the stairs are panelled. It is clear from this
-that no stair carpets were contemplated, a point which is emphasised
-elsewhere by the fact that the landings and treads were often inlaid
-with different woods cut into patterns. Most of the staircases of the
-time were broad and of easy gradient, the balusters were short, and
-were either turned in graceful outlines or were twisted as at Melton
-Constable. At Denham Place, in Buckinghamshire (Fig. 280), the effect
-is quite satisfactory, although the stairs are narrower and steeper
-than usual, and the balusters are longer. This effect is obtained by
-the care bestowed upon the proportion and outline of the balusters.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 280.--Staircase at Denham Place,
-  Buckinghamshire.]
-
-Towards the close of the eighteenth century another form of staircase
-came into vogue. This consisted of a continuous flight of stone
-steps, often oval in plan, leading from floor to floor in one sweep.
-Each step rested on that below, and one of its ends was built into the
-wall, thereby obviating the necessity of any expedient for supporting
-the other end. By this means a free space was obtained beneath the
-staircase. The general effect, although light and sometimes graceful,
-was a little cold and meagre; but it was quite in character with the
-rather severe schemes of decoration prevalent at the time (Fig. 281).
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 281.--Staircase at No. 35 Lincoln’s Inn
-  Fields.]
-
-In the larger houses much attention was bestowed upon the doorways:
-there is a good example at Godmersham Park, in Kent (Fig. 282), where
-the broken pediment affords space for the central feature of a design
-modelled in high relief. As here, so in many other instances, the door
-is of mahogany and the surrounding woodwork is painted white. The
-example from Honington Hall, in Warwickshire (Fig. 283), not only shows
-an important doorway, but also the domed and coffered ceiling of a
-lofty room, as well as walls with panels of plaster, and large pendants
-of fruit and birds in the manner of Grinling Gibbons. In houses of the
-early part of the eighteenth century there was often one room occupying
-two stories in height; sometimes it was the hall, sometimes, as in this
-case, a saloon or drawing-room.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 282.--Doorway at Godmersham Park, Kent.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 283.--HONINGTON HALL,
-  WARWICKSHIRE.]
-
-In smaller houses were such doorways as that at Bourdon House, London
-(Fig. 284), where there is carving enough to impart interest to the
-design without over-weighting it; and at Seckford Hall, in Suffolk,
-is a simple but effective treatment (Fig. 285) which is well within
-the compass of an ordinary joiner. A great variety of effect can be
-obtained at small cost by dint of a little thought and a determination
-not to be too much bound by correct precedents. It is one of the
-failings of the ordinary eighteenth-century designer that he feared to
-depart from the patterns published in books.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 284.--Doorway at Bourdon House, Mayfair,
-  London.]
-
-Very great changes in the manner of treating the walls of a room
-occurred during the course of the century. At first they were panelled
-with wood--not with the small panels of Jacobean times, but with large
-panels surrounded by bold mouldings, such as those at Denham Place
-(Fig. 287). Here the mouldings are enriched with carving, which adds
-considerable richness, but as a rule the mouldings were plain; various
-examples have already been given in Figs. 122, 126, 135, 139. There
-was usually a low dado with long horizontal panels, and above the dado
-rail were lofty vertical panels reaching up to a massive cornice. The
-effect is always simple and dignified, whether the material is oak
-or painted deal. Of course the panels very much restrict the freedom
-of arrangement of pictures, but in those days pictures were not so
-plentiful as they became later, prints were few, and so were the
-amateur artists who bestow the fruit of their elegant leisure upon
-their friends. The panels therefore hampered nobody, and they were
-in themselves a sufficient decoration. Family portraits or notable
-pictures were sometimes framed into them as part of the scheme.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 285.--Head of a Doorway, Seckford Hall,
-  Suffolk.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 286.--Panelling in the Audit Room, Boughton House,
-     Northamptonshire.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 287.--THE LIBRARY, DENHAM PLACE,
-  BUCKINGHAMSHIRE.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 288.--STONELEIGH ABBEY,
-  WARWICKSHIRE. THE SALOON, BY SMITH OF WARWICK.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 289.--House in Queen Square, Bath.]
-
-The backgrounds of engravings published during the first half of
-the eighteenth century often show these large panels, as well as
-sash-windows with stout bars. They seem to harmonise with the flowing
-wigs, the wide coat skirts and knee-breeches of the actors in the
-incidents which the prints are intended to record.
-
-An unusual form of panelling, but one which is both cheap and
-effective, is to be seen in the audit room at Boughton House (Fig.
-286). It consists of boards nailed vertically to the wall, having the
-joints covered with a moulding; below is a skirting, and above is a
-frieze and cornice.
-
-Wood panelling was gradually superseded by panels formed in plaster on
-the plastered walls. Gibb’s drawings have already afforded examples of
-this treatment (Figs. 166–169), and any book of the eighteenth century
-on house design will supply others. Stoneleigh Abbey, Kenilworth, has
-panels of unusual richness (Fig. 288), and a house in Queen Square,
-Bath, by one of the Woods, has some delicately modelled panels on the
-staircase (Fig. 289). The drawback to this method of decoration is
-that, being rather ambitious in aim, it challenges criticism much more
-definitely than does simple panelling. It is conceivable that one
-eventually might tire of seeing the same youth piping to the same old
-man, and the same lady for ever playing the same organ without looking
-at her notes.
-
-But a more radical change in wall decoration was to come in the shape
-of wall-papers. The early history of this method of adorning rooms
-has not been fully explored, but it seems clear that already in the
-seventeenth century sheets of paper covered with stencilled patterns
-had been pasted on to walls, or perhaps on to the panels into which
-they were divided. This was a laborious and by no means cheap process,
-but it contained the germ of the procedure which is so widely adopted
-to-day. Another and even more effective step was taken when Chinese
-papers were introduced (Fig. 290). These papers consisted of rolls,
-each printed with a portion of a large design, which required some
-five or six pieces to complete it. It was probably of such sets that
-the vivacious Lady Mary Wortley Montague, most celebrated of blue
-stockings, wrote to her daughter from Louvere, in 1749, to say, “I have
-heard the fame of paper hangings, and had some thoughts of sending for
-a suite, but was informed that they were as dear as damask is here,
-which put an end to my curiosity.” In some cases curiosity outweighed
-thriftiness, and the suites still remain in a few old houses; here
-and there some of the original rolls still exist, rolls which for
-some reason or other were not used, and which have luckily escaped
-destruction. Chinese papers became fashionable, and it is not difficult
-to imagine the process of evolution from rolls--each bearing part of a
-large design either of trees and flowers, or of a landscape or a figure
-subject, after the manner of tapestry--to other rolls all printed alike
-and forming a continuous pattern, with the parts duly repeated, which
-should cover the whole walls with decoration of a sort. The advantages
-of the new method were obvious: it was cheap; and although at first
-the paper was applied to canvas nailed to battens on the wall, yet
-eventually it was placed on the wall itself, and thus did away with
-the spaces between the walls and the panelling or tapestry, where dirt
-or spiders or more noxious insects could harbour; rough surfaces were
-rendered smooth, joints between wood frames and stone or brick walls
-were filled with plaster, and draughts were lessened. Most of these
-advantages were obtained by plastered walls ornamented with panels,
-but plain surfaces covered with paper were cheaper, and gave greater
-scope for the unrestricted hanging of pictures and prints as the taste
-for such things developed. Then, again, more and more people lived in
-hired houses, and with every fresh tenant new papers could readily be
-pasted over the old. There was no idea in those days of stripping off
-the previous papers; and in dealing with ancient houses as many as
-twenty layers of paper have sometimes been found. But our notions of
-sanitation have improved, and in the present day everything is removed
-down to the plaster before the new paper is hung.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 290.--A Chinese Paper, Ramsbury,
-  Wiltshire.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 291.--TAPESTRY: SUBJECT, VULCAN AND VENUS.
-  WOVEN AT MORTLAKE, _circa_ 1620.
-
-      In the Victoria and Albert Museum.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 292.--Chimney-Piece in the Mayor’s
-  Parlour, The Town Hall, South Molton, Devonshire.]
-
-The Chinese papers, as already observed, had some affinity in
-their subjects to tapestry, and tapestry had been a favourite means
-of covering walls from very early times (Figs. 291, 293). In the
-seventeenth century it was much in vogue among the rich, both on the
-Continent and in England, and a noble form of decoration it is. It
-would be beside the mark to recount the history of tapestry weaving at
-any length, but it is of interest to know that during the seventeenth
-century the English factory at Mortlake was the most renowned in the
-world, and produced some of the finest tapestries that have come down
-to us. The factory was founded in 1619 by James I., and with it are
-connected the names of two families who have already been mentioned
-in these pages. The first was that of the Cranes, the other the
-Montagus.[86] Sir Francis Crane, who built a house at Stoke Bruerne,
-in Northamptonshire (see pp. 174, 176), managed the factory for many
-years on behalf of the king, and made a considerable fortune. The
-factory flourished under James I. and Charles I., but declined under
-the Commonwealth. After the Restoration new vigour was imparted to
-it; it passed from the direct patronage of the king and was acquired
-in 1674 by the Montagus, whose house at Boughton (see pp. 196–199)
-retains many splendid examples from its looms. But by this time the
-factory at Gobelins was producing work as fine as that at Mortlake, if
-not finer, and this circumstance, together with the declining taste
-for tapestries, brought the Mortlake venture to an end in 1703.[87]
-Tapestries were at all times chiefly for the wealthy, but early in the
-eighteenth century they began to go out of fashion, and were superseded
-by the other modes of decoration already described.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 293.--THE TAPESTRY DRAWING-ROOM, POWIS
-  CASTLE, MONTGOMERY.]
-
-At the beginning of the eighteenth century fireplaces were, as a rule,
-still contrived for the burning of wood logs. They were wide and deep,
-and were generally surrounded by a very bold moulding of stone or
-marble, like that in the Town Hall at South Molton (Fig. 292). The
-panelling of the room was often brought up to the marble, and continued
-above it with an additional richness over the fireplace; but sometimes
-there was a special margin provided round the large moulding, as in the
-case of South Molton. Occasionally it was found convenient to place the
-fireplace in a corner of the room, which led to some such ingenious
-treatment as that in Fig. 294, which is from a room at Boughton House.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 294.--Corner Fireplace at Boughton House.]
-
-Open fireplaces like these required fire-dogs on which to place the
-logs for the increase of the draught, and a great variety of such
-dogs or andirons were produced, varying in character from rich and
-admirably modelled specimens like that in the queen’s guard chamber
-at Hampton Court (Fig. 295), down to the simplest forms. It was also
-necessary to have fire-backs of cast iron to prevent the fire from
-eating away the brickwork against which it was piled. The various
-iron works in Sussex and elsewhere produced a great quantity of these
-backs of all degrees of elaboration. The ornament most frequently
-adopted was a shield of arms, either those of the sovereign, or those
-of the family who usually warmed themselves at the fire; but the range
-of design was considerable, and included floral and figure subjects
-(Figs. 296–298), as well as patterns of extreme simplicity. Other
-accessories were tongs, bellows, and sometimes a fire shovel. The tongs
-were sufficiently stout to enable the logs to be handled; the bellows
-produced life in an almost dead fire with wonderful celerity; the
-shovel was used to bank up the ashes, which were allowed to accumulate
-in a great heap, and thereby preserved warmth during the night.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 295.--Fire-Dog at Hampton Court, in the
-  Queen’s Guard Chamber.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 296.--Fire-Back and Dogs, Sutton Place.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 297.--Fire-Basket at Penshurst, Kent.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 298.--Jamb of Fireplace, Abbot’s Hall,
-  Battle Abbey, Sussex.]
-
-But early in the eighteenth century a rapid change took place in the
-kind of fuel consumed, and coal superseded wood. Sea-coal, that is
-sea-borne coal, had been in occasional use for many years; now it
-was to become universal. The change is curiously indicated in some
-inventories of 1720, made for one “Francis Hawes, of London, Esq.,
-one of the late directors of the South Sea Company.” When that great
-bubble burst Francis Hawes had to be sold up, and in consequence a
-complete statement of his affairs had to be prepared. It includes three
-inventories, two of manor-houses in the country, and one of a house in
-Winchester Street, London. In regard to the point under consideration,
-some of the rooms, especially the bedrooms, had iron hearths, dogs,
-tongs, bellows, and fire shovels, which were requisite for the
-old-fashioned wood fires; others, including the parlours and hall, had
-the grates, shovels, tongs, pokers, and fenders requisite for coal
-fires.
-
-So, too, had the servants’ hall, whereas the drawing-room had an open
-fire. We may, therefore, conclude that the rooms in most frequent use
-had the newer contrivances, the most noteworthy of which were the
-grates, the pokers (for breaking the coal, and quite unnecessary with
-a wood fire), and the fenders. It is clear that in 1720 Francis Hawes
-had only partially adopted coal as his fuel, but the use of it quickly
-spread, and henceforward we find grates of various kinds in common use.
-Some of these were in effect baskets to hold the coal (Fig. 297), and
-they were placed in the old openings. Others were so large as to hold
-either wood or coal, an intermediate step of which there is an example
-at Dyrham, in Gloucestershire. In later years the basket grates gave
-way to cast-iron grates which filled the whole width of the recess,
-and were built in as fixtures (Figs. 299, 300). Some of the patterns
-were delicately modelled and charmingly designed, but as heat-producers
-these grates were crude to a degree. They merely held the coal. No
-attempt was made to regulate its consumption, or to direct its heat
-into the room; a large proportion went up the chimney, and chimneys
-were still built of the generous dimensions which had been customary
-in the days of wood fires. These generous dimensions were a length of
-four or five feet by a width of two or three at the base, gradually
-diminishing towards the outlet above the roof. Where the flues passed
-through the bedrooms they occupied a large amount of space, but
-generally left room at the sides for those deep cupboards which are
-often to be found in old houses. The only way to sweep such enormous
-shafts was for somebody to clamber up them with a brush. This dirty and
-dangerous task was usually imposed upon the chimney sweep’s boy, until
-it was prohibited by legislation, but modern fires have flues of such
-small size as not to admit the most diminutive boy.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 299.--Fire-Grate at Kew Palace.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 300.--Fire-Grate at Kew Palace.]
-
-When huge fires were customary, they warmed the huge flues above them,
-and down-draughts were prevented; but when the same huge flues were
-warmed only by a basketful of coal, there was no longer the same upward
-draught, and the fires began to smoke. To remedy this, new fireplaces
-were made rather smaller, and the flues were slightly contracted;
-but the remedy was not effectual, and the next step, taken towards
-the end of the eighteenth century, was to fill up the large opening,
-and thereby restrict the access of air to the space occupied by the
-fire, and thus came into being the first of our modern fire-grates,
-which carry no suggestion with them of the ancient open fire on the
-hearth. This form of grate was an improvement, but it was wasteful
-and inefficient, and was at length superseded by the numerous modern
-contrivances which minimise the consumption of fuel, and direct more of
-the heat into the room and less up the flue. It would be rash to say
-that they have done away with smoky chimneys, but at any rate they have
-made them the exception rather than the rule.
-
-The inventories of Francis Hawes are interesting in other ways than
-in marking the change from the ancient wood fires to the modern coal
-fires: they tell us of the manner in which his rooms were adorned and
-furnished. It would be outside the scope of the present inquiry to
-enter into these details at any length, but a few of the words thus
-spoken direct from the past may be worth listening to. The parlours
-of the London house were apparently panelled or otherwise decorated
-with some fixed material, since no mention is made of hangings. They
-had chimney-glasses, sconces of brass or glass, and curtains to the
-windows: of furniture one had two card-tables, ten red Turkey-leather
-chairs, a leather screen, sixteen pictures, and a painted cloth for
-the floor--not a very elaborate furnishing. The other parlour had a
-pier glass and marble slab, a scrutoire, six cane chairs, two Dutch
-chairs, a leather dressing-chair, two tables, a small nest of drawers,
-eight pictures, and a small carpet. The effect must have been rather
-bare according to modern standards, but these have gone to the other
-extreme, with the result that many rooms are now overcrowded with
-furniture. Upstairs one of the rooms must have been a gallery, for
-it had no chairs, but was full of curios and _objets d’art_. The
-bedrooms of all the houses were also sparsely furnished. They nearly
-all had large bedsteads, evidently four-posters, with furniture of
-different kinds, camlet lined with silk, yellow mohair, green or
-crimson harratine, green serge, and other materials. The walls were
-hung in most cases with materials of the same kind, blue china, crimson
-harratine, tapestry, mohair, or Irish stitch and Dutch matting. There
-were curtains to the windows. One of the smaller bedrooms had but a
-table and dressing-glass, a couple of chairs and a box; another had
-a “bewreau” and a card-table in addition. The larger ones had two
-tables, half a dozen chairs, stools, a nest of drawers, a bookcase, and
-a number of pictures. It is noteworthy how seldom mention is made of
-a basin or even of a dressing-table with a glass. This confirms what
-has already been indicated--that our ancestors of those days spent but
-little time upon their toilet. Very few rooms had a carpet but nearly
-every one had a hand-bell, some had as many as four.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 301.--Chimney-Piece in the George Inn,
-  Winchester.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 302.--Chimney-Piece in the Deanery, Wells.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 303.--Design for a Chimney-Piece, by
-  Flaxman.
-
-      From the Ionides Collection in the V. and A. M.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 304.--Marble Chimney-Piece, 60 Carey
-  Street, London.]
-
-But to return to the question of fireplaces, and more particularly
-to the chimney-pieces which surrounded them. The method adopted in
-William III.’s time of having merely a bold moulding round the opening,
-tended to establish the practice of having chimney-pieces of one
-stage in height instead of two. In Jacobean time most of the large
-chimney-pieces reached from the floor to the ceiling; so they did in
-the mid-seventeenth century under Inigo Jones and John Webb, although
-a few of their designs show one stage only. When the “Designs of Inigo
-Jones” were published by Kent in 1727, they gave an impetus again to
-the two-stage type, such as that shown in Fig. 170; but smaller and
-less pretentious patterns were frequently adopted, of which a typical
-example is shown in Fig. 301; here a marble slab surrounds the opening,
-and is in its turn surrounded by a small wood moulding and surmounted
-by a flat frieze and a cornice which forms the mantel shelf. This type
-held the field all through the eighteenth century, sometimes plain,
-sometimes enriched, as in the example from the Deanery at Wells (Fig.
-302). A variation, all in marble, is shown in Fig. 304, from a house in
-Carey Street.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 305.--Design for a Chimney-Piece at
-  Shardiloes House, 1761, by Robert Adam.
-
-      In the Soane Museum.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 306.--CEILING AT THE LAW COURTS,
-  NORTHAMPTON.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 307.--Ceiling at No. 16 Bishopsgate Street
-  Without, London.
-
-      Now in the Victoria and Albert Museum.]
-
-Under the influence of the brothers Adam, detail of exquisite
-delicacy was introduced, including panels of well-modelled figures.
-This ornament was sometimes carved in marble or wood, but still more
-frequently worked in composition and applied to the woodwork. An
-example by Robert Adam is shown in Fig. 305, and a design by Flaxman in
-Fig. 303.
-
-We have already seen in Chapter V. how the busy ceilings of the
-Jacobean type changed into the coffered ceilings of Inigo Jones and
-Webb, who established a type which held the field, under Wren and his
-successors, well into the eighteenth century. The general tendency was
-to increase the relief of the plasterwork, to imitate nature instead
-of conventionalising it; to work on the same lines which Grinling
-Gibbons was following with his carving in wood. The result was that
-the plasterwork had frequently to be modelled on wire which formed the
-stems of the leaves, and much of it was completely detached from the
-surface of the ceiling which it adorned. A very fine example of this
-treatment is to be seen in the Courts of Justice at Northampton (Fig.
-306).
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 308.--OLD BUCKINGHAM HOUSE. THE STAIRCASE,
-  WITH PAINTED CEILING AND WALLS.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 309.--HAMPTON COURT PALACE. THE GRAND
-  STAIRCASE, WITH PAINTED CEILING AND WALLS.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 310.--Part of a Painted Ceiling, Boughton
-  House.]
-
-Contemporary with this kind of ceiling was a treatment entirely
-different, which was in vogue in great houses during the reigns of
-Charles II., James II., and William and Mary; this was the painting of
-immense plain surfaces with allegorical, mythological, and scriptural
-subjects. Old Buckingham House had a large ceiling of the kind over
-the principal staircase (Fig. 308); and the walls were painted so as
-to produce the effect of architectural perspective. This fashion is
-intimately associated with the name of Verrio, an Italian painter,
-who was brought to England by Charles II. He and his assistant and
-successor Laguerre are the best known of those who worked in this line
-of decoration, for they are immortalised by Pope, who describes how
-in a great house, being summoned “to all the pride of prayer” in the
-chapel--
-
-    “On painted ceilings you devoutly stare
-    Where sprawl the saints of Verrio and Laguerre.”
-
-But there were several other artists engaged by wealthy noblemen to do
-similar work; among them was Cheron at Boughton House, and Lanscroon at
-Drayton, both in Northamptonshire. But Verrio was by far the busiest
-of all, and did a vast amount of work at Windsor, Hampton Court,
-and Burghley House, among other places. Over the grand staircase at
-Hampton Court (Fig. 309) the composition which occupies the ceiling is
-brought down on to the walls. This device was sometimes adopted with
-the view, apparently, of bringing ceiling and walls into one scheme;
-but although the technique is clever, the effect is rather confusing.
-The examples from Boughton House (Figs. 310, 311) show a simpler and
-more intelligible treatment. Evelyn frequently mentions Verrio with
-high commendation, and his work and that of his school is extremely
-clever, and were it more easily seen and with less physical discomfort,
-doubtless it would beget more admiration than it actually does. Verrio
-died in 1707 and Laguerre twenty years later. Their tradition was
-carried on for another ten or twelve years by Sir James Thornhill, but
-it then died out, and painting on ceilings was confined to small panels.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 311.--Part of Ceiling over the Staircase,
-  Boughton House.]
-
-It was chiefly in the larger houses that ornamental ceilings were now
-introduced. In those of ordinary size, and those built on speculation
-to let to tenants, the ceilings were for the most part plain. Where
-design was employed it became less ambitious, and during the second
-quarter of the eighteenth century it produced such comparatively simple
-work as that in a house in Bishopsgate Street Without (Fig. 307), or
-that in the Spenser room at Canons Ashby, in Northamptonshire (Fig.
-312). Cottesbrooke House, in the same county, has some delicate work of
-much the same type (Fig. 313).
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 312.--Part of Ceiling in the Spenser Room,
-  Canons Ashby, Northamptonshire.]
-
-During the last half of the century, where ornament was applied to
-ceilings at all, it partook of the extreme delicacy and refinement
-associated with the name of the brothers Adam. The modelling was in
-low relief, but was done with great care and minuteness, and the flow
-of the thin lines of ornament was studied with close attention. This
-type is exemplified in the ceiling from a house in Wimpole Street (Fig.
-314), and there are many such ceilings left in that neighbourhood,
-especially in Harley Street, which in its early days was inhabited by
-many distinguished people; William Pitt, Viscount Bridport, and Admiral
-Lord Keith did much to shape the history of their time; Allan Ramsay,
-portrait painter to George III., may stand for Art, and James Stuart,
-author of the “Antiquities of Athens,” may represent architecture and
-archæology. At present these streets are more particularly associated
-with the pursuit of medicine; their inhabitants are no less celebrated
-than those of old, but their fame is of a special kind, and those who
-go to consult them on matters of life and death may well be excused
-if they spare no thought for the decoration which covers the ceilings
-above their heads.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 313.--Part of Ceiling, Cottesbrooke Hall,
-  Northants.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 314.--CEILING FROM WIMPOLE STREET, LONDON.]
-
-The work of the latter part of the eighteenth century was so dominated
-by the influence of the Adams that a few further examples of their
-designs may be of interest. In the staircase from a house in Mansfield
-Street (Fig. 315) all superfluous ornament has been eliminated, so much
-so that one almost longs for something less chaste and cold. In some
-moods and to some temperaments Venus is more attractive than Diana.
-But restraint is ever commendable, and restraint marks most of Adam’s
-work. It is present in the doorway at Harewood House (Fig. 316) and in
-the two chimney-pieces, one from Belcombe and one from Bedford Square,
-figured in the illustrations 317, 318. In these it will be noticed that
-overmantels are replaced by designs worked on the wall itself. Their
-interest depends almost entirely upon grace of composition and skill
-in execution, and derives nothing from aptness of association with the
-houses or their occupants. In this respect the ornament differs from
-that of earlier days, when it was usually adapted from the family coat
-of arms; but the time had now come when houses were more often built to
-let to unknown tenants than as homes for particular families. In the
-drawing-room at Kedleston (Fig. 319) the treatment again strikes a note
-of simplicity and severity--a note which is seldom so well maintained
-in the disposition of the pictures and the choice of furniture as it is
-in this case. The ceiling and the great cove beneath it are filled with
-that flowing and delicate ornament which demands great accuracy of line
-and equal care in modelling its low relief.
-
-As time went on this delicate ornament faded away and, except here
-and there, ceilings became merely large unbroken surfaces, save that
-with the introduction of gas-pendants there came the tradesman’s
-centre-flower from which they might depend. This and an equally
-interesting cornice served for years as the principal decoration of
-most houses; the plasterer’s art seemed to have died out. But for some
-time past matters have been improving, and, given the requisite money,
-ceilings can now be devised equal to anything that has been done in the
-past.
-
-Indeed English craftsmen have always been able to produce good work
-when adequately guided. But modern conditions, among which one of the
-most pressing is the supply of an enormous number of cheap houses, are
-adverse to the display of that capacity for design and execution which
-requires some amount of leisure and a great amount of wealth to bring
-it forth.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 315.--Staircase from a House in Mansfield
-  Street.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 316.--Doorway, Harewood House.]
-
-There are indications that after the war a vast number of workmen’s
-dwellings will have to be built, and, moreover, will have to be
-built cheaply. A survey of the domestic architecture of the last
-three hundred years is fruitful of suggestions for this undertaking,
-although it will be one demanding little or no ornament. Such a survey
-points towards a suitable placing of the houses on the site; avoiding
-dreariness and monotony on the one hand, and on the other avoiding
-attempts at the grandiose, and the imposing on posterity a scheme
-too complete in itself to allow of those variations which time will
-inevitably require. It points equally to treating the houses themselves
-with a simplicity corresponding to the simplicity of the requirements.
-It points further to the value of good, sound building. The smaller
-Georgian houses, which we find so charming, furnish admirable
-suggestions. No attempt at actual reproduction need be made; but the
-means which produce the effect in the old houses can be applied to the
-new. These means are simple enough. The general proportion, the size
-and shape of the windows, and the shadow of the eaves will be found on
-examination to be the chief causes of the pleasure which many of the
-old houses arouse.
-
-The past has not only its suggestions, but also its warnings, and
-of these the most obvious is against the impairing of comfort and
-convenience for the sake of appearance. The first canon of utilitarian
-art is that an object should answer its purpose well. It is in availing
-himself of these suggestions, and in profiting by these warnings, that
-the architect is enabled to help his own generation and give pleasure
-to those that come after.
-
-The vast increase in population during the last two hundred years has
-accentuated the division of the course of design into two streams;
-one directed by the highly trained architect, the other by the
-workman trained only in the use of his tools and the knowledge of his
-materials. Could the two streams be brought into one channel they might
-flow on into ideal conditions. But the very complexity of modern life
-has a tendency to resolve itself into the simplicity of specialisation.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 317.--Chimney-Piece at Belcombe.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 318.--Chimney-Piece in the Dining-Room, 25
-  Bedford Square.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 319.--THE DRAWING-ROOM, KEDLESTON HALL,
-  DERBYSHIRE.]
-
-Since the beginning of the eighteenth century the course of domestic
-architecture has been conditioned partly by the nation becoming
-too large and complex to admit of a single expression in national
-architecture; partly by the tendency, common to all the arts, for ideas
-to pass into excess in one direction and into tenuity in the other.
-A wider outlook over the civilised world, a greater knowledge of the
-achievements of foreign countries, led inevitably to the disappearance
-of a truly national style, such as that which we call Gothic. On the
-one hand the homes of the wealthy grew in splendour and in fidelity
-to theories of architecture expounded in books, with the result that
-use and convenience were largely subordinated to grandiose effects. On
-the other hand, richness of architectural thought declined in smaller
-houses through the stages of dignity and comfort down either to a
-consistent plainness of character or one only marked by individual
-caprice. Such caprice, schooled by a study of bygone styles, led to
-the eclectic imitativeness of the nineteenth century. But the last
-twenty years have seen many signs of a new beginning. Based upon actual
-needs, and striving after beautiful expression, domestic architecture
-is slowly progressing on lines characteristically English. Sooner or
-later this movement will accelerate, and will eventually reach heights
-as great as those upon which we now look back with admiration and
-delight. Architecture, like other arts, is immortal; the qualities of
-proportion, ornament, and fitness can never long be disregarded, for no
-building is quite complete which is not beautiful to look upon.
-
-
-
-
-                              APPENDIX I
-
-                            SIR ROGER PRATT
-
-
-The foregoing pages had already passed through the press when the
-contents of the note-books of Sir Roger Pratt were placed at my
-disposal by the courtesy of his descendant, Edward Roger M. Pratt,
-Esq., of Ryston Hall, Norfolk.
-
-Roger Pratt is mentioned in the text (p. 180) as the architect of
-Clarendon House, built by the Lord Chancellor Hyde, and as one of the
-men whom the great fire of London led into the pursuit of architecture.
-But his note-books show him to have been a student and practitioner
-of the art before that event. He was under no necessity to earn his
-own living, as he appears to have been a man of means, succeeding
-to his father’s property before he was of age, and in later years
-inheriting from his cousin the estate of Ryston. Still his interest in
-architecture was more than that of an amateur, for he clearly had a
-good knowledge of building, and a practical acquaintance with the many
-matters involved in the erection of large houses.
-
-He was born in 1620, and entered Magdalen College, Oxford, when he was
-nineteen; in the following year he became possessed of his father’s
-property, and three years later, in 1643, he went to travel abroad. He
-visited France, Italy, Holland, and Flanders, for the purpose, as he
-states, to “give himself some convenient education”; his tour lasted
-six years, thus keeping him away from England during the troubled
-times of the Civil War. This education was evidently in architecture,
-for although he became a member of the Inner Temple in 1657, there
-is no record of his having followed the law as a profession. He had
-rooms in the Temple from the time of his entrance until 1676, and
-doubtless they enabled him to enjoy congenial society and provided
-him with a convenient residence during his frequent visits to London.
-For more than half his tenancy he was a bachelor, for he did not
-marry until he was forty-eight, when he took to wife, in the year
-1668, the eldest daughter of Sir Edward Monins of Kent, a lady of
-good family--“descended,” as he said, “from ye second best famely in
-hir county”--who brought him a fortune of £4,000. The same year saw
-another notable event in his life, the conferring of a knighthood upon
-him by Charles II.
-
-A year before his marriage he had succeeded to the Ryston estate,
-and thenceforward he appears to have followed the life of a country
-gentleman, for we hear no more of him in connection with architecture,
-save that he designed and built himself a new house at Ryston, which
-remains to this day, and is the only example of his work left, unless
-the attribution of Coleshill to Inigo Jones is a mistake. There is
-no doubt that Roger Pratt had something to do with Coleshill, which
-was built by a relative of his, Sir Henry Pratt; for he says, in
-considering the proportions of cornices for ceilings, “all wh. 4 last
-recited proportions have bin made use of by mee at Sr George Pratt’s at
-Colsell.” Sir George was the son and successor of Sir Henry.
-
-Most of the gentry at this time, as John Webb tells us, had some
-knowledge of the theory of architecture, “but nothing of ye
-practicque.” Roger Pratt bettered his fellows in this respect, for
-not only had he a wide knowledge of the art, as understood in the
-seventeenth century--of the architecture, that is, of modern Italy and
-of Palladio in particular--but he was familiar with the qualities of
-materials and the routine of building, not to mention tactful methods
-of accounting for “extras.”
-
-During his stay in Rome he met John Evelyn, who appears to have
-acquired and preserved a high regard for him. Twenty years later, in
-writing to Lord Cornbery on 20th January 1665, about his father’s
-mansion of Clarendon House, Evelyn said that Roger Pratt, his old
-friend and fellow traveller (co-habitant and contemporary at Rome),
-had “perfectly acquitted himself.” The turn of events had brought them
-together about this time, when both of them became commissioners for
-the repair of St Paul’s Cathedral and for the rebuilding of London
-after the great fire.
-
-Pratt’s chief works were Horseheath in Cambridgeshire for Lord
-Allington, and Clarendon House. The former was begun in 1663, and was a
-magnificent mansion. There are many technical notes relating to it in
-the note-books, but not much of general interest beyond its dimensions.
-It was dismantled in 1760, and sold for the value of the materials.
-
-The notes concerning Clarendon House, which was begun in 1664, are more
-voluminous. They serve to show that Pratt was a practical architect,
-that he was fully acquainted with the details of the various trades,
-and was alive to the chances of crooked dealing by the workmen. He
-deals with the levels of the site and the setting out of the house,
-which was to be placed central with St James’s Street, truly parallel
-with the frontage line, and set back 160 ft., whereby a court of that
-depth and of a width of 214 ft. would be obtained. Another lively touch
-is given by his instructions to the mason regarding the coat of arms in
-the tympanum of the “frontispiece,” the central feature of the front.
-The description which he incidentally gives agrees with what is shown
-on the engraving. But more interesting and more entertaining are the
-reasons he adduces in a draft letter of the 13th February 1665 (1666
-new style) to the Lord Chancellor for the cost having exceeded his
-estimate. The foundations were much deeper than was expected, an old
-pond having been found on one part of the site, and a vast hole the
-whole length of my lady’s pavilion on another. Severe frost rendered it
-necessary to take down and rebuild some of the work. My Lord Cornbery
-caused a foot to be added to the height of the first floor, much
-increasing, it is true, the nobleness of the effect. The bricks cost
-more; the Dutch war increased the price of timber, and the carpenter
-threw up his contract, leaving himself to the mercy of his employer;
-but the plague had infected the whole town, and workmen everywhere
-died. It was agreed, therefore, that by fair words and promises the
-carpenter should be encouraged to persist in his undertaking, which he
-only consented to do on a fresh basis of pay, whereby his account was
-increased by at least one-third more than his original price.
-
-In addition to the notes relating to these two houses in particular,
-there are Notes as to the building of Country Houses, dated 1660, and
-Rules for the Guidance of Architects, dated 1662. These fill many
-pages, and would have made a much more useful book, had they been
-published, than Gerbier’s “Counsel.” Space forbids long extracts,
-which indeed might prove tedious to all but enthusiastic students of
-this period; but three matters are worth mentioning. First, it is
-recommended that a house should be placed so as to take advantage
-of existing trees in the approach and lay out, and to obtain a fine
-prospect. This must be one of the earliest expressions of a deliberate
-liking for natural scenery. Secondly, Pratt advises those about to
-build a house “to get some ingenious gentleman who hath seen much
-of that kind abroad and been somewhat versed in the best authors of
-architecture, viz., Palladio, Scamozzi, Serlio, etc., to doe it for
-you and give you a design on paper.” This will be far better than
-trusting to a home-bred architect, who would be inexperienced in such
-matters, as is daily seen. The paper design having been agreed upon, a
-model of wood should be made, and as a final precaution, other houses
-of a suitable kind should be visited and studied.
-
-The third point of interest lies in his references to Inigo Jones’s
-work. In dealing with fine examples of architecture he says that with
-us in England there is nothing remarkable but the Banqueting House at
-Whitehall and the Portico at Paul’s. Elsewhere he cites the Queen’s
-House at Greenwich. As far as it goes, his testimony appears to confirm
-the view taken in the text as to Jones’s work.
-
-In addition to these notes on houses, there are others relating
-to St Paul’s, and to the steps taken for the rebuilding of London
-after the fire. In relation to the latter, he was asked by the other
-commissioners to undertake duties which would now devolve upon the
-Secretary. In regard to St Paul’s, he has a page or two of criticism on
-the model designed by “Dr. Renne,” 12th July 1673, as it offered itself
-upon a short and confused view of a quarter of an hour only. In 1673
-Wren’s favourite design was approved by the king, who issued a warrant
-for building in accordance with it on 12th November, and caused a model
-to be made (illustrated on p. 146). The details of Pratt’s criticism do
-not apply very aptly to this model, and we seem to be faced with two
-alternatives: either that his criticisms, written from memory after a
-hasty examination, were rather wide of the mark; or that they refer to
-a design different from those which have so far come into prominence
-from among the numerous drawings prepared by Wren in connection with St
-Paul’s.
-
-The later note-books are chiefly concerned with estate management, and
-we gather that after the building of the house at Ryston, Sir Roger
-Pratt settled down in the country. He died on the 20th February 1684–5,
-and was buried at Ryston, leaving a widow and three sons. His widow
-subsequently married again, and survived until 1706.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-The note-books, of which there are eight, are mostly bound in
-parchment, and by way of fastening, are tied with two sets of parchment
-strips. They bear a strong family resemblance to the sketch-book of
-Inigo Jones, preserved at Chatsworth.
-
-
-
-
-                              APPENDIX II
-
-                THE ARCHITECTS OF COLESHILL, BERKSHIRE
-
-
-Further interesting information regarding Sir Roger Pratt’s connection
-with Coleshill has been supplied by the kindness of Mr. Pratt of Ryston,
-and the Hon. Mrs. Pleydell Bouverie of Coleshill. It is derived in part
-from Sir Roger Pratt’s note-books, and in part from a diary of Sir Mark
-Pleydell (1692–1768), preserved in the muniment room at Coleshill.
-
-The estate of Coleshill was bought from the Pleydells by Sir Henry
-Pratt, a grandson through a junior branch of William Pratt, who was
-Lord of the Manor of Ryston in 1628. Sir Roger Pratt was great-grandson
-of the same William through the senior branch. The estate returned to
-the family of Pleydell in 1699, by the marriage of a Pleydell with the
-heiress of the Pratts of Coleshill.
-
-Sir Henry Pratt died on 6th April 1647, and the old house at Coleshill
-which he had bought was burnt down later in the same year, shortly
-after the marriage of his son, Sir George. The present house was begun
-in 1650, according to the tablet still preserved therein. Of this Sir
-Mark Pleydell says in his diary that Sir Roger Pratt of Ryston in
-Norfolk, knight, cousin to Sir George, was the architect in friendship
-to him. He also observes that “Mr. Mildmay apprehended it was built
-by Inigo Jones, and Lord Barrington says it was built by one Webb, a
-disciple of the said Inigo.”
-
-In the same diary it is stated that before the existing house was
-commenced Sir George Pratt began to build a new seat in “the present
-cucumber garden,” which he raised to one story, when Pratt and Jones
-arriving, caused it to be pulled down and rebuilt where it now stands.
-Sir Mark adds that Pratt and Jones were frequently here, and Jones was
-also consulted about the ceilings. “John Buffin, who often saw them
-both, frequently declared this to Wm. Pepal, who came to Coleshill in
-1700, and carried him to the spot in ye cucumber garden. We found ye
-remains of ye walls in ye cucumber garden ye 10th February 1746.”
-
-It is interesting to find that Jones, Webb, and Pratt were all
-concerned in the design, and it is tolerably clear that Pratt had a
-large hand in the matter, not only from Sir Mark Pleydell’s express
-intimation, but also from Sir Roger Pratt’s own note-books. It will
-be remembered that Jones died in 1652, but the house was not finished
-until some years afterwards, probably in 1664. Roger Pratt has entries
-in his note-books that in December 1656 he gave Sir George Pratt’s man
-a tip of two shillings, in April 1659 he gave to six maids and two
-boys of Sir George two guineas, and in January 1662 he gave a dinner
-to Sir George and his lady at a cost of £5. 9s. Such hospitality may
-presumably be attributed partly to the ties of consanguinity, and
-partly to those of architect and client.
-
-Sir Roger Pratt has notes relating to Coleshill under the year 1664,
-which, in addition to those concerning the ceilings mentioned in
-Appendix I. deal with the proportion of the windows. These, he says,
-seemed somewhat narrow, either because not sufficiently splayed on the
-sides, or because the wooden frame and the iron one took so much from
-the glass. The windows were at that time iron casements, not sashes as
-they are now; and they were all alike in this respect, including the
-dormers in the garrets and the turret. One remark is rather puzzling in
-which he speaks of the heads of the windows of the dining-room being 5
-ft. below the ceilings, for the vertical distance between the windows
-of the ground and upper floors is only about 7 ft. from glass to glass.
-
-The testimony that the windows were casements and not sashes is
-interesting, so too is the detailed description of the casements and of
-the devices to exclude the weather. The window-bars were ¼ in. thick
-and ½ in. broad; the casements ¼ in. thick and 2 in. broad. They were
-hanged upon three strong hooks, the opening-rod being ½ in. thick with
-five rings to hold it; there was an iron plate with a pin let into the
-wood to hold the hook of the rod. A little piece of iron was put over
-the rebate of the casements to keep out the wind, and a little border
-of lead was nailed close to the casements on the bottom and sides,
-as well as a strip over the heads outside. Further there was another
-border inside to prevent the rain, which beat up under the casements,
-from flowing down upon the baseboard.
-
-Let us hope these precautions were adequate, and that it was not
-necessary to lay out another £5 on a dinner to placate Sir George and
-his lady, and to drown the memory of reproaches urged with cousinly
-freedom.
-
-
-
-
-                    INDEX TO ILLUSTRATIONS AND TEXT
-
-   _Note._--The ordinary figures denote references to pages of
-         text; the illustrations, _which are referred to by their
-         figure numbers_, are denoted by the heavier type.
-
-
-    Acton, iron gate at, =269=
-
-    Adam, the brothers, 19, 21, 280, 381, 387
-
-    Adam, Robert, 280–85, 387–389
-
-        „       design for chimney-piece, =305=
-
-        „       illustrations of his work, =193=, =194=, =195=, =196=,
-                   =197=, =198=, =315=, =316=, =317=, =318=, =319=
-
-    Addison, 3
-
-    Adelphi, The, 285
-
-    “Advice to Servants,” by Dean Swift, 115
-
-    Age of Romance, 23
-
-    Albemarle, Duke of, 180
-
-        „      House, 180, =118=
-
-    Allen, Ralph, 263–66
-
-    All Souls, Oxford, 143, 154, 176
-
-             „       drawings by Wren at, =99=, =100=, =101=, =102=,
-                        =103=
-
-    Amelia, Princess, 231
-
-    Anne, Queen, 2
-
-        „      the mansion of her time, 5
-
-    “Arching galleries”, 171
-
-    Architect; the term seldom occurs prior to the seventeenth
-        century, 25
-
-    Architectural design, change in, 25
-
-    Artari, 255
-
-    “Art of Dialling”, 319
-
-    Art, utilitarian, 391
-
-    Artificiality in architecture, 3
-
-    Arundel, Earl of, 2, 42, 52
-
-        „    House, =21=
-
-    Ashburnham House, Westminster, the staircase, 118, =73=, =74=
-
-    Ashburnham, William, 118
-
-    Ashdown House, Berkshire, 97, =55=
-
-    Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, staircase, 351, =277=
-
-    Aske’s Hospital, Hoxton, 180
-
-    Aston Hall, Warwickshire, 7, 8, 42, =2=
-
-    Astwell, Northamptonshire, gateway, 102, =59=
-
-    Aubrey, John, 63, 64, 65
-
-    Austen, Jane, 311
-
-    Avenues at Boughton, 200
-
-
-    Banqueting House, Whitehall, 6, 42, 43, 50, 52, 63, 64, 66, 67, 68,
-                                 73, 99, 162, =22=
-
-        „       „     Inigo Jones’s drawings for, 66, =36=, =37=
-
-        „       „     Smithson’s drawing, 66, =38=
-
-        „       „     Doorway, drawing by Jones, =86=
-
-        „       „     Window, drawing by Jones, =88=
-
-    Bakewell, Robert (Smith), 342
-
-    Barrow Gurney, Somerset, gateway, 329, =249=
-
-    Barry, Charles, 172
-
-    Basil, Simon, 46
-
-    Bath, Somerset, Milsom Street, 303, =211=
-
-           „        Pulteney Bridge, 267, =184=
-
-           „        Queen’s Square, Panels in house, 363, =289=
-
-           „        Ralph Allen’s house, 302, =214=
-
-           „        Royal Crescent, 268, =185=
-
-    Battle Abbey, Sussex, jamb of fireplace, =298=
-
-    Beaufort House, Chelsea, 324
-
-    Beckford, Alderman, 14
-
-        „     the younger, 17
-
-    Beckley, Sussex, Church House, 292, =202=
-
-    Bedford Square, London--
-      houses in, 307, =221=
-      chimney-piece, =318=
-
-    Belcombe, chimney-piece, =317=
-
-    Belton House, near Grantham, 157–160
-
-          „       plan, =105=
-
-          „       chapel, =96=
-
-          „       house, =104=
-
-          „       iron screen, =106=
-
-          „       carving, =107=
-
-    Bethlem Hospital, London, 180, =116=
-
-    Bignor, Sussex, chimney, =229=
-
-    Birmingham, lead rain-water head, =272=
-
-    Bishopsgate Street Without, London, ceiling, 386, =307=
-
-    Blaythwayt, William, 203
-
-    Blenheim Palace, 5, 152, 223, 224, 227, =155=
-
-    Blomfield, R., 216 (_footnote_)
-
-    Bolsover Castle, Derbyshire, 32, 33, =13=, =16=
-
-    Bond, Sir Thomas, 180
-
-    Books on Architecture, 2, 25–28, 212, 372
-
-        „    German, Dutch, and French, 28
-
-    Botolph Lane, London, house in, 185, =119=, =120=
-
-    Boughton House, Northamptonshire, 178, 196–203
-
-            „       plan, =132=
-
-            „       house, =133=, =134=
-
-            „       state room, =135=
-
-            „       bird’s-eye view, =136=
-
-            „       staircase, 352, =276=
-
-            „       panelling, 363, =286=
-
-            „       fireplace, 369, =294=
-
-            „       painted ceilings, 385, =310=, =311=
-
-    Bourdon House, London, doorway, 357, =284=
-
-    Bramham Park, Yorkshire, gardens, 232–236, =162=, =163=
-
-    Brasenose College, Oxford, 106, =63=, =64=
-
-            „          doorway, 127, =84=
-
-    Brettingham, Matthew, 276–278
-
-    Brewers’ Hall, London, 190, =125=, =126=
-
-    Bridge at Prior Park, =154=
-
-      „    at Bath, =184=
-
-    Bridport, Viscount, 387
-
-    Bristol, houses at, 307, =220=
-
-    British Museum, drawings at, 64, =19=
-
-    Broadfield Hall, Hertfordshire, 9, =3=
-
-    Brownlow, Sir John, 157
-
-    Buckingham (Villiers), Duke of, 60, 161
-
-         „     (Sheffield), Duke of, 168
-
-         „     House, London, 168, 171, 172, =113=, =113A=
-
-         „       „    staircase and ceiling, =308=
-
-         „     Street, Strand, doorway, =258=
-
-    Bulwick, Northamptonshire, date-stone, =235=
-
-    Burford, 43
-
-      „     Priory, 106, =62=
-
-    Burghley House, 385
-
-        „    Lord, 1, 212
-
-    Burley-on-the-Hill, Rutland, 176, 329, =245=
-
-    Burlington-Devonshire, drawings, 52, 64, 65 (_footnote_), 83
-        (_footnote_), =42=, =43=, =44=, =45=, =76=, =77=, =86–88=,
-        =91=, =92=, =93=, =94=, =240=, =241=
-
-    Burlington House, 216
-
-         „     Lord, 2, 63, 64, 214–216, 271
-
-    Burney, Frances, 3
-
-    Butleigh, Somerset, 84, 142
-
-    Byron, Lord, 21, 32
-
-
-    Cambridge, Magdalene College, Pepysian Library, 100, =56=
-
-        „      St John’s College, gate-piers, 325, =243=
-
-        „      Trinity Hall, cupola, 318, =233=
-
-    Campbell, Colin, 31, 64, 65, 66, 67, 69, 79, 80, 168, 171, 172,
-        176, 207, 240, 251–255
-
-    Campion, Thomas, 78
-
-    Can Court, Wiltshire, staircase, 122, =78=
-
-    Canons Ashby, Northamptonshire--
-      Gate-piers, 322, =238=
-      Gates, =239=
-      Ceiling, =312=
-
-    Canterbury, streets, 296
-
-    “Capability” Brown, 236
-
-    Carey Street, London, chimney-piece, =303=
-
-    Cariat (Coryat), Thomas, 44
-
-    Carlisle, Earl of, 216
-
-    Carr, of York, 271
-
-    Caryatides, 73
-
-    Castle Combe, Wiltshire, doorway, 333, =252=
-
-    Castle Howard, Yorkshire, 216–223, =149=, =150=, =151=, =152=
-
-          „        Mausoleum, 220, =153=
-
-    Castor, Northamptonshire, gate-piers, 329, =247=
-
-    Catherine Court, Tower Hill, London, =117=
-
-    Ceilings--
-      Seventeenth-century, 122, =31=, =34=, =54=, =74–77=, =112=, =120=
-      Eighteenth-century, 381, =144=, =174=, =180=, =283=, =288=, =306=,
-         =307=, =312–314=
-      Painted, 384, =293=, =308–311=
-
-    Chambers, Sir William, 274
-
-    Changes in house design, 99, 115, 117
-
-    Chapman, George, 78
-
-    Charles I., 7, 41, 66, 70, 87, 163
-
-        „      his influence on architecture, 41
-
-    Charles II., 10, 84, 141
-
-        „      his idea of rebuilding Whitehall Palace, 70
-
-        „      his interest in building, 142
-
-    Charleton, Dr., 50 (_footnote_), 52
-
-    Chatham, Lord, 231
-
-    Chatsworth House, Derbyshire, 204, 217, =140=
-
-        „       „    drawings at, 64, 66, =36=, =37=, =40=, =41=
-
-    Chelmsford, street, 296, =210=
-
-    Cheltenham, shop at, 304, =217=
-
-    Cheron, 198, 384
-
-    Chesterfield, Lord, 214
-
-    Chimneys, 314, =229=, =230=
-
-    Chimney-pieces--
-      Seventeenth-century, 138
-      By Inigo Jones, 138, =91=, =92=
-      By John Webb, =93=, =94=
-      In the Jerusalem Chamber, =90=
-      At Forde Abbey, =95=
-      Eighteenth-century, 377, =170=, =292=, =294=, =301=, =302=,
-          =303=, =304=, =305=
-
-    Chinese wall-papers, 364, =290=
-
-    Chipping Campden, The Martins, 339, =261=
-
-    Chirurgeons’ Theatre, London, 50, 52
-
-    Chiswick, Lord Burlington’s Villa, 214, =148=
-
-    “Chorea Gigantum”, 50 (_footnote_)
-
-    Christ Church, Oxford, 45
-
-          „        Tom Tower, 145
-
-    Christian IV. of Denmark, 45
-
-    Church Langton, Leicestershire, rectory, 294, =207=
-
-    Cirencester, shop at, 304, =216=
-
-    City churches, 13
-
-    Civil War, The, 2, 10
-
-    Clarendon, Earl of, 180
-
-    Clarke, Dr., of All Souls, Oxford, 63, 64
-
-    Cliefden House, Buckinghamshire, 168, 172, =114=
-
-    Coke, Rev. D’Ewes, 32
-
-    Coke, Thomas, Earl of Leicester, 274
-
-    Coke, Thomas, Earl of Leicester, killed in a duel, 276
-
-    Coleshill, Berkshire, 54–58, 88
-
-             „          plan, =28=
-
-             „          elevation, =29=
-
-             „          staircase, =30=
-
-             „          ceiling, =31=
-
-             „          gate-piers, 324, =242=
-
-    College Hill, London, house in, 185, =121=
-
-    Combe Abbey, 171
-
-    Comfort in houses, 5
-
-    Coniers, Sir John, 227
-
-    Cooke, “My ladye Cooke’s House”, 36, =18=
-
-    Coryat, Thomas, 44
-
-    Cottesbrooke, Northamptonshire, 178
-
-          „       ceiling, 386, =313=
-
-    “Counsel and Advice to all Builders,” by Gerbier, 161
-
-    Covent Garden Piazza, 50, =24=
-
-         „        St Paul’s Church, 48, 52, =23=
-
-    Cowper, 3
-
-    Craftsmen, English, are skilful, 389
-
-    Crane, Sir Francis, 176, 367
-
-    Craven, William Lord, 164
-
-    Croom’s Hill, Greenwich, garden house, 236, =161=
-
-    Cunningham, Peter, his “Life of Inigo Jones”, 45 (_footnote_),
-        50 (_footnote_), 60 (_footnote_)
-
-    Cupolas, 316, =5=, =29=, =51=, =55=, =104=, =106=, =118=, =231–234=
-
-
-    Dacres, Lord, 216
-
-    Dance, George, 307
-
-    Daniell, Samuel, 78
-
-    Date-stones, 318, =235=, =236=
-
-    D’Avenant, 87
-
-    Davies, Robert (Smith), 345 (_footnote_)
-
-    Dawtrey Mansion, Petworth, Sussex, staircase, 124, =79=
-
-    Deanery at Wells, panelling, 193, =128=
-
-        „      „      chimney-piece, 379, =302=
-
-    Dean Street, Soho, London, house in, 251, =171=
-
-    Decline of fancy in design, 313
-
-    Deene, Northamptonshire, the “Seahorse”, 291, =205=
-
-    De L’Orme, 28, 73
-
-    Denham Place, Buckinghamshire, staircase, 355, =280=
-
-        „    panelling, 359, =287=
-
-    Denham, Sir John, 69, 70, 84, 87, 141, 144, 212
-
-    Denmark House, chapel at, 50
-
-    Design follows two paths, 99, 391
-
-    Designs of Inigo Jones. _See under_ Jones, Inigo.
-
-    Devonshire, Dukes of, 64, 204
-
-    Doorways, seventeenth-century, 126
-
-        „       exterior, =13=, =21=, =35=, =58=, =59=, =84=
-
-        „       interior, =48=, =83=, =85=, =86=, =87=, =89=, =124=,
-                   =126=, =129=, =130=
-
-        „     eighteenth-century--exterior, 333–339, =196=, =197=,
-        =252–259=
-
-        „       interior, =282–285=
-
-    Dorking, shop at, 305, =219=
-
-    Double cube rooms, 58
-
-    Drayton, Leicestershire, date-stone, =235=
-
-    Drayton House, Northamptonshire, chimney-piece, 97, 138, =94=
-
-        „          gardens, 236, =159=, =160=
-
-    Dryden, 60
-
-    Du Cerceau, 28
-
-    Dunkirk House, 180
-
-    Dunstable, street, 296
-
-    Durham House, 97, 115
-
-    Dyrham, Gloucestershire, 203, 204, 373
-
-        „   plan, =138=
-
-        „   house, =137=
-
-        „   dining-room, =139=
-
-
-    Easton Neston, Northamptonshire, 178, 207–210
-
-         „     plan, =142=
-
-         „     house, =141=
-
-         „     interiors, =143=, =144=
-
-    Edney, William (smith), 342
-
-    Elizabethan houses, 1, 5, 56
-
-         „       „     still habitable, 3
-
-    Ely, Cambridgeshire, house at, 294, =206=
-
-    Emmett, William, of Bromley, 64, 65, 66
-
-    Entrances to houses, 319
-
-    Erectheus, Temple of, 311
-
-    Evelyn, John, 2, 70, 142, 180
-
-          „      quoted,  27, 167 (_footnote_)
-
-    Extinguishers near doors, 333
-
-
-    Ferguson, 274
-
-    Fielding’s “Tom Jones”, 266
-
-    Finsbury Circus, London, house in, 311, =225=
-
-    Finsbury Square, London, houses in, 307, =222=
-
-    Fire-backs, 370, =296=
-
-      „  basket, 370, =297=
-
-      „  dogs, 370, =295=, =296=
-
-      „  grates, =299=, =300=
-
-      „  places, 369, 375
-
-      „    jamb of, =298=
-
-    Fitzwilliam, Earl of, 258, 260
-
-    Flaxman, design for a chimney-piece, =304=
-
-    Flitcroft, Henry, 258–260
-
-    “Florimene,” a pastoral, 87
-
-    Fonthill Abbey, sale at, 17
-
-      „      House, Wiltshire, 14, 17, =9=
-
-    Ford Abbey, Dorset, chimney-piece, 138, =95=
-
-    Fournier Street, London, doorways, =257=
-
-    Frogley, R. (carpenter), 145
-
-    Furniture of houses in 1720, 375
-
-
-    Gables, 99
-
-    Gammon, Richard, 60
-
-    Ganymede, 19
-
-    Gardens, 229–236, =108=, =136=, =156–162=
-
-        „   at Boughton, 200
-
-    Garrick, 3
-
-    Gates and gateways, 322–331, =21=, =35=, =46=, =50=, =59=, =110=,
-        =111=, =238=, =239=, =241–251=
-
-    Georgian Houses, 237
-
-            „       accommodation in the smaller, 287
-
-    Gerbier, Sir Balthazar, 60, 161–163, 168
-
-    Gibbs, James, 31, 178, 243–251
-
-          „      drawings by, =164–170=
-
-    Girdlers’ Hall, London, 191, =127=
-
-    Gloucester, house in Eastgate, 307
-
-        „         „      Southgate, 109, =65=
-
-    Godmersham Park, Kent, doorway, 356, =282=
-
-    Goodridge, H. E., of Bath, 265
-
-    Gothic revival, 20, 23
-
-    Grainger, of Newcastle, 282
-
-    Grecian temples in English gardens, 311
-
-    Greek influence, 21
-
-    Greenwich Hospital (formerly Palace), 150, =98=
-
-    Greenwich Palace--
-      King Charles’s Block, 52, 64, 65, 83, 168, =45=
-      Ceiling, =77=
-      Door, =87=
-      Queen’s house at Greenwich, 43, 50, 52
-      Plan, =25=
-      View, =26=
-      Elevation, =27=
-      Chimney-pieces by Inigo Jones, =91=, =92=
-
-    Greenwich Old Palace, staircase, 126, =82=, =83=
-
-    Gresham College, London, 143
-
-    Grinling Gibbons, 160, 189, 207, 357, 381
-
-    Gwydyr House, Whitehall, 20, =11=
-
-
-    Hagley, Worcestershire, 231
-
-    Hakewill, 91
-
-    Hall, the great, 6, 7
-
-      „   of eighteenth-century houses, 351
-
-    Ham House, Surrey, staircase, 126, =80=
-
-    Hampton Court, 13, 70, 150, 154, =6=
-
-           „       gate-pier, =244=
-
-           „       iron screen, =262=
-
-           „       iron balustrade, =264=
-
-           „       fire-dogs, 295
-
-           „       staircase and ceiling, =309=
-
-    Hamstead Marshall, Berkshire, 163–168, 324, =108=, =112=
-
-    Hanbury Hall, near Droitwich, 13, =5=
-
-    Harewood House, doorway, =316=
-
-    Harley Street, London, 386
-
-    Hatton, 1
-
-    Hawes, Francis, his inventory, 372, 375
-
-    Hawksmoor, Nicholas, 207–212, 220
-
-    Hengrave Hall, 275
-
-    Henry, Prince of Orange, 164
-
-      „        „     Wales,  45, 46
-
-    Hercules, 19
-
-    High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire, sundial, 318, =234=
-
-    Hinderskelf, Castle of, 216
-
-    Hogarth, 251
-
-    Holdenby House, 167
-
-    Holkham, Norfolk, 178, 271–275
-
-        „       „    plan, =188=
-
-        „       „    view, =189=
-
-    Holt, near Bradford-on-Avon, 291, =201=
-
-    Homes, English, 1
-
-    Homes of great nobles, 2
-
-    Honington Hall, Warwickshire, doorway and ceiling, 357, =283=
-
-    Hooke, Robert, 178
-
-    Horse Guards, The, Whitehall, 276, =190=
-
-    Houghton, Norfolk, 178, 251–256, 351
-
-       „        „     plan, =172=
-
-       „        „     views, =173–178=
-
-    Houses in towns, 299–313
-
-    Hyde, Lord Chancellor, 180
-
-
-    Ince Blundell, Lancashire, The Lion Lodge, 329, =246=
-
-    Inigo Jones. _See_ Jones, Inigo.
-
-    Inventory of house furniture in 1720, 372
-
-    Ipswich, houses at, 111, =66=
-
-    Ironwork, 299, 339–345, =212=, =213=, =262–266=, =268–271=
-
-    Isham, Sir Justinian, 93, 95
-
-    Italian influence and inspiration, 1, 2, 6, 27, 36
-
-
-    Jackson, John, 109
-
-    James I., 3, 45, 66
-
-    Jeffreys, Judge, 13
-
-    Jerusalem Chamber, Westminster, chimney-piece, 136, =90=
-
-    Johnson, Dr., on Kedleston Hall, 278
-
-    Jones, Inigo, 2, 6, 7, 13, 20, 31, 33, 40, 41–61, 64, 82, 83, 84,
-        99, 117, 118, 122, 126, 129, 132, 136, 138, 142, 143, 146, 161,
-        162, 176
-
-    Jones, Inigo--
-      his designs for masques, 39, 45
-      employed to purchase pictures, 42
-      his birth, 44
-      visits to Italy, 45, 46
-      his sketch-book at Chatsworth, 45, 46
-      his annotated copy of Palladio, 45
-      work attributed to him, 46–50
-      “the Vitruvius of his age”, 52
-      his death and will, 60
-      Kent’s “Designs of Inigo Jones”, 56, 63, 64, 68, 80, 82, 87, 153,
-          212, 216, 237–240, 243, 260, 278, 377
-      “Designs of Inigo Jones,” compared with earlier designs, 82
-      designs for scenery, 64
-      drawings attributed to him, 65
-      Jones and the designs for the Palace at Whitehall, 63–80
-      “Designs for Whitehall”, 68
-      drawings by him, 77 (_footnote_), 79
-      Jones as scene-painter, 79
-      as surveyor, 79
-      drawings by Jones--
-        Banqueting House, =36=, =37=
-        elevations of a house, =42=
-        drawing for a masque, =43=
-        ceiling at Wilton, =75=
-        door at the Banqueting House, =86=
-        window at the same, =88=
-        chimney-pieces, =91=, =92=
-        clock turret at Whitehall, =232=
-        Temple Bar, =240=
-        gateway, =241=
-        plan of Stoke Bruerne, =115=
-
-    Jonson, Ben, 78, 79
-
-
-    Kedleston, Derbyshire, 178, 271, 278–280
-
-        „         „      plan, =191=
-
-        „         „      Hall, =192=
-
-        „         „      furniture at, 280
-
-        „         „      drawing-room, 389, =319=
-
-    Keith, Admiral Lord, 387
-
-    Keith, W. Grant, 77 (_footnote_), 87 (_footnote_)
-
-    Kelmarsh Hall, 178
-
-    Kennington Common, 311
-
-    Kennington Park Road, London, houses in, 311, =226=, =227=
-
-    Kent, William, 63, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 138, 229, 255, 256, 271–278
-
-    Kew Palace, fire-grates, =299=, =300=
-
-    Kimbolton Castle, 224, 227
-
-    King’s Lynn, 296, =209=
-
-    Kingston, Castle Inn, staircase, 125, =81=
-
-    King’s Weston, Somerset, 13, 14, =7=
-
-          „          „     staircase, 352, =275=
-
-    Kip or Kyp, “Britannia Illustrata”, 164, 236
-
-    Kirby Hall, Northamptonshire, chimney and dormer window, =230=
-
-
-    Laguerre, 384, 385
-
-    Lamport Hall, Northamptonshire, 93, =52=
-
-    Landor, Walter Savage, 301
-
-    Langley, B. and T., 26 (_footnote_)
-
-    Lanscroon, 384
-
-    Laud, Archbishop, 127
-
-    Lead cisterns, =267=, =274=
-
-    Lead work, 345, 349, =267=, =274=
-
-    Lectures on Architecture in the Seventeenth Century, 163
-
-    Leicester, Earl of, 274, 275
-
-    Leicester, Lady, 275
-
-    Lempster, William, Lord, 207
-
-    Le Nôtre, 216
-
-    Lenthall, Speaker, 106
-
-    Leoni, 229
-
-    Leyton Great House, Essex, 185, =122=
-
-    Lewes, Sussex, house in the High Street, 314, =228=
-
-    Lincoln’s Inn Fields, staircase at No. 35, 356, =281=
-
-    Lisle, Dame Alice, 13
-
-    London Houses, 181, 307–311
-
-          „      plan, =223=
-
-    London suburbs, 313
-
-    Louvre, The, 74
-
-    Lysicrates, Choragic Monument of, 311
-
-
-    Magdalene College, Cambridge, 100, =56=
-
-    Malton, Earl of, 258
-
-    Mansfield Street, London, staircase, =315=
-
-    Market Harborough, Sign of Inn at, =212=
-
-    Mark Lane, London, doorway, 333, =254=
-
-    Marlborough, Duchess of, 150
-
-        „      town, 296
-
-    Masques, 45 (_footnote_), 78
-
-       „   drawing by Inigo Jones, 77, =43=
-
-    Mediæval houses, plan of, 115
-
-           „         traditions, decline of, 20
-
-    Melbourne, Derbyshire, gardens, 236
-
-    Melton Constable, Norfolk, 193, =131=
-
-          „         staircase, 354, =279=
-
-    Meopham, Kent, chimney, =229=
-
-    Middle Ages, vaulted rooms of the, 3
-
-    Milton, 10
-
-    Montagu, Duke of, 178, 196, 369
-
-       „     House, 178
-
-    Montague, Lady Mary Wortley, 216, 364
-
-    Mortlake, factory of tapestry, 367
-
-    Moulton, Northamptonshire, date-stone, =235=
-
-    Movable scenery, design of the, first, 87 (_footnote_)
-
-    Moyles Court, Hampshire, 10, =4=
-
-
-    Names of rooms on plans by, Thorpe and Webb, 115
-
-    Napoleon, 21
-
-    Nash, Beau, 266
-
-    Neville Holt, Leicestershire, The Stables, 316, =231=
-
-    Newcastle House, 168, 171
-
-    Newcastle, Earls and Dukes of, 32
-
-    Newmarket, royal house at, 50
-
-    Nixon, Alderman John, 111
-
-          „         his grammar school, at Oxford, 111, =67=
-
-    Normanton Park, Rutland, 17, =10=
-
-    Northampton, ceiling in Courts, of Justice, 381, =306=
-
-    Northleach, 43
-
-    Northumberland House, chimney-piece, 97
-
-    Norwich, doorways, =256=
-
-
-    Oliver, Mr., City Surveyor, 63, 64
-
-    Oundle, doorway, 333, =253=
-
-    Ormond, Duke of, 180
-
-    Osborne, Dorothy, 95
-
-    Oxford, house in the High St., 291, =203=
-
-       „    house in St. Giles, 291, =200=
-      (See also All Souls College, Ashmolean Museum, Brasenose College
-          Chapel, Christ Church, Nixon’s Grammar School, Sheldonian
-          Theatre, St. John’s College, Trinity College, Worcester
-          College.)
-
-
-    Paine, James, 271, 278, 280
-
-    Palladio, 83
-
-    Panelling, 136, 360
-
-    Paul’s Cathedral, St., London, 13, 48, 63, 101, 142, 145–149
-
-       „      „      model by Wren, =97=
-
-    Paul’s, St., Covent Garden, 48, 52, =23=
-
-    Penshurst, Kent, fire-basket, =297=
-
-    Pepys, 2, 100, 180
-
-    Pepysian Library, Cambridge, 100, =56=
-
-    “Persians”, 73
-
-    Petersham, Surrey, house at, 294, =208=
-
-    Philibert de l’Orme, 28
-
-    Physicians’ College, 97
-
-    Piddletown, Dorset, vicarage, 291, =199=
-
-    Pitt, William, 387
-
-    Pope, 5, 227, 243
-
-    Porches, open, 89
-
-    Powell, Sir Edward, 118
-
-    Powis Castle, Monmouth, tapestry room, =293=
-
-    Powis House. _See_ Newcastle House.
-
-    Powis, Marquis of, 171
-
-    Pratt, Roger, 180, and Appendix, 395–398
-
-    Price, Dr. George, chimney-piece for, 138, =93=
-
-    Prior Park, Bath, bridge, 220, =154=
-
-         „       „    house, 260–266, =182=, =183=, 351
-
-    Proportion in architecture, 80
-
-    Puget, architect, 178
-
-    Pugin, 20, 311
-
-    Pulteney Bridge, Bath, 267, =184=
-
-
-    Queen Anne, wife of James I., 45
-
-    Queen’s House at Greenwich. _See_ Greenwich.
-
-    Quenby Hall, Leicestershire, iron gateway, 344, =266=
-
-
-    Raleigh, Sir Walter, 1
-
-    Ramsay, Allan, 387
-
-    Ramsbury Manor, Wiltshire, 95, =53=, =54=
-
-          „        Chinese wall-paper, =290=
-
-    Raynham Park, Norfolk, 58
-
-         „     „  plan, =32=
-
-         „     „  view, =33=
-
-    Reddish Manor, Wiltshire, 268, =186=
-
-    Reynolds, Sir Joshua, 3, 14, 229
-
-    R.I.B.A. Collection of Drawings, 58–64, =42=, =44=, =45=
-
-    Rice, R. Garraway, 342 (_footnote_)
-
-    Ricci, 172
-
-    Ripley, 14, 271
-
-    Roads in Georgian times, 299
-
-    Robinson, Thomas (Smith), 342
-
-    Rockingham, Marquis of, 258
-
-    Rooms named on old plans, 115
-
-    Rubens, 60
-
-    Rundhurst, Sussex, gate-piers, 329, =248=
-
-    Rysbrach, 255
-
-
-    Saffron Walden, Essex, houses, 111, =68=, =69=
-
-    Salisbury, sign of an inn, =213=
-
-        „      gateway in the Close, =250=
-
-        „      staircase, 352, =278=
-
-    “Salmacida spolia”, 87
-
-    Sandby, Thomas, 7, 60, 74, FRONTISPIECE, FIG. =1=
-
-    Sanitary conveniences in Georgian houses, 288
-
-    Sappho, 21
-
-    Sash-windows introduced, 134
-
-         „       earliest example, 136
-
-    Scole, Norfolk, inn, 111, =72=
-
-    Scott (Sir Walter), 23
-
-    Seaton Delaval, Northumberland, 178, 224
-
-    Seckford Hall, Suffolk, doorway, =285=
-
-    Sedgemoor, 13
-
-    Serlio, 80
-
-    Shakespeare, 10, 25
-
-    Shardiloes House, design for chimney-piece, =305=
-
-    Shaw, Huntingdon (Smith), 342
-
-    Sheffield, “my lord’s house”, 34
-
-        „     Duke of Buckingham, 168
-
-    Sheldonian Theatre, Oxford, 144
-
-    Sherborne, Gloucestershire, 43
-
-    Sherrard, Bennet, Lord, 191
-
-    Shops, 304, 305, =216=, =219=
-
-    Short survey of twenty-six counties in 1634, 43 (_footnote_)
-
-    Shrivenham, Berkshire, House, 294, =204=
-
-    “Siege of Rhodes”, 87
-
-    Silchester, Hampshire, chimney, =229=
-
-    Smithson, John, 7, 42, 168
-
-       „       „   his family, 31
-
-       „       „   his drawings, 32–40, 66, 77, =14=, =15=, =17=, =18=,
-                                    =20=, =21=, =38=
-
-       „     Robert, 31
-
-       „     Huntingdon, 31
-
-    Snaresbrook, Elm Hall, iron gates, =268=
-
-    Soane Museum, 31
-
-    Somerset House, 50
-
-           „       new wing, 105, =61=
-
-    South Molton, fireplace in Town Hall, 369, =292=
-
-    South Sea Company, 372
-
-    Spalato in Dalmatia, 280
-
-    Speculative builders, their influence on house design, 311
-
-    Spiers, Walter L., 31 (_footnote_)
-
-    St Catherine’s Court, Somerset, 236
-
-    St Cloud, 200
-
-    St James’s Palace, 58
-
-        „      „    chapel at, 50
-
-        „     Square, No. 32, 20, =12=
-
-    St. John’s College, Oxford--
-      doorway, 127, =85=
-      panelling, 136, =89=
-      rain-water heads, 345
-
-    St Lawrence Jewry, London, carving, 185, =123=, =124=
-
-    St Mary Redcliffe, Bristol, iron gates, 342, =265=
-
-    St John, Oliver, 88
-
-    Staircases of seventeenth century, 118, =73=, =78–83=
-
-         „        eighteenth century, 351, =275–281=, =308=, =309=
-
-    Stanton Harcourt, Oxfordshire, farmhouse, 113, =71=
-
-    Stanway House, Gloucestershire, doorway, 101, =58=
-
-    Stapleford Park, Leicestershire, 191, =129=, =130=
-
-    Starkie Gardner, 345 (_footnote_)
-
-    Stationers’ Hall, London, 191
-
-         „       „   doorway, 337, =259=
-
-    Stoke Bruerne, Northamptonshire, 176
-
-    Stoke Bruerne, Northamptonshire, plan, =115=
-
-    “Stone-Heng Restored”, 44, 50 (_footnote_)
-
-    Stoneleigh Abbey, Warwickshire--
-      iron gateway, 342, =263=
-      panelling, 363, =288=
-
-    Stone, Nicholas, 60
-
-    Stowe House, Buckinghamshire, 224
-
-    Stowe House, Buckinghamshire, gardens, 229–232, 276, =157=, =156=
-
-    Strafford, Earl of, 258
-
-    Stratford, near London, iron gate, =271=
-
-    Stratton Street, London, house, 310, =224=
-
-    Streets in towns, 296
-
-    Stuart, James, 387
-
-    Sturmer, Essex, chimney, =229=
-
-    Sundials, 318, =237=
-
-    Sutton Place, fire-back and dogs, =296=
-
-    Swakeleys, Middlesex, 102, =60=
-
-
-    Talman, architect, 203, 204
-
-    Talmash, Thomas, 126
-
-    Tapestry, 367, =291=, =293=
-
-    Temple Bar, design for, by Inigo Jones, 323, =240=
-
-    Temple, The, London, staircases, 351
-
-    Temple, Sir William, 95
-
-    Tenche, Sir Fisher, 185
-
-    Thornhill, Sir James, 385
-
-    Thorpe Hall, Northamptonshire, 88–91, 324
-
-    Thorpe Hall, Northamptonshire--
-      plan, =47=
-      views and details, =46=, =48–51=
-
-    Thorpe, John,  28, 31, 77, 115
-
-          „      plan of London houses, 310
-
-    Thrale, Mrs., 3
-
-    Tijou, Jean, 339, 340
-
-    Town houses of the gentry, 299
-
-    Town-planning on architectural lines, 267, 299, 301
-
-    Towns, growth of, 304
-
-    Townshend, Aurelian, 78
-
-        „      George, 275
-
-    Trellis-work to fronts of houses, 311, =225–227=
-
-    Trinity College, Oxford, 145
-
-    Triumphal arches by Gerbier, 162
-
-    Tuileries, plan for the palace, 73
-
-
-    Uffington, near Stamford, gate-pier, =251=
-
-
-    Vandike, Sir Anthony, 52
-
-    Vanbrugh, Sir John, 13, 19, 20, 150, 216–229
-
-    Vathek, 17
-
-    Vernon, Thomas, 13
-
-    Verrio, 199, 384, 385
-
-    Versailles, 196
-
-    Vignola, 163
-
-    Villiers, Duke of Buckingham, 60
-
-    “Vindication of Stone-Heng Restored,” by Webb, 45 (_footnote_),
-        48, 50 (_footnote_), 52 (_footnote_), 84
-
-    “Vitruvius Britannicus,” by Campbell, 64, 240–243
-
-
-    Wade, General, 214
-
-    Wall-papers, 364
-
-        „      Chinese, =290=
-
-    Walpole, Horace, 20, 31, 32, 161
-
-       „     his visit to Stowe, 231
-
-       „     Sir Robert, 251, 256
-
-    Wansford, Northamptonshire, chimney, =229=
-
-    Wanstead, 260
-
-    Ware, Isaac, 176, 271
-
-    Wareham, Dorset, shop at, 305, =218=
-
-    Warminster, Free School, 99, =57=
-
-    Warwick, streets, 296
-
-       „     Aylesford Hotel, 301, =215=
-
-       „     lead rain-water head, =273=
-
-    Watson, Samuel, of Heanor, 207
-
-    Webb, John, 2, 7, 31, 45 (_footnote_), 48, 50, 52, 54, 56, 60, 63,
-        64, 65, 68, 101, 141, 176
-
-        „     commissioned to acquire works of art, 42
-
-        „     his petition to Charles II., 69, 70
-
-        „     brief attached to same, 84
-
-        „     designed the Palace at Whitehall by command of
-        Charles I., 70
-
-        „     design for a house by him, =44=
-
-        „     his own work, 83–97
-
-        „     “Inigo Jones’s man”, 83, 87
-
-        „     designs for masques, 87
-
-        „     drawings by him, for new wing, Somerset House, =61=
-
-        „     ceiling at Wilton, =76=
-
-        „     ceiling at Greenwich, =77=
-
-        „     door at Greenwich, =87=
-
-        „     chimney-pieces, =93=, =94=
-
-        „     hall or public room, =145=
-
-    Webb, William, 63, 64
-
-    Welbeck, 32
-
-       „    riding-house, 33, =20=
-
-    Wells, Deanery, 193, =128=
-
-      „    chimney-piece, 379, =302=
-
-    Wentworth Castle, Yorkshire, 258
-
-        „     Woodhouse, Yorkshire, 256–260, =179=, =181=
-
-    Westminster, dormitory at, 216
-
-    Whitehall Palace, 7, 39, 42, 52, 154, 162, 168
-
-          „          “Designs for Whitehall”, 64, 68
-
-          „          drawings for, 65 (_footnote_)
-
-          „          designs for the Palace, 63–80, =1=, =19=, =39–41=
-
-          „          by Wren, =103=
-
-          „          clockhouse by Inigo Jones, =232=
-
-    Widcombe Manor House, near Bath, 268, =187=
-
-    Wilkins, Dr., 143
-
-    William and Mary, 2
-
-    Williams, John, Bishop of Lincoln, 136
-
-    Willis, Professor, 100
-
-    Wilton, Wiltshire, 58, 97, 220, =34=
-
-      „         „     ceilings, 118, 122, =75=, =76=
-
-    Wimpole Street, London, ceiling, =314=
-
-    Winchester, chimney-piece, =301=
-
-        „       palace at, 142
-
-    Winde, Wine, or Wynne, Capt. _See_ Wynne.
-
-    Windows of seventeenth century, 129
-
-    Windsor Castle, 385
-
-          „       sash-window, 136
-
-    Witney, Oxfordshire, school at, 113, =70=
-
-    Wollaton, 31
-
-    Wolterton Hall, Norfolk, 14, =8=
-
-    Woodford Road, London, iron gate, =270=
-
-    Wood, John, of Bath, 260–268
-
-    Worcester College, Oxford, drawings at, 52, 58, 63, 64, 65, 68
-
-    Workmen and books, 27
-
-    Working men’s dwellings, 389
-
-    Wren, Sir Christopher, 13, 20, 31, 61, 101, 108, 141–160, 176, 178,
-                              189
-
-        „         „       drawings at All Souls College, 145, 154, 176
-
-        „         „       designs for houses, =99=, =102=
-
-        „         „       for palace at Whitehall, =103=
-
-    Wren, Dr. Christopher, 143
-
-      „   Matthew, Bishop of Ely, 143
-
-    Wrest, Bedfordshire, gardens, 236, =158=
-
-    Wynne, Captain, 163, 168
-
-      „       „    drawings by, 171 (_footnote_), =109=, =110=, =112=
-
-
-    Yarmouth, lay out of streets, 296
-
-        „      porch at, 337, =260=
-
-    York, streets in, 296
-
-      „   Assembly Rooms, 214, =146=, =147=
-
-      „   doorway, 333, =255=
-
-    York House, London, 60, 161
-
-      „    „  water-gate, 60, 322
-
-      „    „  FRONTISPIECE, =35=
-
-
-
-            _Printed in Great Britain at_ THE DARIEN PRESS,
-                              _Edinburgh_
-
-
-
-
-FOOTNOTES:
-
-[1] The publication of “Gothic Architecture, Improved by Rules and
-Proportions,” by B. and T. Langley, in 1742, does not invalidate
-this statement, for the illustrations are intended to show how a
-kind of Gothic detail might be applied to a kind of classic “order.”
-The “Historical Dissertation on Gothic Architecture,” attached by
-way of introduction, is absolutely negligible in the light of modern
-knowledge, and could have helped nobody to a comprehension of the
-subject.
-
-[2] Evelyn’s “Account of Architects and Architecture.”
-
-[3] See a communication from Mr. Walter L. Spiers to the _Journal of the
-Royal Institute of British Architects_, 10th Dec. 1908, where a short
-pedigree is given.
-
-[4] “As appears by his name over the gate.”
-
-[5] It was, however, John Smithson’s son, Huntingdon, who died in 1648.
-John Smithson died in 1634.
-
-[6] “A Relation of a Short Survey of 26 Counties observed in a
-seven weekes Journey begun on August 11, 1634, by a _Captain_, a
-_Lieutenant_, and an _Ancient_.”
-
-[7] “Lives of the British Architects,” by E. Beresford Chancellor.
-
-[8] It is true that his spelling, especially that of the notes in his
-sketch-book, is eccentric, even for those days.
-
-[9] “Cal. State Papers, Domestic,” Sept. 2, 1611.
-
-[10] John Webb, in his “Vindication of Stone-Heng Restored” (1725), p.
-119, says he resided “many years” in Italy, especially at Venice. This
-refers to his first visit. He was back in England before Twelfth Night,
-1605, as he designed the “Masque of Blackness,” which was produced on
-that day. (See Peter Cunningham’s “Life of Inigo Jones.”)
-
-[11] Peter Cunningham’s “Life of Inigo Jones,” p. 6.
-
-[12] “Cal. State Papers, Domestic,” April 27, 1613.
-
-[13] “A Vindication of Stone-Heng Restored,” p. 27. All this work was
-destroyed in the great fire. The loss of the portico was considered a
-national misfortune.
-
-[14] “A Vindication,” p. 36. This work has been much altered.
-
-[15] Destroyed.
-
-[16] “A Vindication,” p. 119.
-
-[17] Kennet, in Wood’s “Ath. Ox.,” by Bliss, iii. 806; quoted in Peter
-Cunningham’s “Inigo Jones.”
-
-[18] In the year 1620, King James I., being at Wilton on one of his
-progresses, sent for Inigo Jones, and instructed him to produce out of
-his own practice in architecture and experience in antiquities abroad,
-what he could discover about Stonehenge. The “few undigested notes”
-which Jones made were amplified by John Webb and published by him as
-“Stone-Heng Restored” in 1655. They went to show that Stonehenge was
-a Roman temple. A Dr. Charleton attacked this conclusion in a pamphlet
-called “Chorea Gigantum,” whereupon Webb retaliated in his “Vindication
-of Stone-Heng Restored.” From the antiquarian point of view the
-controversy is of no value, but it is interesting because of the
-references to Inigo Jones.
-
-[19] Webb’s “Vindication,” p. 11. It would seem that Vandyke is here
-quoted as using the phrase “designing with his pen,” and not (as
-biographers have freely supposed) as having given Jones a certificate
-of ability.
-
-[20] In the collection at the Royal Institute of British Architects.
-
-[21] See Appendix II.
-
-[22] See p. 69.
-
-[23] “London Past and Present,” by Wheatley and Cunningham.
-
-[24] Peter Cunningham’s “Life,” where it is stated that the register of
-St Bennet’s records his burial on the 26th June.
-
-[25] Peter Cunningham’s “Inigo Jones,” p. 39.
-
-[26] John Aubrey’s “Brief Lives,” ed. by Andrew Clark. Oxford, 1898,
-vol. ii. 10.
-
-[27] One of this series is illustrated in Fig. 39.
-
-[28] Those who desire to pursue the subject more fully are referred
-to two papers by the author--“The Burlington-Devonshire Drawings,”
-in the _Journal of the Royal Institute of British Architects_, Third
-Series, vol. xviii., No. 10, and “The Original Drawings for the Palace
-at Whitehall, attributed to Inigo Jones,” _Architectural Review_, June
-1912.
-
-[29] “State Papers, Domestic: Charles II.,” vol. v., Nos. 74, 74, I.
-
-[30] It is the version published by Kent which is here dealt with, as
-being the best known.
-
-[31] In an article by Mr. W. Grant Keith, published in the _Burlington
-Magazine_ of January 1913, are given some reproductions of half a dozen
-drawings by Inigo Jones, which are among the most carefully finished
-specimens of his handiwork that survive. They include a ceiling for
-Wilton, 1649, and some decorative work at Oatlands Palace in Surrey.
-
-[32] Mostly preserved at Chatsworth; there are also a few at the
-British Museum.
-
-[33] It has not been found possible to illustrate this scene, as was
-intended, owing to the war having rendered the drawings at Chatsworth
-inaccessible for the time being.
-
-[34] “Cal. State Papers, Domestic,” xcv. 12.
-
-[35] Horace Walpole’s “Anecdotes of Painting.”
-
-[36] See the article on the Burlington-Devonshire Drawings in the
-_Journal of the Royal Institute of British Architects_, Third Series,
-vol. xviii., No. 10.
-
-[37] Vol. vi. p. 129, printed in full in Peter Cunningham’s “Life of
-Inigo Jones,” p. 48.
-
-[38] “The Designs for the First Movable Scenery on the English Public
-Stage,” by William Grant Keith, in _The Burlington Magazine_, Nos.
-cxxxiii. and cxxxiv., April and May 1914, where reproductions of Webb’s
-drawings are given.
-
-[39] “Thorpe Hall,” by A. W. Hakewill, 1852.
-
-[40] Neal, in his “Seats,” says it was designed by Webb; and although
-he quotes no authority he must have had some reason for the statement.
-
-[41] Willis and Clarke’s “Architectural History of the University of
-Cambridge,” ii. 366.
-
-[42] “The Old Colleges of Oxford,” by Aymer Vallance, p. 62.
-
-[43] Illustrated in “Early Renaissance Architecture in England,” by the
-present author (Batsford).
-
-[44] “Ashburnham House and the Precincts of Westminster Abbey,” by
-Harry Sirr, _Journal of the R.I.B.A._, 8th January 1910.
-
-[45] “Windsor Castle,” by Sir W. H. St John Hope, p. 329.
-
-[46] It was perhaps Pierre le Muet whose work most influenced Wren.
-
-[47] “Lives of the British Architects,” by E. Beresford Chancellor, p.
-79.
-
-[48] Walpole’s “Anecdotes of Painting.”
-
-[49] Collins’s “Peerage.”
-
-[50] This conjecture is strengthened by a reference of Evelyn’s, who
-notes that in going from Reading to Marlborough in June 1654 he saw “my
-Lord Craven’s house at Causam now in ruines, his goodly woods felling
-by the rebels.”
-
-[51] “Vit. Brit.,” i. 43, 44.
-
-[52] The curious volume of original drawings by Wynne, which is
-preserved at the Bodleian Library, and from which the illustrations
-109, 110, and 112 are reproduced, also contains drawings for work at
-Combe Abbey; it would appear, therefore, that Wynne was the architect
-employed both there and at Hamstead Marshall.
-
-[53] Wheatley and Cunningham’s “London, Past and Present.”
-
-[54] “Vit. Brit,” i. 44.
-
-[55] “Journey through England” (1722), by J. Mackay, quoted in “London,
-Past and Present.”
-
-[56] Bridges’ “History of Northamptonshire,” vol. i. p. 328.
-
-[57] The curious can compare the appearance of the old house with what
-Gibbs put in its place by referring to the plates in Bridges’ “History
-of Northamptonshire”; whether the newer design was an improvement,
-either in appearance or convenience, is open to question.
-
-[58] But see Appendix I., p. 395.
-
-[59] See “The Great House, Leyton,” by Edwin Gunn, published by the
-Committee for the Survey of the Memorials of Greater London, 1903.
-
-[60] Collins’s “Peerage,” 1741 ed., i. 334.
-
-[61] An excellent annotated catalogue of the pictures has been prepared
-by Mr. C. H. Scott and privately printed. The Boughton estates passed
-to the Dukes of Buccleuch (Montagu-Douglas-Scott) by marriage with an
-heiress of the Montagus.
-
-[62] It was begun in 1687 and finished in 1706.
-
-[63] Bridges’ “History of Northamptonshire,” i. 289, repeated by Baker
-in his history of the same county, ii. 144.
-
-[64] Baker, _ut supra_.
-
-[65] Mr. R. Blomfield’s “History of Renaissance Architecture in
-England,” p. 224.
-
-[66] “Court and Society from Elizabeth to Anne,” edited from the papers
-at Kimbolton, by the Duke of Manchester, London, 1864, p. 56.
-
-[67] “Court and Society from Elizabeth to Anne,” 1864, p. 227.
-
-[68] Letter to George Montagu, 7th July 1770; also to H. S. Conway,
-12th July 1770.
-
-[69] “Vitruvius Britannicus,” ii., pl. 81, 82.
-
-[70] The first series, in three volumes, is here referred to.
-
-[71] “Vitruvius Britannicus,” iii, pl. 27–34.
-
-[72] Collins’s “Peerage.”
-
-[73] Walpole, “Anecdotes.”
-
-[74] “Treatise on Architecture.”
-
-[75] Ferguson’s “History of Architecture,” Book IV., 1873 ed., p. 328.
-
-[76] “Memoirs of a Royal Chaplain,” by Albert Hartsborne, pp. 318–320.
-
-[77] See an article on Holkham by M. Jourdain, “Interiors of English
-Mansions,” in the _Art Journal_ of July 1911, and Lenygon’s “Decoration
-in England” and “Furniture in England” (1660–1790), 2 vols. (Batsford).
-
-[78] Mr. Percy Fitzgerald, M.A., F.S.A., in his “Robert Adam.”
-
-[79] A Latinised version of the Greek word for “Brothers.”
-
-[80] “London Past and Present.”
-
-[81] From a description by Cole, quoted in Willis and Clark’s
-“Architectural History of the University of Cambridge.”
-
-[82] London in the eighteenth century was even darker than it has been
-since the lighting has been minimised as a protection against air-raids.
-
-[83] See two articles on Huntingdon Shaw by R. Garraway Rice, F.S.A.,
-in the _Archæological Journal_, June 1895, and the _Home Counties
-Magazine_, January 1902, vol. iv., No. 13.
-
-[84] See “English Ironwork of the XVIIth and XVIIIth Centuries,” by J.
-Starkie Gardner. (Batsford.)
-
-[85] This work is attributed by Mr. Starkie Gardner to a skilful smith
-named Robert Davies.
-
-[86] See “Tapestry Weaving in England,” by W. G. Thomson. (Batsford.)
-
-[87] “Guide to an Exhibition of Tapestries, Carpets, and Furniture,
-lent by the Earl of Dalkeith to the Victoria and Albert Museum,” by A.
-F. K., 1914.
-
-
-Transcriber’s Note:
-
-1. Obvious printers’, punctuation and spelling errors have been
-   corrected silently.
-
-2. Where appropriate, original spelling has been retained.
-
-3. Superscripts are represented using the caret character, e.g. D^r.
-   or X^{xx}.
-
-4. Italics are shown as _xxx_.
-
-5. Bold print is shown as =xxx=.
-
-6. In the Note at the beginning of the Index, some words are
-   underlined. For the purpose of this work, these words have been
-   shown as written in italics, to emphasize them.
-
-7. Some hyphenated and non-hyphenated versions of the same words have
-   been retained as in the original.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE ENGLISH HOME FROM CHARLES
-I. TO GEORGE IV. ***
-
-Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will
-be renamed.
-
-Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright
-law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works,
-so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the
-United States without permission and without paying copyright
-royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part
-of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm
-concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark,
-and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following
-the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use
-of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for
-copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very
-easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation
-of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project
-Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away--you may
-do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected
-by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark
-license, especially commercial redistribution.
-
-START: FULL LICENSE
-
-THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
-PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
-
-To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
-distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
-(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
-Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
-Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at
-www.gutenberg.org/license.
-
-Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic works
-
-1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
-electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
-and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
-(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
-the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
-destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your
-possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
-Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound
-by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the
-person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph
-1.E.8.
-
-1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be
-used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
-agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
-things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
-even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
-paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this
-agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm
-electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
-
-1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the
-Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection
-of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual
-works in the collection are in the public domain in the United
-States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the
-United States and you are located in the United States, we do not
-claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing,
-displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as
-all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope
-that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting
-free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm
-works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the
-Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily
-comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the
-same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when
-you share it without charge with others.
-
-1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
-what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are
-in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States,
-check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this
-agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing,
-distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any
-other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no
-representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any
-country other than the United States.
-
-1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
-
-1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other
-immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear
-prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work
-on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the
-phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed,
-performed, viewed, copied or distributed:
-
-  This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
-  most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no
-  restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it
-  under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this
-  eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the
-  United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where
-  you are located before using this eBook.
-
-1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is
-derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
-contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the
-copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in
-the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
-redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project
-Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply
-either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or
-obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm
-trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
-
-1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
-with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
-must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
-additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
-will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works
-posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the
-beginning of this work.
-
-1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
-License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
-work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
-
-1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
-electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
-prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
-active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
-Gutenberg-tm License.
-
-1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
-compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including
-any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access
-to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format
-other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official
-version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm website
-(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
-to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means
-of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain
-Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the
-full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
-
-1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
-performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
-unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
-
-1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
-access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
-provided that:
-
-* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
-  the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
-  you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed
-  to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has
-  agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project
-  Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid
-  within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are
-  legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty
-  payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project
-  Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in
-  Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg
-  Literary Archive Foundation."
-
-* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
-  you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
-  does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
-  License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
-  copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue
-  all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm
-  works.
-
-* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of
-  any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
-  electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
-  receipt of the work.
-
-* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
-  distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
-
-1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than
-are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing
-from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of
-the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the Foundation as set
-forth in Section 3 below.
-
-1.F.
-
-1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
-effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
-works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project
-Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm
-electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may
-contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate
-or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
-intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or
-other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
-cannot be read by your equipment.
-
-1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
-of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
-Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
-Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
-liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
-fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
-LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
-PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
-TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
-LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
-INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
-DAMAGE.
-
-1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
-defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
-receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
-written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
-received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium
-with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you
-with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in
-lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person
-or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second
-opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If
-the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing
-without further opportunities to fix the problem.
-
-1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
-in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO
-OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT
-LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
-
-1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
-warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
-damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement
-violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the
-agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or
-limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or
-unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the
-remaining provisions.
-
-1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
-trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
-providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in
-accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the
-production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm
-electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses,
-including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of
-the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this
-or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or
-additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any
-Defect you cause.
-
-Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
-
-Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
-electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
-computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It
-exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations
-from people in all walks of life.
-
-Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
-assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
-goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
-remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
-Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
-and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future
-generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
-Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see
-Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at
-www.gutenberg.org
-
-Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary
-Archive Foundation
-
-The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit
-501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
-state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
-Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
-number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary
-Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by
-U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
-
-The Foundation's business office is located at 809 North 1500 West,
-Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up
-to date contact information can be found at the Foundation's website
-and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact
-
-Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
-Literary Archive Foundation
-
-Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without
-widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
-increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
-freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest
-array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations
-($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
-status with the IRS.
-
-The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
-charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
-States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
-considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
-with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations
-where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND
-DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular
-state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate
-
-While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
-have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
-against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
-approach us with offers to donate.
-
-International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
-any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
-outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
-
-Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation
-methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
-ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To
-donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate
-
-Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
-
-Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
-Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be
-freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
-distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of
-volunteer support.
-
-Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
-editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
-the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
-necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
-edition.
-
-Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
-facility: www.gutenberg.org
-
-This website includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
-including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
-Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
-subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
diff --git a/old/67419-0.zip b/old/67419-0.zip
deleted file mode 100644
index f407d7e..0000000
--- a/old/67419-0.zip
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h.zip b/old/67419-h.zip
deleted file mode 100644
index 8e4df00..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h.zip
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/67419-h.htm b/old/67419-h/67419-h.htm
deleted file mode 100644
index 1d8cb5e..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/67419-h.htm
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,15073 +0,0 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
-    "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
-<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en">
-  <head>
-    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=utf-8" />
-    <meta http-equiv="Content-Style-Type" content="text/css" />
-    <title>
-      The English Home from Charles I. to George IV, by J. Alfred Gotch&mdash;A Project Gutenberg eBook
-    </title>
-    <link rel="coverpage" href="images/cover.jpg" />
-    <style type="text/css">
-
-body {
-    margin-left: 10%;
-    margin-right: 10%;
-}
-
-    h1,h2 {
-    text-align: center; /* all headings centered */
-    clear: both;
-    font-weight: normal;}
-
-h1.smaller  {font-size: 100%;}
-
-h2   {font-size: 100%; }
-
-.subhed { display: block; margin-top: 1em; font-size: 100%; font-weight: normal; }
-
-.subhed1 { display: block; margin-top: 1em; font-size: 120%; font-weight: normal; }
-
-.subhed2 { display: block; margin-top: 1em; font-size: 90%; font-weight: normal; }
-
-#half-title {  text-align: center;
-               font-size: 150%; }
-
-p {
-    margin-top: .51em;
-    text-align: justify;
-    margin-bottom: .49em;
-    text-indent: 1.2em;}
-
-.p-min    {margin-top: -.6em;}
-.p0       {margin-top: 0em;}
-.p2       {margin-top: 2em;}
-.p4       {margin-top: 4em;}
-.p6       {margin-top: 6em;}
-
-hr {
-    width: 33%;
-    margin-top: 2em;
-    margin-bottom: 2em;
-    margin-left: 33.5%;
-    margin-right: 33.5%;
-    clear: both;
-}
-
-hr.tb   {width: 45%; margin-left: 27.5%; margin-right: 27.5%;}
-hr.chap {width: 65%; margin-left: 17.5%; margin-right: 17.5%;}
-@media print { hr.chap {display: none; visibility: hidden;} }
-
-div.chapter {page-break-before: always;}
-
-ul       { list-style-type: none; }
-li.i1 {text-indent: 1em;}
-li.i2 {text-indent: 2em;}
-
-.hangingindent {
-  padding-left: 2em ;
-  text-indent: -2em ;}
-
-.hangingindent1 {
-  padding-left: 3.25em ;
-  text-indent: -2em ;}
-
-
-table {
-margin: auto;
-width:auto;
-border: 0;
-border-spacing: 0;
-border-collapse: collapse; }
-
-td {
-padding:  .05em .2em .2em 2.5em;
-border: .1em none white;
-text-align: left;
-text-indent: -2em; }
-
-th.chap {
-font-weight: normal;
-font-size: x-small;
-text-align: left;
-padding-left: 1em; }
-
-th.pag {
-font-weight: normal;
-font-size: x-small;
-text-align: right;
-padding-left: 6em; }
-
-td.chn {
-text-align: right;
-vertical-align: top;
-padding-right: 1em;
-font-weight: bold;  }
-
-td.cht {
-text-align: left;
-vertical-align: top;
-padding-left: 1em;
-text-indent: -1em;
-font-weight: bold;}
-
-td.cht1 {
-text-align: left;
-vertical-align: top;
-padding-left: 3em;
-text-indent: -2em;}
-
-td.pag {
-text-align: right;
-vertical-align: bottom;
-padding-left: 2em;}
-
-.pagenum { /* uncomment the next line for invisible page numbers */
-    /*  visibility: hidden;  */
-    position: absolute;
-    left: 92%;
-    font-size: smaller;
-    text-align: right;
-    font-style: normal;
-    font-weight: normal;
-    font-variant: normal;
-} /* page numbers */
-
-.blockquot {
-    margin-left: 5%;
-    margin-right: 10%;
-    font-size: 90%;
-}
-
-
-.center   {text-align: center;
-           text-indent: 0em;}
-
-.left    {text-align: left;}
-
-.right    {text-align: right;}
-
-.r2    {text-align: right;
-        margin-right: 2em;}
-
-.left3 {text-align: left;
-        margin-left: 3em;}
-
-.smcap    {font-variant: small-caps;}
-
-.allsmcap {font-variant: small-caps; text-transform: lowercase;}
-
-.u        {text-decoration: underline;}
-
-.xs { font-size: x-small;}
-
-.sm { font-size: small;}
-
-.lg  { font-size: large;}
-
-.xl  { font-size: x-large;}
-
-.xxl  { font-size: xx-large;}
-
-.smaller  {font-size: 90%; }
-
-/* Images */
-
-img {
-    max-width: 100%;
-    height: auto;
-}
-
-.figcenter {
-    margin: auto;
-    text-align: center;
-    page-break-inside: avoid;
-    max-width: 100%;
-}
-
-
-/* Footnotes */
-.footnotes        {border: 1px dashed;}
-
-.footnote         {margin-left: 10%; margin-right: 10%; font-size: 0.9em;}
-
-.footnote .label  {position: absolute; right: 84%; text-align: right;}
-
-.fnanchor {
-    vertical-align: super;
-    font-size: .8em;
-    text-decoration:
-    none;
-}
-
-/* Poetry */
-
-.poetry-container
-{
-text-align: center;
-font-size: 90%;
-}
-
-.poetry
-{
-display: inline-block;
-text-align: left;
-margin-left: 2.5em;
-line-height: 100%;
-}
-
-@media handheld
-{
-  .poetry
-  {
-    display: block;
-    margin-left: 1.5em;
-  }
-}
-
-.poetry .stanza
-{
-margin: 1em 0em 1em 1em;
-}
-
-.poetry .ileft  {margin-left: -.6em;}
-.poetry .i1  {margin-left: 1em;}
-.poetry .i2  {margin-left: 2em;}
-
-@media print { .poetry {display: block;} }
-.x-ebookmaker .poetry {display: block;}
-
-/* Transcriber's notes */
-.transnote {background-color: #E6E6FA;
-    color: black;
-     font-size:smaller;
-     padding:0.5em;
-     margin-bottom:5em;
-     font-family:sans-serif, serif; }
-
-    </style>
-  </head>
-<body>
-<p style='text-align:center; font-size:1.2em; font-weight:bold'>The Project Gutenberg eBook of The English Home from Charles I. to George IV., by John Alfred Gotch</p>
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
-most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
-whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
-of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online
-at <a href="https://www.gutenberg.org">www.gutenberg.org</a>. If you
-are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws of the
-country where you are located before using this eBook.
-</div>
-
-<p style='display:block; margin-top:1em; margin-bottom:0; margin-left:2em; text-indent:-2em'>Title: The English Home from Charles I. to George IV.</p>
-<p style='display:block; margin-left:2em; text-indent:0; margin-top:0; margin-bottom:1em;'>Its Architecture, Decoration and Garden Design</p>
-<p style='display:block; margin-top:1em; margin-bottom:0; margin-left:2em; text-indent:-2em'>Author: John Alfred Gotch</p>
-<p style='display:block; text-indent:0; margin:1em 0'>Release Date: February 16, 2022 [eBook #67419]</p>
-<p style='display:block; text-indent:0; margin:1em 0'>Language: English</p>
-  <p style='display:block; margin-top:1em; margin-bottom:0; margin-left:2em; text-indent:-2em; text-align:left'>Produced by: MWS, Karin Spence and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images generously made available by The Internet Archive/American Libraries.)</p>
-<div style='margin-top:2em; margin-bottom:4em'>*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE ENGLISH HOME FROM CHARLES I. TO GEORGE IV. ***</div>
-
-<p id="half-title" class="p6">THE ENGLISH HOME<br />
-
-<span class="sm">FROM CHARLES I. TO GEORGE IV.</span></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_frontis" style="width: 516px">
-     <p class="right p2 smcap">Frontispiece</p>
-     <img
-    class="p0"
-    src="images/i_frontis.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm">YORK BUILDINGS, <span class="smcap">Adelphi Stairs and Waterworks</span>.</p>
-     <p class="center p-min sm">(<i>from a water-colour drawing by Thomas Sandby, R.A.</i>)</p>
-  </div>
-
-
-<h1 class="smaller">THE<br />
-
-<span class="xxl">ENGLISH HOME</span><br />
-
-<span class="lg">FROM CHARLES I. <span class="allsmcap">TO</span> GEORGE IV.</span></h1>
-
-<p class="center p2 lg">ITS ARCHITECTURE,
-DECORATION
-AND GARDEN DESIGN</p>
-
-<p class="center p2 sm">BY</p>
-
-<p class="center lg">J. ALFRED GOTCH, <span class="allsmcap">F.S.A.</span>, <span class="allsmcap">F.R.I.B.A.</span></p>
-
-<p class="center xs p0">AUTHOR OF “ARCHITECTURE OF THE RENAISSANCE IN ENGLAND,”
-“EARLY RENAISSANCE ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND,” “THE GROWTH OF
-THE ENGLISH HOUSE,” ETC.</p>
-
-<p class="center p2 sm">WITH UPWARDS OF 300 ILLUSTRATIONS FROM<br />
-PHOTOGRAPHS, DRAWINGS, AND ENGRAVINGS</p>
-
-<p class="center p2 sm"><i>SECOND IMPRESSION</i>
-<i>With Corrections</i></p>
-
-
-<p class="center p2"><span class="sm">LONDON</span><br />
-<span class="lg">B. T. BATSFORD <span class="smcap">Ltd.</span>, 94 HIGH HOLBORN</span></p>
-
-
-
-
-<p class="center sm p4"><i>First Impression, August 1918</i><br />
-<i>Second Impression, April 1919</i></p>
-
-
-<p class="center xs p4">PRINTED IN GREAT BRITAIN AT<br />
-THE DARIEN PRESS, EDINBURGH</p>
-
-
-
-<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<h2>LIST OF SUBSCRIBERS.</h2>
-</div>
-
-<p>HER MOST GRACIOUS MAJESTY THE QUEEN</p>
-
-
-<div class="blockquot">
-
-<p>The Most Hon. The Marquis of Ailsa</p>
-
-<p>The Rt. Hon. The Countess of Ancaster</p>
-
-<p>The Rt. Hon. The Countess of Antrim</p>
-
-<p>Capt. The Rt. Hon. Viscount Althorp</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">The Architectural Association, London, per F. R. Yerbury, Esq., Secretary</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">The Society of Architects, London, per C. McArthur Butler, Esq., Secretary</p>
-
-<p>J. R. de M. Abbott, Esq., Acton, W.</p>
-
-<p>Peter Adam, Esq., J.P., Cairndhu, Kidderminster</p>
-
-<p>Philip L. Agnew, Esq., J.P., Farthingstone, Northants</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. Ahrend &amp; Zoon, Booksellers, Amsterdam</p>
-
-<p>Akademiska Bokhandeln, Helsingfors</p>
-
-<p>Bryce Allan, Esq., Wemyss Bay, Renfrewshire</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Messrs. E. G. Allen &amp; Son, Ltd., Booksellers, London, W.C.</p>
-
-<p>J. A. O. Allan, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., Aberdeen</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Arthur Acland Allen, Esq., M.P., L.C.C., London, S.W.</p>
-
-<p>Walter C. Alston, Esq., Newmarket</p>
-
-<p>Chas. Ambler, Esq., Bradford, Yorks</p>
-
-<p>John Ambler, Esq., Baildon, Yorks</p>
-
-<p>S. Ambler, Esq., Harrogate, Yorks</p>
-
-<p>Victor Ames, Esq., Thornham, King’s Lynn</p>
-
-<p>J. A. Amschell, Esq., London, S.W.</p>
-
-<p>Cecil Bruyn Andrews, Esq., Hove, Sussex</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Messrs. Angus &amp; Robertson, Ltd. Booksellers, Sydney, N.S.W.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">F. H. Anstruther-Gough-Calthorpe, Esq., J.P., Winchfield, Hants</p>
-
-<p>Lieut.-Col. W. Anstruther-Gray, M.P., Kilmany, Fife</p>
-
-<p>Harold D. Arbuthnot, Esq., Worplesden</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Messrs. James Archibald &amp; Co., Ltd., Booksellers, Hull</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. H. R. Armitage, Walton Lea, Warrington</p>
-
-<p>Chas. Armstrong, Esq., Cambridge</p>
-
-<p>T. M. E. Armstrong, Esq., Limpsfield, Surrey</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Army &amp; Navy Co-operative Society, Ltd., Book Dept., London, S.W.</p>
-
-<p>Chas. A. Ashe, Esq.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">The Rev. Dr. Dukinfield Astley, M.A. East Rudham, King’s Lynn</p>
-
-
-<p class="p2">His Grace The Duke of Buccleuch</p>
-
-<p>The Most Hon. The Marchioness of Bute</p>
-
-<p>The Rt. Hon. Earl Bathurst</p>
-
-<p>The Rt. Hon. Earl Beauchamp, K.G.</p>
-
-<p>Major The Rt. Hon. Lord Blythswood</p>
-
-<p>The Rt. Hon. Sir John Brunner, Bt. D.L., LL.D.</p>
-
-<p>Belfast Public Library</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Birmingham University Library, per W. H. Cope, Esq., Librarian</p>
-
-<p>Bootle Public Library, per C. H. Hunt, Esq., Librarian</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Bradford Public Library, per Butler Wood, Esq., Librarian</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Brighton Public Library, per Henry D. Roberts, M.B.E., Director</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. J. T. Babington, Great Durnford, Salisbury</p>
-
-<p>W. St. Clair Baddeley, Esq., J.P., Painswick, Glos.</p>
-
-<p>Mr. James Bain, Bookseller, London, W.C.</p>
-
-<p>Mr. Edward Baker, Bookseller, Birmingham</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. J. Baker &amp; Son, Booksellers, Clifton, Bristol</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. A. H. Shorland Ball, Burton, Westmorland</p>
-
-<p>C. H. Barber, Esq., Chelford, Cheshire</p>
-
-<p>S. Barker, Esq.</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. Barnicott &amp; Pearce, Booksellers, Taunton</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Captain F. Jardine Barnish, Appleton Cross, nr. Warrington</p>
-
-<p>Stanley G. R. Barratt, Esq., Totteridge, Herts</p>
-
-<p>F. C. W. Barrett, Esq., London, S.W.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Thomas Barrett-Lennard, Esq., D.L. J.P., Horsfold Manor, Norwich</p>
-
-<p>Ernest R. Barrow, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., London, W.C.</p>
-
-<p>J. M. Barwick, Esq., Yeadon, nr. Leeds</p>
-
-<p>C. F. Bates, Esq., Newport, Mon.</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. Battiscombe &amp; Harris, Ltd., London, W.</p>
-
-<p>Señor M. Bayes, Bookseller, Barcelona</p>
-
-<p>A. Chester Beatty, Esq., London, W.</p>
-
-<p>W. Gedney Beatty, Esq., New York</p>
-
-<p>J. W. Beaumont, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., Manchester</p>
-
-<p>A. Stuart Beazley, Esq., Reigate</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">George Lord Beeforth, Esq., F.S.A., D.L., J.P., Scarborough</p>
-
-<p>Walter P. Belk, Esq., Sheffield</p>
-
-<p>The Rev. Randolph Berens, M.A., London, S.W.</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. Berkeley, Cotheridge Court, Worcester</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. Berkeley, Spetchley Park, Worcester</p>
-
-<p>H. F. M. Berthon, Esq., R.N., H.M.S. Warspite</p>
-
-<p>The Rev. E. Best-Dalison, M.A., Boxley, Maidstone</p>
-
-<p>R. A. P. Bevan, Esq., J.P., Cuckfield, Sussex</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. Bickers &amp; Son, Ltd., Booksellers, London</p>
-
-<p>Mr. J. G. Bisset, Bookseller, Aberdeen</p>
-
-<p>George Blackall-Simonds, Esq., Goring Heath, Oxon</p>
-
-<p>Norman A. Blackburn, Esq., Dewsbury, Yorks.</p>
-
-<p>Mr. B. H. Blackwell, Bookseller, Oxford</p>
-
-<p>Thomas R. Blampied, Esq., Samares, Jersey</p>
-
-<p>Frank Ed. B. Blanc, Esq., Edinburgh</p>
-
-<p>Edw. T. Boardman, Esq., F.R.I.B.A. Norwich</p>
-
-<p>Percy Bois, Esq., Godalming, Surrey</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">The Rev. Canon Bonney, Sc.D., LL.D., F.R.S., F.S.A., Cambridge</p>
-
-<p>The Bon Marché, Book Dept., Liverpool</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">J. A. N. Booker, Esq., D.L., J.P., Woodfield, nr. Ross, Herefordshire</p>
-
-<p>John Borie, Esq., London, W.</p>
-
-<p>F. K. Borrow, Esq., Haslemere, Surrey</p>
-
-<p>Señor Agustin Bosch, Bookseller, Barcelona</p>
-
-<p>Hubert S. M. Bourke, Esq., Harlow, Essex</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. Bowes &amp; Bowes, Booksellers, Cambridge</p>
-
-<p>Frederick Bradbury, Esq., Sheffield</p>
-
-<p>R. F. Brain, Esq., Chatham</p>
-
-<p>Mr. T. A. Braithwaite, Bookseller, Wakefield</p>
-
-<p>W. R. Branagan, Esq., Fairfield, Liverpool</p>
-
-<p>Major Leonard Brassey, M.P., Peterborough</p>
-
-<p>John C. E. Bridge, Esq., J.P., Aylesbury</p>
-
-<p>Harry Bridson, Esq., M.A., Bolton</p>
-
-<p>T. R. Bridson, Esq., London, S.W.</p>
-
-<p>Walter H. Brierley, Esq., F.S.A., F.R.I.B.A., York</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Messs. Bright’s Stores, Ltd., Booksellers, Bournemouth</p>
-
-<p>Miss Mary Brindle, Polperro, Cornwall</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. Brintons, Ltd., Kidderminster</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. G. O. Broms, Dormans Park, Surrey</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">The Rev. C. C. Brookes, M.A., Lillington Vicarage, Leamington</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. Brooks, Clifton, Bristol</p>
-
-<p>C. W. Wilsone Broun, Esq., Rugeley, Staffs</p>
-
-<p>W. Langdon Brown, Esq., M.D., London, W.</p>
-
-<p>W. Talbot Brown, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., Wellingborough</p>
-
-<p>Mr. William Brown, Bookseller, Edinburgh</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Messrs. Browne &amp; Browne, Ltd., Booksellers, Newcastle-on-Tyne</p>
-
-<p>Mr. Charles E. Brumwell, Bookseller, Hereford</p>
-
-<p>John M. Bryce, Esq., Glasgow</p>
-
-<p>Miss Bulley</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Messrs. J. &amp; E. Bumpus, Ltd., Booksellers, London, W.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Alfred W. N. Burder, Esq., J.P., F.S.A. Belcombe, Bradford-on-Avon</p>
-
-<p>Rowland Burdon-Muller, Esq., London, W.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Messrs. Burleigh’s Library, Booksellers, London, S.W.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">J. W. Stanley Burmester, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., Westminster, S.W.</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. Burnside, Ltd., Booksellers, Blackheath, S.E.</p>
-
-<p>Jas. E. Bush, Esq., Melksham, Wilts.</p>
-
-<p>G. C. Bushy, Esq.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Mrs. A. J. Agard Butler, Church Langton Rectory, Market Harborough</p>
-
-
-<p class="p2">The Most Hon. The Marquis of Crewe, K.G.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">The Rt. Hon. Earl Curzon of Kedleston, G.C.S.I., G.C.I.E.</p>
-
-<p>Lady George Campbell</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">The Rt. Hon. Sir Fairfax Cartwright, G.C.M.G., G.C.V.O.</p>
-
-<p>The Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Cardiff Public Libraries, per Harry Farr, Esq., Librarian</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Charterhouse School Library, Godalming, per J. L. Stokes, Esq., Librarian</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Chelsea Public Libraries, per J. Henry Quinn, Esq., Librarian</p>
-
-<p>J. T. Cackett, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., Newcastle-on-Tyne</p>
-
-<p>Frank R. Calburn, Esq., Effingham Manor, Surrey</p>
-
-<p>Arthur Card, Esq., St. Albans</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Miss M. Smith-Carington, Ashby Folville Manor, Melton Mowbray</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">W. D. Caröe, Esq., M.A., F.S.A., F.R.I.B.A., Westminster, S.W.</p>
-
-<p>B. Carpenter, Esq., London, W.</p>
-
-<p>Walter J. Carter, Esq., Oxford</p>
-
-<p>Walter Cave, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., London, W.</p>
-
-<p>A. Cay, Esq., Leigh Woods, Bristol</p>
-
-<p>H. E. Chafy, Esq., Rous Lench Court, Evesham</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">E. Beresford Chancellor, Esq., M.A., Wargrave, Berks.</p>
-
-<p>Wm. J. Checkley, Esq., London, N.W.</p>
-
-<p>Frederick Clark, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., Darlington</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. Clarke &amp; Satchell, Booksellers, Leicester</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. C. E. Clayton, Henfield, Sussex</p>
-
-<p>H. M. Cleminson, Esq., Writtle, Chelmsford</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Messrs. Coates &amp; Bairstow, Booksellers, Huddersfield</p>
-
-<p>S. Pepys Cockerell, Esq., Kensington</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">J. W. Cockrill, Esq., A.R.I.B.A., M.I.C.E., Gt. Yarmouth</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Mons. E. Coenen, Sous-Intendant Militaire Belge, Bourbourg, France</p>
-
-<p>Marcus E. Collins, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., London, E.C.</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. Combridge, Ltd., Booksellers, Dublin</p>
-
-<p>Mr. J. G. Commin, Bookseller, Exeter</p>
-
-<p>R. C. de la Condamine, Esq., Chelsea</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">The Rev. A. H. Coombes, M.A., Hurstpierpoint College, Sussex</p>
-
-<p>Edwin Cooper, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., London, W.C.</p>
-
-<p>Mr. Ernest Cooper, Bookseller, Bournemouth</p>
-
-<p>L. A. Cooper, Esq., Ealing, W.</p>
-
-<p>G. Wilfred Copeland, Esq., Basford, Stoke-on-Trent</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Ronald Copeland, Esq., Tittensor Chase, Stoke-on-Trent</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Messrs. Cornish Bros., Ltd., Booksellers, Birmingham</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Messrs. James Cornish &amp; Sons, Booksellers, Liverpool</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. J. E. Cornish, Ltd., Booksellers, Manchester</p>
-
-<p>Reginald Cory, Esq., Duffryn, nr. Cardiff</p>
-
-<p>Country Life, Ltd., London, W.C.</p>
-
-<p>Alfred W. Cox, Esq., Glencarse, Perthshire</p>
-
-<p>Frank Crawley, Esq., M.D., Dublin</p>
-
-<p>G. A. Crawley, Esq., London, S.W.</p>
-
-<p>Miss Natalie de M. Croft, Ware, Herts</p>
-
-<p>W. J. Croome, Esq., Feltrim, Weston-super-Mare</p>
-
-<p>Fred. H. Crossley, Esq., Chester</p>
-
-<p>John K. Currie, Esq., Billingham, Stockton-on-Tees</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Laurence Currie, Esq., M.A., J.P., Farnborough, Hants</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. Cuthbert, Beaufront Castle, Hexham</p>
-
-
-<p class="p2">His Highness Prince Frederick Duleep Singh, M.V.O.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">The Most Hon. Flora, Marchioness of Dufferin and Ava</p>
-
-<p>The Rt. Hon. Earl of Donoughmore</p>
-
-<p>Lady Eva Dugdale</p>
-
-<p>The Rt. Hon. Lady D’Abernon</p>
-
-<p>The Rt. Hon. Lord Desborough, K.C.V.O.</p>
-
-<p>Sir Thomas L. Devitt, Bt.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Deptford Public Libraries, per F. J. Peplow, Esq., Librarian</p>
-
-<p>National Library of Ireland, Dublin</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Dundee Public Library, per A. H. Millar, Esq., LL.D., Librarian</p>
-
-<p>Hylton B. Dale, Esq., London, W.C.</p>
-
-<p>T. W. Dannatt, Esq., Blackheath</p>
-
-<p>T. J. Daniel, Esq., Moseley, Birmingham</p>
-
-<p>William J. Dargan, Esq., M.D., Dublin</p>
-
-<p>Francis Hastings Dauney, Esq., Ryde, I. of W.</p>
-
-<p>Edward O. Davey, Esq., Dunmow, Essex</p>
-
-<p>E. Guy Dawber, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., London, W.</p>
-
-<p>The Rev. William Dawson, M.A., Loughton, Essex</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Messrs. Wm. Dawson &amp; Sons, Ltd., Booksellers, London, E.C.</p>
-
-<p>W. M. Dean, Esq., Sunningdale, Berks</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Messrs. Deighton, Bell &amp; Co., Ltd., Booksellers, Cambridge</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. A. &amp; F. Denny, Booksellers, London, W.C.</p>
-
-<p>H. Llewellyn Dent, Esq., Kew</p>
-
-<p>Devonshire Library, Ltd., Booksellers, Buxton</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">T. F. G. Dexter, Esq., B.A., B.Sc., Perranporth, Cornwall</p>
-
-<p>Edward Percival Dickin, Esq., Brightlingsea</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. B. Diver &amp; Son, Booksellers, Cambridge</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. Dodsley, Mansfield, Notts</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. Donaldson-Hudson, Market Drayton</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. Aitken Dott &amp; Son, Booksellers, Edinburgh</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. Douglas &amp; Foulis, Booksellers, Edinburgh</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Mrs. Edward Douty, Clifford Manor, nr. Stratford-on-Avon</p>
-
-<p>Ernest Dunkels, Esq., Maidenhead</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">James B. Dunn, Esq., A.R.S.A., F.R.I.B.A., Edinburgh</p>
-
-<p>Ralph S. Dutton, Esq., Alresford, Hants</p>
-
-<p>Mr. W. Dymock, Bookseller, Sydney, N.S.W.</p>
-
-
-<p class="p2">Royal Scottish Museum, Edinburgh</p>
-
-<p>Major Cyril Earle, T.D., Hull</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">The Rev. H. V. S. Eck, M.A., Ardeley Vicarage, Hertfordshire</p>
-
-<p>Colonel Robt. W. Edis, C.B., Great Ormesby, Norfolk</p>
-
-<p>The Educational Depository, Booksellers, Dublin</p>
-
-<p>Mr. Francis Edwards, Bookseller, London, W.</p>
-
-<p>Major J. Edward Elin, London, W.</p>
-
-<p>The Rev. Prof. Henry Ellershaw, M.A., Durham</p>
-
-<p>Mr. Andrew Elliott, Bookseller, Edinburgh</p>
-
-<p>Colonel W. Elliott, Sutton Valence, Maidstone</p>
-
-<p>Geoffrey Ellis, Esq., St. Leonards-on-Sea</p>
-
-<p>H. C. Ellis, Esq., Hemel Hempstead</p>
-
-<p>Captain H. C. Ellis, Jarvis Brook, Sussex</p>
-
-<p>John Every, Esq., Lewes, Sussex</p>
-
-
-<p class="p2">Miss M. Fairholme, Mitchelstown Castle, Co. Cork</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">A. Douglas Farmer, Esq., Windham Club, St. James’, S.W.</p>
-
-<p>Miss Margaret Farnley-Smith, Sherborne, Dorset</p>
-
-<p>Lionel Faudel-Phillips, Esq., Braintree, Essex</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">J. E. Fawcett, Esq., J.P., Farnham, Knaresborough, Yorks</p>
-
-<p>Major Guy Feilden, Witney, Oxon</p>
-
-<p>Miss V. M. Feilden, Bebington, Cheshire</p>
-
-<p>P. H. Feilding, Esq., Chiddingly, Sussex</p>
-
-<p>F. Fenwick, Esq., Wolsingham, Durham</p>
-
-<p>Ivor A. B. Ferguson, Esq., London</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Lieut. F. E. Fetherstonhaugh, R.N.V.R., North Berwick, Scotland</p>
-
-<p>E. Willoughby Firth, Esq., J.P., Hope, nr. Sheffield</p>
-
-<p>Major Benton Fletcher, Cobham, Surrey</p>
-
-<p>Miss M. Fletcher, Newnham College, Cambridge</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. Flooks &amp; Manning, Booksellers, Melksham</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. Follett, Thetford, Norfolk</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Chas. W. Forbes, Esq., D.L., J.P., of Callendar, Falkirk, Scotland</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. James Forman, Nottingham</p>
-
-<p>Mr. Robert Forrester, Bookseller, Glasgow</p>
-
-<p>George Fottrell, Esq., Dublin</p>
-
-<p>Mr. E. S. Fowler, Bookseller, Eastbourne</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">T. Musgrave Francis, Esq., D.L., J.P. Quy Hall, Cambridge</p>
-
-<p>Herbert Freyberg, Esq., F.S.I., M.S.A., London, S.W.</p>
-
-<p>Mr. C. E. Fritze, Bookseller, Stockholm</p>
-
-<p>T. W. Fry, Esq., J.P., F.S.A., Darlington</p>
-
-<p>Major Robert F. Fuller, J.P., Great Chalfield, Wilts</p>
-
-
-<p class="p2">Lady Henry Grosvenor</p>
-
-<p>Sir Ernest Goodhart, Bt.</p>
-
-<p>Sir William Garforth, LL.D.</p>
-
-<p>Galignani Library, Booksellers, Paris</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. Galloway &amp; Porter, Booksellers, Cambridge</p>
-
-<p>Arthur Galton, Esq., M.A., Bourne, Lincs.</p>
-
-<p>Ewan Cameron Galton, Esq., J.P., Eynsham, Oxon</p>
-
-<p>Miss Clare Galwey, Monkstown, co. Dublin</p>
-
-<p>Mr. Alex. Gardner, Bookseller, Paisley</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. Garnett, Leckhampton, Glos.</p>
-
-<p>Major S. H. Garrard, Daventry, Northants</p>
-
-<p>Francis N. A. Garry, Esq., London</p>
-
-<p>MM. Georg &amp; Co., Librairie, Geneva</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. William George’s Sons, Booksellers, Bristol</p>
-
-<p>Edward M. Gibbs, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., Sheffield</p>
-
-<p>Lt.-Colonel George A. Gibbs, M.P., Bristol</p>
-
-<p>H. Martin Gibbs, Esq., J.P., Flax-Bourton, Somerset</p>
-
-<p>John Gibson, Esq., London, E.C.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Messrs. H. M. Gilbert &amp; Son, Booksellers, Southampton</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. Godfrey Giles &amp; Co., London, W.</p>
-
-<p>Francis V. Gill, Esq., Bradford, Yorks</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Henry Neville Gladstone, Esq., J.P., Burton Manor, Chester</p>
-
-<p>Maurice Glyn, Esq., J.P., Much Hadham, Herts.</p>
-
-<p>Walter H. Godfrey, Esq., F.S.A., London, S.W.</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. W. E. &amp; J. Goss, Booksellers, Kettering</p>
-
-<p>Mr. H. J. Goulden, Bookseller, Canterbury</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Prof. Chas. Gourlay, Esq., B.Sc., A.R.I.B.A., F.S.A. Scot., Glasgow</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">W. V. S. Gradwell-Goodwin, Esq., J.P., Silverdale, Staffordshire</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. Robert Grant, Lingfield, Surrey</p>
-
-<p>Trevor Grant, Esq., London, W.</p>
-
-<p>H. St. George Gray, Esq., Taunton Castle, Somerset</p>
-
-<p>T. Grazebrook, Esq., The Dene, nr. Stourbridge</p>
-
-<p>Frank Green, Esq., F.S.A., Treasurer’s House, York</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Benson Greenall, Esq., Lt. Cheshire Regt., London, E.C.</p>
-
-<p>O. W. Greene, Esq., Beckenham, Kent</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. Greene’s Library, Dublin</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Hubert J. Greenwood, Esq., J.P., L.C.C., F.S.A., London, S.W.</p>
-
-<p>Mr. George Gregory, Bookseller, Bath</p>
-
-<p>John R. Gregory, Esq., London, W.</p>
-
-<p>Major L. Gregson, London, S.W.</p>
-
-<p>E. Hyla Greves, Esq., M.D., Bournemouth</p>
-
-<p>Geo. J. Gribble, Esq., J.P., London</p>
-
-<p>J. Henry Griffith, Esq., Llanbedr, Merioneth.</p>
-
-<p>Percival D. Griffiths, Esq., Sandridge, Herts.</p>
-
-<p>W. H. Grinstead, Esq., Eastbourne</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. Gerald Guinness, Chippenham, Wilts.</p>
-
-<p>Lieut. R. S. Guinness, R.N.V.R., H.M.S. “Monarch”</p>
-
-<p>Mr. N. J. Gumperts, Bookseller, Gothenburg</p>
-
-<p>Dr. Gunther, Hampton Wick, Kingston-on-Thames</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. Reginald Gurney, Norwich</p>
-
-
-<p class="p2">The Rt. Hon. Viscount Halifax, M.A., F.S.A.</p>
-
-<p>The Rt. Hon. Lord Hastings</p>
-
-<p>The Rt. Hon. F. Leverton Harris, M.P.</p>
-
-<p>Sir William St. John Hope, Litt.D., D.C.L., M.A.</p>
-
-<p>The Rev. Andrew Halden, Inverkeilor, Forfarshire</p>
-
-<p>Charles A. H. Hall, Esq., J.P., Basingstoke</p>
-
-<p>Ernest B. Hall, Esq., Market Drayton, Staffs.</p>
-
-<p>John Hall, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., Sunderland</p>
-
-<p>Mr. Fred. Hanna, Bookseller, Dublin</p>
-
-<p>George Hampton, Esq., Lingham, Wimborne, Dorset</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. Hargreaves, Bury St. Edmunds</p>
-
-<p>R. L. Harmsworth, Esq., M.P., London, W.</p>
-
-<p>W. H. Harrison, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., Westminster, S.W.</p>
-
-<p>Mr. W. Harrison, Bookseller, Ipswich</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. Harrison &amp; Sons, Booksellers, London, W.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Ernest Hartland, Esq., M.A., F.S.A., J.P., Chepstow, Mon.</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. Hatchards, Booksellers, London, W.</p>
-
-<p>Lt.-Colonel Hawkshaw, Liphook, Hants.</p>
-
-<p>E. S. Haynes, Esq., London, W.</p>
-
-<p>A. R. Hayward, Esq., Misterton, Somerset</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. Aldam Heaton &amp; Co., Ltd., London, W.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Messrs. W. Heffer &amp; Sons, Ltd., Booksellers, Cambridge</p>
-
-<p>Andrew G. Henderson, Esq., A.R.I.B.A., Glasgow</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. A. Heneage, Prestbury, Glos.</p>
-
-<p>Claud W. Heneage, Esq., London</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Messrs. John Heywood, Ltd., Booksellers, Manchester</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. Hicks-Beach, Witcombe Park, nr. Gloucester</p>
-
-<p>G. Higgs, Esq., London, W.C.</p>
-
-<p>E. D. Hildyard, Esq., Kirby Moorside, Yorkshire</p>
-
-<p>Chas. H. Hill, Esq., J.P., Woodborough Hall, Notts.</p>
-
-<p>Mr. F. R. Hockliffe, Bookseller, Bedford</p>
-
-<p>Victor T. Hodgson, Esq., F.S.A., Harpenden, Herts.</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. George Holdsworth, London, W.</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. Jaqueline Hope-Nicholson, Chelsea, S.W.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Donald Hopewell, B.A., LL.B., Old Basford, Nottingham</p>
-
-<p>Mr. Hugh Hopkins, Bookseller, Glasgow</p>
-
-<p>Chas. H. Hopwood, Esq., F.S.A., Stamford Hill, N.</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. Horan, Lamberhurst, Kent</p>
-
-<p>P. Morley Horder, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., London, S.W.</p>
-
-<p>Percy P. Hore, Esq., M.Inst.C.E., Streatham, S.W.</p>
-
-<p>C. H. St. John Hornby, Esq., London</p>
-
-<p>A. B. Horne, Esq., Balcombe</p>
-
-<p>E. J. Horniman, Esq., J.P., London</p>
-
-<p>J. P. Hornung, Esq., J.P., Horsham, Sussex</p>
-
-<p>T. C. Horsfall, Esq., Swanscoe Park, nr. Macclesfield</p>
-
-<p>Mr. Bertram Hosier, Bookseller, Sheffield</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">H. W. Paget Hoskyns, Esq., J.P., Crewkerne, Somerset</p>
-
-<p>F. T. S. Houghton, Esq., Birmingham</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. Edward Howell, Ltd., Booksellers, Liverpool</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">George Hubbard, Esq., F.S.A., F.R.I.B.A., London, E.C.</p>
-
-<p>H. A. Hubbersty, Esq., J.P., Buxton, Derbyshire</p>
-
-<p>Mr. E. F. Hudson, Bookseller, Birmingham</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">C. Lang Huggins, Esq., J.P., Hadlow Grange, nr. Uckfield</p>
-
-<p>Maurice Hulbert, Esq., J.P., A.R.I.B.A., Ealing, W.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Sydney Humphries, Esq., Lamport Hall, Northamptonshire</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. F. J. C. Hunter, Bystock, Exmouth</p>
-
-<p>Jas. Kennedy Hunter, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., Ayr</p>
-
-<p>John Hunter, Esq., Belper</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Messrs. Hunter &amp; Longhurst, Booksellers, London, E.C.</p>
-
-<p>W. Hutchinson, Esq., Liverpool</p>
-
-
-<p class="p2">Mrs. Florence H. S. Iliffe, Foxcombe Hill, Oxford</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. Alfred Illingworth, Daisy Bank, Bradford</p>
-
-<p>Major Douglas Illingworth, Eastcote, Middlesex</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. Harry Illingworth, Wydale, Brompton, Yorks.</p>
-
-<p>W. L. Ingle, Esq., Morley Grange, Churwell</p>
-
-<p>Ernest Innes, Esq., London</p>
-
-<p>Captain A. Linton Iredale, Newhaven</p>
-
-
-<p class="p2">Lady Jenner</p>
-
-<p>Col. Sir Herbert Jekyll, K.C.M.G.</p>
-
-<p>Mr. Richard Jackson, Bookseller, Leeds</p>
-
-<p>W. Geoffrey Jackson, Esq., Witley, Surrey</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. Jackson &amp; Fox, Halifax</p>
-
-<p>W. A. James, Esq., Maidenhead</p>
-
-<p>George Jameson, Esq., Raheny, Co. Dublin</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. Jarrold &amp; Sons, Ltd., Booksellers, Norwich</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. Jarvis, Doddington Hall, Lincoln</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. Leo Jenner, Avebury, Wilts.</p>
-
-<p>Walter Johnston, Esq.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Lieut. C. A. Johnstone, K.S.L.I., Oswestry, Shropshire</p>
-
-<p>C. Sydney Jones, Esq., Princes Park, Liverpool</p>
-
-<p>E. Peter Jones, Esq., J.P., Greenbank, Chester</p>
-
-<p>Frederick Jones, Esq., East Hoathly, Sussex</p>
-
-<p>H. E. Jones, Esq., Mayfield, Sussex</p>
-
-<p>Ronald P. Jones, Esq., M.A., London, W.C.</p>
-
-<p>W. Campbell Jones, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., London, E.C.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Messrs. Jones &amp; Evans’ Bookshop Ltd., London, E.C.</p>
-
-<p>W. Joynson-Hicks, Esq., M.P., London, S.W.</p>
-
-
-<p class="p2">The Rt. Hon. Lord Kenyon</p>
-
-<p>The Rt. Hon. Lady Kinloch</p>
-
-<p>Sir Charles Knightley, Bt., D.L., J.P.</p>
-
-<p>Kensington Public Libraries, per Herbert Jones, Esq.</p>
-
-<p>Walter K. Kaye, Esq., M.I.Mech.E. Harrogate</p>
-
-<p>James Kent, Esq., Edenbridge, Kent</p>
-
-<p>John Keppie, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., Glasgow</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Kettering Book Club, per The Rev. A. K. Pavey, M.A.</p>
-
-<p>Harold C. King, Esq., Westminster</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Captain Sydney D. Kitson, F.S.A., F.R.I.B.A., Kirklington, Notts.</p>
-
-<p>Frederick A. Konig, Tyringham, Bucks.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Messrs. H. A. Kramers &amp; Son, Ltd., Booksellers, Rotterdam</p>
-
-<p>M. Kundig, Libraire, Geneva</p>
-
-
-<p class="p2">Major The Rt. Hon. Viscount Lascelles, D.S.O.</p>
-
-<p>The Rt. Hon. Lady Leconfield</p>
-
-<p>The Rt. Hon. Lord Leith of Fyvie</p>
-
-<p>The Rt. Hon. Lord Leverhulme</p>
-
-<p>The Hon. Claud Lambton</p>
-
-<p>The Hon. Mrs. Archibald Langman</p>
-
-<p>The Hon. Irwin B. Laughlin</p>
-
-<p>Sir Edwin L. Lutyens, A.R.A., F.R.I.B.A.</p>
-
-<p>The Leeds Library, Leeds</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Leeds Public Libraries, per Thomas W. Hand, Esq., City Librarian</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Leeds &amp; West Yorkshire Architectural Society, per G. J. Coombs, Esq., A.R.C.A.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Leicestershire Society of Architects, per F. B. Cooper, Esq., A.R.I.B.A.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Leicestershire Book Society, per Major W. J. Freer, V.D., D.L., F.S.A.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Liverpool Public Libraries, per G. T. Shaw Esq., Librarian</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">The London Library, per C. T. Hagberg Wright, Esq., LL.D.</p>
-
-<p>Charles E. Lamb, Esq., Kettering</p>
-
-<p>R. E. Lambert, Esq., Battle, Sussex</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Messrs. Lamley &amp; Co., Booksellers, Kensington, S.W.</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. Laycock, Wiseton, Bawtry, Yorks.</p>
-
-<p>Stanley H. le Fleming, Esq., D.L., J.P., Ambleside</p>
-
-<p>Frank H. Lehany, Esq., London, N.E.</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. Gerard Leigh, London, W.</p>
-
-<p>Walter L. Levett, Esq., Monmouth</p>
-
-<p>Walter Lewis, Esq., Redditch</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. Liberty &amp; Co., Ltd., London</p>
-
-<p>Captain C. O. Liddell, Chepstow</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. Linley-Howlden, Freshford, Somerset</p>
-
-<p>F. H. Livens, M.Inst.C.E., Lincoln</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Nathaniel Lloyd, Esq., O.B.E., Great Dixter, Northiam</p>
-
-<p>James Lochhead, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., Hamilton</p>
-
-<p>Mr. Morton Loder, Bookseller, Woodridge</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">London Literary Lounge, London, W. per James Truslove, Esq.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">The Rev. A. M. Luckock, M.A., Titchmarsh, Thrapston</p>
-
-<p>G. D. Lumb, Esq., F.S.A., Leeds</p>
-
-
-<p class="p2">The Rt. Hon. The Countess of Mount-Edgcumbe</p>
-
-<p>The Rt. Hon. Lady Monk Bretton</p>
-
-<p>The Hon. Lady Miller</p>
-
-<p>The Rt. Hon. H. D. McLaren, M.P.</p>
-
-<p>Sir Kenneth Matheson, Bt., D.L., J.P.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">A. C. Macdonald, Esq., J.P., Ipley Manor, Marchwood, Hants.</p>
-
-<p>J. W. Macfie, Esq.</p>
-
-<p>James McLachlan, Esq., Edinburgh</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Messrs. James Maclehose &amp; Sons, Booksellers, Glasgow</p>
-
-<p>S. A. Macleish, Esq., Liverpool</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">George A. Macmillan, Esq., D.Litt., J.P., London, S.W.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Messrs. Macniven &amp; Wallace, Booksellers, Edinburgh</p>
-
-<p>Donald D. Macpherson, Esq., Radbrook Hall, Salop</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Major F. Maitland, R.G.A., Nodes Point Battery, St. Helen’s, I. of W.</p>
-
-<p>Lieut. S. Mallinson, Leeds</p>
-
-<p>Colonel E. W. Margesson, Worthing</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">A. E. Marlow, Esq., Preston Deanery Hall, Northampton</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. Henry W. Marsh, Warwick Castle</p>
-
-<p>R. T. Marsh, Esq., J.P., Kenyon, Lancs.</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. Marsh, Jones &amp; Cribb, Leeds</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. H. H. Martyn &amp; Co., Ltd., Cheltenham</p>
-
-<p>T. P. Marwick, Esq., A.R.I.B.A., Edinburgh</p>
-
-<p>H. R. Maunsell, Esq., Dublin</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Messrs. Mawson, Swan, &amp; Morgan, Booksellers, Newcastle-on-Tyne</p>
-
-<p>Medens Bokhandels, A.B., Gothenburg</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Melville &amp; Mullen Propty, Ltd., Booksellers, Melbourne</p>
-
-<p>Claude Miller, Esq., London, W.</p>
-
-<p>James Miller, Esq., A.R.S.A., F.R.I.B.A., Glasgow</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Lt.-Col. David Milne-Home of Wedderburn, D.L., J.P., Berwick-on-Tweed</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. Minchin &amp; Gibbs, Booksellers, Gloucester</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. Minshull &amp; Meeson, Booksellers, Chester</p>
-
-<p>Major Charles Mitchell, J.P., Cornhill-on-Tweed</p>
-
-<p>F. C. Montague, Esq., Oxford</p>
-
-<p>F. Frankfort Moore, Esq., Lewes, Sussex</p>
-
-<p>William Mordey, Esq., King’s Acre, Newport, Mon.</p>
-
-<p>Reginald Morphew, Esq., Polperro, Cornwall</p>
-
-<p>J. H. Morrison, Esq.</p>
-
-<p>William J. Moscrop, Esq., F.R.I.B.A. Darlington</p>
-
-<p>Thomas Muddiman, Esq., London</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. Wm. Mullan &amp; Son, Booksellers, Belfast</p>
-
-<p>D. L. Murdoch, Esq., Mauchline, Ayrshire</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. Evelyn Murray, London, W.</p>
-
-<p>John Murray, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., London, S.W.</p>
-
-<p>H. E. C. Murton, Esq., Jesmond, Newcastle-on-Tyne</p>
-
-
-<p class="p2 hangingindent1">The Rev. The Most Hon. The Marquis of Normanby, D.L., J.P.</p>
-
-<p>Lady Henry Nevill</p>
-
-<p>The Rt. Hon. Lady Newborough</p>
-
-<p>The Hon. Harold Nicholson</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Newcastle-upon-Tyne Public Library per Basil Anderton, Esq., M.A.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Northampton Public Library, per Reginald W. Brown, Esq.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Nottingham School of Art, per Joseph Harrison, Esq., A.R.C.A.</p>
-
-<p>Miss C. Clare Nauheim, London, N.W.</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. Nelson, Sandford St. Martin, Oxon</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">The Rev. Hugh Nelson-Ward, M.A. Wicken, Stony-Stratford</p>
-
-<p>Captain T. N. C. Nevill, Bramall Hall nr. Stockport</p>
-
-<p>Arthur C. Newsum, Esq., Lincoln</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. Nicholls &amp; Jones, High Wycombe</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Monsieur Edouard Isidore Niffle, U.P.A. Lg., London, E.C.</p>
-
-<p>Mr. Martinus Nijhoff, Bookseller, The Hague</p>
-
-<p>Nordiska Kompaniet, Booksellers, Stockholm</p>
-
-<p>E. Norkett, Esq., Art Metal Works, Maidenhead</p>
-
-<p>Simeon H. Norman, Esq., Burgess Hill, Sussex</p>
-
-
-<p class="p2">Lady Beatrice Ormsby-Gore</p>
-
-<p>Lady Christian Ogilvy</p>
-
-<p>Sir John R. O’Connell, M.A., LL.D.</p>
-
-<p>The Ven. Archdeacon of Oakham, Uppingham</p>
-
-<p>George H. Oatley, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., Bristol</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Maurice A. Ockenden, Esq., M.I.Mech.E., F.G.S., London</p>
-
-<p>John A. O’Connell, Esq., Cork</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">John H. Oglander, Esq., D.L., J.P. F.S.A., Brading, I. of W.</p>
-
-<p>Basil Oliver, Esq., A.R.I.B.A., Dunfermline</p>
-
-<p>Mr. S. Opdenberg, Bookseller, The Hague</p>
-
-<p>H. Ormerod, Esq., Brighouse, Yorks</p>
-
-<p>Mr. John Orr, Bookseller, Edinburgh</p>
-
-<p>Joseph Oswald, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., Newcastle-on-Tyne</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. E. Grace Outhwaite, Roxford, Marton, Yorks.</p>
-
-<p>Mr. George E. Over, Bookseller, Rugby</p>
-
-<p>Segar Owen, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., Warrington</p>
-
-<p>Captain Tudor Owen, London, W.</p>
-
-
-<p class="p2">Her Grace The Duchess of Portland</p>
-
-<p>The Rt. Hon. The Earl of Powis</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Paisley Public Library, per John Renfrew, Esq., Librarian</p>
-
-<p>F. E. Pagniez, Esq., Leigh-on-Sea</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. Parker &amp; Son, Booksellers, Oxford</p>
-
-<p>Edmund Parsons, Esq., Tyhurst, Andover</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Messrs. E. Parsons &amp; Sons, Booksellers, London, S.W.</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. Paynter, Amlwch, N. Wales</p>
-
-<p>James Bernard Paynter, Esq., Yeovil</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Messrs. Percival Pearse, Ltd., Booksellers, Warrington</p>
-
-<p>Herbert Pearson, Esq., Wokingham, Berks.</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. Albert J. Pell, Bury St. Edmunds</p>
-
-<p>Herbert S. Pepper, Esq., Birmingham</p>
-
-<p>F. Thorpe Perry, Esq., Carcolston, Notts.</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. J. M. Perry, Nottingham</p>
-
-<p>J. T. Perry, Esq., Nottingham</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. Perry &amp; Co., London, W.</p>
-
-<p>Charles H. Petter, Esq., Ilfracombe</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. Petty, Crosshills, nr. Keighley</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. Philipson &amp; Golder, Booksellers, Chester</p>
-
-<p>S. Perkins Pick, Esq., F.S.A., F.R.I.B.A., Leicester</p>
-
-<p>Robert Young Pickering, Esq., Conheath, Dumfries</p>
-
-<p>H. H. Pillans, Esq., Edinburgh</p>
-
-<p>Ernest Pitman, Esq., London, W.C.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Francis W. Pixley, Esq., J.P., F.S.A. Wooburn House, Wooburn, Buckinghamshire</p>
-
-<p>Walter Plomer-Young, Esq., London, S.W.</p>
-
-<p>John Poland, Esq., F.R.C.S., Seal, Kent</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Lt.-Col. D’Arcy Power, R.A.M.C. (T.), F.S.A., London, W.</p>
-
-<p>Mr. Fred. Power, Bookseller, Bradford</p>
-
-<p>Mr. G. A. Poynder, Bookseller, Reading</p>
-
-<p>E. R. Pratt, Esq., J.P., D.L., C.C., Downham, Norfolk</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. Christopher Pratt &amp; Sons, Ltd., Bradford</p>
-
-<p>A. N. Prentice, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., London, W.C.</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. Price, Coggeshall, Essex</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">L. L. Price, Esq., M.A., Fellow of Oriel College, Oxford</p>
-
-<p>B. C. Prichard, Esq., Cambridge</p>
-
-<p>J. Sutcliffe Pyman, Esq., London, W.</p>
-
-
-<p class="hangingindent1 p2">Messrs. Bernard Quaritch, Ltd., Booksellers, London, W.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">C. H. B. Quennell, Esq., F.R.I.B.A. Westminster, S.W.</p>
-
-
-<p class="p2">The Rt. Hon. The Earl of Rocksavage</p>
-
-<p>Sir Herbert Raphael, Bt., M.P., J.P.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Royal Institute of British Architects, per Rudolf Dircks, Esq., Librarian</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. Ratcliffe, Prestbury, Glos.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Willingham Franklin Rawnsley, M.A., J.P., Shamley Green</p>
-
-<p>Thomas Rayson, Esq., A.R.I.B.A., Witney, Oxon</p>
-
-<p>R. Charles Reed, Esq., Bourne End, Bucks.</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. Hugh Rees, Ltd., Booksellers, London, W.</p>
-
-<p>Herbert K. Reeves, Esq., Leatherhead</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">The Rev. Oswald J. Reichel, M.A., F.S.A., Lympston, Devon</p>
-
-<p>Captain F. H. Reynard, Bedale, Yorks.</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. Reynolds, Bloxham, nr. Banbury</p>
-
-<p>E. F. Reynolds, Esq., Lic.R.I.B.A., Birmingham</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. H. Davis-Richter, London, S.W.</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. J. Rimell &amp; Son, Booksellers, London, W.</p>
-
-<p>Mr. Jacs. G. Robbers, Bookseller, Amsterdam</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Vernon Roberts, Esq., Kincardine Castle, Auchterarder</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Messrs. G. Robertson &amp; Co. Propy. Ltd., Booksellers, London, E.C.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Robert Burns Robertson, Esq., F.S.A. (Scot.), Windsor Castle</p>
-
-<p>Miss D. C. Robinson, Dalston, Cumberland</p>
-
-<p>W. H. Romaine-Walker, Esq., A.R.I.B.A., London, W.</p>
-
-<p>Miss Rooke, Mealsgate, Cumberland</p>
-
-<p>W. Roscoe, Esq.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Messrs. Wilson Ross &amp; Co., Ltd., Booksellers, Edinburgh</p>
-
-<p>Miss Roughsedge, Hoylake, Cheshire</p>
-
-<p>Mr. Walter Ruck, Bookseller, Maidstone</p>
-
-<p>C. D. Ruding-Bryan, Esq., Clifton, Bristol</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Captain C. E. A. L. Rumbold, Godminster Manor, Bruton</p>
-
-<p>Barrie Russell, Esq., Gloucester Hotel, Weymouth</p>
-
-<p>S. B. Russell, Esq., Broadway, Worcestershire</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Charles T. Ruthen, Esq., O.B.E., Lic.R.I.B.A., Swansea</p>
-
-
-<p class="p2">The Most Hon. The Marquis of Salisbury, G.C.V.O.</p>
-
-<p>The Most Hon. The Marchioness of Sligo</p>
-
-<p>The Rt. Hon. The Earl of Stafford</p>
-
-<p>Lady Octavia Shaw Stewart</p>
-
-<p>The Rt. Hon. The Viscountess St. Davids</p>
-
-<p>The Rt. Hon. Lady Sackville</p>
-
-<p>The Rt. Hon. Lord Sheffield</p>
-
-<p>The Rt. Hon. Lord Sherborne</p>
-
-<p>Sir Henry Samuelson, Bt.</p>
-
-<p>Sir Edward Stern</p>
-
-<p>Sir Frank Swettenham, G.C.M.G.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Sheffield Public Libraries, per Samuel Smith, Esq., Librarian</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Sheffield University Library, per W. S. Purchon, Esq., M.A.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Somersetshire Archæological Society per H. St. George Gray, Esq.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Atkinson Free Library, Southport per F. H. Mills, Esq., Librarian</p>
-
-<p>Juán E. Sackman, Esq., London, S.E.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">S. G. Stopford Sackville, Esq., M.A., D.L., J.P., Thrapston</p>
-
-<p>Julian Sampson, Esq., London, W.C.</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. Mahlon Sands, Campden, Glos.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Messrs. Sands &amp; McDougall Propy., Ltd., London, E.C.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">V. G. Santo, Esq., A.R.I.B.A., Coddington Hall, Newark</p>
-
-<p>A. Sassoon, Esq., for Clifton College Library</p>
-
-<p>Octavius Satchell, Esq., London, W.</p>
-
-<p>H. N. Savill, Esq., London, W.C.</p>
-
-<p>Mr. Henry B. Saxton, Bookseller, Nottingham</p>
-
-<p>John Scott, Esq., Ilkley, Yorks</p>
-
-<p>Allen W. Seaby, Esq., University College, Reading</p>
-
-<p>H. Gordon Selfridge, Esq., London, W.</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. Arthur Shephard, Kensington</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. Sherratt &amp; Hughes, Booksellers, Manchester</p>
-
-<p>R. D. Shirley, Esq., Burlesdon Rectory, Southampton</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Coningsby C. Sibthorpe, Esq., D.L., J.P., Canwick, Lincoln</p>
-
-<p>Mr. S. W. Simms, Bookseller, Bath</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Messrs. Simpkin, Marshall, Hamilton, Kent &amp; Co., Ltd., London, E.C.</p>
-
-<p>Jonathan Simpson, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., Bolton</p>
-
-<p>J. J. Simpson, Esq., Cotham Park, Bristol</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Messrs. Sinclair &amp; Woolston, Ltd., Booksellers, Nottingham</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. Walter Skull &amp; Son, Ltd., High Wycombe</p>
-
-<p>Major E. H. Sleigh, The Curragh, Kildare</p>
-
-<p>H. Sutcliffe Smith, Esq., Baildon, Yorks.</p>
-
-<p>J. P. Smith, Esq., Barrow-in-Furness</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Messrs. John Smith &amp; Son, Ltd., Booksellers, Glasgow</p>
-
-<p>R. Freeman Smith, Esq., Hampstead</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Messrs. W. H. Smith &amp; Son, Booksellers, London, W.C.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Messrs. W. H. Smith &amp; Son, Ltd., Booksellers, Harrogate</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. W. H. Smith &amp; Son, Ltd., Booksellers, York</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. Aldwin Soames, Moor Park, Farnham</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. H. Sotheran &amp; Co., Booksellers, London, W.</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. Spottiswoode, Ballantyne &amp; Co., Ltd., Eton</p>
-
-<p>Wm. Barclay Squire, Esq., Kensington, W.</p>
-
-<p>H.M. Stationery Office, London, S.W.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Messrs. G. E. Stechert &amp; Co., Booksellers, London, W.C.</p>
-
-<p>H. Steel, Esq., Skellow Grange, nr. Doncaster</p>
-
-<p>Albert J. Stephens, Esq., Gloucester</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Prof. J. E. A. Steggall, M.A., J.P., University College, Dundee</p>
-
-<p>Capt. William J. Stephens, R.A.M.C. Newquay</p>
-
-<p>R. H. Stephenson, Esq., Leicester</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Messrs. B. F. Stevens &amp; Brown, Booksellers, London, W.C.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Henry Stewart, Esq., Lieut., R.G.A., Kelvinside, Glasgow</p>
-
-<p>J. Hutton Stott, Esq., Southport</p>
-
-<p>Philip Sidney Stott, Esq., Broadway, Worcestershire</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. John C. Straker, Hexham</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Arthur Stratton, Esq., F.S.A., F.R.I.B.A., London, W.C.</p>
-
-<p>W. G. Strickland, Esq., Dublin</p>
-
-<p>Charles W. Stringer, Esq., Kettering</p>
-
-<p>Mr. F. Sturt, Bookseller, Farnham, Surrey</p>
-
-<p>Canon A. F. Sutton, F.S.A., Newark-on-Trent, Surrey</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Col. M. A. W. Swinfen-Broun, Swinfen Hall, Lichfield</p>
-
-<p>Commander Harold Swithinbank, Denham, Bucks.</p>
-
-
-<p class="p2">The Rt. Hon. Lord Triowen</p>
-
-<p>The Hon. Mrs. Townshend</p>
-
-<p>Sir A. Brumwell Thomas, F.R.I.B.A.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Travellers’ Club, London, S.W., per Sir Almeric Fitzroy, K.C.V.O.</p>
-
-<p>The Rev. Prebendary Talbot, M.A., Newport, Salop</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. J. M. Tankard, Baildon, Yorks</p>
-
-<p>Henry Tanner, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., London, W.</p>
-
-<p>W. G. Tarrant, Esq., Byfleet, Surrey</p>
-
-<p>Sydney Tatchell, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., Westminster, S.W.</p>
-
-<p>Captain Hurford Tatlow, M.C., London, W.</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. Tempest, Skipton-in-Craven, Yorks.</p>
-
-<p>A. H. Ryan Tenison, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., London, W.</p>
-
-<p>William C. Terry, Esq., Clapton</p>
-
-<p>Mr. James Thin, Bookseller, Edinburgh</p>
-
-<p>Mr. Charles E. Thomas, Bookseller, Worthing</p>
-
-<p>P. A. Thomas, Esq., M.A., Malvern</p>
-
-<p>Miss Amy H. Thompson, Bromley, Kent</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">C. W. W. Thompson, Esq., 2nd Lieut. R.E., A.R.I.B.A., Rochester</p>
-
-<p>Edward P. Thompson, Esq., J.P., Whitchurch, Salop</p>
-
-<p>H. D. Thompson, Esq., Lincoln</p>
-
-<p>W. Stuart Thompson, Esq., Peterborough</p>
-
-<p>T. Thornton-Berry, Esq., Bishop’s Hull, Taunton</p>
-
-<p>E. Thornton-Smith, Esq., London</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. Thornton-Smith, Ltd., London, W.</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. Thurnam &amp; Sons, Booksellers, Carlisle</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. Frederick Tibbenham, Ltd., Ipswich</p>
-
-<p>Times Book Club, London, W.</p>
-
-<p>Cecil Torr, Esq., Yonder Wreyland</p>
-
-<p>W. Charles Tozer, Esq., London, W.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Messrs. Truslove &amp; Hanson, Ltd., Booksellers, Clifford Street, W.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Messrs. Truslove &amp; Hanson, Ltd., Booksellers, Oxford Street, W.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Messrs. Truslove &amp; Hanson, Ltd., Booksellers, Sloane Street, S.W.</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. F. Cecilia Tubbs, St. Leonards-on-Sea</p>
-
-<p>Grahame B. Tubbs, Esq., London</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. Tuke, Chiswick, W.</p>
-
-<p>W. Gladwin Turbutt, Esq., J.P., Ogston Hall, Alfreton</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. Warner Turner, Mansfield</p>
-
-<p>John Tweedy, Esq., Howth, Dublin</p>
-
-<p>Mr. G. H. Tyndall, Bookseller, Ely</p>
-
-
-<p class="p2">University College, London, Dept. of Architecture</p>
-
-
-<p class="p2">The Hon. Mrs. Douglas Vickers</p>
-
-<p>Sir Richard V. Vassar-Smith, Bt., D.L., J.P.</p>
-
-<p>Sir Harry Vernon, Bt., D.L., J.P.</p>
-
-<p>Sir Arthur Vicars, K.C.V.O., F.S.A.</p>
-
-<p>J. J. Van Alen, Esq., New York</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Messrs. H. A. Van Winsum &amp; J. Ver Wymeren, London, W.</p>
-
-<p>Lt.-Colonel T. T. Vernon, Chester</p>
-
-
-<p class="hangingindent1 p2">The Royal Library, Windsor Castle, per The Hon. John Fortescue, F.S.A.</p>
-
-<p>Her Grace The Duchess of Wellington</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">The Rt. Hon. The Countess of Winchilsea &amp; Nottingham</p>
-
-<p>The Rt. Hon. Lady Wenlock</p>
-
-<p>The Hon. Mrs. Edward Wyndham</p>
-
-<p>Sir Aston Webb, R.A., F.S.A., F.R.I.B.A.</p>
-
-<p>Wallasey Library, per The Rev. A. E. Parry, Librarian</p>
-
-<p>Warrington Municipal Museum</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Westminster Public Libraries, per Frank Pacy, Esq., Librarian</p>
-
-<p>Weston-super-Mare Public Library, per Miss Alston</p>
-
-<p>Chas. Wade, Esq., Forest Gate, Essex</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Philip K. Wake, Esq., J.P., Handsworth Grange, Sheffield</p>
-
-<p>Mr. Henry Walker, Bookseller, Leeds</p>
-
-<p>J. Reid Walker, Esq., J.P., Shifnal, Salop</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Captain J. W. Walker, F.S.A., Chapelthorpe, Wakefield</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Colonel W. Hall Walker, M.P., D.L. Gresford, Denbigh</p>
-
-<p>Pickford Waller, Esq., Boscombe, Hants.</p>
-
-<p>Colonel Horace Walpole, Winchfield</p>
-
-<p>Miss E. M. Walters, Long Stanton, nr. Cambridge</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. Warde-Aldam, Hooton Pagnell Hall, Doncaster</p>
-
-<p>S. J. Waring, Esq., London, W.</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. Waring &amp; Gillow, Ltd., Lancaster</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. Waring &amp; Gillow, Ltd., London</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. Waring &amp; Gillow, Ltd., Manchester</p>
-
-<p>Bertrand J. Waterhouse, Esq., Sydney, N.S.W.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Vernon Watney, Esq., M.A., J.P., F.S.A., Cornbury Park, Oxon</p>
-
-<p>Humphry Watts, Esq., Clent, Stourbridge</p>
-
-<p>Hugh Weguelin, Esq., London, S.W.</p>
-
-<p>R. W. S. Weir, Esq., London, W.C.</p>
-
-<p>R. Douglas Wells, Esq., F.R.I.B.A., Kensington, W.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Adolph H. C. Wenger, Esq., Trentham Priory, nr. Stoke-on-Trent</p>
-
-<p>Arthur Whereat, Esq., Clifton, Bristol</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. J. Whitehead &amp; Sons, Ltd., London, S.E.</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Lt.-Col. Henry Wickham, C.M.G., J.P., Cotterstock Hall, Oundle</p>
-
-<p>Chas. Wicksteed, Esq., J.P., C.A., Kettering</p>
-
-<p>Mrs. Wigan, Windsor</p>
-
-<p>Mr. J. M. Wigley, Bookseller, Lancaster</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">The Rev. H. J. Wilkins, D.D., Redland Vicarage, Bristol</p>
-
-<p>Chas. Williams, Esq., Cheltenham</p>
-
-<p>Messrs. Clement Williams &amp; Sons, Halifax</p>
-
-<p>H. Williams, Esq., London, E.C.</p>
-
-<p>Sidney Herbert Williams, Esq., St. Leonards-on-Sea</p>
-
-<p>Henry Williamson, Esq., Maryport</p>
-
-<p>J. Bertram Wills, Esq., A.R.I.B.A., Bristol</p>
-
-<p>Mr. D. Wilson, Bookseller, Bradford</p>
-
-<p>W. B. Winckworth, Esq., Taunton</p>
-
-<p>E. Ernest Winterbotham, Esq., Hampstead, N.W.</p>
-
-<p>F. Arthur Wodsworth, Esq., Nottingham</p>
-
-<p>P. W. Wood, Esq., Emmanuel College, Cambridge</p>
-
-<p>G. Grey Wornum, Esq., Nottingham</p>
-
-<p>George Wragge, Esq., Kensington</p>
-
-<p>Wm. Wright, Esq., One Ash, nr. Loughborough</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">The Rev. W. Wykes-Finch, M.A., J.P., Chaddesley Corbett</p>
-
-
-<p class="hangingindent1 p2">York Public Library, per A. H. Furnish, Esq., City Librarian</p>
-
-<p>Edward Yates, Esq., London, E.C.</p>
-
-<p>Thomas Charles Yates, Esq., Kensington, W.</p>
-
-<p>H. S. Young, Esq., Crosby, Liverpool</p>
-
-<p class="hangingindent1">Messrs. Henry Young &amp; Sons, Ltd., Booksellers, Liverpool</p>
-
-
-<p class="p2">J. M. Zarifi, Esq., London, W.</p>
-</div>
-
-<p class="center"><span class="sm"><i>Agents for the United States of America</i></span><br />
-CHARLES SCRIBNER’S SONS<br />
-<span class="sm">FIFTH AVENUE, NEW YORK</span></p>
-
-<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_v">[v]</span></p>
-
-<h2>PREFACE</h2>
-</div>
-
-
-<p>The following pages take up the story of the English House at the point
-to which it was carried in my former work on <i>Early Renaissance
-Architecture in England</i>, and carry it to the beginning of the
-nineteenth century. Between them the two books present the history of
-domestic architecture from the time when houses were becoming homes
-instead of fortresses, until a period well within the recollection of
-our grandfathers.</p>
-
-<p>During the three centuries thus covered, houses were built and
-decorated in successive styles, which were universally accepted at the
-time. The prevailing character of these styles was derived from classic
-sources, as distinguished from our native Gothic traditions, and it
-owed its origin to the Renaissance style of Italy. The earlier efforts
-towards the change are visible in the work of the sixteenth century and
-of the first quarter of the seventeenth.</p>
-
-<p>With the advent of Inigo Jones, however, a further impulse was given
-to the desire for a classic treatment of architecture; and it is this
-impulse and its consequences which form the basis of the present
-inquiry.</p>
-
-<p>There are two views as to English architecture of the seventeenth and
-eighteenth centuries. On the one hand, it is held that in the days
-of Elizabeth architectural design shows a freshness, vivacity, and
-originality which express the genius of the time, and result in a truly
-national style, albeit one which never quite fulfilled its promise;
-and that in later periods designers became more and more imitative,
-and thereby lost from their<span class="pagenum" id="Page_vi">[vi]</span> work, however correct and refined, those
-qualities which make for supreme achievement. On the other hand, it
-is held that the designers of Elizabeth’s time were hampered in their
-efforts at architectural expression by a lack of knowledge; that
-they discarded many of the old ideas without appreciating the full
-significance of the new ideas which they were anxious to adopt; and
-that as they gained wider knowledge, so did their architecture improve.</p>
-
-<p>Much can be said for either of these views, which indeed are not wholly
-inconsistent with each other; but it is my desire in the following
-pages to avoid controversy, and to present the domestic side of the
-subject throughout the period under review in a sympathetic spirit.</p>
-
-<p>During the nineteenth century an increase of acquaintance with the past
-led to the adoption of so many different phases of style as almost to
-eliminate the interest derived from historical continuity. But the
-study of the past need not necessarily have this effect; if rightly
-directed, the inventive genius of the present will find in the past a
-great help for the future.</p>
-
-<p>I have to express my thanks to many persons who have assisted by
-supplying material for the illustrations, and especially to the
-owners of the various houses who have kindly permitted them to be
-photographed. Of the numerous drawings which have been reproduced,
-some, connected with Inigo Jones, are from the collection at Chatsworth
-House, by the kindness of the Duke of Devonshire; and others by Jones
-and John Webb are from the Burlington-Devonshire Collection, in the
-possession of the Royal Institute of British Architects, by permission
-of the Council. For leave to include other contemporary drawings I have
-to thank the Provost of Worcester College, Oxford; the Warden of All
-Souls College, Oxford; and the authorities of the Bodleian<span class="pagenum" id="Page_vii">[vii]</span> Library;
-while the illustrations selected from the Smithson Collection are
-reproduced by the kind permission of the owner. The drawings by Thomas
-Sandby and Edward Dayes are from the British Museum and the Victoria
-and Albert Museum, South Kensington, respectively.</p>
-
-<p>The proprietors of <i>Country Life</i> have kindly furnished Figs.
-162–63, and the Publishers have supplied illustrations from various
-works issued by them, including reproductions of two of Mr. Triggs’
-drawings from “Formal Gardens in England and Scotland,” and some of Mr
-Tanner’s drawings from “Inigo Jones” and “Interior Woodwork.”</p>
-
-<p>I am indebted to the following photographers for permission to include
-photographs taken by them:&mdash;Messrs Bedford, Lemere &amp; Co., Figs. 141,
-143–44, 318; Messrs F. Frith &amp; Co., Figs. 4, 5, 56, and 255; Messrs
-Hills and Saunders, Fig. 155; and Mr. H. Evans, Fig. 52. A number of
-photographs have been contributed by Mr. Montague Cooper, Mr. F. H.
-Crossley, Mr. Horace Dan, and Dr. G. Granville Buckley. Other subjects
-have been furnished by Mr. A. E. Walsham, Messrs Thos. Lewis Ltd.,
-of Birmingham, and the late Mr. W. Galsworthy Davie, while those not
-otherwise mentioned are from negatives taken by myself.</p>
-
-<p>I must also acknowledge with thanks the kindness of Mr. E. R. M. Pratt,
-of Ryston Hall, Norfolk, in placing at my disposal the contents of his
-ancestor’s note-books mentioned in the Appendix.</p>
-
-<p class="r2">J. A. GOTCH.</p>
-
-<p><span class="smcap">Kettering,</span><br />
-<span class="left3"><i>April 1918</i>.</span></p>
-
-<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_ix">[ix]</span></p>
-
-<h2>CONTENTS</h2>
-</div>
-
-<table summary="contents" class="smaller">
-  <tr>
-    <th class="chap">CHAP.</th>
-    <th></th>
-    <th class="pag">PAGE</th>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">I.</td>
-    <td class="cht" colspan="2">INTRODUCTION</td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td></td>
-    <td class="cht1">Evolution of the Modern House&mdash;Elizabethan Domestic
-Arrangements&mdash;First Signs of Transition&mdash;Gradual
-Disappearance of Jacobean Features&mdash;Predominance
-of the Classic Style&mdash;The Gothic Revival</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#Page_1">1</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">II.</td>
-    <td class="cht" colspan="2">THE CHANGE IN STYLE</td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td></td>
-    <td class="cht1">The Native <i>versus</i> the Italian Method&mdash;Change in the
-Status of the Architect&mdash;The Influence of Architectural
-Books&mdash;The Smithson Drawings</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#Page_25">25</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">III.</td>
-    <td class="cht" colspan="2">INIGO JONES</td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td></td>
-    <td class="cht1">Jacobean Design still Prevalent&mdash;Significance of the
-Banqueting House, Whitehall&mdash;The Early Life of
-Inigo Jones&mdash;His Drawings and his Authentic Executed
-Work&mdash;His Pupil and Assistant&mdash;Work Attributed
-to Jones&mdash;Characteristics of his Genius</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#Page_41">41</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">IV.</td>
-    <td class="cht" colspan="2">THE DRAWINGS OF INIGO JONES AND JOHN WEBB</td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td></td>
-    <td class="cht1">The Whitehall Designs and their Authorship&mdash;John Webb:
-his Relation to Jones and Subsequent Career&mdash;Contemporary
-Evidence on the Drawings&mdash;Webb’s Executed
-Work</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#Page_63">63</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">V.</td>
-    <td class="cht" colspan="2">THE TRANSITION IN MINOR BUILDINGS AND INTERIORS</td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td></td>
-    <td class="cht1">Lingering Jacobean Detail&mdash;Some Country Houses of the
-Transitional Period&mdash;Curious Blending of the Old
-and New Styles&mdash;Charm of some of the Successful
-Examples&mdash;Remodelling of Domestic Fittings<span class="pagenum" id="Page_x">[x]</span></td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#Page_99">99</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">VI.</td>
-    <td class="cht" colspan="2">SIR CHRISTOPHER WREN</td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td></td>
-    <td class="cht1">His Life and Early Work&mdash;First Design for St Paul’s
-Cathedral&mdash;The Work of Building&mdash;Other Work,
-including Greenwich and Hampton Court&mdash;Contemporary
-Esteem&mdash;His Influence on the Subsequent
-Course of Architecture&mdash;Domestic Work Attributed
-to him </td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#Page_141">141</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">VII.</td>
-    <td class="cht" colspan="2">SOME FURTHER WORK OF THE TIME OF CHARLES II.</td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td></td>
-    <td class="cht1">Sir Balthazar Gerbier’s “Counsel to Builders”&mdash;“Captain
-Wynne” and his Work&mdash;Hamstead Marshall and Old
-Buckingham House&mdash;London after the Great Fire&mdash;City
-Halls and Churches&mdash;Some Smaller Houses
-Outside London</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#Page_161">161</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">VIII.</td>
-    <td class="cht" colspan="2">GREAT HOUSES AND GARDENS OF THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY</td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td></td>
-    <td class="cht1">Houses of the Nobility&mdash;Grandeur of the Designs and
-Lay Outs&mdash;Boughton House, Dyrham Park, and
-Chatsworth&mdash;Nicholas Hawksmoor and his Work at
-Easton Neston&mdash;Lord Burlington and Sir John
-Vanbrugh&mdash;Castle Howard and Blenheim&mdash;Formal
-and Landscape Gardens</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#Page_195">195</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">IX.</td>
-    <td class="cht" colspan="2">GEORGIAN HOUSES</td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td></td>
-    <td class="cht1">The Character of Eighteenth-Century Houses&mdash;Campbell,
-Gibbs, and other Designers&mdash;Interior Design and
-Decoration&mdash;Typical Georgian Mansions: Houghton
-and Wentworth Woodhouse&mdash;The Woods of Bath
-and Contemporary Town-Planning&mdash;William Kent
-and Holkham&mdash;The Brothers Adam</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#Page_237">237</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">X.</td>
-    <td class="cht" colspan="2">SMALLER HOUSES, TOWN HOUSES, AND EXTERIOR FEATURES</td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td></td>
-    <td class="cht1">Charm of the Smaller Georgian House&mdash;Streets and
-Market Places of Country Towns&mdash;Inns and Shops&mdash;London
-Houses of the Period&mdash;Their Interior Planning&mdash;Growth
-of the Suburbs in the Nineteenth
-Century&mdash;Exterior Features of Smaller Georgian
-Houses: Chimneys, Gates, Doors, and Porches&mdash;Cupolas,
-Lantern Lights, Date-Stones, and Sundials&mdash;Garden
-Ornaments&mdash;Ornamental Iron and Lead
-Work<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xi">[xi]</span></td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#Page_287">287</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">XI.</td>
-    <td class="cht" colspan="2">DECORATION AND INTERIOR FEATURES OF EIGHTEENTH-CENTURY HOUSES</td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td></td>
-    <td class="cht1">Evolution of the Staircase&mdash;Its Treatment in Wood and
-Stone&mdash;The Classic Over-Door&mdash;Decoration of Walls:
-Wood Panelling and Carving, Moulded Plaster, Wall
-Paper, and Tapestry&mdash;The Chimney-Piece, the Fire-Grate
-and its Accessories&mdash;Modelled and Painted
-Ceilings&mdash;Gradual Decline of the Personal Note in
-Craftsmanship&mdash;Conclusion</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#Page_351">351</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn"></td>
-    <td class="cht">APPENDIX I.&mdash;SIR ROGER PRATT</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#Page_395">395</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn"></td>
-    <td class="cht">APPENDIX II.&mdash;THE ARCHITECTS OF COLESHILL, BERKSHIRE</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#Page_399">399</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn"></td>
-    <td class="cht">INDEX TO ILLUSTRATIONS AND TEXT</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#Page_401">401</a></td>
-  </tr>
-</table>
-
-<div class="chapter">
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_001fp">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_001fp.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 1.</span>&mdash;VIEW OF WHITEHALL PALACE
-          <span class="allsmcap">AS IT WOULD HAVE APPEARED IF COMPLETED</span>.</p>
-     <p class="center p-min sm">(<i>from a water-colour drawing by Thomas Sandby, R.A.</i>)</p>
-  </div>
-</div>
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_1">[1]</span></p>
-
-<p class="center xl"><b>THE ENGLISH HOME FROM CHARLES I. TO GEORGE IV.</b></p>
-</div>
-
-<h2>I<br />
-<span class="subhed">INTRODUCTION</span></h2>
-
-<p>In England, more than in any other country, the affections of people in
-all ranks of life have clung round their homes; and to learn something
-of how those homes have changed in disposition and appearance with the
-changing times is an occupation not only fascinating in itself, but one
-which leads into regions of that personal interest which lends life and
-colour to the pictures of the historian.</p>
-
-<p>So far as our present conception of a home is concerned, the time of
-Elizabeth may be held to have seen its birth; for, although the English
-house has an ancestry which goes back to the Conquest, yet it was
-in Elizabeth’s days that houses were first built almost exclusively
-for pleasure and delight. Hers was a great age of house building.
-Peace, wealth, and security from serious turmoil led men in all parts
-of the country to reconstruct their old homes or to build new ones;
-and records remain, either in actual buildings or in old plans, of
-houses of every size, from the great palaces of Burghley or Hatton
-wherein they entertained their sovereign, down to the little house,
-not forty feet square, which was devised for Sir Walter Raleigh in
-St James’s. Much pains and great skill were expended in contriving
-these houses so that they should be convenient and well-looking. The
-planning of them was in the nature of a new experiment, for there was
-no precedent, either of extent or disposition, which was exactly to
-the point. The treatment of the exterior&mdash;in other words, their style
-of architecture&mdash;was also something fresh; for it became the fashion,
-gradually increasing in extent, to seek inspiration in this direction
-from Italy, a country which for more than a century had produced most
-marvellous buildings, both as to conception and as to the lovely detail
-with which they were embellished.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_2">[2]</span></p>
-
-<p>This new demand in regard to style was partly met by inviting foreign
-workmen to this country, and partly by sending English designers to
-study in Italy; but the knowledge thus acquired was utilised by our
-native craftsmen in their own way. It influenced them, but did not
-enslave them. At first it puzzled them, with the result that much
-hybrid work was done which would have astonished both their Gothic
-forefathers and their Italian contemporaries, but which nevertheless
-has an attractive piquancy of its own.</p>
-
-<p>This tentative stage lasted well into the seventeenth century, until
-the knowledge and genius of Inigo Jones, most ably seconded by John
-Webb, gradually wrought a revolution, and English architecture freed
-itself from the pleasant inaccuracies of its earlier exponents.</p>
-
-<p>It is at the time when the old order was beginning to give way to the
-new that the story of the English House is taken up in the following
-pages. It will be pursued through the next two centuries. We shall
-see how the crude ideas of Elizabethan and Jacobean architects were
-mellowed under the influence of Inigo Jones; how John Webb carried on
-his master’s teaching through the disturbed years of the Civil War; how
-wealthy men, following the lead of the Earl of Arundel, indulged their
-growing taste for collecting antiques, pictures, and other works of
-art. Houses will be described and pictured in which Evelyn and Pepys
-must have watched many of the events which they record in their pages.</p>
-
-<p>In due course will come the great homes of the great nobles of William
-and Mary, of Anne and the Georges; homes which express in a vivid way
-the social distinctions of the times, and indicate the vast interval
-which lay between the duke and the merchant&mdash;more particularly in the
-opinion of the duke. It was at this period that domestic architecture
-reached the zenith of its splendour, aided, as it was, not only by the
-patronage of noblemen like Lord Burlington, but by their participation
-in the work of design. That they were able so to participate was
-largely owing to the publication of books on architecture, both
-ancient and modern. The point of view from which architecture was
-then regarded, largely determined by this literature, is of great
-historical interest, although the march of events has been adverse to
-its continued acceptance.</p>
-
-<p>Contemporary with these great efforts in design were innumerable<span class="pagenum" id="Page_3">[3]</span>
-smaller houses, essentially English in expression, and charmingly
-simple. In them lived men and women who helped to make the eighteenth
-century famous&mdash;Addison and Cowper, Reynolds and Garrick, Mrs
-Thrale and Frances Burney. But all through the eighteenth century
-the artificiality which marks much of its sentiment becomes every
-now and then apparent in its houses and their lay outs, wherein are
-sometimes to be found manufactured ruins and strange attempts at Gothic
-temples. Yet always is perceptible an earnest attempt at design. If in
-architecture itself the sense of design became somewhat dulled, it was
-still acute in the smaller matters of decoration, of furniture, and of
-articles for household use; the ornament which prevailed towards the
-close of the long period under review is quite admirable of its kind.</p>
-
-<p>Such, very briefly indicated, is the ground to be traversed in the
-following inquiry. Some of it must be trodden with a light and hasty
-step; but it is hoped that the journey may not be without interest,
-and may perhaps induce the reader to explore at his leisure parts of
-the country of which here he will possibly catch but a glimpse. In the
-meantime let us return to our starting-point, where the old order began
-to give way to the new.</p>
-
-<p>The history of English houses, from the time of James I. onwards, is
-a record of development on lines that were laid down in the time of
-Elizabeth. It was in her days that the great change from mediævalism
-took place, and houses were built for comfort and pleasure without
-any serious thought of defence. Such houses are still habitable;
-there are plenty of people living to-day in Elizabethan houses,
-but the enthusiasts are comparatively few who live from choice in
-the ill-lighted, vaulted rooms of the Middle Ages. Spaciousness,
-cheerfulness, dignity, and often magnificence, were the qualities aimed
-at in houses of the end of the sixteenth century; and these qualities
-are appropriate in the present day. Convenience is another matter; it
-is a relative term, and its significance varies with the varying wants
-of mankind, changes with their changing habits and customs.</p>
-
-<p>An Elizabethan house provided admirable rooms for the common use of the
-family and guests&mdash;reception rooms as they would be called now. It also
-provided an adequate number of bedrooms. Further, so long as the great
-hall was the customary place for eating, the kitchen was conveniently
-situated, and the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_5">[5]</span> food was cooked within a reasonable distance of
-where it was consumed. In these respects, therefore, a house of that
-period fulfilled some of the chief requirements of the present day. The
-direction in which it failed when measured by modern standards was in
-its sanitary arrangements, which, indeed, judged by our own ideas, did
-not exist at all. But we must be careful not to argue backwards, and
-conclude that because things were lacking which we consider essential,
-therefore houses were found uncomfortable at the time. The better way
-is to accept what existed as satisfying the wants of the period, and to
-argue from that, if we please, how vastly we have improved in our own
-habits upon those of our ancestors.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_004">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_004.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 2.</span>&mdash;ASTON HALL,
-          <span class="smcap">near Birmingham (finished 1635)</span>.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>In tracing the changes which took place in the arrangement and
-disposition of rooms during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries,
-therefore, it will be found that not much was done which made houses
-essentially more comfortable, according to modern notions, than they
-had been in the late sixteenth century. Indeed, during much of the
-time comfort was very little studied, and it is one of the reproaches
-levelled at the architects of the early eighteenth century, more
-especially those who were concerned with houses of vast size, that
-their first thought was for display and their last for comfort. Pope’s
-exclamation about Blenheim palace, “’Tis very fine, but when d’ye sleep
-and where d’ye dine?” crystallises much of the criticism that might be
-bestowed upon the large houses of that period, which, however, only
-reflected the spirit of the age. In these houses the most striking
-change that occurred was the abolition of homeliness. When the great
-Elizabethan house was planned, the household was in the nature of a
-large family. It is true that the members of the actual family grouped
-themselves in one wing and the servants in another, but the great hall
-was their common meeting ground, and the relations between the heads
-of the household and their servants were more affectionate than they
-became in later years. All the rooms, moreover, were intended for
-daily use, however finely they were decorated. The whole effect was
-one of stately homeliness. When the Queen Anne mansion was planned,
-much of it was devoted to state functions as a first consideration,
-and was intended for occasional use only; apartments suitable for this
-purpose having been provided, the rest of the space was allotted to
-the ordinary use of the family, and the servants were relegated to the
-basement (which they sometimes<span class="pagenum" id="Page_6">[6]</span> shared with their employers) or to a
-detached wing. Stateliness, not homeliness, was now the keynote. The
-nobleman stood on a pedestal of grandeur, round which his dependants
-grouped themselves as best they could, and among them struggled the
-parson, the poet, and the man of letters. The glorification of the
-individual found expression in his house and his gardens which were all
-designed with theatric magnificence.</p>
-
-<p>The changes here indicated will be dealt with at length in subsequent
-chapters; the first step towards them was taken when the hall ceased to
-be a living-room and became a vestibule, as the result of an alteration
-in domestic habits, an alteration which rendered easy the adoption
-of a house-plan more closely related than was formerly possible to
-those Italian models to which architects had been approximating their
-designs for half a century. So far, the models had been copied but
-halfheartedly, partly because of the conservatism of English habits,
-partly from incomplete knowledge of Italian methods of design.
-But as knowledge increased, both from the study of books and from
-the first-hand investigations of travelling students, so was the
-Italianising of English buildings accelerated; and a great obstacle
-to this progress was removed when the ancient use and position of the
-hall&mdash;which had a tradition of three centuries behind them&mdash;were no
-longer preserved. The movement indicated was by no means regular; it
-was quicker in some places than in others, and in some hands than in
-others: much depended upon the architects employed. Those who were
-learned, those who had travelled, and again those who were influenced
-by the cultured few, departed more completely from old-fashioned ways
-than did those who had not enjoyed the same advantages. The main stream
-of architectural development is fairly well marked and continuous; but
-there are innumerable backwaters in which the impetus of the current
-is hardly perceptible. As a consequence there are to be found as late
-as the end of the seventeenth century buildings which look almost
-contemporary with those of the beginning.</p>
-
-<p>The man who did more than anyone else to bring learning to bear on
-design, and to introduce into England a true and correct knowledge
-of Italian detail, was that great artist, Inigo Jones. His first
-architectural work of importance was the Banqueting House at Whitehall,
-which was finished in 1622.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_7">[7]</span> It has no trace of traditional English
-design about it (see Fig. <a href="#i_043">22</a>). To us it appears a beautiful building,
-but by no means abnormal, because we can see many others of the same
-type. But to those who saw it when it was just built, it was something
-entirely novel, something in which they sought in vain for any of the
-customary devices for producing architectural effect. Doubtless it was
-a stimulant, but it did not revolutionise English architecture. Indeed,
-it was only Inigo Jones, and after him his pupil John Webb, who could
-pretend to work on such learned lines. The ordinary surveyors&mdash;of
-whom there must have been a large number, although their names have
-not survived&mdash;still worked in the hybrid style in which they had
-been trained, with the result that such a house as Aston Hall, near
-Birmingham, which was completed in 1635, is thoroughly Jacobean in
-character (Fig. <a href="#i_004">2</a>), although of sufficient importance to have warranted
-the adoption of the latest ideas in design, had they been at all
-widespread.</p>
-
-<p>There is one point, however, in which Aston Hall shows the impending
-change in house-planning, and that is the disposition of the great
-hall. It is entered in the middle of one side, instead of through
-screens at the end, thus making a large vestibule of it instead of a
-living-room. The same treatment is to be found in some of the plans of
-John Smithson, an eminent architect of the time; and an examination of
-his drawings will presently be undertaken, in order to illustrate the
-steps which led from the Jacobean style to the more fully developed
-classic.</p>
-
-<p>Nothing illustrates this change more aptly than a comparison between
-Smithson’s drawings and those of Inigo Jones and John Webb. The
-first are Jacobean, the second are classic. In the Jacobean are seen
-efforts to sever the ties which ancient traditions still imposed; a
-striving after Italian detail, which was never thoroughly achieved; a
-mixture of a little old-fashioned romance, with a little new-fashioned
-learning. In the classic are seen an ignoring of tradition; a mastery
-of Italian methods; a mixture of sound knowledge with a feeling for
-good proportion. As an illustration of the first large building in
-England conceived in the fully developed classic style, nothing could
-be better than the drawing made by Thomas Sandby about the middle of
-the eighteenth century, showing how the great palace designed for
-Charles I. would have appeared (see Fig. <a href="#i_001fp">1</a>). It is also interesting in
-connection with<span class="pagenum" id="Page_8">[8]</span> the inquiry into the Jones and Webb drawings, which
-will be fully dealt with in Chapter IV.</p>
-
-<p>Incidentally a study of the drawings by Jones and Webb forces the
-inquirer to reconsider the relations of those two men as hitherto
-accepted, and compels him to readjust his ideas as to some of the work
-he had been taught to attribute to Jones.</p>
-
-<p>With the seventeenth century we get into much closer touch with the
-designers of buildings than was possible in earlier times: in many
-cases we can get behind the buildings to their architects. But the
-chief purpose of the following pages is to trace the changes that took
-place in the houses themselves and their accessories, and although it
-would be neither possible nor desirable to omit all mention of the
-architects, the latter will be subsidiary to the main theme, and will
-be dealt with not so much biographically as by way of showing how their
-training, their opportunities and their idiosyncrasies affected the
-buildings with which they were concerned.</p>
-
-<p>The present and immediate purpose is to give a brief and broad outlook
-over the period dealt with in detail in subsequent chapters; and to
-that end a series of houses has been selected, separated from each
-other in point of date by intervals of some twenty or thirty years.</p>
-
-<p>The first of the series is Aston Hall (Fig. <a href="#i_004">2</a>), which may be
-considered an example of how the old order lingered on. It has all the
-characteristics of Jacobean design, with its two pronounced wings, its
-curved gables, its fine chimney-stacks, and its mullioned windows:
-not to mention an open arcade and a forecourt with garden houses at
-the two outlying corners. These characteristics were gradually to
-disappear from houses. The plan became more compact, and wings were
-discarded, except that version of them which became fashionable later
-on, and which consisted of a separate block on either side of the main
-building, connected to it by a colonnade. Gables disappeared, the only
-approach to such features being the flat pediments which were often
-employed as central ornaments to the façades. Chimney-stacks became
-plainer, and the flues were massed into solid blocks, instead of rising
-in separate shafts from a common base. Mullioned windows lingered on
-for some years, but the mullions were of wood, and were insignificant
-compared with their stone predecessors. They were merely part of the
-wood window frame, and they disappeared<span class="pagenum" id="Page_9">[9]</span> almost entirely after the
-advent of the sash-window in the last quarter of the seventeenth
-century.</p>
-
-<p>In the meantime, greater attention was paid to the cornices which made
-the circuit of the buildings; more especially was the topmost cornice
-emphasised&mdash;that from which the roof sprang. The general proportions
-of the building were more closely studied, and in particular the
-proportion of the window openings to the plain wall space.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_009">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_009.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 3.</span>&mdash;Broadfield Hall, Hertfordshire.</p>
-     <p class="center p-min sm">From a Drawing by Buckler, 1832.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Broadfield Hall, in Hertfordshire (Fig. <a href="#i_009">3</a>), illustrates the advance
-along these lines. There are no wings and no gables. Stone mullions
-are still retained; a bold cornice marks each story, the boldest being
-that on which the hipped roof rests. The flues are massed in two large
-stacks, and their existence is duly acknowledged, no attempt being
-made, as was sometimes the case in later times, to conceal them among
-irrelevant ornament. The dormer windows rise from the roof, and are
-no longer placed in portions of the main wall carried up for their
-reception. The unbroken cornice at the eaves necessitated this change.
-The old love of light still shows itself in the size of the windows,
-which are not yet subordinated to the claims of proportion.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_10">[10]</span></p>
-
-<p>The exact date of this house has not been ascertained, but the style
-is characteristic of the middle of the seventeenth century, a period
-when no great amount of building was undertaken, owing to the disturbed
-state of the country consequent upon the Civil War. The time of
-Shakespeare is marked by a distinct style represented in hundreds of
-houses, but no such wealth of illustration enriches the time of Milton.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_010">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_010.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 4.</span>&mdash;Moyles Court, Hampshire.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>With the return of Charles II. a more settled state of affairs came
-about, and once more the stream of architecture flowed steadily
-onwards. Such houses as Moyles Court, in Hampshire (Fig. <a href="#i_010">4</a>), were built
-in considerable numbers. There is nothing pretentious about them; they
-depend for their effect upon the regular spacing of the windows, and
-upon the strong shadow cast by the eaves cornice. The intermediate
-cornices of Broadfield have given way to a plain string. The windows
-are, many of them, sashes; but it would be rash to assert definitely
-that originally they were all so, because sashes had only recently been
-introduced. The chimney-stacks are large, and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_13">[13]</span> have a certain amount
-of character about them. This particular example has two projecting
-wings, which may indicate that the house followed the lines of an
-earlier one, or they may merely be a survival of old ways; in either
-case they are not of the essence of the period. The date of the house
-is not recorded, but it was probably built between 1670 and 1680, by
-that Dame Alice Lisle who suffered death in 1685 at the hands of Judge
-Jeffreys for sheltering a Nonconformist minister and a fugitive from
-Sedgemoor.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_011">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_011.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 5.</span>&mdash;HANBURY HALL,
-                             <span class="smcap">near Droitwich</span>, 1701.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_012">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_012.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 6.</span>&mdash;HAMPTON COURT.</p>
-     <p class="center p-min sm smcap">Part of the River Front, 1689.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Of much the same character, but loftier and more dignified, is Hanbury
-Hall, near Droitwich, built in 1701 for a certain Thomas Vernon (Fig. <a href="#i_011">5</a>).
-The façade is here emphasised by a pediment, which professes to
-be partly carried on two columns. Ornament goes but a little way
-towards producing the pleasing effect, which, in fact, is obtained by
-the windows (including the dormers), the quoins, and the bold eaves
-cornice. The cupola adds a note of interest; it is a feature which had
-been used by Inigo Jones, and before him, although designed on other
-lines, by Jacobean architects.</p>
-
-<p>But a greater figure than the men who designed Moyles Court or Hanbury
-Hall occupied the stage at this time. This was Sir Christopher Wren,
-the greatest architect that England has produced. His work, however,
-lay for the most part outside the scope of the present inquiry which is
-chiefly concerned with domestic architecture. It was largely the city
-churches, and especially the noble cathedral of St Paul, that occupied
-and developed Wren’s uncommon powers. Of ordinary domestic work, but
-little can be put to his credit with certainty. However, at the palace
-of Hampton Court (Fig. <a href="#i_012">6</a>), he showed the same strong hand, the same
-virility of design which appear in his churches. Wren had mastered the
-medium in which he worked, and he used it with freedom, unfettered by
-slavish obedience to the rules which kept his less gifted successors in
-leading strings, and induced them to tread the paths of safety rather
-than those of adventure.</p>
-
-<p>There was, perhaps, one exception to this slavery in the person of
-Sir John Vanbrugh, who had a singular gift for grandiose design.
-Kings Weston, near Bristol (Fig. <a href="#i_015">7</a>), is one of his simpler and more
-restrained efforts, but even here the scale is large and the detail
-verging on coarseness. But it is neither the personal note nor the
-minutiæ of design which<span class="pagenum" id="Page_14">[14]</span> concerns us at present. Kings Weston is
-advanced as illustrating, not so much Vanbrugh’s style, as the complete
-departure from the old ways which architectural design had by this time
-taken. The date of Kings Weston is about 1715. It is not only in the
-external appearance that this departure is noticeable, but also in the
-plan, and in the internal embellishments. These points will be dealt
-with fully in due course, but even on looking at the outside of Kings
-Weston, it is obvious that it is disposed on lines widely different
-from those of a Jacobean house.</p>
-
-<p>These differences are still more apparent in the next illustration
-of the series, Wolterton Hall, in Norfolk (Fig. <a href="#i_016">8</a>). This house is
-attributed to Ripley, and its date is put at 1736. It is staid and
-eminently respectable, but there is none of the picturesqueness of
-the Jacobean methods about it, none of those unexpected human touches
-which help us to condone the ignorance of classic detail exhibited by
-Jacobean designers; no “accident,” as Sir Joshua Reynolds puts it,
-which might lead to variety or intricacy. In making the circuit of its
-walls, the visitor knows exactly what he is likely to find. The appeal
-is to narrower sympathies than of old, to sympathies which spring
-from an acquired feeling for proportion, and are not merely roused by
-quaint personal incidents attractive to all alike, whether trained in
-architecture or not. The dignified effect is produced by the stone
-base, the proportion of the windows in relation to the wall space, and
-the bold cornice at the eaves. The chimneys are symmetrically placed,
-but they have had no design worthy of the name bestowed upon them.</p>
-
-<p>At Fonthill House, in Wiltshire, built about 1760 (Fig. <a href="#i_018">9</a>), there is a
-reversion to a type of plan which had almost died out, a central block,
-namely, with detached wings connected to it by curved colonnades. This
-type had been frequently adopted in the earlier part of the eighteenth
-century, and was still advocated in some of the text-books on house
-design. But its obvious inconveniences in dissipating the forces of
-domestic service instead of concentrating them, so far outweighed
-the advantages of stateliness and grandeur which it bestowed, that
-it fell into disuse. Fonthill House was built by Alderman Beckford
-in succession to a house which was burnt in 1755, and it is doing
-the alderman no injustice to suppose that he strove to make his new
-house a very splendid affair, and accordingly adopted a<span class="pagenum" id="Page_17">[17]</span> striking,
-if inconvenient, plan. He succeeded to such an extent that the result
-of his labours has been referred to as “Fonthill splendens.” His son,
-the author of “Vathek,” is said to have been born at Fonthill in
-1759, possibly in the new house, but there is no record of the actual
-date of its erection. The son eventually sold it for £9,000, a mere
-bagatelle in comparison with its cost, which was nearly a quarter of
-a million. He was then, about 1795, building on a vast scale, with
-the help of Wyatt, one of those freaks in which the late eighteenth
-century delighted, a mansion in the guise of a sham abbey, costing
-another quarter of a million. This wonderful edifice had but a short
-life, for in 1825, two years after he had sold the estate, the great
-tower fell and started the decay of the whole structure. So famous were
-Fonthill Abbey and its contents that half England had flocked to the
-sale, filling every inn for miles around, and eating the countryside
-bare. Beckford the younger, like many of his contemporaries, was a man
-of great wealth and of considerable culture; a great collector of art
-treasures, and one who spent large sums in building in an ancient style
-of which neither he nor anyone living knew the rudiments. Reynolds,
-however, may be held to have countenanced the practice, for he says
-that the imagination being affected by the association of ideas, and we
-having naturally a veneration for antiquity, whatever building brings
-to our remembrance ancient customs and manners, such as the castles of
-the barons of ancient chivalry, is sure to give delight.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_015">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_015.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 7.</span>&mdash;KINGS WESTON,
-          <span class="smcap">near Bristol</span>, <i>cir.</i> 1715.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_016">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_016.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 8.</span>&mdash;WOLTERTON HALL,
-                 <span class="smcap">Norfolk</span>, 1736.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>It is often very difficult to determine the date of old country
-houses; no records of the building of them survive, or if they do they
-are stowed away in unexplored muniment rooms. Tradition is vague or
-unreliable. Additions may have been made from time to time of which no
-precise account remains. The lapse of years may have toned everything
-down to the same antique appearance, rendering the disentanglement of
-the various periods a laborious task, and the results uncertain. The
-work of a later period may, perhaps, predominate to such an extent as
-to overwhelm what remains from an earlier, and cause the whole house
-to be dated half a century later than it ought to be. This is the case
-at Normanton Park, in Rutland, where such considerable alterations
-were made about 1780 that the house is held to be of the Adam period,
-whereas its main disposition was almost certainly settled fifty years
-before that<span class="pagenum" id="Page_19">[19]</span> time. Enough of the earlier work remains in various
-parts to support this idea, and to show that the plan adopted&mdash;that
-of a central block with detached wings connected by colonnades&mdash;was
-the production of the beginning of the century rather than of the end.
-At the later period, however, many of the external walls must have
-been recased if not rebuilt, and the garden front (Fig. <a href="#i_019">10</a>) is a good
-example of the time. The circular bay is a characteristic feature,
-and so are the attic stories of the wings, although the placing of a
-plainly treated attic over a more majestic substructure was by no means
-a novelty. The real touch of the Adam period is to be found in the
-detail, which has all the delicacy and refinement connected with the
-name of the accomplished brothers Adam. That it is useless to argue
-about matters of taste is a dictum as old as the time when thoughts
-were usually expressed in the Latin tongue. Whether the delicacy of
-Adam or the vigour of Vanbrugh is to be preferred is a matter of
-individual liking. Some people admire Ganymede, others regard Hercules
-as a finer type; yet others admire both. With such predilections we
-need not be concerned;<span class="pagenum" id="Page_20">[20]</span> all that is necessary at present is to point
-out the change that had taken place in architectural treatment during
-the course of the eighteenth century.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_018">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_018.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 9.</span>&mdash;FONTHILL HOUSE,
-                 <span class="smcap">Wiltshire</span>, <i>cir.</i> 1760.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_019">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_019.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 10.</span>&mdash;Normanton Park, Rutland, <i>cir.</i> 1780.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>As the century grew older the severance from the traditions of mediæval
-times grew wider. Those traditions, indeed, were lost, and although a
-few attempts were made&mdash;by Horace Walpole and others&mdash;to revive the
-late Gothic style, they only served to show how superficial was the
-current knowledge of Gothic architecture, and how futile it is to
-apply imitations of a departed style, merely by way of ornament, to
-buildings which have no affinity to those from which inspiration is
-sought. These attempts at revival were not numerous, they lay outside
-the normal course of design, which steadily followed the classic lead
-which had been first given whole-heartedly by Inigo Jones. But the
-virility of Jones, Wren, and Vanbrugh had gradually declined, and
-domestic architecture had become correspondingly tame. It was highly
-respectable, much of it was refined, all of it was safe and rather
-uninteresting. To us it is so correct and well-meaning that it escapes
-the fate of much that succeeded it&mdash;the exciting of violent dislike.
-Indeed, after the lapse of more than a century, interest in it is
-reviving, and it bids fair to acquire enthusiastic admirers. It was
-otherwise when it was in full possession of the field, for in spite of
-its excellent qualities it roused the fury of Pugin and his followers,
-and was overwhelmed by the Gothic revival.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_021">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_021.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 11.</span>&mdash;Gwydyr House, Whitehall, London, 1796.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>There was no essential change in the general treatment of houses
-all through the last half of the eighteenth century, as may be seen
-by comparing Gwydyr House, Whitehall (Fig. <a href="#i_021">11</a>), which was built
-in 1796, with Wolterton Hall (Fig. <a href="#i_016">8</a>), built in 1736; that is,
-the general effect is obtained by the same means. The windows are
-carefully proportioned, and the eaves cornice is the only important
-shadow-producing feature. At Gwydyr House the attic story is a
-later addition. The windows in both cases are plain, unornamented
-oblong openings. In the house No. 32 St James’s Square (Fig. <a href="#i_022">12</a>),
-which was built in 1815, and is the last of this particular series
-of illustrations, while the main effect is the result of the window
-proportion and the eaves cornice, some additional interest is given by
-the form of the first floor windows, by the arches in which they are
-placed, and by the balconies.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_022">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_022.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 12.</span>&mdash;No. 32 ST. JAMES’S SQUARE, LONDON, 1815.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Although there was no great originality in the manner in<span class="pagenum" id="Page_21">[21]</span> which
-the bulk of the houses was handled at this time, there was much
-ingenuity bestowed upon the detail and ornament. The brothers Adam,
-who were busy during the last quarter of the eighteenth century,
-have given their name to a particular style of decoration, marked
-by much delicacy and refinement, but they did nothing of first-rate
-importance in architecture itself, nothing that set men building in
-a fresh way. After them came the Greek influence, which affected a
-number of designers. The ambitions of Napoleon absorbed the attention
-of nearly the whole of Europe, but Greece was at that time exciting a
-considerable amount of interest, which was fostered to a certain extent
-by the poetry of Byron. But although he hymned the Isles of Greece and
-burning Sappho, but little of her fire found<span class="pagenum" id="Page_23">[23]</span> its way into the forms
-which her country lent to England. Then there followed the Age of
-Romance, inaugurated by the great Wizard of the North; all the world
-fell in love with ancient castles and old houses. Scott’s magic wand
-lifted the veil from the past, and disclosed scenes of bygone manners,
-affecting, amusing, and exciting, thus making easy the advent of the
-Gothic Revival.</p>
-
-<p>This revival broke the thread of classic tradition in house building,
-a thread already attenuated. It brought about the chaos of style which
-marks the nineteenth century. But it set men thinking; it gave them a
-fresh start; it led them to attack problems in a logical way, to adapt
-their designs to circumstances instead of insisting that circumstances
-must conform to established laws of design. In a word it produced the
-wide outlook and the reasonable attitude of adapting means to the end,
-which are the hope of architecture to-day.</p>
-
-<p>Having thus given a bird’s-eye view of the course followed by house
-builders during the whole period under consideration, we will now
-proceed to an examination in detail of the various stages of its
-development.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_24">[24]</span></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_024">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_024.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm smcap">Fig. 13.&mdash;BOLSOVER CASTLE, Derbyshire.</p>
-     <p class="center p-min sm smcap">Entrance Doorway to the Gallery.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_25">[25]</span></p>
-
-<h2>II<br />
-<span class="subhed">THE CHANGE IN STYLE</span></h2></div>
-
-<p>During the seventeenth century a very significant change took place in
-architectural design. All through the mediæval period design seems,
-so far as our knowledge enables us to form an opinion, to have been
-impersonal, the result of a number of men working together, each
-concerned with the portion affecting his particular trade. It is
-probably true that some one individual controlled the general scheme,
-and gave an oversight to the work of the others; but not in such a
-sense as to have been entitled to be called the “architect,” as we
-understand the term. To us the architect is the individual who not only
-provides the plan, not only puts into practicable form the ideas of the
-employer, but also designs most of the details. He not only informs
-the various artificers that particular work is required in particular
-places, but he also provides them with drawings showing what the work
-is to be, and how it is to be fashioned. His influence to-day is much
-wider and much more intimate than it was in the Middle Ages, the ages
-which produced our cathedrals, our ancient churches, castles, and
-manor-houses.</p>
-
-<p>The term “architect” occurs very seldom either in literature or in
-documents previous to the seventeenth century. Shakespeare uses the
-word once; in contracts of Elizabeth’s time it appears seldom, if
-ever; although the documents refer to the provision of design as well
-as workmanship. In the numerous books published for the guidance of
-designers in building matters during the reigns of Elizabeth and James,
-it appears now and then: but the appeals which these books made on
-their title-pages and in their prefaces to those for whom they were
-written, were addressed primarily to artificers and only incidentally
-to architects, who seem to have been included in order to catch a
-possible purchaser. The reason for the absence of the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_26">[26]</span> term is obvious:
-there were hardly any people who called themselves architects.</p>
-
-<p>The publication of these books is itself a sign of the change which was
-coming over the methods of design. Hitherto design had been a matter
-of tradition, preserved by guilds, handed down from father to son or
-from master to man. The horizon of a mediæval workman was limited: he
-neither knew nor cared much for what was being done in distant lands.
-His style was influenced by local considerations, and although he
-conformed to the general changes which affected the whole of Gothic
-architecture, there was usually a local flavour about his work. The
-difference in character between the work in Norfolk, Northamptonshire,
-and Somerset is obvious at first sight: but a closer scrutiny will
-often reveal local variations in those districts themselves.</p>
-
-<p>Why were these books published, and what kind of architectural style
-did they illustrate? Did they bring before the eye of the designer
-masterpieces of Gothic architecture, or details of Gothic work? Not at
-all: no book illustrating Gothic architecture was published till the
-end of the eighteenth century.<a id="FNanchor_1" href="#Footnote_1" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> There was, in truth, no need for such
-a book: the mediæval workmen had their own traditional knowledge, and
-it concerned them not at all to learn how the workmen in Germany or
-southern France or Spain differed in method from themselves. They gave
-no thought to such matters, nor did they think of themselves as being
-concerned with architecture; they merely built in the manner of their
-fathers.</p>
-
-<p>But although the successors of the mediæval craftsmen in the
-mid-sixteenth century shared their predecessors’ apathy in respect of
-what was being done abroad, it was otherwise with those for whom they
-worked&mdash;the great men who were building fine houses all over the land.
-To these had come new ideas in relation to their buildings. They had
-heard of the splendid work that for years had been executed in Italy:
-some of them had<span class="pagenum" id="Page_27">[27]</span> seen it; monarchs and wealthy nobles had even brought
-foreign craftsmen over to exercise their skill in the northern parts
-of Europe. The Italian manner was a novelty in this land of Gothic
-traditions, it was unlike anything to which England was accustomed. But
-the new fashion became popular. Employers demanded the novel detail
-in their houses; the foreign artists were not numerous, and so the
-English workmen had to supply the best imitation they could contrive
-on a scanty training. Here came the opportunity for the bookmakers.
-They showed the way in which Italian buildings were designed; they
-illustrated the “Orders” which gave those buildings their distinctive
-character so far as appearance went; they showed how classic detail
-might be applied or perverted to meet the exigencies of buildings which
-had a Gothic parentage. The books, therefore, were published in order
-to help designers who aimed at working in the new classic style.</p>
-
-<p>The effect, of course, was to foster that style at the expense of the
-native Gothic. It is true that books were not widely distributed; there
-was not in those days the rapid dissemination of ideas that there
-is in our own. But if anyone wanted a book about building, he could
-only find such as dealt with classic architecture. Hence in a short
-time the operations which had hitherto been thought of as building,
-began to be thought of as Architecture, and the only architecture that
-was formulated was classic architecture. The idea of that art became
-inseparably connected in the minds of men with classic expressions of
-it. Thus it came about that in the course of half a century people of
-culture regarded all Gothic buildings&mdash;even the noblest&mdash;as barbarous,
-and not worthy the name of Architecture.<a id="FNanchor_2" href="#Footnote_2" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> The “Gothic order,” as it
-was called, was merely a “fantastic and licentious manner of building.”</p>
-
-<p>It was only a small proportion of the actual workmen who were able to
-study books; the rest picked up the new manner from such foreigners
-as they met, from work which they saw as they moved about, and
-occasionally, perhaps, from verbal description. Some worked all their
-lives on the old lines. One result of the difficulty of imbuing the
-workmen with the requisite knowledge was that some of the men whose
-duty it was to overlook buildings&mdash;the surveyors&mdash;made a point of
-studying<span class="pagenum" id="Page_28">[28]</span> the new style either through books or by foreign travel or
-both. They rendered themselves familiar with classic detail, and were
-thus enabled to give the desired character to the buildings under
-their charge. They gradually became more and more responsible for
-design in the various branches of the building trades, and thus grew
-to be architects as well as surveyors. The inevitable tendency was for
-architectural design to become more personal, and for its results to
-become less like a spontaneous growth of the land.</p>
-
-<p>The number of architectural books published was not in reality very
-great; they were mostly of foreign production, and probably few
-copies found their way into England. The earliest were printed in
-Italy during the closing years of the fifteenth century. By the
-middle of the sixteenth century there were, perhaps, half a score in
-existence, some in Italian, some in French. These were obviously of
-no use to unlettered workmen, but they were appreciated by men of
-learning, and were studied by some of the surveyors of the time. One
-or two Englishmen had produced treatises on architecture by the end
-of the century, but their direct effect on English design can hardly
-be traced. It is, indeed, unwise to look to any of the books of the
-time for direct and immediate influence; their effect seems to have
-been gradual. As may be supposed, it would be the illustrations which
-would have the greatest weight, for they would be intelligible to
-men unacquainted with the language of the text. The more important
-treatises confined themselves largely to drawings of the orders, but
-a few smaller books, published by Germans and Dutchmen, gave many
-illustrations of particular features such as doorways, windows, and so
-forth, and these appear to have appealed more powerfully to English
-workmen and to have influenced in some degree the appearance which they
-imparted to their details.</p>
-
-<p>In another and different direction some of the French books would seem
-to have had an interesting effect. Philibert de l’Orme and Androuet
-du Cerceau had published remarkably fine illustrations of the more
-important buildings then recently erected in France. It is certain
-that John Thorpe, who was the most accomplished and ingenious of the
-English surveyors of his time, had studied du Cerceau’s books, and it
-is quite conceivable that, fired by such an example, he may himself
-have contemplated a similar production for England, and that<span class="pagenum" id="Page_31">[31]</span> to this
-idea is owing the very interesting collection of drawings now preserved
-at the Soane Museum. But however this may be, it is clear that some of
-the men who were concerned with the design of large houses thought it
-worth while to preserve their drawings, for, in addition to the Thorpe
-collection, there is that other collection by Thorpe’s contemporary
-and successor, Smithson; while in later years are those connected
-with the work of Inigo Jones, John Webb, and Wren; and in still later
-times Campbell, Gibbs, and other architects made a point of publishing
-illustrations of the buildings which they and their contemporaries had
-designed.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_029" style="width: 750px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_029.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm">Ground Floor.<span style="margin-left: 10em">Upper Floor.</span></p>
-     <p class="center p-min sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 14.</span>&mdash;MY LORD SHEFFIELD’S HOUSE.</p>
-     <p class="center p-min sm right">From the Smithson Collection.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_030">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_030.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 15.</span>&mdash;GROUND AND UPPER PLANS OF A HOUSE, NOT NAMED.</p>
-     <p class="center p-min sm">From the Smithson Collection.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>But although we may perhaps see in the books of the sixteenth century
-the genesis of our own English architectural publications, their
-immediate interest lies in the fact that whatever was published
-about the beginning of the seventeenth century dealt with classic
-architecture, and that anyone who sought in books for information
-about building, found nothing about the old Gothic detail, but only
-instructions how to design in the classic style.</p>
-
-<p>The Thorpe collection of drawings is well known, and belongs to the
-order of things which was passing away. But the Smithson collection is
-but little known, and as it forms a link between what was passing and
-what was approaching, it will be of interest to say a few words about
-it, and to give a few illustrations from it.</p>
-
-<p>Of Smithson, as of his predecessors in his calling, very little is
-actually known. He seems to have belonged to a family of architectural
-designers, the members of which have been rather confused by Walpole
-and other writers who have referred to them. The facts seem to be
-that of his parentage there are no records, although chronology would
-admit of Robert Smithson, of Wollaton, being his father; his own
-name was John, he had a son named Huntingdon, a grandson named John
-and a great-grandson named Huntingdon. He himself died in 1634, and
-his son Huntingdon in 1648. They were both buried at Bolsover, in
-Derbyshire, and an inscription over the grave of the son speaks of
-his “skill in architecture.” The two have been confused with each
-other, but their separate identity has recently been made clear.<a id="FNanchor_3" href="#Footnote_3" class="fnanchor">[3]</a>
-According to Walpole,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_32">[32]</span> in his “Anecdotes of Painting,” “John Smithson
-was an architect in the service of the Earls of Newcastle. He built
-part of Welbeck in 1604, the riding-house there in 1623,<a id="FNanchor_4" href="#Footnote_4" class="fnanchor">[4]</a> and the
-stables in 1625; and when William Cavendish, Earl and afterwards Duke
-of Newcastle, proposed to repair and make great additions to Bolsover
-Castle, Smithson, it is said, was sent to Italy to collect designs.
-From them I suppose it was that the noble apartment erected by that
-duke, and lately pulled down, was completed, Smithson dying in 1648.<a id="FNanchor_5" href="#Footnote_5" class="fnanchor">[5]</a>
-Many of Smithson’s drawings were purchased by the late Lord Byron from
-his descendants who lived in Bolsover.” On Lord Byron’s death the
-drawings were purchased by the Rev. D’Ewes Coke, and they are now in
-the possession of his descendants at Brookhill Hall.</p>
-
-<p>Many of the drawings have no title or other means of identifying them;
-but such as have go to show that Smithson, who, it would seem, was not
-only buried but also lived at Bolsover on the north-east border of
-Derbyshire, had a considerable local practice, as well as a certain
-amount of work in London. The riding-house and stables at Welbeck,
-mentioned by Walpole, are both in the collection, and there are also
-several drawings relating to Bolsover Castle.</p>
-
-<p>The buildings which go to make the “castle” may be divided into three
-groups: First, there is the castellated portion, built on the site of
-the old keep and begun in 1613: this part is still in good repair.
-Then there is a long range on the terrace&mdash;the “noble apartment”
-mentioned by Walpole. This was built by Sir William Cavendish,
-afterwards Duke of Newcastle, who presumably found the older building
-too small. Its principal apartment was a magnificent gallery, but, so
-far as its ruinous state permits the other rooms to be made out (and
-among them was a kitchen), it would appear to have been a completely
-equipped residence. On the view of the castle which adorns the Duke
-of Newcastle’s book on Horsemanship, this building is called “La
-Gallerie.” The third group comprises the riding-house and its adjuncts,
-which adjoin the gallery at its western end.</p>
-
-<p>The few drawings in the Smithson collection which refer to Bolsover
-are all, except one, connected with the castellated<span class="pagenum" id="Page_33">[33]</span> portion, and they
-go to prove that John Smithson must have been concerned with that
-particular building. But there is one drawing of a large doorway (No.
-40) which closely resembles the central doorway on the terrace front of
-the gallery, and the general detail of this building, which is large in
-scale, heavy and rather spoilt by laboured freaks, is akin to much else
-that is to be found among the Smithson drawings. This gallery block
-is evidently of two dates. The eastern portion has a certain amount
-of detail in the simpler style of the Jacobean period, while that of
-the western half is more laboured and contorted. At the eastern end
-are five small projecting stones bearing initials and dates; one of
-them has on it H. S. 1629, and may conceivably commemorate Huntingdon
-Smithson. But as it has four neighbours with other initials and the
-dates 1629, 1630, it would appear that in any case he was only one
-out of five persons entitled to recognition. However, the evidence
-of tradition, the date-stone and the drawings clearly point to the
-Smithsons being responsible for the design of the buildings generally,
-and it may well be that the influence of the father is visible in the
-earlier and simpler work, and that of the son in the grandiose gallery,
-with which he may have been busy at some time between his father’s
-death in 1634 and the outbreak of hostilities in 1642. The riding-house
-is much quieter in treatment than the gallery, and its detail is more
-refined. In spite of the tradition that the designs were collected in
-Italy, the work shows more affinity to Dutch models than to Italian, as
-may be gathered from the illustrations (Figs. <a href="#i_024">13</a>, <a href="#i_034">16</a>).</p>
-
-<p>The riding-house at Welbeck (Fig. <a href="#i_038">20</a>) follows the established lines in
-its treatment; it has steep gables with finials, mullioned windows, and
-an open hammer-beam roof: the very heavy pediments over the doors are
-in keeping with those at Bolsover, and with many other details in the
-collection, and they show how crude Smithson was in his treatment of
-classic features. It is important to bear this in mind, because he may
-be considered (although he had an uncommonly heavy hand) as typical of
-the majority of English designers before the influence of Inigo Jones
-began to be felt.</p>
-
-<p>Smithson’s house-plans are of great interest, inasmuch as they belong
-to the order of things which was shortly to pass away. Some of them
-follow the traditional lines which made<span class="pagenum" id="Page_34">[34]</span> the hall the principal
-apartment of the house, placing it between the family rooms and the
-servants’ quarters. The plan “for My Lord Sheffield’s house” is an
-example of this arrangement (Fig. <a href="#i_029">14</a>). It shows the rooms grouped in
-the old way round a courtyard, which had to be traversed in approaching
-the hall from the front door. The hall itself was entered through the
-screens at its lower end, and was flanked at its upper end by the
-parlour and other family rooms, and by the grand staircase. On the
-opposite side of the court were the kitchen, pantry, and other rooms
-for the service of the house. In the four corners of the court were
-square turrets containing subsidiary staircases. On the upper floor
-(Fig. <a href="#i_029">14</a>) the chief rooms were the dining-chamber, placed as far from
-the kitchen as the limits of the house would allow, and the long
-gallery. The fact of a special room being set apart for dining itself
-indicates a fairly late date in respect of this ancient type of plan.
-As my Lord Sheffield was created Earl of Mulgrave in 1626, the plan
-must be prior to that year, but the house was probably not more than
-ten years old when the change of title took place.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_034">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_034.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 16.</span>&mdash;Bolsover Castle, Derbyshire. The Riding-House.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_35">[35]</span></p>
-
-<p>The other specimen of Smithson’s planning is one of the H type,
-with the hall in one of the wings (Fig. <a href="#i_030">15</a>). This is a departure
-from the old arrangement, which would have placed the hall in the
-central block, and thus have brought the buttery (which opens from
-the screens) into close touch with the kitchens. The hall becomes
-here more of a passage-room and less of a living-room than under
-the ancient disposition. There are no sitting-rooms for the family
-on the ground floor, but the principal staircase leads to the great
-chamber on the upper floor, thence to the long gallery and a distant
-“withdrawing-chamber,” as well as to the chapel and several bedrooms.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_035" style="width: 750px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_035.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 17.</span>&mdash;Elevation of a House, not named.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From the Smithson Collection.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Both these houses are rigidly symmetrical in their external treatment,
-and it is interesting to note how, in addition to preserving such
-old-established rooms as the great chamber and long gallery, they
-depend for their external effect upon old features, such as mullioned
-windows, arcaded entrances, turrets, and the breaking up of the various
-fronts with substantial projections and large bay-windows. These
-devices were customary among the designers of the time of Elizabeth and
-James I., but they were gradually to be superseded by other methods.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_36">[36]</span></p>
-
-<p>There are no elevations preserved which fit these plans, but Smithson
-has left a number of specimens of his way of dealing with the exterior
-of his buildings. The most important in size is illustrated in Fig. <a href="#i_035">17</a>.
-It follows the usual lines of the period with its mullioned windows,
-large horizontal cornices, arcaded entrance, balustraded parapets, and
-curly central gable; but it is rather clumsy compared with most of John
-Thorpe’s elevations. So, also, is the elevation of “My Ladye Cookes
-house in Houlborn” (Fig. <a href="#i_036">18</a>) to which additional interest is lent by
-the fact that it is dated 1619. This front, with its large dominating
-pediment and circular-headed window has a later touch about it, and has
-lost most of the light-hearted piquancy which characterises the work of
-the preceding fifty years.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_036" style="width: 474px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_036.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 18.</span>&mdash;Lady Cook’s House in Holborn, 1619.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From the Smithson Collection.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_037">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_037.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 19.</span>&mdash;PERSPECTIVE OF PALACE, WHITEHALL.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_038" style="width: 634px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_038.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 20.</span>&mdash;THE RIDING-HOUSE AT WELBECK, 1622.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From the Smithson Collection.</p>
- </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_039" style="width: 750px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_039.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 21.</span>&mdash;The Italyan grate over the Watter. A newe
-Italyan wyndowe, the gallerye at Arrundell house. The newe
-Italyan gate at Arrundell house in the garden there, 1618.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From the Smithson Collection.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The hankering after Italian detail which had affected English designers
-in an increasing degree for many years finds expression in the Smithson
-drawings, among which are several “Italyan” windows and doors, an
-“Italyan” gate (Fig. <a href="#i_039">21</a>), and one or two “pergulars.”</p>
-
-<p>The Thorpe and Smithson drawings are closely allied both in
-architectural style and in methods of draughtsmanship, although the
-latter collection is obviously later in feeling. There<span class="pagenum" id="Page_39">[39]</span> is a vast
-difference in both respects between them and the drawings prepared by
-Inigo Jones and John Webb, which will presently be described. There
-are comparatively few details in the Thorpe and Smithson collections,
-especially in the former. The designers concerned themselves primarily
-with the mass of the building rather than with its particular features.
-The plans in all the collections, both early and late, are drawn with
-much care and many of them with singular neatness. But the elevations
-and perspective views are not of equal excellence. The latter are
-generally drawn by Thorpe as bird’s-eye views. They are in the nature
-of diagrams. There are, it is true, hardly any perspectives among
-the architectural drawings of Jones and Webb, but in the one notable
-instance&mdash;the view of a front for Whitehall Palace, at the British
-Museum&mdash;the spectator is supposed to be standing on the ground and
-not floating in the air (Fig. <a href="#i_037">19</a>). In Jones’s designs for the scenery
-of masques there are many interesting<span class="pagenum" id="Page_40">[40]</span> architectural compositions,
-and these are perforce drawn to satisfy the eye of a spectator on the
-floor of the theatre. They show great skill in perspective drawing. The
-difference between the two methods is best indicated by describing the
-earlier as archaic and the later as modern. Indeed with the advent of
-Inigo Jones we enter upon a new phase in architectural design; we are
-leaving the ancient ways and turning into the modern.</p>
-<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_41">[41]</span></p>
-
-<h2>III<br />
-<span class="subhed">INIGO JONES</span></h2></div>
-
-<p>The accession of Charles I. to the throne in 1625 marks a convenient
-date in the development of architectural design to consider briefly
-its condition and tendencies. The king and his court still exercised
-an enormous influence over the life and habits of the people in
-directions other than political. In mediæval times the king was the
-centre of public affairs, the pivot upon which the State turned. His
-own will, even his whims and fancies, counted for much. But for the
-last three-quarters of a century this influence had been gradually
-lessening, and the king’s personal power had been curtailed. It was
-in opposing this tendency, in endeavouring to reassert his personal
-ascendancy, in re-establishing his prerogatives, that Charles came
-into conflict with his subjects and ultimately succumbed. But bearing
-this state of things in mind, it will be more readily understood that
-the influence of the king in relation to architecture, for instance,
-would be very considerable; vastly more so than the influence of any
-individual in the present day. Charles was a man of culture, and
-without crediting him with an intimate knowledge of architectural
-design, we may well believe that he would foster the growth of a
-refined and scholarly version of the style at which English designers
-had been aiming for many years. That is to say, since the tendency was
-to adopt Italian ideas he would like to see them adopted thoroughly
-and with full knowledge. The man to do this for him was there in the
-person of Inigo Jones, who had already been employed by his father, and
-who was the only man in England possessing really competent knowledge
-of Italian detail. Here then was another powerful influence at work
-tending to divert English design from the old traditional channels.</p>
-
-<p>No doubt had Charles been blessed with leisure to gratify his refined
-tastes, and to devote himself to the encouragement of the arts, had he
-been in possession of funds commensurate<span class="pagenum" id="Page_42">[42]</span> with his artistic ambitions,
-the Italianising of English architecture would have been more rapid
-than it actually was. But his time was occupied with sterner matters,
-and the huge palace at Whitehall which he is said to have contemplated
-(and his father before him, according to many writers), but of which
-the true history will be presently outlined, never went further than to
-be committed to paper. What he did do, however, was to foster the seed
-which had been sown by his father, and which bore fruit later in the
-century.</p>
-
-<p>The love of Charles for the fine arts was shared by many of his court.
-Thomas Howard, Earl of Arundel, caused not only the marbles which
-still bear his name, but many other fine relics of antiquity, to be
-brought to England. Inigo Jones was frequently employed by the nobility
-to purchase pictures and other treasures, and to see them suitably
-displayed in the houses they were to adorn. John Webb made it one of
-his claims to consideration that he had been commissioned by the “great
-nobility and eminent gentry” to acquire for them medals, statues, and
-other works of art.</p>
-
-<p>Meanwhile, in the country generally, and outside the circle influenced
-by Inigo Jones, the old habits still prevailed, and many houses
-were built, including such important buildings as Aston Hall, in
-Warwickshire, already mentioned, in which the old arrangements of plan
-were retained, and all the old devices for obtaining architectural
-effect were used&mdash;mullioned windows, steep or curved gables, large
-and lofty chimney-stacks, turrets and bay-windows, with a strong
-infusion of Italian detail in the form of cornices and pilasters; just
-such devices indeed as had been employed by John Smithson and his
-contemporaries.</p>
-
-<p>When this is borne in mind, when it is remembered what Smithson stands
-for, and that he lived until 1634; that Aston Hall, where Jacobean
-methods were still paramount, was not completed until 1635; it will
-be easier to grasp the significance of Inigo Jones’s Banqueting
-House at Whitehall (Fig. <a href="#i_043">22</a>), designed in 1619 and finished in 1622,
-in which there is no trace of traditional English design, which
-in fact approaches nearer to Italian models than any building of
-the seventeenth century. No wonder, considering the goal at which
-all designers were more or less aiming, that it was quoted as a
-masterpiece, as the finest flower of modern architecture in England.
-This<span class="pagenum" id="Page_43">[43]</span> position it held all through the century, and indeed still
-holds in the opinion of many competent judges. At the time it was
-built it was unique, and for thirty years afterwards travellers might
-have searched England in vain for anything so thoroughly Italian in
-treatment, unless they happened to see the Queen’s House at Greenwich,
-or one or two other buildings by the same architect, such as Sherborne,
-in Gloucestershire, between Northleach and Burford, which was described
-in 1634 as a “stately, rich, compacted Building all of Free-stone,
-flat, and couer’d with Lead, with Strong Battlements about, not much
-unlike to that goodly, and magnificent Building the Banquetting House
-at Whitehall.”<a id="FNanchor_6" href="#Footnote_6" class="fnanchor">[6]</a></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_043">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_043.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 22.</span>&mdash;The Banqueting House, Whitehall, 1619–22.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_44">[44]</span></p>
-
-<p>The Banqueting House must not be regarded as a step in the normal
-development of English design; it was something outside, the work of a
-specially trained and exceptionally gifted man, who achieved in 1619
-what less learned and less skilful men were striving after, consciously
-or unconsciously, for nearly half a century afterwards.</p>
-
-<p>The ultimate influence of Inigo Jones on English architecture was so
-important that it is desirable to know something of his training and
-of his history. He was born in 1573, the parish of St Bartholomew,
-Smithfield.<a id="FNanchor_7" href="#Footnote_7" class="fnanchor">[7]</a> The church register records his baptism: “Enego Jones
-the sonne of Enego Jones was christened the xixth day of July 1573.”
-His father was a cloth-worker in good circumstances at that time, but
-when the lad was sixteen years old, the father was obliged to compound
-with his creditors. There were other children, but it would seem that
-only Inigo and three sisters survived their father, who died in the
-early months of 1597; as he left his property to be divided among his
-four children, he must, to a certain extent, have recovered from his
-financial embarrassments. In any event it would appear that Inigo the
-younger was left to make his own career. It is not known where he
-received his education, nor how thorough, or otherwise, it was: but it
-was apparently up to the average bestowed upon youths of his condition,
-and probably of much the same character, <i>mutatis mutandis</i>, as
-would be acquired by boys of the upper middle class to-day.<a id="FNanchor_8" href="#Footnote_8" class="fnanchor">[8]</a> That he
-was a man of culture is indicated by a copy of rhymes in Latin written
-by Thomas Cariat (Coryat) of Brasenose College, Oxford, in 1611, and
-preserved among the State Papers.<a id="FNanchor_9" href="#Footnote_9" class="fnanchor">[9]</a> They describe a philosophical
-feast, among the guests at which was Inigo Jones. There is a tradition,
-but without evidence to support it, that he was apprenticed to a joiner
-in St Paul’s Churchyard. If this were so, it would at least give him
-an amount of practical knowledge which would be of material assistance
-in his later career. But his early training is really a matter for
-conjecture. He says in the preface to “Stone-Heng Restored”: “Being
-naturally inclined in my younger years to study the arts of design, I
-passed into foreign parts to<span class="pagenum" id="Page_45">[45]</span> converse with the great masters thereof
-in Italy; where I applied myself to search out the Ruins of those
-ancient Buildings, which, in despite of Time itself, and violence of
-Barbarians, are yet remaining. Having satisfied myself in these, and
-returning to my native country, I applied my mind more particularly to
-the study of Architecture.”</p>
-
-<p>At whose expense he passed into foreign parts, or in what year he first
-did so, there is no record. But it is agreed that he paid two visits to
-Italy, the first somewhere about the year 1600; the second in 1613–14.
-Of the first visit little or nothing is known;<a id="FNanchor_10" href="#Footnote_10" class="fnanchor">[10]</a> but of the second
-there are definite records in the shape of his sketch-book preserved
-at Chatsworth, and of his marginal notes on a copy of Palladio which
-he carried with him from place to place, and which is now in Worcester
-College, Oxford.</p>
-
-<p>During his first visit he seems to have achieved such a reputation that
-Christian IV., King of Denmark and brother of the queen of James I.,
-invited him to enter his service. Here, again, there is no reliable
-information as to his achievements; the only evidence indeed is of a
-negative character and consists of the remark of a Danish gentleman to
-the effect that “your great architect left nothing to my country but
-the fame of his presence.”</p>
-
-<p>On his return to England he seems to have been occupied chiefly in the
-devising of masques and plays, among the earliest of which were some
-given at Christ Church, Oxford, to entertain James I. Oddly enough the
-comment of the chronicler in this case is that he “undertook to further
-them much and furnish them with rare devices, but performed very little
-of that which was expected.”<a id="FNanchor_11" href="#Footnote_11" class="fnanchor">[11]</a> That this failure must have been an
-exceptional case is sufficiently proved by the numerous drawings of
-scenery by him preserved at Chatsworth.</p>
-
-<p>Soon after his return to England he was appointed surveyor to the
-queen (Anne of Denmark), and in the year 1610 surveyor of the works to
-Henry, Prince of Wales, but there is no record<span class="pagenum" id="Page_46">[46]</span> of these appointments
-having resulted in any architectural work. Prince Henry died in 1612,
-and in 1613 Jones secured the reversion, after Simon Basil, of the
-office of surveyor of works to the king.<a id="FNanchor_12" href="#Footnote_12" class="fnanchor">[12]</a> In the same year he went
-to Italy for the second time, where he studied the work of celebrated
-painters and architects, as well as the splendid remains of ancient
-architecture which were even more abundant in those days than in these.
-His intercourse with living architects and painters shaped his own
-methods of study and design, and there can be no doubt that he returned
-not only fully equipped to undertake any work that might fall to his
-lot, but deeply imbued with the spirit of Italian art and the prevalent
-Italian methods of design.</p>
-
-<p>He walked on a high plane, his outlook was wider than that of any of
-his contemporaries at home. He had acquired conceptions of architecture
-nobler than those engendered by its application to the ordinary needs
-of daily life. He has left us very little record of his own opinions
-on any subject; it is all the more interesting, therefore, to find in
-his sketch-book, under the date, “Friday y<sup>e</sup> 20 January 1614” (1615 new
-style), a page of reflections of which the following is the gist. “In
-all designing of ornament one must first design the ground plain as it
-is for use, and then adorn and compose it with decorum according to its
-use. To say true, all this composed ornament resulting from abundance
-of design, such as was brought in by Michael Angelo and his followers,
-does not in my opinion suit solid architecture but is more appropriate
-to gardens, the ornaments of chimneys, friezes and the inside of
-houses, where such things must of necessity be used. For as outwardly
-every wise man carries himself gravely in public places, yet inwardly
-has imagination and fire which sometimes flies out unrestrained, just
-as Nature sometimes flies out to delight or amuse us, to move us to
-laughter, contemplation, or even horror; so in architecture the outward
-ornament is to be solid, proportionable according to rule, masculine
-and unaffected.”</p>
-
-<p>No epithets more suitable than the two last&mdash;masculine and
-unaffected&mdash;could be applied to Jones’s own work.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_047a" style="width: 750px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_047a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 23.</span>&mdash;St Paul’s Church, Covent Garden. West Front.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From an Engraving by Thomas Sandby.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_047b" style="width: 750px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_047b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 24.</span>&mdash;The Piazza, Covent Garden.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From an Engraving by Thomas Sandby.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_048">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_048.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 25.</span>&mdash;Ground Plan, Queen’s House, Greenwich, 1635.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The amount of Jones’s own work in architecture is scarcely so large as
-has hitherto been supposed. In regard to the various buildings with
-which he has been credited, some of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_48">[48]</span> the attributions are supported
-by contemporary evidence in the shape of drawings or of references in
-letters and documents; others by the direct enumeration of his staunch
-admirer, John Webb, who was his pupil and assistant, who married a
-kinswoman of his, and was the executor of his will. Others rest upon
-tradition or upon the opinions of critics. Tradition is not altogether
-reliable, owing partly to a natural tendency to attribute any
-outstanding piece of work to the most celebrated artist of the time,
-and partly to the natural desire of owners to attach a well-known name
-to their possessions. The value of a critic’s opinion obviously depends
-upon that uncertain factor&mdash;the ability and equipment of the critic for
-his task, and although the opinion of a competent critic will always
-count for much, it cannot count for so much as direct evidence. The
-evidence in this case consists of allusions in contemporary letters,
-not very numerous or helpful; of architectural drawings by Jones, which
-are helpful but not numerous; and of the testimony of Webb, who was
-in the best position to know what his master actually designed. Webb
-has occasion in his “Vindication of Stone-Heng Restored,” to mention
-Jones’s principal works, which he thus enumerates: The west portico
-of St Paul’s Cathedral, and the reducing-of the body of it “from
-the steeple to the west end, into that order and uniformity we now
-behold”;<a id="FNanchor_13" href="#Footnote_13" class="fnanchor">[13]</a> St Paul’s, Covent<span class="pagenum" id="Page_50">[50]</span> Garden (Fig. <a href="#i_047a">23</a>), “built likewise with
-the porticoes about the Piazza there by Mr. Jones” (Fig. <a href="#i_047b">24</a>)<a id="FNanchor_14" href="#Footnote_14" class="fnanchor">[14]</a>; the
-royal chapels at Denmark House and St James’s;<a href="#Footnote_15" class="fnanchor">[15]</a> the Banqueting House
-at Whitehall; the royal house at Newmarket;<a id="FNanchor_15" href="#Footnote_15" class="fnanchor">[15]</a>
-and the queen mother’s new building at Greenwich.<a id="FNanchor_16" href="#Footnote_16" class="fnanchor">[16]</a> The inscription
-on Jones’s monument which was put up by Webb, designated him as
-“architectus celeberrimus,” and recorded merely that he built the Royal
-White Hall (Aul. Alb. Reg.) and restored the Cathedral of St Paul.<a id="FNanchor_17" href="#Footnote_17" class="fnanchor">[17]</a></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_049a">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_049a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 26.</span>&mdash;The Queen’s House, Greenwich, 1619–35.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_049b">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_049b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 27.</span>&mdash;Elevation.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_050">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_050.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 28.</span>&mdash;Coleshill, Berkshire, 1650. Ground Plan.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>This list need not necessarily be considered as complete, but Webb
-evidently regarded the buildings he mentions as the most noteworthy
-of Jones’s productions, inasmuch as he advances them as proofs of
-his skill in architecture, upon which his fame would rest much more
-securely than upon his literary and antiquarian effort in “Stone-Heng
-Restored.”<a id="FNanchor_18" href="#Footnote_18" class="fnanchor">[18]</a></p>
-
-<p>The authority for the attribution to Jones of other buildings, such
-as the enlargement of Somerset House, the chirurgeon’s<span class="pagenum" id="Page_52">[52]</span> theatre, and
-King Charles’s block at Greenwich, rests upon the Worcester College
-and Burlington-Devonshire drawings, but these buildings should more
-properly be credited to Webb, by whose hand they were drawn.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_051">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_051.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 lg">COLESHILL HOVSE:</p>
-     <p class="center p-min sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 29.</span>&mdash;ELEVATION OF COLESHILL.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The largest design by far which has hitherto been ascribed to Jones is
-that for the great palace at Whitehall, but it will be presently shown
-that the ascription is wrong, and that here also the chief credit ought
-to be given to John Webb.</p>
-
-<p>But although in the interests of historical accuracy it is necessary
-to throw doubt upon much of the work with which Inigo Jones has been
-credited, what remains is sufficient to establish his fame, and it
-is beyond controversy that he was regarded as the “Vitruvius of his
-age.” What he undoubtedly did was to introduce into England a refined
-and scholarly rendering of that Italian manner at which all designers
-had been aiming for half a century. As Webb says in addressing Dr
-Charleton, “I must tell you that what was truly meant by the Art
-of Design was scarcely known in this kingdom, until he, under the
-protection of his late Sacred Majesty, and that famous Mœcenas of Arts,
-the Right Honourable Thomas Earl of Arundel and Surrey, brought it in
-use and esteem among us here.” We can also agree with him when he says
-that “Mr. Jones was generally learned, eminent for Architecture, a great
-geometrician, and in designing with his pen (as Sir Anthony Vandike
-used to say) not to be equalled by whatever great masters in his time,
-for boldness, softness, sweetness, and sureness of his touches.”<a id="FNanchor_19" href="#Footnote_19" class="fnanchor">[19]</a>
-Of the buildings ascribed by Webb to Inigo Jones there remain but
-three&mdash;the Banqueting House, St Paul’s, Covent Garden, which has been
-much altered, and the Queen’s House at Greenwich, which was begun in
-1619 and finished in 1635. It is quite as far removed as the Banqueting
-House from the traditional type of English design. It is essentially
-Italian both in plan and elevation (Figs. <a href="#i_048">25–27</a>), and it indicates how
-completely Inigo Jones had departed from the old ways. The original
-drawings for the house itself have not been preserved, but there exist
-several sketches by Jones’s hand of chimney-pieces and other details
-connected with it.<a id="FNanchor_20" href="#Footnote_20" class="fnanchor">[20]</a></p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_53">[53]</span></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_053">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_053.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 30.</span>&mdash;COLESHILL. <span class="smcap">The Staircase.</span></p>
-  </div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_54">[54]</span></p>
-
-<p>Another house attributed to Jones on fairly good evidence is Coleshill,
-in Berkshire, which stands on a steep hillside facing westwards across
-the valley to Highworth. It is a striking embodiment of that cultivated
-manner in architecture which was begun by Jones, continued by Webb,
-and was destined gradually to supersede the traditional methods of the
-countryside. Although thoroughly English in feeling it could never
-have been devised without an intimate knowledge of Italian detail. It
-is simple, dignified, and regular, depending for its effect upon nice
-proportion and skilful detail, not at all upon picturesque variety
-or broken grouping. It is a plain oblong in plan, without wings or
-projections (Fig. <a href="#i_050">28</a>); it is lofty in elevation, without gables or even
-a pediment (Fig. <a href="#i_051">29</a>); the corners are emphasised with bold quoins,
-the roof springs from a widely projecting cornice, and is crowned
-with a stout balustrade surrounding a spacious lead-covered flat, out
-of which rises a large central cupola. The slopes of the roof are
-diversified with dormers; the massive chimney-stacks are accurately and
-symmetrically placed, each answering to each. There is nothing about
-it haphazard or unexpected, nothing quaint or piquant; everything is
-correct, regular, and stately. It cannot, however, be deemed, like
-Tennyson’s Maud,</p>
-
-  <div class="poetry-container">
-    <div class="poetry">
-      <div class="stanza">
-        <div>“Faultily faultless, icily regular, splendidly null,”</div>
-      </div>
-    </div>
-  </div>
-
-<p>for its effect is both striking and attractive; it is noble without
-being oppressively grand.</p>
-
-<p>The simplicity of the exterior arises from the simplicity of the plan.
-The ground floor, which is mainly occupied by the reception rooms and
-the great staircase, is raised high above the ground, thus leaving
-space for the windows of the basement, which is devoted to the kitchens
-and servants’ quarters. The upper floor contains the grand saloon
-and bedrooms; in the roof are commodious attics; a staircase in the
-cupola leads on to the flat roof, whence fine views are obtained of the
-distant Marlborough Downs.</p>
-
-<p>Although the house is of considerable size, the accommodation is
-not ample in proportion; the bedrooms are large and lofty, but few
-in number. Homeliness is somewhat sacrificed to stateliness. It is
-inevitable that these fine, regular houses should have the defects of
-their qualities.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_055">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_055.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 31.</span>&mdash;COLESHILL. <span class="smcap">Ceiling of the Hall.</span></p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The plan is as different from the traditional plan of English<span class="pagenum" id="Page_56">[56]</span> houses
-as are those in Kent’s “Designs of Inigo Jones,” a collection which
-will be dealt with more particularly later on. There is no great hall
-connecting the parlours with the kitchens, and serving itself as one
-of the chief living-rooms. The servants are relegated to the basement,
-the whole of the ground floor is given up to the family, the hall is
-more of a vestibule than a living-room. In former times the staircase,
-although often handsomely treated, consisted of a single series of
-flights occupying a compact space. At Coleshill a vast hall is devoted
-to the staircase, or rather to two staircases, each equally eligible,
-starting from the same place and terminating at either end of the same
-landing (Fig. <a href="#i_053">30</a>).</p>
-
-<p>Although the servants were sent half underground, some of the
-stateliness followed them, and the approach to the back door is flanked
-by two massive pillars, each of which contains a coved niche.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_056">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_056.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 32.</span>&mdash;Raynham Park, Norfolk. Ground Plan.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The building is attributed to Inigo Jones on the testimony of a tablet
-in the house, and its date, according to the same authority, is 1650.
-In the absence of any other evidence this assertion, although not
-contemporaneous with the building, may be accepted;<a id="FNanchor_21" href="#Footnote_21" class="fnanchor">[21]</a> but it should
-be remembered that Jones died in 1652, and that the last years of his
-life, or almost the last, were spent in the turmoil of the Civil War.
-So much did the unrest disturb his life that he appointed John Webb
-to be his deputy in the office of surveyor of the works.<a id="FNanchor_22" href="#Footnote_22" class="fnanchor">[22]</a> In any
-case it must have been either Jones or Webb who designed Coleshill,
-for there was nobody else who had at that time received the training
-necessary to produce it.</p>
-
-<p>There are several fine ceilings (Fig. <a href="#i_055">31</a>) wrought in Jones’s bold
-fashion, which was as different from that which produced the busy and
-slender patterns of Elizabethan work, as was the general treatment
-of plan and elevation from that of an Elizabethan mansion. It is
-interesting to find one of the smaller rooms panelled in an earlier
-style, Jacobean in character, with panelling designed for its position,
-not imported from elsewhere; and as it is difficult to suppose that
-Jones would have departed<span class="pagenum" id="Page_58">[58]</span> from his usual manner in this particular
-case, it is probable that the room was left to the unaided skill of
-some local craftsman, who relied on his own traditions.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_057">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_057.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 33.</span>&mdash;RAYNHAM PARK, <span class="smcap">Norfolk</span>, <i>cir.</i> 1636. <span class="smcap">Garden Front.</span></p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Of Jones’s connection with Raynham Park, in Norfolk (Figs. <a href="#i_056">32</a>, <a href="#i_057">33</a>),
-there is no evidence beyond tradition and the style of the work itself;
-but much of this has touches about it which are quite in his manner.
-There are indications that the house was built at two periods, and
-these make it difficult to attribute the whole work to one designer.
-But the treatment of the front, with its two wings of decided though
-slight projection, and its rather heavily-curved gables, serves to make
-it a connecting link between the old and the new styles. The date of
-this house is generally stated to be 1636, but further investigation is
-required in order to arrive at its true history, and to account for the
-two periods of building.</p>
-
-<p>At Wilton, in Wiltshire, is some of the finest of Jones’s internal
-work, and his connection with this house is established by a series
-of designs for the ceilings preserved among the Worcester College
-drawings. The south front, of which there is a sketch in the R.I.B.A.
-collection, would hardly have served to make his reputation, but the
-splendid suite of state rooms is unrivalled in any English house. One
-of these is a double cube, being 60 ft. by 30 ft. by 30 ft. high, and
-another is a single cube of 30 ft. The double cube, with its stately
-panelling filled with Vandyke’s portraits of the family, deserves
-its reputation as the finest room in the country (Fig. <a href="#i_059">34</a>). A plain,
-double cube of these dimensions would be unpleasantly lofty (as may be
-realised by visiting one at St James’s Palace), but here at Wilton the
-great height is lessened to the eye by the introduction of a large cove
-which springs from a bold cornice some 9 ft. below the ceiling, thus
-reducing the height of the walls to 21 ft.</p>
-
-<p>The double cube and such precise proportions were quite new in English
-architecture; so also were the careful proportions of the windows and
-their relation to the wall space, the pervading refinement of the
-mouldings, and the simplicity (almost amounting to baldness in some
-cases) of the general treatment. These factors inevitably influenced
-the plan of the house, which became much less elastic than of old, and
-less adaptable to the wants of English life. They tended towards the
-glorification of the house at the expense of its inhabitants and to
-subordinate household comfort to architecture.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_59">[59]</span></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_059">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_059.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 34.</span>&mdash;WILTON HOUSE,
-             <span class="smcap">Wiltshire. The Double Cube Room.</span> About 1649.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_60">[60]</span></p>
-
-<p>A small but admirable piece of work which may safely be assigned to
-Jones is the water-gate of York House (Fig. <a href="#i_061">35</a>). Its present rather
-forlorn situation at the bottom of Buckingham Street, Strand, gives no
-indication that it was an adjunct of the town house of the princely
-Villiers, Duke of Buckingham, the “Steenie” of Charles I. York House,
-for so the place was called, had belonged to the Archbishops of York,
-but when it came into the hands of Buckingham, he pulled it down and
-built a large and temporary structure, apparently for the purpose of
-using it for state occasions. Within its walls he housed a magnificent
-collection of pictures and other works of art, purchased from
-Rubens.<a id="FNanchor_23" href="#Footnote_23" class="fnanchor">[23]</a> Gerbier (who will be mentioned again later) was employed by
-the duke to design some of the new work at York House, and hence the
-water-gate has been attributed to him. But the fact that a drawing of
-it by Webb is included among the “Inigo Jones” drawings precludes this
-idea, for it is hard to imagine either Jones or Webb condescending to
-delineate any work of Gerbier’s. Apart from this it is improbable that
-Gerbier could have designed anything so good. That excellent mason and
-sculptor, Nicholas Stone, was employed upon its execution, and he put
-in a claim to the design, but Webb’s drawing is a sufficient answer to
-this pretension also.</p>
-
-<p>York House was sold in 1672 by the second duke, the “chymist, fiddler,
-statesman, and buffoon” of Dryden, to a syndicate who pulled down the
-house, and covered the site with new buildings, leaving the water-gate
-as practically the sole relic of the old palace. Its appearance, backed
-by its newer neighbours, is well indicated in a drawing by Thomas
-Sandby, made about 1760 (reproduced as the frontispiece).</p>
-
-<p>Inigo Jones died in June 1652.<a id="FNanchor_24" href="#Footnote_24" class="fnanchor">[24]</a> His will is dated the 22nd July
-1650, when he was “aged seaventy-seaven yeares.” He left in specified
-sums the amount of £4,150, and he bequeathed the debt owing to him
-from the late king and queen, of which the amount is not stated, in
-equal shares to his executor, John Webb, and one Richard Gammon, a
-carpenter, after deducting £50 for the paymaster of the works payable
-within a month after the discharge of the debt. He disposes of one half
-of his wearing apparel, but does not mention the other half, nor does<span class="pagenum" id="Page_61">[61]</span>
-he dispose of the residue of his estate. He mentions no collection of
-drawings (as did John Webb) nor any books. On the face of it he can
-hardly be considered a wealthy man at his death. A really exhaustive
-account of his life has yet to be written; one which shall be free
-from the undemonstrable attribution of work to him; free from baseless
-eulogy on the one hand and detraction on the other; one which shall
-fairly balance tradition and evidence; which shall take account of him
-as an artist and scene-painter, as a surveyor dealing from day to day
-with prosaic details, and as an architectural designer. It has been no
-part of the present purpose to enter minutely into these particulars;
-it was outside the scope of this work to marshal all the evidence for
-or against his authorship of every building with which he has been
-credited. The aim has been to indicate the general influence he had
-upon English architecture, particularly in respect of house design.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_061">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_061.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 35.</span>&mdash;The Water-Gate of York House, London.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>He was the most notable figure that had hitherto appeared upon the
-stage of English architecture, the most refined and scholarly, with an
-exquisite sense of proportion. He was at heart an artist, just as Wren
-was at heart a man of science.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_62">[62]</span></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_062" style="width: 750px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_062.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 36.</span>&mdash;Drawing by Inigo Jones for the
-Banqueting House, Whitehall. This drawing was carried out, but with
-slight modifications; the pediment was omitted, the roof being flat,
-with a balustrade.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From the Chatsworth Collection, by kind permission of the Duke of Devonshire.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_63">[63]</span></p>
-
-<h2>IV<br />
-<span class="subhed1">THE DRAWINGS OF INIGO JONES AND JOHN WEBB</span><br />
-<span class="subhed">WEBB’S OWN WORK</span></h2></div>
-
-<p>Reference has been made more than once to the design for an immense
-palace at Whitehall. The drawings for this, which are, most of them,
-preserved at Worcester College, Oxford, were first introduced to the
-public by William Kent, the architect, in the year 1727, under the
-title of “Designs of Inigo Jones.” There are two volumes of this book,
-the first occupied chiefly with the great palace; the second with
-miscellaneous designs, principally houses. The drawings used by Kent
-were in the possession of Lord Burlington, the well-known dilettante;
-at any rate, some of them were, while others seem to have belonged to
-Dr. Clarke of All Souls College, Oxford, who subsequently left them to
-Worcester College.</p>
-
-<p>The history of the drawings is not altogether free from obscurity,
-but it appears to be as follows. John Webb had in his possession a
-large number of drawings, mostly done by himself, but including some
-by his old master, Inigo Jones. At his death in 1672 Webb left all
-his “library and books, and all his prints and cuts and drawings of
-architecture” to his son William, with strict injunctions that they
-were to be kept together.<a id="FNanchor_25" href="#Footnote_25" class="fnanchor">[25]</a> This injunction was not respected, and
-it is said that the widow of William Webb disposed of the collection.
-John Aubrey, writing between 1669 and 1696, says that “Mr. Oliver, the
-City Surveyor, hath all his [Jones’s] papers and designs, not only of
-St Paul’s Cathedral, etc., and the Banqueting House, but his designs
-of all Whitehall suitable to the Banqueting House; a rare thing, which
-see.”<a id="FNanchor_26" href="#Footnote_26" class="fnanchor">[26]</a> It is almost certain that the drawings<span class="pagenum" id="Page_64">[64]</span> mentioned by Aubrey
-were those left to William Webb by his father, for it is extremely
-unlikely that there would have been two collections of the kind. There
-is no record of how Mr. Oliver obtained them, nor of how he disposed of
-them; the next thing that is known is that Lord Burlington had acquired
-the larger half and Dr. Clarke the smaller, but in some respects the
-more important. Lord Burlington’s portion descended to the Dukes of
-Devonshire, and the seventh duke made a gift of a great part to the
-Royal Institute of British Architects, in whose library they are
-preserved. Some, however, he retained at Chatsworth, including a series
-entitled “Designs for Whitehall,” which are, as a matter of fact,
-mostly preliminary sketches by Webb for the various versions of the
-great palace; and a large number of designs by Jones for the scenery,
-setting, and costumes of masques, as well as some by Webb. Dr. Clarke
-bequeathed his portion to Worcester College, Oxford, on his death in
-1736. It is practically certain that the Burlington collection and
-that at Worcester College were originally one collection, inasmuch as
-each contains drawings which supplement some of those in the other.
-At Worcester College are the “designs for all Whitehall suitable to
-the Banqueting House,” together with a large number of miscellaneous
-drawings. At Chatsworth are designs of the Banqueting House itself,
-together with many preliminary drawings for the palace at Whitehall.
-At the Royal Institute of British Architects is a drawing of the west
-front of St Paul’s, together with many others, notably those of the
-King Charles block at Greenwich, and almost the whole series which Kent
-used for his second volume of “Designs of Inigo Jones.”</p>
-
-<p>Besides these drawings there are yet others attributed to Jones at
-the British Museum. Some of these are the originals of the design for
-Whitehall Palace published by Campbell in his “Vitruvius Britannicus,”
-which is quite different from that published by Kent. Others are
-sketches of figures and drapery undoubtedly drawn by Jones. The
-drawings used by Campbell were in 1717 in the possession of William
-Emmett, of Bromley, an architect, but it is not known how he became
-possessed of them, nor whether they once formed part of Webb’s
-collection, but their style links them up with the rest of the drawings
-of the palace.<a id="FNanchor_27" href="#Footnote_27" class="fnanchor">[27]</a></p>
-
-<p>The whole of these drawings have until quite recently been<span class="pagenum" id="Page_65">[65]</span> regarded
-as the work of Jones himself. Aubrey mentions them as his; Kent
-published many of them as his; Campbell attributed to him those which
-he used, presumably on the authority of Emmett. All subsequent writers
-have taken the authorship for granted, although some have agreed that
-Jones’s hand is not visible in the finished designs of the palace,
-preserved at Worcester College. This acquiescence in established
-opinion is not surprising. The drawings had not been thoroughly
-examined and catalogued, and in particular those at one library had not
-been collated with those at the others. But when recently the various
-collections came to be catalogued and definitely arranged, when, by the
-aid of photographs, they were brought together and compared one with
-another, very interesting results were obtained. It soon became easy to
-differentiate between Jones’s draughtsmanship and Webb’s. The result
-was that it became apparent that nearly the whole of the drawings
-should be assigned to Webb and very few to Jones. Nor would logic allow
-a halt to be called there, and suffer us to say that Webb may have been
-the draughtsman, but Jones was still the designer. For many of the
-drawings are sketches with notes in Webb’s writing, which go to show
-how he developed his ideas as he went along. It would be impossible in
-the space at command to indicate fully which drawings are by Jones,
-which are by Webb inspired by Jones, and which are of Webb’s own
-design. But in the latter category the evidence constrains us to place
-the designs for the palace at Whitehall, the designs in the second
-volume of Kent, and those for King Charles’s block at Greenwich.<a id="FNanchor_28" href="#Footnote_28" class="fnanchor">[28]</a></p>
-
-<p>Although the pursuit of truth compels us to credit Webb rather than
-Jones with the bulk of the designs in both of Kent’s volumes, admirers
-of the great master will probably not only survive the shock, but will
-eventually be grateful to find that the indifferent pieces of design
-which mar many of those excellent conceptions need not be attributed to
-him.</p>
-
-<p>It would be impossible to pursue the subject fully here, but the branch
-of it which refers to the palace of Whitehall is sufficiently curious
-to justify a brief account.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_66">[66]</span></p>
-
-<p>The generally received opinion was that two designs were prepared for
-the palace, one of which was published by Campbell in 1722, and the
-other by Kent in 1727. Authorities have differed as to which was the
-earlier to be devised, but both are attributed to Jones. Both designs
-include the well-known Banqueting House, and it has been taken for
-granted that they must have been designed before that building was
-erected. The date of its erection is on record. It was begun on 1st
-June 1619, and completed in March 1622. The assumption, therefore, was
-that James I. contemplated either the vast palace illustrated by Kent,
-or the smaller version of Campbell, but that the only portion actually
-built was the Banqueting House.</p>
-
-<p>As a matter of fact, James can have had nothing to do with either of
-these designs. Campbell states that the design which he published
-was submitted to Charles I. by Inigo Jones in 1639. The accuracy of
-this statement has been questioned, but it was evidently made on the
-authority of a formal inscription written by Emmett on one of the
-drawings. If true, it disposes of the idea that this design was made
-prior to the building of the Banqueting House. But that idea is in
-any case not tenable, for the Banqueting House was built to replace
-an older building which was burnt down in January 1619; it was built
-immediately after that catastrophe, and built on the same site. As only
-some three months elapsed between the destruction of the old building
-and the completion of the design for the new one, any idea of the
-conception of so vast a scheme as the new palace in that space of time
-must be abandoned. Moreover, there are preserved at Chatsworth Jones’s
-own drawings for the new Banqueting House, which is there shown as
-an isolated structure (Figs. <a href="#i_062">36</a>, <a href="#i_067">37</a>). Further, although the accounts
-for the new Banqueting House are preserved, together with a detailed
-description of it, and a record of a payment to Inigo Jones for the
-“model” of it, there is no mention of any other buildings in connection
-with it, contemplated or otherwise. Nor is there any contemporary
-reference to the projected palace of any kind until the one presently
-to be mentioned.</p>
-
-<p>In the Smithson collection there is an interesting drawing which shows
-a plan of the old Banqueting House previous to its destruction, and an
-elevation of the ground story of the new Banqueting House (Fig. <a href="#i_068">38</a>).
-They are obviously not drawn to the same scale, inasmuch as the new
-building was 100 ft. long as against 120 ft. for the old. The fact
-that Smithson thought it<span class="pagenum" id="Page_67">[67]</span> worth while to draw the ground story, so far
-as then built, suggests that he was struck by its novel treatment.
-The rusticated stonework, the flat arched openings, and the unmoulded
-plinth and stringcourse were unfamiliar features.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_067" style="width: 659px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_067.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 37.</span>&mdash;Drawing by Inigo Jones for the
-Banqueting House, Whitehall. A preliminary sketch, subsequently
-modified. The annexes were omitted.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From the Chatsworth Collection.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_068" style="width: 585px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_068.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 38.</span>&mdash;Plan of the Old Banqueting House which was
-burnt down. Below is an Elevation of “The First Storye of the
-Newe Banketinge house.”</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From the Smithson Collection.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>There is so far nothing to connect Jones with the designs for the
-palace, as distinguished from the Banqueting House, except the
-assumption of Kent and Campbell. An examination of the various<span class="pagenum" id="Page_68">[68]</span>
-drawings serves further to dissociate him from them. At Worcester
-College are the finished drawings for the scheme published by Kent: but
-in addition to those which he used are others which have not hitherto
-been elucidated; some of them are, in fact, the elevations and sections
-of a different scheme, while one is the isolated plan of a third. The
-key to this part of the puzzle lies at Chatsworth in the shape of
-the collection of drawings and sketches, bound together and entitled
-“Designs for Whitehall.” These turn out to be almost entirely the work
-of Webb, among them being, however, the drawings of the Banqueting
-House by Jones himself. The drawings by Webb are the preliminary
-sketches for the finished set at Worcester College, as well as some
-for yet other schemes, and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_69">[69]</span> among them are the elevations, as well as
-a plan, corresponding to the isolated plan at Worcester College. The
-writing and the drawing, the thumb-nail sketches, the alterations,
-variations, and corrections all go to show that here we have the
-inception of several schemes, all by Webb, the ultimate outcome of
-which was the well-known design published some eighty years afterwards
-by Kent.</p>
-
-<p>There are, in fact, not two, but at least seven different schemes for
-the palace, more or less worked out. Of these two are by Webb, and are
-preliminary to the third, which was published by Kent; a fourth is a
-variant of the third; the fifth and sixth are undoubtedly by Webb; the
-seventh is the British Museum design published by Campbell.</p>
-
-<p>The conclusion forced upon the inquirer by a prolonged examination
-of the drawings&mdash;that Webb was the real author of the designs for
-the palace&mdash;is curiously confirmed by a document preserved in the
-“State Papers,” an important passage in which has hitherto escaped the
-attention it deserves. This is a petition, signed by Webb, presented
-soon after the restoration of Charles II., wherein he seeks the office
-of surveyor of the king’s works, which was about to be bestowed upon
-Mr. Denham, afterwards Sir John.<a id="FNanchor_29" href="#Footnote_29" class="fnanchor">[29]</a> The whole document is interesting,
-but is too long to quote in its entirety. In the petition itself, Webb
-says that he was by the especial command of “your Majesty’s Royal
-Father of ever blessed memory brought up by Inigo Jones, Esq., your
-Majesty’s late surveyor of the works, in the study of architecture, for
-enabling him to do your Royal Father and your Majesty service in the
-said office. In order whereunto he was by Mr. Jones, upon leaving his
-house at the beginning of the late unhappy war, appointed his Deputy
-to execute the said place in his absence, which your petitioner did,
-until by a Committee of Parliament in the year 1643 he was thrust
-out.” He then goes on to say that in preparing the royal houses for
-His Majesty’s reception he has engaged his own credit to the amount
-of £8,140. 5s. 4d., of which he has only received £500, and prays the
-king to “settle upon him the surveyor’s office of your majesty’s work,
-whereunto your Royal Father assigned him, and to that end only ordered
-his education.” In the “Brief of Mr. Webb’s Case,” attached to the
-petition, occurs the remarkable piece of testimony alluded to: “That he
-was Mr. Jones’s Deputy and in actual possession of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_70">[70]</span> the office upon his
-leaving London, and attended his Majesty in that capacity at Hampton
-Court and at the Isle of Wight, where he received his majesty’s command
-to design a palace for Whitehall, which he did until his majesty’s
-unfortunate calamity caused him to desist.”</p>
-
-<p>This striking statement supplies an explanation of the whole intricate
-series of drawings, including those at the British Museum. It is the
-culminating proof that they were the work of Webb and not of Jones.
-It accounts for the absence of any reference in earlier documents to
-a project which would have been vast enough to attract much attention
-in court circles had it been in contemplation; and indeed it goes to
-show that the project never had any real vitality, but was merely
-an exercise on paper. Incidentally, it illustrates the inability
-of Charles I. to perceive the real trend of events, for he gave
-instructions for this huge palace when already the shadow of death had
-almost enveloped him.</p>
-
-<p>Webb’s petition did not serve to divert the gift of the coveted office
-from Denham to himself, but it may have suggested to Charles II. the
-idea of resuscitating the project of a palace at Whitehall; for there
-is a block plan by Webb of a scheme differing from all the others,
-dated 17th October 1661, and there are notes in Webb’s hand on some of
-the drawings which show that he submitted to the second Charles some
-of the designs which he had prepared for the first, and that they were
-“taken,” or accepted. It is certain that Charles II. did entertain for
-a time the idea of rebuilding the palace, for Evelyn relates, under
-the date 27th October 1664, that being at Whitehall, the king took him
-aside into a window recess, and having borrowed from him a pencil and
-paper, proceeded to draw, using the window-sill as a table, a plan for
-the projected palace, with the rooms of state and other particulars.
-But in Webb’s case, as in so many others, the bright hopes inspired by
-the Restoration were overclouded; the projected palace went no further
-than to be a design on paper; the surveyorship was given to Denham, and
-on his death, in spite of a promise of its reversion, Webb suffered the
-mortification of seeing the young and wholly inexperienced Wren, who
-was at that time not even an architect, passed over his head.</p>
-
-<p>With regard to the design of the palace much has been written in
-praise, something in dispraise. Nearly all that has been said has been
-founded upon Kent’s version. The vastness<span class="pagenum" id="Page_73">[73]</span> of the scheme and the
-belief that Jones devised it have acted and reacted upon each other in
-stimulating admiration. Had the project been of ordinary dimensions,
-or had not Jones been credited with it, it is conceivable that less
-eulogistic language might have been employed.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_071" style="width: 750px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_071.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 39.</span>&mdash;PLAN FOR THE PALACE AT WHITEHALL.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From the Worcester College Collection.</p>
-     <p class="center p-min sm">This is the plan utilised by Kent, but reversed by him in the
-printing of it. The Charing Cross front is at the top, the
-Westminster front at the bottom, the River front on the right,
-the Park front on the left. The Banqueting House, then already
-built, was to have been incorporated in the scheme. It lies
-between the large court and the small court in the right-hand
-bottom corner.</p>
-</div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_072" style="width: 602px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_072.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 40.</span>&mdash;SKETCHES FOR PARTS OF THE PALACE AT
-WHITEHALL, <span class="smcap">including two for the “Persians.”</span> The sketches and
-writing are by Webb’s hand.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From the Chatsworth Collection, by kind permission of the Duke of Devonshire.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The scheme, however, is truly remarkable.<a id="FNanchor_30" href="#Footnote_30" class="fnanchor">[30]</a> It is of vast size;
-the buildings and courts would have covered an area of some 23 acres
-(Fig. <a href="#i_071">39</a>). They would have extended from the Charity Commission’s
-offices, south of the Banqueting House, to within a hundred feet of
-Craig’s Court on the north; and from Whitehall Court on the east, right
-across the Horse Guards parade and up to the enclosure of the park
-on the west. They are skilfully disposed, with great architectural
-magnificence. The noble Banqueting House was to be incorporated, but
-it was to be one of the minor features. There were to be seven courts;
-the largest, in the middle of the building, was 732 ft. long by 370
-ft. wide; the four corner courts, each 280 ft. by 180 ft.; one of the
-courts was to be circular, 220 ft. in diameter, and its columns were
-to be fashioned in the likeness of venerable men in flowing draperies,
-called Persians, as distinguished from the female figures which,
-fulfilling a similar purpose, were called Caryatides.</p>
-
-<p>All these particulars can be gathered from Kent’s published version.
-He gives plans, elevations, and sections, but he gives no internal
-features save the insignificant matters inherent in the sections.
-Webb’s drawings, on the other hand, include not only sketches for
-the general plan and for detailed portions of it, not only sketches
-for external features, and among them several alternatives for the
-Persians, but also the working out of lobbies, staircases, chapels and
-the like (Figs. <a href="#i_072">40</a>, <a href="#i_075">41</a>). It is true that these details are part of
-one of the preliminary schemes, but they show how seriously he took
-his work, and how thoroughly he had mastered the details of classic
-design. These sketches are unmistakably Webb’s; there are none by Jones
-relating to the designing of the palace. It is interesting to compare
-Webb’s large plan for Whitehall with Philibert de l’Orme’s plan for
-the Tuileries, which has two oval courts set within larger ones. Webb
-may have got his idea of the circular Persian court from this source,
-and indeed the whole plan may have been a help to him, possibly; but
-his scheme is far larger and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_74">[74]</span> more elaborate than De l’Orme’s and is
-treated in a different style.</p>
-
-<p>The appearance which the building would have presented from the river
-is well shown in Thomas Sandby’s drawing (Fig. <a href="#i_001fp">1</a>), hitherto unknown.
-The view is supposed to have been taken from the gardens of old
-Somerset House previous, of course, to the erection of Waterloo Bridge.
-It is the most poetic rendering of the great scheme which has been
-attempted. It is founded on the version published by Kent, so far as
-the river front is concerned, and on one of the other seven designs
-in respect of the front facing to the right of the spectator. On the
-original drawings this front is considerably longer than Sandby makes
-it, the lower portion being more than half as long again; a good idea
-may thus be obtained of the magnitude of the conception.</p>
-
-<p>Admitting to the full the great skill and knowledge which the designs
-display and which prove that Webb was not unworthy of the august
-influence which placed him under the tuition of Inigo Jones, it is
-nevertheless no great matter for regret that the palace was never
-built. It can hardly be held that the complete design maintains the
-high standard of the Banqueting House. Much of it indeed verges on
-the commonplace. So vast a building would have been a burden on any
-monarch; it would inevitably have fallen from its high estate, and
-would probably have drifted to being put to such ignoble uses as was
-the much smaller palace of the Louvre in Paris. If fate had been less
-relentless it might eventually have been devoted to some public use for
-which it was ill-contrived&mdash;public offices or a museum. Architecture,
-although apparently the most permanent of all the arts, suffers most
-from change. Buildings may remain, but the uses for which they were
-designed either cease or are so modified that the buildings become
-unsuitable. Then follows degradation, decay, or even destruction: at
-the luckiest, a diversion from the original purpose. The Banqueting
-House itself is a case in point; for who among those who inspect the
-interesting collection it now contains have any notion of why it was
-built, or can picture, even faintly, the scenes enacted within its
-walls?</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_075" style="width: 518px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_075.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 41.</span>&mdash;SKETCHES FOR PARTS OF THE PALACE AT
-WHITEHALL, <span class="smcap">by Webb</span>.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From the Chatsworth Collection.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_076" style="width: 544px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_076.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 42.</span>&mdash;ELEVATIONS OF A HOUSE,
-                            <span class="smcap">by Inigo Jones</span>.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From the Burlington-Devonshire Collection at the Royal Institute of British Architects.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>In addition to the direct evidence which goes to show that Jones was
-not the designer of the palace at Whitehall, there is the evidence of
-such architectural drawings as are either actually signed by him, or
-such as can almost certainly be<span class="pagenum" id="Page_77">[77]</span> attributed to him. All told, these
-amount to comparatively few, and they exhibit curious inconsistencies.
-Some are almost puerile, although drawn when he was mature in years.
-Others (and these are more numerous) are strong, simple, and noble,
-full of restraint, and depending chiefly upon proportion for their
-effect (Fig. <a href="#i_076">42</a>). They are large in scale, and are mainly drawn with
-a free hand. Indeed it is characteristic of Jones to draw to a large
-scale and with little aid from instruments. He appears to have been
-impatient of petty details, and it is extremely doubtful whether he
-could have brought his wide-sweeping hand down to the working out of a
-complicated plan on the small scale actually employed in the Whitehall
-drawings.<a id="FNanchor_31" href="#Footnote_31" class="fnanchor">[31]</a></p>
-
-<p>In the collections of earlier date, John Thorpe’s and Smithson’s, the
-bulk of the drawings may safely be attributed to Thorpe and Smithson
-respectively; which makes the absence of drawings by Jones all the
-more remarkable. And it must be remembered that although there are few
-architectural drawings by him there are many of other kinds, notably of
-the scenery for masques and of the human figure.<a id="FNanchor_32" href="#Footnote_32" class="fnanchor">[32]</a> Indeed, to judge
-only by his drawings one would regard him as a painter rather than an
-architect. His surviving architectural drawings may be reckoned by
-dozens; those for masques, figure studies, and drapery by hundreds.
-His figure studies and drapery are executed with great vigour and a
-masterly touch. His sketches for the numerous masques, of which he
-designed the setting, are spontaneous and bold (Fig. <a href="#i_078">43</a>). Many of them
-have an architectural character, and, needless to say, the architecture
-is always classic in style. There is one, however, which represents a
-scene near London; the wings are composed of old houses, the backcloth
-is a distant view of London itself with old St Paul’s as the principal
-feature.<a id="FNanchor_33" href="#Footnote_33" class="fnanchor">[33]</a> It is interesting to see that the houses in the foreground
-are Jacobean in treatment, yet Jacobean with a larger infusion of
-classic detail than houses<span class="pagenum" id="Page_78">[78]</span> of the period actually exhibited. The
-artist’s hand instinctively sought a classic expression.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_078" style="width: 722px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_078.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 43.</span>&mdash;Masque by Inigo Jones.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From the Burlington-Devonshire Collection at the R.I.B.A.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Jones, indeed, designed most of the masques presented at court during
-the reigns of James I. and his son, and collaborated with several
-of the different poets who wrote the words of these fanciful plays;
-with Ben Jonson, Samuel Daniell, Thomas Campion, George Chapman, and
-Aurelian Townshend. One of his efforts was less successful than could
-have been wished, although it was for an occasion when expectation was
-particularly high&mdash;the masque on Twelfth Night 1618, when the prince
-was to take a part for the first time. Gossiping<span class="pagenum" id="Page_79">[79]</span> letters dubbed it
-poor, said that Inigo Jones had lost reputation, and that it was indeed
-so dull that the poet, Ben Jonson, ought to return to his old trade of
-brick making.<a id="FNanchor_34" href="#Footnote_34" class="fnanchor">[34]</a></p>
-
-<p>But in spite of the gossips Jones was a skilful scene-painter, and owed
-much of his facility in the art to the months he had spent in Italy
-conversing, as he says, with the great masters in design. To him we
-owe the first introduction of movable scenery into English theatres.
-He was also a practical surveyor of some ability; already in 1613 he
-had been appointed surveyor of his majesty’s works, and although in
-those days it was not necessarily a practical man who was appointed to
-such a post, yet a clever man, even if ill-equipped at first, would
-soon acquire experience. The State Papers show that he was kept busy
-with the duties of his office, duties which included many matters of
-dull routine. It is perhaps worthy of note that in matters requiring
-detailed reports and estimates he was generally commissioned along
-with one or two others who may (or may not) have had more practical
-knowledge than himself. It is also interesting to find that in several
-cases where repairs or alterations were under consideration, special
-stress was laid in the reports upon the probable result on the beauty
-of the buildings they affected. This particular and uncommon touch may
-certainly be credited to Jones.</p>
-
-<p>In order fully to understand the subject of the so-called Inigo Jones
-drawings and their influence on English architecture, it will be
-advisable to set out again what and where they are.</p>
-
-<p>Firstly, there are those for the palace at Whitehall. Of these the
-finished designs, utilised by Kent, are at Worcester College, Oxford,
-and the preliminary drawings are at Chatsworth. These, as already
-shown, must be credited to Webb. There is also at the British Museum
-another and much scantier set, utilised by Campbell.</p>
-
-<p>Secondly, there are at Worcester College a number of miscellaneous
-drawings, mostly by Webb, but including a few by Jones.</p>
-
-<p>Thirdly, there are in the library of the Royal Institute of British
-Architects a large number of miscellaneous drawings, also mostly by
-Webb, but also including a few by Jones. The most important of these
-are the series of designs utilised by Kent in his “Designs of Inigo
-Jones,” and the drawings for the Charles II. block at Greenwich
-Hospital. Practically all these are by Webb.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_80">[80]</span></p>
-
-<p>These drawings were unknown to the public until Kent published the
-“Designs” in 1727. His two volumes comprise, as already mentioned, the
-designs of Whitehall Palace, and a series of houses, large and small.
-It was not until they were published that the public generally knew
-anything about them, and it was accordingly not till then that they
-affected architectural design. Walpole makes this quite clear: “It
-was in this reign,” he says&mdash;that of George II.&mdash;“that architecture
-resumed all her rights. Noble publications of Palladio, Jones, and the
-antique recalled her to true principles and correct taste; she found
-men of genius to execute her rules, and patrons to countenance their
-labours.”<a id="FNanchor_35" href="#Footnote_35" class="fnanchor">[35]</a></p>
-
-<p>But apart from their effect upon the public, the insight which these
-drawings give into the inner working of the designers’ minds is of
-great interest. Besides the finished drawings there are innumerable
-sketches for plans, elevations, and details, as well as many scraps
-copied from Italian books on architecture, notably from Serlio.
-Comparing these and Jones’s own sketches with similar memoranda and
-sketches by Italian architects of the period, it is curious to find
-how thoroughly he adopted their particular methods of work, and after
-him Webb likewise. Everything is classic in style, all the proportions
-are carefully worked out. The lengths and heights of buildings are not
-the result of caprice, or chance, or even primarily of convenience,
-but of systems of proportion. So also in the plans: these are largely
-adaptations of Italian models, not only in their formality and
-symmetry, but also in the disposition of the rooms. There is nothing
-haphazard, fortuitous, or rambling about them: they are the result of
-carefully considered proportion. Every house was complete in itself,
-and to be altered or enlarged afterwards was to be spoilt.</p>
-
-<p>This sort of precision had a natural tendency to become mechanical, and
-in later years, notably in the early part of the eighteenth century,
-the tendency asserted itself strongly. But it is interesting to find
-that the foibles of Campbell, Gibbs, and their contemporaries had their
-justification in the work of Jones and Webb.</p>
-
-<p>It was more particularly Webb who founded himself so carefully on
-definite proportions. Jones had a natural instinct for good proportion.
-His studies of the human figure and of drapery, his construction
-of scenery for masques, gave him freedom of touch and sureness in
-achieving the result at which<span class="pagenum" id="Page_82">[82]</span> he aimed not to be found in Webb.
-Jones’s youth had been passed in that atmosphere of freedom and
-joyous fancy in house design which was characteristic of Elizabethan
-days. The intelligent ignorance with which Italian detail was treated
-he set himself to correct; but he did not altogether crush out its
-light-heartedness. His own work, although purer and more severe than
-that of his predecessors, retained something of their freedom.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_081" style="width: 502px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_081.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 44.</span>&mdash;DESIGN FOR A HOUSE, <span class="smcap">by John Webb</span>.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From the Burlington-Devonshire Collection at the R.I.B.A.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The same, but in a less degree, may be said of Webb. Immersed though
-he seems to have been in his endeavours to saturate himself with the
-true rules of proportion, when he came to put his ideas into execution,
-he showed a pretty play of natural fancy, and much of his detail has a
-freshness and individuality sadly lacking in the work of fifty years
-later.</p>
-
-<p>Apart entirely from the question as to the authorship of the Inigo
-Jones drawings, the ideas embodied in them are of the first importance.
-For the purpose of grasping these, the second volume of Kent’s “Designs
-of Inigo Jones” will answer almost as well as the originals. Comparing
-them with Elizabethan or Jacobean houses, a complete change will be
-seen to have taken place, both in the plans and the elevations (Fig. <a href="#i_081">44</a>).
-There is no resemblance to the older manner. The time-honoured
-arrangement which placed the great hall centrally between the
-family wing and the servants’ wing has been superseded by one which
-places the kitchens in a basement, devotes the ground floor to the
-principal living-rooms, abolishes the great hall as a living-room,
-and substitutes for it a central saloon of great height, which not
-infrequently reaches from the ground floor to the roof. The orderly
-straggling of the ancient plan has given way to a trim compactness in
-the new. The plan, of course, controls the elevation, which is more
-precise and far less picturesque than of old. There are few, if any,
-gables; the chimneys are solid and staid; the windows consist each of
-one large opening, instead of being a group of small lights formed by
-mullions and transoms. It does not need an examination of the elaborate
-proportions tabulated by Webb on many of the original drawings to
-realise that here the old instinctive and even haphazard methods have
-been superseded by a system of carefully calculated design. The change
-is apparent at a glance, and one feels at once that the source of
-inspiration is not English<span class="pagenum" id="Page_83">[83]</span> but Italian. Very few of these designs
-appear to have been actually carried out, but they had a considerable
-influence on domestic architecture after their publication. They
-include practically none of the houses attributed to Jones or Webb
-which still exist.</p>
-
-<p>John Webb has hardly received his due as an architect, either from his
-contemporaries or from posterity. Evelyn spoke of him as “Inigo Jones’s
-man.” Most modern writers have regarded him as merely a pale shadow
-of his master. But from what has just been said about his share in
-the “Inigo Jones” drawings, this estimate of his position ought to be
-revised, for there can be no doubt that he was the actual draughtsman
-of the designs for the palace at Whitehall; of nearly all those in the
-second volume of Kent inscribed “Inigo Jones, architectus”; and of
-King Charles’s block at Greenwich (Fig. <a href="#i_085">45</a>). It may be said, indeed
-it has been said, that even if that be so, he was only carrying out
-ideas which had been already devised in the rough by the older man.
-To which the reply is that there is no evidence of this among the
-drawings themselves, and that the evidence of contemporary documents,
-preserved among the State Papers, confirms the presumption that Webb
-was the designer of the Whitehall Palace and of the Greenwich block.
-With regard to the series of house designs in Kent’s second volume,
-no extraneous evidence is likely to be found, for they can only be
-regarded as exercises in design; to transfer these works from Jones’s
-account to Webb’s is to do no injustice to the former’s reputation,
-it is rather to enhance it. It relieves a first-rate artist from the
-weight of work which is not quite first-rate: and the same may be said,
-as already pointed out, of the Whitehall drawings. With regard to the
-Greenwich design, it has, with justice, been highly extolled; but
-this is the less surprising when it is remembered that it is a clever
-adaptation of an excellent Italian design to be found in the pages of
-Palladio.<a id="FNanchor_36" href="#Footnote_36" class="fnanchor">[36]</a></p>
-
-<p>Webb’s drawings of the Greenwich designs are fairly numerous, and they
-include a plan for a complete scheme, as well as plans, elevations and
-many details of King Charles’s block. They are dated 1663, 1665, 1666,
-and one 1669–70. It is interesting, therefore, to find in the Audit
-Office Enrolments<a id="FNanchor_37" href="#Footnote_37" class="fnanchor">[37]</a><span class="pagenum" id="Page_84">[84]</span> a warrant dated “the 21st day of November 1666,”
-and directed “To Our Trusty and Wellbeloved John Webb, of Butleigh,
-in Our County of Somerset, Esq<sup>re</sup>,” which begins thus: “Charles
-R. Trusty and wellbeloved, wee greet you well. Whereas wee have
-thought fit to employ you for the erecting and building of Our palace
-at Greenwich, Wee doe hereby require and authorize you to execute,
-act, and proceed there, according to your best skill and judgment
-in Architecture, as our Surveyor Assistant unto S<sup>r.</sup> John Denham,
-K<sup>nt.</sup> of the Bath, Surveyor General of Our Works, with the same power
-of executing, acting, proceeding therein, and graunting of Warrants
-for stones to be had from Portland, to all intents and purposes, as
-the said Sir John Denham have or might have....” The salary is to be
-£200 per annum with travelling charges. This appointment, together with
-Webb’s drawings and the absence of any preliminary drawings or sketches
-by Jones, seems to establish Webb as the actual designer.</p>
-
-<p>It is not at all probable that Webb destroyed any sketches that might
-have been in existence, with a view to his own reputation. For he
-preserved several slight sketches by Jones, and whereas he nowhere
-publicly pushes himself, he was extremely jealous of Jones’s fame, as
-appears on page after page of his “Vindication of Stone-Heng Restored.”
-Indeed, he subordinates himself completely to his old master, and
-posterity appears to have taken him at his own valuation.</p>
-
-<p>He must have been, nevertheless, a very clever man, an apt pupil, and
-a most painstaking student, judging by the voluminous notes as to
-proportions, and so forth, which he wrote on his drawings. He went
-to Jones in 1628 at the age of seventeen; and according to the brief
-attached to his petition, already mentioned, “he was brought up by his
-Unckle Mr. Inigo Jones upon his late Maiestyes command in the study of
-Architecture, as well that w<sup>ch</sup> relates to building as for masques
-Tryumphs and the like.” It will be remembered that Mr. John Denham, as
-he then was in the year 1660, had been granted the post of surveyor of
-the king’s works, although he had received no suitable training; the
-brief concludes with the following apt remarks: “That Mr. Denham may
-possibly, as most gentry in England at this day have some knowledge in
-the Theory of Architecture; but nothing<span class="pagenum" id="Page_87">[87]</span> of ye practique soe that
-he must of necessity have another at his Mai<sup>ties</sup> charge to doe
-his business; whereas Mr. Webb himself designes, orders, and directs,
-whatever given in command w<sup>th</sup> out any other man’s assistance.
-His Mai<sup>tie</sup> may please to grant some other place more proper for
-Mr. Denham’s abilityes and confirme unto Mr. Webb the Surveyors place
-wherein he hath consumed 30 years study, there being scarce any of the
-greate Nobility or eminent gentry of England but he hath done service
-for in matter of building, ordering of meddalls, statues and the like.”</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_085" style="width: 750px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_085.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 45.</span>&mdash;ELEVATION OF THE RIVER FRONT,
-GREENWICH PALACE, <span class="smcap">by John Webb</span>.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From the original Drawing in the Library of the R.I.B.A.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_086" style="width: 750px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_086.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm">North-East View.<span style="margin-left:10em">North Front.</span></p>
-     <p class="center p-min sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 46.</span>&mdash;THORPE HALL, <span class="smcap">near Peterborough</span>, 1656.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From Engraving by Hakewill, 1852.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The common sense of this contention, although not flattering to Mr
-Denham, was vindicated by the appointment of Webb as assistant surveyor
-at Greenwich. But the petition and brief are interesting in other
-ways. They assert that Charles I. expressly caused Webb to be trained
-in architecture and the preparation of masques, in order to succeed
-Inigo Jones and carry on his work. They confirm roughly the date of his
-apprenticeship: and the brief states that he had worked for most of the
-great nobility and eminent gentry, thereby showing that he was a man
-of large independent practice, and not merely “Inigo Jones’s man”&mdash;a
-conclusion to which his drawings had already led.</p>
-
-<p>The fact that Webb was actually trained in the preparation of masques
-as well as in architecture has hitherto escaped notice, but recent
-researches show that he made drawings for the scenery of some of those
-devised by Inigo Jones, particularly in the case of the pastoral of
-“Florimene” in 1635, and D’Avenant’s “Salmacida Spolia” in 1640. A
-year or two after the death of Jones, namely in 1656, D’Avenant again
-sought Webb’s help, and got him to design the scenery for his “Siege of
-Rhodes,” the first opera produced in England. Webb’s drawings for this
-work are preserved at Chatsworth.<a id="FNanchor_38" href="#Footnote_38" class="fnanchor">[38]</a></p>
-
-<p>The illustrations in the second volume of Kent’s “Designs of Inigo
-Jones,” give a good idea not only of Webb’s powers as a designer, but
-also of the kind of house which was becoming fashionable. But it is
-worth while to supplement them by others which were actually carried
-out.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_88">[88]</span></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_088">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_088.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 47.</span>&mdash;Thorpe Hall, near Peterborough.
-Ground Plan.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The best known of the houses attributed to Webb is Thorpe Hall, near
-Peterborough (Fig. <a href="#i_086">46</a>). It was built for Oliver St John, Lord Chief
-Justice of Common Pleas, and a kinsman of Oliver Cromwell,<a id="FNanchor_39" href="#Footnote_39" class="fnanchor">[39]</a> about
-the year 1656, which date is on the stables. It is a fine massive house
-of oblong shape, and, like Coleshill, it is without wings, gables, or
-dominating pediments; the detail is large and simple, the principal
-effect being gained by a widely projecting cornice at the eaves. The
-roof is hipped at the four corners, and its slopes are broken by
-dormers. The windows are carefully spaced, the angles of the building
-are emphasised with bold quoins, there is an open columned porch in the
-middle of each of the two principal fronts, and on one of the short
-fronts there are two square bay-windows. These are the means adopted to
-give interest to the design, and slight as they are, they achieve their
-purpose. A plinth, and a bold string over the ground floor windows help
-the general proportions, and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_89">[89]</span> a little liveliness is imparted by the
-introduction of pediments over some of the windows. The whole effect
-is refined and severe, widely different from the picturesque variety
-of Elizabethan work. The open porches are probably the first examples
-of their kind to be found in England. The bay-windows, it must be
-confessed, are poor and meagre; they would not be out of place in a
-suburban villa; they are a disappointing substitute for the noble bays
-of earlier times. They appear to be original, but they may derive some
-of their character from the restoration which the house underwent in
-the middle of last century. The chimneys are well designed, massive
-features, of the somewhat<span class="pagenum" id="Page_91">[91]</span> plain type which was supplanting the more
-varied and ingenious designs of fifty years before.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_089" style="width: 555px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_089.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 48.</span>&mdash;Thorpe Hall. Panelling in Dining-Room.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_090" style="width: 750px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_090.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 49.</span>&mdash;THORPE HALL. <span class="smcap">The Staircase.</span></p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">Henry Tanner <i>del.</i></p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The plan of the house, as given by Hakewill (Fig. <a href="#i_088">47</a>), is of the
-modern order, although faintly reminiscent of the ancient arrangement
-in respect of the hall, which is approached from the entrance passage
-through a screen. The ground floor, containing the hall, library,
-and dining-room, is raised well above the ground, and the servants’
-quarters are in the basement. Subsequent to the making of Hakewill’s
-plan, certain alterations were made which did away with the necessity
-of passing through one room to get to the next, but they did not affect
-the main dispositions.</p>
-
-<p>Much of the detail inside is quite charming, especially the ceilings,
-the panelling of the dining-room and the staircase. The sober yet
-fanciful treatment of the dining-room is delightful (Fig. <a href="#i_089">48</a>) and
-strongly resembles that of some of Webb’s designs at Worcester College.
-Indeed the detail throughout abounds in touches such as are to be found
-in his drawings, and it has a freedom from pedantry which is quite
-refreshing, and may be regarded as a legacy from his less learned
-predecessors. The staircase has a carved and pierced floral balustrade
-of a type which had a considerable vogue in England during the second
-half of the seventeenth century (Fig. <a href="#i_090">49</a>). The carving is particularly
-vigorous, especially in the newels and the great scroll at the foot of
-the stairs. The carved work is in lime, while the framework is in oak,
-but time has coloured the whole to one tone. The newels are crowned
-with fanciful vases full of flowers, another feature characteristic
-of the period. Some of the doors have panels over them, filled with
-painted landscapes, one of the earliest instances of a method of
-treatment that became very general in later years. The fireplaces, with
-one or two exceptions, are not fine examples of their kind.</p>
-
-<p>The lay out is quite formal. The house stands in the midst of a large
-oblong enclosure, some 700 ft. long by 350 ft. wide, containing between
-five and six acres. The stables and garden houses occupy part of this
-space, the remainder being devoted to a forecourt and gardens. The
-enclosing wall is pierced with gateways of which the piers are of
-varied and interesting design (Fig. <a href="#i_092a">50</a>). The stables themselves are
-less formal and more picturesque than the house, but the same strong
-and masterful treatment prevails throughout (Fig. <a href="#i_092b">51</a>). As within the
-house so without, the detail has more individuality than was possible
-in<span class="pagenum" id="Page_93">[93]</span> later times when the continued study of Italian models appears to
-have made designers too fearful of committing solecisms to allow them
-to give free play to their fancy.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_092a">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_092a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 50.</span>&mdash;Thorpe Hall. Gate-Piers.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_092b">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_092b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 51.</span>&mdash;Thorpe Hall. The Stables.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_093">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_093.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 52.</span>&mdash;Lamport Hall.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The attribution of Thorpe Hall to Webb rests on tradition and the
-character of the work. His connection with another Northamptonshire
-house, Lamport Hall, is vouched for by Bridges, the county historian,
-who says (writing in the early years of the eighteenth century): “Sir
-Justinian Isham ... hath here a very elegant seat; part of which is
-old, and part new built in his father’s time, by John Webb, son-in-law
-to Inigo Jones. He hath several drawings of mouldings, architraves,
-and freezes, made in the years 1654 and 1655, with some letters from
-Mr. Webb dated in 1657, relating to the gate, and pilasters, and the
-execution of an intended depository.” Owing to alterations which have
-been made from time to time, there is little of the original work
-left except the front (Fig. <a href="#i_093">52</a>), which exhibits the simple, dignified
-yet interesting treatment characteristic of Webb’s manner. Here the
-whole of the architectural detail is in stone, there are two principal
-stories which stand on a windowed basement; there are no strings nor
-cornices between the basement and the main cornice which crowns the
-walls; above this is a parapet which seems to have been altered from
-its original design. The wall space is occupied by windows carefully
-proportioned, and in the centre of the façade is a slight projection
-according to Webb’s custom. The angles of the building are emphasised
-with quoins. The whole design is<span class="pagenum" id="Page_95">[95]</span> simple in the extreme, but its
-excellent proportions give it dignity and charm.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_094">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_094.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 53.</span>&mdash;RAMSBURY MANOR, <span class="smcap">Wiltshire</span>.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>It must surely have been the old house to which the epithet “vile”
-was applied by the charming Dorothy Osborne in one of her letters
-to her future husband, Sir William Temple. The elder Sir Justinian,
-forty-two years old and a widower, was a persistent but unwelcome
-suitor of Dorothy’s, just about the time when he altered his house. He
-was esteemed, according to a biographer, one of the most accomplished
-persons of the time, and, doubtless, it was in that capacity that he
-employed the hardly less accomplished Webb. But Dorothy put a different
-reading on his character, and considered him a self-conceited, learned
-coxcomb. Her letter, wherein she speaks of “a vile house he has in
-Northamptonshire,” is assigned to January 1653, so it is just possible
-that during the course of his wooing she may have indicated her
-opinion of his home, and thus have been an unintentional agent in its
-improvement.</p>
-
-<p>Ramsbury, in Wiltshire, is another house attributed to Webb,<a id="FNanchor_40" href="#Footnote_40" class="fnanchor">[40]</a> but
-no date is given in connection with it. Its admirable proportion and
-simplicity of detail ally it with other work of his (Fig.<a href="#i_094"> 53</a>). Like
-Thorpe Hall it is a simple oblong in plan, but the front and side are
-broken by slight projections which give the opportunity of breaking
-the roof with pediments as well as with the customary dormers. The
-effect depends primarily upon the spacing of the windows, the extent of
-roof in relation to the walls, and the bold cornice at the eaves. The
-detail is refined, and a welcome change from uniformity of treatment
-is afforded by the introduction of twin doorways in the middle of the
-shorter front. The ground floor is kept up above the ground, as was
-customary with Webb, and the servants are placed in the basement. The
-drawbacks of this disposition are less than would appear from the front
-view, as the ground at the other end is so much lower that the basement
-floor is on the same level with it, and there is easy access from the
-kitchen department to the outbuildings which are grouped some distance
-away on the lower level.</p>
-
-<p>The detail inside is not of striking interest; much of it looks rather
-later than Webb’s time, especially the ceiling (Fig. <a href="#i_096">54</a>); but the way
-in which the cupola, which is almost buried between<span class="pagenum" id="Page_97">[97]</span> the roofs, is
-made to light the attic landing, and, by means of a ceiling light, the
-landing also of the floor below, is quite ingenious, and incidentally
-produces a charming feature in the ceiling of the principal landing.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_096">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_096.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 54.</span>&mdash;RAMSBURY MANOR. <span class="smcap">The Saloon.</span></p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_097">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_097.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 55.</span>&mdash;Ashdown House, Berkshire.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>These are some among the houses that are attributed to Webb. Ashdown
-House (Fig. <a href="#i_097">55</a>) is another, a rather gaunt place, built high on the
-downs in the extreme west of Berkshire, far away from everywhere, so
-that the builder, it is said, might run no risk of infection from the
-plague. Taken in conjunction with his dated drawings&mdash;such as ceilings
-at Wilton in 1649; designs for Durham House, London, in the same
-year; the Physicians’ College in 1651; a chimney-piece for Drayton
-in Northamptonshire in 1653; and another for Northumberland House in
-1660&mdash;they show that Webb was tolerably busy all through the time of
-the Commonwealth. But it is probably the fact, confirmed by the absence
-of dated drawings between 1638 and 1649, that he was not doing much
-work, beyond the Whitehall designs, during the course of the actual
-hostilities. This is only what might be expected, and indeed it is
-likely that beyond what Webb did, there was very little important work
-carried out during the period of twenty years from 1640 to 1660.</p>
-
-<p>The consideration of Inigo Jones’s work and that of Webb has taken the
-story down to about 1670; it is necessary now to go back a little in
-order to look at work by less distinguished designers.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_98">[98]</span></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_098a">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_098a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 56.</span>&mdash;Pepysian Library, Magdalene College, Cambridge.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_098b">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_098b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 57.</span>&mdash;The Latin School, Warminster, Wiltshire, 1707.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_99">[99]</span></p>
-
-<h2>V<br />
-<span class="subhed">THE TRANSITION IN MINOR BUILDINGS AND INTERIORS</span></h2></div>
-
-<p>There are numberless buildings in all parts of the country which
-show in their external treatment how gradual was the supersession of
-the old style by the new and more correct treatment, and how limited
-in range was the influence of even so eminent an architect as Inigo
-Jones. Indeed, throughout the seventeenth century it would appear
-that architectural design followed two paths; one was that trodden
-by trained architects who aimed at correctitude; the other was that
-taken by less learned designers, whether architects or (as of old)
-masons and artificers, who had not mastered the niceties of classic
-design, and therefore mixed ancient methods with such of the new as
-they could compass. The mullioned window was one of the old features
-to which they long held fast. The new idea of large window openings
-such as prevailed in the Banqueting House they seem to have disliked.
-Their reluctance had, no doubt, a constructional basis, for the narrow
-lights of a mullioned window are easily bridged, whereas a wide opening
-requires either a deeper head to carry the weight above it, or else
-an arch. The introduction of an arch or a deep head involved a more
-serious departure from ancient ways, and a more complete committal to
-new design than the ordinary man could face. He did not mind pilasters,
-and he did not mind a heavy cornice, and consequently there are plenty
-of instances in which the old mullioned windows are accompanied by the
-more stiff and straight arrangement which a heavy cornice involves.
-Such an instance is to be seen in the free school at Warminster,
-founded as late as 1707 (Fig. <a href="#i_098b">57</a>).</p>
-
-<p>Another feature to which designers clung was the gable. This, of
-course, had been from time immemorial a dominant feature of English
-houses; it was the simplest and most natural<span class="pagenum" id="Page_100">[100]</span> way of closing the end
-of a roof, and as roofs were nearly always of a steep pitch, so, too,
-were the gables. But there was no place in classic architecture for
-steep gables, nor indeed for gables of any kind; the nearest approach
-to them was the pediment. It was only by a determined effort that the
-English architect could get rid of gables, and this effort was too much
-for any but the most resolute to make. Gables survived even longer
-than mullioned windows, and as our climate, with its rain and snow, is
-better encountered by steep roofs than by flat, the roofs continued to
-be steep.</p>
-
-<p>An interesting example of the mixture of mullioned windows, gables, and
-classic details is to be found in the Pepysian Library at Magdalene
-College, Cambridge (Fig. <a href="#i_098a">56</a>). The precise date of this building is not
-known. In many of the colleges accounts have survived from which may
-be gathered the date, the cost, and even the names of the designers of
-the various buildings which make both Cambridge and Oxford so extremely
-interesting to architects. But unluckily in this instance there are no
-accounts left, and it is only inferentially and vaguely that a date
-can be suggested. Subscriptions for a new building were being asked
-for in 1640,<a id="FNanchor_41" href="#Footnote_41" class="fnanchor">[41]</a> and again in 1679, and the building was apparently
-finished, or nearly so, in 1703 when Pepys made his will, by which he
-left his library (after his nephew’s death) either to Trinity College
-or Magdalene, but preferably to the latter, in which case it was to be
-in the “New Building,” where, in fact, it was eventually placed.</p>
-
-<p>It would appear from the plan, and also from the external treatment,
-that the design was made when the project first started in 1640;
-but if Professor Willis’s suggestion be accepted that the Civil War
-interrupted the scheme and that, in view of the change in taste, a
-fresh design was adopted on the resumption of effort in Charles II.’s
-time, the survival of the old method’s becomes still more striking. But
-a close examination of the work strengthens the supposition that the
-front was designed as a whole when the project was started in 1640; and
-that the pediments and cornices over the windows, together with the
-carving, were inserted at the close of the century. The later mouldings
-are larger and bolder in scale than the earlier.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_101">[101]</span></p>
-
-<p>When it is remembered that in 1640 John Webb was drawing none but
-classic buildings, and that by 1679 St Paul’s Cathedral was already
-rising above the ground, and that it was designed on fully developed
-classic lines, the significance of the mixed taste in this building at
-Magdalene College will be the more readily appreciated. But it must
-be borne in mind that Webb and Sir Christopher Wren were members of
-a learned confraternity, while the unknown designer at Magdalene had
-evidently not had the same opportunities as they enjoyed for acquiring
-familiarity with classic detail.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_101">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_101.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 58.</span>&mdash;Doorway at Stanway, Gloucestershire.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Stanway House, in Gloucestershire, belongs in its general treatment
-to the Jacobean period, but there are numerous late touches about it;
-among them are the front door and the window above it (Fig. <a href="#i_101">58</a>). The
-latter appears to be a later insertion, but the doorway is probably
-original, as it agrees in its general character with the arch of the
-fine gate-house, which is contemporary with the mullioned windows by
-which it is encompassed. It was quite a usual custom to adhere to the
-old ways in the general design of a house, but to treat some special
-feature, such as a doorway, in the more modern and correct fashion.
-This is easily intelligible when it is remembered that the books<span class="pagenum" id="Page_102">[102]</span> on
-classic architecture confined themselves largely to details, and dealt
-but sparingly with the designs of entire buildings. At this time, that
-is about 1637, there was probably no one who gave himself up entirely
-to the pursuit of consistent purity of detail, except Jones and his
-pupil Webb.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_102">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_102.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 59.</span>&mdash;Gateway at Astwell, Northamptonshire, 1638.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>At Astwell, in Northamptonshire, there are the remains of some gates
-dated 1638 which were fitted into an old Gothic opening (Fig. <a href="#i_102">59</a>). They
-have traceried heads of a sort, in imitation of mediæval work, but the
-mouldings are allied more nearly to the ordinary work of the time, and
-the whole is an interesting example of the mixture of old and new ideas.</p>
-
-<p>Swakeleys, near Uxbridge, which carries its date, 1638, on some of its
-rain-water heads, is a good example of late Jacobean work, in which the
-old treatment is more apparent than the new (Fig. <a href="#i_103">60</a>). It has mullioned
-windows and many gables, but the flat pediments which crown the latter
-are evidence of its having been built towards the close of the Jacobean
-period. The actual<span class="pagenum" id="Page_105">[105]</span> roofs behind the gables are quite steep and are
-so complicated that some difficulty was found in getting rid of the
-rain water. Part of it is taken in a trough in the thickness of the
-attic floor; and in order to lessen the number of down-pipes, much of
-it is collected into lead troughs which are carried along the inside
-of the attic walls to the few pipes which are provided. The result of
-these arrangements is that every heavy storm or fall of snow entails
-an inspection by the plumber in order to prevent the accumulation of
-debris and the risk of spoiled ceilings and walls. The whole of the
-cornices and pediments are worked in cement, and not, as might be
-supposed, in stone.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_103">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_103.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 60.</span>&mdash;SWAKELEYS, <span class="smcap">near Uxbridge</span>, 1638.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_104" style="width: 750px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_104.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 61.</span>&mdash;NEW WING AT SOMERSET HOUSE, 1638,
-                  <span class="smcap">by Webb</span>.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From the Worcester College Collection.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_105">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_105.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 62.</span>&mdash;The Chapel, Burford Priory, Oxfordshire.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>If this house is compared with Webb’s drawing of a proposed new wing at
-Somerset House (Fig. <a href="#i_104">61</a>), made in the same year, 1638, the difference
-becomes strikingly apparent between the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_106">[106]</span> style of the ordinary designer
-and that of the learned student; and yet Swakeleys was less than
-twenty miles from London, where the new methods were being sedulously
-cultivated.</p>
-
-<p>Perhaps the most remarkable attempt to weld Jacobean and classic
-design into one consistent whole is to be found in the charming chapel
-attached to Burford Priory, in Oxfordshire (Fig. <a href="#i_105">62</a>). There is much
-more here than a mixture of separate features, some in one style, and
-some in the other. The general treatment is reminiscent of Jacobean.
-There is a lofty story crowned with a cornice and an attic above it.
-There are shafts at the angles round which the cornice breaks, and they
-are terminated at the top with obelisks as pinnacles; there are also
-curved gables. But the shafts are fashioned into classic pilasters;
-the cornice not only breaks round them, but jumps up to make way for
-a door. The traceried windows have a novel disposition of curves, and
-the rose window is not a mere travesty of ancient methods, but has a
-vigorous individuality of its own, and is set in a classic framework.
-The whole work is consistent throughout, and the detail is refined and
-carefully handled. It is the successful attempt of a clever designer
-to solve old problems in new ways, and it is a pity that neither his
-name nor any other work from his hand is known. The chapel, as well
-as the house to which it is attached, was built by Speaker Lenthall,
-subsequent to his acquiring the property in 1634.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_107" style="width: 750px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_107.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm">Side of Chapel. <span style="margin-left:10em">End of Chapel.</span></p>
-     <p class="center p-min sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 63.</span>&mdash;BRASENOSE COLLEGE, OXFORD, 1656–66.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_108">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_108.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 64.</span>&mdash;Oriel at Brasenose College, Oxford.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The chapel and library of Brasenose College, Oxford, have escaped the
-full amount of attention which they deserve, probably because they
-lie outside the range of books dealing with the accepted division of
-architecture into Gothic and classic. But for that very reason they
-are of interest to the present inquiry. The detail on the whole is
-more classic than Gothic, but it is dealt with in a manner reminiscent
-of Gothic; the cornices break forward over the pilasters, and round
-the slight projections caused by the advancing of alternate windows;
-the windows have Gothic tracery; pilasters are used in the place of
-buttresses (Fig. <a href="#i_107">63</a>). Indeed the general design is Gothic in its
-arrangement, but classic detail has been applied to it, which in its
-turn has modified the Gothic handling. The whole effect is interesting.
-The designer has not merely made a Gothic design carrying it out with
-classic detail, nor has he made a classic design, giving his windows
-Gothic tracery. But each style has influenced the other. The Gothic
-treatment has modified the classic detail, the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_108">[108]</span> classic detail has
-modified the Gothic treatment The detail itself is quite refined,
-it is not the work of an ignorant man; the ornament is judiciously
-introduced, and applied with knowledge and skill. The oriel window on
-the external front (Fig. <a href="#i_108">64</a>) adjoining the east end of the chapel is
-a charming piece of design, and the work generally is so well done
-that it has been attributed to Sir Christopher Wren; but although
-the attribution is erroneous it shows that popular opinion held the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_109">[109]</span>
-building worthy of being coupled with a great name. It would appear
-that a Mr. John Jackson superintended the building operations, and as he
-made a model for the chapel roof,<a id="FNanchor_42" href="#Footnote_42" class="fnanchor">[42]</a> he may fairly be credited with
-the whole design. The first stone of the chapel was laid on the 18th
-June 1656, and the work was practically finished by 1666, in which
-year, on the 17th November, the dedication took place.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_109">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_109.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 65.</span>&mdash;House in Southgate, Gloucester, 1650.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The old house in Southgate, Gloucester (Fig. <a href="#i_109">65</a>), until recently the
-City Tea Warehouse, is a curious mixture of the old and new styles.
-According to the date on a chimney-piece it was built in 1650. The
-projecting stories, the panels and brackets below the windows of the
-top floor, and, indeed, the general treatment of the whole front,
-belong to the order of things that was passing away. The wide windows
-with their pediments, some straight and some curved, and the stiff
-floral pendents are indicative of the new style then coming into vogue.
-If the sash-windows were adopted from the outset, they would be a still
-more decidedly modern note. But if, as in all probability was the case,
-they merely replace the original mullions the native aspect of the
-front would have been less classic.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_110">[110]</span></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_110a">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_110a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 66.</span>&mdash;Houses at Ipswich.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_110b">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_110b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 67.</span>&mdash;Nixon’s Grammar School, Oxford, 1658 (now destroyed).</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_111">[111]</span></p>
-
-<p>Another type of the quaint mixture of the old and the new is to be seen
-at Ipswich in the well-known Sparrow’s house, and in the less ornate
-example shown in Fig. <a href="#i_110a">66</a>. Here the ancient practice of overhanging
-the upper stories is utilised to obtain the strong horizontal lines
-which are characteristic of the classic style; but instead of the
-walls being full of windows, their blank spaces are larger in extent
-than the windows, and they are panelled in a simple fashion. Above
-the bold cornice spring three sharply pointed gables, which give
-an old-fashioned appearance to the house. The original windows are
-mullioned, but some of them (and probably all at first were alike) have
-an arched central light of double the width of the others. No doubt
-this treatment was introduced in order to vary the monotony of a series
-of windows composed entirely of small rectangular openings. It was
-very generally adopted, but the curved side lights are a variation not
-often found; the more frequent form is that employed in the picturesque
-Grammar School at Oxford (Fig. <a href="#i_110b">67</a>) which was built in the year 1658 for
-the education of freemen’s sons, on the foundation of Alderman John
-Nixon. The steep gables appear to be later additions, the original
-arrangement was the flatter and more carefully devised gable over the
-middle window. The arcade on the ground floor is quite Jacobean in
-feeling.</p>
-
-<p>At Saffron Walden, in Essex, there is a row of houses of ancient
-aspect, with projecting corbelled gables. One of them is dated 1676,
-which probably gives the period when the modelled plasterwork was
-applied to an existing front, for some of the woodwork is Gothic in
-character. They are interesting examples of the ornamental plasterwork
-which at one time abounded in the eastern counties (Figs. <a href="#i_112a">68</a> and <a href="#i_112b">69</a>).</p>
-
-<p>The red brick inn at Scole, in Norfolk (Fig. <a href="#i_114b">72</a>), is another example of
-the mixture of classic cornices and quasi-pilasters with curved gables,
-and it gives a good idea of how local designers strove to modernise
-their buildings and were yet unable to shake off the old fetters
-which bound them to the traditions of their youth. There used to be,
-stretching across the road, a very substantial and picturesque sign
-attached to this inn, a wonderful piece of allegorical design.<a id="FNanchor_43" href="#Footnote_43" class="fnanchor">[43]</a> It
-was dated 1655, which may be taken as the date of the building itself.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_112">[112]</span></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_112a">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_112a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 68.</span>&mdash;House at Saffron Walden, Essex,
-showing Ornamental Plasterwork.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_112b">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_112b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 69.</span>&mdash;Saffron Walden. Detail of Plasterwork.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_113">[113]</span></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_113">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_113.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 70.</span>&mdash;School at Witney, Oxfordshire, 1660.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Another good example of the transitional stage between Jacobean work
-and classic is the school at Witney, in Oxfordshire (Fig. <a href="#i_113">70</a>). The
-wings are still part of the main structure; the windows are mullioned,
-but the larger ones have an oval light in the uppermost compartment;
-the chimneys have square detached shafts set angle ways on their
-base. All these are features of the earlier type. On the other hand,
-the absence of gables, the widely projecting coved eaves, and small
-detached dormers are characteristic of the new methods of design. The
-date of the building, as stated on the panel over the principal door,
-is 1660.</p>
-
-<p>Of such houses as the farmhouse at Stanton Harcourt, in Oxfordshire
-(Fig. <a href="#i_114a">71</a>), there are plenty of examples to be found. Here the mullioned
-windows are still retained; but the absence of gables, the straight
-front, the marked cornice at the eaves, the hood over the door, and
-the plain, severe outline are all in keeping with the more pronounced
-classic treatment which was being gradually adopted, even in remote
-places, by the end of the seventeenth century.</p>
-
-<p>Such are some of the smaller houses built during the years in which
-Inigo Jones and Webb were working; links between the Jacobean style
-and that purer version of Italian to which those eminent men devoted
-themselves.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_115">[115]</span></p>
-
-<p>It has been shown how the general character of houses had changed
-during the period between the accession of Charles I. and the
-Restoration in regard to their arrangement and appearance; it will
-be well now to show briefly how their decoration had also altered.
-But before doing so, it will be useful shortly to recapitulate the
-principal changes that had taken place.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_114a">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_114a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 71.</span>&mdash;House at Stanton Harcourt, Oxfordshire.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_114b">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_114b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 72.</span>&mdash;Inn at Scole, Norfolk, 1655.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The old idea of the house-plan, derived from mediæval times, was to
-provide a great hall for the daily use of the whole household, and
-to supplement it by a group of rooms at each end, one for the use of
-the family, the other for the servants. The relations between the
-family and their retainers were then closer than they became in later
-times. Gradually the custom of dining all together died out; the
-family secluded themselves in their own apartments, the servants in
-theirs. The great hall was deserted as a living-room and degenerated
-into a vestibule leading to the rooms where the daily life was led.
-The distinction between the family and the servants was emphasised
-somewhat to the disadvantage of the latter; for when sacrifices of
-comfort had to be made for the sake of architectural effect, it was the
-servants upon whom discomfort was laid with the least scruple. They
-were frequently relegated to a basement during the day, and to attics
-during the night. The ground floor and the floor above it were reserved
-for the use of the family and for state occasions. The increase in the
-subdivisions of household work may be realised from Swift’s satirical
-“Advice to Servants,” addressed to persons whose duties (many of them)
-had not been specialised, even if they had come into vogue, in the old
-days.</p>
-
-<p>It is interesting to compare the names of the rooms on the plans in the
-Thorpe collection, which dates from 1570 to 1620, with those on Webb’s
-plans for Durham House, dated 1649. Many of them are identical, such
-as the hall, the dining-room, the great chamber, the withdrawing-room,
-the gallery, and the servants’ rooms&mdash;kitchen, pastry, larder, buttery,
-and so forth. But Webb has a few new designations, such as the
-secretary’s room, the apothecary’s lodging, the housekeeper’s room,
-and the under-housekeeper’s, the baker’s and cook’s rooms, the page’s
-room, the master of the horse, the receiver-general, and the surveyor’s
-chamber. Then there are rooms of state, a presence chamber, a private
-dining-room to serve both his lordship’s and lady’s apartments, his
-lordship’s cabinet and his wardrobe, a<span class="pagenum" id="Page_117">[117]</span> dressing-room, and various
-back stairs serving both his lordship’s rooms and those of his lady.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_116">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_116.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 73.</span>&mdash;STAIRCASE AT ASHBURNHAM HOUSE, WESTMINSTER.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>From this it will be seen that the tendency was to increase the
-subdivision of duties and the general convenience of arrangement (by
-means of back stairs, among other things), and to allot more rooms
-to the principal servants. At the same time special provision was
-made for state occasions in the state rooms and presence chamber.
-It must be remembered that these plans of Durham House were made in
-1649, although they were never carried out. They indicate a desire to
-increase at once the convenience and the stateliness of the house, and
-although it was designed on strictly classic lines, everything was not
-yet subordinated, as in later years, to the supposed necessities of
-architectural grandeur. In some of his other plans, many of which were
-studies in design rather than practical work, Webb was almost as great
-a sinner as his successors of the early eighteenth century.</p>
-
-<p>The external appearance of houses had changed even more than their
-plans. Gables had almost disappeared; dormer windows no longer
-rose from the walls, wrought in stone or brick, but from the roofs
-and made of wood; the roofs themselves assumed a flatter pitch and
-generally started from widely projecting eaves. Windows were no longer
-mullioned and transomed into many small lights, but consisted of one
-large opening enclosing a wooden frame, which at first was divided
-by wood mullions, but later was filled with sliding sashes. The
-general appearance of the house was more compact than of old but less
-picturesque; it was more regular, and depended largely upon the nice
-spacing of the windows, upon its proportions, and its more scholarly
-detail.</p>
-
-<p>This scholarly detail gradually ousted the naive design of the
-Jacobean craftsmen. To be scholarly you had to be correctly Italian,
-and therefore the quaint mixtures and the quaint native growths that
-sprang from an imperfect acquaintance with the true gospel of Italian
-design were discountenanced. Fancy was to be smothered by knowledge.
-Nevertheless it is odd to find how long the strapwork <i>motif</i>
-survived, which we are apt to think of as Dutch; it is found in work of
-Charles II.’s time and even later; Webb made use of it, and even Jones
-himself did not disdain it, as may be seen from some of his designs for
-chimney-pieces (Figs. <a href="#i_135">91–94</a>).</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_118">[118]</span></p>
-
-<p>Staircases had also changed in the character of their detail; they
-were still arranged in straight flights, but we have already seen at
-Coleshill that they sometimes formed a more imposing feature than in
-Jacobean days; in that instance the staircase is doubled, each portion
-being of equal importance, and they occupy a considerable part of the
-entrance hall. This double arrangement was by no means of universal
-adoption, it depended upon the space at command, and at Ashburnham
-House, Westminster, for instance, where space was restricted, a single
-staircase was ingeniously planned, but was treated in a monumental
-manner. The design is attributed by some to Inigo Jones, and it is
-almost certain that it must be either by him or by Webb. The house was
-originally fashioned out of some of the old monastic buildings, and had
-been used as a dwelling for many years before the time of Elizabeth.
-It was known as the Dean’s House, and was occupied by a succession of
-tenants. In 1621 a lady became the tenant; she was succeeded in 1628 by
-Sir Edward Powell, who obtained a lease in 1629. The question of the
-tenancy is important as it sets limits to the number of those who would
-be likely to embark on considerable alterations. In 1640 the house was
-transferred to trustees for the benefit of Sir Edward’s wife. Then came
-the Civil War, and the next tenant who appears is William Ashburnham,
-who, already in occupation, obtained a forty years’ lease in 1662. As
-he was an ardent royalist, it is supposed that he could not have taken
-the house previous to the Restoration.<a id="FNanchor_44" href="#Footnote_44" class="fnanchor">[44]</a></p>
-
-<p>The choice of the individual who caused the new work to be done appears
-to lie between Sir Edward Powell and William Ashburnham, for Lady
-Powell’s trustees of 1640 would not be likely to undertake anything of
-such magnitude, and it is improbable, although not impossible, that it
-was done during the Civil War or the Commonwealth. The reasonable dates
-lie, therefore, between 1629–1640, and 1662–1672, in which latter year
-Webb died. On the whole, the character of the work points to the later
-period; it looks as though it were the outcome of longer experience
-than the earlier period could have supplied. It should be borne in
-mind that the treatment of the ceiling, with the open cupola above it,
-resembles that of one or two drawings made by Jones and Webb for Wilton
-and elsewhere.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_119">[119]</span></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_119">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_119.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 74.</span>&mdash;ASHBURNHAM HOUSE. <span class="smcap">Ceiling over Staircase.</span></p>
-  </div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_120">[120]</span></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_120a" style="width: 590px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_120a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 75.</span>&mdash;“Cieling of y<sup>e</sup> passage Roome in to
-y<sup>e</sup> Garden,” at Wilton, by Inigo Jones.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">Worcester College Collection, i. 14.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_120b" style="width: 616px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_120b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 76.</span>&mdash;“Ffor y<sup>e</sup> Seeling of y<sup>e</sup> Cabinett
-Roome, 1649, Wilton,” by Webb.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From the Burlington-Devonshire Collection at the R.I.B.A.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_121">[121]</span></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_121" style="width: 566px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_121.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 77.</span>&mdash;CEILING AT GREENWICH PALACE, <span class="smcap">by Webb</span>.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From a Drawing in the Burlington-Devonshire Collection at the R.I.B.A.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_122">[122]</span></p>
-
-<p>In any case, and whoever designed it, the detail of the work is of
-interest as showing the departure from Jacobean ideals. The staircase,
-it is true, retains the solid newels, the massive handrail, and the
-stout balusters hitherto in vogue (Fig. <a href="#i_116">73</a>); but the ornament has
-changed, and the balusters are almost as stout as if intended to be
-of stone. The panels on the wall are larger in size and in scale than
-those of Jacobean design, and they are marshalled with more pomp. The
-ceiling has no affinity with the busy and intricate ceilings of the
-departing style. The framework is large, and its members are adorned
-with foliage in high relief; the open cupola, with its balustrade and
-detached columns, is a new idea in English work (Fig. <a href="#i_119">74</a>). If it was
-executed between 1629 and 1640, it would be the first example of its
-kind; if between 1662 and 1672, it would have had predecessors among
-the drawings of Jones and Webb. It is perhaps worthy of note that in
-Jones’s designs of ceilings the ornament is usually confined to the
-ribs, the intermediate spaces (that is, the ground of the ceiling
-itself) being plain. Here the ground is covered with foliage as well
-as the ribs, and curiously enough, those of Jones’s designs which
-include cupolas are similarly treated. His drawing for the “cieling of
-y<sup>e</sup> passage Roome in to ye Garden” (at Wilton) is illustrated in Fig.
-<a href="#i_120a">75</a>. and Webb’s drawing “ffor y<sup>e</sup> Seeling of y<sup>e</sup> Cabinett Roome, 1649,
-Wilton,” in Fig. <a href="#i_120b">76</a>. Although the perspective treatment of the cupolas
-is a somewhat special feature, the general design of these and of that
-at Ashburnham House gives a good idea of the manner in which ceilings
-of the period were managed.</p>
-
-<p>Another and more ambitious design for a ceiling by Webb is that for
-“his Majesty’s Presence at Greenwich, 1666” (Fig. <a href="#i_121">77</a>), preserved at
-the Royal Institute of British Architects. The outer border represents
-a bold cove filled with modelled plasterwork in high relief; the four
-angles are occupied by lions and unicorns, emblematic of England and
-Scotland. If this design was ever carried out, it has disappeared, and
-there is no example to be found of modelling treated on so large a
-scale; the cove would have been some eight feet on the curve, and the
-effect of its plaster ornament would have been rather overwhelming.</p>
-
-<p>Returning to the consideration of staircases, there is one at Can
-Court, in Wiltshire (Fig. <a href="#i_123">78</a>), which is earlier in feeling, if not
-in date, than the Ashburnham House staircase. It retains many of the
-characteristics of Jacobean work, particularly in the stoutness<span class="pagenum" id="Page_124">[124]</span><span class="pagenum" id="Page_123">[123]</span> of
-the newels, the handrail and the string. In the balusters, however, a
-later touch is apparent, as well as in the upper part of the newels. It
-is obvious, nevertheless, that the two staircases belong to the same
-type.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_123">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_123.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 78.</span>&mdash;CAN COURT, <span class="smcap">Wiltshire</span>.
-<span class="smcap">The Staircase.</span></p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_124">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_124.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 79.</span>&mdash;Staircase at Dawtrey Mansion, Petworth, 1652.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>An interesting staircase both as to date and detail is one at Dawtrey
-Mansion, Petworth (Fig. <a href="#i_124">79</a>). It is dated 1652, and while it retains
-the Jacobean form of finial, not gracefully designed, it has twisted
-balusters of the kind usually associated with work of fifty years
-later. It is one of the numerous links which connect the old and the
-new forms.</p>
-
-<p>Of the same type as these in essence, although differently<span class="pagenum" id="Page_125">[125]</span> treated,
-is that kind of balustrade already mentioned in connection with Thorpe
-Hall (Fig. <a href="#i_090">49</a>), where the balusters are replaced by scrolls of foliage.
-There was a very interesting example of this fashion at the Castle Inn,
-Kingston, now destroyed (Fig. <a href="#i_126">81</a>), <span class="pagenum" id="Page_126">[126]</span>and there is another at Ham House
-(Fig. <a href="#i_125">80</a>), where, however, the panels display flags, armour, guns, and
-other martial emblems, which may perhaps have some reference to Thomas
-Talmash, a brother of Lord Dysart (the owner) and a general in the time
-of William III.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_125">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_125.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 80.</span>&mdash;Ham House, Surrey. The Staircase.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_126">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_126.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 81.</span>&mdash;The Staircase, Castle Inn,
-Kingston-on-Thames.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>There was an ancient house at Greenwich called the “Old Palace,” but
-distinct from the building which was at one time the royal residence,
-sometimes known as Crowley House. It has been destroyed, but some
-sketches by C. J. Richardson of the interesting work it contained have
-survived, and among them is one of a staircase with foliated balustrade
-(Fig. <a href="#i_127">82</a>). The character of the detail suggests a date in the middle
-of the seventeenth century, and the general treatment recalls the work
-which was being done by Webb at that period. There is a slight survival
-of the earlier style, but the design is handled in a more refined
-spirit than was usually the case with sumptuous examples of Jacobean
-work. This is particularly observed in the door (Fig. <a href="#i_128">83</a>).</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_127" style="width: 666px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_127.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 82.</span>&mdash;The Staircase at the “Old Palace,”
-Greenwich (now destroyed).</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From a Sketch by C. J. Richardson.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_128">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_128.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 83.</span>&mdash;“OLD PALACE,” GREENWICH.
-<span class="smcap">Staircase Details and Door.</span></p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>In the hands of Inigo Jones and Webb both doorways and windows assumed
-a correct Italian appearance, but in less<span class="pagenum" id="Page_127">[127]</span> learned hands there were
-intermediate stages of development between the Jacobean type and the
-full classic. Such a one may be seen in the library door at St John’s
-College, Oxford (Fig. <a href="#i_130b">85</a>), and in an external door at Brasenose College
-(Fig. <a href="#i_130a">84</a>), part of the work already referred to. The library at St
-John’s was built in 1631 by Archbishop Laud, who was at that time
-Bishop of London and Chancellor of the University of Oxford. It is said
-that he obtained the help of Inigo<span class="pagenum" id="Page_129">[129]</span> Jones, but the detail of the work
-is so unlike anything which remains of Jones’s own draughtsmanship,
-that the correctness of the attribution is very doubtful. The stonework
-of this particular door, however, is not unlike some of the doorways
-with which the name of Jones is connected, now preserved at the Royal
-Institute of British Architects. The woodwork has no counterpart among
-his designs.</p>
-
-<p>If we want to see the scholars idea of what a doorway should be, we
-must turn to Jones’s drawing of one for the Banqueting House (Fig.
-<a href="#i_131a">86</a>), or to Webb’s design for one in the palace at Greenwich, the block
-which he designed for Charles II. (Fig. <a href="#i_131b">87</a>). The former is entitled in
-Jones’s writing, “Scitzo for the Great Doore Ban. Ho. 1619.” It has the
-logically indefensible broken pediment, making room for an unfinished
-cartouche which was doubtless to receive the royal arms. On the panel
-in the frieze is indicated an inscription commencing with the first
-letters of Jacobus Rex Magnæ Britanniæ; below it is an ornament in
-which the strapwork <i>motif</i> lingers. The whole effect is strong,
-handsome, and well proportioned. If it was ever actually carried out,
-it has now disappeared. Webb’s drawing is entitled in his own writing,
-“Greenwich, ffor the dore going out of the Cabinet into the gallery
-1663.” The whole composition is not unlike Jones’s, but it is larger,
-although the door itself is smaller. The draughtsmanship in both is
-somewhat alike, but the difference is just that which distinguishes
-the work of the one man from that of the other. Jones’s is the more
-virile and direct. The figures on the pediment at Greenwich are named
-as “Liberality and Magnanimity,” at the other end were to be “Religion
-and Justice.” It must be admitted that their different attributes are
-not clearly indicated. A note at the side shows that this doorway was
-Webb’s own design; it reads “M<sup>e</sup> I must alter these measures and make
-them thus,” then follow the altered dimensions.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_130a">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_130a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 84.</span>&mdash;Doorway at Brasenose College, Oxford, 1656.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_130b">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_130b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 85.</span>&mdash;Doorway at St John’s College, Oxford, 1631.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_131a" style="width: 487px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_131a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 86.</span>&mdash;Banqueting House, Whitehall. “Scitzo
-of the Great Doore, Ban. Ho., 1619,” by Inigo Jones.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_131b">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_131b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 87.</span>&mdash;Doorway at Greenwich Palace, 1663, by
-Webb.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_132">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_132.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 88.</span>&mdash;Banqueting House, Whitehall, “The
-upper windowe of y<sup>e</sup> Modell,” by Inigo Jones.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>It has already been pointed out how the mullioned window was gradually
-altered by the introduction of a wider light surmounted by an arch
-(Fig. <a href="#i_110a">66</a>), or by the introduction of an elliptical light (Fig. <a href="#i_113">70</a>). But
-the mullioned window in any form was out of place in a truly classic
-design. Jones has an early drawing of 1616 in which he makes use of it,
-as well as of other Jacobean features, but it is doubtful whether any
-executed work of his can show a stone mullioned window. The type<span class="pagenum" id="Page_132">[132]</span>
-employed in the Banqueting House is that which he favoured, and it is
-probable that a drawing entitled “The upper windowe of y<sup>e</sup> modell”
-(Fig. <a href="#i_132">88</a>) is a sketch by him for the windows in the upper story of this
-building. By comparing this sketch with that of the Banqueting House
-(Fig. <a href="#i_062">36</a>) the similarity will be apparent. Jones, like Webb after him,
-was a student of Serlio, and he has a sheet of sketches of windows
-taken from Serlio with notes of his own appended. He and Webb do not
-seem to have concerned themselves with the filling of the window space,
-all they troubled about was the proportion and embellishment of the
-main opening. Yet the filling is of considerable interest. Mullioned
-windows were filled with lead lights, which only required glass of
-small size. Their successors, where the main opening was large, appear
-to have been filled with wooden frames having mullions and transoms
-of the same material, which reduced the actual openings to a size
-suitable for glazing in the old way. Later on the lead which held the
-glass was replaced by thick wooden bars holding glass of a larger size.
-But the opening part of all these windows was a casement, that is a<span class="pagenum" id="Page_134">[134]</span>
-framework (generally of iron) which was hung at the side and opened
-like a door. Then, from somewhere&mdash;but nobody knows exactly whence
-or when&mdash;came the ingenious sliding sash, which was hung with cords
-and counterbalanced by concealed weights, so that it could be moved
-up and down. This was really a remarkable change, although we are so
-accustomed to sash-windows<span class="pagenum" id="Page_135">[135]</span> as to take them for granted as part of the
-universal scheme of things. Their effect on the architectural treatment
-of windows was of the first importance. They made mullions impossible,
-they compelled window spaces to be of large size, and these large
-spaces necessarily influenced the design. They also rendered small
-bay-windows impossible, as well as large bay-windows with a narrow
-canted side. They practically put an end to any attempt at modified
-versions of the Jacobean style, but they were excellently adapted to
-the larger, plainer, and more regular classic. Considering the effect
-they had on design it is to be regretted that we know nothing of
-their origin, or the date of their introduction. At present only one
-authenticated instance of their use can be cited before the time of
-William III. If they appear in earlier buildings caution would have
-to be exercised to ascertain whether they were not later insertions.
-Anyone who can settle this point would render a singular service in the
-byways of architectural history. The instance mentioned<span class="pagenum" id="Page_136">[136]</span> above occurs
-in the accounts for work done at Windsor Castle in 1686–88:&mdash;<a id="FNanchor_45" href="#Footnote_45" class="fnanchor">[45]</a></p>
-
-<div class="blockquot">
-
-<p class="hangingindent">Sarah Wyatt for a Sash Window and Frame with Weights Lynes and
-Pullyes and a Wainscott Window-board done in the Governor of the
-Castles Secretaryes office <span style="margin-left: 10em">70<sup>s</sup></span></p>
-</div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_133" style="width: 556px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_133.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 89.</span>&mdash;ST JOHN’S COLLEGE, OXFORD.</p>
-     <p class="center p-min sm smcap">The President’s Drawing-Room.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">Henry Tanner, <i>del.</i></p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_134">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_134.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 90.</span>&mdash;Chimney-Piece in the Jerusalem
-Chamber, Westminster.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm"></p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_135" style="width: 458px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_135.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 91.</span>&mdash;A Chimney-Piece for the Queen’s
-House, Greenwich, 1619, by Inigo Jones.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From a Drawing in the Burlington-Devonshire Collection at the R.I.B.A.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_136" style="width: 750px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_136.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 92.</span>&mdash;A Chimney-Piece for the Queen’s
-House, Greenwich, by Inigo Jones.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From a Drawing in the Burlington-Devonshire Collection at the R.I.B.A.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The kind of panelling which covered the walls of Jacobean houses was
-retained in the houses of less importance till about the middle of the
-century, but there was a tendency for the panels to grow larger. Inigo
-Jones and Webb generally used large panels, and discarded the small
-oblongs still favoured by local joiners. In the detail of woodwork
-generally greater refinement and simplicity became apparent, and more
-successful endeavours were made to adapt classic profiles. At St John’s
-College, Oxford, the work of 1631 illustrates this tendency (Fig. <a href="#i_133">89</a>).
-The wood chimney-pieces in the same building are also handled with more
-restraint than in earlier examples, and a similar kind of treatment
-marks the fine chimney-piece in the Jerusalem Chamber at Westminster
-(Fig. <a href="#i_134">90</a>), which must have been the work of John Williams, Bishop of
-Lincoln, who was Dean of Westminster<span class="pagenum" id="Page_138">[138]</span> during a large part of the
-reign of Charles I. The excellent panelling by Webb at Thorpe Hall has
-already been illustrated (see Fig. <a href="#i_089">48</a>). It embodies a still greater
-departure from the old manner.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_137a" style="width: 628px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_137a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 93.</span>&mdash;A Chimney-Piece for “D<sup>rs</sup> Price his
-Great Chamber,” by Webb.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From the Burlington-Devonshire Collection.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_137b" style="width: 505px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_137b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 94.</span>&mdash;Chimney-Piece at Drayton, by Webb.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From the Burlington-Devonshire Collection.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>This departure is also very noticeable in the designs of chimney-pieces
-which Jones and Webb have left behind them. Fig. <a href="#i_135">91</a> shows one of those
-designed for the Queen’s House at Greenwich in 1637: in the panel below
-the pediment is inscribed “Henrietta Maria Regina.” Fig. <a href="#i_136">92</a> is “for
-Greenwich,” and bears the cipher H.M.R. It is very characteristic of
-Jones’s way of sketching his details; he has bestowed more care (and
-more affection) upon the little children at the side than upon the
-principal object itself. It is evident that the large panel over the
-chimney-piece was to be occupied by a picture, as also perhaps was that
-in the preceding example. In Jacobean times such a space would have
-contained the owner’s arms. Webb’s chimney-pieces follow those of his
-master in general conception, and they are the precursors of the type
-prevalent in the eighteenth century, largely used by Kent, who had
-access to these very drawings. Of the examples selected, one was for
-Drayton House, in Northamptonshire, and it is signed by Webb and dated
-1653 (Fig. <a href="#i_137b">94</a>); the other was for “D<sup>r</sup> George Price his great chamber”
-(Fig. <a href="#i_137a">93</a>). The whole series affords a good idea of the style of the
-period as compared with that of earlier times.</p>
-
-<p>It is interesting to compare with these drawings of Jones and Webb a
-contemporary chimney-piece at Ford Abbey, in Dorset, attributed to
-Jones (Fig. <a href="#i_139">95</a>). It must be confessed, however, that the treatment is
-widely different in the two cases. This is not to say that the Ford
-Abbey example has no merit; on the contrary, there is a refreshing
-playfulness about the way in which the staid classic detail is bent
-from its usual austere lines.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_139">[139]</span></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_139">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_139.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 95.</span>&mdash;CHIMNEY-PIECE IN THE DINING-ROOM,
-FORD ABBEY, <span class="smcap">Dorset</span>.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_140">[140]</span></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_140">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_140.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 96.</span>&mdash;BELTON HOUSE. <span class="smcap">The Chapel.</span></p>
-  </div>
-
-<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_141">[141]</span></p>
-
-<h2>VI<br />
-<span class="subhed">SIR CHRISTOPHER WREN</span></h2></div>
-
-<p>When Charles II. was restored to his inheritance in 1660, he evidently
-contemplated indulging in the royal pastime of fine building. At this
-time John Webb was not only the veteran of architecture, but the
-most notable exponent of the art then living in England. His claims
-on the favour of the king were founded on his long and intimate
-connection with Inigo Jones, a name to conjure with both in relation
-to architecture and to the less stable factor of court influence.
-They were supported on the practical side by the work he had done,
-although fruitlessly, for Charles’s father in the preparation of the
-great schemes for the palace at Whitehall, and by the assistance he
-had given both in architecture and the artistic hobbies of the time
-to many of the nobility and gentry. They were supported on the human
-side by personal services rendered to the late king, especially in
-furnishing to him, while at Oxford, full designs and particulars of
-all the fortifications round London, with instructions how they might
-be carried; and in conveying to the king, whilst at Beverley, his
-majesty’s jewellery, which he took, concealed in his waistcoat, through
-the enemy’s quarters, suffering, in consequence of the fact being
-discovered, close imprisonment for a month.</p>
-
-<p>These claims, as we have seen, failed to gain for him the coveted
-post of surveyor to the king’s works, but Charles employed him in
-resuscitating the idea of a new palace at Whitehall, which never came
-to fruition, and in actually erecting a considerable part of the
-projected palace at Greenwich.</p>
-
-<p>Webb never succeeded in obtaining the official appointment for which
-he longed, for which he appears to have had the best qualifications,
-and of which he was actually promised the reversion on the death of
-Sir John Denham, who was preferred before him<span class="pagenum" id="Page_142">[142]</span> at the Restoration. The
-reasons for his failure are obscure, but it may be that his active
-employment during the Commonwealth told against him, for his clients
-of that period were obviously not such devoted adherents of the royal
-cause as to be in exile, or suffering other great hardships. It may
-be that he lacked the support and patronage of John Evelyn, whose
-influence with Charles II. in all matters of culture was enormous.
-It may be that his age was against him, for when Wren was appointed
-on the death of Denham, Webb was fifty-seven years old. But whatever
-the cause, his failure was complete, and he eventually retired to his
-home at Butleigh where he died in 1672. Although he missed the goal
-of his ambition, although the men who have had the ear of the world
-have not sounded his name in high notes, he was a remarkable man. The
-work conceded to him by general consent is noteworthy, and he probably
-did more to influence domestic architecture in England than any other
-man of his time, Inigo Jones not excepted. For any student, divesting
-himself of established prejudices, who will examine his original
-drawings, can hardly fail to come to the conclusion that it was his
-imagination and his hand which developed and prepared most of the
-designs which, published as the work of Inigo Jones, had so wide an
-effect upon English houses in the eighteenth century.</p>
-
-<p>Charles II.’s interest in the pastime of building was but fitful. The
-Whitehall Palace got little further than Webb’s old designs, nor did
-that at Greenwich go beyond the one block called after the king. He
-was preoccupied with matters of more personal interest, and what money
-he had for his own purposes was spent in directions other than that
-of architecture. Nevertheless incidental to the kingly rôle was the
-patronage of the arts, and when the necessity arose he bestowed his
-attention upon them and upon those, who were engaged in their pursuit.
-It was in this way that Wren was brought to his notice, and thereby
-obtained that official position which led to the development of his
-extraordinary powers. That Charles had no special acquaintance with
-architecture nor any consuming love for it, is sufficiently proved by
-his sanction of that design of Wren’s for St Paul’s Cathedral known
-as the “warrant” design, and by the spasmodic way in which he sought
-to house himself in regal fashion; for another abortive attempt at a
-palace was made in 1683, this time at Winchester and with the help of
-Wren.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_143">[143]</span></p>
-
-<p>Wren is even better known to the public as an architect than Inigo
-Jones, largely owing to the fact that he left behind him many more
-buildings which can be seen to-day than did his predecessor. But the
-admiration he has received, whether founded on knowledge or not, is no
-more than his due, for he was a truly remarkable man. He had achieved
-a European reputation as a man of science before he was thirty, and
-although, when he became officially connected with building for the
-first time, he had apparently received no practical training in
-architecture, he soon made up his deficiencies on the scaffold itself,
-amid the ring of the trowel and the thud of the hammer.</p>
-
-<p>He came of good and cultured stock. His father, Dr. Christopher Wren,
-was Dean of Windsor; his uncle, Matthew, was Bishop of Ely. His father
-was a man of considerable attainments in literature and science, and
-had a superficial knowledge of architecture. Christopher, who was born
-in 1632, was his only son, and received a good education. His natural
-abilities enabled him to profit by his opportunities to such a degree
-that at the age of thirteen he invented a new astronomical instrument
-and a pneumatic engine, both of which he introduced to his father in
-elegant Latin, the one in verse, the other in prose. A year later he
-was entered as a gentleman-commoner at Wadham College, Oxford, where he
-continued to distinguish himself. It would be tedious to recount his
-juvenile essays in astronomy, mathematics, gnomonics, and Latin, but so
-great a reputation did he achieve that when Evelyn (who took a genuine
-interest in anything remarkable) went to Oxford in 1654, he made a
-point of going to see “that miracle of a youth, Mr. Christopher Wren,
-nephew of the Bishop of Ely.”</p>
-
-<p>The youth was then twenty-two, and was already a Master of Arts and
-a Fellow of All Souls; three years later he was chosen Professor of
-Astronomy at Gresham College in London, and subsequently, in 1661,
-Savilian professor of the same subject in the University of Oxford.
-In the same year he was made D.C.L. by both Oxford and Cambridge.
-During these years he was one of the most active of those “virtuous and
-learned men of philosophical minds” who, along with Dr. Wilkins, Warden
-of Wadham, laid the foundations of the Royal Society. A whole page of
-the “Parentalia”&mdash;memoirs written by his son, and the chief source
-of information concerning his life&mdash;is occupied with a catalogue of
-the New Theories, Inventions,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_144">[144]</span> Experiments, and Mechanic Improvements
-exhibited by Mr. Wren at the meetings in connection with the great
-movement. One or two examples will serve to show the wide range of his
-investigations: a weather clock; an artificial eye, with the humours
-truly and dioptically made; several ways of graving and etching; divers
-improvements in the art of husbandry; divers new musical instruments;
-easier ways of whale-fishing; ways to perfect coaches for ease. Indeed
-there seems to have been nothing in the heavens above, or the earth
-beneath, or the waters under the earth, about which he did not know
-something.</p>
-
-<p>These things may be regarded as the by-products of a great imagination,
-an imagination which made him a skilled astronomer and a profound
-mathematician. He had an extraordinary aptitude for scientific
-research, and he was the first who experimented in the infusion of
-foreign liquid into the blood of animals, a process which, modified to
-the transfusion of blood from one person to another, has had remarkable
-results in medicine. He also established, by experiment, before the
-Royal Society in 1668, the Third Law of Motion; and no doubt his study
-of the laws of motion subsequently stood him in good stead in his
-daring feats of architectural construction.</p>
-
-<p>The remarkable thing about these studies and experiments is that, amid
-all their variety, not a word is said about architecture. He was a fair
-draughtsman, but he was primarily a man of science and a virtuoso,
-in other words, a man accomplished in the arts and sciences, but who
-had no need to bring his knowledge to any practical test involving
-responsibility. He was, however, soon to become more than a virtuoso,
-for in the year 1661 he was appointed deputy surveyor of his majesty’s
-works and buildings under Sir John Denham, and, after the latter’s
-death in 1668, he succeeded him in the office to the exclusion of the
-more experienced Webb.</p>
-
-<p>Wren’s early efforts in architecture show, as might be expected,
-considerable immaturity. One of his first was the Sheldonian Theatre
-at Oxford, on which he was engaged between 1663 and 1668. It is
-interesting as the work of a man young in design, but it cannot be
-regarded as a masterpiece; its shape is ungraceful, and its detail
-crude. One of its principal claims to attention was its roof, which
-covered (with a flat ceiling) what was then considered a very wide
-span, namely, 70 ft. Here Wren’s scientific training must have helped
-him; he<span class="pagenum" id="Page_145">[145]</span> was also probably helped by his carpenter, one R. Frogley. The
-roof itself has been renewed, but drawings of it were published by Dr
-Plot in his “Natural History of Oxfordshire,” and were reproduced in
-“Parentalia.” Its most remarkable feature was the long tie-beam of the
-principals, which being too long for one piece of timber, was made up
-of three pieces ingeniously jointed, or “scarfed,” together. There are
-still tie-beams to the roof, but they are hidden in the thickness of
-the attic floor, and it is impossible to say whether they are Wren’s
-or not. But as the disposition of all the visible timbers is quite
-different from those shown by Plot, the inference is that there is
-nothing left of Wren’s ingenious roof. With the old roof went Wren’s
-ugly dormers as well as his turret, which was replaced by that which
-exists to-day.</p>
-
-<p>The other work at Oxford, attributed to Wren, rests its claims,
-except in the case of the Tom Tower of Christ Church, on little or
-no evidence. Even in the case of Trinity College, where letters show
-him to have been consulted, he appears to have done nothing beyond
-sending, in 1664, to his friend, Dr. Bathurst, the president, a letter
-with alternative plans and an elevation; and in criticising, in 1692,
-a design for the chapel. There is no evidence that he actually carried
-out any work here in the formal capacity of architect. About so notable
-a feature of Oxford as the Tom Tower it would be rash to say anything
-in disparagement. But this much may perhaps be said without offence.
-It is at least doubtful whether the designer of the lower part, which
-is the original Gothic work, would have been satisfied with Wren’s
-completion. The scale is different, the detail is different; the whole
-conception is out of harmony with Gothic ideas. Yet it is still less
-allied to anything classic; the fact is that Wren was working in a
-style which he did not understand, and which he frankly disliked. We
-get much nearer to the heart of the man by studying another aspect
-of his work at Oxford, his drawings preserved in the library at All
-Souls. There are four large volumes of them, comprising designs for
-various works, including alterations to one or two large houses; but
-the most interesting are those connected with St Paul’s Cathedral. In
-these volumes can be seen his weakness and his strength, and, taken in
-conjunction with other of his drawings preserved at St Paul’s, they
-show how he felt his way in architectural design. They also indicate
-that the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_146">[146]</span> old system still survived under which the architect relied in
-great measure upon his subordinates for the detail of his work; at the
-same time they prove that Wren worked out his general conceptions much
-more thoroughly than such men as John Thorpe and Smithson had done a
-century earlier.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_146">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_146.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 97.</span>&mdash;Model of Wren’s first Design for St
-Paul’s Cathedral.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The history of the reparation and rebuilding of St Paul’s is too long
-and intricate to be set out in detail in this place, apart from the
-fact that it is outside the category of domestic architecture; but
-it stands for so much in Wren’s life that a few words about it may,
-perhaps, be allowed.</p>
-
-<p>During the years following the restoration of Charles II. much
-consideration had been given to the old cathedral, which was in a
-neglected and ruinous condition. The commissioners, of whom Wren was
-one, were divided in opinion as to the course to be pursued; some were
-for preserving it, others for rebuilding. Inigo Jones had already put
-a new classic west front to the Gothic building; it was held to be
-one of the finest pieces of architecture of modern times. Wren’s idea
-was to continue the classic casing and to replace the lofty spire by
-a classic dome. Some of the drawings at All Souls embody<span class="pagenum" id="Page_147">[147]</span> this idea,
-which fortunately was never carried out. Then came the great fire in
-1666, and the problem was simplified, for the fire had left but little
-to deal with, and it was decided to rebuild.</p>
-
-<p>The fire wrought a great change in Wren: he was no longer the
-professor, the virtuoso, but the architect; for to him fell the duty
-of rebuilding not only the cathedral, but the numerous city churches
-which had been destroyed. It is fortunate that old St Paul’s was so
-completely shattered as to compel its demolition, for although the
-force necessary to remove the ruins was such as would have elicited
-vigorous protests in the present day (gunpowder had to be employed,
-to the terror of adjacent occupants), yet it resulted in providing
-Wren with a vacant site whereon he could place a new building, instead
-of attempting either a mixture of Gothic and classic such as he had
-formerly contemplated, or his own version of Gothic which would have
-been even more unpalatable.</p>
-
-<p>The new St Paul’s is one of the finest and most impressive buildings
-of its kind in Europe; its dome is unrivalled for purity of outline
-and aptness of composition. How did a man, who had no practical
-acquaintance with architecture until he was thirty years old, conceive
-such a masterpiece within a few years from that time? Probably nobody
-but Wren could have done it: he had an extraordinary aptitude for
-mastering any subject to which he turned his attention. But even he did
-not produce this great result at one stroke; he felt his way through
-many attempts. There were two complete preliminary designs, neither
-of which had much in common with the other or with the building as
-erected, beyond the fact that the dominating feature was to be a dome.
-The first of these is known as Wren’s favourite design, the other as
-the “warrant” design.</p>
-
-<p>The first was worked out with much care and completeness, and a large
-model of it was made, which is now preserved in one of the towers of
-the cathedral (Fig. <a href="#i_146">97</a>). The plan, however, was so great a departure
-from the type sanctioned by tradition, that it was rejected by the king
-and his advisers. Wren thereupon produced the “warrant” design, one
-of the most extraordinary ever made by a serious man, and one of the
-worst to which a great architect ever set his name. This is a mystery
-to which no satisfactory solution has yet been found. That a man with
-the capacity of producing St Paul’s as we see it, should have produced
-the “warrant” design, and seriously submitted it<span class="pagenum" id="Page_149">[149]</span> for acceptance, is
-astonishing; but apparently Wren knew his clients, for it was approved
-and ordered to be carried out under the warrant of the king, dated the
-14th May 1675, wherein it is described as “very artificial, proper, and
-useful.” The slight change which time has introduced into the meaning
-of the first of these adjectives lends, for modern ears, a spice of
-humour to the description.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_148">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_148.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 98.</span>&mdash;GREENWICH PALACE, FROM THE RIVER.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Fortunately, nothing more was heard of this design; it reposes among
-the drawings in the All Souls library, and there is nothing to show
-that any attempt was made to develop it. How Wren managed to drop it
-completely has not been explained. He had the king’s leave to vary it
-in minor points; he varied it altogether. It is probable that, the
-matter being left in his hands, he quietly proceeded, as the years went
-by, to improve upon his early ideas. The dome of the “warrant” design
-is its ugliest feature; among Wren’s drawings are many sketches of
-domes, none of them so bad as this, nor any so good as the final one,
-nor is there any special sequence of steps to show how the ultimate
-result was obtained. But it is easy to see that the result was his
-own work, and that it was only after numerous trials that he at last
-achieved it.</p>
-
-<p>The building of St Paul’s took many years. The first stone was laid on
-21st June 1675; the last stone of the cupola was laid by his son in the
-old man’s presence in 1710. During this period of thirty-five years
-Wren practically rebuilt the city churches, and was thus continually
-gaining experience. The great cathedral will always be his chief
-monument, but the fifty-three churches which he carried out would
-themselves have made his reputation. The sites were mostly irregular,
-but of so much value that it was essential to utilise them completely.
-Wren covered them to the last inch, and yet contrived to get that
-classic treatment in which symmetry plays so important a part. In many
-hands symmetry would have meant extravagance in space and materials.
-The problem in planning was new in another respect, for the churches
-were all designed for the Protestant form of worship, requiring an
-arrangement different from that of mediæval churches, and, among other
-things, a suitable auditorium.</p>
-
-<p>To his skill in planning he added a constant variety of treatment,
-both inside and out; and, given a departure from the simple straight
-lines of a Gothic spire, nothing could exceed the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_150">[150]</span> happy ingenuity and
-fertility of design exhibited in Wren’s steeples.</p>
-
-<p>Wren did not pass his whole time in designing ecclesiastical buildings.
-He had the chief share in the shaping of Greenwich Hospital which,
-originally intended for a palace, was begun and continued in a palatial
-manner, although diverted from its first purpose and made into a home
-for worn-out sailors (Fig. <a href="#i_148">98</a>). He also began the rebuilding of Hampton
-Court, but happily did not proceed, as was at one time contemplated,
-to sweep away the whole of the older portions of that fascinating
-place. These are both in a sense domestic work, but they are not
-domestic in the way that appeals to the ordinary person. People who
-live in palaces may well afford some sacrifice to grandeur. Wren’s
-was the grand manner. His churches involved fairly simple planning.
-Their requirements lent themselves to this treatment much more readily
-than those of an ordinary house with its complicated demands, where
-an uncomfortable plan is not atoned for by splendour of appearance.
-If it be asked how Wren would have faced the difficulties of ordinary
-domestic planning, there is but little material for an answer. The work
-he did in the Temple does not help us much. Several houses in different
-parts of the country are attributed to him, but without much reliable
-evidence. At All Souls, however, there are a few drawings, either of
-new houses or of alterations to old ones, and these do not go to prove
-that he had his usual masterful grip of the subject. Doubtless, had
-the necessity arisen, he would have acquired it, but his energies took
-another direction, and he has left no solution of how to build a house
-at once convenient, comfortable, and grand.</p>
-
-<p>He lived to be an old man&mdash;he was ninety-one when he died in 1723&mdash;yet
-he lived a strenuous life till within a few years of his death. He not
-only devised his own buildings, but superintended their erection, and
-it was largely on the scaffold that he gained his experience. This did
-much to sober his judgment and make his work reasonable and sensible,
-more so than that of his immediate successors. Although at first an
-amateur, he became practical through being in constant touch with his
-work: they remained amateurs all the way through.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_151a" style="width: 750px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_151a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 99.</span>&mdash;Elevation of a House.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From the Wren Collection, All Souls College, Oxford.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_151b" style="width: 750px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_151b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 100.</span>&mdash;Elevation and Section of a House.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From the Wren Collection, All Souls College, Oxford.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_152" style="width: 750px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_152.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 101.</span>&mdash;Elevation of a House.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From the Wren Collection, All Souls College, Oxford.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>A slight but vivid picture of him at work was drawn by the lively
-Duchess of Marlborough, who, when expostulating with Vanbrugh for
-demanding £300 a year for looking after<span class="pagenum" id="Page_152">[152]</span> Blenheim, declared that Wren
-had been “content to be dragged up in a basket, three or four times a
-week to the top of St Paul’s, and at great hazard, for £200 a year.”</p>
-
-<p>All through his busy years as an architect he maintained his interest
-in science, and was not only President of the Royal Society in 1680,
-but continued to submit all sorts of inventions and suggestions for
-the consideration of its members. Curiously enough, these things had
-but little practical value, not even that one which showed how smoky
-chimneys might be cured: indeed none but futile specifics have yet been
-offered to the public with this end in view.</p>
-
-<p>His later years were clouded by the intrigues of his opponents at
-court, who not only contrived to oust him from his office of surveyor
-to the royal works, but endeavoured to attack his character for
-probity. The latter attempt failed of course; but when he was already
-eighty-six and had held his office for nearly fifty years, he was
-superseded by an unknown and incompetent person.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_153">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_153.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 102.</span>&mdash;Sketches for the Front of Two
-Houses, by Wren.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Wren’s influence on architecture was powerful while he lived, but
-he can hardly be said to have founded a distinctive school of
-domestic architecture which long survived him. Soon after his death
-new publications, amongst which the most<span class="pagenum" id="Page_153">[153]</span> influential was Kent’s
-“Designs of Inigo Jones,” changed the trend of design. His influence,
-however, continued to be felt in the treatment of interior decoration,
-particularly in regard to panelling and ornamental woodwork, down to
-the middle of the century. The exteriors of many small Georgian houses
-may owe something to him, but such houses as are obviously reminiscent
-of his manner were built during his lifetime.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_154">[154]</span></p>
-
-<p>Most of his successors, while carrying on the style in which he worked,
-failed to impart to their work that vigour and reasonableness which
-distinguished his. The rules and regulations which served as guides
-to him became masters to them, and we look in vain among them either
-for his scientific equipment or his intuitive perception of what was
-fitting. The grandeur of manner which suited admirably the buildings
-with which he had to deal, was out of place when applied to ordinary
-houses; and the artificiality which sprang from the way in which
-architecture was then regarded, but which his genius enabled him to
-avoid, settled down heavily after his death.</p>
-
-<p>Among the drawings at All Souls are the examples of house design
-illustrated here (Figs. <a href="#i_151a">99–102</a>). They are not named, and have not been
-identified; it is not even certain that they were ever carried out. But
-they give some idea of Wren’s notions as to the appearance he would
-have given to houses. In general disposition they conform to the type
-adopted by Jones and Webb, but they have touches about them reminiscent
-of French architecture,<a id="FNanchor_46" href="#Footnote_46" class="fnanchor">[46]</a> more particularly those in Figs. <a href="#i_151a">99</a>, <a href="#i_152">101</a>.
-The others are two rough sketches for the front of a building (probably
-a house), drawn on a piece of waste paper, and apparently they show two
-methods of treating the same façade (Fig. <a href="#i_153">102</a>). They are characteristic
-of Wren’s manner as displayed at Hampton Court (see Fig. <a href="#i_012">6</a>), more
-so than the other examples illustrated, and they are certainly more
-pleasing in their proportions and in the simplicity of their handling.
-The design for part of a front for the new palace at Whitehall (Fig.
-<a href="#i_155">103</a>) is interesting in two respects; it is a specimen of Wren’s
-treatment of domestic architecture on a grand scale; and it proves
-that Charles II. still harboured the idea of a great new palace at
-Whitehall, an idea which fructified as little under Wren’s direction as
-it had done under Webb’s. As a piece of design this is no advance upon
-what had already been tried before. There is a weediness and crudity of
-ornament about it which is out of keeping with Wren’s actual work; but
-of him it may be said, as of Inigo Jones and other great architects,
-that his designs are less happy on paper than in execution. Indeed
-a study of all the important collections of architectural drawings
-inclines one to take the negative side in the interesting controversy,
-“Is fine drawing necessary to fine architecture?”</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_155">[155]</span></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_155" style="width: 533px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_155.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 103.</span>&mdash;ELEVATION OF PART OF THE FRONT OF A
-PROPOSED PALACE AT WHITEHALL.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From the Wren Collection, All Souls College, Oxford.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_156">[156]</span></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_156">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_156.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 104.</span>&mdash;BELTON HOUSE,
-<span class="smcap">Lincolnshire</span>.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_157">[157]</span></p>
-
-<p>The indications of French feeling alluded to above may be accounted
-for by the fact that in the early days of Wren’s connection with
-architecture, in 1665, he went to France for a few months. He was
-already enthusiastic in his new vocation, and like many an enthusiast
-in the same cause before him and after him, he wanted to see what
-was being done in foreign lands. He spent his whole time there in
-interviewing eminent architects and in visiting the most noteworthy
-buildings of Paris and its neighbourhood. He made so many sketches that
-he said in one of his letters that he bid fair to bring back “almost
-all France on paper.” He had indeed caught the architectural fever; and
-every architect knows that thenceforward it would never leave his veins.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_157">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_157.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 105.</span>&mdash;Belton House. Ground Floor.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Among the houses attributed, on insufficient grounds, to Wren is Belton
-House, near Grantham, one of the seats of Earl Brownlow (Fig. <a href="#i_156">104</a>);
-it was built in the year 1689 for Sir John Brownlow. There is nothing
-particularly novel about it; it follows the type of what may be called
-the Webb house, both as to plan (Fig. <a href="#i_157">105</a>) and external treatment. It
-has the bold cornice, the hipped roof, and the balustraded flat out of
-which rises a cupola, which Webb had rendered familiar. In spite of its
-good proportions, however, it hardly hits the mark so fully and truly
-as Webb’s work, and it lacks in many respects the masculine vigour of
-Wren’s. Nevertheless it is a notable building, and an admirable example
-of a dignified yet unpretentious country house, quite comfortable to
-live in.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_158">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_158.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 106.</span>&mdash;IRON SCREEN AND GATES, BELTON HOUSE.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_159">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_159.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 107.</span>&mdash;BELTON HOUSE. <span class="smcap">Carving in the
-Great Hall.</span></p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The screen of ironwork which runs from the house to a subsidiary range
-of buildings contains a fine gateway (Fig. <a href="#i_158">106</a>) and encloses a court of
-some architectural interest and one<span class="pagenum" id="Page_160">[160]</span> which strikes a pleasing note,
-as it brings some of the minor accommodation into close relationship
-to the house. It is approached through an archway in the side opposite
-to what is now the front door. Being enclosed on one side by the open
-screen already mentioned, it has a cheerful outlook over the park. The
-present front door, with its porch, has been squeezed in among the
-windows; it probably replaces an original exit of small importance
-which led into the court for the sake of convenience. The principal
-entrance was formerly up the broad flight of steps in the middle of
-the façade; but the present access, although not so stately, is better
-adapted to modern requirements.</p>
-
-<p>The interior has excellent decorative work of the period. In addition
-to the panelling there is a considerable amount of carving attributed
-to Grinling Gibbons (Fig. <a href="#i_159">107</a>); and there are a few ceilings executed
-in high relief, with admirably modelled detail, of which the treatment
-corresponds with that associated with Gibbons’ name. So charming are
-the figures and foliage that they prompt a desire to see them at close
-quarters, instead of on the inaccessible heights of a ceiling.</p>
-
-<p>The chapel (Fig. <a href="#i_140">96</a>) is interesting as an example of classic treatment
-applied to sacred purposes, and as one among the last survivals of the
-mediæval idea that it was necessary for a large house to have a chapel
-within it. In the days when a household might be cut off for weeks from
-the parish church and when a daily exercise of religious observances
-was of the first importance, a chapel always accessible and close at
-hand was necessary. But the time was approaching, if it had not already
-arrived, when the religious fervour of distinguished people could
-easily be satisfied by attendance at places of public worship.</p>
-<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_161">[161]</span></p>
-
-<h2>VII<br />
-<span class="subhed">SOME FURTHER WORK OF THE TIME OF CHARLES II</span></h2></div>
-
-<p>It is needless to insist upon the fact that there was a large amount
-of work executed during the seventeenth century by men other than
-Jones, Webb, and Wren. Some of this has already been considered, in so
-far as it illustrates the gradual change of style in small buildings.
-But during the reign of Charles II. important work was done by men
-little known to fame, and much else by others whose names have either
-not survived or have not yet been disinterred from the ruins of the
-past. So few architects contemporary with Jones are known that it will
-be of interest to mention one who, if not intimately connected with
-architecture himself, wrote a book about it, and trained a pupil who
-merits more attention than his master.</p>
-
-<p>This individual was Sir Balthazar Gerbier, to whom Horace Walpole
-devotes several pages in his “Anecdotes of Painting,” where he treats
-of him as a painter. But Gerbier does not appear to have pursued any
-art with much application. He hung on the fringe of state affairs, and
-was a versatile adventurer of indifferent character, if Walpole does
-him no injustice. Among other things he dabbled in architecture. He
-was surveyor to the Duke of Buckingham, for whom he is said to have
-designed a temporary house on the site of old York House in the Strand.
-According to Gerbier’s own account, in a letter to the duke dated 2nd
-December 1624, Inigo Jones came to see this house, and “was like one
-surprised and abashed ... he is very jealous of it.”<a id="FNanchor_47" href="#Footnote_47" class="fnanchor">[47]</a> It may have
-been so, but it is certain that Gerbier was jealous of Jones, for he
-makes several slighting references to him in the little book which he
-published, “Of Counsel and Advice to all Builders.” It is, indeed,
-this book which gives him a claim to be mentioned in connection with<span class="pagenum" id="Page_162">[162]</span>
-architecture, and that because of incidental allusions to matters of
-interest. In his dedication to Charles II. (the book was published in
-1664) he advises the king to set the main body of his contemplated
-palace on the side of St James’s Park, and the gardens along the river.
-This, no doubt, refers to the schemes upon which Webb, as already
-mentioned, was then engaged. Gerbier has several oblique as well as
-one direct thrust at Inigo Jones. He carps at those “who have marshald
-colombs,” and have made them “like things patcht or glewed against a
-wall, and for the most part against the second Story of a Building ...
-as if their intent were, that the weight of the colombs should draw
-down the Wall on the heads of those that passe by.” Doubtless this was
-an allusion to the Banqueting House, about which he makes further and
-more definite criticisms. After cavilling at the elaboration of stage
-effects in masques, he roundly states that “Inigo Jones (the late
-surveyor)” found the Banqueting House unsuitable for such purposes, and
-that he “was constrained to Build a Wooden House overthwart the Court
-of <i>Whitehall</i>.” He then takes exception to the height of the
-room, alleging that the king and his retinue were lost in it because of
-its vastness; and goes on to say that he does not undervalue any modern
-works, “every good Talent being commendable,” including, presumably,
-even the late surveyor’s. At the same time there were some alive who
-knew that the king of blessed memory had graciously avouched, in the
-year 1648, that a room near York Gate not above 35 ft. square (which
-was the one Gerbier had designed himself) was as apt for masques as the
-Banqueting House itself. Moreover judicious persons would not deny that
-the excellence of the Triumphal Arches erected in London (which Gerbier
-is said to have designed for the entry of Charles II.) consisted not in
-their bulk.</p>
-
-<p>The book abounds in malicious and egotistical touches of this kind,
-both in the two treatises into which it is divided, and in the forty
-dedicatory epistles which he deemed necessary to the launching of
-his venture. But amid a deal of skimble-skamble stuff, he says a few
-things worth noting. Chimneys need only be carried about 2 ft. above
-the ridge; large and lofty stacks he deems unsightly and dangerous.
-Staircases should be easy of ascent and wide. Anyone who has sound
-limbs and a “gallant gate” naturally lifts his toes at least<span class="pagenum" id="Page_163">[163]</span> 4 inches
-in walking; if, therefore, stairs be only 4 inches high and 18 from
-front to back, the ordinary person can walk up them as easily as he
-can walk on the level. His reasons for these proportions are hardly
-convincing, but in regard to the width of staircases he is probably
-nearer the mark, when he says they ought to be so wide that the
-attendants on each side the noble person who is ascending may not be
-straitened for room.</p>
-
-<p>His advice to persons contemplating building, that they should employ
-an architect and should not be constantly interfering with him, is
-undoubtedly sound: and one reason advanced for employing an architect,
-namely, that “the several Master-workmen may receive instructions by
-way of Draughts, Models, Frames, etc.,” is interesting as showing
-that architects were now accustomed to provide more minute details
-than in the time of Elizabeth and James. One more reference and
-this curious book, with its few noteworthy observations buried in
-pages of involved verbiage, may be left. In speaking of such as were
-concerned with building he says, “they may perchance have heard of
-rare buildings, nay, seen the Books of the <i>Italian</i> Architects,
-have the Traditions of <i>Vignola</i> in their Pockets, and have heard
-Lectures on the Art of Architecture.” It is interesting to learn that
-in addition to books on architecture there were opportunities, so long
-ago, to hear lectures on the subject; but it is probable that, in his
-usual egotistical way, Gerbier is here referring to lectures which he
-himself had given at an academy which he founded in Bethnal Green,
-in imitation, Walpole suggests, of another established by Charles I.
-for instruction in arts and sciences, foreign languages, mathematics,
-painting, architecture, riding, fortification, antiquities, and the
-science of medals.<a id="FNanchor_48" href="#Footnote_48" class="fnanchor">[48]</a></p>
-
-<p>The “Counsel” concludes with a lengthy schedule of prices at which all
-kinds of building work could be executed.</p>
-
-<p>Little, if any, architectural work can with safety be attributed to
-Gerbier. Hamstead Marshall, which is said to be his, is more probably
-due to his pupil, Wynne, to whom, as Master William Wine, he addresses
-one of his numerous dedications.</p>
-
-<p>Walpole says that Wynne, or Winde as he calls him, finished the house
-which had been begun by his master, making several alterations in
-the plan; but the history of the owner and of the house, as well as
-the character of the work, renders it doubtful whether Gerbier could
-have had anything to do with it. The<span class="pagenum" id="Page_164">[164]</span> house was one of the seats of
-William, Lord Craven; it has been destroyed with the exception of some
-fine gate-piers and part of the lay out, but Kip has an engraving of
-it in “Britannia Illustrata” (Fig. <a href="#i_165">108</a>). There are also a few drawings
-of details in the Bodleian Library, including windows, gate-piers,
-doors, and a ceiling. The windows and piers can be identified on
-Kip’s engraving, as also can the general lay out, thus confirming the
-accuracy of Kip’s view. His illustration shows the house with a front
-of Jacobean design as to its two lower stories, but of later character
-as to the third story and the return front. The windows of this later
-work agree in general appearance with the drawing at the Bodleian,
-which shows festoons above the windows and panels between them,
-decorated with Lord Craven’s cipher, W. C., and a baron’s coronet (Fig.
-<a href="#i_166a">109</a>).</p>
-
-<p>By examining Kip’s view in the light of the principal facts of Lord
-Craven’s life, and of the dates on the Bodleian drawings, a shrewd
-guess can be made as to the history of the house. In his youth William
-Craven achieved such honour through “valiant adventures” in Germany
-and the Netherlands under Henry, Prince of Orange, that in the year
-1626, when he was eighteen years old, he was knighted by Charles I.
-at Newmarket and was immediately afterwards created a baron, with the
-title of Lord Craven of Hamstead Marshall. In 1631 he returned to the
-scenes of his early glories, and continued to reside abroad until the
-Restoration. Although absence prevented him from fighting for Charles
-I. he was a staunch loyalist, and helped the king with considerable
-supplies. This brought him under the notice of the Parliament, and his
-estates were confiscated in 1651, and sold to different persons.<a id="FNanchor_49" href="#Footnote_49" class="fnanchor">[49]</a>
-After the Restoration, however, Charles II. created him an earl in
-recompense for his services, and he must previously have regained
-possession of Hamstead Marshall, since the drawings for the new work
-bear a baron’s coronet and various dates, of which the earliest is 1662.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_165" style="width: 750px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_165.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 108.</span>&mdash;HAMSTEAD MARSHALL,
-<span class="smcap">Berkshire</span>.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From Kip’s “Britannia Illustrata.”</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_166a" style="width: 750px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_166a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 109.</span>&mdash;Hamstead Marshall. “The Ornament of
-the Windows,” by Wynne.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From a Drawing in the Bodleian Library.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_166b" style="width: 750px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_166b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 110.</span>&mdash;“The North Piers at Hamstead
-Marshall, 1663,” by Wynne.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From a Drawing in the Bodleian Library.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>It would appear, then, that the original house was a Jacobean building,
-and from the fact that Lord Craven was a bachelor and was resident
-abroad for the greater part of his life previous to the Restoration,
-it is highly improbable that he did any building during that period;
-he had neither family nor leisure to induce him. On the sale of the
-property in 1651, it is quite<span class="pagenum" id="Page_167">[167]</span> possible that the house was partly
-dismantled,<a id="FNanchor_50" href="#Footnote_50" class="fnanchor">[50]</a> as were many others in similar circumstances, notably
-Holdenby House. On his return in 1660, or as soon afterwards as he
-could, he set about restoring his home. He preserved the Jacobean
-front, but added a new top story and new sides. The drawing of the
-portico, which would be at the back of the house shown by Kip, is
-dated 1662; that of the gate-piers in the front wall is dated 1663
-(Fig. <a href="#i_166b">110</a>), and those in the circular wall at the rear 1673; a ceiling
-is dated 1686. The baron’s coronet indicates that the work was done
-before the earldom was bestowed, which was in 1663. The dates on the
-drawings suggest what one might expect, that the house itself was first
-taken in hand, then the garden walls and lay out, and subsequently the
-embellishment of some of the chief rooms.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_167">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_167.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 111.</span>&mdash;Gate Piers at Hamstead Marshall.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>If the history of the house is rightly conjectured, there<span class="pagenum" id="Page_168">[168]</span> would be
-no room for Gerbier in its design, for he is said to have died in
-1662 when he was at least seventy years old, and there is no trace
-of senility in the Bodleian drawings. They are vigorous in design as
-well as drawing; the gate-piers (Fig. <a href="#i_167">111</a>) are still in existence,
-some scattered, as it were, in a field, others still leading into a
-walled garden. It is only when the imagination restores the walls
-that once connected them that an idea is formed of the size of the
-original enclosures to which those piers were the noble entrances. The
-ceiling (Fig. <a href="#i_169">112</a>), dated 1686 on the drawing, is of the type prevalent
-throughout the greater part of the seventeenth century, and usually
-employed by Jones, Webb, and Wren.</p>
-
-<p>As Wynne&mdash;“the learned and ingenious Captain Wynne” Campbell calls
-him<a id="FNanchor_51" href="#Footnote_51" class="fnanchor">[51]</a>&mdash;is the only other person whose name is connected with the
-designing of Hamstead Marshall, the credit may fairly be placed to his
-account. The character of the new work, as shown by Kip, accords with
-the treatment usually adopted by Webb; that is to say, the walls are
-fairly plain, there is a wide cornice at the eaves. The height of the
-roof is proportioned to the walls (not merely determined by the span of
-the building), it is crowned by cupolas and broken by dormers, and the
-chimneys are short and solid&mdash;perhaps, in this case, in consequence of
-the teaching of Gerbier, Wynne’s master.</p>
-
-<p>It is evident that the restoration of Charles II. gave a great impetus
-to building. Charles himself revived the project for a new palace at
-Whitehall; he built a large wing of another at Greenwich; Lord Craven
-was among those who endeavoured to redeem the time; and Gerbier thought
-the occasion opportune to publish his “Counsel” to those who were
-contemplating new houses.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_169" style="width: 750px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_169.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 112.</span>&mdash;A CEILING AT HAMSTEAD MARSHALL,
-22<span class="allsmcap">ND</span> JUNE 1686. “<span class="smcap">This Draaft for the Dineing Roome att
-Hamstead Marshall, marked A, Allowed of by me W. Wynde.</span>”</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From a Drawing in the Bodleian Library.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_170">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_170.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 113.</span>&mdash;BUCKINGHAM HOUSE IN ST JAMES’S PARK, 1705.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Too little is known of this learned and ingenious Captain Wynne.
-Campbell credits him with old Buckingham House in St James’s Park, for
-the Duke of Buckingham, in 1705. This duke must not be confused with
-either of the Villiers, Dukes of Buckingham. He was the first duke
-of a new creation, his family name being Sheffield. He was, in fact,
-the grandson of that “my lord Sheffield” whose house has already been
-illustrated in Chapter II. as one of the designs of John Smithson.
-To Wynne is also assigned Cliefden House for the same nobleman,
-and Newcastle House in Lincoln’s Inn Fields, as well as certain<span class="pagenum" id="Page_171">[171]</span>
-additions to Combe Abbey for Lord Craven.<a id="FNanchor_52" href="#Footnote_52" class="fnanchor">[52]</a> Hardly anything remains
-of all this work, but if it was of a standard equal to the remnants
-of Hamstead Marshall, Wynne would take a high place among English
-architects. Newcastle House, originally called Powis House after
-William Herbert, Viscount Montgomery and Marquis of Powis, for whom
-it was built in 1686,<a id="FNanchor_53" href="#Footnote_53" class="fnanchor">[53]</a> still stands at the north-west corner of
-Lincoln’s Inn Fields, but it has been considerably altered; the loss
-through fire of the original fine wooden cornice has much diminished
-its effect.</p>
-
-<p>Buckingham House (Fig. <a href="#i_170">113</a>) stood where Buckingham Palace now is, and,
-judging by Campbell’s elevation,<a id="FNanchor_54" href="#Footnote_54" class="fnanchor">[54]</a> was of much greater architectural
-interest than the present building before it was refronted. It was
-considered “one of the great beauties of London, both by reason
-of its situation and its building.”<a id="FNanchor_55" href="#Footnote_55" class="fnanchor">[55]</a> It fronted the Mall&mdash;the
-noblest avenue in Europe, according to Campbell&mdash;and at the back
-was a fine garden and a noble terrace, whence the eye roamed over a
-wide rural prospect, so free from obtrusive buildings as to justify
-the inscription placed by the duke on this front, “Rus in Urbe.” The
-description of the entrance court is interesting as giving a good idea
-of the kind of lay out that went with all large houses of that time.
-“The courtyard which fronts the Park is spacious; the offices are on
-each side divided from the Palace by two arching galleries, and in the
-middle of the court is a round basin of water, lined with freestone,
-with the figures of Neptune and the Tritons in a water-work.”
-Campbell’s plan agrees with this description save that he makes the
-basin octagonal. The “arching galleries” were by this time a very
-usual feature which will be further described presently. His plan also
-conveniently illustrates the duke’s own description of the entrance
-into the house itself. “After crossing the courtyard,” he says, “we
-mount to a terrace in the front of a large Hall, paved with square
-white stones mixed with a dark-coloured marble; the walls of it covered
-with a set of pictures done in<span class="pagenum" id="Page_172">[172]</span> the school of Raphael. Out of this on
-the right-hand we go into a parlour 33 feet by 39 feet, with a niche 15
-feet broad for a Bufette, paved with white marble, and placed within
-an arch, with Pilasters of divers colours, the upper part of which as
-high as the ceiling is painted by Ricci.” The roof of the house was
-flat and gave opportunity for obtaining a fine prospect: on the parapet
-fronting the park were four statues of Mercury Secrecy, Equity, and
-Liberty, and fronting the garden were the four Seasons. This particular
-enumeration gives a touch of life and reality to the endless figures
-which break the skyline of Campbell’s elevations, and of John Webb’s
-before him. The view reproduced in Fig. <a href="#i_172fp">113<span class="allsmcap">A</span></a> shows the house
-as it appeared in 1790, when it was about a hundred years old. It not
-only suggests the rural surroundings, but gives a lively idea of the
-groups which frequented the Mall, down the length of which this front
-faced. The Mall, it will be remembered, was the principal walk in the
-royal park of St James, and apparently enjoyed the formality of being
-guarded by sentries.</p>
-
-<p>Cliefden House, in Buckinghamshire, was another of these noblemen’s
-“palaces,” with “arching galleries” joining the offices to the house.
-It stood upon an enormous terrace described by Campbell as 433 ft. long
-and 24 ft. high, the front of which consisted of a series of alcoves
-or niches, flanked at either end by a flight of steps (Fig. <a href="#i_173">114</a>). The
-original house has entirely disappeared, and has been replaced by one
-of excellent design by Charles Barry. Merely the terrace, somewhat
-altered, and the dwarf walls of the lay out remain, and Wynne’s work
-can only be judged from Campbell’s elevations and from old prints.</p>
-
-<p>The consideration of these two houses brings vividly before the mind
-the completeness of the change that had come over domestic architecture
-during the course of the seventeenth century. The description of
-Buckingham House from contemporary pens (one of them that of the owner
-himself) gives an air of <i>vraisemblance</i> to Campbell’s cold
-illustrations. The “arching galleries” indicate a disposition of plan
-which was being adopted in many large houses, and was for another half
-century employed in order to impart stateliness to what otherwise might
-have been a rather bald design.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_172fp" style="width: 750px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_172fp.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 113</span>a.&mdash;BUCKINGHAM HOUSE, <i>St. James’s Park</i>.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">(<i>from a water-colour by Edward Dayes.</i>)</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_173" style="width: 750px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_173.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 114.</span>&mdash;CLIEFDEN, <span class="smcap">in Buckinghamshire</span>.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From an Engraving by Luke Sullivan.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The idea of this arrangement was to have a central block containing
-the principal rooms, and to flank it at some distance on each side
-by a subsidiary block connected to the main structure by curved
-colonnades&mdash;the “arching galleries” of <span class="pagenum" id="Page_174">[174]</span>Buckingham House. These
-outlying blocks contained the offices, which were sometimes the
-kitchens, sometimes the stables, and occasionally the library or
-chapel. The inconvenience of the arrangement is obvious; under it
-compactness was sacrificed to appearance. If these outliers looked out
-on to the approach, their windows embarrassed the access to the front
-door. If they looked the other way, they turned their dull backs upon
-the main approach. Windows suitable for a kitchen had to be balanced
-by similar windows in the stables which were not suitable; or, as an
-alternative, sham windows were employed. Designers found themselves
-obliged to resort to devices of one kind or another, which sacrificed
-the convenience of one block in order to assimilate it in appearance
-to the other. Nor did the sacrifice stop here; it affected more or
-less the whole house. The mistaken claims of “architecture” led to the
-external appearance being considered as of the first importance; the
-internal convenience was modified to suit it. Not infrequently rooms
-were wrongly placed, wrongly lighted, awkwardly shaped, given a bad
-aspect, or otherwise ill-handled, in order to preserve the symmetry and
-proportion of the exterior. The placing of the kitchen in a distant
-block, connected perhaps by an open colonnade, must have been a great
-inconvenience both to the family and the servants. But inconvenience
-counted for little so long as an imposing edifice was secured.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_174">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_174.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 115.</span>&mdash;Plan of Stoke Bruerne,
-Northamptonshire.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_175">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_175.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 116.</span>&mdash;VIEW OF BETHLEHEM HOSPITAL.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The introduction of this particular form of plan, with a<span class="pagenum" id="Page_176">[176]</span> central
-block, two outlying wings, and connecting colonnades, is associated
-with the name of Inigo Jones and the house of Stoke Bruerne, in
-Northamptonshire. According to Bridges, the county historian, “the
-house was built by Sir <i>Francis Crane</i>, who brought the design
-from <i>Italy</i>, and in the execution of it received the assistance
-of <i>Inigo Jones</i>. It consists of a body and two wings, joined
-by corridores or galleries (see plan, Fig. <a href="#i_174">115</a>). The pillars which
-support the galleries leading to the wings, are red and of a different
-colour from the house.... The house was begun about the year 1630 and
-finished before 1636, during which interval he gave an entertainment
-here to the King and Queen.”<a id="FNanchor_56" href="#Footnote_56" class="fnanchor">[56]</a> Colin Campbell, however, says that
-the building was begun by Inigo, who made the wings, colonnades, and
-all the foundations, and that owing to the interruption caused by
-the Civil War the front was designed by “another architect.” He puts
-the date at 1640. Bridges’ account is circumstantial, and he was a
-careful historian; but Campbell’s elevation shows the body of the house
-treated in a different manner from the wings, and so far supports his
-statement. Unfortunately this part of the building was burnt down in
-1886, and the opportunity of comparing the differences in the work
-itself is lost.</p>
-
-<p>Both authorities concur in placing the date as early as somewhere
-between 1630 and 1640, which was quite half a century before this type
-of plan became at all popular. Nevertheless among Webb’s drawings,
-which cover at least thirty years of the half-century, there are
-several instances in which it is employed; and even the practical
-and level-headed Wren has a plan of this type among his drawings
-at All Souls College, Oxford (see Fig. <a href="#i_151b">100</a>). The genesis of this
-particular form is of interest inasmuch as it was widely adopted in the
-eighteenth century; so much so that Isaac Ware in his “Complete Body
-of Architecture,” published in 1756, lays down various rules for its
-disposition and proportions, and recommends its adoption as raising
-a house out of the commonplace and making it handsome without being
-necessarily pompous.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_177" style="width: 541px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_177.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 117.</span>&mdash;CATHERINE COURT, TOWER HILL, LONDON.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">Drawn by F. L. Emanuel.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Among the more notable examples of this type of plan may be mentioned
-Burley on the Hill, in Rutland, where a low curved colonnade is thrust
-out on each side to a great distance without serving any particular
-object beyond that of obtaining an appearance of grandeur; this was
-one of the earlier applications of the idea, dating from late in the
-seventeenth century: Easton<span class="pagenum" id="Page_178">[178]</span> Neston, in Northamptonshire, dated 1702,
-which will be described presently; Cottesbrooke, in the same county,
-built in the early part of the eighteenth century; Kelmarsh, a not very
-distant neighbour of Cottesbrooke, designed by Gibbs and replacing a
-picturesque Jacobean house;<a id="FNanchor_57" href="#Footnote_57" class="fnanchor">[57]</a> Seaton Delaval, in Northumberland,
-designed by Vanbrugh about 1720, of which the two wings alone remain
-in use; Houghton, in Norfolk, begun in 1722; Holkham, in the same
-county, begun in 1734; and Kedlestone, in Derbyshire, dating from 1761;
-the last three of which will be referred to at greater length in a
-subsequent chapter.</p>
-
-<p>Wren was not the only man of science of his time who became an
-architect; there was his acquaintance, Robert Hooke, three years his
-junior, and, like himself, the son of a parson. Hooke was almost as
-versatile a genius as Wren, but it was as a mathematician that he
-achieved most reputation. He was connected with the Royal Society at
-its inception, and was appointed curator of experiments. The great
-fire of London appears to have turned his attention to architecture;
-indeed that event, owing to the necessity it imposed of a vast amount
-of urgent rebuilding, seems to have led into the paths of architecture
-men whose previous training, although not architectural, qualified them
-even slightly for the work. Doubtless Hooke’s mathematics pointed him
-out as being not unsuitable to become a city surveyor, besides which he
-had submitted a plan to the Royal Society for the rebuilding of London,
-which received much commendation from the lord mayor and corporation,
-who asked that it might be submitted to the king. In this direction,
-however, he had been forestalled by Wren with his fine scheme. In the
-end nothing came of either of the suggestions.</p>
-
-<p>Hooke appears to have made a considerable fortune as a surveyor, and
-he is credited with the design of three important buildings, all of
-which have disappeared. One of these was Montagu House, in Bloomsbury,
-for Ralph, Lord Montagu, whose country house at Boughton is presently
-to be described. Hooke’s house did not last long; it was begun in 1675
-and burnt down in 1686, its successor being designed by the French
-architect, Puget, whom Lord Montagu may have known during<span class="pagenum" id="Page_180">[180]</span> his long
-residence in France. The second building ascribed to Hooke is the old
-Bethlem Hospital, likewise begun in 1675 and pulled down in 1814 (Fig.
-<a href="#i_175">116</a>); and the third is Aske’s Hospital at Hoxton, begun about 1688.
-Engravings of the last two buildings (there is no record of the first
-Montagu House) do not lead to the opinion that Hooke was a great master
-of architecture, although it is true that the long front of Bethlem
-Hospital is handled in a simple, straightforward manner. He was far
-behind Wren, but he is interesting as being another whose training led
-him, under the special conditions of the time, into active practice.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_179" style="width: 750px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_179.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 118.</span>&mdash;SOUTH OR PRINCIPAL FRONT OF
-ALBEMARLE HOUSE, LONDON, 1664.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From an Engraving by R. Sawyer, Jun.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Lord Chancellor Hyde, Earl of Clarendon, built a fine house during
-the heyday of his prosperity, on a site in Piccadilly, opposite the
-top of St James’s Street (Fig. <a href="#i_179">118</a>). It was highly extolled by Evelyn
-(especially when writing to Lord Cornbury, the chancellor’s eldest
-son), and after him by Pepys, who went to see it, “hearing so much from
-Mr. Evelyn of it.” He declared it to be the finest pile he ever did see,
-and on a subsequent visit he climbed with some trouble to the top, and
-there found the noblest prospect that ever he saw, Greenwich being
-nothing to it. The engraving hardly bears out this extravagant praise,
-but it must have been a stately house. The architect was Roger Pratt,
-afterwards knighted, another of the men whom the great fire appears to
-have brought into the service of architecture.<a id="FNanchor_58" href="#Footnote_58" class="fnanchor">[58]</a> Evelyn mentions him
-more than once; he was a fellow commissioner of his in the inquiry as
-to the rebuilding of St Paul’s, and Evelyn had met him years before in
-Italy. The house was begun in 1664, and was approaching completion in
-November 1666. But misfortune dogged it from the outset. The populace,
-with whom Clarendon was no favourite, dubbed it Dunkirk House, in
-allusion to his supposed connection with the sale of that town to the
-French. The chancellor occupied it but a single year before he fled the
-country; his son occupied it for another year or two, and it was then
-let on lease to the Duke of Ormond. After Clarendon’s death at the end
-of 1674, it was sold to the second Duke of Albemarle, and became known
-as Albemarle House; he again sold it some three years later to a kind
-of building syndicate, who in a few years pulled it down and laid out
-its site and the surrounding land in streets, one of which was called
-Albemarle Street, and another Bond Street, after Sir Thomas Bond who
-was one of the principals concerned in the transaction. The house was
-regarded as an<span class="pagenum" id="Page_181">[181]</span> unwarrantable extravagance, and Clarendon himself is
-reported to have eventually looked upon the building of it as a “vanity
-and folly.” But after all it only cost £50,000, which was a small sum
-compared with the cost of many houses both before and since. It is
-interesting because of its short life&mdash;less than twenty years from
-foundation to demolition&mdash;and from the character of the design, which
-follows the lines laid down by Jones and Webb.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_181">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_181.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 119.</span>&mdash;Staircase of a House between Love
-Lane and Botolph Lane, London (demolished in 1906).</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Apart from the large houses which were built for wealthy persons,
-the new London which sprang up after the fire must have been widely
-different from the old. The houses which were burnt down were, many
-of them, built of wood and plaster&mdash;relics of mediæval times. Their
-fronts leaned across narrow lanes, each story projecting over the one
-beneath it, after such a fashion as may still be seen, though ever less
-frequently, in some of our ancient country towns. The houses which
-replaced them followed in most cases the old frontage lines, but their
-fronts were vertical and admitted as much light and air as the width
-of the street allowed. Nevertheless, the width was frequently<span class="pagenum" id="Page_182">[182]</span> but
-little, and houses of great size and finely treated within, were built
-in streets and lanes which in the present day we should regard as mere
-alleys, and which, indeed, would not be permitted under any modern
-by-laws. London still preserves many of these old houses (Fig. <a href="#i_177">117</a>),
-although they are gradually being improved away. They are generally
-built of brick, with very little relief to their fronts save a good
-doorway and a good cornice, and perhaps a few touches in some ironwork.
-The same general treatment prevailed for half a century or more, with
-a tendency, however, to even greater simplicity; the result was that,
-although in the city where the narrow lanes were crooked and had here
-and there unexpected projections, the effect was<span class="pagenum" id="Page_185">[185]</span> interesting, yet
-where the same plain treatment was applied to long straight streets,
-the effect became dull and monotonous. Most of these houses had
-interesting detail within them, many of them were actually sumptuous,
-and of a richness suitable to the merchant princes who dwelt there.
-They had fine staircases and ceilings like those in a house in Botolph
-Lane (Figs. <a href="#i_181">119</a>, <a href="#i_182">120</a>), and good doorways and panelling like that in a
-house in College Hill (Fig. <a href="#i_183">121</a>).</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_182">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_182.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 120.</span>&mdash;Ceiling in a House between Love and
-Botolph Lanes.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_183" style="width: 750px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_183.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 121.</span>&mdash;HOUSE IN COLLEGE HILL.
-<span class="smcap">Details.</span></p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">Lawrence Furniss, <i>del.</i></p>
-     <p class="center p-min sm">Illustration reproduced by permission of Messrs Technical Journals, Ltd.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_184">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_184.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 122.</span>&mdash;THE GREAT HOUSE, LEYTON.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">Edwin Gunn, <i>del.</i></p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>A fine example of the treatment, prevalent at this period, of a
-staircase and hall was to be seen, before its destruction, at the
-Great House at Leyton, in Essex, not far from London (Fig. <a href="#i_184">122</a>). It is
-designed in a broad, simple, yet monumental manner, which, however,
-has led to the dividing of the lower part of the staircase into two
-separate flights, which merge into a single flight of the same width at
-the half-landing. The treatment is not quite logical, but&mdash;which was
-held to be more important&mdash;it is symmetrical. The Great House was built
-by Sir Fisher Tenche, Bart., whose father was an Alderman of London,
-and it is a good example of the houses built by wealthy citizens out in
-the country, but within reach of the city.<a id="FNanchor_59" href="#Footnote_59" class="fnanchor">[59]</a></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_186" style="width: 750px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_186.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 123.</span>&mdash;ST LAWRENCE, JEWRY. <span class="smcap">Detail of
-Carving in Vestry Room.</span></p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">Silver Medal Drawing by David Wickham Ayre.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_187">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_187.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 124.</span>&mdash;ST LAWRENCE, JEWRY. <span class="smcap">Detail of
-Side of Vestry Room.</span></p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">Silver Medal Drawing by David Wickham Ayre.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_188">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_188.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 125.</span>&mdash;BREWERS’ HALL.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Although, strictly speaking, rather outside the subject of domestic
-architecture, the city halls and churches should not be overlooked,
-as they contain splendid specimens of decoration in wood and plaster
-of the same kind as those to be found in houses. At the period under
-consideration, as in former times, the same sort of embellishment
-was applied to churches as to houses; it is quite a modern idea,
-born of revivals and restorations, to consider it necessary that a
-church should be Gothic in style; to think of Gothic as essentially
-ecclesiastic and of Classic as secular. Accordingly in Wren’s churches
-there are admirable bits of woodwork, which illustrate the methods of
-design then in vogue in houses. So, too, in the halls of the great city
-companies. All this work was the consequence of the destruction of
-the older buildings by the great fire. The new church of St Lawrence,
-Jewry, was begun in 1671, Wren being the architect, and it was opened
-in 1677. The woodwork of the interior is as fine as anything that this
-age of fine woodwork produced, and that of the vestry is designed
-after the same fashion as the panelling and doorways of a large house
-(Fig. <a href="#i_187">124</a>); it is, if anything, more<span class="pagenum" id="Page_189">[189]</span> superb. The carving (Fig.
-<a href="#i_186">123</a>) is almost certainly the work of Grinling Gibbons. St Lawrence is
-one of the best furnished of Wren’s churches, but many others possess
-admirable fittings such as pulpits, pews, organ-cases, galleries, and
-doorways, boldly designed and richly decorated, which show what a high
-excellence the joiner’s art had achieved under Wren, Gibbons, and their
-chief craftsmen.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_189">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_189.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 126.</span>&mdash;Brewers’ Hall.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_190">[190]</span></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_190">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_190.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 127.</span>&mdash;Girdlers’ Hall, London.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>One of the most interesting of the city halls is that of the Brewers’
-Company, in Addle Street. It has undergone restoration and some amount
-of alteration, but the principal floor, which contains the hall and
-council chamber, still retains much of its original flavour. The walls
-are panelled in large panels (Fig. <a href="#i_188">125</a>), the hall is entered through
-a screen with a splendid doorway (Fig. <a href="#i_189">126</a>), and the council chamber
-has a fine fireplace. This is as good an example as could be found of
-the manner<span class="pagenum" id="Page_191">[191]</span> of panelling and decorating large rooms which prevailed at
-the time it was built, namely, 1673. The Stationers’ Hall has as fine
-a screen and doorway as those of the Brewers, and indeed most of the
-city halls, in spite of modern renovations, retain good work of this
-period, among the less known examples of which is the rich panelling at
-Girdlers’ Hall, in Basinghall Street (Fig. <a href="#i_190">127</a>).</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_191">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_191.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 128.</span>&mdash;The Deanery, Wells.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Outside London there was a large amount of work done during this
-period, much of it fresh and interesting. Stapleford Park, in
-Leicestershire, a house with a long history and possessing some unusual
-detail of the date of 1633, was considerably altered and enlarged about
-the time of Charles II. by Bennet, Lord Sherard, who was in possession
-from 1640 to 1700. The exterior is plain, but in the interior are
-two rooms, with charming woodwork; the door of the dining-room is
-illustrated in Fig. <a href="#i_192b">130</a>, and that of the library in Fig. <a href="#i_192a">129</a>. The two
-doors differ, but they are alike in that each is placed on a slight
-projection which causes a break in the main cornice of the room. The<span class="pagenum" id="Page_193">[193]</span>
-dining-room has large panels with a boldly carved bolection moulding.
-The door has a broken pediment in the gap of which is placed a shield
-connected by heavy swags to the surrounding work. This was a common
-feature of the period. The library door is of much the same type, but
-instead of a shield there is a bust. The panels on the walls are formed
-by a bold moulding, which is broken backwards and forwards into a
-pattern that recalls the busy treatment of Jacobean work.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_192a">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_192a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 129.</span>&mdash;Stapleford Park, Leicestershire.
-Doorway in the Library.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_192b">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_192b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 130.</span>&mdash;Stapleford Park, Leicestershire.
-Doorway in the Dining-Room.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>In the Deanery at Wells is a fine panelled room attributed to Sir
-Christopher Wren, and certainly wrought after his style if not actually
-designed by him. The walls are divided into bays by heavy Ionic
-pilasters, the spaces between which are filled with large panels.
-Here, too, the bolection moulding is carved, as well as several other
-members, the whole effect being rich and handsome (Fig. <a href="#i_191">128</a>).</p>
-
-<p>Melton Constable stands in a park amid the undulations of the western
-part of Norfolk. It is a fine simple house of about the year 1680
-(Fig. <a href="#i_194">131</a>). The eaves cornice gives it its chief character; the rest
-of the detail is correct, but strikes the modern eye as being a little
-hackneyed; but this is the fault, not of the original architect but of
-his successors, who, if they did not copy this actual work, drew, one
-after the other, upon the same well of inspiration.</p>
-
-<p>These examples serve to illustrate the progress of house design
-during the later years of the seventeenth century; they show how the
-fully developed classic manner had superseded the homely treatment of
-Jacobean times. Its further career of grandeur and stateliness demands
-a fresh chapter for its consideration.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_194">[194]</span></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_194">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_194.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 131.</span>&mdash;MELTON CONSTABLE, <span class="smcap">Norfolk</span>.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_195">[195]</span></p>
-
-<h2>VIII<br />
-<span class="subhed">GREAT HOUSES AND GARDENS OF THE EARLY EIGHTEENTH CENTURY</span></h2></div>
-
-<p>Twenty-five years after his restoration Charles II. died; James II.
-passed uneasily across the scene to his inglorious exit, and William
-and Mary succeeded him on the throne. But it is not to the sovereigns
-that we must look as pioneers in house building, although at Greenwich
-and Hampton Court fine work was accomplished. It is rather to the
-great nobles, or at least to aristocratic and wealthy families, that
-we owe the most notable specimens of domestic architecture of the
-time. At this period the gulf between the upper and lower classes was
-wide and deep: its widening was perhaps one of the reactions from the
-conditions of the Commonwealth when many persons of humble origin
-fought their way to eminence. The distance between the heads of a
-great household and their retainers had been increasing all through
-the century; the increase has already been indicated in the type of
-plan adopted by Jones and Webb. The great hall, where the whole family
-used to meet on common ground and with common objects, had disappeared.
-The great noble of Elizabeth’s time lived among his retainers; the
-grandee under William and Mary relegated his servants to a distant
-part of the building or to the basement. The great ones of the land
-now housed themselves in splendid buildings, and surrounded themselves
-with splendid gardens. Nobody grumbled; the whole community concurred
-in this exaltation of birth combined with wealth. Men whose names to
-us are household words sought the patronage of others whose names and
-doings are hardly recorded outside the pages of the “Complete Peerage.”
-Manners, customs, dress emphasised this condition at the time;
-architecture reflects it to-day.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_196">[196]</span></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_196" style="width: 750px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_196.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 132.</span>&mdash;Boughton House, Northamptonshire.
-Plan of the Upper Story, 1736.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From a Plan preserved in the house.</p>
-     <p class="p0 sm">The front at the bottom of the plan faces north. The house lies
-to the right of the plan, the stables to the left. The entrance
-to the house is between the two wings on the north front.
-Remains of the original house are to be found in the great hall
-situated at the north end of the oblong court, and in the two
-sides of the same court.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Boughton House, near Kettering in Northamptonshire, is a good example
-of a home of one of the great nobles of the time of William and Mary.
-Ralph Montagu (afterwards Duke of Montagu) succeeded his father as Lord
-Montagu of Boughton in 1681. In 1669 he had been appointed ambassador
-extraordinary to France, and during his stay in that country he lived
-for a considerable period at Versailles. One of his biographers<a id="FNanchor_60" href="#Footnote_60" class="fnanchor">[60]</a>
-says that “here it was his Grace formed his idea of building and
-gardening, erecting his seat at Boughton, in Northamptonshire, after
-the pattern, and as his Dimensions would allow, after the very model
-of Versailles.” In 1695 he entertained King William and Queen Mary
-at Boughton for fifteen days. He had been created Earl of Montagu by
-William in 1689, and in 1705 he was created Duke of Montagu by Queen
-Anne. He was, therefore, a great personage, and he<span class="pagenum" id="Page_198">[198]</span> made his house and
-its surroundings of a magnificence suitable to his dignity.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_197a">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_197a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 133.</span>&mdash;Boughton House. North Front of
-House, with Stables beyond.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_197b">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_197b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 134.</span>&mdash;Boughton House. A Corner of the
-Entrance Front.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_198">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_198.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 135.</span>&mdash;Boughton House. One of the State Rooms.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>An ancestor had already, in the middle of the sixteenth century,
-built a fine house at Boughton, with a great hall covered by a roof
-of unusual beauty and excellence, and with wings and adjuncts of
-considerable extent. Ralph, Lord Montagu, proceeded to overlay this old
-house with his new work so completely (see plan, Fig. <a href="#i_196">132</a>) that it is
-only here and there, on the removal of panelling, or in the course of
-some minor alteration such as must from time to time occur in these old
-houses, that traces of the original building can be found. Fortunately
-the roof of the hall was preserved, but it was hidden, and remains
-hidden, by a new plaster ceiling on which Cheron painted a large and
-elaborate composition. The old house was taken as the nucleus of the
-new, but it was extended in various directions, especially on the
-north side, where a range of state rooms was erected with two boldly
-projecting wings (Fig. <a href="#i_197a">133</a>). It is this part of the house which is
-reminiscent of Versailles, if the lofty windows and Mansard roofs can
-really be said to remind one of that vast and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_199">[199]</span> much more ornate palace.
-But the style of this particular work bears a certain resemblance to
-the grand stable buildings at Versailles; it is large in scale, sober
-and dignified in treatment (Fig. <a href="#i_197b">134</a>). Indeed, it is so severe as to be
-thought dull by the casual visitor.</p>
-
-<p>This reproach is not brought against the interior. The rooms are large
-and stately; their walls are panelled with the great, boldly moulded
-panels of the period (Fig. <a href="#i_198">135</a>); their ceilings are painted with the
-gay mythological subjects of Verrio and his school (see Figs. <a href="#i_384">310</a>,
-<a href="#i_385">311</a>); the floors are filled with the tables, chairs, settees, cabinets,
-and bedsteads of the time. Portraits of the family<a id="FNanchor_61" href="#Footnote_61" class="fnanchor">[61]</a> hang on the
-panelling, there are mirrors in which their glories were reflected,
-and knick-knacks which they handled. In other wings are rooms of less
-stateliness, intended for daily use; in the attics are long rows of
-still plainer rooms intended for the servants.</p>
-
-<p>At the time it was built the house, no doubt, answered its purpose
-admirably; but times change and we change with them; and eventually the
-rooms were found to be cold, draughty, and inconveniently arranged&mdash;one
-leading, as a rule, out of another. There was space enough, but there
-were none of the comforts of modern life; no baths nor even any supply
-of water laid on; it all had to be carried long distances. The house
-became less constantly in use, and to this fact is largely owing the
-preservation of its ancient character. Nothing brings home to the
-mind the changes that have taken place in manners and customs during
-the last two centuries so forcibly as an attempt to live in an old
-unaltered house, where even the cooking appliances, although on a grand
-scale, are ill-adapted to modern needs; and it is only by drastic
-alterations in some of the less notable rooms that Boughton has been
-fitted for modern occupation.</p>
-
-<p>Ralph was succeeded in 1708 by his son John, the second duke, who
-carried on such work as his father had left unfinished. He is
-responsible for several fireplaces, among other things, on which he
-made a considerable display of heraldry. The difference between the
-<i>motif</i> of Duke John’s heraldry and that of a hundred years
-earlier is that in the earlier work<span class="pagenum" id="Page_200">[200]</span> the aim was as much decorative as
-historic, while in the latter it was mainly historic. In James I.’s
-time the family arms were found to be excellent objects for ornamenting
-important panels, and if at the same time they ministered to family
-pride, so much the better. In Duke John’s case the aim of the heraldry
-is not so much to provide decoration as to set forth the descent of
-the ducal family and its alliances, especially the last alliance of
-all, the marriage of the Duke of Montagu with a daughter of the great
-Duke of Marlborough. It not inaptly illustrates the attitude of mind
-of the nobles of the time, their assumption of qualities which placed
-them on a plane above the rest of mankind, where “grandeur hears with
-a disdainful smile the short and simple annals of the poor.” The rest
-of mankind, however, concurred in the assumption, especially those
-who stood in need of patrons, and the literature of the eighteenth
-century makes it clear that noblemen and persons of quality wielded an
-influence which made their goodwill worth cultivating.</p>
-
-<p>It was only fitting that such notable personages should be worthily
-housed, and at Boughton the first two dukes surrounded themselves with
-suitable magnificence. The splendour was not confined to the house,
-it pervaded the surroundings as well. The first duke planted a grand
-double avenue as wide as the whole façade of the house. He laid out the
-gardens on a large scale with parterres and wildernesses, long canals
-and <i>jets d’eau</i> (Fig. <a href="#i_201">136</a>). The water of the canals fell over a
-cascade of five stages into an ornamental pond. Intricate walks, some
-curved and some straight, were left among the young trees. Statues gave
-point to the vistas. The second duke carried on the work both inside
-and outside the gardens. He planted a network of avenues extending for
-many miles in all directions; some of them centred on the house, others
-pointed to neighbouring churches, yet others converged upon an ancient
-oak marking the spot where, according to tradition, the last wolf in
-England was killed. They all linked up the ancient woods, remnants of
-the old forest of Rockingham. Many old plans are preserved at the house
-showing the growth of the scheme. There is also an ancient plan of
-St Cloud in France showing the forests and avenues with which it was
-enclosed, and from the strong likeness between the English maps and the
-French, it is not difficult to guess whence the duke’s inspiration was
-derived.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_201" style="width: 750px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_201.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 136.</span>&mdash;BOUGHTON HOUSE. <i>Bird’s-Eye View
-of the Gardens and Lay Out, about</i> 1735.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From a Drawing preserved at Boughton.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_202">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_202.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 137.</span>&mdash;DYRHAM, <span class="smcap">Gloucestershire</span>, 1698.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The grandeur of the gardens has long been dismantled; the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_203">[203]</span> statues
-have disappeared, and some may be seen adorning other people’s fields.
-The parterres are obliterated, and the intricate walks can no longer be
-traced; indeed time alone would have rendered them an overgrown tangle.
-But the great avenues still remain, still centre on the house, still
-point to the churches, still converge on the ancient oak, still link up
-the ancient woods. The canals are there, and would yet fall over the
-cascade were the floodgates lowered. Many of the little trees which
-formed curious patterns on the plans have grown into giants. Here and
-there a path survives, following part of its allotted route, enough to
-show that the original design was not merely a visionary scheme but was
-actually carried out.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_203">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_203.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 138.</span>&mdash;Plan of the Ground Floor of Dyrham.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Dyrham, in Gloucestershire, is another but somewhat smaller house of
-this period; it was built in 1698 from the designs of “the ingenious
-Mr. Talman,” as Campbell calls him, for William Blaythwayt, who was
-Secretary of State to William III. The property had come to him some
-thirty years before by a marriage with the heiress of the Wynters,
-whose ancient house was removed to make way for the new one. The site
-lies towards the base of a steep hill down which the road winds through
-a park, presenting a bird’s-eye view of the house for some time before
-it is reached. The buildings stand on a level platform contrived among
-the declivities of the park, and from a terrace at the back a fine
-flight of steps leads down to the gardens.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_204">[204]</span> The entrance front (Fig.
-<a href="#i_202">137</a>) is lengthened by the adjoining orangery, forming a façade of some
-220 ft., of which the house itself occupies 130 ft. In the middle of
-this part is the front door, which opens into a hall (see plan, Fig.
-<a href="#i_203">138</a>). Immediately opposite is the door into the saloon, beyond which is
-a second hall, which leads out to the terrace. A vista is thus formed
-through the house and on to the gardens. The terrace is flanked on one
-side by the stable buildings and on the other by a corridor leading
-to the ancient church. The whole arrangement is symmetrical, stately,
-and interesting. Being on a reasonable scale the effect is dignified
-without being overpowering. Time has dealt kindly with the place, and
-there are no modern restorations to interfere either with the tone or
-the sentiment of the surroundings.</p>
-
-<p>There is nothing particularly striking about the architecture of the
-interior, charming though this is; most of the rooms are panelled with
-the large and boldly moulded panelling of the period (Fig. <a href="#i_205">139</a>), and
-there is one in which the effect is very happily enhanced by rich,
-though subdued gilding. The unusual charm of the house springs from the
-fact that very few alterations have been made, and that it retains its
-old furniture, books, and pictures, which combine to produce a fine
-feeling of old-fashioned comfort and culture.</p>
-
-<p>From the plan (Fig. <a href="#i_203">138</a>) it will be gathered that many of the rooms
-communicate with each other and are, in fact, thoroughfare rooms; and
-in this respect it must be granted that the comfort of those days
-differed from that of our own. It will also be seen that the saloon is
-lighted from one end only, an arrangement which, although rendering the
-room by no means dark, yet detracts somewhat from its cheerfulness and
-deprives it of all prospect.</p>
-
-<p>An important point in the external treatment, differentiating this
-house from most of those hitherto mentioned, is that the roof is not
-visible. Webb made his roofs an important feature, bestowing much care
-upon their proportion and pitch; here the cornice is surmounted by an
-open balustrade, and the chimneys, instead of being made to attract the
-eye, are as inconspicuous as possible.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_205">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_205.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 139.</span>&mdash;DYRHAM, <span class="smcap">Gloucestershire</span>.
-<span class="smcap">The Small Dining-Room.</span></p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_206">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_206.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 140.</span>&mdash;CHATSWORTH HOUSE,
-<span class="smcap">Derbyshire</span>, 1687–1706.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Talman had adopted the same treatment at Chatsworth, which was being
-built at this time<a id="FNanchor_62" href="#Footnote_62" class="fnanchor">[62]</a> for the first Duke of Devonshire (Fig. <a href="#i_206">140</a>).
-Chatsworth is on a much larger scale than<span class="pagenum" id="Page_207">[207]</span> Dyrham, and is far better
-known to the public. Indeed to many persons it presents itself as the
-model of what a great nobleman’s seat should be. This is owing to its
-simple and dignified treatment, and to its admirable situation and the
-lordly nature of its lay out. When examined closely, it lacks interest
-and variety in its detail. Some of the rooms, however, are finely
-proportioned and are decorated with beautiful woodwork and plasterwork;
-and there are two or three doorways with alabaster mouldings and
-pediments of remarkable interest. Much of the wood carving, from its
-style and workmanship, was ascribed for many years to Grinling Gibbons,
-but the building accounts show that it was in fact executed by a
-Derbyshire man of the name of Samuel Watson, of Heanor. This is another
-illustration of the tendency to attribute, in the absence of definite
-knowledge, any remarkable work to the best known master of the time.</p>
-
-<p>It might have been expected that Wren’s manner would have been
-continued in the work of his assistant, Nicholas Hawksmoor, and to
-a certain extent it was; but Hawksmoor was influenced largely by
-Vanbrugh, who infected him with some of his own passion for the
-grandiose. The most notable work of Hawksmoor in domestic architecture
-is Easton Neston, in Northamptonshire, built for William, Lord
-Lempster, of which a plan (Fig. <a href="#i_209">142</a>) and elevation are given in
-“Vitruvius Britannicus.” The principal block, containing the state
-rooms, is flanked on the plan by outlying wings occupied by the stables
-and offices, and beyond them the court is widened out, and eventually
-completed by a monumental arcade or corridor, which obviously could
-never have been of any practical use. There are no less than five
-important approaches to the courtyard, through the wings and the
-arcaded portion; the whole arrangement is designed for stateliness.
-It is said that the wings were designed by Wren, and that Hawksmoor
-added the house itself in 1702, some twenty years later.<a id="FNanchor_63" href="#Footnote_63" class="fnanchor">[63]</a> Campbell’s
-elevation certainly does not confirm the idea that Wren’s hand was
-employed; there is nothing of his gracious dignity about the portion of
-the wings there shown. Campbell says that the building was finished in
-1713, and that he was indebted to Hawksmoor himself for the original
-drawings of the house; he does not mention Wren. The central building
-<span class="pagenum" id="Page_209">[209]</span>itself bears the date “A<sup>o</sup> Sal. MDCCII” on the frieze, so there is
-evidently some confusion as to the wings. These might have been built
-after the house and finished in 1713, but in that case they could
-hardly have been the work of Wren.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_208">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_208.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 141.</span>&mdash;EASTON NESTON,
-<span class="smcap">Northamptonshire</span>, 1702.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_209">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_209.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 142.</span>&mdash;Plan of Easton Neston.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm"></p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>It is noteworthy that the whole of the wings and courtyard were
-subsequently pulled down,<a id="FNanchor_64" href="#Footnote_64" class="fnanchor">[64]</a> and nothing remains of the original house
-but the central block. The reason of this destruction was presumably
-that they were found to be useless and extravagant, as indeed might
-be expected. The effect has been somewhat spoiled, for the house,
-unsupported by anything but some buildings wholly unworthy of it,
-looks gaunt and abrupt; it seems too grand for its size (Fig. <a href="#i_208">141</a>).
-It suffers in fact from its grandeur; the large windows are suitable
-enough for the large rooms, but where the exigencies of the plan
-bring them into small rooms or passages, they are overwhelming. It
-is interesting to find that Hawksmoor felt this himself, and that in
-the two ends of the house he departs from the large scale of the main
-façades. He has collected as far as possible his small rooms at the two
-ends, and has given them smaller windows, contriving two floors here
-in the height of one along the front. The plan of the house follows
-the stately ideas of the time, which took little count of domestic
-comfort. The hall was treated in an unusual way; it was formed of three
-portions, but whereas the middle bay was carried up to the height of
-two stories, the two end bays were of but one story. The effect was
-rather fine, as may be seen from the view in Fig. <a href="#i_210">143</a>. A large floor
-space was obtained, and also the effect of noble height without the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_210">[210]</span>
-overpowering result which would have followed from carrying the whole
-of the hall to the height of two stories. But even this restraint left
-a greater void than suits modern comfort, and the more lofty portion
-has now been divided by a floor at the level of the cornice. Other
-alterations, both of disposition and of decoration, have been made.
-The original hall has become the dining-room, and a new hall has been
-fashioned to the left of the entrance. The drawing-room, however,
-retains much of its original treatment, including the elaborate ceiling
-with figures in high relief in the middle panel, and the walls, which
-are occupied by panels with rather extravagant frames (Fig <a href="#i_211">144</a>).</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_210">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_210.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 143.</span>&mdash;Easton Neston. The Dining-Room (now altered).</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_211">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_211.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 144.</span>&mdash;EASTON NESTON. <span class="smcap">The
-Drawing-Room.</span></p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The bulk of Hawksmoors work was concerned with churches, and therefore
-lies outside the scope of the present inquiry. He was a trained and
-skilful architect, but contemporary with him<span class="pagenum" id="Page_212">[212]</span> figure others who had
-not received the practical teaching which he enjoyed.</p>
-
-<p>Almost ever since the publication of books on architecture had begun,
-a certain number of wealthy Englishmen had taken an interest in the
-subject. Lord Burghley had procured books from abroad in the time
-of Elizabeth; and as the years went by more and more people studied
-such publications as were procurable. Webb, it will be remembered,
-referred to the fact that “most gentry in England at this day have
-some knowledge in the theory of architecture,” and by the end of the
-seventeenth century, it had become the fashion among the great and
-wealthy to take an interest in the subject&mdash;that is, in the classic
-architecture of the books. It is hardly necessary to say that the
-interest was somewhat superficial, and concerned itself with appearance
-more than with convenience; it was still the theory rather than “ye
-practique,” as Webb phrases it, that was studied. The pursuit of
-the most technical and utilitarian of the arts was thus taken up by
-amateurs. Wren himself was an amateur when he first began to design.
-His chief, Sir John Denham, was reckoned by Evelyn “a better poet than
-architect,” but to do Sir John justice, he does not appear to have
-advanced a claim to be an architect of any kind. Evelyn was a patron
-of the arts, and especially of architecture, about which he wrote a
-book. After him, in the eighteenth century, came Lord Burlington,
-the most distinguished patron of architecture of that age. He was a
-patron of architects, too; many of the best known men of the century
-owed their start in life to the earl. He dabbled in design himself.
-We are probably justified in calling it dabbling, but it was not so
-considered at the time, and Horace Walpole, himself a dabbler, speaks
-of him as a distinguished architect. It was through the munificence of
-Lord Burlington that many designs of Palladio were published, as well
-as those drawings left behind him by Webb, which, under the title of
-“Designs by Inigo Jones,” had so great a vogue at this period.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_213" style="width: 650px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_213.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 145.</span>&mdash;A HALL OR PUBLIC ROOM, <span class="smcap">by
-Webb</span>.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From the Worcester College Collection, i. 37.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Of the work usually attributed to Lord Burlington, it may fairly be
-surmised that the practical part was done by one or other of the men
-who were profiting by his generosity in their endeavours to become
-architects. The theoretical part was really not very difficult,
-for designers had a short way with architectural problems in those
-days. The general purpose of a building having been considered,
-its external appearance was<span class="pagenum" id="Page_214">[214]</span> then more or less suitably designed.
-When the elevation was perfected according to the rules of art,
-the plan was made to fit it, and if the plan did not answer all
-the purposes for which it was intended, those concerned had to put
-up with the deficiency. The oft-quoted saying of Lord Chesterfield
-illustrates this, for when Lord Burlington had designed a beautiful
-but inconvenient house for General Wade, Lord Chesterfield advised
-the latter if he could not live in it to his comfort, to take a house
-opposite and look at it. It should not have been difficult for Lord
-Burlington to design this particular house, for he had all Webb’s
-drawings to help him, and among them many examples of this type.
-So with the Assembly Rooms at York; the large hall is a crib from
-Palladio’s illustration of a hall after the Egyptian manner, but
-influenced by a rendering of the same subject by Webb. Webb’s version
-consists of an oblong room, having a row of columns set some eight feet
-from the walls, thus forming an aisle all round the room (Fig. <a href="#i_213">145</a>).
-The columns carry a wall which is pierced with windows, and which in
-its turn carries the roof. The outside walls of the ground floor stop
-short below the windows, and are crowned with a balustraded parapet
-masking the flat roof over the aisle. Lord Burlington adopted this
-idea wholesale (Fig. <a href="#i_215b">147</a>), but he made his room much narrower than
-Webb’s, although of about the same length, and he kept to the general
-proportions of Palladio. When, however, the treatment of the end of
-the hall (which was the source of inspiration) was lengthened nearly
-fourfold to do duty for the sides, the effect became monotonous and
-poverty-stricken; this is apparent on Burlington’s section (Fig. <a href="#i_215a">146</a>).
-To the main room he added others of less account, but they are nearly
-all too long and too narrow, whether for appearance or for use.</p>
-
-<p>Another well-known work of his is his villa at Chiswick (Fig. <a href="#i_217">148</a>),
-which was copied from a design of Palladio’s for a villa near Vicenza,
-but spoilt in the process. Here again there is no originality, and the
-practical drawbacks are so great as to arouse even Walpole’s criticism,
-to which, however, he adds the illuminating observation that its
-faults were condoned by the fact that here, without any trouble, might
-be obtained picturesque views better worth seeing than many of those
-fragments of ancient grandeur which travellers sought with infinite
-labour&mdash;an interesting testimonial to scenic architecture.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_215">[215]</span></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_215a">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_215a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 146.</span>&mdash;Section of the Assembly Room, York.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_215b">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_215b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 147.</span>&mdash;Plan of the Assembly Room, York.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_216">[216]</span></p>
-
-<p>The other works attributed to Lord Burlington are the dormitory at
-Westminster, a school and almshouses at Seven-oaks, both illustrated by
-Kent in his “Designs of Inigo Jones,” and Burlington House, Piccadilly.
-Of these the dormitory at Westminster was a bald and mutilated version
-of a design by Wren, and Burlington House was probably designed by
-Campbell.<a id="FNanchor_65" href="#Footnote_65" class="fnanchor">[65]</a></p>
-
-<p>But although Burlington cannot be regarded as an architect who did
-anything great in design, he was a munificent patron of the art and of
-those who pursued it more practically.</p>
-
-<p>Contemporary with him, and indeed starting a little before him, was
-another well-known but more skilful amateur, the witty dramatist, Sir
-John Vanbrugh, who has left behind him some of the largest and most
-ponderous houses ever built in England. His patrons and friends among
-the nobility were all esteemed good judges of architecture, and to
-their judgment he submitted at least one of his largest designs.</p>
-
-<p>Among the noblemen who employed him was the third Earl of Carlisle,
-who conceived the idea of making himself a magnificent home at Castle
-Howard, in Yorkshire, to replace the ancient castle of Hinderskelf,
-which had been brought into the family by marriage with one of the
-co-heiresses of Lord Dacres. The scheme embraced not only a new palace,
-but a large lay out of plantations, vistas, lakes, temples, obelisks,
-lodges, and other objects of interest, such as had been employed by
-Le Nôtre at Versailles and elsewhere. The completion of his scheme
-is recorded in verses too bald (one would imagine) to be any but his
-lordship’s, engraved on an important obelisk. They give the date of
-commencement as 1702, the inscription is dated 1731, so that year may
-be held to have witnessed the fulfilment of the main project.</p>
-
-<p>But the house had been occupied long before this; for in 1714 Lady Mary
-Wortley Montague wrote from Yorkshire to her husband, professing to
-be “in a great fright” about attempts from Scotland in favour of the
-Pretender. “The four young ladies at Castle Howard,” she says, were
-as much alarmed as she was, for their father had gone away and was
-not likely to return for months. They had asked her to join them, a
-suggestion which she was inclined to comply with, since Castle Howard
-would be a safe retreat, although rather like<span class="pagenum" id="Page_217">[217]</span> a nunnery, as no mortal
-man ever entered its doors in the absence of the father.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_217" style="width: 650px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_217.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 148.</span>&mdash;Lord Burlington’s Villa at Chiswick.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">Drawn by A. C. Bossom.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>It must have been early in the year 1699 that the earl called Vanbrugh
-to his assistance, for the latter writes on the 25th December that he
-had been that summer at Lord Carlisle’s, and had visited most of the
-great houses of the North. Amongst others he had been to Chatsworth,
-where he stayed four or five days, and had shown to the duke all the
-designs for Castle Howard, which he “absolutely approved.” Since then
-they had been submitted to a great many other critics, and as no
-objection had been raised to them, the stone was already being quarried
-and the foundations were to be laid in the spring. A model of the house
-was being prepared in wood, which was to be sent to Kensington for the
-criticism of the king.<a id="FNanchor_66" href="#Footnote_66" class="fnanchor">[66]</a> Thus<span class="pagenum" id="Page_218">[218]</span> fortified with general approval the
-design was carried out, the works extending over some thirty years. The
-cost must have been very great, and in a later letter Vanbrugh tells
-how it was met in part, for in July 1707 he says that Lord Carlisle
-had “£2,000 from the Sharpers, and is gone down to lay it out in his
-buildings.”<a id="FNanchor_67" href="#Footnote_67" class="fnanchor">[67]</a></p>
-
-<p>Although the whole of Vanbrugh’s design was not carried out the house
-is of great size and of palatial magnificence (Fig. <a href="#i_219b">150</a>). Indeed no
-modern person can be incessantly as grand as the grandeur of the
-building demands. It requires innumerable servants to keep it in order,
-innumerable guests to make it cheerful. It involves a great drain upon
-the owner’s resources, both of temperament and of purse, to fill it
-with enough people to prevent its being dull, and to maintain it in
-suitable repair and tidiness. From a practical standpoint the corridors
-are too many and are out of all proportion to the rooms they serve.
-There are indeed no rooms of a size commensurate with the outside
-grandeur; most of them appear small and narrow, their height is as
-great as their width (Fig. <a href="#i_222">152</a>), and this must have tended, before the
-introduction of modern heating, to make them cold. The finest apartment
-is the hall (Fig. <a href="#i_221">151</a>), so large and lofty as to occupy an undue
-proportion of space compared with what is devoted to domestic use. Its
-effect is more nearly allied to what we are accustomed to associate
-with a large museum or other public building than with a house.</p>
-
-<p>The view in “Vitruvius Britannicus” does more justice to Vanbrugh’s
-conception than does the building itself. The house is there shown with
-a subsidiary court on each side, one being devoted to laundries and
-so forth, and the other to stables. In front there was to have been a
-forecourt enclosed by a monumental fence with the main entrance gates
-on the axial line. Actually but one of the side courts was built, and
-the forecourt was not carried out. The road, instead of approaching the
-house directly opposite to the centre of the façade, thus giving the
-visitor a <i>coup d’œil</i> of the whole vast composition, approaches
-it laterally, close to the end of one of the wings, and it is only on
-passing the corner of the wing that the visitor is suddenly aware at
-close quarters of the recessed entrance front.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_219a">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_219a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 149.</span>&mdash;Castle Howard. View from the Mausoleum.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_219b">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_219b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 150.</span>&mdash;Castle Howard, Yorkshire. The Garden Front, 1702.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The one subsidiary court which was built contains the laundries, and
-it is in the nature of a shock to see laundry-maids<span class="pagenum" id="Page_220">[220]</span> at work amid
-surroundings almost massive enough for Diocletian himself.</p>
-
-<p>The lay out is of corresponding scenic magnificence. From one direction
-the house is approached along a far-stretching avenue, which leads up
-hill and down dale, then beneath a gateway in a long, symmetrically
-designed range of building crowned with a sturdy pyramid, and so
-onwards towards a lofty obelisk, the meeting-point of several roads,
-one of which leads to the house. The formal gardens close to the house
-surround a large basin, in the midst of which is Atlas bearing up the
-world, amid the encouragements of four huge tritons who raise great
-horns towards him across the water. The broad gravel walk along the
-garden front leads in one direction to the walled fruit gardens; in
-the other to a smooth grass track which slopes upwards to a copse of
-beeches. Curving away from this is another grass track which, passing
-an ordered row of lead figures, comes eventually to a classic temple.
-Beyond are undulating fields skirting an artificial lake, across
-which is flung a massive bridge which deserves, even more than that
-at Wilton, Walpole’s epithet of “theatric,” for it serves no purpose
-but to adorn the landscape. It spans a sheet of water contrived for
-little else than to provide the opportunity to build it. Its roadway,
-deep-grown in grass, leads from nowhere to nowhere. The Palladian
-bridge at Prior Park, near Bath, illustrated in Fig. <a href="#i_225">154</a>, is almost an
-exact replica of that at Wilton.</p>
-
-<p>Still further on, crowning an eminence, stands a huge mausoleum, a
-noble building designed by Hawksmoor (Fig. <a href="#i_223">153</a>). It rests on a lofty
-and spacious platform of irregular symmetry, whereon the friends and
-tenants of deceased earls may have gathered to await the arrival of
-the funeral procession as it made its slow way along the grass walks,
-and after halting at the temple, wound across the rolling fields. Long
-stone benches suggest the scores of horsemen who dismounted and left
-their horses to be tended on the ample spaces of the platform. The
-mausoleum itself is a circular domed building, surrounded by disengaged
-columns; within it are two chambers; the lower level with the platform,
-contains the vaults; the upper is the chapel. The latter is approached
-by long flights of steps, and is itself circular and covered at a great
-height with a coffered dome. The sweep of the walls within is relieved
-by eight recesses for an altar, the clergy, and the chief mourners.
-The vaulted apartment below is massively constructed, and in the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_223">[223]</span>
-thickness of the masonry are contrived many recesses for the reception
-of coffins. But few have been utilised, and, as the visitor discovers
-by the light of his taper cavern after cavern still unoccupied and
-unlikely ever to be filled, as he stands in the chilly spaces of the
-chapel with its dome soaring far overhead, as he gazes from an angle
-of the platform across the fields and the grass-grown bridge on to the
-distant house (Fig. <a href="#i_219a">149</a>), he realises how vastly things have changed,
-how entirely this fine conception has lost its point, how empty is the
-pomp of architecture when the habits to which it ministered have ceased.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_221">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_221.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 151.</span>&mdash;CASTLE HOWARD. <span class="smcap">The Hall.</span></p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_222">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_222.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 152.</span>&mdash;CASTLE HOWARD. <span class="smcap">The Tapestry Room.</span></p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_223">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_223.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 153.</span>&mdash;The Mausoleum at Castle Howard, as
-seen from the Platform on which it stands.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Castle Howard was a private undertaking. Immense though it was&mdash;its
-total length was to have been 660 ft. had both its courts been
-built&mdash;it was exceeded in size by the palace of Blenheim, which was a
-national monument to the glory of the British arms, although actually
-a gift to the Duke of Marlborough. Here Vanbrugh must have been in
-his element. There was presumably to be no unreasonable limit to the
-cost; the result was to be monumental. Convenience of arrangement,
-internal effect, the amenities of daily life were minor considerations.
-The nation wanted a monument; it should<span class="pagenum" id="Page_224">[224]</span> have something which should
-impress the thousands who would see the exterior, rather than the
-scores who might possibly see the interior. The house itself was
-flanked, as at Castle Howard, by two huge courts, one for the stables,
-the other for the kitchens; the total façade was 850 ft. in length.
-The approach was along the axial line over a splendid bridge, finer
-in every way than that at Castle Howard; indeed, it is the most
-satisfactory piece of design at Blenheim. The house is overwhelmed
-by its own size (Fig. <a href="#i_226">155</a>). The eye cannot grasp it in its entirety,
-and when it studies isolated portions they do not suggest thoughts of
-domestic pleasures; the colonnades and the turrets are not consecrated
-by daily use, they are there for scenic effect; the statues are cold
-abstractions, they are no more germane to Blenheim than to any other
-grand house. How different is this effect from that of even the largest
-of the Elizabethan palaces. There grandeur itself was homely. The
-difference cannot be attributed to increase in size; the absence of
-homeliness springs not even from the inevitable difference between
-a palace and a manor house. It is inherent in the changed views
-prevalent both as to life and as to architecture. The aloofness of the
-great noble accounts for something, but the desire to produce scenic
-architecture in preference to creating a home, accounts for more. It
-underlay nearly all Vanbrugh’s efforts, as indeed it did those of his
-contemporaries and successors. At Stowe House, near to Buckingham, it
-is apparent in the sacrifice of the bedroom windows on the south front
-to the desire for an appearance of solidness and simplicity; it is
-still more obvious in the treatment of the gardens, presently to be
-described. Seaton Delaval, in Northumberland, is perhaps Vanbrugh’s
-most pleasing production, but even here convenience and common sense
-gave way to display, and the house itself, having been burnt down some
-few years after it was built, no one has thought it worth while to
-reinstate it. No one could be comfortable in it if he did.</p>
-
-<p>In one of his houses, at any rate, Vanbrugh did not resort to his
-usual devices for producing his effects. This was Kimbolton Castle,
-in Huntingdonshire, which, except on one front which has a great
-columnar portico, is as gaunt and plain as anyone could desire; and
-it was made so of set purpose, for Vanbrugh writes to his client, the
-Earl of Manchester, in July 1707, “I thought it was absolutely best to
-give it something of the castle air, though at the same time to make
-it<span class="pagenum" id="Page_227">[227]</span> regular, ... so I hope your Lordship will not be discouraged
-if any Italian you may shew it to, should find fault that it is not
-Roman; for to have built a front with pilasters and what the orders
-require, could never have been done with the rest of the castle. I am
-sure this will make a very noble and masculine show.” And again in
-the following September, “I shall be much deceived if people do not
-see a manly beauty in it, when it is up, that they did not conceive
-could be produced out of such rough materials; but it is certainly the
-figure and proportions that make the most pleasing fabric, and not the
-delicacy of the ornaments, a proof of which I am in great hopes to shew
-your Lordship at Kimbolton.”</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_225">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_225.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 154.</span>&mdash;THE PALLADIAN BRIDGE, PRIOR PARK,
-<span class="smcap">near Bath</span>.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_226">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_226.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 155.</span>&mdash;BLENHEIM VIEW.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>There is much sound sense in all this, and every architect will agree
-that no amount of ornament can redeem a badly proportioned building;
-but Vanbrugh’s reason for the omission of pilasters, and what the
-orders require, would have had more point if there had been anything
-preserved of the ancient castle beyond its name. So far as can be seen
-there is nothing older than the house itself, and although it was built
-of the old stones, as Vanbrugh says (and this may be the real reason
-for so plain a treatment), there is no evidence of earlier working
-visible upon them.</p>
-
-<p>A casual remark in another letter is of interest, as showing what
-people thought of some of these large houses. He is speaking of
-Blenheim in a letter of July 1708. “He (Sir John Coniers) made mighty
-fine speeches upon the building, and took it for granted no subject’s
-house in Europe would approach it, which will be true if the Duke of
-Shrewsbury judges right in saying, ‘There is not in Italy so fine a
-house as Chatsworth,’ for this of Blenheim is, beyond all comparison,
-more magnificent than that.” He is certainly right as to magnificence,
-if not also as to the general pleasurable effect.</p>
-
-<p>Vanbrugh’s houses may be taken as the highest manifestation of the
-spirit of the age in house building; the exaltation of social grandeur,
-the scenic magnificence of architecture. That they rather missed the
-mark in respect of comfort and convenience, as we understand those
-qualities, was not held to be a great drawback. Yet even contemporary
-voices were raised in protest, as may be gathered from Pope’s verses
-on “The Duke of Marlborough’s House at Woodstock,” wherein, after
-listening to an admirer’s description of its splendour, he suddenly
-interrupts him:&mdash;</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_229">[229]</span></p>
-
-  <div class="poetry-container">
-    <div class="poetry">
-      <div class="stanza">
-        <div class="ileft">“Thanks, Sir, I cried, ’tis very fine,</div>
-        <div>But where d’ye sleep, or where d’ye dine?</div>
-        <div>I find by all you have been telling,</div>
-        <div>That ’tis a house, but not a dwelling.”</div>
-      </div>
-    </div>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_228" style="width: 750px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_228.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 156.</span>&mdash;STOWE, <span class="smcap">Buckinghamshire</span>.
-<span class="smcap">View of Queen’s Theatre, from the Rotunda.</span></p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From an Engraving by Jean Rigaud.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Sir Joshua Reynolds, in the thirteenth of his admirable Discourses,
-remarks that Vanbrugh “was defrauded of the due reward of his merit by
-the wits of the time”; and we can heartily concur in his opinion as a
-painter, that Vanbrugh, “had originality of invention, he understood
-light and shade, and had great skill in composition.”</p>
-
-<p>In all these great houses the lay out helped the general effect; the
-gardens and the groves were designed in the same spirit as the houses
-which they surrounded. Those at Stowe were the most famous of their
-time. There was but little formality about them, although they were
-traversed by a few straight walks and vistas (Fig. <a href="#i_228">156</a>). They embodied,
-indeed, the new idea which eschewed formality, and sought to gain
-the help of nature without apparent effort (Fig. <a href="#i_230">157</a>). They covered
-a considerable amount of space, and were diversified by undulations
-of varied steepness, and by great masses of trees. The landscape thus
-provided by nature was improved by art. A stream was made to fall
-here, to wind there, to broaden out into a lake elsewhere. Paths were
-contrived to pass through thickets, to descend a dell, to curve beneath
-a lofty mound crowned with a “temple,” to undulate along the edge of
-a copse and overlook meadows sloping down to the lake. The whole was
-studded at intervals with buildings, each of which had a character of
-its own. There were grottoes, temples, arches, rotundas, and columns,
-designed by Vanbrugh, Leoni, Kent, and others. They were so placed amid
-the trees, the meadows, and the water as to remind the spectator of
-pictures of Italian scenery. Half Italy was squeezed into two hundred
-acres of English countryside. A Corinthian arch admitted the principal
-approach from Buckingham. There were many temples; among them one to
-Venus, one to Bacchus, others to the Ancient Virtues, to the Modern
-Virtues (in ruins&mdash;a costly piece of satire which must speedily have
-palled), to British worthies, to Concord and Victory, to Friendship and
-to other deities and abstractions. There was Dido’s cave in one place,
-and St Augustine’s in another, a Fane of Pastoral Poetry elsewhere;
-there were monuments to people of more or less eminence, archways
-commemorative<span class="pagenum" id="Page_231">[231]</span> of royal visitors, artificial ruins, bridges over
-artificial waters, a Gothic temple, and a large tablet to a dead dog.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_230" style="width: 750px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_230.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 157.</span>&mdash;STOWE, <span class="smcap">Buckinghamshire</span>.
-<span class="smcap">A View from Captain Grenville’s Monument to the Grecian Temple.</span></p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From an Engraving by G. Bickham.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Most of these buildings were furnished with inscriptions on which were
-bestowed much ingenuity, scholarship, and neatness of versification.
-For thirty or forty years monuments were added as occasion arose,
-either to commemorate the death of a distinguished acquaintance, or the
-visit of some royal personages. Horace Walpole was half repelled, yet
-wholly attracted by this curious panorama. The modern visitor is filled
-with much the same emotions. The mere catalogue sounds inane, yet the
-whole idea is carried out with so much skill, the buildings themselves
-are so charming that, once we accept the artificial atmosphere of
-the place, we wander from point to point with unabated interest and
-admiration. Nowhere else can we gain so vivid an insight into the
-laborious elegance of the age.</p>
-
-<p>Walpole’s lively account of his visit to meet the Princess Amelia, in
-July 1770, gives an excellent idea of the impressions the place made
-upon him. The view through the archway, erected in honour of her royal
-highness, he describes as “a tall landscape framed by the arch and the
-embowering trees, and comprehending more beauties of light, shade, and
-buildings, than any picture of Albano I ever saw.”<a id="FNanchor_68" href="#Footnote_68" class="fnanchor">[68]</a> “Twice a day we
-made a pilgrimage to almost every heathen temple in that province that
-they call a garden; and there is no sallying out of the house without
-descending a flight of steps as high as St Paul’s.” He describes an
-<i>al fresco</i> supper, which they attended in state, in one of the
-grottoes on a cold evening. It reduces to very human dimensions the
-lordliness of the great scheme. A large concourse of people from
-Buckingham and the district came to behold the distinguished company
-at their revels. Before this crowd the house party descended the vast
-flight of steps leading from the house. “I could not help laughing as
-I surveyed our troop, which, instead of tripping lightly to such an
-Arcadian entertainment, were hobbling down by the balustrades, wrapped
-up in cloaks and great-coats for fear of catching cold. The earl, you
-know, is bent double, the countess very lame; I am a miserable walker,
-and the princess, though as strong as a Brunswick lion, makes no figure
-in going down fifty stone stairs.”</p>
-
-<p>Stowe, and Hagley in Worcestershire, which both owe much<span class="pagenum" id="Page_232">[232]</span> of their
-character to the taste and judgment of Lord Chatham, are perhaps
-the best examples of lay outs which are not so much gardens, as a
-collection of landscape pictures to which interest was imparted by
-the introduction of classic buildings, and from which symmetry and
-formality were excluded.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_232">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_232.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 158.</span>&mdash;In the Gardens of Wrest, Bedfordshire.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>In contrast to the free treatment at Stowe, which brought a tract
-of countryside into the curtilage of the house, is the formality at
-Bramham Park, some ten miles from Leeds, which carried the ordered
-symmetry of the house into the gardens. Of the two methods, the formal
-was the earlier, but during the eighteenth century it gradually gave
-way to the other.</p>
-
-<p>The gardens at Bramham are among the most satisfactory of the large
-lay outs of the period (Figs. <a href="#i_235">162</a>, <a href="#i_236">163</a>). They were devised for Robert
-Benson, afterwards Lord Bingley, about the year 1710.<a id="FNanchor_69" href="#Footnote_69" class="fnanchor">[69]</a> There are the
-usual vistas converging upon the house; there are various buildings
-in imitation of the antique, both classic and Gothic; there are
-memorials to pet animals; but the number is reasonable, and the scheme
-is more easily grasped than that of Stowe. The principal walk runs
-parallel to the garden front of the house, near which it ends against
-a<span class="pagenum" id="Page_234">[234]</span> “temple,” which is the chapel of the mansion. In the opposite
-direction it merges into an avenue which leads the eye across the
-park to a distant monument. Just before quitting the garden the vista
-crosses an elaborate arrangement of ornamental water, comprising a
-large basin flanked by subsidiary pools and cascades, all symmetrically
-planned. The walk is led from one level to another by monumental steps,
-producing picturesque groups of garden architecture, and the large
-water basin is the starting-point of fresh vistas.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_233a">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_233a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 159.</span>&mdash;The Gardens at Drayton House,
-Northamptonshire.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_233b" style="width: 750px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_233b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 160.</span>&mdash;Plan of the Gardens at Drayton
-House, Northamptonshire.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">H. Inigo Triggs, <i>del.</i></p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_234">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_234.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 161.</span>&mdash;Garden House at Croom’s Hill,
-Greenwich.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The garden buildings form an interesting commentary on the
-architectural literature of the time, for whereas those in the classic
-style are quite good, owing to the numerous examples in books, those in
-the Gothic style are lamentable, since there was nothing to guide the
-designer but his own study and observation; and nobody at that period
-had any but the merest nodding acquaintance with Gothic work.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_235">[235]</span></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_235">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_235.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 162.</span>&mdash;BRAMHAM PARK GARDENS,
-<span class="smcap">Yorkshire</span>.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_236">[236]</span></p>
-
-<p>The adoption of a dignified lay out, large or small, to every house of
-any pretensions at this period, is exemplified in many contemporary
-prints and books, notably in Kip’s “Britannia Illustrata” and
-Campbell’s “Vitruvius Britannicus.” Many of these formal gardens have
-been destroyed, submerged by the wave of landscape gardening, on which
-“Capability” Brown floated to fame; but there still remain admirable
-examples besides those already mentioned. There are the placid canals
-of Wrest, in Bedfordshire (Fig. <a href="#i_232">158</a>); the sloping vistas of Melbourne,
-in Derbyshire; the terraces of St Catherine’s Court, in Somerset; and
-the pleached walks and broad parterres of Drayton, in Northamptonshire
-(Fig. <a href="#i_233a">159</a>), where the forecourt with its beautiful gates and screen
-of ironwork, the steps from one level to another, and the lead vases,
-placed on the terrace walls, or raised on pedestals as a dominating
-part of the scheme, all combine to render the lay out one of the most
-fascinating of its kind (see plan, Fig. <a href="#i_233b">160</a>). Indeed, examples may
-be found in every county, although not a tithe of what once existed;
-and on their terraces, amid their canals and straight walks may be
-found groups of figures, delightful temples, monuments, urns, and
-garden houses, like that at Croom’s Hill, Greenwich (Fig. <a href="#i_234">161</a>), which
-are not only charming in themselves, but give point to the whole
-conception. And those conceptions are the most satisfactory which are
-on a scale moderate enough to enable the mind to grasp them on the
-spot, without the aid of a plan.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_236">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_236.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 163.</span>&mdash;Bramham Yew Hedge.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_237">[237]</span></p>
-
-<h2>IX<br />
-<span class="subhed">GEORGIAN HOUSES</span></h2></div>
-
-<p>Reference was made in the last chapter to the influence of
-architectural books in stimulating the interest of wealthy amateurs
-in the matter of building. The eighteenth century saw a considerable
-increase in the number published, and of these two of the earliest
-and most important were Lord Burlington’s, or rather Kent’s, “Designs
-of Inigo Jones,” and Colin Campbell’s “Vitruvius Britannicus.” Kent
-put his name to the former, and no doubt rightly, as being the
-collector and editor of the materials comprised in the two volumes;
-but Lord Burlington was the “only begetter” as well as the paymaster
-of the venture. The first volume is devoted almost entirely to one
-of the designs for the palace at Whitehall, which have already been
-dealt with in Chapter IV. The second volume consists of designs for
-houses of all sizes, nominally by Inigo Jones, but actually by Webb.
-Plans, elevations, and some sections are given, but there is an air
-of unreality about them, and, as a matter of fact, very few of them
-were actually built. They are mostly exercises in design in which
-the convenience of the plan is a secondary consideration. The Thorpe
-collection is very different in this respect. There most of the plans
-have the rooms named, a genuine effort being made to get a workable
-design, with all its parts suitably related one to the other. In Kent’s
-book none of the rooms are named; there appears to be no effort to
-achieve a workable result. The space enclosed within the outside walls
-is divided into rooms, and the rooms are carefully proportioned; but so
-far as the designer is concerned any room might be put to any purpose
-at the fancy of the occupant. The relation of the dining-room to the
-kitchen, for instance, is held of no account: aspect and prospect
-are alike neglected. Sanitary provision there is none. Bath-rooms,
-of course, were unknown: indeed, from the few allusions to such<span class="pagenum" id="Page_240">[240]</span>
-matters as occur in the literature of the time, it is evident that
-our ancestors of the eighteenth century had deplorable ideas as to
-cleanliness and sanitation; and the provisions now made in these
-respects, which are one of the pivots upon which a modern plan turns,
-were then undreamed of. When all practical considerations were left to
-take care of themselves, planning a house was a very simple matter, and
-one which an amateur could undertake with a light heart. The principal
-aim of designers was to achieve a scenic success. The rooms were to be
-well proportioned, and so arranged as to produce a stately effect, both
-in themselves and in the passing from one to the other. They were also
-so disposed as to result in a fine exterior, where the length should be
-duly proportioned to the height, the windows should be regularly placed
-and of a size agreeable to the eye. Every part was to be symmetrical,
-and the whole was to be a neat piece of architecture. There seems, in
-looking through these designs, to be no essential reason why one should
-have differed from another, except for the sake of variety. Yet every
-modern architect knows that a house properly planned to meet one set
-of circumstances can never be utilised for another without drastic
-alterations; that every fresh house presents a fresh problem. But this
-springs from the modern way of looking at house designing, namely, that
-a house ought to satisfy the wants and even the idiosyncrasies of the
-owner, and that its disposition must be modified by considerations of
-aspect, prospect, soil, surroundings, and a score of other things.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_238" style="width: 536px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_238.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 164.</span>&mdash;DESIGN FOR A HOUSE.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From Gibbs’s “Book of Architecture,” pl. 57.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_239" style="width: 750px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_239.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 165.</span>&mdash;DESIGN FOR A HOUSE, <span class="smcap">by
-Gibbs</span>.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From the Gibbs Collection in the Radcliffe Library, Oxford.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>But the outlook of the eighteenth century being what it was, the
-designers were successful in compassing their object, and they produced
-many charming houses, often stately and always dignified. This result
-was owing in a large degree to a study of Kent’s “Designs of Inigo
-Jones.”</p>
-
-<p>Campbell’s “Vitruvius Britannicus” is an epitome of the more important
-houses of the last twenty years of the seventeenth century and first
-twenty of the eighteenth.<a id="FNanchor_70" href="#Footnote_70" class="fnanchor">[70]</a> The ideas underlying it are those which
-have already been mentioned. There is a short descriptive account of
-each subject. In these, Campbell dwells on the proportions of his
-rooms, on the truly classic treatment of the elevations; he explains
-how one subject is treated in the “palatial” style, another in the
-“temple” style; another in the “theatrical.” The principal rooms are
-all stately,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_243">[243]</span> the family rooms in some cases are in the attics,
-lighted from the leads. In one design he plumes himself on not having
-his windows “crowded”; and indeed the amount of wall space between
-the lower and upper windows is so ample that either the lower must be
-far below the ceiling, or the upper far above the floor. It would be
-tedious to multiply instances; anyone can find them for himself by
-looking through his volumes. The point is that many important houses of
-that time were built for state and show, rather than for comfort and
-convenience; and they afford a striking commentary on the difference in
-outlook on daily life between that period and our own among the wealthy
-classes.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_241" style="width: 750px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_241.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 166.</span>&mdash;DESIGN FOR THE FOUR SIDES OF A ROOM.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From the Gibbs Collection in the Radcliffe Library.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_242" style="width: 750px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_242.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 167.</span>&mdash;DESIGN FOR THE FOUR SIDES OF A ROOM.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From the Gibbs Collection in the Radcliffe Library.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>These particular manifestations were not merely a passing fashion;
-they were too widespread and too lasting for that; yet that they were
-in fact the outcome of fashion is proved by Pope’s Epistle to Lord
-Burlington (the fourth of the “Moral Essays”) which is in effect a
-vindication of common sense as opposed to extravagance in buildings,
-gardens, and entertainments. Pope credits Lord Burlington with the
-qualities he commends, yet in none of the buildings attributed to that
-nobleman is common sense very conspicuous.</p>
-
-<p>Another book on architecture was published by James Gibbs, a
-contemporary of Hawksmoor and Vanbrugh, but somewhat younger, and who
-was one of the numerous architects encouraged by Lord Burlington. He
-deservedly enjoyed a large practice, and designed many churches and
-houses. He was skilful and ingenious, and showed more originality than
-most of his contemporaries, particularly in his churches; his houses go
-very little outside the lines which were universally accepted as being
-appropriate for gentlemen’s residences. Like several of his fellows he
-commended himself to the public by publishing (in 1728) a large folio
-volume of his designs. These are well worth study, for they were all
-either actually built or were intended to be built, the erection of
-some being prevented by the death of the client or by some other cause.
-They have therefore a more vital interest than most of those in Kent’s
-“Designs of Inigo Jones.”</p>
-
-<p>His Introduction is interesting. The work was undertaken, he says,
-at the instance of several Persons of Quality, who were of opinion
-that it “would be of use to such Gentlemen as might be concerned in
-Building, especially in remote parts of the Country, where little
-or no assistance for Designs can be procured.”<span class="pagenum" id="Page_244">[244]</span> He suggests that,
-furnished with his book, these remote gentlemen can employ any workman
-who understands lines to build them a house, and even make alterations
-in his designs if guided by a person of judgment. But he (very
-rightly) warns his readers against employing only ignorant workmen in
-the management of buildings of great expense, lest they undergo the
-mortification of finding the result condemned by persons of taste,
-entailing even the drastic remedy of pulling the building down. He also
-warns them against extravagant and misapplied ornament, “for it is not
-the Bulk of a Fabrick, the Richness and Quantity of the Materials, the
-Multiplicity of Lines, nor the Gaudiness of the Finishing, that give
-the Grace or Beauty and Grandeur to a Building; but the Proportion of
-the Parts to one another and to the Whole, whether entirely plain, or
-enriched with a few Ornaments properly disposed.” It is to be feared
-that his readers must have felt that what he gave with one hand in
-offering them his book, he took away with the other by showing how
-hazardous it was to use it without training and experience.</p>
-
-<p>He concludes by saying that his designs had been done in the best taste
-he could form upon the instructions of the greatest masters in Italy,
-supplemented by his own observations upon the ancient buildings there
-during many years’ study; adding, as a sly dig at the amateurs, “for a
-cursory View of those August Remains can no more qualify the Spectator,
-or Admirer, than the Air of the Country can inspire him with the
-knowledge of Architecture.”</p>
-
-<p>It is a characteristic pronouncement, with its reliance on the
-authority of the Italian masters, its insistence on proportion, its
-omission of any reference to domestic comfort, its intention that
-the book should help the unlearned, coupled with the warning that
-unless the user had taste and judgment of his own, he must seek those
-qualities in an expert.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_245" style="width: 577px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_245.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 168.</span>&mdash;DESIGN FOR A STAIRCASE.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From the Gibbs Collection in the Radcliffe Library.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_246" style="width: 750px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_246.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 169.</span>&mdash;DESIGN FOR A STAIRCASE, <span class="smcap">with
-Painted Architecture</span>.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From the Gibbs Collection in the Radcliffe Library.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The illustrations give a good idea of what was expected in a country
-house in those days. The plans are all symmetrical, and each front is
-regular and intended to be seen; there was no thought of giving the
-house a back for the use of servants and tradesmen. Indeed there were
-hardly any tradesmen to be considered. Every house was self-sustaining
-and provided its own bread, meat, and vegetables. This is an important
-point to bear in mind; it accounts for the numerous outbuildings
-which<span class="pagenum" id="Page_247">[247]</span> form part of old houses, inasmuch as places had to be provided
-for storing most of the things which are now retained by the shopkeeper
-until his carts take them to his customers. It also partly explains how
-it was possible to have each side of the house a show-front, for there
-was less outside traffic when there were no tradesmen’s carts, although
-there was always a staff of servants going in and out. The servants are
-placed either in a basement or in an outlying wing, never in proximity
-to the principal rooms; at the same time, in order to gain their rooms
-in the attics, they generally had to cross either the hall or one of
-the rooms intended for the family. The effect of this was that they
-were less conveniently placed for service than they are in the present
-day, and yet they could not gain their bedrooms without the risk of
-intruding on the family.</p>
-
-<p>In many instances the kitchen with its dependencies occupied an
-outlying wing, and the food had to be brought a long distance, and
-frequently through an open corridor. The inconvenience of this
-arrangement must have outweighed the advantage of getting the smells
-and noise of the kitchen away from the house. The family rooms were the
-chief concern of the designer, and his aim was to make them stately.
-The arrangement most often adopted was to have a large entrance hall,
-and beyond it a dining-room; on either side were two or more rooms with
-a staircase between them. The hall occupied two stories in height,
-being as much as 30 ft. or 36 ft. high, and it must have been cold and
-cheerless, if grand. The principal rooms were lofty, and over each
-was another of the same size; in some instances small rooms of less
-height were placed next to the staircases, thus enabling others over
-them to be reached from a landing half-way up&mdash;“intersoles,” as Gibbs
-calls them. The same device had already been adopted by Hawksmoor at
-Easton Neston. The symmetrical disposition of the rooms favoured the
-placing of their doors in a straight line so that long vistas could
-be obtained, and although Gibbs prides himself on providing passages
-which rendered every room private, there were usually doors of
-intercommunication, and many of the rooms suffered from a multiplicity
-of entrances. The passages were evidently a concession to modern ideas,
-and were often ill-lighted from openings into the hall. The observance
-of strict symmetry sometimes led to the provision of two equally
-important staircases where<span class="pagenum" id="Page_248">[248]</span> one would have been enough for practical
-purposes. It also resulted in the stairs crossing windows, the outside
-harmony of which was held to be sacred; and a further consequence was
-the introduction of many sham windows for the sake of uniformity.</p>
-
-<p>In spite of such drawbacks, which sprang from the formality of the
-treatment, Gibbs’s plans are ingenious and well devised. He attaches
-great importance to privacy, and frequently introduces a number of
-“apartments,” as he calls them, each apartment comprising a bedroom and
-dressing-room, with occasionally a third or ante-room. The demands of
-those times were, of course, far simpler than our own, and Gibbs was as
-skilful as any of his contemporaries in satisfying them. He was able to
-do this within walls which were treated in a strictly classic manner,
-founded on instructions of the Italian masters. Whether he could have
-met the complex wants of the present day in so simple a fashion is open
-to question.</p>
-
-<p>Many of Gibbs’s original drawings are preserved in the Radcliffe
-Library at Oxford, some of these being included in his “Book of
-Architecture.” Two of them are reproduced here, one (Fig. <a href="#i_238">164</a>) is plate
-57 of his book, the other (Fig. <a href="#i_239">165</a>) has not been published. The first
-is an example of a house with a forecourt and wings connected by open
-corridors to the central block; in the left-hand wing are the kitchens,
-in the right the stables. The house is entered through a large hall
-beyond which is a gallery, with small rooms at each end. To the left
-of the hall is presumably the dining-room, as it lies nearest to the
-kitchens, to the right is a room of the same size. There are two large
-staircases resembling each other in all respects, that on the left
-being probably the back stairs. Grouped on each side of the staircases
-are small rooms over which might have been the “intersoles,” although
-Gibbs does not expressly mention them. In this instance the hall was
-but one story in height with a room over it, and there were three rooms
-over the gallery. The same disposition obtained on the top floor, which
-may have been devoted to guest chambers, as it would appear that the
-servants were lodged in the kitchen wing, judging by the size of the
-staircase.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_249" style="width: 458px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_249.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 170.</span>&mdash;A CHIMNEY-PIECE, <span class="smcap">by Gibbs</span>.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From the Gibbs Collection in the Radcliffe Library.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_250">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_250.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 171.</span>&mdash;No. 75 DEAN STREET, SOHO. <span class="smcap">Part
-of the Painted Decoration of the Wall of the Staircase.</span></p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The other and unpublished design (Fig. <a href="#i_239">165</a>) is of a somewhat different
-type. The centre of the house is occupied by a vast and lofty staircase
-mainly lighted from a cupola. Round this<span class="pagenum" id="Page_251">[251]</span> is a broad corridor
-giving access to the various rooms, which are of fine dimensions.
-The same disposition appears to apply to all three floors, save that
-on the topmost the corridor is omitted, and thus an open space is
-provided which gives light to the hall on one side and to a passage
-on the other, which is taken off the width of the rooms. There is no
-indication where the kitchens lie; the section shows no basement, and
-there are no indications of separate wings.</p>
-
-<p>The section gives an adequate idea of the internal treatment; it
-shows the great hall and its lighting, as well as the very simple
-decoration of the rooms, far plainer in this case than in most of
-those published in his book. The rooms are usually panelled somewhat
-after the manner shown in Figs. <a href="#i_241">166</a> and <a href="#i_242">167</a>. This gives an air of
-distinction to them, but it severely limits (and perhaps not unhappily)
-the number of pictures and prints which can be hung on the walls. A
-very similar treatment is applied to the staircases (Fig. <a href="#i_245">168</a>). In one
-instance the walls were apparently to be painted with an architectural
-composition, which introduces a touch of poetry into the practical
-prose of Gibbs’s ordinary handling (Fig. <a href="#i_246">169</a>). There is a house in
-Dean Street, Soho (Fig. <a href="#i_250">171</a>), where the staircase walls are decorated
-with figure subjects by Hogarth, somewhat after the fashion of Gibbs’s
-drawing, but more elaborate in design. The decoration of the rooms
-already illustrated includes in each case the chimney-piece, but a
-further example, to a larger scale (Fig. <a href="#i_249">170</a>), will serve to show the
-kind of design which was widely adopted, not only by Gibbs but by most
-architects during the first half of the eighteenth century.</p>
-
-<p>Campbell was also a practising architect as well as an illustrator of
-the art, and he was consulted in the erection of Houghton Hall, in
-Norfolk, which is one of the finest examples of the great houses of its
-period, a period when nobles and wealthy gentlemen were vying with one
-another in building fine homes in the fashionable Italian manner, and
-surrounding them with equally fine gardens. It was the celebrated Prime
-Minister, Sir Robert Walpole, who built Houghton; and Colin Campbell
-supplied him with the design in the year 1722.<a id="FNanchor_71" href="#Footnote_71" class="fnanchor">[71]</a> It would appear,
-however, that Campbell did not carry out the work himself, but that his
-designs were handed over to Ripley, who altered them in many respects
-while following the general idea<span class="pagenum" id="Page_252">[252]</span> pretty faithfully. The sizes and
-disposition of the rooms were varied, both in the central block and in
-the wings. The proportions of the windows were altered, and Campbell’s
-projecting portico was omitted, the columns being attached to the wall
-instead of standing some fifteen feet in front of it. The attic stories
-of his corner pavilions were also changed into domes. On the whole
-these slight alterations tended to improve the appearance, but in spite
-of these variations, Campbell must have the credit for the design (Fig.
-<a href="#i_253">173</a>).</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_252">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_252.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 172.</span>&mdash;Houghton, Norfolk. Plan of Principal
-Floor, 1722.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The whole arrangement is of the prevalent type. There is a noble main
-building flanked on each side at some distance by a subsidiary block,
-connected to the house by colonnades which are curved on one face and
-rectangular on the other. The south wing contains the kitchen and
-servants’ quarters; the north wing is occupied by a picture gallery and
-chapel, but much of this particular building has been destroyed by fire.</p>
-
-<p>The house itself is of three stories, including the basement, which is
-used in part for domestic purposes, but serves in the main to raise
-the principal floor well above the ground. This floor (see plan, Fig.
-<a href="#i_252">172</a>) contains the fine stone hall, a cube of 40 ft., a saloon somewhat
-smaller and less lofty, a dozen fine rooms and some staircases, of
-which the chief one is magnificent. All these rooms are symmetrically
-arranged, and the doorways are so disposed as to produce long vistas
-when the whole series is opened. The four rooms in the corners can
-only be gained by<span class="pagenum" id="Page_255">[255]</span> passing through other rooms. The whole effect is
-stately both inside and out, and although in the present day there may
-be a certain lack of comfort, yet the house fully met the needs of the
-time when it was built, and it provided the atmosphere of splendour
-which was demanded by all great persons of the period. The whole
-façade is over 500 ft. long, the central block has a frontage of 165
-ft., and the wings 110 ft. These are handsome dimensions; they are
-indeed so large that it is not easy for the eye to include the whole
-group at once from any ordinary viewpoint. The illustration (Fig. <a href="#i_253">173</a>)
-only shows the house and its colonnades, beyond which the reader’s
-imagination must add the wings, which are strictly subordinated in
-height to the main building.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_253">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_253.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 173.</span>&mdash;HOUGHTON, <span class="smcap">Norfolk</span>.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_254">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_254.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 174.</span>&mdash;HOUGHTON. <span class="smcap">The Stone Hall.</span></p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The interior decorations are attributed to Kent, who was assisted in
-the plasterwork by the Italian, Artari. But the stone hall (Fig. <a href="#i_254">174</a>)
-follows Campbell’s drawing in the main, as may be seen by comparing
-it with his sections in “Vitruvius Britannicus.” The ceiling is a
-remarkable <i>tour de force</i>, and the cove, with its children
-disporting themselves among the wreaths, is much admired. There is
-plenty of movement and variety in it, but the figures are a little
-inclined to obesity. The whole work perhaps suffers from being in too
-high relief, but its vigour and freedom of design are incontestably
-admirable. One of the principal rooms is called the marble dining-room,
-and it was intended to be lined with marble throughout, but one side
-only was carried out in this manner (Fig. <a href="#i_256">175</a>). It includes a fine
-chimney-piece, characteristic of the grander type then in vogue; on
-either side of it are marble-lined recesses in which are placed marble
-sideboards to correspond with their surroundings. The panel of the
-chimney-piece contains a figure subject, a sacrifice to Bacchus, carved
-by Rysbrach, and the decoration, both here and in the ceiling, consists
-largely of grapes, a form of ornament highly appropriate to a room
-devoted to entertainments in which deep drinking played an important
-part. The woodwork throughout is exceedingly handsome; it is executed
-for the most part in mahogany, a precious wood which had not previously
-been used in great abundance. The doorway of the green state room is an
-example of a rich treatment (Fig. <a href="#i_257">176</a>), and Sir Robert’s dressing-room
-one of a plainer handling (Fig. <a href="#i_258">177</a>). The principal staircase has an
-exceedingly massive mahogany<span class="pagenum" id="Page_256">[256]</span> balustrade (Fig. <a href="#i_259">178</a>), and the walls are
-decorated with figures and subjects in monochrome, by the hand of Kent
-himself. Sir Robert is said by Walpole, in his “Anecdotes of Painting,”
-to have purposely restricted the artist to this vehicle, having lively
-misgivings as to Kent’s exploits in brighter and more varied pigments.</p>
-
-<p>Another of the imposing houses of the eighteenth century is Wentworth
-Woodhouse, in Yorkshire, a seat of the Earl<span class="pagenum" id="Page_258">[258]</span> Fitzwilliam, which must
-not be confused with Wentworth Castle, near Barnsley, a smaller house,
-but still a fine one, built by Thomas, Earl of Strafford, in 1730.
-Wentworth Woodhouse was designed in the year 1740 by Henry Flitcroft
-for Thomas, Earl of Malton, who succeeded some six years later to the
-barony of Rockingham, and was thereupon created Marquis of Rockingham.
-His biographer<a id="FNanchor_72" href="#Footnote_72" class="fnanchor">[72]</a> says that he “rebuilt the ancient family seat, now
-called Wentworth House, in a very elegant manner, where he died on 14th
-December 1750.” His eldest<span class="pagenum" id="Page_260">[260]</span> daughter, Anne, married Earl Fitzwilliam,
-and carried Wentworth House into her husband’s family in 1769.
-Flitcroft published a drawing of the principal front of the house at
-the end of the 1770 edition of Kent’s “Designs of Inigo Jones,” and in
-the main this design was carried out. The central and chief part of the
-façade was executed as drawn, but the two wings, while preserving their
-original disposition, were considerably improved.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_256">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_256.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 175.</span>&mdash;Houghton. The Marble Dining-Room.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_257">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_257.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 176.</span>&mdash;HOUGHTON. <span class="smcap">The Green State
-Room.</span></p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_258">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_258.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 177.</span>&mdash;Houghton. Sir Robert Walpole’s
-Dressing-Room.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_259">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_259.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 178.</span>&mdash;HOUGHTON. <span class="smcap">The Upper Part of
-Staircase.</span></p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The stately front (Fig. <a href="#i_261">179</a>) is some 600 ft. in extent, and is the more
-striking in that it is a continuous façade, and not broken up into the
-usual three parts, consisting of the house and two outlying wings.
-The memory of the old curved colonnades is preserved in the convex
-portions which connect the end towers with the front. The central block
-is not so much an adaptation as a copy of Campbell’s second design for
-Wanstead (“Vit. Brit.,” i. 24, 25), with the omission of the cupola and
-of one window in the length of the wings. It is rendered personal to
-the builder by the introduction of his arms in the pediment, and the
-Wentworth motto, “Mea gloria fides,” in the frieze. To whatever extent
-Flitcroft may have borrowed his materials, it cannot be denied that he
-has blended them together with noble results.</p>
-
-<p>In the interior there is a fine saloon (Fig. <a href="#i_262">180</a>), which recalls
-Campbell’s stone hall at Houghton. Its variety of treatment is in
-strong contrast to the cold-looking hall which contains the staircase
-(Fig. <a href="#i_263">181</a>). Both these apartments have the defect of their qualities.
-There is so much architecture that there is scarcely room for those
-homely touches which endear a house to its occupants. The architect is
-more in evidence than the family. The splendour which stimulates the
-admiration of the stranger palls upon the eye that sees it daily; the
-feelings cease to answer to the stimulus. Grand rooms like these seem
-to demand an impossible series of grand functions, or at the least that
-old-fashioned custom of keeping open house which once prevailed at
-Wentworth Woodhouse.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_261">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_261.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 179.</span>&mdash;WENTWORTH WOODHOUSE,
-<span class="smcap">Yorkshire</span>, 1740.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_262">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_262.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 180.</span>&mdash;WENTWORTH WOODHOUSE. <span class="smcap">The
-Saloon.</span></p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_263">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_263.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 181.</span>&mdash;Wentworth Woodhouse. The Staircase Hall.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_264" style="width: 598px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_264.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 182.</span>&mdash;PRIOR PARK. <span class="smcap">The Hall.</span></p>
-     <p class="center p0 sm">The ceiling of the hall was opened up by Goodridge, who added the
-balustrade in 1829.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Another of the great mansions built about the same time as Wentworth
-Woodhouse was Prior Park, near Bath, and here again the result would
-appear to owe something to Campbell’s second design for Wanstead in so
-far as the great hexastyle portico is concerned. The architect was John
-Wood, of Bath,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_263">[263]</span> who designed it in 1736 for Ralph Allen, an extremely
-capable man, who, from being a clerk in a Bath post office, became
-one of the wealthiest men of his time. He established a lucrative
-system of posts, and he exploited the quarries of the district. It
-is said, indeed, that Prior Park was built in order to advertise<span class="pagenum" id="Page_265">[265]</span>
-the excellence of Bath stone; if true, it was a noble form of
-advertisement. The house stands high up on a hillside, and is flanked
-at a distance by stables and other buildings to which it is joined by
-low rusticated arcades of the same height as the basement story (Fig.
-<a href="#i_265">183</a>). The whole façade is slightly curved concavely in order to follow
-the conformation of the ground. From the terrace on which the house
-stands a fine flight of steps, partly straight and partly curved, leads
-down to a lower level, but this is a later addition, carried out by H.
-E. Goodridge, of Bath, in the year 1825.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_265">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_265.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 183.</span>&mdash;Prior Park, near Bath, 1736.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>It is interesting to find so splendid a house built for a self-made
-man, but as Allen left no family, it has not acquired the intimate
-charm of most great houses; it was for many years a Roman Catholic
-college, but has now been taken over for purposes connected with the
-war. The interior has suffered from fire, but the great hall retains
-its imposing appearance (Fig. <a href="#i_264">182</a>). Like most halls of the period, it
-is, perhaps, too grand to be home-like, but it is admirably suited for
-the present uses of the house. If, as is said, Allen was the prototype
-of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_266">[266]</span> Fielding’s Mr. Allworthy, he must have been an amiable as well as
-a capable man. The man himself may have stood for the portrait, but
-Fielding placed Allworthy in circumstances of his own invention. He
-was made of ancient descent, and although his seat was in Somerset,
-and occupied a site comparable to that of Prior Park, the house itself
-was a noble product of the Gothic style; “there was an air of grandeur
-in it that struck you with awe, and rivalled the beauties of the best
-Grecian architecture; and it was as commodious within as venerable
-without.”</p>
-
-<p>Do we not see in this description signs of a revolt from the prevailing
-worship of the classic type? Fielding published “Tom Jones” about 1744,
-but there were still many years to run before the classic idea ceased
-to dominate domestic architecture.</p>
-
-<p>Wood himself certainly did nothing to divert architectural design from
-its accustomed channel. He, and his son after him, stamped Bath with
-its particular character, and made it the finest city in England.
-It had become a fashionable resort early in the eighteenth century,
-largely owing to the exertions of Beau Nash, and it is a fortunate
-circumstance that when it had to expand there was so accomplished a
-man as John Wood on the spot to control the expansion. He it was who
-first designed streets and squares and rows of houses as definite
-architectural conceptions. There is much to be said for this idea,
-especially when the work is new and the design still retains the colour
-and disposition intended by the architect, and while the buildings are
-occupied for the purposes for which they were built. But with the lapse
-of time inevitable changes occur. The property falls into different
-hands; each owner treats his portion after his own will. It may be that
-one paints his part of the façade one colour, while another paints his
-of a different tint, the lines of demarcation having no relation to
-the architectural treatment. Some of the tenements may become business
-premises, with large indications of their purpose exposed to catch
-the public eye. Others may even be rebuilt in a fashion wholly out of
-keeping with the original design. In short, although a square may be
-built as one architectural conception, it is impossible to preserve it
-as such in perpetuity, and when once the original idea is destroyed
-by the march of events, the effect is worse than if it had never been
-conceived.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_267">[267]</span></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_267" style="width: 750px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_267.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 184.</span>&mdash;Pulteney Bridge, Bath.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From an Aquatint by Thomas Malton.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Town-planning on architectural lines can be studied at Bath better,
-perhaps, than anywhere, but all towns are not equally fortunate in
-preserving the original character of their buildings. Pulteney Street,
-attributed to Thomas Baldwin, was laid out about 1780 with good
-residences, and to close its vista there was a carefully designed
-house, pleasant to look upon. Eventually, however, this house fell into
-decay, the character of the street changed, and its general aspect,
-instead of being fine, became depressing. Its very virtues emphasised
-its decline. The house has now been restored, and the whole street has
-once more become cheerful. But local enterprise is not everywhere so
-vigorous as at Bath, and decay in a scheme of this kind cannot always
-be arrested. Pulteney Bridge, which leads to the street of the same
-name, carries a row of narrow shops on each side, and presents much the
-same appearance as shown in Fig. <a href="#i_267">184</a>. But the shops are necessarily
-small, low, and shallow, and they can have no chance of expanding
-or of keeping pace with other premises not thus restricted. Their
-relative importance is therefore much smaller than it was at the time
-when they were built. An<span class="pagenum" id="Page_268">[268]</span> example of a row of houses dealt with as a
-piece of architecture, and one which has suffered little, if at all,
-from change, is the Royal Crescent (Fig. <a href="#i_268">185</a>). It was designed by the
-younger Wood in 1769.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_268">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_268.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 185.</span>&mdash;The Royal Crescent, Bath, 1769.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_269">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_269.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 186.</span>&mdash;REDDISH MANOR, BROAD CHALK,
-<span class="smcap">Wilts.</span></p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_270">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_270.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 187.</span>&mdash;WIDCOMBE MANOR HOUSE, BATH.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The abundance and excellent quality of the stone in the Bath district
-greatly facilitated the erection of new houses both in the city and
-the neighbourhood. It was susceptible of delicate detail, and lent
-itself admirably to the classic work then in vogue, which indeed
-could never have obtained a footing save through the medium of stone.
-Throughout the district there are to be found good houses of the time
-of the Woods, houses which are not large, which have no pretensions
-to vie with Prior Park, yet which are handsomely treated, and have
-had considerable skill and some learning bestowed upon their design.
-Such a one is Widcombe Manor House (Fig. <a href="#i_270">187</a>), of which, however, it
-must be observed that it would be useless to undertake such a house
-unless one were prepared to spend a considerable amount for the sake
-of architectural effect. It is interesting to contrast with this
-product of the stone district a house in the adjoining county of
-Wilts.&mdash;Reddish Manor, Broad Chalk (Fig. <a href="#i_269">186</a>). The<span class="pagenum" id="Page_271">[271]</span> walls here are of
-brick and the ornament is of stone, but apparently either the stone or
-the money gave out by the time the roof was reached, for the cornice
-and the pediment are of brick, and it is seen at once how impossible it
-was to carry out classic detail in the ordinary brick of the district,
-and with the limited skill of the ordinary workman. Nevertheless
-the result is attractive, and it prompts the somewhat disconcerting
-question, whether the fancy is not as much tickled by the efforts of
-the obscure and half-educated designer, as by the correct and skilful
-handling of the trained architect? Accidents of colour and situation,
-the effects of time and weather, and above all, individuality of
-treatment, are as potent factors in impressing the imagination as
-book-learning and careful adherence to rules of proportion; and in
-admiring the great houses of the eighteenth century, and Campbell,
-Gibbs, and the hierarchy of architects who produced them, one longs to
-meet some unexpected difficulty successfully surmounted, some state of
-things not contemplated in the books, which should prove that the man
-had an invention, an imagination, one might almost say a soul, of his
-own.</p>
-
-<p>The custom of building large houses with detached wings survived well
-into the middle of the eighteenth century. It will be remembered that
-Isaac Ware, in his “Complete Body of Architecture” (1756), gives
-elaborate rules for the proportions and disposition of such edifices;
-Holkham Hall, in Norfolk, designed by Kent about 1734, and Kedleston
-Hall, in Derbyshire, designed by James Paine in 1761, are two notable
-examples still in existence.</p>
-
-<p>Holkham is the most important piece of domestic work of the fashionable
-architect, William Kent, who was the favourite protégé of Lord
-Burlington. Like most of his contemporaries, Kent passed several years
-in Italy before doing any work in England. He was of lowly origin, as
-were many architects of the time. As a start in life he was apprenticed
-to a coach-painter; Ripley walked to London at the onset of his career,
-and obtained work with a journeyman carpenter; Carr, of York, began as
-a working mason; all three were Yorkshire men. Kent early impressed
-men of position with his unusual capacity, and it was through their
-kindness that he was enabled to study in Italy, where he appears to
-have lived from 1710 to 1719. At this time he was studying painting, a
-pursuit<span class="pagenum" id="Page_272">[272]</span> in which, by general consent, he achieved no distinction&mdash;at
-any rate no enviable distinction. Sir Robert Walpole’s opinion of his
-powers in this direction has already been indicated (p. 256). During
-his stay in Rome he became acquainted with Lord Burlington, who,
-according to Horace Walpole, “discovered the rich vein of genius that
-had been hid from the artist himself.” He came back to England with his
-new patron, and thenceforward his success was assured. An apartment was
-assigned to him in Burlington House as long as he lived, and on his
-death “he was buried in a very handsome manner in Lord Burlington’s
-vault at Chiswick.”<a id="FNanchor_73" href="#Footnote_73" class="fnanchor">[73]</a></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_272">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_272.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 188.</span>&mdash;Holkham Hall, Norfolk, 1734. Plan of
-the Principal Floor.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_273">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_273.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 189.</span>&mdash;HOLKHAM HALL. <span class="smcap">The South
-Front.</span></p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Endowed with natural abilities above the average, which had been
-cultivated during nine years in Italy, and fortified by the most
-powerful patronage of the age, it is no wonder that Kent was able
-to cut a good figure in the world of art. He became the fashionable
-decorator of the time in many directions, especially in relation to
-great houses and their surroundings. Walpole had a poor opinion of
-him as a painter, admired him as an architect, and praised him highly
-as a garden designer. To us in the present day he appears as a man of
-considerable ability and culture, who seldom rose above mediocrity,
-especially in his architecture, which, however sound and correct, is
-wanting in<span class="pagenum" id="Page_274">[274]</span> vivacity. Holkham is a case in point. There is nothing
-novel about the plan (Fig. <a href="#i_272">188</a>), save that the wings are closer to the
-main building than usual; but in spite of this the kitchen is a long
-way from the dining-room. The rooms are not particularly striking: the
-finest are the entrance hall, and the sculpture gallery or “statue
-gallery,” as it is called on the plan in “Vitruvius Britannicus.” The
-house was designed for the reception of the numerous works of art
-which the owner and builder, Thomas Coke (afterwards created Earl of
-Leicester), collected in Italy. The collection of pictures, statues,
-antiques, books, and manuscripts ranks among the finest in England.
-The opinions of critics on the house are by no means unanimous. Sir
-William Chambers, for instance, remarks how difficult it is to give
-pleasing proportions to rooms of differing sizes, but which are all of
-the same height, and so to arrange the smaller as to contrive suitable
-mezzanines above them. “Holkham,” he says, “is a masterpiece in this
-respect, as well as in many others. It deserves much commendation,
-and does credit to the memory of Mr. Kent, it being exceedingly well
-contrived both for state and convenience.”<a id="FNanchor_74" href="#Footnote_74" class="fnanchor">[74]</a> Ferguson, on the other
-hand, says: “We are left to conjecture whether the noble host and
-hostess sleep in a bedroom 40 ft. high, or are relegated like their
-guests to a garret or an outhouse, or perhaps may have their bedroom
-windows turned inwards on a lead flat.” He goes on to say that although
-the house may be “a monumental whole, yet the occupants would probably
-prefer rooms of appropriate dimensions, where they could get fresh air
-and a view of the park.”<a id="FNanchor_75" href="#Footnote_75" class="fnanchor">[75]</a></p>
-
-<p>Both opinions are, or were, probably right. At the time it was built,
-and for the wants of that period, Holkham was no doubt both convenient
-and stately. But Ferguson’s criticisms find a ready echo in our own
-bosoms, and they are a measure of the difference between the ideas of
-the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries as to domestic comfort.</p>
-
-<p>The exterior of Holkham (Fig. <a href="#i_273">189</a>), although a departure from the
-customary treatment, is hardly an improvement upon it. It is a little
-monotonous, and the large extent of plain wall above the windows of
-the principal floor has a dull<span class="pagenum" id="Page_275">[275]</span> effect. The plain turrets and the thin
-cornice of the wings impart a meagre appearance, which is heightened by
-the fact that the walls are of white brick, a material which remains
-<i>triste</i> to the end, although centuries may have endeavoured to
-mellow it, as they have in vain at Hengrave Hall, in Suffolk.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_275">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_275.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 190.</span>&mdash;The Horse Guards, Whitehall.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Kent’s versatility is evidenced at Holkham in the furniture, most
-of which was designed by him. It is characterised by a solidity and
-massiveness, both of construction and decoration, in striking contrast
-to the attenuated elegance of his successors.</p>
-
-<p>Kent died in 1748, long before the house was finished; the Earl of
-Leicester died in 1759, still leaving much to be completed. The manner
-of his death brings home to us the changes which have taken place
-in habits and customs even more vividly than does his house. Lord
-Leicester had spoken slightingly of the militia at his own table, a
-topic of general comment at the time; his remarks were taken ill by
-George Townshend, his neighbour at Rainham, who challenged him to a
-duel. Townshend was young and a practised duellist; Lord Leicester was
-a staid<span class="pagenum" id="Page_276">[276]</span> gentleman of sixty-five. The result was a foregone conclusion,
-and the older man died of his wound.<a id="FNanchor_76" href="#Footnote_76" class="fnanchor">[76]</a></p>
-
-<p>Lady Leicester carried on the works at Holkham with the help of Matthew
-Brettingham, of Norwich, who had been a pupil of Kent’s and had acted
-as his assistant and clerk of the works. After the work was ended he
-published the plans and elevations of the house in a book dedicated
-to Lady Leicester, and claimed the whole credit of the design. But it
-belongs in reality to Kent, and Holkham is an interesting example of
-the work of one man, alike as to the house, its decoration and its
-furniture.<a id="FNanchor_77" href="#Footnote_77" class="fnanchor">[77]</a></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_276">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_276.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 191.</span>&mdash;Kedleston, Derbyshire, 1761. Plan of
-the Principal Floor.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Although Holkham is his most notable achievement&mdash;unless we except the
-Horse Guards, which has some resemblance to it in general treatment
-(Fig. <a href="#i_275">190</a>)&mdash;Kent was fully employed during his thirty years of active
-work. He designed many houses and many gardens. One of the most
-pleasing of the buildings at Stowe, the Temple of Ancient Virtues, was
-his. His help was obtained in directions other than architecture, and
-Walpole tells<span class="pagenum" id="Page_278">[278]</span> us that he designed birthday gowns for two ladies,
-to which he gave a decidedly architectural turn. He must have spent
-much time in producing “The Designs of Inigo Jones,” and it is not
-improbable that he was the power behind the throne in respect of the
-architectural efforts of Lord Burlington.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_277">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_277.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 192.</span>&mdash;KEDLESTON HALL, <span class="smcap">Derbyshire</span>.
-<span class="smcap">The Hall.</span></p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Brettingham had a certain connection with Kedleston, as he seems to
-have designed and built one of the wings. He was succeeded by James
-Paine, to whom the general design is attributed, which followed the
-lines started by Brettingham. The house was to have had four outlying
-wings, much after the fashion of Holkham, but only two were carried
-out. The original plan looks very striking on paper (Fig. <a href="#i_276">191</a>), but
-it is one further proof of the way in which comfort was sacrificed to
-grandeur by the architects of that time. All the principal rooms are
-noble, those, that is, which were to be used on grand occasions; the
-others are quite subordinate. The basement, which contains rooms in
-daily use, seems overweighted by the superstructure, and is in fact too
-low to allow the light to penetrate freely to the remoter parts of the
-entrance. The bedrooms were, in the opinion of Dr. Johnson, who visited
-the house with Boswell in September 1777, “but indifferent rooms.” The
-hall is a lordly apartment with a row of lofty columns down each side
-(Fig. <a href="#i_277">192</a>). Some of the columns are monoliths, and one is of alabaster
-from the locality. Dr. Johnson thought the house “would do excellently
-for a town-hall; the large room with the pillars would do for the
-judges to sit in at the assizes; the circular room for a jury-chamber;
-and the room above for prisoners.” It is quite true that many of these
-large houses produce an impression similar to that created by public
-buildings.</p>
-
-<p>The situation of the house is in keeping with the ideas prevalent at
-the time. It is not, as of old, the centre of a formally disposed lay
-out, with vistas stretching away from its principal windows. It stands,
-indeed, askew with all points of view, on a slope of the park, backed
-by a long range of trees which crowns the summit of the hill; behind
-another group of trees lie the stables, connected to the house by a
-sunk way. A contemporary bridge in the park, over which the approach
-is carried, lies in haphazard relation to the house. But this was<span class="pagenum" id="Page_280">[280]</span>
-all part of the design, which aimed not at any formal lay out, but
-at a result which should convey the impression that everything was
-unstudied, and that skill was bestowed not in making an effect, but
-merely in seizing on the effects supplied by nature and using them to
-the best advantage.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_279" style="width: 535px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_279.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 193.</span>&mdash;ELEVATION OF SIR WATKIN WYNN’S HOUSE
-IN ST JAMES’S SQUARE, LONDON.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_280">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_280.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 194.</span>&mdash;Houses in Portland Place, London.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_281">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_281.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 195.</span>&mdash;ADELPHI TERRACE, LONDON.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Paine did not finish the house. Before it was completed he was replaced
-by the brothers Adam, who carried out all the decoration of the
-interior and also designed much of the furniture.</p>
-
-<p>Of the brothers Adam (there were four of them), Robert was the most
-gifted, and it is his work which gave rise to the well-known “Adam”
-style. He, too, had a training of several years in Italy (from 1754
-to 1758), but, more adventurous than other students, he paid a visit
-of some weeks’ duration to Spalato in Dalmatia, where he occupied
-himself, with the help of companions, in taking measurements and
-making drawings of Diocletian’s palace. According to one authority<a id="FNanchor_78" href="#Footnote_78" class="fnanchor">[78]</a>
-these studies were the foundation of his future style. Much of the
-furniture at Kedleston, however, is more nearly allied to the type<span class="pagenum" id="Page_282">[282]</span>
-established by Kent than to that which we are accustomed to associate
-with Adam; presumably he had not yet established his own individuality.
-In his architectural work he had a great idea of obtaining “movement”
-by giving rhythmical projections to a façade, and a picturesque but
-ordered variety to the skyline. This was his intention, and the
-adoption of the word is his own; it is doubtful whether observers and
-critics would have discovered enough of the one to have adopted the
-other of their own accord. Indeed the exteriors of his buildings are
-often tame. He broke away, it is true, from the conventions of the
-preceding half-century, but although the result was to a certain extent
-novel, it can hardly be deemed more attractive. The fact is that he
-laboured under the same drawback which beset all the architects of the
-eighteenth century, the glorification of architecture at the expense
-of practical building. Instead of making his architecture reflect
-the requirements of the persons who were to use the edifice, he made
-the interior arrangements to fit the preconceived exterior. This is
-exemplified in a small instance in the fact that, having designed two
-houses to form one architectural composition, he was obliged to make
-the party wall cut a window in two, a mutilated half of which lighted
-a room in each of two separate houses. We have already seen how the
-same sort of difficulty beset Wood’s houses in Bath; and exactly the
-same fault in regard to windows is to be found in Grainger’s work at
-Newcastle. The absurdity is only fully realised when one of the houses
-has to be remodelled or rebuilt, when, among other odd results, it is
-found that a window has to be shorn in two, one half removed and the
-other left.</p>
-
-<p>Adam’s excellence lies in his eye for proportion, in the refinement
-of his detail, and in the fastidious handling of his ornament. A
-house in St James’s Square (Fig. <a href="#i_279">193</a>) and another in Portland Place
-(Fig. <a href="#i_280">194</a>) are characteristic examples of his work. At first sight
-they appear insipid, and might easily escape the eye; but when the
-attention is once caught it is arrested by the detail which appeals to
-the cultivated taste; the intellect is charmed with the extreme care
-bestowed upon every part of the ornament, or rather, considering the
-enormous amount of work which occupied Adam’s time, by the wonderful
-intuition which produced such harmonious results.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_283a">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_283a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 196.</span>&mdash;Doorway in Mansfield Street, London.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_283b">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_283b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 197.</span>&mdash;Entrance and Porch at 20 Portman
-Square, London.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_284">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_284.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 198.</span>&mdash;WINDOW AT SUTTON COURT.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>He can hardly be said to have made a permanent mark in<span class="pagenum" id="Page_285">[285]</span> his
-large architectural conceptions. With the help of his brothers he
-rebuilt a whole district of London which was called after them,
-“the Adelphi.”<a id="FNanchor_79" href="#Footnote_79" class="fnanchor">[79]</a> The long terrace on an arcaded basement was much
-admired, and it has been claimed for him that he planted by the side
-of the Thames a worthy version of the splendours of Spalato, but the
-building (Fig. <a href="#i_281">195</a>) hardly bears out this contention. It is Spalato
-much diluted. The lesson to be learnt from this as from most of the
-architecture of that period is that no reproduction of ancient glories,
-whether direct or modified, can be of abiding interest. Architecture
-to be interesting must meet certain definite wants, must reflect the
-needs of the hour and of the individual, and as these must of necessity
-be ever changing, so must architectural expression. Each work of every
-architect presents a fresh problem which ought to be solved in its own
-way.</p>
-
-<p>It is in particular features, such as doorways, windows, balustrades,
-and panels, that Adam’s gift of design shows to the best advantage. A
-doorway in Mansfield Street (Fig. <a href="#i_283a">196</a>), with its large fanlight, is
-characteristic of one treatment; the projecting porch from Portman
-Square (Fig. <a href="#i_283b">197</a>) is equally so of another. The window from Sutton
-Court (Fig. <a href="#i_284">198</a>) would be a prosaic affair, but for the fanlight and
-the detail imparted to the surrounding woodwork. It should be noticed
-that, in keeping with his delicate mouldings, the sash-bars are thin,
-in complete contrast to the more vigorous handling of his predecessors.</p>
-
-<p>The delicacy of his detail was more appropriate to the inside of a
-house than to the outside, and nothing pleased him better than to
-design the whole decoration of a room&mdash;doors, chimney-piece, ceiling,
-plaster wall panels, lockplates and door handles, grate, and the whole
-of the furniture. Pretty, graceful, and refined, but rarely virile, his
-work appeals to the less tumultuous emotions; indeed he made his mark
-not so much by his architecture as by his decoration, which exhibits
-extraordinary fecundity and fertility of design.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_286">[286]</span></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_286a">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_286a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 199.</span>&mdash;Vicarage at Puddletown, Dorset.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_286b">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_286b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 200.</span>&mdash;House in St Giles, Oxford.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_287">[287]</span></p>
-
-<h2>X<br />
-<span class="subhed">SMALLER HOUSES, TOWN HOUSES, EXTERIOR FEATURES</span></h2></div>
-
-<p>In the large houses which have been described in the preceding
-chapters, it has been impossible to avoid passing a certain amount of
-adverse criticism upon the manner in which comfort and convenience were
-often sacrificed to the claims of fine architecture, as the term was
-understood during the eighteenth century. When we turn to the smaller
-houses this drawback is much less in evidence; not because better
-architects were employed, for doubtless the unknown designers of these
-smaller buildings would have sinned equally with their more famous
-brethren, had the opportunity to do so come their way, but because the
-occasion demanded no great display, and there was no money wherewith
-to make it. Nothing more was wanted than a handsome-looking house
-with rooms of suitable size and number. It was very seldom that any
-great ingenuity was required of the designers. Two, three, or in the
-larger houses, four sitting-rooms, a hall and staircase, a kitchen,
-back kitchen, and pantries usually completed the accommodation of the
-ground floor; the floor above was occupied by bedrooms, which, if
-insufficient, were supplemented by others in the attic. There were no
-bathrooms, cloak-rooms, or other sanitary conveniences; it was not
-necessary to provide a fireplace to each room. The problems of design
-were therefore much simpler than those of the present day. There was
-no group of small rooms requiring a convenient yet inconspicuous
-situation: there was no need to struggle with single flues from
-isolated bedrooms, which could not be led to the main stacks;
-this difficulty was met by leaving the rooms without a fireplace.
-Nothing is commoner in old houses than to find two or perhaps three
-chimney-stacks, the position of which is determined by that of the
-sitting-rooms and kitchen, and to find that the bedrooms adjoining
-these stacks<span class="pagenum" id="Page_288">[288]</span> have fireplaces, while those away from them have none. As
-to sanitary conveniences, with the crude means of sewage disposal then
-in use, it was impossible to have them in the house; it was only after
-the introduction of water carriage that this could be done. In the
-ancient days of fortified houses it was of course necessary for them
-to be within the walls, and considerable skill was often displayed in
-placing them so as to be as innocuous as possible. On Elizabethan plans
-they were sometimes retained indoors, but they were obviously a source
-of annoyance and danger; in later times, they were removed outside,
-and in old houses, here and there, may still be found evidence of the
-handsome treatment provided for the family as distinguished from<span class="pagenum" id="Page_291">[291]</span> the
-servants. The bedrooms, as many old houses still testify, were provided
-with some variation of the <i>chaise percée</i>.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_288">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_288.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 201.</span>&mdash;The Court, Holt, near
-Bradford-on-Avon.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_289a">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_289a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 202.</span>&mdash;The Church House, Beckley, Sussex.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_289b">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_289b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 203.</span>&mdash;House in the High, Oxford.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_290a">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_290a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 204.</span>&mdash;House at Shrivenham, Berkshire.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_290b">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_290b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 205.</span>&mdash;House (now the “Seahorse” Inn) at
-Deene, Northamptonshire.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The rooms, therefore, which had to be provided, could all be of a
-fair size, and they could be so disposed as to allow their windows to
-fall into the symmetrical arrangement, which the exterior treatment
-required. The results can be seen in most of our old-fashioned villages
-and towns: small manor-houses and parsonages in the former; houses for
-the doctor, the lawyer, the well-to-do tradesmen in the latter. The
-vicarage at Puddletown, in Dorset (Fig. <a href="#i_286a">199</a>), is an example of the
-early years of the century. It has one large chimney-stack in the main
-part of the house, and two smaller, and probably later stacks in the
-adjoining wing; its wide eaves give it its distinctive character, and
-further touches are added by the cut brickwork under the window-sills
-and the circular panels in the end. Beyond these there is nothing to
-raise emotions either of praise or blame. There is considerably more
-attempt at design in the Court at Holt, near Bradford-on-Avon (Fig.
-<a href="#i_288">201</a>). This place is in the midst of a district abounding in stone, and
-the builders availed themselves of the opportunity to impart a more
-pretentious character to their work. The older methods make themselves
-felt in the manner in which the eaves cornice is bent up to form a
-gable, steeper than classic handling usually permits. Here, again,
-there are but two chimney-stacks, one at each end of the house.</p>
-
-<p>The house in St Giles, Oxford (Fig. <a href="#i_286b">200</a>), is rather more imposing.
-It is of the period of Wren, and is, indeed, attributed locally to
-him. The treatment is large, simple, and dignified, and the effect is
-enhanced by the handsome gate-piers which give access, up a few steps,
-to the front door. It is evident that here, at any rate, more rooms
-have fireplaces than those at the ends of the house. There is another
-house at Oxford, in the High Street (Fig. <a href="#i_289b">203</a>), of a later date, which
-is quite admirable in its simplicity and careful proportions, and the
-front is relieved from baldness by the slight projections at each
-end. Compared with the more famous pieces of architecture by which it
-is surrounded, this house is insignificant, and may well escape the
-attention it deserves. Dating from early in the century is the dower
-house at Deene, in Northamptonshire (Fig. <a href="#i_290b">205</a>), now occupied as a
-public-house under the sign of the sea-horse, which is the crest of the
-family owning the village. It presents<span class="pagenum" id="Page_292">[292]</span> a quaint combination of the
-steep coped gables of the district prevalent in earlier times, with the
-wide eaves, sash-windows, and dormers fashionable when it was built. It
-has quite a large number of chimneys, but the dowagers who came from
-the great house no doubt looked for the comforts to which they had
-always been accustomed. Several of the rooms are decorated with good
-panelling and plasterwork, and have had skill and knowledge bestowed
-upon their proportions and design.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_292">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_292.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 206.</span>&mdash;House at Ely, Cambridgeshire.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_293a">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_293a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 207.</span>&mdash;Rectory at Church Langton,
-Leicestershire.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_293b">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_293b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 208.</span>&mdash;House at Petersham, Surrey.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The Church House at Beckley, in Sussex (Fig. <a href="#i_289a">202</a>), has no projecting
-eaves, but above the cut-brick cornice rises a parapet which
-effectually blocks the outlook from the dormer windows. The usual plain
-treatment of the walls is here varied by the introduction of a pilaster
-at each end of the front, and by carrying up a slight projection from
-the keystone of the middle window. The pilasters are surmounted by a
-piece of architrave and frieze of the same width as the pilaster, a
-device which displays a misconception of classic features. The two main
-chimney-stacks are placed at the back of the principal block<span class="pagenum" id="Page_294">[294]</span> instead
-of at the ends, thus giving them an opportunity to serve rooms behind
-as well as those in the front.</p>
-
-<p>The house at Shrivenham, in Berkshire (Fig. <a href="#i_290a">204</a>), is of the more
-ordinary type. It has a good eaves cornice, and the usual two
-chimney-stacks; the projecting porch forms a pleasing variation, and
-the whole house gives the impression of comfort and respectability. So,
-too, does the house at Ely (Fig. <a href="#i_206">206</a>) which faces the green opposite
-the west end of the cathedral. It has a chimney-stack at each end,
-and a pediment of unusually steep pitch. Like several of the other
-examples, it has five windows along the front; the middle one lights
-the landing, and the two on each side light the rooms with fireplaces.
-Additional importance is given by the large gate-piers, and the
-whole effect is dignified and restful, eminently in keeping with the
-atmosphere of an old cathedral town. The house at Petersham (Fig.<a href="#i_293b"> 208</a>)
-is of larger size, having seven windows along the front; the three in
-the middle are placed in a slight projection round which the cornice
-breaks. This projection, together with the bold cornice, the rather
-large front door, and the wide window margins, is all there is in the
-way of design to give interest to the house. The rectory at Church
-Langton, in Leicestershire (Fig. <a href="#i_293a">207</a>), is of somewhat later date,
-probably about the beginning of the nineteenth century. Here there is a
-decided attempt at architectural effect in the ornamented pediment, the
-central arched recess, and the low buildings at the side; but the house
-itself is not more commodious inside, nor has it larger rooms than
-other houses of the same type. The adjuncts, too, are added for effect
-rather than for use.</p>
-
-<p>Houses such as these abound in country districts. There is nothing
-particularly notable about them, and very little effort at design. But
-as a rule their proportions are pleasing, and the very absence of any
-attempt to achieve striking effects is itself one of their charms. They
-seem the natural expression of the quiet, uneventful lives led by the
-inhabitants, who, like the Vicar of Wakefield, had no adventures save
-by the fireside, and no migrations save from the blue bed to the brown.
-Their interest varies not so much through difference in design as by
-reason of their surroundings, and the variety of creepers which climb
-up their walls, and are the less objectionable in that they hide no
-architectural detail.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_295">[295]</span></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_295">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_295.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 209.</span>&mdash;THE TUESDAY MARKET-PLACE, KING’S LYNN.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_296">[296]</span></p>
-
-<p>In the towns, of course, the surroundings did little to help the
-appearance of houses; there they had to rely on their own merits.
-Nevertheless the disposition of the streets often lent picturesqueness
-to the houses that formed them. It is one of the charms of most English
-towns that their appearance is the result of fortuitous causes, or
-of some necessity which is no longer obvious. In some towns, like
-Marlborough or Dunstable, it is the width of the main street which
-gives character to the place; in others, like York, Canterbury, and
-(in a less degree) Warwick, it is the narrowness which strikes the
-visitor. In the one case the open spaces of the country are embodied in
-the town; there is room enough and to spare. In the other it is clear
-that every foot of room was utilised. Yarmouth has a very interesting
-lay out, evidently the result of premeditated design and not of chance.
-The river upon which it is built turns suddenly to the right as it
-approaches the sea, and runs for some distance parallel to the sea
-front, leaving a certain space between itself and the shore. Upon
-this restricted space the town was built; streets of no great width
-were formed parallel with the river, next to which was a broad quay;
-then at right angles to the streets a series of narrow passages were
-formed, called “rows.” Although these “rows” are not more than 4 or 5
-ft. wide, they were formed of good houses, and it is surprising, in
-traversing them to-day, when they have become degraded into slums, to
-find remains of houses which must have been the residences of wealthy
-people. But the circumstances of Yarmouth were peculiar. At King’s
-Lynn, another ancient port in the same county, although most of the
-old streets are narrow, judged by modern standards, there is a very
-fine open space known as the Tuesday market-place, which still retains
-much of its old-world flavour. The old print of it which is reproduced
-in Fig. <a href="#i_295">209</a> rather exaggerates its size, owing to the perspective
-of the draughtsman; the market hall and its circular adjuncts have
-disappeared, but the Georgian buildings in the front and on either side
-still remain, and that on the left retains its steps and obelisks.
-Another old print&mdash;one of Chelmsford (Fig. <a href="#i_297a">210</a>)&mdash;gives a good idea of
-that town in Georgian times. Most of the houses are of the eighteenth
-century, and must have been quite modern at the time when the print
-was published; others are of an earlier date. Their disposition is the
-result of a long period of growth, and could never be achieved under a
-scheme<span class="pagenum" id="Page_299">[299]</span> of town-planning. One of the most prominent objects in the
-view is the inn sign, a good solid structure, thrust well out into the
-public way; it is characteristic of the times, both in its size and in
-the wrought-iron scroll-work which surrounds the swinging lion; indeed
-bits of fanciful ironwork such as this were prodigally used during the
-eighteenth century, and give interest to a house or a street which
-otherwise would attract no attention. In the middle distance is another
-sign typical of many which used to exist, but which are seldom found in
-the present day. Here it stretches across a large part of the public
-road, but in many cases these signs were made to span the whole width
-of the street. An example of an elaborate sign may be seen at the Swan
-Inn, Market Harborough (Fig. <a href="#i_298">212</a>), and an unpretentious but effective
-specimen is shown in Fig. <a href="#i_299">213</a>.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_297a" style="width: 750px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_297a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 210.</span>&mdash;Chelmsford, Essex.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From an Old Print.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_297b" style="width: 750px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_297b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 211.</span>&mdash;Somerset Buildings, Milsom Street, Bath.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From an Engraving by Thomas Malton.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_298">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_298.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 212.</span>&mdash;SIGN OF THE SWAN HOTEL, MARKET
-HARBOROUGH.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_299" style="width: 400px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_299.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 213.</span>&mdash;The Sign of an Inn at Salisbury.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>In most of the county towns the gentry of the district used to have
-their winter residences, to which they repaired when the state of
-the roads rendered locomotion difficult. It must be remembered that
-the roads in those days, except the most important, were little more
-than tracks across the country; nothing was done to make them hard or
-permanent&mdash;they merely traversed the natural soil. “Where there is good
-land there is foul way,” was a saying of the time; and conversely,
-where the ground was stony the roads were fairly hard. Horace Walpole,
-among other writers, recounts the difficulties he experienced on
-country roads in bad weather, and this condition of things accounts for
-the number of horses which, according to old prints, were harnessed to
-family coaches. These in their turn were built in a strong and heavy
-fashion, in order to withstand the shocks to which they were inevitably
-subjected. When the wet weather came on, families who lived in country
-houses betook<span class="pagenum" id="Page_301">[301]</span> themselves to the town for society and amusement. In
-places like Nottingham and Derby there still remain a fair number of
-houses which were built for county magnates, but in every instance they
-have been diverted from their original purpose and have become business
-premises. This affords another proof, if such were needed, that no lay
-out can be expected to retain in perpetuity its original character.
-Half the squares of London point the same moral.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_300">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_300.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 214.</span>&mdash;RALPH ALLEN’S HOUSE AT BATH.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_301">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_301.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 215.</span>&mdash;The Aylesford Hotel, Warwick.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>No doubt the house at Warwick, which, for the time being, is the
-Aylesford Hotel (Fig. <a href="#i_301">215</a>), was built for some such purpose as has
-just been indicated; it is a handsome and interesting example of the
-early part of the eighteenth century. Just outside the east gate is
-the house where Walter Savage Landor was born in 1775. Another house
-of the same kind is that of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_302">[302]</span> Ralph Allen at Bath (Fig. <a href="#i_300">214</a>), which is
-an architectural composition of much greater pretensions, now almost
-hidden from public view. It will be remembered that his country house
-was Prior Park.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_302">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_302.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 216.</span>&mdash;Shops at Cirencester.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_303">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_303.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 217.</span>&mdash;Shops, Montpellier, Cheltenham.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_304">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_304.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 218.</span>&mdash;Shop in East Street, Wareham,
-Dorset.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Bath, of course, is full of good examples of town houses; but Bath was
-much more than a town to which the neighbouring gentry resorted for
-the winter. It was a fashionable watering place, and provision had to
-be made for visitors throughout the year. Some of its buildings have
-already been mentioned, but<span class="pagenum" id="Page_303">[303]</span> the accompanying engraving of Milsom
-Street (Fig. <a href="#i_297b">211</a>) gives a good idea of its street architecture, devoted
-partly to residential purposes and partly to business premises. This
-mixture of dwellings and shops is still met with in old-fashioned
-towns, where the principal streets are made up of houses&mdash;some large
-and some small&mdash;interspersed with shops and inns. But in places<span class="pagenum" id="Page_304">[304]</span> where
-factories are introduced and the population increases, the universal
-tendency is towards the multiplication of shops and the diminution
-of houses. Every growing town experiences this change. As the houses
-part with their tenants, whether through death or otherwise, they
-are either converted into shops and offices, or they are pulled down
-to make room for tradesmen seeking the best situations for their
-business; the tradesmen themselves seek the cheaper and larger spaces
-of the suburbs for their own dwellings. The intentional combination
-of shop and dwelling, such as those at Cirencester (Fig. <a href="#i_302">216</a>) or
-Cheltenham (Fig. <a href="#i_303">217</a>), seldom occurs in the present day, when by-laws
-require for a house a certain amount of open space which can be more
-profitably used for business pure and simple. In the example from
-Cirencester the ground story, if not actually of the same date as the
-superstructure, has been skilfully designed to harmonise with it, and
-appears sufficiently sturdy to support it. But most tradesmen of the
-present day require so much room for the display of their goods, that
-they grudge every inch given to the purposes of support, and they would
-regard with equal<span class="pagenum" id="Page_305">[305]</span> disfavour the columns employed at Cirencester and
-the caryatides at Cheltenham.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_305">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_305.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 219.</span>&mdash;Shop Front at Dorking, Surrey.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Needless to say, the little old-fashioned shop fronts with small panes
-are quite out of the question in the present day, except for a very few
-trades. They would fill a modern shop fitter with contempt, yet there
-is something quite refreshing about such a front as that at Wareham
-(Fig. <a href="#i_304">218</a>) or that at Dorking (Fig. <a href="#i_305">219</a>). The outward curve, according
-to the simple ideas of the time, brought the goods into prominence, and
-when as yet it was unnecessary for rivals to shout each other down,
-the modest depth of the frieze was sufficient to display the name and
-calling<span class="pagenum" id="Page_306">[306]</span> of the occupier. The delicate ornament in the cornice is
-in scale with its surroundings, but it would be out of place on the
-top of a sheet of plate glass two or three hundred feet in area, or
-surmounting a name board with letters two feet high.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_306">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_306.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 220.</span>&mdash;Houses at Bristol.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Bristol still retains many interesting old houses, some dating<span class="pagenum" id="Page_307">[307]</span> from
-the early seventeenth century, and bearing witness to the wealth of
-its inhabitants at that period. These are to be found within a short
-distance of the quays, where the trade of the town centred. As the
-town spread further out more good houses were built, and there are
-still to be found in the outlying parts of the old town such houses as
-that shown in Fig. <a href="#i_306">220</a>. It has a handsome, substantial front treated
-with more than usual richness; but if the pediments over the windows
-and the pilasters were removed, the residue would resemble one of the
-ordinary plain brick houses of the time. That is to say, the ornamental
-features are merely applied, and have no vital connection with the
-structure. The house is set a little way back from the street, thus
-leaving a narrow forecourt, which is enclosed by a railing abutting
-at each end on a handsome stone pier; two similar piers carry a pair
-of elaborate iron gates in the middle of the front. The piers lend an
-air of dignity to the whole. In some instances, where a good house was
-built in a crowded street, it was set back some sixteen or twenty feet,
-thus forming a forecourt; and high walls were built at the sides of the
-court from the house up to the street, thus providing screens to mask
-the ends of the adjoining houses, which were built on the actual street
-front. There is such a case in Eastgate, Gloucester, but the forecourt
-is now filled with a shop, above which can be seen the front of the
-house and the screen walls. Nearly all our old towns retain relics of
-ancient grandeur such as this, but they are gradually disappearing
-before the march of modern improvements.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_308a">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_308a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 221.</span>&mdash;Houses in Bedford Square, London, 1780.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_308b">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_308b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 222.</span>&mdash;Houses in Finsbury Square, London,
-<i>cir.</i> 1780.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_309">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_309.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 223.</span>&mdash;Plan of a London House.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>London, as may well be supposed, has innumerable examples of late
-eighteenth-century houses in such districts as Bloomsbury and
-Piccadilly. Bedford Square was built about 1780, and presents to
-the world some inoffensive, although not very exciting fronts. The
-central feature of one side is shown in Fig. <a href="#i_308a">221</a>; there is nothing of
-striking originality in its design, but enough to break the monotony
-of the general treatment, and give a little interest to this rather
-dull though highly respectable square. Contemporary with this is
-Finsbury Square, which was laid out by George Dance, the younger,
-between 1777 and 1791.<a id="FNanchor_80" href="#Footnote_80" class="fnanchor">[80]</a> A part of it is illustrated in Fig. <a href="#i_308b">222</a>. By
-simple expedients the designer has imparted variety to his front, and
-has emphasised the principal floor, where, according to custom, the
-drawing-room<span class="pagenum" id="Page_309">[309]</span> is placed. The difficulty attending on the ornamenting
-of a row of houses with architectural features is illustrated here by
-the fact that one of the pilasters, which belongs in common to two
-houses, has been painted of two colours, which meet in a vertical
-line down the whole length of the pilaster&mdash;an effect certainly not
-contemplated by the architect. All these London houses have their
-kitchens in the basement, which is lighted from a sunk area between
-the house and the pavement. The plan generally adopted consisted
-of two rooms on each floor, one lighted from the front, the other
-from the back. Alongside the front room on the ground floor was the
-entrance passage, and next to the back room was the staircase, with
-its gangway of communication from flight to flight (Fig. <a href="#i_309">223</a>). On the
-first floor the drawing-room occupied the whole of the front, behind
-it was a bedroom; the other floors repeated the arrangement. Sometimes
-the drawing-room included the space elsewhere devoted to the bedroom,
-thus making a large L-shaped room. This plan was used for houses of
-fair size and also for artisans’ dwellings; it is still the staple
-plan for houses in the long streets which make up the modern extension
-of growing towns, with the important exception that the kitchen and
-scullery are not in a basement, but on the ground floor, occupying the
-back room and the annexe. Of the London examples here illustrated this
-arrangement applies only to the houses in Finsbury Square; the others
-are double-fronted. It is said to have been brought from Holland with
-William III., and this at least is tolerably certain, that no plan of
-this type is to be found in any collection of English drawings before
-this period, although there are plenty of plans with underground
-kitchens and offices. Thorpe has<span class="pagenum" id="Page_310">[310]</span> some plans for small houses in the
-city, with four rooms on the ground floor, one of which is a kitchen;
-he also has a house occupying the space of “three ordinary tenements,”
-from which we gather that an ordinary tenement had a frontage of 17 ft.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_310">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_310.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 224.</span>&mdash;House at the Corner of Stratton
-Street, Piccadilly, London.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The house at the corner of Stratton Street, Piccadilly (Fig. <a href="#i_310">224</a>),
-is typical of many of its contemporaries in London. It is plain
-to baldness, the most interesting things about it being the iron
-balustrades. This appears to be an early example of that method of
-designing which works on the supposition that the various faces of a
-building are as distinct in execution as they are on the drawings,
-and that a rich treatment of the front need not be continued along
-the side, nor even find an echo there, although the side is equally
-visible.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_311">[311]</span></p>
-
-<p>At the beginning of the nineteenth century a much plainer and duller
-type of house was in vogue than had been the case at the beginning of
-the eighteenth. The trend of design had been always in this direction,
-always towards a more severe treatment. This severity was endurable in
-large buildings where variety could be obtained by a skilful grouping
-of the masses, but in rows of small houses, or even in small detached
-houses, it resulted in a baldness that can only rouse admiration when
-other means of enjoyment are exhausted. Tennyson’s “long unlovely”
-street consisted of buildings thus plainly treated. Another cause
-of this lack of interest was the erection of houses by speculative
-builders and owners. Such houses had of necessity to be cheap, and
-where cheapness is the first consideration the amenities of design are
-generally the last. Design indeed had lost itself; the traditions which
-had been its guides were worn out; in looking for help it appealed for
-a time to Greece, and with its assistance planted a copy of the Temple
-of Erectheus in St Pancras and of the Choragic Monument of Lysicrates
-in Regent Street. Upon many a country garden it bestowed a Grecian
-temple, set amid winding shrubberies, towards which some heroine of
-Jane Austen would steal to indulge her love-sick fancies.</p>
-
-<p>Such pagan architecture eventually roused protests in this Christian
-country, and Pugin initiated the Gothic revival. But the consideration
-of this development is beyond our present scope, and it is only
-mentioned in order to show how completely design had lost its way.
-Its last effort in the old paths was to cover in part the plain front
-of a small house with a verandah enclosed by trellis-work, in which
-originality is still to be found. There is a good example in Finsbury
-Circus (Fig. <a href="#i_312a">225</a>), which was built about 1814. Others may be found
-in Kennington Park Road (Figs. <a href="#i_312b">226</a>, <a href="#i_313">227</a>), somewhat more elaborate in
-treatment. Kennington Park was at that time a common, and was the place
-where malefactors from this part of Surrey expiated their crimes on
-the gallows. The progress of civilisation has not only reduced the
-number of crimes for which the penalty was paid on Kennington Common,
-but has withdrawn the last scene from public gaze. Doubtless, however,
-balconies such as these were often crowded by persons eager to watch
-the irrevocable punishment of offences now adequately purged by a few
-months’ imprisonment.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_312">[312]</span></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_312a">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_312a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 225.</span>&mdash;No. 18 Finsbury Circus, London, 1814.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_312b">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_312b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 226.</span>&mdash;From a House, No. 272 Kennington
-Park Road, London.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_313">[313]</span></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_313">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_313.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 227.</span>&mdash;From a House, No. 282 Kennington
-Park Road, London.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>With the improved methods of road making which were adopted at the end
-of the eighteenth century, there came greater inducements for citizens
-to retire to the suburbs of London after finishing their labours in
-town. Probably no great city had such beautiful suburbs as those which
-surrounded London a hundred years ago. They were full of fine trees
-embowering large houses which stood in their own spacious grounds. But
-year by year these remains of the past are disappearing, and their
-sites are being covered with dwellings of a humbler kind, towards which
-an immense population gravitates every evening. Yet in spite of these
-changes there still remain, along most of the great roads which lead
-out of London, houses of moderate size dating back to some period of
-the eighteenth century or the early years of the nineteenth.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_314">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_314.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 228.</span>&mdash;House in the High Street, Lewes,
-Sussex.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>During the eighteenth century, especially as it grew older, the play
-of fancy which marks the work of earlier times diminished more and
-more. Consequently less interest attaches to particular features than
-was the case in the days of Elizabeth, James, and the Charleses.
-Chimneys and parapets had but slight variety, and so also the windows,
-for the sash-window has very little elasticity compared with the
-mullioned. Baywindows<span class="pagenum" id="Page_314">[314]</span> went almost out of fashion, so unyielding were
-the sashes with which they would have had to be fitted. In small
-houses a bay-window is sometimes to be found, such as those in a house
-in the High Street at Lewes, in Sussex (Fig. <a href="#i_314">228</a>). Chimneys grew
-plainer and plainer, and came to be regarded rather as a necessary
-evil than as a means of adorning the house. Nearly all those on the
-houses illustrated in this chapter are of the simplest character, far
-removed, for instance, from that on the north front of Kirby Hall, in
-Northamptonshire (Fig. <a href="#i_316a">230</a>), which is part of the work attributed to
-Inigo Jones. The dormer window included in the same group is allied
-to the Jacobean type, inasmuch as it is in effect part of the wall,
-whereas from Webb’s time onwards dormers were part of the roof, and
-were susceptible of very little variety of treatment. The stone chimney
-from a house at Wansford (Fig. <a href="#i_315">229</a>, 2) dates from the end of the
-seventeenth century, and although much plainer, it is clear that pains
-have been taken with its design. So, too, with the four brick examples
-in Fig. <a href="#i_315">229</a>; they are all interesting, though not elaborate. In later
-years even the touches which gave these their character were withheld,
-and chimney-stacks became mere oblong masses with the scantiest of
-caps.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_315">[315]</span></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_315" style="width: 512px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_315.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 229.</span>&mdash;EIGHTEENTH-CENTURY CHIMNEYS.</p>
-<ul class="left">
-  <li>1. Meopham, Kent.</li>
-  <li>2. Wansford, Northamptonshire.</li>
-  <li>3. Sturmer, Essex.</li>
-  <li>4. Silchester, Hampshire.</li>
-  <li>5. Bignor, Sussex.</li>
-</ul>
-  </div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_316">[316]</span></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_316a" style="width: 500px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_316a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 230.</span>&mdash;Chimney and Dormer Window at Kirby
-Hall, Northamptonshire.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm"></p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_316b">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_316b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 231.</span>&mdash;The Stables, Neville Holt,
-Leicestershire.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Some compensation was afforded, however, by the introduction of the
-cupolas or lantern lights which were prevalent during the last half
-of the seventeenth century and the first few years of the eighteenth.
-There is an interesting drawing of such a feature for Whitehall by
-Inigo Jones in the Worcester College collection (Fig. <a href="#i_317a">232</a>). It is
-entitled in Jones’s writing&mdash;“June 1, 1627, for the Cloke house Whight
-hall.” Webb made use of the same kind of feature, and so did Wren and
-his contemporaries. There is a fine example on the stables at Neville
-Holt, in Leicestershire<span class="pagenum" id="Page_318">[318]</span> (Fig. <a href="#i_316b">231</a>), a building of great interest,
-possessing doorways of curious seventeenth-century detail; and another
-good specimen is at Trinity Hall, Cambridge (Fig. <a href="#i_317b">233</a>). The old hall
-was altered about the year 1742, when it was described as “very gloomy
-and dark,” and as being “roofed with old Oak Beams, very black &amp; dismal
-from y<sup>e</sup> Charcoal w<sup>ch</sup> is burnt in y<sup>e</sup> middle of y<sup>e</sup> Hall; and over
-it in y<sup>e</sup> middle of y<sup>e</sup> Roof was an old awkward kind of Cupulo to let
-out y<sup>e</sup> Smoak.”<a id="FNanchor_81" href="#Footnote_81" class="fnanchor">[81]</a> The new cupola was considered, presumably, more
-elegant and less awkward than the old one. The reference to the ancient
-method of warming the hall by a fire in the middle of the floor is
-interesting, as showing how long the old practice lingered in places
-where those in authority were averse to change. A further example is
-shown in Fig. <a href="#i_318">234</a>.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_317a" style="width: 412px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_317a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 232.</span>&mdash;Clock Turret, Whitehall.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From a Drawing by Inigo Jones, dated 1st June 1627.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_317b">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_317b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 233.</span>&mdash;Cupola at Trinity Hall, Cambridge.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_318" style="width: 238px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_318.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 234.</span>&mdash;Cupola at Caius College, Cambridge.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>While fancy still played a part in the work of local masons, the little
-date-stones shown in Fig. <a href="#i_319">235</a> were built into some unpretentious houses
-in the Midlands; but a hundred years later the diligent pursuit of
-correctitude had banished such touches from the work of architects, and
-masons had lost the feeling which gave rise to them. They are, however,
-quite suggestive, and provide ideas for the perpetuation of the owner’s
-name and the date of his work&mdash;facts which are of interest in respect
-of all buildings. The example from Amersham is rather more ambitious,
-but hardly more successful (Fig. <a href="#i_320a">236</a>).</p>
-
-<p>Another feature of interest to be found on many an eighteenth-century
-house is the sundial. A specimen from High Wycombe is shown in Fig.
-<a href="#i_320b">237</a>, but almost every market town, and not a few villages, can produce
-examples as good. Sometimes an appropriate sentiment or an apt
-quotation was inscribed on the dial, but the number of cases where this
-occurs is not quite so<span class="pagenum" id="Page_319">[319]</span> great as the literature on the subject would
-lead one to suppose. In those days, when no cheap watches were to be
-had, when indeed a watch was handed down from one generation to another
-as a valuable possession, sundials were of real use, even though they
-told none but sunny hours. “The Art of Dialling” was a recognised
-branch of polite learning, and an intricate subject it was; dealing not
-only with horizontal and vertical dials, but with those which faced
-in some other direction than due south. Dial stones may sometimes be
-seen with one side brought slightly forward, so that the face is not
-quite parallel with the wall in which it is set. This is an expedient
-to make the face look due south, in order to simplify the setting out
-of the lines. Needless to say that when the sun was relied on to tell
-the hour of the day, the introduction of “Summer time” would have been
-impossible; for the power to set back the shadow on the dial, as it was
-set back on that of Ahaz, has never been given to man.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_319" style="width: 300px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_319.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 235.</span>&mdash;Seventeenth-Century Date-Stones.</p>
-<ul class="left">
-  <li>1. Bulwick, Northamptonshire.</li>
-  <li>2. Drayton, Leicestershire.</li>
-  <li>3. Moulton, Northamptonshire.</li>
-</ul>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_320a">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_320a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap"> Fig. 236.</span>&mdash;Date-Stone from Amersham,
-Buckinghamshire.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_320b">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_320b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 237.</span>&mdash;Sundial from High Wycombe,
-Buckinghamshire.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_321" style="width: 560px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_321.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 238.</span>&mdash;GATE-PIERS AT CANONS ASHBY,
-<span class="smcap">Northamptonshire</span>.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">Drawn by H. Inigo Triggs.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_322">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_322.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 239.</span>&mdash;Wooden Gates, Canons Ashby.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_323" style="width: 589px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_323.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 240.</span>&mdash;Design for Temple Bar, London, by
-Inigo Jones, 1636.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From the Burlington-Devonshire Collection at the R.I.B.A.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_324">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_324.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 241.</span>&mdash;Drawing of Gateway by Inigo Jones.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_325">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_325.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 242.</span>&mdash;Gate-Piers at Coleshill, Berkshire.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_326a">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_326a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 243.</span>&mdash;Gate-Piers at St John’s College,
-Cambridge.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_326b">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_326b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 244.</span>&mdash;Gate-Pier at Hampton Court.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_327">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_327.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 245.</span>&mdash;GATEWAY AT BURLEY-ON-THE HILL,
-<span class="smcap">Rutland</span>.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_328a">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_328a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 246.</span>&mdash;Lion Lodge, Ince Blundell,
-Lancashire.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_328b">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_328b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 247.</span>&mdash;Gateway at Castor, Northamptonshire.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_329" style="width: 650px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_329.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 248.</span>&mdash;Gate-Piers at Rundhurst, Sussex.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">J. A. Gotch, <i>del.</i></p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>From the earliest days it had been customary to give importance to the
-entrance of a house. When means of defence were a necessity, the access
-was through a portion of the main building, and so into a courtyard.
-The portal was flanked with turrets which at first were devised for its
-protection, but in later times were retained as handsome architectural
-features. Then came the period when defence was no longer necessary,
-and the forecourt was merely surrounded by a wall. Access to this<span class="pagenum" id="Page_322">[322]</span>
-court was generally obtained through a gate-house, and Elizabethan and
-Jacobean houses have innumerable examples of these charming buildings.
-In the smaller houses an archway replaced the gate-house, and in
-course of time the archway gave place to gate-piers. But through all
-the changes, the desire to give emphasis to the entrance remained,
-and every house with architectural pretensions had gate-piers more
-or less handsome. At Canons Ashby, in Northamptonshire, there are
-several good types (Fig. <a href="#i_321">238</a>); those between the green court and the
-park have a Jacobean flavour about them, while those at the bottom
-of the garden are surmounted by the family crest in the shape of a
-demi-lion holding a sphere. The gates which formerly hung between these
-piers (Fig. <a href="#i_322">239</a>) are probably the earliest example of garden gates in
-wood which survive, but they are so unconstructional in design that
-they threatened to fall to pieces, and were replaced by something
-plainer, but more convenient. Among the drawings by Jones and Webb
-are many of gateways, some rich in appearance, and some quite plain.
-The finest which remains is the well-known York water-gate at the
-foot of Buckingham Street (Fig. <a href="#i_061">35</a>). There are some careful<span class="pagenum" id="Page_323">[323]</span> drawings
-of this by Webb in the Burlington-Devonshire collection at the Royal
-Institute of British Architects. In the same collection is a design
-for Temple Bar by Jones (Fig. <a href="#i_323">240</a>), never carried out; a drawing of
-the constructional brickwork for the same, signed by him and dated
-1638; and a drawing by Webb dated 1636. The two large circular panels
-represent “Lætitia Publica” and “Hylaritas Publica.” If this design
-had been carried out, there would have been a grim irony in the custom
-of exhibiting rebels’ heads just above roundels of such cheerful<span class="pagenum" id="Page_324">[324]</span>
-intention. Among the numerous designs for gateways is the original by
-Jones of the little doorway which was once at Beaufort House, Chelsea,
-but is now at Chiswick, and an unnamed example illustrated in Fig.
-<a href="#i_324">241</a>. By the same master, in all probability, are the splendid piers
-at Coleshill, in Berkshire (Fig. <a href="#i_325">242</a>). Next in order of date are the
-gate-piers at Thorpe Hall, in Northamptonshire, by John Webb, shown
-in Fig. <a href="#i_092a">50</a>, and shortly after them is the fine series at Hamstead
-Marshall, of which some have already been illustrated in Figs. <a href="#i_166b">110</a>,
-<a href="#i_167">111</a>. These bring us down to the time of Wren, and at<span class="pagenum" id="Page_325">[325]</span> Hampton Court is
-the lordly pier shown in Fig. <a href="#i_326b">244</a>. At St John’s College, Cambridge, the
-piers shown in Fig. <a href="#i_326a">243</a> form part of the bridge built between 1696 and
-1712. They perpetuate to some extent the feeling of Tudor work in the
-rose, the portcullis, and the heraldic animals on their summits. All
-the large houses of the early eighteenth century, and many of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_329">[329]</span> the
-small ones, had noteworthy gates and gate-piers. There are hundreds of
-examples up and down the country, and that at Burley-on-the-Hill, near
-Oakham (Fig. <a href="#i_327">245</a>), is typical of the larger kind. This treatment, with
-lofty stone piers and iron gates of more or less elaborate design, is
-more frequent than that adopted at Ince Blundell Hall, in Lancashire,
-where an archway forms the main entrance, and is flanked on each side
-by a length of wall containing gates for foot traffic (Fig. <a href="#i_328a">246</a>).
-Many smaller examples might be cited, but their general effect can
-be gathered from the three illustrations in Figs. <a href="#i_328b">247</a>, <a href="#i_330a">249</a>, and <a href="#i_330b">250</a>,
-one of which is at a house at Castor, in Northamptonshire, another
-at a little house in Barrow Gurney, Somersetshire, and the third at
-one of the delightful houses in the Close at Salisbury. They are all
-quite unpretentious, but they impart a pleasant amount of interest and
-a certain degree of dignity to the houses which they serve. Another
-simple example is taken from a derelict house at Rundhurst, in Sussex
-(Fig. <a href="#i_329">248</a>), and at Uffington, in Lincolnshire, is the more important
-example in Fig. <a href="#i_331">251</a>, one of a pair of stone<span class="pagenum" id="Page_331">[331]</span> piers which support some
-good iron gates, through which, standing on the village road, a glimpse
-of the hall gardens can be obtained.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_330a">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_330a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 249.</span>&mdash;Gateway at Barrow Gurney, Somerset.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_330b">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_330b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 250.</span>&mdash;Gateway in the Close, Salisbury.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_331" style="width: 587px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_331.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 251.</span>&mdash;Gate-Pier at Uffington, near
-Stamford.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">J. A. Gotch, <i>del.</i></p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The tendency being, as already pointed out, towards a plain treatment
-of the exterior, largely owing to the substitution of sash-windows
-for mullioned, some amount of relief was imparted by a rich treatment
-of the principal door, but there came a time when even this modicum
-of decoration was abandoned, and the exterior of a house was dealt
-with on purely utilitarian principles, the necessary openings being
-provided, but devoid of any attempt at ornament. But before this last
-stage of imaginative poverty, or inertia maybe, was reached, doorways
-were provided which gave a touch of fancy to an otherwise bald front.
-The form of circular hood, supported by carved brackets and filled with
-a fluted cove, usually described as a shell, is a common<span class="pagenum" id="Page_333">[333]</span> feature of
-the work of the end of the seventeenth century and twenty years later.
-An example from Castle Combe, in Wiltshire, is shown in Fig. <a href="#i_332">252</a>. The
-centre from which the flutings radiate is here occupied by a small
-shield of arms. There is a rather plainer rendering of the same idea
-at Oundle, in Northamptonshire (Fig. <a href="#i_333">253</a>). Another rich form of hood,
-with straight outlines, may still be found in out-of-the-way streets
-and lanes in London, where the necessity for radical changes has not
-yet arisen. A simple form of this idea is shown in Fig. <a href="#i_335b">257</a>, where
-one hood covers two contiguous doorways. A treatment very commonly
-adopted was that shown in the example from York (Fig. <a href="#i_334b">255</a>), where
-the circular-headed doorway is covered with a pediment supported by
-pilasters; the semicircular space over the door is filled with a
-fanlight divided by thick bars. In this case the bars are simple in
-form, but they were often curved into curious patterns, surprising
-in their variety, and suggesting that the designers of the time had
-no lack of ingenuity had circumstances allowed them to display it.
-The extinguisher to the left of the doorway should be noted. It is a
-reminder of the times when there was no public lighting of the streets,
-when indeed the casual illumination from shops and from houses, private
-and public, was of the feeblest, and citizens had to find their way
-home through thoroughfares where no scavenger was employed, by the
-light of torches, which they extinguished as they entered their
-houses.<a id="FNanchor_82" href="#Footnote_82" class="fnanchor">[82]</a></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_332">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_332.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 252.</span>&mdash;DOORWAY AT CASTLE COMBE,
-<span class="smcap">Wiltshire</span>.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_333">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_333.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 253.</span>&mdash;Doorway at Oundle, Northamptonshire.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_334a">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_334a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 254.</span>&mdash;Doorway in Mark Lane, London.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_334b">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_334b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 255.</span>&mdash;A Doorway in York.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_335a">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_335a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 256.</span>&mdash;Doorways at Norwich.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_335b">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_335b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 257.</span>&mdash;Nos. 16 and 18 Fournier Street,
-London.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_336">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_336.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 258.</span>&mdash;Door, 22 Buckingham Street, Strand.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Of the same type as the last is the doorway at No. 33 Mark<span class="pagenum" id="Page_336">[336]</span> Lane,
-London (Fig. <a href="#i_334a">254</a>), but it is far more elaborate, and served as the
-entrance to one of the fine private houses which lined Mark Lane, but
-which now are utilised as offices, if by chance they have escaped the
-wholesale demolition and rebuilding which expanding commerce entails.
-Another good example is to be seen in Buckingham Street, Strand (Fig.
-<a href="#i_336">258</a>). Of later date is the double porch at Norwich (Fig. <a href="#i_335a">256</a>), which is
-simple and dignified, and will so remain as long as the two occupants
-are of the same mind as to the colour it should be painted. It will
-be noticed that in all these examples the doorway is the only feature
-of interest; the surrounding work is quite plain. At<span class="pagenum" id="Page_337">[337]</span> the Stationers’
-Hall, in London (Fig. <a href="#i_337">259</a>), we get a still later treatment, dating from
-the year 1800, when Robert Mylne cased the building with stone. The
-iron standards were probably devised to carry lamps, which shed enough
-light to help incomers up the steps; but all things are relative, and
-doubtless, at the time, two oil lamps were considered a brilliant
-illumination.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_337">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_337.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 259.</span>&mdash;Doorway at Stationers’ Hall, London.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_338">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_338.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 260.</span>&mdash;House at Yarmouth.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Here and there in old towns are to be found two-storied porches
-projecting from the face of a house like that at Yarmouth (Fig. <a href="#i_338">260</a>),
-which is the central feature of a front rather more elaborately
-treated than usual. In this case<span class="pagenum" id="Page_338">[338]</span> the porch stands on its own ground,
-but occasionally porches were built over part of the pavement, and
-the public traffic passed through them. It would be impossible for a
-private owner to take such liberty in the present day, when plans have
-to be submitted to the local council; but in those far-off<span class="pagenum" id="Page_339">[339]</span> times men
-of influence did many things which nobody was bold enough to stop; and
-while heartily agreeing that private interests must be subordinated to
-public, we may, perhaps, indulge in feelings of secret gratification
-that among our ancestors individuality had more play than is possible
-in these well ordered times. Another picturesque but, strictly
-speaking, intolerable effort at design is to be seen at The Martins,
-Chipping Campden (Fig. <a href="#i_340">261</a>). The great truncated corner pilaster, the
-porch with its cornice running into the window, can be defended on no
-grounds save that there they are. But so imperfect is our nature that
-this bit of haphazard composition gives more pleasure than many a more
-correct attempt at design; a pleasure allied, perhaps, to that cynical
-satisfaction we experience in watching shortcomings in our friends from
-which we ourselves are free.</p>
-
-<p>The ironwork of the early eighteenth century is one of its most
-remarkable productions. In England ironwork design seems to have burst
-suddenly into full splendour, without any gradual preparation. There
-are no elaborate specimens to be found throughout the seventeenth
-century until its close, nor are there any drawings by Thorpe,
-Smithson, Jones, or Webb, which lead one to suppose that they treated
-ironwork in any but the simplest way. But with the advent in 1689 of
-Jean Tijou, a native of France, who was probably brought over from
-the Netherlands by Queen Mary, consort of William III., the whole
-aspect was changed, and a school of clever blacksmiths grew up who
-filled the country, and more especially London and its suburbs, with
-beautiful bits of design in gates, fences, sign-boards, mace-holders
-in churches, balustrades of staircases, screens, and other objects
-where iron could be employed. Their work is marked by great judgment
-in varying the sizes of the iron bars and scrolls, by the variety and
-elaboration of the design, and by the judicious introduction of thin
-sheet iron, hammered and modelled into foliage or some heraldic device.
-The craftsmen seem to have known exactly how to handle their material
-so as to combine strength with lightness, vigour with delicacy, the
-open effect of scroll-work with the solid effect of foliage. The due
-mixture of the curved line with the straight, the growth of one from
-the other, the repetition of straight lines in suitable positions,
-all seem to have come to them by intuition which seldom erred. Of the
-immense amount of work<span class="pagenum" id="Page_340">[340]</span> which still survives, the proportion of weak,
-unmeaning, or ill-adapted design is infinitesimal. Something, no doubt,
-they owed to France, but they worked largely on their own lines, and
-established a school of design which is essentially English.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_340">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_340.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 261.</span>&mdash;The Martins, Chipping Campden, 1714.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_341a">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_341a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 262.</span>&mdash;Part of Iron Screen, Hampton Court Palace.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_341b">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_341b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 263.</span>&mdash;Iron Gateway, Stoneleigh Abbey,
-Warwickshire.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Tijou worked for Queen Mary at Hampton Court, where he placed some of
-the richest screens and gates which the country can boast. A portion
-of his work is illustrated in Fig. <a href="#i_341a">262</a>. He also executed some splendid
-ironwork at Chatsworth, Burghley, and St Paul’s, London. The balustrade
-to the king’s staircase at Hampton Court (Fig. <a href="#i_342">264</a>) may also in all
-probability be assigned to him. He must have had assistants, among whom
-Huntingdon Shaw, of Nottingham, has been reckoned the chief, and indeed
-the actual work on the screens at Hampton Court<span class="pagenum" id="Page_342">[342]</span> has been claimed as
-his; but recent investigations show conclusively that the claim cannot
-be sustained.<a id="FNanchor_83" href="#Footnote_83" class="fnanchor">[83]</a> Another of Tijou’s assistants was Robert Bakewell,
-who settled in Derby and was widely employed in the Midlands. To him,
-perhaps, we owe the gates at Stoneleigh Abbey, illustrated in Fig. <a href="#i_341b">263</a>,
-although tradition says that these were brought here from Watergate, a
-dismantled mansion beyond Southam.<a id="FNanchor_84" href="#Footnote_84" class="fnanchor">[84]</a> The ironwork in and round London
-may be largely attributed to Thomas Robinson and his successors, and
-it would appear that skilful smiths settled in different centres in
-England, round which they influenced the work over a wide area. Bristol
-was the home of such a man, William Edney by name, and that he was an
-accomplished craftsman is proved by the magnificent gates at St Mary
-Redcliffe (Fig. <a href="#i_343">265</a>), which date from 1710.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_342">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_342.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 264.</span>&mdash;Balustrade to the King’s Staircase,
-Hampton Court.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_343">[343]</span></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_343">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_343.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 265.</span>&mdash;IRON GATES AT ST MARY REDCLIFFE,
-BRISTOL.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_344">[344]</span></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_344" style="width: 553px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_344.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 266.</span>&mdash;Gateway formerly at Quenby Hall,
-Leicestershire.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">Museum, Leicester.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Examples without number could be produced of English ironwork of this
-period, but space forbids any but a few specimens being cited. There
-was a splendid gateway at Quenby Hall, Leicestershire, with elaborate
-iron piers, now in<span class="pagenum" id="Page_345">[345]</span> front of the museum at Leicester (Fig. <a href="#i_344">266</a>).<a id="FNanchor_85" href="#Footnote_85" class="fnanchor">[85]</a>
-The four examples shown in Figs. <a href="#i_346a">268–271</a> are of far simpler design,
-but they are worth careful study, and are typical of the ordinary work
-of the time. In the gate from Acton the solid work is aptly introduced
-and gives it richness and importance; the others exhibit a judicious
-combination of simplicity and richness which is quite admirable. Indeed
-the ironwork of the early part of the eighteenth century has never been
-bettered either in design or execution.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_345">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_345.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 267.</span>&mdash;Lead Cistern in the possession of Mr
-L. A. Shuffrey.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_346a" style="width: 464px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_346a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 268.</span>&mdash;Gate at Elm Hall, Snaresbrook.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">A. H. Ough, <i>del.</i></p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_346b" style="width: 586px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_346b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 269.</span>&mdash;Gate at Acton, now demolished.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">Launcelot Fedder, <i>del.</i></p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_347a" style="width: 430px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_347a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 270.</span>&mdash;Gate at Lawn House, Woodford Road, London.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">A. H. Ough, <i>del.</i></p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_347b" style="width: 650px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_347b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 271.</span>&mdash;Gate at Romford Road, Stratford,
-near London.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">G. G. Poston, <i>del.</i></p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_348a">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_348a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 272.</span>&mdash;Lead Rain-Water Head, High Street,
-Birmingham.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_348b">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_348b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 273.</span>&mdash;Lead Rain-Water Head at the
-Aylesford Hotel, Warwick.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Ornamental leadwork was a characteristic feature of English houses as
-early as the time of Elizabeth, and many beautiful rain-water heads
-of that period still survive. They had worthy successors all through
-the seventeenth century and well into the eighteenth. Some of the
-rain-water heads at St John’s College, Oxford, of the time of Charles
-I., are splendid things of their kind. Many houses built during the
-next hundred years retain fine examples of similar features (Fig.
-<a href="#i_348a">272</a>), and indeed, as long as it was necessary to fashion such things
-by hand, the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_349">[349]</span> craftsman imparted character to his work even if it
-was of a simple and unobtrusive kind (Fig. <a href="#i_348b">273</a>); but with the advent of
-the speculative builder, the number of such things required, and the
-necessity of a rapid and cheap supply, led to more expeditious methods,
-and with the advent of cast-iron heads a general level of dullness
-and monotony was reached. The scope of lead ornament was necessarily
-restricted, it was only here and there that it was applicable; the
-other direction in which it was largely used was in cisterns or
-troughs of which examples occasionally occur, but lead being always a
-marketable commodity, most of these objects, when once out of use, were
-sold for melting and re-use. Some good examples dated 1728, 1714 and
-1755 are shown in Figs. <a href="#i_345">267</a>, <a href="#i_349">274</a>.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_349">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_349.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 274.</span>&mdash;Two Examples of Lead Cisterns.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_350">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_350.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 275.</span>&mdash;THE STAIRCASE, KING’S WESTON,
-<span class="smcap">Gloucestershire</span>.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The English craftsman has always been able to do good work when he has
-had the opportunity. Even during the period when house design may be
-held to be void of interest, there are numberless examples of fittings,
-or furniture, or household articles which show his skill, and if a free
-and reasonable view of design is maintained, there is every prospect of
-his doing as good work in the future as he has done in the past.</p>
-<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_351">[351]</span></p>
-
-<h2>XI<br />
-<span class="subhed">INTERNAL FEATURES (EIGHTEENTH CENTURY)</span></h2></div>
-
-<p>The internal decoration of houses of the seventeenth century has
-already been described, and incidentally a considerable number of
-examples have been given of the treatment of later houses; but it
-is desirable to treat the subject a little more fully than has been
-possible in former chapters.</p>
-
-<p>In entering an eighteenth-century house the visitor found himself
-in a large vestibule or hall&mdash;not the old-fashioned hall of the
-early seventeenth century, which was itself one of the principal
-living-rooms, but a hall which was merely a vestibule or ante-room
-leading to the living-rooms. Sometimes it had a fireplace, but
-sometimes not; in either case it was not regarded as a room for
-constant use. In houses of the middle size it contained the staircase,
-and the same held good in many of larger size; but in the largest the
-hall was frequently the most striking apartment in the house, as for
-instance at Houghton (Fig. <a href="#i_254">174</a>) and Prior Park (Fig. <a href="#i_264">182</a>).</p>
-
-<p>The staircases were always handsomely treated. As a rule they were of
-wood, but a few instances occur of marble steps and balustrades, and
-of stone steps with iron balustrades. The typical English staircase
-is of wood, with turned wood balusters. For a short time during the
-seventeenth century foliated balustrades had been the fashion (see
-Figs. <a href="#i_125">80–82</a>), but towards its close the turned baluster reasserted
-itself. Massive handrails and solid strings were still retained, as
-in the example from the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford (Fig. <a href="#i_353a">277</a>); and many
-examples of simple staircases of this type are to be found in the
-Temple, London, and the surrounding neighbourhood.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_352">[352]</span></p>
-
-<p>An important development in design occurred when the old-fashioned
-solid string was abandoned, and the balusters rested upon the steps
-themselves. This change took place about the beginning of the
-eighteenth century, and there is an early example at King’s Weston,
-in Gloucestershire (Fig. <a href="#i_350">275</a>). The steps are very deep from back to
-front, so much so that each step overlaps the second one above it.
-The nosings are carried along the end of every step and returned
-back to the wall under the step above; the bottom edge of this is
-finished with a moulding which returns and rests on the nosing of the
-step below. A very similar treatment is adopted at Boughton House,
-in Northamptonshire (Fig. <a href="#i_352">276</a>), but here the edge of the soffit has
-a moulding like the nosing, but reversed: the junction of the two is
-masked by a wood block. These blocks are all painted with arms of the
-Montagus and their alliances, which prompted Horace Walpole to inquire
-whether the chief staircase at Boughton was intended for the “descent
-of the Montagus.” Another point to be noticed in the King’s Weston
-example is that the two bottom steps are carried out sideways beyond
-the others and rounded off with a bold sweep, and that the handrail
-is wreathed round instead of finishing against a large newel. This
-is a treatment which only became possible on the abandonment of the
-old-fashioned newels and strings.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_352" style="width: 423px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_352.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 276.</span>&mdash;Staircase at Boughton House,
-Northamptonshire.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">J. A. Gotch, <i>del.</i></p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_353a">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_353a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 277.</span>&mdash;Staircase, Ashmolean, Oxford.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_353b">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_353b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 278.</span>&mdash;Staircase in a House in Queen
-Street, Salisbury.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_354">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_354.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 279.</span>&mdash;Staircase at Melton Constable, Norfolk.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>A variation of the treatment adopted at Boughton may be seen in an old
-house in Salisbury (Fig. <a href="#i_353b">278</a>), where the nosings are still carried back
-some distance, but are supported by carved<span class="pagenum" id="Page_354">[354]</span> brackets. It will be seen
-that the old stout newels have been replaced by small columns slightly
-larger than the balusters, and that the handrail is continuous, being
-bent upwards in a ramp where it has suddenly to attain a higher level.
-It is curved at the bottom in a large sweep similar to those at Kings
-Weston. At Melton Constable (Fig. <a href="#i_354">279</a>) the same ideas are adopted, but
-here the risers of the stairs are panelled. It is clear from this<span class="pagenum" id="Page_355">[355]</span>
-that no stair carpets were contemplated, a point which is emphasised
-elsewhere by the fact that the landings and treads were often inlaid
-with different woods cut into patterns. Most of the staircases of the
-time were broad and of easy gradient, the balusters were short, and
-were either turned in graceful outlines or were twisted as at Melton
-Constable. At Denham Place, in Buckinghamshire (Fig. <a href="#i_355">280</a>), the effect
-is quite satisfactory, although the stairs are narrower and steeper
-than usual, and the balusters are longer. This effect is obtained by
-the care bestowed upon the proportion and outline of the balusters.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_355">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_355.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 280.</span>&mdash;Staircase at Denham Place,
-Buckinghamshire.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Towards the close of the eighteenth century another form of staircase
-came into vogue. This consisted of a continuous<span class="pagenum" id="Page_356">[356]</span> flight of stone
-steps, often oval in plan, leading from floor to floor in one sweep.
-Each step rested on that below, and one of its ends was built into the
-wall, thereby obviating the necessity of any expedient for supporting
-the other end. By this means a free space was obtained beneath the
-staircase. The general effect, although light and sometimes graceful,
-was a little cold and meagre; but it was quite in character with the
-rather severe schemes of decoration prevalent at the time (Fig. <a href="#i_356">281</a>).</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_356">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_356.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 281.</span>&mdash;Staircase at No. 35 Lincoln’s Inn
-Fields.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>In the larger houses much attention was bestowed upon the doorways:
-there is a good example at Godmersham Park,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_357">[357]</span> in Kent (Fig. <a href="#i_357">282</a>), where
-the broken pediment affords space for the central feature of a design
-modelled in high relief. As here, so in many other instances, the door
-is of mahogany and the surrounding woodwork is painted white. The
-example from Honington Hall, in Warwickshire (Fig. <a href="#i_358">283</a>), not only shows
-an important doorway, but also the domed and coffered ceiling of a
-lofty room, as well as walls with panels of plaster, and large pendants
-of fruit and birds in the manner of Grinling Gibbons. In houses of the
-early part of the eighteenth century there was often one room occupying
-two stories in height; sometimes it was the hall, sometimes, as in this
-case, a saloon or drawing-room.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_357">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_357.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 282.</span>&mdash;Doorway at Godmersham Park, Kent.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_358">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_358.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 283.</span>&mdash;HONINGTON HALL,
-<span class="smcap">Warwickshire</span>.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>In smaller houses were such doorways as that at Bourdon<span class="pagenum" id="Page_359">[359]</span> House, London
-(Fig. <a href="#i_359">284</a>), where there is carving enough to impart interest to the
-design without over-weighting it; and at Seckford Hall, in Suffolk,
-is a simple but effective treatment (Fig. <a href="#i_360a">285</a>) which is well within
-the compass of an ordinary joiner. A great variety of effect can be
-obtained at small cost by dint of a little thought and a determination
-not to be too much bound by correct precedents. It is one of the
-failings of the ordinary eighteenth-century designer that he feared to
-depart from the patterns published in books.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_359">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_359.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 284.</span>&mdash;Doorway at Bourdon House, Mayfair,
-London.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Very great changes in the manner of treating the walls of a room
-occurred during the course of the century. At first they were panelled
-with wood&mdash;not with the small panels of Jacobean times, but with large
-panels surrounded by bold mouldings, such as those at Denham Place
-(Fig. <a href="#i_361">287</a>). Here<span class="pagenum" id="Page_360">[360]</span> the mouldings are enriched with carving, which adds
-considerable richness, but as a rule the mouldings were plain; various
-examples have already been given in Figs. <a href="#i_184">122</a>, <a href="#i_189">126</a>, <a href="#i_198">135</a>, <a href="#i_205">139</a>. There
-was usually a low dado with long horizontal panels, and above the dado
-rail were lofty vertical panels reaching up to a massive cornice. The
-effect is always simple and dignified, whether the material is oak
-or painted deal. Of course the panels very much restrict the freedom
-of arrangement of pictures, but in those days pictures were not so
-plentiful as they became later, prints were few, and so were the
-amateur artists who bestow the fruit of their elegant leisure upon
-their friends. The panels therefore hampered nobody, and they were
-in themselves a sufficient decoration. Family portraits or notable
-pictures were sometimes framed into them as part of the scheme.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_360a">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_360a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 285.</span>&mdash;Head of a Doorway, Seckford Hall,
-Suffolk.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_360b" style="width: 371px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_360b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 286.</span>&mdash;Panelling in the Audit Room, Boughton House,
-Northamptonshire.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_361">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_361.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 287.</span>&mdash;THE LIBRARY, DENHAM PLACE,
-<span class="smcap">Buckinghamshire</span>.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_362">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_362.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 288.</span>&mdash;STONELEIGH ABBEY,
-<span class="smcap">Warwickshire</span>. <span class="smcap">The Saloon, by Smith of Warwick.</span></p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_363">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_363.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 289.</span>&mdash;House in Queen Square, Bath.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The backgrounds of engravings published during the first half of
-the eighteenth century often show these large panels, as well as
-sash-windows with stout bars. They seem to harmonise with the flowing
-wigs, the wide coat skirts<span class="pagenum" id="Page_363">[363]</span> and knee-breeches of the actors in the
-incidents which the prints are intended to record.</p>
-
-<p>An unusual form of panelling, but one which is both cheap and
-effective, is to be seen in the audit room at Boughton House (Fig.
-<a href="#i_360b">286</a>). It consists of boards nailed vertically to the wall, having the
-joints covered with a moulding; below is a skirting, and above is a
-frieze and cornice.</p>
-
-<p>Wood panelling was gradually superseded by panels formed in plaster on
-the plastered walls. Gibb’s drawings have already afforded examples of
-this treatment (Figs. <a href="#i_241">166–169</a>), and any book of the eighteenth century
-on house design will supply others. Stoneleigh Abbey, Kenilworth, has
-panels of unusual richness (Fig. <a href="#i_362">288</a>), and a house in Queen Square,
-Bath, by one of the Woods, has some delicately modelled panels on the
-staircase (Fig. <a href="#i_363">289</a>). The drawback to this method of decoration is
-that, being rather ambitious in aim, it challenges criticism much more
-definitely than does simple panelling. It is conceivable that<span class="pagenum" id="Page_364">[364]</span> one
-eventually might tire of seeing the same youth piping to the same old
-man, and the same lady for ever playing the same organ without looking
-at her notes.</p>
-
-<p>But a more radical change in wall decoration was to come in the shape
-of wall-papers. The early history of this method of adorning rooms
-has not been fully explored, but it seems clear that already in the
-seventeenth century sheets of paper covered with stencilled patterns
-had been pasted on to walls, or perhaps on to the panels into which
-they were divided. This was a laborious and by no means cheap process,
-but it contained the germ of the procedure which is so widely adopted
-to-day. Another and even more effective step was taken when Chinese
-papers were introduced (Fig. <a href="#i_365">290</a>). These papers consisted of rolls,
-each printed with a portion of a large design, which required some
-five or six pieces to complete it. It was probably of such sets that
-the vivacious Lady Mary Wortley Montague, most celebrated of blue
-stockings, wrote to her daughter from Louvere, in 1749, to say, “I have
-heard the fame of paper hangings, and had some thoughts of sending for
-a suite, but was informed that they were as dear as damask is here,
-which put an end to my curiosity.” In some cases curiosity outweighed
-thriftiness, and the suites still remain in a few old houses; here
-and there some of the original rolls still exist, rolls which for
-some reason or other were not used, and which have luckily escaped
-destruction. Chinese papers became fashionable, and it is not difficult
-to imagine the process of evolution from rolls&mdash;each bearing part of a
-large design either of trees and flowers, or of a landscape or a figure
-subject, after the manner of tapestry&mdash;to other rolls all printed alike
-and forming a continuous pattern, with the parts duly repeated, which
-should cover the whole walls with decoration of a sort. The advantages
-of the new method were obvious: it was cheap; and although at first
-the paper was applied to canvas nailed to battens on the wall, yet
-eventually it was placed on the wall itself, and thus did away with
-the spaces between the walls and the panelling or tapestry, where dirt
-or spiders or more noxious insects could harbour; rough surfaces were
-rendered smooth, joints between wood frames and stone or brick walls
-were filled with plaster, and draughts were lessened. Most of these
-advantages were obtained by plastered walls ornamented with panels,
-but plain surfaces<span class="pagenum" id="Page_365">[365]</span> covered with paper were cheaper, and gave greater
-scope for the unrestricted hanging of pictures and prints as the taste
-for such things developed. Then, again, more and more people lived in
-hired houses, and with every fresh tenant new papers could readily be
-pasted over the old. There was no idea in those days of stripping off
-the previous papers; and in dealing with ancient houses as many as
-twenty layers of paper have sometimes been found. But our notions of
-sanitation have improved, and in the present day everything is removed
-down to the plaster before the new paper is hung.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_365">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_365.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 290.</span>&mdash;A Chinese Paper, Ramsbury,
-Wiltshire.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_366" style="width: 750px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_366.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 291.</span>&mdash;TAPESTRY: SUBJECT, VULCAN AND VENUS.
-<span class="smcap">Woven at Mortlake</span>, <i>circa</i> 1620.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">In the Victoria and Albert Museum.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_367">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_367.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 292.</span>&mdash;Chimney-Piece in the Mayor’s
-Parlour, The Town Hall, South Molton, Devonshire.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The Chinese papers, as already observed, had some affinity<span class="pagenum" id="Page_367">[367]</span> in
-their subjects to tapestry, and tapestry had been a favourite means
-of covering walls from very early times (Figs. <a href="#i_366">291</a>, <a href="#i_368">293</a>). In the
-seventeenth century it was much in vogue among the rich, both on the
-Continent and in England, and a noble form of decoration it is. It
-would be beside the mark to recount the history of tapestry weaving at
-any length, but it is of interest to know that during the seventeenth
-century the English factory at Mortlake was the most renowned in the
-world, and produced some of the finest tapestries that have come down
-to us. The factory was founded in 1619 by James I., and with it are
-connected the names of two families who have already been mentioned
-in these pages. The first was that of the Cranes, the other the
-Montagus.<a id="FNanchor_86" href="#Footnote_86" class="fnanchor">[86]</a> Sir Francis Crane, who built a house at Stoke Bruerne,
-in Northamptonshire (see pp. 174, 176), managed the factory for many
-years on behalf of the king, and made a considerable fortune. The
-factory flourished under James I. and Charles I., but declined under
-the Commonwealth. After<span class="pagenum" id="Page_369">[369]</span> the Restoration new vigour was imparted to
-it; it passed from the direct patronage of the king and was acquired
-in 1674 by the Montagus, whose house at Boughton (see pp. 196–199)
-retains many splendid examples from its looms. But by this time the
-factory at Gobelins was producing work as fine as that at Mortlake, if
-not finer, and this circumstance, together with the declining taste
-for tapestries, brought the Mortlake venture to an end in 1703.<a id="FNanchor_87" href="#Footnote_87" class="fnanchor">[87]</a>
-Tapestries were at all times chiefly for the wealthy, but early in the
-eighteenth century they began to go out of fashion, and were superseded
-by the other modes of decoration already described.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_368">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_368.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 293.</span>&mdash;THE TAPESTRY DRAWING-ROOM, POWIS
-CASTLE, <span class="smcap">Montgomery</span>.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>At the beginning of the eighteenth century fireplaces were, as a rule,
-still contrived for the burning of wood logs. They were wide and deep,
-and were generally surrounded by a very bold moulding of stone or
-marble, like that in the Town Hall at South Molton (Fig. <a href="#i_367">292</a>). The
-panelling of the room was often brought up to the marble, and continued
-above it with an additional richness over the fireplace; but sometimes
-there was a special margin provided round the large moulding, as in the
-case of South Molton. Occasionally it was found convenient to place the
-fireplace in a corner of the room, which led to some such ingenious
-treatment as that in Fig. <a href="#i_369">294</a>, which is from a room at Boughton House.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_369">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_369.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 294.</span>&mdash;Corner Fireplace at Boughton House.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Open fireplaces like these required fire-dogs on which to place the
-logs for the increase of the draught, and a great variety<span class="pagenum" id="Page_370">[370]</span> of such
-dogs or andirons were produced, varying in character from rich and
-admirably modelled specimens like that in the queen’s guard chamber
-at Hampton Court (Fig. <a href="#i_370">295</a>), down to the simplest forms. It was also
-necessary to have fire-backs of cast iron to prevent the fire from
-eating away the brickwork against which it was piled. The various
-iron works in Sussex and elsewhere produced a great quantity of these
-backs of all degrees of elaboration. The ornament most frequently
-adopted was a shield of arms, either those of the sovereign, or those
-of the family who usually warmed themselves at the fire; but the range
-of design was considerable, and included floral and figure subjects
-(Figs. <a href="#i_371a">296–298</a>), as well as patterns of extreme simplicity. Other
-accessories were tongs, bellows, and sometimes a fire shovel. The tongs
-were sufficiently stout to enable the logs to be handled; the bellows
-produced life in an almost dead fire with wonderful celerity; the
-shovel was used to bank up the ashes, which were allowed to accumulate
-in a great heap, and thereby preserved warmth during the night.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_370">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_370.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 295.</span>&mdash;Fire-Dog at Hampton Court, in the
-Queen’s Guard Chamber.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_371a">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_371a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 296.</span>&mdash;Fire-Back and Dogs, Sutton Place.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_371b">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_371b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 297.</span>&mdash;Fire-Basket at Penshurst, Kent.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_372">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_372.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 298.</span>&mdash;Jamb of Fireplace, Abbot’s Hall,
-Battle Abbey, Sussex.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>But early in the eighteenth century a rapid change took place in the
-kind of fuel consumed, and coal superseded wood. Sea-coal, that is
-sea-borne coal, had been in occasional use for<span class="pagenum" id="Page_372">[372]</span> many years; now it
-was to become universal. The change is curiously indicated in some
-inventories of 1720, made for one “Francis Hawes, of London, Esq.,
-one of the late directors of the South Sea Company.” When that great
-bubble burst Francis Hawes had to be sold up, and in consequence a
-complete statement of his affairs had to be prepared. It includes three
-inventories, two of manor-houses in the country, and one of a house in
-Winchester Street, London. In regard to the point under consideration,
-some of the rooms, especially the bedrooms, had iron hearths, dogs,
-tongs, bellows, and fire shovels, which were requisite for the
-old-fashioned wood fires; others, including the parlours and hall, had
-the grates, shovels, tongs, pokers, and fenders requisite for coal
-fires.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_373">[373]</span></p>
-
-<p>So, too, had the servants’ hall, whereas the drawing-room had an open
-fire. We may, therefore, conclude that the rooms in most frequent use
-had the newer contrivances, the most noteworthy of which were the
-grates, the pokers (for breaking the coal, and quite unnecessary with
-a wood fire), and the fenders. It is clear that in 1720 Francis Hawes
-had only partially adopted coal as his fuel, but the use of it quickly
-spread, and henceforward we find grates of various kinds in common use.
-Some of these were in effect baskets to hold the coal (Fig. <a href="#i_371b">297</a>), and
-they were placed in the old openings. Others were so large as to hold
-either wood or coal, an intermediate step of which there is an example
-at Dyrham, in Gloucestershire. In later years the basket grates gave
-way to cast-iron grates which filled the whole width of the recess,
-and were built<span class="pagenum" id="Page_374">[374]</span> in as fixtures (Figs. <a href="#i_373">299</a>, <a href="#i_374">300</a>). Some of the patterns
-were delicately modelled and charmingly designed, but as heat-producers
-these grates were crude to a degree. They merely held the coal. No
-attempt was made to regulate its consumption, or to direct its heat
-into the room; a large proportion went up the chimney, and chimneys
-were still built of the generous dimensions which had been customary
-in the days of wood fires. These generous dimensions were a length of
-four or five feet by a width of two or three at the base, gradually
-diminishing towards the outlet above the roof. Where the flues passed
-through the bedrooms they occupied a large amount of space, but
-generally left room at the sides for those deep cupboards which are
-often to be found in old houses. The only way to sweep such enormous
-shafts was for somebody to clamber up them with a brush. This dirty and
-dangerous task<span class="pagenum" id="Page_375">[375]</span> was usually imposed upon the chimney sweep’s boy, until
-it was prohibited by legislation, but modern fires have flues of such
-small size as not to admit the most diminutive boy.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_373">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_373.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 299.</span>&mdash;Fire-Grate at Kew Palace.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_374">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_374.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 300.</span>&mdash;Fire-Grate at Kew Palace.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>When huge fires were customary, they warmed the huge flues above them,
-and down-draughts were prevented; but when the same huge flues were
-warmed only by a basketful of coal, there was no longer the same upward
-draught, and the fires began to smoke. To remedy this, new fireplaces
-were made rather smaller, and the flues were slightly contracted;
-but the remedy was not effectual, and the next step, taken towards
-the end of the eighteenth century, was to fill up the large opening,
-and thereby restrict the access of air to the space occupied by the
-fire, and thus came into being the first of our modern fire-grates,
-which carry no suggestion with them of the ancient open fire on the
-hearth. This form of grate was an improvement, but it was wasteful
-and inefficient, and was at length superseded by the numerous modern
-contrivances which minimise the consumption of fuel, and direct more of
-the heat into the room and less up the flue. It would be rash to say
-that they have done away with smoky chimneys, but at any rate they have
-made them the exception rather than the rule.</p>
-
-<p>The inventories of Francis Hawes are interesting in other ways than
-in marking the change from the ancient wood fires to the modern coal
-fires: they tell us of the manner in which his rooms were adorned and
-furnished. It would be outside the scope of the present inquiry to
-enter into these details at any length, but a few of the words thus
-spoken direct from the past may be worth listening to. The parlours
-of the London house were apparently panelled or otherwise decorated
-with some fixed material, since no mention is made of hangings. They
-had chimney-glasses, sconces of brass or glass, and curtains to the
-windows: of furniture one had two card-tables, ten red Turkey-leather
-chairs, a leather screen, sixteen pictures, and a painted cloth for
-the floor&mdash;not a very elaborate furnishing. The other parlour had a
-pier glass and marble slab, a scrutoire, six cane chairs, two Dutch
-chairs, a leather dressing-chair, two tables, a small nest of drawers,
-eight pictures, and a small carpet. The effect must have been rather
-bare according to modern standards, but these have gone to the other
-extreme, with the result that many rooms are now overcrowded with
-furniture.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_376">[376]</span> Upstairs one of the rooms must have been a gallery, for
-it had no chairs, but was full of curios and <i>objets d’art</i>. The
-bedrooms of all the houses were also sparsely furnished. They nearly
-all had large bedsteads, evidently four-posters, with furniture of
-different kinds, camlet lined with silk, yellow mohair, green or
-crimson harratine, green serge, and other materials. The walls were
-hung in most cases with materials of the same kind, blue china, crimson
-harratine, tapestry, mohair, or Irish stitch and Dutch matting. There
-were curtains to the windows. One of the smaller bedrooms had but a
-table and dressing-glass, a couple of chairs and a box; another had
-a “bewreau” and a card-table in addition. The larger ones had two
-tables, half a dozen chairs, stools, a nest of drawers, a bookcase, and
-a number of pictures. It is noteworthy how seldom mention is made of
-a basin or even of a dressing-table with a glass. This confirms what
-has already been indicated&mdash;that our ancestors of those days spent but
-little time upon their toilet. Very few rooms had a carpet but nearly
-every one had a hand-bell, some had as many as four.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_376">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_376.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 301.</span>&mdash;Chimney-Piece in the George Inn,
-Winchester.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_377">[377]</span></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_377">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_377.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 302.</span>&mdash;Chimney-Piece in the Deanery, Wells.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_378a" style="width: 650px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_378a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 303.</span>&mdash;Design for a Chimney-Piece, by
-Flaxman.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">From the Ionides Collection in the V. and A. M.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_378b">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_378b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 304.</span>&mdash;Marble Chimney-Piece, 60 Carey
-Street, London.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>But to return to the question of fireplaces, and more particularly
-to the chimney-pieces which surrounded them. The method adopted in
-William III.’s time of having merely a bold moulding round the opening,
-tended to establish the practice of having chimney-pieces of one
-stage in height instead of two. In Jacobean time most of the large
-chimney-pieces reached from the floor to the ceiling; so they did in
-the mid-seventeenth century under Inigo Jones and John Webb, although
-a few of their designs show one stage only. When the “Designs of Inigo
-Jones” were published by Kent in 1727, they gave an impetus again to
-the two-stage type, such as that shown in<span class="pagenum" id="Page_379">[379]</span> Fig. <a href="#i_249">170</a>; but smaller and
-less pretentious patterns were frequently adopted, of which a typical
-example is shown in Fig. <a href="#i_376">301</a>; here a marble slab surrounds the opening,
-and is in its turn surrounded by a small wood moulding and surmounted
-by a flat frieze and a cornice which forms the mantel shelf. This type
-held the field all through the eighteenth century, sometimes plain,
-sometimes enriched, as in the example from the Deanery at Wells (Fig.
-<a href="#i_377">302</a>). A variation, all in marble, is shown in Fig. <a href="#i_378b">304</a>, from a house in
-Carey Street.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_379" style="width: 452px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_379.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 305.</span>&mdash;Design for a Chimney-Piece at
-Shardiloes House, 1761, by Robert Adam.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">In the Soane Museum.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_380">[380]</span></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_380">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_380.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 306.</span>&mdash;CEILING AT THE LAW COURTS,
-NORTHAMPTON.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_381">[381]</span></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_381" style="width: 750px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_381.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 307.</span>&mdash;Ceiling at No. 16 Bishopsgate Street
-Without, London.</p>
-     <p class="right p-min sm">Now in the Victoria and Albert Museum.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Under the influence of the brothers Adam, detail of exquisite
-delicacy was introduced, including panels of well-modelled figures.
-This ornament was sometimes carved in marble or wood, but still more
-frequently worked in composition and applied to the woodwork. An
-example by Robert Adam is shown in Fig. <a href="#i_379">305</a>, and a design by Flaxman in
-Fig. <a href="#i_378a">303</a>.</p>
-
-<p>We have already seen in Chapter V. how the busy ceilings of the
-Jacobean type changed into the coffered ceilings of Inigo Jones and
-Webb, who established a type which held the field, under Wren and his
-successors, well into the eighteenth century. The general tendency was
-to increase the relief of the plasterwork, to imitate nature instead
-of conventionalising it; to work on the same lines which Grinling
-Gibbons was following with his carving in wood. The result was that
-the plasterwork had frequently to be modelled on wire which formed the
-stems of the leaves, and much of it was completely detached from the
-surface of the ceiling which it adorned. A very fine example of this
-treatment is to be seen in the Courts of Justice at Northampton (Fig.
-<a href="#i_380">306</a>).</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_382">[382]</span></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_382">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_382.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 308.</span>&mdash;OLD BUCKINGHAM HOUSE. THE STAIRCASE,
-<span class="smcap">with Painted Ceiling and Walls</span>.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_383">[383]</span></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_383">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_383.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 309.</span>&mdash;HAMPTON COURT PALACE. THE GRAND
-STAIRCASE, <span class="smcap">with Painted Ceiling and Walls</span>.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_384">[384]</span></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_384">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_384.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 310.</span>&mdash;Part of a Painted Ceiling, Boughton
-House.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Contemporary with this kind of ceiling was a treatment entirely
-different, which was in vogue in great houses during the reigns of
-Charles II., James II., and William and Mary; this was the painting of
-immense plain surfaces with allegorical, mythological, and scriptural
-subjects. Old Buckingham House had a large ceiling of the kind over
-the principal staircase (Fig. <a href="#i_382">308</a>); and the walls were painted so as
-to produce the effect of architectural perspective. This fashion is
-intimately associated with the name of Verrio, an Italian painter,
-who was brought to England by Charles II. He and his assistant and
-successor Laguerre are the best known of those who worked in this line
-of decoration, for they are immortalised by Pope, who describes how
-in a great house, being summoned “to all the pride of prayer” in the
-chapel&mdash;</p>
-
-  <div class="poetry-container">
-    <div class="poetry">
-      <div class="stanza">
-        <div class="ileft">“On painted ceilings you devoutly stare</div>
-        <div>Where sprawl the saints of Verrio and Laguerre.”</div>
-      </div>
-    </div>
-  </div>
-
-<p>But there were several other artists engaged by wealthy noblemen to do
-similar work; among them was Cheron at Boughton House, and Lanscroon at
-Drayton, both in Northamptonshire.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_385">[385]</span> But Verrio was by far the busiest
-of all, and did a vast amount of work at Windsor, Hampton Court,
-and Burghley House, among other places. Over the grand staircase at
-Hampton Court (Fig. <a href="#i_383">309</a>) the composition which occupies the ceiling is
-brought down on to the walls. This device was sometimes adopted with
-the view, apparently, of bringing ceiling and walls into one scheme;
-but although the technique is clever, the effect is rather confusing.
-The examples from Boughton House (Figs. <a href="#i_384">310</a>, <a href="#i_385">311</a>) show a simpler and
-more intelligible treatment. Evelyn frequently mentions Verrio with
-high commendation, and his work and that of his school is extremely
-clever, and were it more easily seen and with less physical discomfort,
-doubtless it would beget more admiration than it actually does. Verrio
-died in 1707 and Laguerre twenty years later. Their tradition was
-carried on for another ten or twelve years by Sir James Thornhill, but
-it then died out, and painting on ceilings was confined to small panels.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_385">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_385.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 311.</span>&mdash;Part of Ceiling over the Staircase,
-Boughton House.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>It was chiefly in the larger houses that ornamental ceilings were now
-introduced. In those of ordinary size, and those built<span class="pagenum" id="Page_386">[386]</span> on speculation
-to let to tenants, the ceilings were for the most part plain. Where
-design was employed it became less ambitious, and during the second
-quarter of the eighteenth century it produced such comparatively simple
-work as that in a house in Bishopsgate Street Without (Fig. <a href="#i_381">307</a>), or
-that in the Spenser room at Canons Ashby, in Northamptonshire (Fig.
-<a href="#i_386">312</a>). Cottesbrooke House, in the same county, has some delicate work of
-much the same type (Fig. <a href="#i_387">313</a>).</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_386">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_386.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 312.</span>&mdash;Part of Ceiling in the Spenser Room,
-Canons Ashby, Northamptonshire.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>During the last half of the century, where ornament was applied to
-ceilings at all, it partook of the extreme delicacy and refinement
-associated with the name of the brothers Adam. The modelling was in
-low relief, but was done with great care and minuteness, and the flow
-of the thin lines of ornament was studied with close attention. This
-type is exemplified in the ceiling from a house in Wimpole Street (Fig.
-<a href="#i_388">314</a>), and there are many such ceilings left in that neighbourhood,
-especially in Harley Street, which in its early days was inhabited by<span class="pagenum" id="Page_387">[387]</span>
-many distinguished people; William Pitt, Viscount Bridport, and Admiral
-Lord Keith did much to shape the history of their time; Allan Ramsay,
-portrait painter to George III., may stand for Art, and James Stuart,
-author of the “Antiquities of Athens,” may represent architecture and
-archæology. At present these streets are more particularly associated
-with the pursuit of medicine; their inhabitants are no less celebrated
-than those of old, but their fame is of a special kind, and those who
-go to consult them on matters of life and death may well be excused
-if they spare no thought for the decoration which covers the ceilings
-above their heads.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_387">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_387.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 313.</span>&mdash;Part of Ceiling, Cottesbrooke Hall,
-Northants.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_388">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_388.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 314.</span>&mdash;CEILING FROM WIMPOLE STREET, LONDON.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The work of the latter part of the eighteenth century was so dominated
-by the influence of the Adams that a few further examples of their
-designs may be of interest. In the staircase from a house in Mansfield
-Street (Fig. <a href="#i_390a">315</a>) all superfluous ornament has been eliminated, so much
-so that one almost longs for something less chaste and cold. In some
-moods and to some temperaments Venus is more attractive than Diana.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_389">[389]</span>
-But restraint is ever commendable, and restraint marks most of Adam’s
-work. It is present in the doorway at Harewood House (Fig. <a href="#i_390b">316</a>) and in
-the two chimney-pieces, one from Belcombe and one from Bedford Square,
-figured in the illustrations 317, 318. In these it will be noticed that
-overmantels are replaced by designs worked on the wall itself. Their
-interest depends almost entirely upon grace of composition and skill
-in execution, and derives nothing from aptness of association with the
-houses or their occupants. In this respect the ornament differs from
-that of earlier days, when it was usually adapted from the family coat
-of arms; but the time had now come when houses were more often built to
-let to unknown tenants than as homes for particular families. In the
-drawing-room at Kedleston (Fig. <a href="#i_393">319</a>) the treatment again strikes a note
-of simplicity and severity&mdash;a note which is seldom so well maintained
-in the disposition of the pictures and the choice of furniture as it is
-in this case. The ceiling and the great cove beneath it are filled with
-that flowing and delicate ornament which demands great accuracy of line
-and equal care in modelling its low relief.</p>
-
-<p>As time went on this delicate ornament faded away and, except here
-and there, ceilings became merely large unbroken surfaces, save that
-with the introduction of gas-pendants there came the tradesman’s
-centre-flower from which they might depend. This and an equally
-interesting cornice served for years as the principal decoration of
-most houses; the plasterer’s art seemed to have died out. But for some
-time past matters have been improving, and, given the requisite money,
-ceilings can now be devised equal to anything that has been done in the
-past.</p>
-
-<p>Indeed English craftsmen have always been able to produce good work
-when adequately guided. But modern conditions, among which one of the
-most pressing is the supply of an enormous number of cheap houses, are
-adverse to the display of that capacity for design and execution which
-requires some amount of leisure and a great amount of wealth to bring
-it forth.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_390a">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_390a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 315.</span>&mdash;Staircase from a House in Mansfield Street.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_390b">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_390b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 316.</span>&mdash;Doorway, Harewood House.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>There are indications that after the war a vast number of workmen’s
-dwellings will have to be built, and, moreover, will have to be
-built cheaply. A survey of the domestic architecture of the last
-three hundred years is fruitful of suggestions for this undertaking,
-although it will be one demanding little or no ornament. Such a survey
-points<span class="pagenum" id="Page_391">[391]</span> towards a suitable placing of the houses on the site; avoiding
-dreariness and monotony on the one hand, and on the other avoiding
-attempts at the grandiose, and the imposing on posterity a scheme
-too complete in itself to allow of those variations which time will
-inevitably require. It points equally to treating the houses themselves
-with a simplicity corresponding to the simplicity of the requirements.
-It points further to the value of good, sound building. The smaller
-Georgian houses, which we find so charming, furnish admirable
-suggestions. No attempt at actual reproduction need be made; but the
-means which produce the effect in the old houses can be applied to the
-new. These means are simple enough. The general proportion, the size
-and shape of the windows, and the shadow of the eaves will be found on
-examination to be the chief causes of the pleasure which many of the
-old houses arouse.</p>
-
-<p>The past has not only its suggestions, but also its warnings, and
-of these the most obvious is against the impairing of comfort and
-convenience for the sake of appearance. The first canon of utilitarian
-art is that an object should answer its purpose well. It is in availing
-himself of these suggestions, and in profiting by these warnings, that
-the architect is enabled to help his own generation and give pleasure
-to those that come after.</p>
-
-<p>The vast increase in population during the last two hundred years has
-accentuated the division of the course of design into two streams;
-one directed by the highly trained architect, the other by the
-workman trained only in the use of his tools and the knowledge of his
-materials. Could the two streams be brought into one channel they might
-flow on into ideal conditions. But the very complexity of modern life
-has a tendency to resolve itself into the simplicity of specialisation.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_392a">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_392a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 317.</span>&mdash;Chimney-Piece at Belcombe.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_392b">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_392b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 318.</span>&mdash;Chimney-Piece in the Dining-Room, 25
-Bedford Square.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_393">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_393.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="center p0 sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 319.</span>&mdash;THE DRAWING-ROOM, KEDLESTON HALL,
-<span class="smcap">Derbyshire</span>.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Since the beginning of the eighteenth century the course of domestic
-architecture has been conditioned partly by the nation becoming
-too large and complex to admit of a single expression in national
-architecture; partly by the tendency, common to all the arts, for ideas
-to pass into excess in one direction and into tenuity in the other.
-A wider outlook over the civilised world, a greater knowledge of the
-achievements of foreign countries, led inevitably to the disappearance
-of a truly national style, such as that which we call Gothic. On the
-one hand the homes<span class="pagenum" id="Page_394">[394]</span> of the wealthy grew in splendour and in fidelity
-to theories of architecture expounded in books, with the result that
-use and convenience were largely subordinated to grandiose effects. On
-the other hand, richness of architectural thought declined in smaller
-houses through the stages of dignity and comfort down either to a
-consistent plainness of character or one only marked by individual
-caprice. Such caprice, schooled by a study of bygone styles, led to
-the eclectic imitativeness of the nineteenth century. But the last
-twenty years have seen many signs of a new beginning. Based upon actual
-needs, and striving after beautiful expression, domestic architecture
-is slowly progressing on lines characteristically English. Sooner or
-later this movement will accelerate, and will eventually reach heights
-as great as those upon which we now look back with admiration and
-delight. Architecture, like other arts, is immortal; the qualities of
-proportion, ornament, and fitness can never long be disregarded, for no
-building is quite complete which is not beautiful to look upon.</p>
-<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_395">[395]</span></p>
-
-<h2>APPENDIX I<br />
-<span class="subhed2 smcap">Sir Roger Pratt</span></h2></div>
-
-<p>The foregoing pages had already passed through the press when the
-contents of the note-books of Sir Roger Pratt were placed at my
-disposal by the courtesy of his descendant, Edward Roger M. Pratt,
-Esq., of Ryston Hall, Norfolk.</p>
-
-<p>Roger Pratt is mentioned in the text (p. 180) as the architect of
-Clarendon House, built by the Lord Chancellor Hyde, and as one of the
-men whom the great fire of London led into the pursuit of architecture.
-But his note-books show him to have been a student and practitioner
-of the art before that event. He was under no necessity to earn his
-own living, as he appears to have been a man of means, succeeding
-to his father’s property before he was of age, and in later years
-inheriting from his cousin the estate of Ryston. Still his interest in
-architecture was more than that of an amateur, for he clearly had a
-good knowledge of building, and a practical acquaintance with the many
-matters involved in the erection of large houses.</p>
-
-<p>He was born in 1620, and entered Magdalen College, Oxford, when he was
-nineteen; in the following year he became possessed of his father’s
-property, and three years later, in 1643, he went to travel abroad. He
-visited France, Italy, Holland, and Flanders, for the purpose, as he
-states, to “give himself some convenient education”; his tour lasted
-six years, thus keeping him away from England during the troubled
-times of the Civil War. This education was evidently in architecture,
-for although he became a member of the Inner Temple in 1657, there
-is no record of his having followed the law as a profession. He had
-rooms in the Temple from the time of his entrance until 1676, and
-doubtless they enabled him to enjoy congenial society and provided
-him with a convenient residence during his frequent visits to London.
-For more than half his tenancy he was a bachelor, for he did not
-marry until he was forty-eight, when he took to wife, in the year
-1668, the eldest daughter of Sir Edward Monins of Kent, a lady of
-good family&mdash;“descended,” as he said, “from ye second best famely in
-hir county”&mdash;who brought him a fortune of £4,000. The same year saw
-another<span class="pagenum" id="Page_396">[396]</span> notable event in his life, the conferring of a knighthood upon
-him by Charles II.</p>
-
-<p>A year before his marriage he had succeeded to the Ryston estate,
-and thenceforward he appears to have followed the life of a country
-gentleman, for we hear no more of him in connection with architecture,
-save that he designed and built himself a new house at Ryston, which
-remains to this day, and is the only example of his work left, unless
-the attribution of Coleshill to Inigo Jones is a mistake. There is
-no doubt that Roger Pratt had something to do with Coleshill, which
-was built by a relative of his, Sir Henry Pratt; for he says, in
-considering the proportions of cornices for ceilings, “all wh. 4 last
-recited proportions have bin made use of by mee at Sr George Pratt’s at
-Colsell.” Sir George was the son and successor of Sir Henry.</p>
-
-<p>Most of the gentry at this time, as John Webb tells us, had some
-knowledge of the theory of architecture, “but nothing of ye
-practicque.” Roger Pratt bettered his fellows in this respect, for
-not only had he a wide knowledge of the art, as understood in the
-seventeenth century&mdash;of the architecture, that is, of modern Italy and
-of Palladio in particular&mdash;but he was familiar with the qualities of
-materials and the routine of building, not to mention tactful methods
-of accounting for “extras.”</p>
-
-<p>During his stay in Rome he met John Evelyn, who appears to have
-acquired and preserved a high regard for him. Twenty years later, in
-writing to Lord Cornbery on 20th January 1665, about his father’s
-mansion of Clarendon House, Evelyn said that Roger Pratt, his old
-friend and fellow traveller (co-habitant and contemporary at Rome),
-had “perfectly acquitted himself.” The turn of events had brought them
-together about this time, when both of them became commissioners for
-the repair of St Paul’s Cathedral and for the rebuilding of London
-after the great fire.</p>
-
-<p>Pratt’s chief works were Horseheath in Cambridgeshire for Lord
-Allington, and Clarendon House. The former was begun in 1663, and was a
-magnificent mansion. There are many technical notes relating to it in
-the note-books, but not much of general interest beyond its dimensions.
-It was dismantled in 1760, and sold for the value of the materials.</p>
-
-<p>The notes concerning Clarendon House, which was begun in 1664, are more
-voluminous. They serve to show that Pratt was a practical architect,
-that he was fully acquainted with the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_397">[397]</span> details of the various trades,
-and was alive to the chances of crooked dealing by the workmen. He
-deals with the levels of the site and the setting out of the house,
-which was to be placed central with St James’s Street, truly parallel
-with the frontage line, and set back 160 ft., whereby a court of that
-depth and of a width of 214 ft. would be obtained. Another lively touch
-is given by his instructions to the mason regarding the coat of arms in
-the tympanum of the “frontispiece,” the central feature of the front.
-The description which he incidentally gives agrees with what is shown
-on the engraving. But more interesting and more entertaining are the
-reasons he adduces in a draft letter of the 13th February 1665 (1666
-new style) to the Lord Chancellor for the cost having exceeded his
-estimate. The foundations were much deeper than was expected, an old
-pond having been found on one part of the site, and a vast hole the
-whole length of my lady’s pavilion on another. Severe frost rendered it
-necessary to take down and rebuild some of the work. My Lord Cornbery
-caused a foot to be added to the height of the first floor, much
-increasing, it is true, the nobleness of the effect. The bricks cost
-more; the Dutch war increased the price of timber, and the carpenter
-threw up his contract, leaving himself to the mercy of his employer;
-but the plague had infected the whole town, and workmen everywhere
-died. It was agreed, therefore, that by fair words and promises the
-carpenter should be encouraged to persist in his undertaking, which he
-only consented to do on a fresh basis of pay, whereby his account was
-increased by at least one-third more than his original price.</p>
-
-<p>In addition to the notes relating to these two houses in particular,
-there are Notes as to the building of Country Houses, dated 1660, and
-Rules for the Guidance of Architects, dated 1662. These fill many
-pages, and would have made a much more useful book, had they been
-published, than Gerbier’s “Counsel.” Space forbids long extracts,
-which indeed might prove tedious to all but enthusiastic students of
-this period; but three matters are worth mentioning. First, it is
-recommended that a house should be placed so as to take advantage
-of existing trees in the approach and lay out, and to obtain a fine
-prospect. This must be one of the earliest expressions of a deliberate
-liking for natural scenery. Secondly, Pratt advises those about to
-build a house “to get some ingenious gentleman who hath seen much
-of that kind abroad and been somewhat versed in the best authors of
-architecture, viz., Palladio,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_398">[398]</span> Scamozzi, Serlio, etc., to doe it for
-you and give you a design on paper.” This will be far better than
-trusting to a home-bred architect, who would be inexperienced in such
-matters, as is daily seen. The paper design having been agreed upon, a
-model of wood should be made, and as a final precaution, other houses
-of a suitable kind should be visited and studied.</p>
-
-<p>The third point of interest lies in his references to Inigo Jones’s
-work. In dealing with fine examples of architecture he says that with
-us in England there is nothing remarkable but the Banqueting House at
-Whitehall and the Portico at Paul’s. Elsewhere he cites the Queen’s
-House at Greenwich. As far as it goes, his testimony appears to confirm
-the view taken in the text as to Jones’s work.</p>
-
-<p>In addition to these notes on houses, there are others relating
-to St Paul’s, and to the steps taken for the rebuilding of London
-after the fire. In relation to the latter, he was asked by the other
-commissioners to undertake duties which would now devolve upon the
-Secretary. In regard to St Paul’s, he has a page or two of criticism on
-the model designed by “Dr. Renne,” 12th July 1673, as it offered itself
-upon a short and confused view of a quarter of an hour only. In 1673
-Wren’s favourite design was approved by the king, who issued a warrant
-for building in accordance with it on 12th November, and caused a model
-to be made (illustrated on p. 146). The details of Pratt’s criticism do
-not apply very aptly to this model, and we seem to be faced with two
-alternatives: either that his criticisms, written from memory after a
-hasty examination, were rather wide of the mark; or that they refer to
-a design different from those which have so far come into prominence
-from among the numerous drawings prepared by Wren in connection with St
-Paul’s.</p>
-
-<p>The later note-books are chiefly concerned with estate management, and
-we gather that after the building of the house at Ryston, Sir Roger
-Pratt settled down in the country. He died on the 20th February 1684–5,
-and was buried at Ryston, leaving a widow and three sons. His widow
-subsequently married again, and survived until 1706.</p>
-
-<hr class="tb" />
-
-<p>The note-books, of which there are eight, are mostly bound in
-parchment, and by way of fastening, are tied with two sets of parchment
-strips. They bear a strong family resemblance to the sketch-book of
-Inigo Jones, preserved at Chatsworth.</p>
-<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_399">[399]</span></p>
-
-<h2>APPENDIX II<br />
-<span class="subhed2 smcap">The Architects of Coleshill, Berkshire</span></h2></div>
-
-<p>Further interesting information regarding Sir Roger Pratt’s connection
-with Coleshill has been supplied by the kindness of Mr. Pratt of Ryston,
-and the Hon. Mrs. Pleydell Bouverie of Coleshill. It is derived in part
-from Sir Roger Pratt’s note-books, and in part from a diary of Sir Mark
-Pleydell (1692–1768), preserved in the muniment room at Coleshill.</p>
-
-<p>The estate of Coleshill was bought from the Pleydells by Sir Henry
-Pratt, a grandson through a junior branch of William Pratt, who was
-Lord of the Manor of Ryston in 1628. Sir Roger Pratt was great-grandson
-of the same William through the senior branch. The estate returned to
-the family of Pleydell in 1699, by the marriage of a Pleydell with the
-heiress of the Pratts of Coleshill.</p>
-
-<p>Sir Henry Pratt died on 6th April 1647, and the old house at Coleshill
-which he had bought was burnt down later in the same year, shortly
-after the marriage of his son, Sir George. The present house was begun
-in 1650, according to the tablet still preserved therein. Of this Sir
-Mark Pleydell says in his diary that Sir Roger Pratt of Ryston in
-Norfolk, knight, cousin to Sir George, was the architect in friendship
-to him. He also observes that “Mr. Mildmay apprehended it was built
-by Inigo Jones, and Lord Barrington says it was built by one Webb, a
-disciple of the said Inigo.”</p>
-
-<p>In the same diary it is stated that before the existing house was
-commenced Sir George Pratt began to build a new seat in “the present
-cucumber garden,” which he raised to one story, when Pratt and Jones
-arriving, caused it to be pulled down and rebuilt where it now stands.
-Sir Mark adds that Pratt and Jones were frequently here, and Jones was
-also consulted about the ceilings. “John Buffin, who often saw them
-both, frequently declared this to Wm. Pepal, who came to Coleshill in
-1700, and carried him to the spot in ye cucumber garden. We found ye
-remains of ye walls in ye cucumber garden ye 10th February 1746.”</p>
-
-<p>It is interesting to find that Jones, Webb, and Pratt were all<span class="pagenum" id="Page_400">[400]</span>
-concerned in the design, and it is tolerably clear that Pratt had a
-large hand in the matter, not only from Sir Mark Pleydell’s express
-intimation, but also from Sir Roger Pratt’s own note-books. It will
-be remembered that Jones died in 1652, but the house was not finished
-until some years afterwards, probably in 1664. Roger Pratt has entries
-in his note-books that in December 1656 he gave Sir George Pratt’s man
-a tip of two shillings, in April 1659 he gave to six maids and two
-boys of Sir George two guineas, and in January 1662 he gave a dinner
-to Sir George and his lady at a cost of £5. 9s. Such hospitality may
-presumably be attributed partly to the ties of consanguinity, and
-partly to those of architect and client.</p>
-
-<p>Sir Roger Pratt has notes relating to Coleshill under the year 1664,
-which, in addition to those concerning the ceilings mentioned in
-Appendix I. deal with the proportion of the windows. These, he says,
-seemed somewhat narrow, either because not sufficiently splayed on the
-sides, or because the wooden frame and the iron one took so much from
-the glass. The windows were at that time iron casements, not sashes as
-they are now; and they were all alike in this respect, including the
-dormers in the garrets and the turret. One remark is rather puzzling in
-which he speaks of the heads of the windows of the dining-room being 5
-ft. below the ceilings, for the vertical distance between the windows
-of the ground and upper floors is only about 7 ft. from glass to glass.</p>
-
-<p>The testimony that the windows were casements and not sashes is
-interesting, so too is the detailed description of the casements and of
-the devices to exclude the weather. The window-bars were ¼ in. thick
-and ½ in. broad; the casements ¼ in. thick and 2 in. broad. They were
-hanged upon three strong hooks, the opening-rod being ½ in. thick with
-five rings to hold it; there was an iron plate with a pin let into the
-wood to hold the hook of the rod. A little piece of iron was put over
-the rebate of the casements to keep out the wind, and a little border
-of lead was nailed close to the casements on the bottom and sides,
-as well as a strip over the heads outside. Further there was another
-border inside to prevent the rain, which beat up under the casements,
-from flowing down upon the baseboard.</p>
-
-<p>Let us hope these precautions were adequate, and that it was not
-necessary to lay out another £5 on a dinner to placate Sir George and
-his lady, and to drown the memory of reproaches urged with cousinly
-freedom.</p>
-<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_401">[401]</span></p>
-
-<h2>INDEX TO ILLUSTRATIONS AND TEXT</h2>
-</div>
-
-<div class="blockquot">
-
-<p><i>Note.</i>&mdash;The ordinary figures denote references to pages
-of text; the illustrations, <span class="u">which are referred to by their
-figure numbers</span>, are denoted by the heavier type.</p>
-</div>
-
-<ul class="left">
-  <li>Acton, iron gate at,
-    <a href="#i_346b"><b>269</b></a></li>
-  <li>Adam, the brothers,
-    <a href="#Page_19">19</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_21">21</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_280">280</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_381">381</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_387">387</a></li>
-  <li>Adam, Robert,
-    <a href="#Page_280">280–85</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_387">387–389</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.6em">design for chimney-piece,</span>
-    <a href="#i_379"><b>305</b></a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent">&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.6em">illustrations of his work,</span>
-    <a href="#i_279"><b>193</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_280"><b>194</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_281"><b>195</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_283a"><b>196</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_283b"><b>197</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_284"><b>198</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_390a"><b>315</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_390b"><b>316</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_392a"><b>317</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_392b"><b>318</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_393"><b>319</b></a></li>
-  <li>Addison,
-    <a href="#Page_3">3</a></li>
-  <li>Adelphi, The,
-    <a href="#Page_285">285</a></li>
-  <li>“Advice to Servants,” by Dean Swift,
-    <a href="#Page_115">115</a></li>
-  <li>Age of Romance,
-    <a href="#Page_23">23</a></li>
-  <li>Albemarle, Duke of,
-    <a href="#Page_180">180</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2.3em">House,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_180">180</a>,
-    <a href="#i_179"><b>118</b></a></li>
-  <li>Allen, Ralph,
-    <a href="#Page_263">263–66</a></li>
-  <li id="All_Souls">All Souls, Oxford,
-    <a href="#Page_143">143</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_154">154</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_176">176</a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent">&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 3.5em">drawings by Wren at,</span>
-    <a href="#i_151a"><b>99</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_151b"><b>100</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_152"><b>101</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_153"><b>102</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_155"><b>103</b></a></li>
-  <li>Amelia, Princess,
-    <a href="#Page_231">231</a></li>
-  <li>Anne, Queen,
-    <a href="#Page_2">2</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 3em">the mansion of her time,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_5">5</a></li>
-  <li>“Arching galleries”,
-    <a href="#Page_171">171</a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent">Architect; the term seldom occurs prior to the seventeenth century,
-    <a href="#Page_25">25</a></li>
-  <li>Architectural design, change in,
-    <a href="#Page_25">25</a></li>
-  <li>Artari,
-    <a href="#Page_255">255</a></li>
-  <li>“Art of Dialling”,
-    <a href="#Page_319">319</a></li>
-  <li>Art, utilitarian,
-    <a href="#Page_391">391</a></li>
-  <li>Artificiality in architecture,
-    <a href="#Page_3">3</a></li>
-  <li>Arundel, Earl of,
-    <a href="#Page_2">2</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_42">42</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_52">52</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 3em">House,</span>
-    <a href="#i_039"><b>21</b></a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent">Ashburnham House, Westminster, the staircase,
-    <a href="#Page_118">118</a>,
-    <a href="#i_116"><b>73</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_119"><b>74</b></a></li>
-  <li>Ashburnham, William,
-    <a href="#Page_118">118</a></li>
-  <li>Ashdown House, Berkshire,
-    <a href="#Page_97">97</a>,
-    <a href="#i_097"><b>55</b></a></li>
-  <li id="Ashmolean">Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, staircase,
-    <a href="#Page_351">351</a>,
-    <a href="#i_353a"><b>277</b></a></li>
-  <li>Aske’s Hospital, Hoxton,
-    <a href="#Page_180">180</a></li>
-  <li>Aston Hall, Warwickshire,
-    <a href="#Page_7">7</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_8">8</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_42">42</a>,
-    <a href="#i_004"><b>2</b></a></li>
-  <li>Astwell, Northamptonshire, gateway,
-    <a href="#Page_102">102</a>,
-    <a href="#i_102"><b>59</b></a></li>
-  <li>Aubrey, John,
-    <a href="#Page_63">63</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_64">64</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_65">65</a></li>
-  <li>Austen, Jane,
-    <a href="#Page_311">311</a></li>
-  <li>Avenues at Boughton,
-    <a href="#Page_200">200</a></li>
-</ul>
-
-<ul class="left">
-  <li class="hangingindent">Banqueting House, Whitehall,
-    <a href="#Page_6">6</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_42">42</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_43">43</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_50">50</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_52">52</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_63">63</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_64">64</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_66">66</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_67">67</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_68">68</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_73">73</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_99">99</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_162">162</a>,
-    <a href="#i_043"><b>22</b></a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent">&emsp;&emsp;„&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2em">Inigo Jones’s drawings for,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_66">66</a>,
-    <a href="#i_062"><b>36</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_067"><b>37</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2em">Smithson’s drawing,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_66">66</a>,
-    <a href="#i_068"><b>38</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2em">Doorway, drawing by Jones,</span>
-    <a href="#i_131a"><b>86</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2em">Window, drawing by Jones,</span>
-    <a href="#i_132"><b>88</b></a></li>
-  <li>Bakewell, Robert (smith),
-    <a href="#Page_342">342</a></li>
-  <li>Barrow Gurney, Somerset, gateway,
-    <a href="#Page_329">329</a>,
-    <a href="#i_330a"><b>249</b></a></li>
-  <li>Barry, Charles,
-    <a href="#Page_172">172</a></li>
-  <li>Basil, Simon,
-    <a href="#Page_46">46</a></li>
-  <li>Bath, Somerset, Milsom Street,
-    <a href="#Page_303">303</a>,
-    <a href="#i_297b"><b>211</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 3.2em">Pulteney Bridge,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_267">267</a>,
-    <a href="#i_267"><b>184</b></a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent">&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 3.2em">Queen’s Square, Panels in house,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_363">363</a>,
-    <a href="#i_363"><b>289</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 3.2em">Ralph Allen’s house,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_302">302</a>,
-    <a href="#i_300"><b>214</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 3.2em">Royal Crescent,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_268">268</a>,
-    <a href="#i_268"><b>185</b></a></li>
-  <li>Battle Abbey, Sussex, jamb of fireplace,
-    <a href="#i_363"><b>298</b></a></li>
-  <li>Beaufort House, Chelsea,
-    <a href="#Page_324">324</a></li>
-  <li>Beckford, Alderman,
-    <a href="#Page_14">14</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.6em">the younger,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_17">17</a></li>
-  <li>Beckley, Sussex, Church House,
-    <a href="#Page_292">292</a>,
-    <a href="#i_289a"><b>202</b></a></li>
-  <li>Bedford Square, London&mdash;</li>
-  <li class="i1">houses in,
-    <a href="#Page_307">307</a>,
-    <a href="#i_308a"><b>221</b></a></li>
-  <li class="i1">chimney-piece,
-    <a href="#i_392b"><b>318</b></a></li>
-  <li>Belcombe, chimney-piece,
-    <a href="#i_392a"><b>317</b></a></li>
-  <li>Belton House, near Grantham,
-    <a href="#Page_157">157–160</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2.6em">plan,</span>
-    <a href="#i_157"><b>105</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2.6em">chapel,</span>
-    <a href="#i_140"></a><b>96</b></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2.6em">house,</span>
-    <a href="#i_156"><b>104</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2.6em">iron screen,</span>
-    <a href="#i_158"><b>106</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2.6em">carving,</span>
-    <a href="#i_159"><b>107</b></a></li>
-  <li>Bethlem Hospital, London,
-    <a href="#Page_180">180</a>,
-    <a href="#i_175"><b>116</b></a></li>
-  <li>Bignor, Sussex, chimney,
-    <a href="#i_315"><b>229</b></a></li>
-  <li>Birmingham, lead rain-water head,
-    <a href="#i_348a"><b>272</b></a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent">Bishopsgate Street Without, London, ceiling,
-    <a href="#Page_386">386</a>,
-    <a href="#i_381"><b>307</b></a></li>
-  <li>Blaythwayt, William,
-    <a href="#Page_203">203</a></li>
-  <li>Blenheim Palace,
-    <a href="#Page_5">5</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_152">152</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_223">223</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_224">224</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_227">227</a>,
-    <a href="#i_226"><b>155</b></a></li>
-  <li>Blomfield, R.,
-    <a href="#Footnote_65">216 (<i>footnote</i>)</a></li>
-  <li>Bolsover Castle, Derbyshire,
-    <a href="#Page_32">32</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_33">33</a>,
-    <a href="#i_024"><b>13</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_034"><b>16</b></a></li>
-  <li>Bond, Sir Thomas,
-    <a href="#Page_180">180</a></li>
-  <li>Books on Architecture,
-    <a href="#Page_2">2</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_25">25–28</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_212">212</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_372">372</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.6em">German, Dutch, and French,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_28">28</a></li>
-  <li>Botolph Lane, London, house in,
-    <a href="#Page_185">185</a>,
-    <a href="#i_181"><b>119</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_182"><b>120</b></a></li>
-  <li>Boughton House, Northamptonshire,
-    <a href="#Page_178">178</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_196">196–203</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 3.8em">plan,</span>
-    <a href="#i_196"><b>132</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 3.8em">house,</span>
-    <a href="#i_197a"><b>133</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_197b"><b>134</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 3.8em">state room,</span>
-    <a href="#i_198"><b>135</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 3.8em">bird’s-eye view,</span>
-    <a href="#i_201"><b>136</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 3.8em">staircase,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_352">352</a>,
-    <a href="#i_352"><b>276</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 3.8em">panelling,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_363">363</a>,
-    <a href="#i_360b"><b>286</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 3.8em">fireplace,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_369">369</a>,
-    <a href="#i_369"><b>294</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 3.8em">painted ceilings,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_385">385</a>,
-    <a href="#i_384"><b>310</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_385"><b>311</b></a></li>
-  <li>Bourdon House, London, doorway,
-    <a href="#Page_357">357</a>,
-    <a href="#i_359"><b>284</b></a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent">Bramham Park, Yorkshire, gardens,
-    <a href="#Page_232">232–236</a>,
-    <a href="#i_235"><b>162</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_236"><b>163</b></a></li>
-  <li id="Brasenose">Brasenose College, Oxford,
-    <a href="#Page_106">106</a>,
-    <a href="#i_107"><b>63</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_108"><b>64</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 3.5em">doorway,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_127">127</a>,
-    <a href="#i_130a"><b>84</b></a></li>
-  <li>Brettingham, Matthew,
-    <a href="#Page_276">276–278</a></li>
-  <li>Brewers’ Hall, London,
-    <a href="#Page_190">190</a>,
-    <a href="#i_188"><b>125</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_189"><b>126</b></a></li>
-  <li>Bridge at Prior Park,
-    <a href="#i_225"><b>154</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.6em">at Bath,</span>
-    <a href="#i_267"><b>184</b></a></li>
-  <li>Bridport, Viscount,
-    <a href="#Page_387">387</a></li>
-  <li>Bristol, houses at,
-    <a href="#Page_307">307</a>,
-    <a href="#i_306"><b>220</b></a></li>
-  <li>British Museum, drawings at,
-    <a href="#Page_64">64</a>,
-    <a href="#i_037"><b>19</b></a></li>
-  <li>Broadfield Hall, Hertfordshire,
-    <a href="#Page_9">9</a>,
-    <a href="#i_009"><b>3</b></a></li>
-  <li>Brownlow, Sir John,
-    <a href="#Page_157">157</a></li>
-  <li>Buckingham (Villiers), Duke of,
-    <a href="#Page_60">60</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_161">161</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 3em">(Sheffield), Duke of,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_168">168</a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent">&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 3em">House, London,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_168">168</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_171">171</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_172">172</a>,
-    <a href="#i_170"><b>113</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_172fp"><b>113<span class="allsmcap">A</span></b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.5em">staircase and ceiling,</span>
-    <a href="#i_382"><b>308</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 3em">Street, Strand, doorway,</span>
-    <a href="#i_336"><b>258</b></a></li>
-  <li>Bulwick, Northamptonshire, date-stone,
-    <a href="#i_319"><b>235</b></a></li>
-  <li>Burford,
-    <a href="#Page_43">43</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.6em">Priory,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_106">106</a>,
-    <a href="#i_105"><b>62</b></a></li>
-  <li>Burghley House,
-    <a href="#Page_385">385</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&ensp;„<span style="margin-left: 2em">Lord,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_1">1</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_212">212</a></li>
-  <li>Burley-on-the-Hill, Rutland,
-    <a href="#Page_176">176</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_329">329</a>,
-    <a href="#i_327"><b>245</b></a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent">Burlington-Devonshire, drawings,
-    <a href="#Page_52">52</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_64">64</a>,
-    <a href="#Footnote_28">65&nbsp;(<i>footnote</i>)</a>,
-    <a href="#Footnote_36">83 (<i>footnote</i>)</a>,
-    <a href="#i_076"><b>42</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_078"><b>43</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_081"><b>44</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_085"><b>45</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_120b"><b>76</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_121"><b>77</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_131a"><b>86–88</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_135"><b>91</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_136"><b>92</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_137a"><b>93</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_137b"><b>94</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_323"><b>240</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_324"><b>241</b></a></li>
-  <li>Burlington House,
-    <a href="#Page_216">216</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2.3em">Lord,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_2">2</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_63">63</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_64">64</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_214">214–216</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_271">271</a></li>
-  <li>Burney, Frances,
-    <a href="#Page_3">3</a></li>
-  <li>Butleigh, Somerset,
-    <a href="#Page_84">84</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_142">142</a></li>
-  <li>Byron, Lord,
-    <a href="#Page_21">21</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_32">32</a></li>
-</ul>
-
-<ul class="left">
-  <li class="hangingindent">Cambridge, Magdalene College, Pepysian Library,
-    <a href="#Page_100">100</a>,
-    <a href="#i_098a"><b>56</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2.6em">St John’s College, gate-piers,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_325">325</a>,
-    <a href="#i_326a"><b>243</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2.6em">Trinity Hall, cupola,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_318">318</a>,
-    <a href="#i_317b"><b>233</b></a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent">Campbell, Colin,
-    <a href="#Page_31">31</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_64">64</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_65">65</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_66">66</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_67">67</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_69">69</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_79">79</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_80">80</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_168">168</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_171">171</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_172">172</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_176">176</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_207">207</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_240">240</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_251">251–255</a></li>
-  <li>Campion, Thomas,
-    <a href="#Page_78">78</a></li>
-  <li>Can Court, Wiltshire, staircase,
-    <a href="#Page_122">122</a>,
-    <a href="#i_123"><b>78</b></a></li>
-  <li>Canons Ashby, Northamptonshire&mdash;</li>
-  <li class="i1">Gate-piers,
-    <a href="#Page_322">322</a>,
-    <a href="#i_321"><b>238</b></a></li>
-  <li class="i1">Gates,
-    <a href="#i_322"><b>239</b></a></li>
-  <li class="i1">Ceiling,
-    <a href="#i_386"><b>312</b></a></li>
-  <li>Canterbury, streets,
-    <a href="#Page_296">296</a></li>
-  <li>“Capability” Brown,
-    <a href="#Page_236">236</a></li>
-  <li>Carey Street, London, chimney-piece,
-    <a href="#i_378a"><b>303</b></a></li>
-  <li>Cariat (Coryat), Thomas,
-    <a href="#Page_44">44</a></li>
-  <li>Carlisle, Earl of,
-    <a href="#Page_216">216</a></li>
-  <li>Carr, of York,
-    <a href="#Page_271">271</a></li>
-  <li>Caryatides,
-    <a href="#Page_73">73</a></li>
-  <li>Castle Combe, Wiltshire, doorway,
-    <a href="#Page_333">333</a>,
-    <a href="#i_332"><b>252</b></a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent">Castle Howard, Yorkshire,
-    <a href="#Page_216">216–223</a>,
-    <a href="#i_219a"><b>149</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_219b"><b>150</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_221"><b>151</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_222"><b>152</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 3em">Mausoleum,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_220">220</a>,
-    <a href="#i_223"><b>153</b></a></li>
-  <li>Castor, Northamptonshire, gate-piers,
-    <a href="#Page_329">329</a>,
-    <a href="#i_328b"><b>247</b></a></li>
-  <li>Catherine Court, Tower Hill, London,
-    <a href="#i_177"><b>117</b></a></li>
-  <li>Ceilings&mdash;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Seventeenth-century,
-    <a href="#Page_122">122</a>,
-    <a href="#i_055"><b>31</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_059"><b>34</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_096"><b>54</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_119"><b>74–77</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_169"><b>112</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_182"><b>120</b></a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Eighteenth-century,
-    <a href="#Page_381">381</a>,
-    <a href="#i_211"><b>144</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_254"><b>174</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_262"><b>180</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_358"><b>283</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_362"><b>288</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_380"><b>306</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_381"><b>307</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_386"><b>312–314</b></a></li>
-  <li class="i1">Painted,
-    <a href="#Page_384">384</a>,
-    <a href="#i_368"><b>293</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_382"><b>308–311</b></a></li>
-  <li>Chambers, Sir William,
-    <a href="#Page_274">274</a></li>
-  <li>Changes in house design,
-    <a href="#Page_99">99</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_115">115</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_117">117</a></li>
-  <li>Chapman, George,
-    <a href="#Page_78">78</a></li>
-  <li>Charles I.,
-    <a href="#Page_7">7</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_41">41</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_66">66</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_70">70</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_87">87</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_163">163</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.4em">his influence on architecture,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_41">41</a></li>
-  <li>Charles II.,
-    <a href="#Page_10">10</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_84">84</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_141">141</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.4em">his idea of rebuilding Whitehall Palace,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_70">70</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.4em">his interest in building,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_142">142</a></li>
-  <li>Charleton, Dr.,
-    <a href="#Footnote_18">50 (<i>footnote</i>)</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_52">52</a></li>
-  <li>Chatham, Lord,
-    <a href="#Page_231">231</a></li>
-  <li>Chatsworth House, Derbyshire,
-    <a href="#Page_204">204</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_217">217</a>,
-    <a href="#i_206"><b>140</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„&emsp;&emsp;&ensp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.6em">drawings at,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_64">64</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_66">66</a>,
-    <a href="#i_062"><b>36</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_067"><b>37</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_072"><b>40</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_075"><b>41</b></a></li>
-  <li>Chelmsford, street,
-    <a href="#Page_296">296</a>,
-    <a href="#i_297a"><b>210</b></a></li>
-  <li>Cheltenham, shop at,
-    <a href="#Page_304">304</a>,
-    <a href="#i_303"><b>217</b></a></li>
-  <li>Cheron,
-    <a href="#Page_198">198</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_384">384</a></li>
-  <li>Chesterfield, Lord,
-    <a href="#Page_214">214</a></li>
-  <li>Chimneys,
-    <a href="#Page_314">314</a>,
-    <a href="#i_315"><b>229</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_316a"><b>230</b></a></li>
-  <li>Chimney-pieces&mdash;</li>
-  <li class="i1">Seventeenth-century,
-    <a href="#Page_138">138</a></li>
-  <li class="i1">By Inigo Jones,
-    <a href="#Page_138">138</a>,
-    <a href="#i_135"><b>91</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_136"><b>92</b></a></li>
-  <li class="i1">By John Webb,
-    <a href="#i_137a"><b>93</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_137b"><b>94</b></a></li>
-  <li class="i1">In the Jerusalem Chamber,
-    <a href="#i_134"><b>90</b></a></li>
-  <li class="i1">At Forde Abbey,
-    <a href="#i_139"><b>95</b></a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Eighteenth-century,
-    <a href="#Page_377">377</a>,
-    <a href="#i_249"><b>170</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_367"><b>292</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_369"><b>294</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_376"><b>301</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_377"><b>302</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_378a"><b>303</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_378b"><b>304</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_379"><b>305</b></a></li>
-  <li>Chinese wall-papers,
-    <a href="#Page_364">364</a>,
-    <a href="#i_365"><b>290</b></a></li>
-  <li>Chipping Campden, The Martins,
-    <a href="#Page_339">339</a>,
-    <a href="#i_340"><b>261</b></a></li>
-  <li>Chirurgeons’ Theatre, London,
-    <a href="#Page_50">50</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_52">52</a></li>
-  <li>Chiswick, Lord Burlington’s Villa,
-    <a href="#Page_214">214</a>,
-    <a href="#i_217"><b>148</b></a></li>
-  <li>“Chorea Gigantum”,
-    <a href="#Footnote_18">50 (<i>footnote</i>)</a></li>
-  <li id="Christ_Church">Christ Church, Oxford,
-    <a href="#Page_45">45</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2.6em">Tom Tower,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_145">145</a></li>
-  <li>Christian IV. of Denmark,
-    <a href="#Page_45">45</a></li>
-  <li>Church Langton, Leicestershire, rectory,
-    <a href="#Page_294">294</a>,
-    <a href="#i_293a"><b>207</b></a></li>
-  <li>Cirencester, shop at,
-    <a href="#Page_304">304</a>,
-    <a href="#i_302"><b>216</b></a></li>
-  <li>City churches,
-    <a href="#Page_13">13</a></li>
-  <li>Civil War, The,
-    <a href="#Page_2">2</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_10">10</a></li>
-  <li>Clarendon, Earl of,
-    <a href="#Page_180">180</a></li>
-  <li>Clarke, Dr., of All Souls, Oxford,
-    <a href="#Page_63">63</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_64">64</a></li>
-  <li>Cliefden House, Buckinghamshire,
-    <a href="#Page_168">168</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_172">172</a>,
-    <a href="#i_173"><b>114</b></a></li>
-  <li>Coke, Rev. D’Ewes,
-    <a href="#Page_32">32</a></li>
-  <li>Coke, Thomas, Earl of Leicester,
-    <a href="#Page_274">274</a></li>
-  <li>Coke, Thomas, Earl of Leicester, killed in a duel,
-    <a href="#Page_276">276</a></li>
-  <li>Coleshill, Berkshire,
-    <a href="#Page_54">54–58</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_88">88</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 4em">plan,</span>
-    <a href="#i_050"><b>28</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 4em">elevation,</span>
-    <a href="#i_051"><b>29</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 4em">staircase,</span>
-    <a href="#i_053"><b>30</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 4em">ceiling,</span>
-    <a href="#i_055"><b>31</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 4em">gate-piers,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_324">324</a>,
-    <a href="#i_325"><b>242</b></a></li>
-  <li>College Hill, London, house in,
-    <a href="#Page_185">185</a>,
-    <a href="#i_183"><b>121</b></a></li>
-  <li>Combe Abbey,
-    <a href="#Page_171">171</a></li>
-  <li>Comfort in houses,
-    <a href="#Page_5">5</a></li>
-  <li>Coniers, Sir John,
-    <a href="#Page_227">227</a></li>
-  <li>Cooke, “My ladye Cooke’s House”,
-    <a href="#Page_36">36</a>,
-    <a href="#i_036"><b>18</b></a></li>
-  <li>Coryat, Thomas,
-    <a href="#Page_44">44</a></li>
-  <li>Cottesbrooke, Northamptonshire,
-    <a href="#Page_178">178</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&ensp;„<span style="margin-left: 3em">ceiling,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_386">386</a>,
-    <a href="#i_387"><b>313</b></a></li>
-  <li>“Counsel and Advice to all Builders,” by Gerbier,
-    <a href="#Page_161">161</a></li>
-  <li>Covent Garden Piazza,
-    <a href="#Page_50">50</a>,
-    <a href="#i_047b"><b>24</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2.8em">St Paul’s Church,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_48">48</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_52">52</a>,
-    <a href="#i_047a"><b>23</b></a></li>
-  <li>Cowper,
-    <a href="#Page_3">3</a></li>
-  <li>Craftsmen, English, are skilful,
-    <a href="#Page_389">389</a></li>
-  <li>Crane, Sir Francis,
-    <a href="#Page_176">176</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_367">367</a></li>
-  <li>Craven, William Lord,
-    <a href="#Page_164">164</a></li>
-  <li>Croom’s Hill, Greenwich, garden house,
-    <a href="#Page_236">236</a>,
-    <a href="#i_234"><b>161</b></a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent">Cunningham, Peter, his “Life of Inigo Jones”,
-    <a href="#Footnote_10">45&nbsp;(<i>footnote</i>)</a>,
-    <a href="#Footnote_17">50 (<i>footnote</i>)</a>,
-    <a href="#Footnote_23">60 (<i>footnote</i>)</a></li>
-  <li>Cupolas,
-    <a href="#Page_316">316</a>,
-    <a href="#i_011"><b>5</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_051"><b>29</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_092b"><b>51</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_097"><b>55</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_156"><b>104</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_158"><b>106</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_179"><b>118</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_316b"><b>231–234</b></a></li>
-</ul>
-
-<ul class="left">
-  <li>Dacres, Lord,
-    <a href="#Page_216">216</a></li>
-  <li>Dance, George,
-    <a href="#Page_307">307</a></li>
-  <li>Daniell, Samuel,
-    <a href="#Page_78">78</a></li>
-  <li>Date-stones,
-    <a href="#Page_318">318</a>,
-    <a href="#i_319"><b>235</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_320a"><b>236</b></a></li>
-  <li>D’Avenant,
-    <a href="#Page_87">87</a></li>
-  <li>Davies, Robert (smith),
-    <a href="#Footnote_85">345 (<i>footnote</i>)</a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent">Dawtrey Mansion, Petworth, Sussex, staircase,
-    <a href="#Page_124">124</a>,
-    <a href="#i_124"><b>79</b></a></li>
-  <li>Deanery at Wells, panelling,
-    <a href="#Page_193">193</a>,
-    <a href="#i_191"><b>128</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.6em">chimney-piece,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_379">379</a>,
-    <a href="#i_377"><b>302</b></a></li>
-  <li>Dean Street, Soho, London, house in,
-    <a href="#Page_251">251</a>,
-    <a href="#i_250"><b>171</b></a></li>
-  <li>Decline of fancy in design,
-    <a href="#Page_313">313</a></li>
-  <li>Deene, Northamptonshire, the “Seahorse”,
-    <a href="#Page_291">291</a>,
-    <a href="#i_290b"><b>205</b></a></li>
-  <li>De L’Orme,
-    <a href="#Page_28">28</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_73">73</a></li>
-  <li>Denham Place, Buckinghamshire, staircase,
-    <a href="#Page_355">355</a>,
-    <a href="#i_355"><b>280</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 3em">panelling,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_359">359</a>,
-    <a href="#i_361"><b>287</b></a></li>
-  <li>Denham, Sir John,
-    <a href="#Page_69">69</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_70">70</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_84">84</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_87">87</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_141">141</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_144">144</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_212">212</a></li>
-  <li>Denmark House, chapel at,
-    <a href="#Page_50">50</a></li>
-  <li>Design follows two paths,
-    <a href="#Page_99">99</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_391">391</a></li>
-  <li>Designs of Inigo Jones. <i>See under</i> <a href="#Inigo">Jones, Inigo</a>.</li>
-  <li>Devonshire, Dukes of,
-    <a href="#Page_64">64</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_204">204</a></li>
-  <li>Doorways, seventeenth-century,
-    <a href="#Page_126">126</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 3em">exterior,</span>
-    <a href="#i_024"><b>13</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_039"><b>21</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_061"><b>35</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_101"><b>58</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_102"><b>59</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_130a"><b>84</b></a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent">&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 3em">interior,</span>
-    <a href="#i_089"><b>48</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_128"><b>83</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_130b"><b>85</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_131a"><b>86</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_131b"><b>87</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_133"><b>89</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_187"><b>124</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_189"><b>126</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_192a"><b>129</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_192b"><b>130</b></a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent">&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2.5em">eighteenth-century&mdash;exterior,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_333">333–339</a>,
-    <a href="#i_283a"><b>196</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_283b"><b>197</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_332"><b>252–259</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 3em">interior,</span>
-    <a href="#i_357"><b>282–285</b></a></li>
-  <li>Dorking, shop at,
-    <a href="#Page_305">305</a>,
-    <a href="#i_305"><b>219</b></a></li>
-  <li>Double cube rooms,
-    <a href="#Page_58">58</a></li>
-  <li>Drayton, Leicestershire, date-stone,
-    <a href="#i_319"><b>235</b></a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent">Drayton House, Northamptonshire, chimney-piece,
-    <a href="#Page_97">97</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_138">138</a>,
-    <a href="#i_137b"><b>94</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 3em">gardens,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_236">236</a>,
-    <a href="#i_233a"><b>159</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_233b"><b>160</b></a></li>
-  <li>Dryden,
-    <a href="#Page_60">60</a></li>
-  <li>Du Cerceau,
-    <a href="#Page_28">28</a></li>
-  <li>Dunkirk House,
-    <a href="#Page_180">180</a></li>
-  <li>Dunstable, street,
-    <a href="#Page_296">296</a></li>
-  <li>Durham House,
-    <a href="#Page_97">97</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_115">115</a></li>
-  <li>Dyrham, Gloucestershire,
-    <a href="#Page_203">203</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_204">204</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_373">373</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.6em">plan,</span>
-    <a href="#i_203"><b>138</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.6em">house,</span>
-    <a href="#i_202"><b>137</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.6em">dining-room,</span>
-    <a href="#i_205"><b>139</b></a></li>
-</ul>
-
-<ul class="left">
-  <li>Easton Neston, Northamptonshire,
-    <a href="#Page_178">178</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_207">207–210</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 3em">plan,</span>
-    <a href="#i_209"></a><b>142</b></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 3em">house,</span>
-    <a href="#i_208"><b>141</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 3em">interiors,</span>
-    <a href="#i_210"><b>143</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_211"><b>144</b></a></li>
-  <li>Edney, William (smith),
-    <a href="#Page_342">342</a></li>
-  <li>Elizabethan houses,
-    <a href="#Page_1">1</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_5">5</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_56">56</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„&emsp;&emsp;&ensp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.6em">still habitable,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_3">3</a></li>
-  <li>Ely, Cambridgeshire, house at,
-    <a href="#Page_294">294</a>,
-    <a href="#i_292"><b>206</b></a></li>
-  <li>Emmett, William, of Bromley,
-    <a href="#Page_64">64</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_65">65</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_66">66</a></li>
-  <li>Entrances to houses,
-    <a href="#Page_319">319</a></li>
-  <li>Erectheus, Temple of,
-    <a href="#Page_311">311</a></li>
-  <li>Evelyn, John,
-    <a href="#Page_2">2</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_70">70</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_142">142</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_180">180</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.8em">quoted,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_27">27</a>,
-    <a href="#Footnote_50">167 (<i>footnote</i>)</a></li>
-  <li>Extinguishers near doors,
-    <a href="#Page_333">333</a></li>
-</ul>
-
-<ul class="left">
-  <li>Ferguson,
-    <a href="#Page_274">274</a></li>
-  <li>Fielding’s “Tom Jones”,
-    <a href="#Page_266">266</a></li>
-  <li>Finsbury Circus, London, house in,
-    <a href="#Page_311">311</a>,
-    <a href="#i_312a"><b>225</b></a></li>
-  <li>Finsbury Square, London, houses in,
-    <a href="#Page_307">307</a>,
-    <a href="#i_308b"><b>222</b></a></li>
-  <li>Fire-backs,
-    <a href="#Page_370">370</a>,
-    <a href="#i_371a"><b>296</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2em">basket,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_370">370</a>,
-    <a href="#i_371b"><b>297</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2em">dogs,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_370">370</a>,
-    <a href="#i_370"><b>295</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_371a"><b>296</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2em">grates,</span>
-    <a href="#i_373"><b>299</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_374"><b>300</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2em">places,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_369">369</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_375">375</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2em">jamb of,</span>
-    <a href="#i_372"><b>298</b></a></li>
-  <li>Fitzwilliam, Earl of,
-    <a href="#Page_258">258</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_260">260</a></li>
-  <li>Flaxman, design for a chimney-piece,
-    <a href="#i_378b"><b>304</b></a></li>
-  <li>Flitcroft, Henry,
-    <a href="#Page_258">258–260</a></li>
-  <li>“Florimene,” a pastoral,
-    <a href="#Page_87">87</a></li>
-  <li>Fonthill Abbey, sale at,
-    <a href="#Page_17">17</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&ensp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.4em">House, Wiltshire,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_14">14</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_17">17</a>,
-    <a href="#i_018"><b>9</b></a></li>
-  <li>Ford Abbey, Dorset, chimney-piece,
-    <a href="#Page_138">138</a>,
-    <a href="#i_139"><b>95</b></a></li>
-  <li>Fournier Street, London, doorways,
-    <a href="#i_335b"><b>257</b></a></li>
-  <li>Frogley, R. (carpenter),
-    <a href="#Page_145">145</a></li>
-  <li>Furniture of houses in 1720,
-    <a href="#Page_375">375</a></li>
-</ul>
-
-<ul class="left">
-  <li>Gables,
-    <a href="#Page_99">99</a></li>
-  <li>Gammon, Richard,
-    <a href="#Page_60">60</a></li>
-  <li>Ganymede,
-    <a href="#Page_19">19</a></li>
-  <li>Gardens,
-    <a href="#Page_229">229–236</a>,
-    <a href="#i_165"><b>108</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_201"><b>136</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_228"><b>156–162</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&ensp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.4em">at Boughton,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_200">200</a></li>
-  <li>Garrick,
-    <a href="#Page_3">3</a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent">Gates and gateways,
-    <a href="#Page_322">322–331</a>,
-    <a href="#i_039"><b>21</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_061"><b>35</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_086"><b>46</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_092a"><b>50</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_102"><b>59</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_166b"><b>110</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_167"><b>111</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_321"><b>238</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_322"><b>239</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_324"><b>241–251</b></a></li>
-  <li>Georgian Houses,
-    <a href="#Page_237">237</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 3em">accommodation in the smaller,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_287">287</a></li>
-  <li>Gerbier, Sir Balthazar,
-    <a href="#Page_60">60</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_161">161–163</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_168">168</a></li>
-  <li>Gibbs, James,
-    <a href="#Page_31">31</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_178">178</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_243">243–251</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.8em">drawings by,</span>
-    <a href="#i_238"><b>164–170</b></a></li>
-  <li>Girdlers’ Hall, London,
-    <a href="#Page_191">191</a>,
-    <a href="#i_190"><b>127</b></a></li>
-  <li>Gloucester, house in Eastgate,
-    <a href="#Page_307">307</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„&emsp;&emsp;&ensp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2em">Southgate,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_109">109</a>,
-    <a href="#i_109"><b>65</b></a></li>
-  <li>Godmersham Park, Kent, doorway,
-    <a href="#Page_356">356</a>,
-    <a href="#i_357"><b>282</b></a></li>
-  <li>Goodridge, H. E., of Bath,
-    <a href="#Page_265">265</a></li>
-  <li>Gothic revival,
-    <a href="#Page_20">20</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_23">23</a></li>
-  <li>Grainger, of Newcastle,
-    <a href="#Page_282">282</a></li>
-  <li>Grecian temples in English gardens,
-    <a href="#Page_311">311</a></li>
-  <li>Greek influence,
-    <a href="#Page_21">21</a></li>
-  <li>Greenwich Hospital (formerly Palace),
-    <a href="#Page_150">150</a>,
-    <a href="#i_148"><b>98</b></a></li>
-  <li id="Greenwich">Greenwich Palace&mdash;</li>
-  <li class="i1">King Charles’s Block,
-    <a href="#Page_52">52</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_64">64</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_65">65</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_83">83</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_168">168</a>,
-    <a href="#i_085"><b>45</b></a></li>
-  <li class="i1">Ceiling,
-    <a href="#i_121"><b>77</b></a></li>
-  <li class="i1">Door,
-    <a href="#i_131b"><b>87</b></a></li>
-  <li class="i1">Queen’s house at Greenwich,
-    <a href="#Page_43">43</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_50">50</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_52">52</a></li>
-  <li class="i1">Plan,
-    <a href="#i_048"><b>25</b></a></li>
-  <li class="i1">View,
-    <a href="#i_049a"><b>26</b></a></li>
-  <li class="i1">Elevation,
-    <a href="#i_049b"><b>27</b></a></li>
-  <li class="i1">Chimney-pieces by Inigo Jones,
-    <a href="#i_135"><b>91</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_136"><b>92</b></a></li>
-  <li>Greenwich Old Palace, staircase,
-    <a href="#Page_126">126</a>,
-    <a href="#i_127"><b>82</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_128"><b>83</b></a></li>
-  <li>Gresham College, London,
-    <a href="#Page_143">143</a></li>
-  <li>Grinling Gibbons,
-    <a href="#Page_160">160</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_189">189</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_207">207</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_357">357</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_381">381</a></li>
-  <li>Gwydyr House, Whitehall,
-    <a href="#Page_20">20</a>,
-    <a href="#i_021"><b>11</b></a></li>
-</ul>
-
-<ul class="left">
-  <li>Hagley, Worcestershire,
-    <a href="#Page_231">231</a></li>
-  <li>Hakewill,
-    <a href="#Page_91">91</a></li>
-  <li>Hall, the great,
-    <a href="#Page_6">6</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_7">7</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: .8em">of eighteenth-century houses,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_351">351</a></li>
-  <li>Ham House, Surrey, staircase,
-    <a href="#Page_126">126</a>,
-    <a href="#i_125"><b>80</b></a></li>
-  <li>Hampton Court,
-    <a href="#Page_13">13</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_70">70</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_150">150</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_154">154</a>,
-    <a href="#i_012"><b>6</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2.8em">gate-pier,</span>
-    <a href="#i_326b"><b>244</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2.8em">iron screen,</span>
-    <a href="#i_341a"><b>262</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2.8em">iron balustrade,</span>
-    <a href="#i_342"><b>264</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2.8em">fire-dogs,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_295">295</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2.8em">staircase and ceiling,</span>
-    <a href="#i_383"><b>309</b></a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent">Hamstead Marshall, Berkshire,
-    <a href="#Page_163">163–168</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_324">324</a>,
-    <a href="#i_165"><b>108</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_169"><b>112</b></a></li>
-  <li>Hanbury Hall, near Droitwich,
-    <a href="#Page_13">13</a>,
-    <a href="#i_011"><b>5</b></a></li>
-  <li>Harewood House, doorway,
-    <a href="#i_390b"><b>316</b></a></li>
-  <li>Harley Street, London,
-    <a href="#Page_386">386</a></li>
-  <li>Hatton,
-    <a href="#Page_1">1</a></li>
-  <li>Hawes, Francis, his inventory,
-    <a href="#Page_372">372</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_375">375</a></li>
-  <li>Hawksmoor, Nicholas,
-    <a href="#Page_207">207–212</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_220">220</a></li>
-  <li>Hengrave Hall,
-    <a href="#Page_275">275</a></li>
-  <li>Henry, Prince of Orange,
-    <a href="#Page_164">164</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&ensp;„&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.6em">Wales,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_45">45</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_46">46</a></li>
-  <li>Hercules,
-    <a href="#Page_19">19</a></li>
-  <li>High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire, sundial,
-    <a href="#Page_318">318</a>,
-    <a href="#i_318"><b>234</b></a></li>
-  <li>Hinderskelf, Castle of,
-    <a href="#Page_216">216</a></li>
-  <li>Hogarth,
-    <a href="#Page_251">251</a></li>
-  <li>Holdenby House,
-    <a href="#Page_167">167</a></li>
-  <li>Holkham, Norfolk,
-    <a href="#Page_178">178</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_271">271–275</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„&emsp;&emsp;&ensp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.6em">plan,</span>
-    <a href="#i_272"><b>188</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„&emsp;&emsp;&ensp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.6em">view,</span>
-    <a href="#i_273"><b>189</b></a></li>
-  <li>Holt, near Bradford-on-Avon,
-    <a href="#Page_291">291</a>,
-    <a href="#i_288"><b>201</b></a></li>
-  <li>Homes, English,
-    <a href="#Page_1">1</a></li>
-  <li>Homes of great nobles,
-    <a href="#Page_2">2</a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent">Honington Hall, Warwickshire, doorway and ceiling,
-    <a href="#Page_357">357</a>,
-    <a href="#i_358"><b>283</b></a></li>
-  <li>Hooke, Robert,
-    <a href="#Page_178">178</a></li>
-  <li>Horse Guards, The, Whitehall,
-    <a href="#Page_276">276</a>,
-    <a href="#i_275"><b>190</b></a></li>
-  <li>Houghton, Norfolk,
-    <a href="#Page_178">178</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_251">251–256</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_351">351</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„&emsp;&emsp;&ensp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.6em">plan,</span>
-    <a href="#i_252"><b>172</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„&emsp;&emsp;&ensp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.6em">views,</span>
-    <a href="#i_253"><b>173–178</b></a></li>
-  <li>Houses in towns,
-    <a href="#Page_299">299–313</a></li>
-  <li>Hyde, Lord Chancellor,
-    <a href="#Page_180">180</a></li>
-</ul>
-
-<ul class="left">
-  <li>Ince Blundell, Lancashire, The Lion Lodge,
-    <a href="#Page_329">329</a>,
-    <a href="#i_328a"><b>246</b></a></li>
-  <li>Inigo Jones. <i>See</i> <a href="#Inigo">Jones, Inigo</a>.</li>
-  <li>Inventory of house furniture in 1720,
-    <a href="#Page_372">372</a></li>
-  <li>Ipswich, houses at,
-    <a href="#Page_111">111</a>,
-    <a href="#i_110a"><b>66</b></a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent">Ironwork,
-    <a href="#Page_299">299</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_339">339–345</a>,
-    <a href="#i_298"><b>212</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_299"><b>213</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_341a"><b>262–266</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_346a"><b>268–271</b></a></li>
-  <li>Isham, Sir Justinian,
-    <a href="#Page_93">93</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_95">95</a></li>
-  <li>Italian influence and inspiration,
-    <a href="#Page_1">1</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_2">2</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_6">6</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_27">27</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_36">36</a></li>
-</ul>
-
-<ul class="left">
-  <li>Jackson, John,
-    <a href="#Page_109">109</a></li>
-  <li>James I.,
-    <a href="#Page_3">3</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_45">45</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_66">66</a></li>
-  <li>Jeffreys, Judge,
-    <a href="#Page_13">13</a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent">Jerusalem Chamber, Westminster, chimney-piece,
-    <a href="#Page_136">136</a>,
-    <a href="#i_134"><b>90</b></a></li>
-  <li>Johnson, Dr., on Kedleston Hall,
-    <a href="#Page_278">278</a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent" id="Inigo">Jones, Inigo,
-    <a href="#Page_2">2</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_6">6</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_7">7</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_13">13</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_20">20</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_31">31</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_33">33</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_40">40</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_41">41–61</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_64">64</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_82">82</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_83">83</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_84">84</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_99">99</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_117">117</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_118">118</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_122">122</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_126">126</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_129">129</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_132">132</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_136">136</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_138">138</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_142">142</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_143">143</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_146">146</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_161">161</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_162">162</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_176">176</a></li>
-  <li>Jones, Inigo&mdash;</li>
-  <li class="i1">his designs for masques,
-    <a href="#Page_39">39</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_45">45</a></li>
-  <li class="i1">employed to purchase pictures,
-    <a href="#Page_42">42</a></li>
-  <li class="i1">his birth,
-    <a href="#Page_44">44</a></li>
-  <li class="i1">visits to Italy,
-    <a href="#Page_45">45</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_46">46</a></li>
-  <li class="i1">his sketch-book at Chatsworth,
-    <a href="#Page_45">45</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_46">46</a></li>
-  <li class="i1">his annotated copy of Palladio,
-    <a href="#Page_45">45</a></li>
-  <li class="i1">work attributed to him,
-    <a href="#Page_46">46–50</a></li>
-  <li class="i1">“the Vitruvius of his age”,
-    <a href="#Page_52">52</a></li>
-  <li class="i1">his death and will,
-    <a href="#Page_60">60</a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Kent’s “Designs of Inigo Jones”,
-    <a href="#Page_56">56</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_63">63</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_64">64</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_68">68</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_80">80</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_82">82</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_87">87</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_153">153</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_212">212</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_216">216</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_237">237–240</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_243">243</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_260">260</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_278">278</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_377">377</a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">“Designs of Inigo Jones,” compared with earlier designs,
-    <a href="#Page_82">82</a></li>
-  <li class="i1">designs for scenery,
-    <a href="#Page_64">64</a></li>
-  <li class="i1">drawings attributed to him,
-    <a href="#Page_65">65</a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Jones and the designs for the Palace at Whitehall,
-    <a href="#Page_63">63–80</a></li>
-  <li class="i1">“Designs for Whitehall”,
-    <a href="#Page_68">68</a></li>
-  <li class="i1">drawings by him,
-    <a href="#Footnote_31">77 (<i>footnote</i>)</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_79">79</a></li>
-  <li class="i1">Jones as scene-painter,
-    <a href="#Page_79">79</a></li>
-  <li class="i1">as surveyor,
-    <a href="#Page_79">79</a></li>
-  <li class="i1">drawings by Jones&mdash;</li>
-  <li class="i2">Banqueting House,
-    <a href="#i_062"><b>36</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_067"><b>37</b></a></li>
-  <li class="i2">elevations of a house,
-    <a href="#i_076"><b>42</b></a></li>
-  <li class="i2">drawing for a masque,
-    <a href="#i_078"><b>43</b></a></li>
-  <li class="i2">ceiling at Wilton,
-    <a href="#i_120a"><b>75</b></a></li>
-  <li class="i2">door at the Banqueting House,
-    <a href="#i_131a"><b>86</b></a></li>
-  <li class="i2">window at the same,
-    <a href="#i_132"><b>88</b></a></li>
-  <li class="i2">chimney-pieces,
-    <a href="#i_135"><b>91</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_136"><b>92</b></a></li>
-  <li class="i2">clock turret at Whitehall,
-    <a href="#i_317a"><b>232</b></a></li>
-  <li class="i2">Temple Bar,
-    <a href="#i_323"><b>240</b></a></li>
-  <li class="i2">gateway,
-    <a href="#i_324"><b>241</b></a></li>
-  <li class="i2">plan of Stoke Bruerne,
-    <a href="#i_174"><b>115</b></a></li>
-  <li>Jonson, Ben,
-    <a href="#Page_78">78</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_79">79</a></li>
-</ul>
-
-<ul class="left">
-  <li>Kedleston, Derbyshire,
-    <a href="#Page_178">178</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_271">271</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_278">278–280</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2.5em">plan,</span>
-    <a href="#i_276"><b>191</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2.5em">Hall,</span>
-    <a href="#i_277"><b>192</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2.5em">furniture at,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_280">280</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2.5em">drawing-room,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_389">389</a>,
-    <a href="#i_393"><b>319</b></a></li>
-  <li>Keith, Admiral Lord,
-    <a href="#Page_387">387</a></li>
-  <li>Keith, W. Grant,
-    <a href="#Footnote_31">77 (<i>footnote</i>)</a>,
-    <a href="#Footnote_38">87 (<i>footnote</i>)</a></li>
-  <li>Kelmarsh Hall,
-    <a href="#Page_178">178</a></li>
-  <li>Kennington Common,
-    <a href="#Page_311">311</a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent">Kennington Park Road, London, houses in,
-    <a href="#Page_311">311</a>,
-    <a href="#i_312b"><b>226</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_313"><b>227</b></a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent">Kent, William,
-    <a href="#Page_63">63</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_65">65</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_66">66</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_67">67</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_68">68</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_69">69</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_138">138</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_229">229</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_255">255</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_256">256</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_271">271–278</a></li>
-  <li>Kew Palace, fire-grates,
-    <a href="#i_373"><b>299</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_374"><b>300</b></a></li>
-  <li>Kimbolton Castle,
-    <a href="#Page_224">224</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_227">227</a></li>
-  <li>King’s Lynn,
-    <a href="#Page_296">296</a>,
-    <a href="#i_295"><b>209</b></a></li>
-  <li>Kingston, Castle Inn, staircase,
-    <a href="#Page_125">125</a>,
-    <a href="#i_126"><b>81</b></a></li>
-  <li>King’s Weston, Somerset,
-    <a href="#Page_13">13</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_14">14</a>,
-    <a href="#i_015"><b>7</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„&emsp;&emsp;&ensp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.6em">staircase,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_352">352</a>,
-    <a href="#i_350"><b>275</b></a></li>
-  <li>Kip or Kyp, “Britannia Illustrata”,
-    <a href="#Page_164">164</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_236">236</a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent">Kirby Hall, Northamptonshire, chimney and dormer window,
-    <a href="#i_316a"><b>230</b></a></li>
-</ul>
-
-<ul class="left">
-  <li>Laguerre,
-    <a href="#Page_384">384</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_385">385</a></li>
-  <li>Lamport Hall, Northamptonshire,
-    <a href="#Page_93">93</a>,
-    <a href="#i_093"><b>52</b></a></li>
-  <li>Landor, Walter Savage,
-    <a href="#Page_301">301</a></li>
-  <li>Langley, B. and T.,
-    <a href="#Footnote_1">26 (<i>footnote</i>)</a></li>
-  <li>Lanscroon,
-    <a href="#Page_384">384</a></li>
-  <li>Laud, Archbishop,
-    <a href="#Page_127">127</a></li>
-  <li>Lead cisterns,
-    <a href="#i_345"><b>267</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_349"><b>274</b></a></li>
-  <li>Lead work,
-    <a href="#Page_345">345</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_349">349</a>,
-    <a href="#i_345"><b>267</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_349"><b>274</b></a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent">Lectures on Architecture in the Seventeenth Century,
-    <a href="#Page_163">163</a></li>
-  <li>Leicester, Earl of,
-    <a href="#Page_274">274</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_275">275</a></li>
-  <li>Leicester, Lady,
-    <a href="#Page_275">275</a></li>
-  <li>Lempster, William, Lord,
-    <a href="#Page_207">207</a></li>
-  <li>Le Nôtre,
-    <a href="#Page_216">216</a></li>
-  <li>Lenthall, Speaker,
-    <a href="#Page_106">106</a></li>
-  <li>Leoni,
-    <a href="#Page_229">229</a></li>
-  <li>Leyton Great House, Essex,
-    <a href="#Page_185">185</a>,
-    <a href="#i_184"><b>122</b></a></li>
-  <li>Lewes, Sussex, house in the High Street,
-    <a href="#Page_314">314</a>,
-    <a href="#i_314"><b>228</b></a></li>
-  <li>Lincoln’s Inn Fields, staircase at No. 35,
-    <a href="#Page_356">356</a>,
-    <a href="#i_356"><b>281</b></a></li>
-  <li>Lisle, Dame Alice,
-    <a href="#Page_13">13</a></li>
-  <li>London Houses,
-    <a href="#Page_181">181</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_307">307–311</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 3.3em">plan,</span>
-    <a href="#i_309"><b>223</b></a></li>
-  <li>London suburbs,
-    <a href="#Page_313">313</a></li>
-  <li>Louvre, The,
-    <a href="#Page_74">74</a></li>
-  <li>Lysicrates, Choragic Monument of,
-    <a href="#Page_311">311</a></li>
-</ul>
-
-<ul class="left">
-  <li>Magdalene College, Cambridge,
-    <a href="#Page_100">100</a>,
-    <a href="#i_098a"><b>56</b></a></li>
-  <li>Malton, Earl of,
-    <a href="#Page_258">258</a></li>
-  <li>Mansfield Street, London, staircase,
-    <a href="#i_390a"><b>315</b></a></li>
-  <li>Market Harborough, Sign of Inn at,
-    <a href="#i_298"><b>212</b></a></li>
-  <li>Mark Lane, London, doorway,
-    <a href="#Page_333">333</a>,
-    <a href="#i_334a"><b>254</b></a></li>
-  <li>Marlborough, Duchess of,
-    <a href="#Page_150">150</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&ensp;„<span style="margin-left: 2.8em">town,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_296">296</a></li>
-  <li>Masques,
-    <a href="#Footnote_10">45 (<i>footnote</i>)</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_78">78</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.6em">drawing by Inigo Jones,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_77">77</a>,
-    <a href="#i_078"><b>43</b></a></li>
-  <li>Mediæval houses, plan of,
-    <a href="#Page_115">115</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.8em">traditions, decline of,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_20">20</a></li>
-  <li>Melbourne, Derbyshire, gardens,
-    <a href="#Page_236">236</a></li>
-  <li>Melton Constable, Norfolk,
-    <a href="#Page_193">193</a>,
-    <a href="#i_194"><b>131</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 4.2em">staircase,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_354">354</a>,
-    <a href="#i_354"><b>279</b></a></li>
-  <li>Meopham, Kent, chimney,
-    <a href="#i_315"><b>229</b></a></li>
-  <li>Middle Ages, vaulted rooms of the,
-    <a href="#Page_3">3</a></li>
-  <li>Milton,
-    <a href="#Page_10">10</a></li>
-  <li>Montagu, Duke of,
-    <a href="#Page_178">178</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_196">196</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_369">369</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.6em">House,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_178">178</a></li>
-  <li>Montague, Lady Mary Wortley,
-    <a href="#Page_216">216</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_364">364</a></li>
-  <li>Mortlake, factory of tapestry,
-    <a href="#Page_367">367</a></li>
-  <li>Moulton, Northamptonshire, date-stone,
-    <a href="#i_319"><b>235</b></a></li>
-  <li>Movable scenery, design of the, first,
-    <a href="#Footnote_38">87 (<i>footnote</i>)</a></li>
-  <li>Moyles Court, Hampshire,
-    <a href="#Page_10">10</a>,
-    <a href="#i_010"><b>4</b></a></li>
-</ul>
-
-<ul class="left">
-  <li>Names of rooms on plans by, Thorpe and Webb,
-    <a href="#Page_115">115</a></li>
-  <li>Napoleon,
-    <a href="#Page_21">21</a></li>
-  <li>Nash, Beau,
-    <a href="#Page_266">266</a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent">Neville Holt, Leicestershire, The Stables,
-    <a href="#Page_316">316</a>,
-    <a href="#i_316b"><b>231</b></a></li>
-  <li id="Newcastle">Newcastle House,
-    <a href="#Page_168">168</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_171">171</a></li>
-  <li>Newcastle, Earls and Dukes of,
-    <a href="#Page_32">32</a></li>
-  <li>Newmarket, royal house at,
-    <a href="#Page_50">50</a></li>
-  <li>Nixon, Alderman John,
-    <a href="#Page_111">111</a></li>
-  <li id="Nixon">&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.6em">his grammar school, at Oxford,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_111">111</a>,
-    <a href="#i_110b"><b>67</b></a></li>
-  <li>Normanton Park, Rutland,
-    <a href="#Page_17">17</a>,
-    <a href="#i_019"><b>10</b></a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent">Northampton, ceiling in Courts, of Justice,
-    <a href="#Page_381">381</a>,
-    <a href="#i_380"><b>306</b></a></li>
-  <li>Northleach,
-    <a href="#Page_43">43</a></li>
-  <li>Northumberland House, chimney-piece,
-    <a href="#Page_97">97</a></li>
-  <li>Norwich, doorways,
-    <a href="#i_335a"><b>256</b></a></li>
-</ul>
-
-<ul class="left">
-  <li>Oliver, Mr., City Surveyor,
-    <a href="#Page_63">63</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_64">64</a></li>
-  <li>Oundle, doorway,
-    <a href="#Page_333">333</a>,
-    <a href="#i_333"><b>253</b></a></li>
-  <li>Ormond, Duke of,
-    <a href="#Page_180">180</a></li>
-  <li>Osborne, Dorothy,
-    <a href="#Page_95">95</a></li>
-  <li>Oxford, house in the High St.,
-    <a href="#Page_291">291</a>,
-    <a href="#i_289b"><b>203</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.6em">house in St. Giles,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_291">291</a>,
-    <a href="#i_286b"><b>200</b></a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1 ">(See also <a href="#All_Souls">All Souls College</a>,
-                                        <a href="#Ashmolean">Ashmolean Museum,</a>
-                                        <a href="#Brasenose">Brasenose College Chapel</a>,
-                                        <a href="#Christ_Church">Christ Church</a>,
-                                        <a href="#Nixon">Nixon’s Grammar School</a>,
-                                        <a href="#Sheldonian">Sheldonian Theatre</a>,
-                                        <a href="#John">St. John’s College</a>,
-                                        <a href="#Trinity">Trinity College</a>,
-                                        <a href="#Worcester">Worcester College.</a>)</li>
-</ul>
-
-<ul class="left">
-  <li>Paine, James,
-    <a href="#Page_271">271</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_278">278</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_280">280</a></li>
-  <li>Palladio,
-    <a href="#Page_83">83</a></li>
-  <li>Panelling,
-    <a href="#Page_136">136</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_360">360</a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent">Paul’s Cathedral, St., London,
-    <a href="#Page_13">13</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_48">48</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_63">63</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_101">101</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_142">142</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_145">145–149</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;„&emsp;&emsp;&ensp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.6em">model by Wren,</span>
-    <a href="#i_146"><b>97</b></a></li>
-  <li>Paul’s, St., Covent Garden,
-    <a href="#Page_48">48</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_52">52</a>,
-    <a href="#i_047a"><b>23</b></a></li>
-  <li>Penshurst, Kent, fire-basket,
-    <a href="#i_371b"><b>297</b></a></li>
-  <li>Pepys,
-    <a href="#Page_2">2</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_100">100</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_180">180</a></li>
-  <li>Pepysian Library, Cambridge,
-    <a href="#Page_100">100</a>,
-    <a href="#i_098a"><b>56</b></a></li>
-  <li>“Persians”,
-    <a href="#Page_73">73</a></li>
-  <li>Petersham, Surrey, house at,
-    <a href="#Page_294">294</a>,
-    <a href="#i_293b"><b>208</b></a></li>
-  <li>Philibert de l’Orme,
-    <a href="#Page_28">28</a></li>
-  <li>Physicians’ College,
-    <a href="#Page_97">97</a></li>
-  <li>Piddletown, Dorset, vicarage,
-    <a href="#Page_291">291</a>,
-    <a href="#i_286a"><b>199</b></a></li>
-  <li>Pitt, William,
-    <a href="#Page_387">387</a></li>
-  <li>Pope,
-    <a href="#Page_5">5</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_227">227</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_243">243</a></li>
-  <li>Porches, open,
-    <a href="#Page_89">89</a></li>
-  <li>Powell, Sir Edward,
-    <a href="#Page_118">118</a></li>
-  <li>Powis Castle, Monmouth, tapestry room,
-    <a href="#i_368"><b>293</b></a></li>
-  <li>Powis House. <i>See</i> <a href="#Newcastle">Newcastle House</a>.</li>
-  <li>Powis, Marquis of,
-    <a href="#Page_171">171</a></li>
-  <li>Pratt, Roger,
-    <a href="#Page_180">180</a>, and Appendix,
-    <a href="#Page_395">395–398</a></li>
-  <li>Price, Dr. George, chimney-piece for,
-    <a href="#Page_138">138</a>,
-    <a href="#i_137a"><b>93</b></a></li>
-  <li>Prior Park, Bath, bridge,
-    <a href="#Page_220">220</a>,
-    <a href="#i_225"><b>154</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.2em">house,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_260">260–266</a>,
-    <a href="#i_264"><b>182</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_265"><b>183</b></a>,
-    <a href="#Page_351">351</a></li>
-  <li>Proportion in architecture,
-    <a href="#Page_80">80</a></li>
-  <li>Puget, architect,
-    <a href="#Page_178">178</a></li>
-  <li>Pugin,
-    <a href="#Page_20">20</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_311">311</a></li>
-  <li>Pulteney Bridge, Bath,
-    <a href="#Page_267">267</a>,
-    <a href="#i_267"><b>184</b></a></li>
-</ul>
-
-<ul class="left">
-  <li>Queen Anne, wife of James I.,
-    <a href="#Page_45">45</a></li>
-  <li>Queen’s House at Greenwich. <i>See</i> <a href="#Greenwich">Greenwich</a>.</li>
-  <li>Quenby Hall, Leicestershire, iron gateway,
-    <a href="#Page_344">344</a>,
-    <a href="#i_344"><b>266</b></a></li>
-</ul>
-
-<ul class="left">
-  <li>Raleigh, Sir Walter,
-    <a href="#Page_1">1</a></li>
-  <li>Ramsay, Allan,
-    <a href="#Page_387">387</a></li>
-  <li>Ramsbury Manor, Wiltshire,
-    <a href="#Page_95">95</a>,
-    <a href="#i_094"><b>53</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_096"><b>54</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;&ensp;„<span style="margin-left: 3.8em">Chinese wall-paper,</span>
-    <a href="#i_365"><b>290</b></a></li>
-  <li>Raynham Park, Norfolk,
-    <a href="#Page_58">58</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„&emsp;&emsp;&ensp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.2em">plan,</span>
-    <a href="#i_056"><b>32</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„&emsp;&emsp;&ensp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.2em">view,</span>
-    <a href="#i_057"><b>33</b></a></li>
-  <li>Reddish Manor, Wiltshire,
-    <a href="#Page_268">268</a>,
-    <a href="#i_269"><b>186</b></a></li>
-  <li>Reynolds, Sir Joshua,
-    <a href="#Page_3">3</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_14">14</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_229">229</a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent">R.I.B.A. Collection of Drawings,
-    <a href="#Page_58">58–64</a>,
-    <a href="#i_076"><b>42</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_081"><b>44</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_085"><b>45</b></a></li>
-  <li>Rice, R. Garraway,
-    <a href="#Footnote_83">342 (<i>footnote</i>)</a></li>
-  <li>Ricci,
-    <a href="#Page_172">172</a></li>
-  <li>Ripley,
-    <a href="#Page_14">14</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_271">271</a></li>
-  <li>Roads in Georgian times,
-    <a href="#Page_299">299</a></li>
-  <li>Robinson, Thomas (smith),
-    <a href="#Page_342">342</a></li>
-  <li>Rockingham, Marquis of,
-    <a href="#Page_258">258</a></li>
-  <li>Rooms named on old plans,
-    <a href="#Page_115">115</a></li>
-  <li>Rubens,
-    <a href="#Page_60">60</a></li>
-  <li>Rundhurst, Sussex, gate-piers,
-    <a href="#Page_329">329</a>,
-    <a href="#i_329"><b>248</b></a></li>
-  <li>Rysbrach,
-    <a href="#Page_255">255</a></li>
-</ul>
-
-<ul class="left">
-  <li>Saffron Walden, Essex, houses,
-    <a href="#Page_111">111</a>,
-    <a href="#i_112a"><b>68</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_112b"><b>69</b></a></li>
-  <li>Salisbury, sign of an inn,
-    <a href="#i_299"><b>213</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.6em">gateway in the Close,</span>
-    <a href="#i_330b"><b>250</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.6em">staircase,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_352">352</a>,
-    <a href="#i_353b"><b>278</b></a></li>
-  <li>“Salmacida spolia”,
-    <a href="#Page_87">87</a></li>
-  <li>Sandby, Thomas,
-    <a href="#Page_7">7</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_60">60</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_74">74</a>,
-    <a href="#i_frontis"><span class="smcap">Frontispiece</span></a>, <span class="smcap">Fig.</span>
-    <a href="#i_001fp"><b>1</b></a></li>
-  <li>Sanitary conveniences in Georgian houses,
-    <a href="#Page_288">288</a></li>
-  <li>Sappho,
-    <a href="#Page_21">21</a></li>
-  <li>Sash-windows introduced,
-    <a href="#Page_134">134</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2.6em">earliest example,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_136">136</a></li>
-  <li>Scole, Norfolk, inn,
-    <a href="#Page_111">111</a>,
-    <a href="#i_114b"><b>72</b></a></li>
-  <li>Scott (Sir Walter),
-    <a href="#Page_23">23</a></li>
-  <li>Seaton Delaval, Northumberland,
-    <a href="#Page_178">178</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_224">224</a></li>
-  <li>Seckford Hall, Suffolk, doorway,
-    <a href="#i_360a"><b>285</b></a></li>
-  <li>Sedgemoor,
-    <a href="#Page_13">13</a></li>
-  <li>Serlio,
-    <a href="#Page_80">80</a></li>
-  <li>Shakespeare,
-    <a href="#Page_10">10</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_25">25</a></li>
-  <li>Shardiloes House, design for chimney-piece,
-    <a href="#i_379"><b>305</b></a></li>
-  <li>Shaw, Huntingdon (smith),
-    <a href="#Page_342">342</a></li>
-  <li>Sheffield, “my lord’s house”,
-    <a href="#Page_34">34</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.6em">Duke of Buckingham,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_168">168</a></li>
-  <li id="Sheldonian">Sheldonian Theatre, Oxford,
-    <a href="#Page_144">144</a></li>
-  <li>Sherborne, Gloucestershire,
-    <a href="#Page_43">43</a></li>
-  <li>Sherrard, Bennet, Lord,
-    <a href="#Page_191">191</a></li>
-  <li>Shops,
-    <a href="#Page_304">304</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_305">305</a>,
-    <a href="#i_302"><b>216</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_305"><b>219</b></a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent">Short survey of twenty-six counties in 1634,
-    <a href="#Footnote_6">43&nbsp;(<i>footnote</i>)</a></li>
-  <li>Shrivenham, Berkshire, House,
-    <a href="#Page_294">294</a>,
-    <a href="#i_290a"><b>204</b></a></li>
-  <li>“Siege of Rhodes”,
-    <a href="#Page_87">87</a></li>
-  <li>Silchester, Hampshire, chimney,
-    <a href="#i_315"><b>229</b></a></li>
-  <li>Smithson, John,
-    <a href="#Page_7">7</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_42">42</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_168">168</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„&emsp;&emsp;&ensp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.2em">his family,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_31">31</a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent">&emsp;&emsp;„&emsp;&emsp;&ensp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.2em">his drawings,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_32">32–40</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_66">66</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_77">77</a>,
-    <a href="#i_029"><b>14</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_030"><b>15</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_035"><b>17</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_036"><b>18</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_038"><b>20</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_039"><b>21</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_068"><b>38</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2em">Robert,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_31">31</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2em">Huntingdon,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_31">31</a></li>
-  <li>Snaresbrook, Elm Hall, iron gates,
-    <a href="#i_346a"><b>268</b></a></li>
-  <li>Soane Museum,
-    <a href="#Page_31">31</a></li>
-  <li>Somerset House,
-    <a href="#Page_50">50</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 3.5em">new wing,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_105">105</a>,
-    <a href="#i_104"><b>61</b></a></li>
-  <li>South Molton, fireplace in Town Hall,
-    <a href="#Page_369">369</a>,
-    <a href="#i_367"><b>292</b></a></li>
-  <li>South Sea Company,
-    <a href="#Page_372">372</a></li>
-  <li>Spalato in Dalmatia,
-    <a href="#Page_280">280</a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent">Speculative builders, their influence on house design,
-    <a href="#Page_311">311</a></li>
-  <li>Spiers, Walter L.,
-    <a href="#Footnote_3">31 (<i>footnote</i>)</a></li>
-  <li>St Catherine’s Court, Somerset,
-    <a href="#Page_236">236</a></li>
-  <li>St Cloud,
-    <a href="#Page_200">200</a></li>
-  <li>St James’s Palace,
-    <a href="#Page_58">58</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.6em">chapel at,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_50">50</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.6em">Square, No. 32,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_20">20</a>,
-    <a href="#i_022"><b>12</b></a></li>
-  <li id="John">St. John’s College, Oxford&mdash;</li>
-  <li class="i1">doorway,
-    <a href="#Page_127">127</a>,
-    <a href="#i_130b"><b>85</b></a></li>
-  <li class="i1">panelling,
-    <a href="#Page_136">136</a>,
-    <a href="#i_133"><b>89</b></a></li>
-  <li class="i1">rain-water heads,
-    <a href="#Page_345">345</a></li>
-  <li>St Lawrence Jewry, London, carving,
-    <a href="#Page_185">185</a>,
-    <a href="#i_186"><b>123</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_187"><b>124</b></a></li>
-  <li>St Mary Redcliffe, Bristol, iron gates,
-    <a href="#Page_342">342</a>,
-    <a href="#i_343"><b>265</b></a></li>
-  <li>St John, Oliver,
-    <a href="#Page_88">88</a></li>
-  <li>Staircases of seventeenth century,
-    <a href="#Page_118">118</a>,
-    <a href="#i_116"><b>73</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_123"><b>78–83</b></a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent">&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;&nbsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.6em">eighteenth century,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_351">351</a>,
-    <a href="#i_350"><b>275–281</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_382"><b>308</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_383"><b>309</b></a></li>
-  <li>Stanton Harcourt, Oxfordshire, farmhouse,
-    <a href="#Page_113">113</a>,
-    <a href="#i_114a"><b>71</b></a></li>
-  <li>Stanway House, Gloucestershire, doorway,
-    <a href="#Page_101">101</a>,
-    <a href="#i_101"><b>58</b></a></li>
-  <li>Stapleford Park, Leicestershire,
-    <a href="#Page_191">191</a>,
-    <a href="#i_192a"><b>129</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_192b"><b>130</b></a></li>
-  <li>Starkie Gardner,
-    <a href="#Footnote_85">345 (<i>footnote</i>)</a></li>
-  <li>Stationers’ Hall, London,
-    <a href="#Page_191">191</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„&emsp;&emsp;&ensp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.4em">doorway,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_337">337</a>,
-    <a href="#i_337"><b>259</b></a></li>
-  <li>Stoke Bruerne, Northamptonshire,
-    <a href="#Page_176">176</a></li>
-  <li>Stoke Bruerne, Northamptonshire, plan,
-    <a href="#i_174"><b>115</b></a></li>
-  <li>“Stone-Heng Restored”,
-    <a href="#Page_44">44</a>,
-    <a href="#Footnote_18">50 (<i>footnote</i>)</a></li>
-  <li>Stoneleigh Abbey, Warwickshire&mdash;</li>
-  <li class="i1">iron gateway,
-    <a href="#Page_342">342</a>,
-    <a href="#i_341b"><b>263</b></a></li>
-  <li class="i1">panelling,
-    <a href="#Page_363">363</a>,
-    <a href="#i_362"><b>288</b></a></li>
-  <li>Stone, Nicholas,
-    <a href="#Page_60">60</a></li>
-  <li>Stowe House, Buckinghamshire,
-    <a href="#Page_224">224</a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent">Stowe House, Buckinghamshire, gardens,
-    <a href="#Page_229">229–232</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_276">276</a>,
-    <a href="#i_230"><b>157</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_228"><b>156</b></a></li>
-  <li>Strafford, Earl of,
-    <a href="#Page_258">258</a></li>
-  <li>Stratford, near London, iron gate,
-    <a href="#i_347b"><b>271</b></a></li>
-  <li>Stratton Street, London, house,
-    <a href="#Page_310">310</a>,
-    <a href="#i_310"><b>224</b></a></li>
-  <li>Streets in towns,
-    <a href="#Page_296">296</a></li>
-  <li>Stuart, James,
-    <a href="#Page_387">387</a></li>
-  <li>Sturmer, Essex, chimney,
-    <a href="#i_315"><b>229</b></a></li>
-  <li>Sundials,
-    <a href="#Page_318">318</a>,
-    <a href="#i_320b"><b>237</b></a></li>
-  <li>Sutton Place, fire-back and dogs,
-    <a href="#i_371a"><b>296</b></a></li>
-  <li>Swakeleys, Middlesex,
-    <a href="#Page_102">102</a>,
-    <a href="#i_103"><b>60</b></a></li>
-</ul>
-
-<ul class="left">
-  <li>Talman, architect,
-    <a href="#Page_203">203</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_204">204</a></li>
-  <li>Talmash, Thomas,
-    <a href="#Page_126">126</a></li>
-  <li>Tapestry,
-    <a href="#Page_367">367</a>,
-    <a href="#i_366"><b>291</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_368"><b>293</b></a></li>
-  <li>Temple Bar, design for, by Inigo Jones,
-    <a href="#Page_323">323</a>,
-    <a href="#i_323"><b>240</b></a></li>
-  <li>Temple, The, London, staircases,
-    <a href="#Page_351">351</a></li>
-  <li>Temple, Sir William,
-    <a href="#Page_95">95</a></li>
-  <li>Tenche, Sir Fisher,
-    <a href="#Page_185">185</a></li>
-  <li>Thornhill, Sir James,
-    <a href="#Page_385">385</a></li>
-  <li>Thorpe Hall, Northamptonshire,
-    <a href="#Page_88">88–91</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_324">324</a></li>
-  <li>Thorpe Hall, Northamptonshire&mdash;</li>
-  <li class="i1">plan,
-    <a href="#i_088"><b>47</b></a></li>
-  <li class="i1">views and details,
-    <a href="#i_086"><b>46</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_089"><b>48–51</b></a></li>
-  <li>Thorpe, John,
-    <a href="#Page_28">28</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_31">31</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_77">77</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_115">115</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.8em">plan of London houses,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_310">310</a></li>
-  <li>Thrale, Mrs.,
-    <a href="#Page_3">3</a></li>
-  <li>Tijou, Jean,
-    <a href="#Page_339">339</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_340">340</a></li>
-  <li>Town houses of the gentry,
-    <a href="#Page_299">299</a></li>
-  <li>Town-planning on architectural lines,
-    <a href="#Page_267">267</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_299">299</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_301">301</a></li>
-  <li>Towns, growth of,
-    <a href="#Page_304">304</a></li>
-  <li>Townshend, Aurelian,
-    <a href="#Page_78">78</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2.6em">George,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_275">275</a></li>
-  <li>Trellis-work to fronts of houses,
-    <a href="#Page_311">311</a>,
-    <a href="#i_312a"><b>225–227</b></a></li>
-  <li id="Trinity">Trinity College, Oxford,
-    <a href="#Page_145">145</a></li>
-  <li>Triumphal arches by Gerbier,
-    <a href="#Page_162">162</a></li>
-  <li>Tuileries, plan for the palace,
-    <a href="#Page_73">73</a></li>
-</ul>
-
-<ul class="left">
-  <li>Uffington, near Stamford, gate-pier,
-    <a href="#i_331"><b>251</b></a></li>
-</ul>
-
-<ul class="left">
-  <li>Vandike, Sir Anthony,
-    <a href="#Page_52">52</a></li>
-  <li>Vanbrugh, Sir John,
-    <a href="#Page_13">13</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_19">19</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_20">20</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_150">150</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_216">216–229</a></li>
-  <li>Vathek,
-    <a href="#Page_17">17</a></li>
-  <li>Vernon, Thomas,
-    <a href="#Page_13">13</a></li>
-  <li>Verrio,
-    <a href="#Page_199">199</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_384">384</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_385">385</a></li>
-  <li>Versailles,
-    <a href="#Page_196">196</a></li>
-  <li>Vignola,
-    <a href="#Page_163">163</a></li>
-  <li>Villiers, Duke of Buckingham,
-    <a href="#Page_60">60</a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent">“Vindication of Stone-Heng Restored,” by Webb,
-    <a href="#Footnote_10">45&nbsp;(<i>footnote</i>)</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_48">48</a>,
-    <a href="#Footnote_18">50 (<i>footnote</i>)</a>,
-    <a href="#Footnote_19">52 (<i>footnote</i>)</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_84">84</a></li>
-  <li>“Vitruvius Britannicus,” by Campbell,
-    <a href="#Page_64">64</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_240">240–243</a></li>
-</ul>
-
-<ul class="left">
-  <li>Wade, General,
-    <a href="#Page_214">214</a></li>
-  <li>Wall-papers,
-    <a href="#Page_364">364</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2.5em">Chinese,</span>
-    <a href="#i_365"><b>290</b></a></li>
-  <li>Walpole, Horace,
-    <a href="#Page_20">20</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_31">31</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_32">32</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_161">161</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 3.2em">his visit to Stowe,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_231">231</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.6em">Sir Robert,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_251">251</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_256">256</a></li>
-  <li>Wansford, Northamptonshire, chimney,
-    <a href="#i_315"><b>229</b></a></li>
-  <li>Wanstead,
-    <a href="#Page_260">260</a></li>
-  <li>Ware, Isaac,
-    <a href="#Page_176">176</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_271">271</a></li>
-  <li>Wareham, Dorset, shop at,
-    <a href="#Page_305">305</a>,
-    <a href="#i_304"><b>218</b></a></li>
-  <li>Warminster, Free School,
-    <a href="#Page_99">99</a>,
-    <a href="#i_098b"><b>57</b></a></li>
-  <li>Warwick, streets,
-    <a href="#Page_296">296</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.6em">Aylesford Hotel,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_301">301</a>,
-    <a href="#i_301"><b>215</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.6em">lead rain-water head,</span>
-    <a href="#i_348b"><b>273</b></a></li>
-  <li>Watson, Samuel, of Heanor,
-    <a href="#Page_207">207</a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent">Webb, John,
-    <a href="#Page_2">2</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_7">7</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_31">31</a>,
-    <a href="#Footnote_10">45 (<i>footnote</i>)</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_48">48</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_50">50</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_52">52</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_54">54</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_56">56</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_60">60</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_63">63</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_64">64</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_65">65</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_68">68</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_101">101</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_141">141</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_176">176</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2.2em">commissioned to acquire works of art,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_42">42</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2.2em">his petition to Charles II.,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_69">69</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_70">70</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2.2em">brief attached to same,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_84">84</a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent">&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2.2em">designed the Palace at Whitehall by command of Charles I.,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_70">70</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2.2em">design for a house by him,</span>
-    <a href="#i_081"><b>44</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2.2em">his own work,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_83">83–97</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2.2em">“Inigo Jones’s man”,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_83">83</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_87">87</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2.2em">designs for masques,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_87">87</a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent">&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2.2em">drawings by him, for new wing, Somerset House,</span>
-    <a href="#i_104"><b>61</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2.2em">ceiling at Wilton,</span>
-    <a href="#i_120b"><b>76</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2.2em">ceiling at Greenwich,</span>
-    <a href="#i_121"><b>77</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2.2em">door at Greenwich,</span>
-    <a href="#i_131b"><b>87</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2.2em">chimney-pieces,</span>
-    <a href="#i_137a"><b>93</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_137b"><b>94</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2.2em">hall or public room,</span>
-    <a href="#i_213"><b>145</b></a></li>
-  <li>Webb, William,
-    <a href="#Page_63">63</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_64">64</a></li>
-  <li>Welbeck,
-    <a href="#Page_32">32</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&ensp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.6em">riding-house,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_33">33</a>,
-    <a href="#i_038"><b>20</b></a></li>
-  <li>Wells, Deanery,
-    <a href="#Page_193">193</a>,
-    <a href="#i_191"><b>128</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2.2em"> chimney-piece,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_379">379</a>,
-    <a href="#i_377"><b>302</b></a></li>
-  <li>Wentworth Castle, Yorkshire,
-    <a href="#Page_258">258</a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent">&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2.2em">Woodhouse, Yorkshire,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_256">256–260</a>,
-    <a href="#i_261"><b>179</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_263"><b>181</b></a></li>
-  <li>Westminster, dormitory at,
-    <a href="#Page_216">216</a></li>
-  <li>Whitehall Palace,
-    <a href="#Page_7">7</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_39">39</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_42">42</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_52">52</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_154">154</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_162">162</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_168">168</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 3.5em">“Designs for Whitehall”,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_64">64</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_68">68</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 3.5em">drawings for,</span>
-    <a href="#Footnote_28">65 (<i>footnote</i>)</a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent">&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 3.5em">designs for the Palace,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_63">63–80</a>,
-    <a href="#i_001fp"><b>1</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_037"><b>19</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_071"><b>39–41</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 3.5em">by Wren,</span>
-    <a href="#i_155"><b>103</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 3.5em">clockhouse by Inigo Jones,</span>
-    <a href="#i_317a"><b>232</b></a></li>
-  <li>Widcombe Manor House, near Bath,
-    <a href="#Page_268">268</a>,
-    <a href="#i_270"><b>187</b></a></li>
-  <li>Wilkins, Dr.,
-    <a href="#Page_143">143</a></li>
-  <li>William and Mary,
-    <a href="#Page_2">2</a></li>
-  <li>Williams, John, Bishop of Lincoln,
-    <a href="#Page_136">136</a></li>
-  <li>Willis, Professor,
-    <a href="#Page_100">100</a></li>
-  <li>Wilton, Wiltshire,
-    <a href="#Page_58">58</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_97">97</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_220">220</a>,
-    <a href="#i_059"><b>34</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&ensp;„&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.8em">ceilings,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_118">118</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_122">122</a>,
-    <a href="#i_120a"><b>75</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_120b"><b>76</b></a></li>
-  <li>Wimpole Street, London, ceiling,
-    <a href="#i_388"><b>314</b></a></li>
-  <li>Winchester, chimney-piece,
-    <a href="#i_376"><b>301</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2.5em">palace at,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_142">142</a></li>
-  <li>Winde, Wine, or Wynne, Capt. <i>See</i> <a href="#Wynne">Wynne</a>.</li>
-  <li>Windows of seventeenth century,
-    <a href="#Page_129">129</a></li>
-  <li>Windsor Castle,
-    <a href="#Page_385">385</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 3em">sash-window,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_136">136</a></li>
-  <li>Witney, Oxfordshire, school at,
-    <a href="#Page_113">113</a>,
-    <a href="#i_113"><b>70</b></a></li>
-  <li>Wollaton,
-    <a href="#Page_31">31</a></li>
-  <li>Wolterton Hall, Norfolk,
-    <a href="#Page_14">14</a>,
-    <a href="#i_016"><b>8</b></a></li>
-  <li>Woodford Road, London, iron gate,
-    <a href="#i_347a"><b>270</b></a></li>
-  <li>Wood, John, of Bath,
-    <a href="#Page_260">260–268</a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent" id="Worcester">Worcester College, Oxford, drawings at,
-    <a href="#Page_52">52</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_58">58</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_63">63</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_64">64</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_65">65</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_68">68</a></li>
-  <li>Workmen and books,
-    <a href="#Page_27">27</a></li>
-  <li>Working men’s dwellings,
-    <a href="#Page_389">389</a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent">Wren, Sir Christopher,
-    <a href="#Page_13">13</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_20">20</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_31">31</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_61">61</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_101">101</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_108">108</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_141">141–160</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_176">176</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_178">178</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_189">189</a></li>
-  <li class="hangingindent">&emsp;&emsp;„&emsp;&emsp;&ensp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2.2em">drawings at All Souls College,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_145">145</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_154">154</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_176">176</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„&emsp;&emsp;&ensp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2.2em">designs for houses,</span>
-    <a href="#i_151a"><b>99</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_153"><b>102</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„&emsp;&emsp;&ensp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2.2em">for palace at Whitehall,</span>
-    <a href="#i_155"><b>103</b></a></li>
-  <li>Wren, Dr. Christopher,
-    <a href="#Page_143">143</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.2em">Matthew, Bishop of Ely,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_143">143</a></li>
-  <li>Wrest, Bedfordshire, gardens,
-    <a href="#Page_236">236</a>,
-    <a href="#i_232"><b>158</b></a></li>
-  <li id="Wynne">Wynne, Captain,
-    <a href="#Page_163">163</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_168">168</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;„&emsp;&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.8em">drawings by,</span>
-    <a href="#Footnote_52">171 (<i>footnote</i>)</a>,
-    <a href="#i_166a"><b>109</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_166b"><b>110</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_169"><b>112</b></a></li>
-</ul>
-
-<ul class="left">
-  <li>Yarmouth, lay out of streets,
-    <a href="#Page_296">296</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 2em">porch at,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_337">337</a>,
-    <a href="#i_338"><b>260</b></a></li>
-  <li>York, streets in,
-    <a href="#Page_296">296</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.1em">Assembly Rooms,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_214">214</a>,
-    <a href="#i_215a"><b>146</b></a>,
-    <a href="#i_215b"><b>147</b></a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.1em">doorway,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_333">333</a>,
-    <a href="#i_334b"><b>255</b></a></li>
-  <li>York House, London,
-    <a href="#Page_60">60</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_161">161</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;„&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.4em">water-gate,</span>
-    <a href="#Page_60">60</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_322">322</a></li>
-  <li>&emsp;„&emsp;&emsp;„<span style="margin-left: 1.4em">
-    <a href="#i_frontis"><span class="smcap">Frontispiece</span></a>,
-    <a href="#i_061"><b>35</b></a></span></li>
-</ul>
-
-
-<p class="center sm"><i>Printed in Great Britain at</i> <span class="smcap">The Darien Press</span>,
-<i>Edinburgh</i></p>
-
-
-<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<div class="footnotes"><h2>FOOTNOTES:</h2>
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_1" href="#FNanchor_1" class="label">[1]</a> The publication of “Gothic Architecture, Improved by Rules
-and Proportions,” by B. and T. Langley, in 1742, does not invalidate
-this statement, for the illustrations are intended to show how a
-kind of Gothic detail might be applied to a kind of classic “order.”
-The “Historical Dissertation on Gothic Architecture,” attached by
-way of introduction, is absolutely negligible in the light of modern
-knowledge, and could have helped nobody to a comprehension of the
-subject.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_2" href="#FNanchor_2" class="label">[2]</a> Evelyn’s “Account of Architects and Architecture.”</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_3" href="#FNanchor_3" class="label">[3]</a> See a communication from Mr. Walter L. Spiers to the
-<i>Journal of the Royal Institute of British Architects</i>, 10th Dec.
-1908, where a short pedigree is given.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_4" href="#FNanchor_4" class="label">[4]</a> “As appears by his name over the gate.”</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_5" href="#FNanchor_5" class="label">[5]</a> It was, however, John Smithson’s son, Huntingdon, who died
-in 1648. John Smithson died in 1634.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_6" href="#FNanchor_6" class="label">[6]</a> “A Relation of a Short Survey of 26 Counties observed in a
-seven weekes Journey begun on August 11, 1634, by a <i>Captain</i>, a
-<i>Lieutenant</i>, and an <i>Ancient</i>.”</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_7" href="#FNanchor_7" class="label">[7]</a> “Lives of the British Architects,” by E. Beresford
-Chancellor.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_8" href="#FNanchor_8" class="label">[8]</a> It is true that his spelling, especially that of the notes
-in his sketch-book, is eccentric, even for those days.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_9" href="#FNanchor_9" class="label">[9]</a> “Cal. State Papers, Domestic,” Sept. 2, 1611.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_10" href="#FNanchor_10" class="label">[10]</a> John Webb, in his “Vindication of Stone-Heng Restored”
-(1725), p. 119, says he resided “many years” in Italy, especially at
-Venice. This refers to his first visit. He was back in England before
-Twelfth Night, 1605, as he designed the “Masque of Blackness,” which
-was produced on that day. (See Peter Cunningham’s “Life of Inigo
-Jones.”)</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_11" href="#FNanchor_11" class="label">[11]</a> Peter Cunningham’s “Life of Inigo Jones,” p. 6.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_12" href="#FNanchor_12" class="label">[12]</a> “Cal. State Papers, Domestic,” April 27, 1613.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_13" href="#FNanchor_13" class="label">[13]</a> “A Vindication of Stone-Heng Restored,” p. 27. All this
-work was destroyed in the great fire. The loss of the portico was
-considered a national misfortune.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_14" href="#FNanchor_14" class="label">[14]</a> “A Vindication,” p. 36. This work has been much altered.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_15" href="#FNanchor_15" class="label">[15]</a> Destroyed.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_16" href="#FNanchor_16" class="label">[16]</a> “A Vindication,” p. 119.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_17" href="#FNanchor_17" class="label">[17]</a> Kennet, in Wood’s “Ath. Ox.,” by Bliss, iii. 806; quoted
-in Peter Cunningham’s “Inigo Jones.”</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_18" href="#FNanchor_18" class="label">[18]</a> In the year 1620, King James I., being at Wilton on one
-of his progresses, sent for Inigo Jones, and instructed him to produce
-out of his own practice in architecture and experience in antiquities
-abroad, what he could discover about Stonehenge. The “few undigested
-notes” which Jones made were amplified by John Webb and published by
-him as “Stone-Heng Restored” in 1655. They went to show that Stonehenge
-was a Roman temple. A Dr. Charleton attacked this conclusion in a
-pamphlet called “Chorea Gigantum,” whereupon Webb retaliated in his
-“Vindication of Stone-Heng Restored.” From the antiquarian point of
-view the controversy is of no value, but it is interesting because of
-the references to Inigo Jones.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_19" href="#FNanchor_19" class="label">[19]</a> Webb’s “Vindication,” p. 11. It would seem that Vandyke
-is here quoted as using the phrase “designing with his pen,” and
-not (as biographers have freely supposed) as having given Jones a
-certificate of ability.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_20" href="#FNanchor_20" class="label">[20]</a> In the collection at the Royal Institute of British
-Architects.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_21" href="#FNanchor_21" class="label">[21]</a> See Appendix II.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_22" href="#FNanchor_22" class="label">[22]</a> See<a href="#Page_69"> p. 69</a>.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_23" href="#FNanchor_23" class="label">[23]</a> “London Past and Present,” by Wheatley and Cunningham.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_24" href="#FNanchor_24" class="label">[24]</a> Peter Cunningham’s “Life,” where it is stated that the
-register of St Bennet’s records his burial on the 26th June.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_25" href="#FNanchor_25" class="label">[25]</a> Peter Cunningham’s “Inigo Jones,” p. 39.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_26" href="#FNanchor_26" class="label">[26]</a> John Aubrey’s “Brief Lives,” ed. by Andrew Clark. Oxford,
-1898, vol. ii. 10.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_27" href="#FNanchor_27" class="label">[27]</a> One of this series is illustrated in Fig. 39.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_28" href="#FNanchor_28" class="label">[28]</a> Those who desire to pursue the subject more fully are
-referred to two papers by the author&mdash;“The Burlington-Devonshire
-Drawings,” in the <i>Journal of the Royal Institute of British
-Architects</i>, Third Series, vol. xviii., No. 10, and “The Original
-Drawings for the Palace at Whitehall, attributed to Inigo Jones,”
-<i>Architectural Review</i>, June 1912.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_29" href="#FNanchor_29" class="label">[29]</a> “State Papers, Domestic: Charles II.,” vol. v., Nos. 74,
-74, <span class="allsmcap">i</span>.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_30" href="#FNanchor_30" class="label">[30]</a> It is the version published by Kent which is here dealt
-with, as being the best known.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_31" href="#FNanchor_31" class="label">[31]</a> In an article by Mr. W. Grant Keith, published in
-the <i>Burlington Magazine</i> of January 1913, are given some
-reproductions of half a dozen drawings by Inigo Jones, which are among
-the most carefully finished specimens of his handiwork that survive.
-They include a ceiling for Wilton, 1649, and some decorative work at
-Oatlands Palace in Surrey.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_32" href="#FNanchor_32" class="label">[32]</a> Mostly preserved at Chatsworth; there are also a few at
-the British Museum.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_33" href="#FNanchor_33" class="label">[33]</a> It has not been found possible to illustrate this scene,
-as was intended, owing to the war having rendered the drawings at
-Chatsworth inaccessible for the time being.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_34" href="#FNanchor_34" class="label">[34]</a> “Cal. State Papers, Domestic,” xcv. 12.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_35" href="#FNanchor_35" class="label">[35]</a> Horace Walpole’s “Anecdotes of Painting.”</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_36" href="#FNanchor_36" class="label">[36]</a> See the article on the Burlington-Devonshire Drawings in
-the <i>Journal of the Royal Institute of British Architects</i>, Third
-Series, vol. xviii., No. 10.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_37" href="#FNanchor_37" class="label">[37]</a> Vol. vi. p. 129, printed in full in Peter Cunningham’s
-“Life of Inigo Jones,” p. 48.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_38" href="#FNanchor_38" class="label">[38]</a> “The Designs for the First Movable Scenery on the
-English Public Stage,” by William Grant Keith, in <i>The Burlington
-Magazine</i>, Nos. cxxxiii. and cxxxiv., April and May 1914, where
-reproductions of Webb’s drawings are given.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_39" href="#FNanchor_39" class="label">[39]</a> “Thorpe Hall,” by A. W. Hakewill, 1852.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_40" href="#FNanchor_40" class="label">[40]</a> Neal, in his “Seats,” says it was designed by Webb; and
-although he quotes no authority he must have had some reason for the
-statement.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_41" href="#FNanchor_41" class="label">[41]</a> Willis and Clarke’s “Architectural History of the
-University of Cambridge,” ii. 366.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_42" href="#FNanchor_42" class="label">[42]</a> “The Old Colleges of Oxford,” by Aymer Vallance, p. 62.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_43" href="#FNanchor_43" class="label">[43]</a> Illustrated in “Early Renaissance Architecture in
-England,” by the present author (Batsford).</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_44" href="#FNanchor_44" class="label">[44]</a> “Ashburnham House and the Precincts of Westminster
-Abbey,” by Harry Sirr, <i>Journal of the R.I.B.A.</i>, 8th January
-1910.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_45" href="#FNanchor_45" class="label">[45]</a> “Windsor Castle,” by Sir W. H. St John Hope, p. 329.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_46" href="#FNanchor_46" class="label">[46]</a> It was perhaps Pierre le Muet whose work most influenced
-Wren.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_47" href="#FNanchor_47" class="label">[47]</a> “Lives of the British Architects,” by E. Beresford
-Chancellor, p. 79.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_48" href="#FNanchor_48" class="label">[48]</a> Walpole’s “Anecdotes of Painting.”</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_49" href="#FNanchor_49" class="label">[49]</a> Collins’s “Peerage.”</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_50" href="#FNanchor_50" class="label">[50]</a> This conjecture is strengthened by a reference of
-Evelyn’s, who notes that in going from Reading to Marlborough in June
-1654 he saw “my Lord Craven’s house at Causam now in ruines, his goodly
-woods felling by the rebels.”</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_51" href="#FNanchor_51" class="label">[51]</a> “Vit. Brit.,” i. 43, 44.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_52" href="#FNanchor_52" class="label">[52]</a> The curious volume of original drawings by Wynne, which
-is preserved at the Bodleian Library, and from which the illustrations
-109, 110, and 112 are reproduced, also contains drawings for work at
-Combe Abbey; it would appear, therefore, that Wynne was the architect
-employed both there and at Hamstead Marshall.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_53" href="#FNanchor_53" class="label">[53]</a> Wheatley and Cunningham’s “London, Past and Present.”</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_54" href="#FNanchor_54" class="label">[54]</a> “Vit. Brit,” i. 44.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_55" href="#FNanchor_55" class="label">[55]</a> “Journey through England” (1722), by J. Mackay, quoted in
-“London, Past and Present.”</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_56" href="#FNanchor_56" class="label">[56]</a> Bridges’ “History of Northamptonshire,” vol. i. p. 328.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_57" href="#FNanchor_57" class="label">[57]</a> The curious can compare the appearance of the old
-house with what Gibbs put in its place by referring to the plates in
-Bridges’ “History of Northamptonshire”; whether the newer design was an
-improvement, either in appearance or convenience, is open to question.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_58" href="#FNanchor_58" class="label">[58]</a> But see Appendix I., p. 395.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_59" href="#FNanchor_59" class="label">[59]</a> See “The Great House, Leyton,” by Edwin Gunn, published
-by the Committee for the Survey of the Memorials of Greater London,
-1903.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_60" href="#FNanchor_60" class="label">[60]</a> Collins’s “Peerage,” 1741 ed., i. 334.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_61" href="#FNanchor_61" class="label">[61]</a> An excellent annotated catalogue of the pictures has been
-prepared by Mr. C. H. Scott and privately printed. The Boughton estates
-passed to the Dukes of Buccleuch (Montagu-Douglas-Scott) by marriage
-with an heiress of the Montagus.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_62" href="#FNanchor_62" class="label">[62]</a> It was begun in 1687 and finished in 1706.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_63" href="#FNanchor_63" class="label">[63]</a> Bridges’ “History of Northamptonshire,” i. 289, repeated
-by Baker in his history of the same county, ii. 144.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_64" href="#FNanchor_64" class="label">[64]</a> Baker, <i>ut supra</i>.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_65" href="#FNanchor_65" class="label">[65]</a> Mr. R. Blomfield’s “History of Renaissance Architecture in
-England,” p. 224.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_66" href="#FNanchor_66" class="label">[66]</a> “Court and Society from Elizabeth to Anne,” edited from
-the papers at Kimbolton, by the Duke of Manchester, London, 1864, p.
-56.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_67" href="#FNanchor_67" class="label">[67]</a> “Court and Society from Elizabeth to Anne,” 1864, p. 227.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_68" href="#FNanchor_68" class="label">[68]</a> Letter to George Montagu, 7th July 1770; also to H. S.
-Conway, 12th July 1770.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_69" href="#FNanchor_69" class="label">[69]</a> “Vitruvius Britannicus,” ii., pl. 81, 82.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_70" href="#FNanchor_70" class="label">[70]</a> The first series, in three volumes, is here referred to.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_71" href="#FNanchor_71" class="label">[71]</a> “Vitruvius Britannicus,” iii, pl. 27–34.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_72" href="#FNanchor_72" class="label">[72]</a> Collins’s “Peerage.”</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_73" href="#FNanchor_73" class="label">[73]</a> Walpole, “Anecdotes.”</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_74" href="#FNanchor_74" class="label">[74]</a> “Treatise on Architecture.”</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_75" href="#FNanchor_75" class="label">[75]</a> Ferguson’s “History of Architecture,” Book IV., 1873 ed.,
-p. 328.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_76" href="#FNanchor_76" class="label">[76]</a> “Memoirs of a Royal Chaplain,” by Albert Hartsborne, pp.
-318–320.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_77" href="#FNanchor_77" class="label">[77]</a> See an article on Holkham by M. Jourdain, “Interiors
-of English Mansions,” in the <i>Art Journal</i> of July 1911,
-and Lenygon’s “Decoration in England” and “Furniture in England”
-(1660–1790), 2 vols. (Batsford).</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_78" href="#FNanchor_78" class="label">[78]</a> Mr. Percy Fitzgerald, M.A., F.S.A., in his “Robert Adam.”</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_79" href="#FNanchor_79" class="label">[79]</a> A Latinised version of the Greek word for “Brothers.”</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_80" href="#FNanchor_80" class="label">[80]</a> “London Past and Present.”</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_81" href="#FNanchor_81" class="label">[81]</a> From a description by Cole, quoted in Willis and Clark’s
-“Architectural History of the University of Cambridge.”</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_82" href="#FNanchor_82" class="label">[82]</a> London in the eighteenth century was even darker than it
-has been since the lighting has been minimised as a protection against
-air-raids.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_83" href="#FNanchor_83" class="label">[83]</a> See two articles on Huntingdon Shaw by R. Garraway Rice,
-F.S.A., in the <i>Archæological Journal</i>, June 1895, and the <i>Home
-Counties Magazine</i>, January 1902, vol. iv., No. 13.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_84" href="#FNanchor_84" class="label">[84]</a> See “English Ironwork of the XVIIth and XVIIIth
-Centuries,” by J. Starkie Gardner. (Batsford.)</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_85" href="#FNanchor_85" class="label">[85]</a> This work is attributed by Mr. Starkie Gardner to a
-skilful smith named Robert Davies.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_86" href="#FNanchor_86" class="label">[86]</a> See “Tapestry Weaving in England,” by W. G. Thomson.
-(Batsford.)</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_87" href="#FNanchor_87" class="label">[87]</a> “Guide to an Exhibition of Tapestries, Carpets, and
-Furniture, lent by the Earl of Dalkeith to the Victoria and Albert
-Museum,” by A. F. K., 1914.</p>
-
-</div>
-</div>
-
-<p class="transnote">Transcriber’s Note:<br />
-
-1. Obvious printers’, punctuation and spelling errors have been corrected silently.<br />
-
-2. Where appropriate, original spelling has been retained.<br />
-
-3. Some hyphenated and non-hyphenated versions of the same words have been
-retained as in the original.</p>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin-top:4em'>*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE ENGLISH HOME FROM CHARLES I. TO GEORGE IV. ***</div>
-<div style='text-align:left'>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-Updated editions will replace the previous one&#8212;the old editions will
-be renamed.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright
-law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works,
-so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United
-States without permission and without paying copyright
-royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part
-of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project
-Gutenberg&#8482; electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG&#8482;
-concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark,
-and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following
-the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use
-of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for
-copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very
-easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation
-of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project
-Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away&#8212;you may
-do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected
-by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark
-license, especially commercial redistribution.
-</div>
-
-<div style='margin:0.83em 0; font-size:1.1em; text-align:center'>START: FULL LICENSE<br />
-<span style='font-size:smaller'>THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE<br />
-PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK</span>
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-To protect the Project Gutenberg&#8482; mission of promoting the free
-distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
-(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase &#8220;Project
-Gutenberg&#8221;), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
-Project Gutenberg&#8482; License available with this file or online at
-www.gutenberg.org/license.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; font-size:1.1em; margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'>
-Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg&#8482; electronic works
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg&#8482;
-electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
-and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
-(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
-the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
-destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg&#8482; electronic works in your
-possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
-Project Gutenberg&#8482; electronic work and you do not agree to be bound
-by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person
-or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.B. &#8220;Project Gutenberg&#8221; is a registered trademark. It may only be
-used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
-agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
-things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg&#8482; electronic works
-even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
-paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
-Gutenberg&#8482; electronic works if you follow the terms of this
-agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg&#8482;
-electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (&#8220;the
-Foundation&#8221; or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection
-of Project Gutenberg&#8482; electronic works. Nearly all the individual
-works in the collection are in the public domain in the United
-States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the
-United States and you are located in the United States, we do not
-claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing,
-displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as
-all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope
-that you will support the Project Gutenberg&#8482; mission of promoting
-free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg&#8482;
-works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the
-Project Gutenberg&#8482; name associated with the work. You can easily
-comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the
-same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg&#8482; License when
-you share it without charge with others.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
-what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are
-in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States,
-check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this
-agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing,
-distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any
-other Project Gutenberg&#8482; work. The Foundation makes no
-representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any
-country other than the United States.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other
-immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg&#8482; License must appear
-prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg&#8482; work (any work
-on which the phrase &#8220;Project Gutenberg&#8221; appears, or with which the
-phrase &#8220;Project Gutenberg&#8221; is associated) is accessed, displayed,
-performed, viewed, copied or distributed:
-</div>
-
-<blockquote>
-  <div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-    This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most
-    other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
-    whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
-    of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online
-    at <a href="https://www.gutenberg.org">www.gutenberg.org</a>. If you
-    are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws
-    of the country where you are located before using this eBook.
-  </div>
-</blockquote>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg&#8482; electronic work is
-derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
-contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the
-copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in
-the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
-redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase &#8220;Project
-Gutenberg&#8221; associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply
-either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or
-obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg&#8482;
-trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg&#8482; electronic work is posted
-with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
-must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
-additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
-will be linked to the Project Gutenberg&#8482; License for all works
-posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the
-beginning of this work.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg&#8482;
-License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
-work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg&#8482;.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
-electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
-prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
-active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
-Gutenberg&#8482; License.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
-compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including
-any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access
-to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg&#8482; work in a format
-other than &#8220;Plain Vanilla ASCII&#8221; or other format used in the official
-version posted on the official Project Gutenberg&#8482; website
-(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
-to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means
-of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original &#8220;Plain
-Vanilla ASCII&#8221; or other form. Any alternate format must include the
-full Project Gutenberg&#8482; License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
-performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg&#8482; works
-unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
-access to or distributing Project Gutenberg&#8482; electronic works
-provided that:
-</div>
-
-<div style='margin-left:0.7em;'>
-    <div style='text-indent:-0.7em'>
-        &#8226; You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
-        the use of Project Gutenberg&#8482; works calculated using the method
-        you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed
-        to the owner of the Project Gutenberg&#8482; trademark, but he has
-        agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project
-        Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid
-        within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are
-        legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty
-        payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project
-        Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in
-        Section 4, &#8220;Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg
-        Literary Archive Foundation.&#8221;
-    </div>
-
-    <div style='text-indent:-0.7em'>
-        &#8226; You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
-        you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
-        does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg&#8482;
-        License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
-        copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue
-        all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg&#8482;
-        works.
-    </div>
-
-    <div style='text-indent:-0.7em'>
-        &#8226; You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of
-        any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
-        electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
-        receipt of the work.
-    </div>
-
-    <div style='text-indent:-0.7em'>
-        &#8226; You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
-        distribution of Project Gutenberg&#8482; works.
-    </div>
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project
-Gutenberg&#8482; electronic work or group of works on different terms than
-are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing
-from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of
-the Project Gutenberg&#8482; trademark. Contact the Foundation as set
-forth in Section 3 below.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.F.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
-effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
-works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project
-Gutenberg&#8482; collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg&#8482;
-electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may
-contain &#8220;Defects,&#8221; such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate
-or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
-intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or
-other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
-cannot be read by your equipment.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the &#8220;Right
-of Replacement or Refund&#8221; described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
-Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
-Gutenberg&#8482; trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
-Gutenberg&#8482; electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
-liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
-fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
-LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
-PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
-TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
-LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
-INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
-DAMAGE.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
-defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
-receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
-written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
-received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium
-with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you
-with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in
-lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person
-or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second
-opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If
-the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing
-without further opportunities to fix the problem.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
-in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you &#8216;AS-IS&#8217;, WITH NO
-OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT
-LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
-warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
-damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement
-violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the
-agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or
-limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or
-unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the
-remaining provisions.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
-trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
-providing copies of Project Gutenberg&#8482; electronic works in
-accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the
-production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg&#8482;
-electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses,
-including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of
-the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this
-or any Project Gutenberg&#8482; work, (b) alteration, modification, or
-additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg&#8482; work, and (c) any
-Defect you cause.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; font-size:1.1em; margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'>
-Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg&#8482;
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-Project Gutenberg&#8482; is synonymous with the free distribution of
-electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
-computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It
-exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations
-from people in all walks of life.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
-assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg&#8482;&#8217;s
-goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg&#8482; collection will
-remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
-Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
-and permanent future for Project Gutenberg&#8482; and future
-generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
-Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see
-Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; font-size:1.1em; margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'>
-Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit
-501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
-state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
-Revenue Service. The Foundation&#8217;s EIN or federal tax identification
-number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary
-Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by
-U.S. federal laws and your state&#8217;s laws.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-The Foundation&#8217;s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West,
-Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up
-to date contact information can be found at the Foundation&#8217;s website
-and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; font-size:1.1em; margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'>
-Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-Project Gutenberg&#8482; depends upon and cannot survive without widespread
-public support and donations to carry out its mission of
-increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
-freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest
-array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations
-($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
-status with the IRS.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
-charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
-States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
-considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
-with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations
-where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND
-DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state
-visit <a href="https://www.gutenberg.org/donate/">www.gutenberg.org/donate</a>.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
-have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
-against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
-approach us with offers to donate.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
-any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
-outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation
-methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
-ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To
-donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; font-size:1.1em; margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'>
-Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg&#8482; electronic works
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
-Gutenberg&#8482; concept of a library of electronic works that could be
-freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
-distributed Project Gutenberg&#8482; eBooks with only a loose network of
-volunteer support.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-Project Gutenberg&#8482; eBooks are often created from several printed
-editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
-the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
-necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
-edition.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
-facility: <a href="https://www.gutenberg.org">www.gutenberg.org</a>.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-This website includes information about Project Gutenberg&#8482;,
-including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
-Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
-subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
-</div>
-
-</div>
-</body>
-</html>
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/cover.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/cover.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 022123d..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/cover.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_001fp.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_001fp.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index a8ed1fe..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_001fp.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_004.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_004.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index dbdf2ab..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_004.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_009.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_009.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index f17ced2..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_009.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_010.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_010.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index da1a6b9..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_010.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_011.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_011.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index f7529b7..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_011.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_012.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_012.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 46a7b44..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_012.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_015.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_015.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 342d5f1..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_015.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_016.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_016.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 7e20b68..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_016.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_018.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_018.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index d187568..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_018.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_019.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_019.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 1b6d2fd..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_019.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_021.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_021.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 5a18452..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_021.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_022.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_022.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 202b966..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_022.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_024.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_024.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index e97a23b..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_024.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_029.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_029.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 276a64f..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_029.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_030.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_030.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index c18b1ca..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_030.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_034.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_034.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 6b349f5..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_034.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_035.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_035.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 303bda7..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_035.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_036.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_036.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 662fd02..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_036.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_037.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_037.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 28b16d7..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_037.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_038.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_038.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 456728a..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_038.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_039.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_039.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index a586424..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_039.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_043.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_043.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 1dfbf95..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_043.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_047a.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_047a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 76fb637..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_047a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_047b.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_047b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 8135715..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_047b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_048.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_048.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 268331f..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_048.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_049a.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_049a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index aefaa91..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_049a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_049b.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_049b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 24eb337..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_049b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_050.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_050.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index ede7954..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_050.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_051.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_051.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 181e56b..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_051.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_053.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_053.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 0adc39a..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_053.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_055.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_055.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index a87c82c..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_055.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_056.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_056.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index dcd43b1..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_056.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_057.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_057.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index c33fd40..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_057.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_059.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_059.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 0c25221..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_059.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_061.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_061.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 21d6522..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_061.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_062.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_062.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 29b7950..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_062.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_067.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_067.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 0b0da21..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_067.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_068.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_068.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 5f40c30..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_068.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_071.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_071.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 7e210cf..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_071.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_072.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_072.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 4093f17..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_072.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_075.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_075.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index f71bb6a..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_075.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_076.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_076.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 0290ca8..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_076.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_078.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_078.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index cd7c428..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_078.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_081.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_081.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 973226a..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_081.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_085.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_085.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index eeef5bd..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_085.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_086.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_086.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index a83c572..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_086.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_088.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_088.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 3db400b..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_088.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_089.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_089.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 36e5e0f..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_089.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_090.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_090.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index af9c809..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_090.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_092a.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_092a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index f108f9e..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_092a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_092b.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_092b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 80aa7ff..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_092b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_093.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_093.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 35e31da..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_093.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_094.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_094.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 24f4a03..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_094.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_096.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_096.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 5fca9be..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_096.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_097.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_097.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 0f5fcee..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_097.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_098a.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_098a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 872a52a..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_098a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_098b.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_098b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 66264a5..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_098b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_101.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_101.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 5cfbd35..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_101.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_102.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_102.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 14ef79e..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_102.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_103.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_103.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 842dc6c..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_103.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_104.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_104.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index c8c48ba..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_104.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_105.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_105.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 08f45a0..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_105.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_107.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_107.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 78901ce..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_107.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_108.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_108.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 0abad6b..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_108.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_109.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_109.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index a1c7bc0..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_109.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_110a.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_110a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 7f92d1f..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_110a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_110b.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_110b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index b5e7c7c..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_110b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_112a.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_112a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 2a098de..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_112a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_112b.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_112b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 027e811..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_112b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_113.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_113.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index eb5a47d..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_113.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_114a.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_114a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index fc7cedc..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_114a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_114b.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_114b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index fd9f555..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_114b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_116.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_116.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 4ddaab4..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_116.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_119.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_119.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index f0d0924..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_119.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_120a.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_120a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 93a79dd..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_120a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_120b.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_120b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index ec46d44..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_120b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_121.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_121.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 43a258e..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_121.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_123.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_123.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 3bff4c9..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_123.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_124.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_124.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index dfda99a..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_124.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_125.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_125.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index f92fa16..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_125.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_126.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_126.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 2ab0f0d..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_126.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_127.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_127.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 5674668..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_127.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_128.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_128.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index bc005fd..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_128.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_130a.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_130a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 5b85c2d..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_130a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_130b.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_130b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 24233b6..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_130b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_131a.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_131a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 900b0a8..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_131a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_131b.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_131b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index bff23bf..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_131b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_132.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_132.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index cc8f8d2..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_132.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_133.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_133.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 32a47fa..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_133.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_134.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_134.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 60cf639..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_134.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_135.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_135.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 34ec25d..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_135.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_136.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_136.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index d9d23e8..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_136.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_137a.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_137a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index b408c68..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_137a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_137b.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_137b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index f976127..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_137b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_139.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_139.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 48d483a..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_139.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_140.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_140.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 203a121..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_140.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_146.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_146.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 77c423f..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_146.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_148.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_148.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 06878fd..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_148.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_151a.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_151a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 0b88bd2..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_151a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_151b.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_151b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 22b8abe..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_151b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_152.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_152.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 8f85f2f..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_152.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_153.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_153.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 1a01504..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_153.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_155.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_155.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 04d5029..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_155.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_156.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_156.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index b25317e..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_156.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_157.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_157.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index dd16a95..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_157.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_158.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_158.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 73dc33a..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_158.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_159.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_159.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index d753a32..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_159.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_165.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_165.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 679fc58..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_165.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_166a.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_166a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index f93a830..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_166a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_166b.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_166b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index edbcc94..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_166b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_167.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_167.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 9663d66..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_167.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_169.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_169.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 406d810..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_169.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_170.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_170.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 73b15a3..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_170.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_172fp.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_172fp.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 58a1415..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_172fp.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_173.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_173.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index bd0a0f0..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_173.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_174.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_174.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 2ed5052..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_174.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_175.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_175.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index b3d62d4..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_175.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_177.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_177.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 9091b56..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_177.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_179.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_179.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 8e1bdbf..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_179.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_181.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_181.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 64fb781..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_181.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_182.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_182.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index a123bb6..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_182.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_183.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_183.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 6243a70..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_183.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_184.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_184.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 7f3bd18..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_184.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_186.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_186.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index eb2da9d..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_186.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_187.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_187.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 69f0027..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_187.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_188.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_188.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 8e18785..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_188.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_189.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_189.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index a3d2aff..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_189.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_190.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_190.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 15f24ca..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_190.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_191.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_191.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 38fa11e..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_191.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_192a.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_192a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 4aafdad..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_192a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_192b.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_192b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index c0e195c..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_192b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_194.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_194.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index d482e96..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_194.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_196.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_196.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 16f6b71..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_196.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_197a.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_197a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 697768e..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_197a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_197b.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_197b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 541f8d2..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_197b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_198.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_198.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 4061032..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_198.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_201.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_201.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index f57d264..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_201.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_202.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_202.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index adefcb0..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_202.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_203.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_203.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index c83e474..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_203.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_205.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_205.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 801130d..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_205.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_206.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_206.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 969d067..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_206.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_208.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_208.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index ea5800a..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_208.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_209.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_209.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 4fa455f..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_209.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_210.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_210.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index dec7360..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_210.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_211.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_211.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 3d019c0..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_211.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_213.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_213.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 5b786f5..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_213.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_215a.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_215a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 0e80f95..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_215a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_215b.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_215b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 2cbdc1d..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_215b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_217.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_217.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 69834c9..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_217.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_219a.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_219a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 5a8919f..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_219a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_219b.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_219b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index d223dc0..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_219b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_221.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_221.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 522bf5e..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_221.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_222.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_222.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 776b0f9..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_222.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_223.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_223.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 4cdf40d..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_223.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_225.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_225.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index dfb021f..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_225.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_226.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_226.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 0f4b089..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_226.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_228.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_228.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index fb343c3..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_228.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_230.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_230.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 23ba571..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_230.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_232.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_232.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 7f8f3d7..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_232.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_233a.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_233a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 98d30d5..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_233a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_233b.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_233b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 4563d07..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_233b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_234.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_234.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 591f640..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_234.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_235.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_235.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 42dccb2..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_235.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_236.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_236.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 01a6591..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_236.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_238.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_238.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 3a3d569..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_238.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_239.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_239.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index e68b6fc..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_239.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_241.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_241.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 26215a7..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_241.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_242.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_242.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 178b926..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_242.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_245.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_245.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index c48aac6..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_245.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_246.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_246.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 80db52e..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_246.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_249.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_249.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 6696582..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_249.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_250.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_250.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index a341fb3..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_250.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_252.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_252.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 592bd22..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_252.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_253.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_253.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 46adbbb..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_253.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_254.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_254.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 840f47a..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_254.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_256.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_256.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index bf8345d..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_256.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_257.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_257.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index d67ce1c..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_257.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_258.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_258.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 569a474..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_258.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_259.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_259.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 92d25ff..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_259.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_261.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_261.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 4f92461..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_261.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_262.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_262.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index d4d7931..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_262.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_263.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_263.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 2623804..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_263.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_264.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_264.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 09fbd60..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_264.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_265.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_265.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 4475eaf..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_265.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_267.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_267.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index e022fc2..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_267.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_268.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_268.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index f9e870e..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_268.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_269.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_269.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index ba70878..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_269.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_270.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_270.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 9a003a6..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_270.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_272.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_272.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index f8bc02e..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_272.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_273.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_273.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 9f02ffb..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_273.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_275.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_275.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 4c460d8..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_275.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_276.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_276.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index d684105..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_276.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_277.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_277.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 072e522..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_277.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_279.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_279.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index e62b8ae..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_279.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_280.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_280.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index a145d60..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_280.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_281.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_281.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 14aa14a..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_281.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_283a.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_283a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 178929a..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_283a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_283b.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_283b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index cf7e1a2..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_283b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_284.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_284.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 478f77d..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_284.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_286a.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_286a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 3d45a58..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_286a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_286b.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_286b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index c87575d..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_286b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_288.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_288.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index b21c76a..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_288.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_289a.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_289a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 3915269..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_289a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_289b.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_289b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index cdc1640..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_289b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_290a.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_290a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 5031554..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_290a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_290b.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_290b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 1240cfd..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_290b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_292.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_292.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index ee29e3d..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_292.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_293a.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_293a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index a466537..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_293a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_293b.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_293b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 33bca24..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_293b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_295.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_295.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 43cce95..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_295.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_297a.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_297a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index d3bdb70..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_297a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_297b.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_297b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 4cb06d1..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_297b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_298.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_298.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 3e395de..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_298.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_299.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_299.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 4cb1ec7..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_299.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_300.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_300.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 0a2569f..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_300.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_301.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_301.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index f1d4855..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_301.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_302.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_302.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 41ed035..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_302.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_303.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_303.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index bdf8392..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_303.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_304.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_304.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 1689002..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_304.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_305.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_305.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 61b2515..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_305.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_306.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_306.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index dce7a4a..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_306.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_308a.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_308a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 3060a20..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_308a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_308b.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_308b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index b8afaeb..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_308b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_309.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_309.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 75a2986..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_309.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_310.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_310.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 9682036..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_310.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_312a.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_312a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 903da93..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_312a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_312b.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_312b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index b1ed597..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_312b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_313.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_313.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 694ee26..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_313.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_314.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_314.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 9cccf92..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_314.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_315.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_315.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 040e708..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_315.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_316a.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_316a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 0f098e6..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_316a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_316b.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_316b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 9dd88ce..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_316b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_317a.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_317a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 3f02f51..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_317a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_317b.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_317b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index a7c85e9..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_317b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_318.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_318.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 87006d4..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_318.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_319.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_319.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 54b2e37..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_319.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_320a.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_320a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index c5d977b..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_320a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_320b.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_320b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index cc05330..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_320b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_321.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_321.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 8381e91..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_321.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_322.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_322.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 593e640..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_322.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_323.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_323.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index ec0e948..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_323.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_324.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_324.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index db5c434..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_324.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_325.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_325.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index f7b37bb..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_325.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_326a.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_326a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index b0da87e..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_326a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_326b.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_326b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 3b9bd95..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_326b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_327.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_327.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 7b00021..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_327.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_328a.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_328a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index ab0b91b..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_328a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_328b.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_328b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index ca36fa6..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_328b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_329.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_329.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 9c5f5d6..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_329.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_330a.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_330a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 5365a67..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_330a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_330b.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_330b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index e6f0dbd..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_330b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_331.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_331.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 005adb4..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_331.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_332.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_332.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index c1d451f..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_332.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_333.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_333.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index a951110..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_333.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_334a.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_334a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 797494a..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_334a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_334b.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_334b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 50ae799..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_334b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_335a.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_335a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index b17d01e..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_335a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_335b.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_335b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index e8dd25e..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_335b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_336.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_336.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index bcaab7e..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_336.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_337.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_337.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 9106ae9..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_337.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_338.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_338.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 2bd8d98..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_338.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_340.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_340.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 8f1e842..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_340.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_341a.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_341a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 0f96183..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_341a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_341b.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_341b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 6d668e2..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_341b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_342.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_342.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index f9a86f9..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_342.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_343.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_343.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index a4049bd..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_343.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_344.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_344.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index d6a7f7a..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_344.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_345.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_345.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 9c9c726..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_345.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_346a.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_346a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index ebe4271..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_346a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_346b.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_346b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 38fd9b3..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_346b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_347a.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_347a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 7099b9b..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_347a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_347b.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_347b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index c9d291a..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_347b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_348a.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_348a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 2ad08c9..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_348a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_348b.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_348b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index eb385cf..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_348b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_349.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_349.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 1b2cbe1..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_349.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_350.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_350.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index aaf7714..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_350.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_352.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_352.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index bacaa09..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_352.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_353a.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_353a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index cfacde0..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_353a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_353b.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_353b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 978b6b2..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_353b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_354.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_354.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index ac8d1fe..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_354.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_355.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_355.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 497cc4c..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_355.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_356.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_356.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index b9121a2..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_356.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_357.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_357.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 4e44e98..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_357.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_358.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_358.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 2e038ba..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_358.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_359.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_359.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index c058ee8..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_359.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_360a.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_360a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index c6e95ca..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_360a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_360b.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_360b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 5a772fd..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_360b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_361.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_361.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index fff4601..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_361.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_362.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_362.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 80e9ead..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_362.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_363.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_363.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 3e891a3..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_363.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_365.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_365.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index a0dc253..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_365.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_366.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_366.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index b989973..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_366.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_367.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_367.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 06c41ee..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_367.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_368.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_368.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index d5db073..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_368.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_369.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_369.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 69a81e0..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_369.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_370.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_370.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 47cdc1c..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_370.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_371a.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_371a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index e5f3b4d..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_371a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_371b.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_371b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 47b9ff5..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_371b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_372.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_372.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index ae2ab97..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_372.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_373.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_373.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index d886b36..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_373.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_374.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_374.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 70dd3bc..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_374.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_376.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_376.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index a8423f3..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_376.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_377.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_377.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index af93179..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_377.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_378a.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_378a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 29e13c3..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_378a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_378b.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_378b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index c4274fc..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_378b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_379.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_379.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 3a50c69..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_379.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_380.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_380.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 07d9d54..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_380.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_381.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_381.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 3491310..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_381.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_382.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_382.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index ef87a9b..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_382.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_383.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_383.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index dd94427..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_383.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_384.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_384.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 558a806..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_384.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_385.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_385.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 2039caa..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_385.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_386.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_386.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 4da9831..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_386.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_387.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_387.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 49c4f47..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_387.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_388.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_388.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 2d0eb63..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_388.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_390a.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_390a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 68c63b8..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_390a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_390b.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_390b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 92176aa..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_390b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_392a.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_392a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 5a96208..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_392a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_392b.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_392b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 09b2a80..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_392b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_393.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_393.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index d55f082..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_393.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/67419-h/images/i_frontis.jpg b/old/67419-h/images/i_frontis.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 2579ec9..0000000
--- a/old/67419-h/images/i_frontis.jpg
+++ /dev/null
author	nfenwick <nfenwick@pglaf.org>	2025-01-22 04:56:12 -0800
committer	nfenwick <nfenwick@pglaf.org>	2025-01-22 04:56:12 -0800
commit	102d55b0692f40ad1b5e87d42880e094699e2181 (patch)
tree	c6f32e30934b47016369c8d995f179123f76c3b8
parent	d60f9f601144bea2b9d9820265ea072d85595639 (diff)