Soe Fee be : Bia f SS eee o aie eee ENGLISH DOMESTIC ARCHITECTURE , i . OF THE XVII AND XVIII CENTURIES j GLEN G. MOSHER ENGLISH MOVES TIC ARCHITECTURE She rHE XVII AND XVIII CENTURIES PeeeeeECIION OF EXAMPLES OF SMALLER BUILDINGS MEASURED DRAWN AND PHOTOGRAPHED WET SAN SINTRODUCTION ANDSNOTES: BY HORACE FIELD anp MICHAEL BUNNEY ELLOWS OF THE NEW AND REVISED EDITION (eeu ee LEV ELAN DO. 1928 First published, December 1905 Second Edition, Revised and Reset, 1928 PREFACE TO FIRST EDITION, 1905 WE desire to record our thanks to all who, either by their advice and sugges- tions, or by the loan of drawings, have assisted us in the preparation of this work, and specially to Mr Temple Moore, Mr T. R. Bridson, Mr C. C. Makins, and Mr A. G. Scott. We also wish to express our indebtedness to the owners and occupiers of the buildings illustrated for their kindness in allowing free access for the purpose of taking measurements and photographs, and, lastly, to Mr Edward Bell for the trouble he has taken in supervising and arranging the Plates, and for his help in regard to the text. HORACE FIELD. MICHAEL BUNNEY. NOTE LOroeCOND EDITION IT seems fitting that, having just passed the year of its majority, a second edition of this book should be published, and it is with satisfaction we find, in spite of the number of books dealing with this period which have been issued since this volume was prepared, that it is still in demand and has not, therefore, belied the promise of its youth. When the text was written, now more than twenty years ago, the building tradition embodied in the works of this period had hardly begun to recover the great influence it now exerts upon domestic architecture, and it was some- what in the nature of pioneers that we approached the task. Times have changed and advocacy now is not required, nevertheless we consider it better to leave the text unaltered, and we are the more confirmed in this, because there are no statements that need correction either in the descriptions of the plates or in the short chapter on “The Renaissance Vv Evolution in England.” For this new edition, however, the book has been. rearranged so as to bring the plates and the text relating to them together. — Since this book was first published some of the buildings lyst h been destroyed, and others wil, in 1 time, share the same fate, ae: English Renaissance. In carrying on the tradition of this period, an example is set generations, by following which; and building on such sound a foundations, they may, while developing this style to suit the ev conditions of modern environment, preserve it from destruction fresh life into its spirit and principles. erO NS ENTS INTRODUCTION ; 5 , THE RENAISSANCE EVOLUTION IN ENGLAND NOTES ON THE ILLUSTRATIONS PLATES AND DESCRIPTIONS PAGE THE MANor House, PouLTon . ; Sap 29 THe BeaurortT Dower House, MonmoutTH 24 Tue Town Hatt, Monmovtn . : anges Ha.u’s ALMSHOUSE, BRADFORD-ON-AVON . 26 St CLEMENT’s ALMSHOUSE, OXFORD. et 26 Meprorp House, MICKLETON . : Re eae) OLD Rectory House, Burrorp . ; Zo HOUSE NEAR THE CHURCH, PAINSWICK a A. Dover House, PAINSWICK . ; pad ee 36 SAMUEL SALTER’S House, ‘TROWBRIDGE 40 Tue Manor House, TINTINHULL ‘ See THe Dower House, Wooprorp. : ae House aT EAMONT-BRIDGE, WESTMORLAND. 49 CASTLETON HALL, NEAR ROCHDALE. eat) Lioyps BANK, CIRENCESTER d : leiegy Tue Market House, TEeTsury . : Vat: A STREET AT TETBURY . ‘ ; == 50 COXWELL STREET, CIRENCESTER . : Syria SCHOOL AT CIRENCESTER . : : ecxkt) House AT LECHLADE . : : : sae LINDEN Houser, CIRENCESTER. : nest oe A House at BLOCKLEY . : 2 cb oe THE SHip INN aT MERE . : : a House at WINCHCOMBE . : : fen Oe THE LATIN SCHOOL, WARMINSTER. = OO HousE OVERLOOKING THE CHURCHYARD, CIRENCESTER : 4 : : 20268 House IN VICARAGE STREET, WARMINSTER THe Court, Hoit, WILTs A FARMHOUSE NEAR CASTLE CARY No. 3 ALL Saints PLAcE, STAMFORD . ‘THE BROMLEY ARMS, ELLASTONE CENTRAL PART OF THE BLUECOAT SCHOOL, FROME : : é BANK House, WooTTON BASSETT A House IN BISLEY STREET, PAINSWICK LEBURN House, BAMPTON . Warcop Hatt, WESTMORLAND House IN KING STREET, LYNN REGIS KIRKLEATHAM HOSPITAL, NEAR REDCAR CULVERTHORPE HALL, NEAR SLEAFORD THE BuTTER MarkeET, BARNARD CASTLE Buncay BuTTER MARKET, 1789 . THE Masonic Rooms, BLANDFORD FORUM . THE OLp House, BLANDFORD FORUM THE FREE SCHOOL, WATFORD, Herts . A House at DITCHINGHAM, NORFOLK THE Town Hatt, AMERSHAM THE SCHOOLHOUSE, RISLEY . ReppIsH HousE, Broap CHALKE, WILTS HeEALE House, Wooprorp, WILTS LONGNOR HALL, NEAR SHREWSBURY, AND TWO SUFFOLK HOUSES . HousE NEAR THE CHURCH, NEWENT Vil PAGE PAGE 70 IIo Lit Tue Custom House, DARTMOUTH CARSHALTON HOusE, SURREY THe CHARITY SCHOOL AT DENHAM STABLES AT FROGNAL, SIDCUP THE LATIN SCHOOL AT AYLESBURY A House at NEWENT, 1695 CHAPEL AT STANDISH HALL, NEAR WIGAN Ryves ALMSHOUSES, BLANDFORD WRENCOTE, CROYDON FOxDENTON Ha._, LANCcs . : : BisHop SETH WaArRD’s HosPiTaL, BUNTING- FORD . : : : COLLEGE OF MATRONS, SALISBURY CLIFFORD CHAMBERS, NEAR STRATFORD-ON- AVON A ; BROMLEY COLLEGE, KENT . ; THE ALMSHOUSE, WORMINGHALL, BUCKS CurIsT’s HospiTaL, ABINGDON HousE NEAR THE Matson Dieu, DOVER TOMKINS’ ALMSHOUSE, ABINGDON . THE GARDEN House, EBRINGTON HALL GARDEN HOUSE AT POUNDISFORD PARK, NEAR TAUNTON . : ‘ : : LEAD WoRK AT POUNDISFORD PARK . House AT ASHBURTON, DEVON , : : PAGE 112 TEs I2I 122 124 125 126 128 a 133 133 House AT BRIDLINGTON, YORKSHIRE Houses AT BECCLES, SUFFOLK . : STANFORD DINGLEY REcTORY, BERKS . : RUTLAND LODGE, PETERSHAM . ; ; Two Houses aT SAWBRIDGEWORTH, HERTS . HovusE NOW USED AS A BANK AT NEWENT . A STREET IN WOOTTON BassETT ; ‘ HousE AT GUILDFORD, SURREY . : , A STREET AT WEST WYCOMBE . ; : THE OLD CHURCH, UPTON-ON-SEVERN , A Bripce aT NEwsury, BERKS . : ; Two Houses at HIGH WYCOMBE ; : A House at WOOLSTON, BUCKS . : ; Tue Ketron Ox INN, YARM . ; : Houses at EVESHAM, BRIDGENORTH, AND HARLESTON . : ‘ : ; A House IN THE HIGH STREET, TEWKESBURY A PLASTERED HOUSE AT FRAMLINGHAM : A House aT PARHAM, SUFFOLK . 3 : GARDEN HousE, CUBBINGTON . : : A Doorway AT CIRENCESTER. : ‘ A Doorway aT West WYCOMBE j ‘ A GarDEN Door, CARSHALTON HOUSE : St WILLIAM’s COLLEGE, YORK . : A A Group OF RENAISSANCE Doors ‘ : Vill ENGLISH DOMESTIC ARCHITECTURE INTRODUCTION S° much attention has recently been directed to Renaissance Architecture in England that it may seem superfluous to add another volume to its literature. The subject is, however, of the greatest interest, and has practically only been seriously dealt with in the case of the larger mansions and buildings of the period. After careful study of some of the minor buildings of the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries in England, we now publish the results in the hope that by so doing we may interest both those who are already acquainted with the work of the period under review, and many others who have never studied it, and are therefore ignorant of the simple and dignified character displayed in the less important buildings of this time, which makes them worthy to rank with the very best examples of any age, and bears on it the characteristics of restraint and solidity, making this style as dis- tinctively English as any in the history of our architecture. Tradition in art is of the greatest importance, and, as hereafter will be shown, it is to its influence that the buildings herein illustrated owe their general high level of excellence, an influence too often lacking in the more ambitious buildings of the period. By tradition in building is meant the handing down of recognised archi- tectural forms from generation to generation; tradition is conservatism in art, the conventional expression of the thought and ideals of any age, in stone, wood, or other material, an expression which satisfies the workers of the period as being the best. Work on such definite lines must have made the general high level of artistic effort easier to maintain than in the present day, when there is no traditional mode of expression and every man is a law unto himself. In the Middle Ages the erection of, say, a new cathedral by some master-hand could not fail to have an influence on contemporary ideas, and, doubtless, alterations in detail, plan, or what not, would be copied; hence changes would take place in general practice, changes almost imperceptible at the time, like the slow growth of an oak tree, and thus the progression, though so sure, was gradual until the sixteenth century. The fall of Constantinople and the revival of classic learning were at last felt in England, and resulted in the grafting of ill-digested classical forms on to the style of architecture then in vogue through the influence of Italian and German artificers. At first sight this might appear to be a complete break with traditional English work, and indeed in many buildings, such, for example, as Wollaton, it may almost be said that tradition was lost; yet in the majority of the more important buildings from the sixteenth to the middle of the seventeenth century, traditional forms are still main- tained, though changes in style were more rapid than in medizval times. In the middle of the seventeenth century the building of the Banqueting Hall in Whitehall by Inigo Jones, after his second visit to Italy, may be said to be the first complete break with tradition; but the work of this period as a whole had not lost its national character, and buildings were being erected all over the land in a style founded on unbroken tradition. And this may be said to have continued well on into the eighteenth century, and indeed in out-of-the-way places, in smaller buildings not requiring any particular design, it lingered on till the beginning of the nineteenth century, after which time, for all practical purposes it ceased to exist. Books were published in the eighteenth century and onwards which were com- pendiums of all styles. From these the intending builder could choose the one which suited him best, and, as might naturally be supposed, the resultant designs had little to recommend them. Following the Italian Renaissance comes the pure Classic or Greek revival in- augurated by the work of Stuart and Revett. Side by side with this arises the dawn of the Gothic Renaissance, which attained its full power in the middle of the nineteenth century. As early as 1747 Horace Walpole built for himself Strawberry Hill, which was supposed to be in the Gothic style; and at about the same time Batty Langley published books dealing with this style. It is interesting to note these facts as they indicate the first symptom of the unrest which was beginning to be felt. At the time, no doubt, this return to quasi-Gothic work was not generally recognised as heralding a serious and far-reaching revolt from classicism in architecture, any more than were the writings of Burns regarded as paving the way for the Romantic revival in literature illustrated by the works of Scott, Byron, and others, a movement which was closely connected with the Gothic propaganda of Rickman and Pugin. It was partly upon these so-called Gothic buildings, and perhaps more upon Classic Architecture, that Pugin and the other thoughtful workers of his time made such a fierce attack. Had there been any really traditional style, even of the meanest kind, we should have no hesitation in considering their crusade unnecessary and therefore wrong, but the state of the Arts was such that a revolution of some kind was inevitable, and it is to be welcomed for the sake of the enthusiasm and discussion it aroused, narrow as the views of the reformers may have been. 2 In 1842, Welby Pugin writes: ‘‘We can never deviate one tittle from the spirit and principles of pointed architecture.” What view can be more narrow and impossible? No doubt the absurdities under the name of architecture which were being built all over the land almost seem to justify such a dictum. It is possible also that he never realised that there was any traditional style in England later than pointed architecture, and therefore went back too far, making the cure almost as bad as the disease. The crusade was also preached against a Classic style laid down by rules of proportion to be learnt from the study of old examples, useful, no doubt, in one way, namely, that the merest tyro, with learning, might produce a facade of reasonable proportion, but dead and uninteresting as all archeological productions must be, when presented by an expert under the guise of an artist. One result of this crusade is certain. It made men think, and it made men see to what a deplorable state architecture had come, and urged them on to the endeavour to do better work by a close and affectionate study of our national styles in the past. One underlying note of the crusade must not be forgotten, and that was truth,— the right use of materials, and that ornament should follow construction. Without a proper appreciation of these fundamental principles the most painstaking work is thrown away, and at the beginning of the nineteenth century there does not seem to have been any recognition of the necessity for a study of materials in respect to their fitness in decoration and design. Anthony Trollope’s comment on the taste in dress of one of his characters: “‘She well knew the great architectural secret of decorating her constructions and never descended to construct a decoration,” was far enough from general acceptation. In effect a dullness and inertia nearly approaching death had settled down over the land as far as architecture and its allied arts were concerned: men hoped for nothing better, tried to do nothing worthy of themselves, but were content to build in this pattern or in that, as the necessity for earning their daily bread compelled them; ornament was merely a question of money, shams of all kinds were indulged in. While acknowledging the benefit conferred on us all by Pugin’s crusade, the mistake seems to be that in choosing a style for a fresh start it was thought necessary to go back to medizval times for inspiration instead of taking up the thread of tradition where it had been broken in the eighteenth century by the weight of too much antiquarian learning and research. The conditions under which Gothic buildings were produced differ so completely from those which prevail in the present day that it appears to be a mistake, which can only lead to disaster, to try to reproduce the work of that time for a modern villa or ordinary domestic building. ‘To-day it is absolutely necessary to give working drawings of the most detailed description, to guide the workman in the carrying out of the design. In the Middle Ages, working drawings as we now know them did not exist; even the largest and most important buildings were erected from outline drawings of the most sketchy description, and details were left to the master-masons 3 and other workmen, who were themselves capable of erecting dwelling-houses and smaller buildings, correct in proportion and pleasing in design, without the help of a master builder or architect. Can we imagine at the present day a band of workmen wandering from village to village, restoring churches, carving new wood bench ends, and beautifying, not destroying, all they touched, as was the case in medizval times? If such were the conditions under which the Gothic work we all admire was produced, it seems impossible to us to hope to revive this spirit again with our modern limitations. If medizval buildings in plan and general conception are unsuited to our modern English wants, so also are the classic buildings erected at the end of the eighteenth and the beginning of the nineteenth century. The use of pure Classic in domestic buildings, so largely adopted at this later period, lost much by the necessary suppression of traditional English constructive features, such as roofs, dormers, and chimney- stacks. These, being out of harmony with the general design, were hidden away as much as possible, making the scheme as a whole artificial and insincere. Compare such buildings with that portion of the Palace of Hampton Court designed by Wren, which has a low roof covered with lead. In elevation, however, the roof overtops the parapet wall, and the chimneys show sufficiently boldly as a part of the general scheme. In this case the design required a low roof, but neither this nor the chimneys are allowed to be forgotten or despised. These difficulties have been cited as typical illustrations of the troubles an architect has to face who uses a style Italian rather than English, possibly suitable even in this country for monumental buildings, but unsuitable for those of an ordinary domestic character. Mere copies of buildings in other countries cannot really be successful and admirable in the truest sense. St George’s Hall in Liverpool is grand in design and execution, a noble addition to the monuments of any town, but, even while we admire it, we regret to find in it nothing but the ideas of other times and countries instead of suggestion and helpful guidance to fresh ideas which may be assimilated with a national style. Such a style might be less grand, perhaps, in studied lines of beauty, but dearer to us for all that, just because it is an expression of the best minds of the day con- centrated in one focus, and not wandering in all directions over the earth seeking inspiration and ideas—a search which so often ends in lifeless reproduction. In view of our English climate, our national preference is for roofs of at least moderate dimensions. In our crowded towns, indeed, they are an advantage where height is required, without at the same time shutting out too much light from narrow streets; they are ours by tradition, and we should try to retain any beauties of our national architecture. We are reminded by Pugin that: ‘God in His wisdom has implanted a love of nation and country in every man, and we should cultivate this feeling.” In the country the roof plays an almost more important part, and it would be indeed a loss if scholarly study of classic work made us banish the roof with its tile, stone, or 4 other covering, which, when touched by the softening hand of Time, acquires year by year an added beauty of the rarest order, a gift from nature working in sympathy, as it were, with man’s efforts and ideas. It cannot, of course, be said that all houses of the period under review have good roofs, but as a general rule the roof is not forgotten as part of the design, and to us the great charm of the houses of this period lies in the retention of the Gothic tradition of a roof as a feature, with well-designed chimneys, and commonly a good cornice as a finish to the wall surface of the building. In the Life of Coventry Patmore, by Mr Basil Champneys, there is a reference to Carlyle a propos of a letter he had written to Coventry Patmore in July 1856. ‘“‘Carlyle’s disclaimer of any knowledge of architecture is probably true in a merely technical sense, but he was undoubtedly sensitive to architectural effect, and especially to the moral qualities it evinced. I remember his speaking to me of Sir Christopher Wren’s Chelsea Hospital in some such words as these: ‘I had passed it almost daily for many years, without thinking much about it, and one day I began to reflect that it had always been a pleasure to me to see it, and I looked at it more attentively, and saw that it was great and dignified and the work of a gentleman, and I have always thought highly of Sir Christopher Wren since then.’ This was followed by a characteristic tirade against the ordinary run of design and workmanship.” It is questionable whether gentlemanly can fitly be applied to any art as its greatest recommendation, but it is well not to be too critical with a genuine outburst of en- thusiasm such as this. In really national English work of the best kind there has always been great restraint, a restraint which 1s satisfied with simple results and does not seek after striking effects, a search which led the German nation into much vulgarity both in Gothic and Renaissance work. It is perhaps the restraint manifested in Chelsea Hospital which led Carlyle to define it as the work of a gentleman. Recently there has been a tendency to revive the Renaissance style of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, and many buildings are now founded on its principles with the best results. Such buildings take their places as living works untainted by narrow dogmatism or a pedantic exhibition of classic learning. New life has been added by suggestions of fresh thought in a gable here or a doorway there, but all in harmony with the leading idea of restraint and the correct use of the best materials at hand. In such work as this there is the real element of progress, a progress not too rapid and far- reaching, producing an unhealthy growth, but one founded on traditional work, while tradition was still its mainspring and backbone. Growth, maturity, and decline is the inevitable history of man and his works, and this fate all styles share in common with man; it is the lot of Classic as well as Gothic work, and will be the history again of all styles, but that a new life may spring from the decay of the old has already been shown in the history of architecture. Can we say that tradition is completely lost, or does it only wait the invigorating influence of new thought to produce the new growth? With the period under review the growth was prematurely arrested; is it impossible to revive and reinvigorate it? 2 Surely, never in the history of England was there a style which demanded less rigid uniformity, and, as this is an age of free thought, it should suit us best. . Where can there be found a style which more directly answers modern require- ments in this respect? Not in the ancient monuments of Greece, still less in the Gothic work of medizval times. All these styles to be successful must be correct and confined to the beaten track of workers.in the past, “from which path we can never depart without a certainty of failure being the result of our presumption.” Buildings founded on the teaching of the style under review are bound to no narrow path of selection: sash windows with wooden glazing bars, iron casements and lead lights, stone, brick, tiles, slates, all are equally suitable and take their places in a well-ordered design. We may have panelling or plastered walls, whitewash or paper, the scheme may be severe and large or moulded on more fanciful lines, but if the true spirit of the teaching be not forgotten, the effect must be broad and refined. The thought and ideas of earlier periods have found a place in this as in no other style. It should be remembered also that it suffers less than any other from modern appliances. Mouldings run by machinery, when of good outline, do not spoil the design as they must inevitably do in Gothic work, the beauty of which so largely depends on the individuality of the work employed. Beautiful as it is to have hand- made mouldings, this luxury is impossible now to most people, and, in a measure, the use of them is a negation of progress. If we are successfully to practise a style it must be one with which modern requirements and methods are not at war, and which can be adopted and carried out well at a reasonable cost without injury to its artistic merits. Perhaps some day there may again be a traditional school of English Architecture when the majority of its workers will take up the thread of tradition where it has been broken, and let us hope the present revival is no mere fashion of the day, but destined to grow stronger as the years pass and become a permanent influence for good. In the following pages an endeavour has been made to give a comprehensive, though not exhaustive, view of the types of ordinary domestic architecture of the period dealt with, by means of photographs and measured drawings. The designs speak for themselves and constitute the strongest argument that can be used as to the suitability of this style for modern work. THE RENAISSANCE EVOLUTION IN ENGLAND ey dealing with the development of architecture in England, the historian, in common with the usual custom, has put forward as the keynote of the prevailing styles those buildings which, by reason of their size and importance, would most strongly press their claims to notice on the popular mind. In the case of Gothic work, constructional and ornamental details belonging to the various periods are so evenly distributed over buildings of all kinds, that it is as easy to assign a date to the humblest house as to the largest cathedral. In each building would be found the prevailing note of construction or decoration belonging to the period under consideration. This was the natural condition of an art the evolution of which had always been controlled by a clearly defined and consistently maintained tradition, one, moreover, which changed very slowly, and was only affected partially by foreign influence. Very different, however, was the condition of the arts during the period extending from 1650 to 1750, for during this time, generally speaking, no such sympathetic relations existed between the larger and smaller buildings which were being erected throughout the land. In the case of the former, the influence of Palladian ideals, introduced into England by the work of Inigo Jones, may be said to have sounded the doom of tradition in architecture, though it did no doubt still linger on to a greater or less degree. For a short period in some of the work of our great master, Wren, it once more asserted its predominant influence only to sink down again to a hardly perceptible existence. In the smaller and less important buildings, however, it still continued, and was the heart and soul of the architectural quality of the work as it had been in medizeval times. The distinguishing feature of Gothic work in England is the truthful and sensible treatment of materials, and the building up of a structure eminently suitable for the purposes assigned to it with due provision for climatic conditions. The addition of ornamental details never entirely obscured the constructional scheme, even when they were most redundant; as a rule, however, they were used in such a manner as in no way to affect the framework of the building, and, if this should be impossible, were dispensed with altogether. ‘This is a characteristic common to ‘j Gothic, and is unaffected by the changes in ornament, decoration, So enduring was this characteristic that, when other features typical of pure Gothic work at last fell before the Renaissance, it was cherished and developed in the humbler and less pretentious structures, giving them much of the charm they But jt is not to be confounded with the essentially English quality of sobriety all the periods of and mouldings. possess. which makes itself felt in the designs of the later Renaissance architects, even when they are the eclectics of the eighteenth century: the former character 1s traditional, the latter national, and buildings acquired this note of sobriety rather from the restrained manner in which the foreign style was handled, than from any constructional tradition handed down from earlier work. Fic. 1.—House aT NORTHLEACH, Fic. 2.—CoTTaGes AT THEALE, BERKS. (GLOUCESTERSHIRE, The history of Gothic Architecture is one of slow and steady progress, from the simple forms of its early stages to its culminating richness in the Decorated period, and then on to the greater refinement of the Perpendicular style. ‘These changes, though in sympathy with, were not substantially influenced by, foreign styles, not- withstanding that foreign workmen were often employed, but moved on in synchronous line and in sympathy with the intellectual and material development of the people. It is important to note that in England, Gothic work in its later development followed a course which was quite the reverse of that pursued by the rest of Western Europe, which became more ornate and fanciful, whereas our own became more refined, symmetrical, austere, and therefore more ready to be assimilated with the new style. The gradual elimination of detail in English work was very powerfully helped forward by the diminution in the number of new ecclesiastical buildings, owing to the decline in the power of religious bodies during the reigns of Henry VII and Henry VIII; possibly also the Black Death in the fourteenth century may have had an influence in the same direction, by causing a dearth in, and consequent dearness of, labour. ‘The wealth taken from the hands of the Church passed into those of the great 8 nobles and others in high favour, the decay of feudalism and the growth of commerce also produced a new class of people who required buildings, but buildings of a secular rather than ecclesiastical kind; the churches that existed were sufficient for the requirements of the time, but as an im- mense impetus was given to the pro- duction of domestic buildings all over the country, the methods heretofore employed in monastic and other build- ings of this class were thus transferred to a new field, but with a certain neces- sary reduction in elaboration. This domestic work, therefore, direct, sincere, and divested of all un- necessary ornament, might almost be classed as another period of Gothic Architecture, dedicated, it is true, to secular rather than ecclesiastical build- Byrn oy sige ‘Ny ays Hi i Is iy i ( Wath iM KV N iM ‘i Nel 4 ay ‘ al ig — aan i Ni LN me: KT TK) My) | 4 NY i. air FER ? = a ene wei ened dig ttt Set ea eam dl le UD ADA Od A-SVRREY -FARMHOVSE : COMPTON: BIGy 3.0 ( T Ni ' ' ; { eC y J ings, but as important in the continuation of Gothic tradition as were any of the preceding styles (Figs. 1 and 2). This is none the less true because the revival of classic learning was beginning to be felt in the sixteenth century, and in consequence many of the larger buildings were : fat : se wv " ; as = Se ae RE ARKINDLEY:- HALL: NEAR COLNE: Fic. 4.? overlarded with so-called Renaissance detail, for side by side with these the pure type of building, absolutely Gothic in every respect, continued to be em- ployed and Gothic tradition remained the underlying influence in all buildings till the advent of Inigo Jones in the middle of the seventeenth century. For these pure Gothic buildings we have not far to search; they may be found all over the country, among the brick and timber farmhouses of the South (Fig. 3), as well as in the stone districts of the North (Fig. 4), notable for their simplicity of detail, without a trace of Renaissance influence even in their ornament. Their principal characteristics are important, as they naturally prepared the way for the change of style when it did come, and may perhaps be enumerated as follows: The whole scheme of treatment is simple and refined, open almost to the objection of dullness, as compared with such hybrid buildings as Audley End. 1 From a sketch in R. Nevill’s Old Cottage and Domestic Architecture, 1889. 2 From a sketch in H. Taylor’s Old Halls in Lancashire and Cheshire, 1884. 9 The frequent use of gables, a feature perhaps more noticeable in the stone districts than elsewhere (Fig. 5). : The use of older constructional forms in a different and simpler manner to suit the requirements of a domestic building. As an example of this, the square-headed mullioned window may perhaps serve. It is true that it was used in Gothic buildings in England, but not on the Continent, and may be found in the Decorated, and more frequently in the Perpendicular period. Most examples are furnished by domestic or semi-fortified buildings, such as Raglan Castle; usually when found it is marked by cuspings, etc., in the head. That a window having to fill a space under a flat ceiling should have a square head is reasonable and constructional, but the universal use of a window of this kind marks the last period of pure Gothic work, and as a rule it is devoid of all ornamental detail beyond the moulding of the constructional parts themselves. Lastly, there is a strongly marked insistence on a symmetrical arrange- ment of features. This characteristic is a very important one in the development of the style, as it formed an unconscious step in anticipation of the greater changes that were to come. That it was a direct result of Italian influence is quite out of the question, Fic. 5.—AtmsHouses, NorTHLEACH. though indirectly, perhaps, this influence may have told slightly. Rather must it have been due to motives born from the subtle undercurrent of feeling heralding the coming style, and first showing themselves in the recognition of the valuable esthetic truth, that a proper balance of parts in an architectural design cannot be neglected. _ It has been necessary to dwell at some length on this last phase of Gothic work, in order to demonstrate clearly the fact that for almost one hundred and fifty years after ‘Torrigiano’s visit to England, early in the sixteenth century, the older con- structional tradition was the important factor in architectural design, even in the Elizabethan and Jacobean periods, obscured, it is true, in a large number of instances by the application of the new surface ornament, but none the less real for all that. How strong that influence must have been is realised when we find even Inigo Jones himself making the experiment at Raynham of combining the use of the Gothic roof and gables with Palladian entablature and other features, an experiment interesting in itself, and important as a herald of the more complete and harmonious fusion of styles that was to come between this date and 1750, in the traditional handling of the buildings herein illustrated. Io Before proceeding, however, it would be well to set down succinctly the important incidents and dates in the period of change, as these must be borne in mind in order to follow the steps by which the Gothic tradition passed from its purity to its amalgamation with Renaissance ideas. 1512. The Italians come to England and introduce Renaissance surface ornament, applying it to Gothic work. This period lasted until 1536. The break with Rome and the suppression of the monasteries. Between this and 1560 architecture practically returned to Gothic methods. 1560. ‘he advent of the Germans, who in their turn merely applied their version of Renaissance ornament to the older constructional forms. The imitative work of John Thorpe and other English builders of his period, for all practical purposes, comes under the same heading. 1619. Inigo Jones builds the Banqueting Hall at Whitehall; on lines different as to constructional scheme and detail from anything that had gone before in England. 1647. The erection of the wing at Cranborne Manor; the first example of Renaissance motives wedded to the constructional scheme of Gothic work as apart from the mere application of ornament. Thus far, therefore, we have traced the natural evolution of the Gothic method of building; a system which held its own, with greater or less force, but still as the dominant factor of every work, either large or small, which was erected up to 1619. Henceforward, in addition to the master masons and master carpenters, a new craftsman was evolved, a man to whom architecture was something apart from mere building in the sense in which it was understood and so ably carried out by the older men. He revelled in the academic problems and paper arrangements which the ideals of Palladio had reduced to rule and measure, and his ambition was to reproduce what he understood to be a correct representation of Italian Architecture, rather than to harmonise the new ideas with the principles he found in general use throughout the land. On the score of cost alone, apart from the question of the new fashion, such works as these were necessarily confined to buildings of importance and scale, and they have therefore been accepted generally as the sole representatives of the influence exerted in England by the Renaissance of Italian Art, and thus “Palladian”’ has been the term applied to the period under review. ; This term does not, however, fitly describe the prevailing note of building effort. Palladianism, in the common estimation, may, perhaps, be best described as a sub- servience of “building” to “effect”; in other words, a subordination of utility and constructional propriety to a single esthetic idea. a A very little inquiry, however, will convince the observer that alongside this Palladian work many buildings were in course of erection all over England which, though they owe their architectonic quality to the principles introduced with the Renaissance, yet obtained definite and distinctive character from the fact that these principles were added to the methods in use at the time without any variation in the traditional methods of construction. ; ; It may be objected that these buildings are of bastard type, and unfair as this term is when applied to the outcome of traditional growth, we can afford to disregard it, as they are for the most part fine architecture, and combine what is best in the Gothic tradition of rational building with the splendid breadth and dignity of Classic Art. It is not to any striking or original features, nor to picturesque outline in any marked degree, that these buildings owe their charm, but to the correctness of proportionate values, the fine balance held between construction and architectural design and the correct use of materials at hand. In this respect they are the very antithesis of true Palladianism, which is too apt to degenerate into~a struggle for effect at all costs, with the inevitable result that so many late Renaissance buildings are insincere and disappointing. Much has been said of Inigo Jones and his influence, for never previously in the history of our architecture has one figure stood out so pre- Fic. 6. eminently beyond all others, and it is impos- : sible to deal with the change of style without being also drawn again and again into reference to his works. Inigo Jones is more generally known by his larger buildings, such as the Banqueting Hall at Whitehall and his work at Greenwich, probably built more directly under his own supervi- sion, and these are marked by the overwhelming influence of Italian feeling. Sir Christopher Wren, his successor, is more traditional in his methods, more truly influenced by his Gothic precursors; possibly, also, his works were for the most part carried out on the old lines by ordinary artificers, whereas even Rubens was called in to help his predecessor. In the new wing to Cranborne Manor (Fig. 6), which was added by Inigo Jones in 1647, and at Coleshill, 1651, we find the prototypes of many buildings which were to follow, as they combine respectively in structure and design the two essential elements of Gothic and Classic methods. At Pendell, 1636 (Fig. 7), he adopted the common Sussex roof form already in use for many years in the timber buildings of the South of England; this building is 12 a Ly ian a2) Bt es || ae DIAGRAM : OF THE WING: CRANBORNE also extremely interesting as it is so much in advance of its date in feeling and general design. In Cranborne Manor, 1647, there are evidences from the work itself, such as the uncouth detail of the cornice and the windows treated with stone mullions and transomes in the manner of earlier work, that much must have been left to the local master-mason. At Coleshill the details must have been more closely followed by the master himself; here we have a fine example of an unbroken cornice with a steeply pitched hipped roof crowning the whole, the spacing of dormers and windows in relation to the general design being particularly good. These buildings show that when the cornice is returned in an unbroken line round the sides of the building, it is necessary, if a roof is to be retained, that it should be hipped back from the angles. It is this particular feature of a crowning cornice returning round at the eaves line with a steeply pitched roof rising immediately from it, and the consequent hipping of the roof, that marks distinctly the change in outline, which is the radical difference between the Renaissance buildings dealt with in this book, and not only the preceding Gothic and Elizabethan houses, but also the contemporary Palladian buildings of larger scale in which the existence of a roof was FIG, 7.—PENDELL, SURREY, 1636. disguised as much as possible. While thus emphasising the use of hipped back roofs, the fact that their use in the South was sufficiently common before this date has not been overlooked, but this feature was perhaps due to the constructive methods adopted in the timber framing, and once its constructional and artistic value had been demonstrated, the transition was easy to its use with the Classic cornice. It is an example of the preparation which was being made on all sides for the introduction of Renaissance motives into design. The circumstances of climate and material made it incumbent on builders to adhere to roofs of a steep pitch, such as had always been used in this country, and unquestionably they must have recognised the esthetic value of the hipped back roof in conjunction with the greater insistence on horizontal lines due to the Classic motives in design. The distinguishing features marking off the new style from those preceding it are: the general use of hipped back roofs instead of gables, the strongly marked horizontal cornice line carried right round the building, and a reduction in the width of window openings. 8) Formerly the whole side or end of a room might be a window merely parcelled out by the necessary mullions into so many lights, but this is NOW changed, and the window, if divided up by a mullion, has two lights only with solid wall surface between it and the next window in the facade, these smaller openings made the building less busy and therefore conformed to the requirements of dignity and repose so essential to Renaissance work. Another feature which must not be forgotten is the Dormer, for as much attention was devoted to this as to any other part of the building. Whenever rooms in the roof required light and ventilation, it had been a simple matter to run up a gable end in which the required opening could be placed, but now if the cornice should properly perform its dual functions as the finish of the wall surface and the base of the roof, clearly it would not do to break this horizontal line with wall surfaces rising out of the cornice. Thus the use of dormers was a necessity and became universal whenever the roof contained rooms, and they began to receive an architectural treatment which had been absent heretofore; when symmetrically arranged on the roof area, and invested with correct and dignified mouldings, these dormers add greatly to the charm of the buildings to which they belong. Such roof treatment is not a direct outcome of Italian Renaissance, it is rather an adaptation of Gothic tradition to new decorative ideas, and will be found in all countries which have been strongly influenced by this tradition, as may be seen in the roofs of France, Germany, and Belgium, as well as our own country. The same process which affected the roofs occurred in the treatment of the chimney- stacks, a necessity of Northern architecture, and also one which in Gothic times had received no little attention from the builders. Here also little instruction could be gathered from the models of the Italian Renaissance; in earlier English work chimney-stacks were usually of large proportions, often elaborate in detail, but generally placed irregularly in relation to the whole architectural scheme. Now they became invariably regular, often placed centrally on the roof area and, if numerous, disposed with scrupulous attention to the symmetrical setting out of the whole design, planning being influenced and modified to attain this end, and the scale and importance which they inherited from their predecessors is well maintained, especially in the earlier examples. The mouldings are suitable adaptations of Renaissance profiles, and no eccen- tricities will be found such as the stacks at Montacute, shaped like Doric columns, cap and base and all, with a flue pipe up the middle. Thus far the influence of Gothic methods on the new ideas has been chiefly dealt with; it is, however, important to note the characteristic way in which Palladian ideals were handled in the traditional spirit and worked into a harmonious scheme. The most far-reaching effect which the Renaissance, especially in its phase 14 of Palladianism, exerted upon all foreign styles lay in its application of the orders of architecture to wall surfaces, as a means not of constructional use, but of decoration. In Elizabethan work the orders, as a rule, were used in the crudest fashion: as compared with the building, they were almost always small in scale, never occupying more than one storey in height, and no attempt was made to impart the real spirit of Classic work to the mouldings and details. A good deal of taste and knowledge appears in their use on much of the work, more especially in small decorative items such as panelling, etc., but as a whole the result is most unsatisfactory, and what could only be expected when we remember that the Renaissance decoration had filtered through German and other foreign mediums, and was carried out more in the manner of a schoolboy writing an essay than as the true expression of the feelings of the workers themselves. Such an application of the merely decorative forms of one style to another, without attempting to bring them into harmony with the structure itself, is hardly worthy to rank as a serious architectural effort. At Greenwich Inigo Jones gave us our first taste of Palladianism, with an order running through two stories, and this is more or less the keynote throughout all the large works of his academic successors of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. To the humbler builders tradition and local methods were still the preponderating factors of design, though they also could not escape the influence of this new treatment. It is to them, and not to their academic contemporaries, that we owe the assimilation of the old with the new: they also applied the orders to their work, but in a fashion original and full of character and delicacy. In few instances did the builders use the orders in the true academic fashion, merely as decoration plastered on the face of walls which, without them, were amply strong enough to do their work. When they used them constructionally or quasi- constructionally they did so, as a rule, with honest purpose, adapting them to the work they had to do, and with a keen sense of fitness, taking into account the use of material and the scale of the building, and even when these features were used, as was occasionally the case, purely for their decorative quality, the orders were not applied in a strictly imitative way and by rule, but were used with a freedom and intelligence that can only evoke our admiration. A pilaster treatment is valuable for spacing out the different parts of a wall surface, or even for buttressing where extra thickness is required, and it is to this use that the orders were applied, whittled down, often without cap or base, until they were in fact mere pilaster strips, a treatment which is extremely common in the many fine brick houses of this period. It indeed appears as if this Palladian motive had been seized upon merely in its abstract sense, and twisted and turned, improved and altered, to suit each case and each fancy. The academic designer would call this an uneducated, perhaps even an unintelligent, method of design—but it is the only method by which it is possible to expect a proper play of individual thought and skill, and by it the spirit of the new I style, rather than the letter, became merged ton the preceding one, thus the true sequence of tradition. In pice other details the same teasonableness a Sens consist imbued with the same Baan of ae Se which fad anim: fathers, yet acknowledging fully the requirements and conditions of 1 grafting on, with truly national deliberation, all of the new fashions 16 NOTES ON THE ILLUSTRATIONS Spo the usual method of chronological sequence does not commend itself as a mode of classification for the series of buildings under review, and as a strictly topographical arrangement in counties is too inelastic, it has been thought best to divide up the examples broadly, according to the material of which they are prin- cipally composed, into three heads, viz. the stone-built, the brick-built, and the plaster-fronted houses. This generalisation is admittedly a wide one, and necessitates, certainly in the case of the first class, the covering of a very large area of distribution, and a widely divergent set of influences, but the effect of material is so marked upon the whole architectural scheme of these buildings, that it is quite justifiable to take this as the basis upon which some kind of classification can be set up. In the Middle Ages two staple building materials were available, wood and stone, for brick did not come into general use until the last period of Gothic architecture. Where stone had been plentiful, and in use from time immemorial, any traditional methods of building were bound to exert a more lasting influence on succeeding work. On the other hand, where timber-framing had been the prevailing building material, the more or less new treatment which the introduction of brick in place of wood involved, tended to produce an adaptation of Renaissance motives which was in many respects different from that by which the stone buildings had been effected. Consequently, traditional elements are more generally apparent in the stone houses than in the brick and plaster-fronted houses. In the districts, such as the great stone belt from Gloucestershire to Lincolnshire, where the principal building material was never superseded to any great extent by another, it is not surprising to find in the early Renaissance houses window mullions, strings and plinths, jamb-mouldings, etc., which, taken by themselves, are very similar in detail to the work of the last Gothic phase. In subsequent work a notable development worked itself out in mullion form, for, so long as stone was handy, and the old trades survived which could work it and supply the necessary casements to fit the mullioned windows, there seemed no reason for discarding them and adopting the new-fashioned double-hung sash. 17 3 In this development two | clearly - marked processes are (} QO apparent: firstly, the whole trend was towards refinement, y 2 mouldings were simplified, parts became smaller; the L. KIRBY HALL . /595- 2. BEAUFORT DOWER HO: /673- ; : TYTICAL TUDOR OR ELIEABETHAN. spacing between the mullions was widened, and thus gave 3 OG 2 O an added appearance of light- d ness, and, as time went on, Be POULTON MANOR . A.. HO: AT COLLEY WESTON. 1696. the recessing became more de- finite and acute by reason of the O square reveals superseding the D receding mouldings of the earlier 5. HO: AT WARMINSTER . 6. HO: NEAR CLITHEROE . 1723- work. Secondly, the whole ob- ject striven after, though often unconsciously, was an approxi- | O DC mation to the architrave treat- ment—a desire to frame the 7. SCHOOL -WARMINSTER - /JO7. 8 RYVES ALMSHO: BLANDFORD /682. opening without discarding the traditional methods of dividing G it up. rl Ly A The plans of typical mullions and window jambs shown on Fig. 8 illustrate this evolutionary 7), process in its several stages. A gl ‘Gy Nos. 2 and 3 show regular Elizabethan mullions, with the initial steps of refinement and , squaring up—the moulded reveal iQ a becoming first splayed and then ; square. In Nos. 4 and 6 an 15 BUNTINGFORD. 1684. 14. LINDEN HO: CIRENCESTER. architrave first makes its appear- sect nandinesiis ast ance, skilfully worked in with P THE DEVELOPEMENT lions. A ZF THE STONE MULLION quite early 9. HO: AT LECHLADE - 1707. 10. HO: AT BURFORD - 11. OLD VICARAGE - BURFORD- 12. COLL- OF MATRONS . SALISBURY - 1682 WGN pee 14 are variants of the regular is, Fon SiC eee architraved mullioned window, ia while No. 15 gives a late and Fic. 8. unusual treatment where the spacing having to be wide enough for sashes, the mullion consequently takes on the dimensions of a pier, while it still conforms to the requirements of mullion treatment, carrying on the 18 mouldings of the architrave, and generally subordinating itself to the whole window scheme. See Fig. g. It is not, however, only in the window construction of the stone houses that traditional element continued to show itself{—for it is almost universally the case that the old sections of plinths and string-courses continued in use even when the mullion treatment had entirely given place to sash windows. The Gothic contours of these mould- ings were admirably suited to the work they had to perform, and as long as they could be made to con- form to the new method of design, so far as the general setting out was concerned, the builders rightly re- fused to cast away tradition in this Fic. 9.—Post OrricE aT BuRFORD, OXON. respect. String-courses at Poulton Manor (p. 23) and at Linden House, Cirencester (p. 61), and plinths at Monmouth (p. 24) and at Vicarage Street, Warminster (p. 71), show the suitability of the older sections when used with the new methods of design. In the country the houses are as a rule solid rectangular blocks, with mullioned windows, and _ strikingly steep hipped roofs, as at Poulton (p. 23), the Beaufort Dower House (p. 24), and St Clement’s Alms- house, Oxford (p. 29). All these will be found to have retained to the fullest extent the earlier struc- tural tradition; they almost stand in a class by themselves, and are purely a English in this respect that work of “="s quite the same nature is not to be Fic. 1o.—Hovusr at WaNsFrorD, NORTHANTS. found abroad. Street fronts retained their gabled treatment more tenaciously (Figs. 10 and 11); nevertheless, there are many examples where the crowning cornice and roof above come into evidence. The little house at Lechlade (p. 60), or Linden House, Cirencester (p. 61), are excellent examples of this arrangement. Hipped roofs over street fronts are rarer; there is a fine though simple example at Winchcombe in Gloucestershire (p. 65). 9 i | ATOLL deed ted | a ir CT nn aT TP ite ta ih m THE -PLOVGH -/NN -AT-MVCH:-WENLOCK Breoss, Fig. 12 shows the early use of a subse- quently common arrangement, viz. a pedi- mented doorway with a shield of arms carved in the pediment. Here also the architrave mouldings, instead of standing forward from the wall face, are sunk back in the same manner as were Gothic jamb- mouldings. Most of the stone houses are singularly free from the pilaster treatment, the earlier ones are completely lacking in this respect; in fact, the change in style is made apparent by the newly acquired symmetry and breadth of design, and by the values of cornice in conjunction with the roof. In the case of the brick buildings, how- ever, the conditions of the outset were very different from those governing the design and construction of the stone houses, al- though some notable exceptions exist, which are dealt with fully later on. When the scarcity of timber, brought about by its universal and prodigal use, became acute, builders were forced to turn to some such material as brick, which, in the districts where stone was not available, could be relied upon to take the place of wood as the chief constructive medium. But since the hand- ling of brickwork in design required methods which are obviously quite dissimilar to those which timber- users had employed for generations, it was inevitable that when a new style of design was introduced, the buildings erected in the new materials should display less traditional element than had been the case where both styles had worked in the same material. Nevertheless, builders set to work at once to endue their designs in the new material with an in- strictly conformable to classic Symmetry and quiet dignity are attributes which seem specially to belong to these plain and dividual motives. character unpretentious brick fronts. Fic. 12,—Doorway, SEVERN END, WORCESTERSHIRE, 20 PLATES AND DESCRIPTIONS THE MANOR HOUSE, POULTON, GLOUCESTERSHIRE. ce ryjoc PouLTON is situated about half-way between Cirencester and Fairford. ‘The Manor House is reputed to have been built by one Padgett, a London merchant who had previously resided at Grove House, Hampshire. This house has Gothic details in the windows, string and plinth, which, coupled with the rectangular shape and symmetrical setting out, produce a very interesting example of the early type. The rubble walling is rather rough, and has~ been whitewashed over; in fact, even the dressed stone is covered with lime, producing, however, a very charming effect. The almost semicircular pedi- ment should be noted, as it is a local characteristic; there is one at HARRINGWORTH VICARAGE, NORTHANTS. Lechlade only a few miles away. The Vicarage at Harringworth in Northampton- shire, here illustrated, is a house of a very similar type to Poulton Manor House, and shows that all over the stone districts more or less the same results were being produced. The drawing of Gretton shows a Gloucestershire farmhouse of a later date, but retaining the old form of window. ‘The door is very well designed. —— cu Ua CUCU CACY COLAC G (Uae cece ets rr a TOU ES TT ( LOUCESTERSHIRE-FA CORNICE ALAA = == i = x eS ese Sass ey veces a a || ow ‘an git LJ a Wm a a = 7 [J 268 a= ZI ae = a éAS Ee} FE PTE MANOR HOVSE = POVLTON -/N-THE- COVNTY: OF -GLOVCESTER: THE BEAUFORT DOWER HOUSE, MONMOUTH Wiruin the precincts of the Castle at Monmouth, and partly constructed with stones taken from the ruins, is a fine building now used as the Militia officers’ quarters. 7 bee] il a | ———— —— OT CE % gig He HAA ae si a He : = te al = oT io} iia: iil an i FH aa. EA ao Eel in nk me |e Laie pfs Mt fs = ne | aaa] : Saal (a | a ies seal | an == 7 : ‘ ) q The date of this house, 1675, is recorded over the central window on the first floor, and, although a certain want of knowledge displayed in the crude Renaissance details employed to embellish the central portion bears out the early date of the building, there is great merit in the general setting out and proportion of the different parts. The roof is pitched at an angle of nearly sixty degrees, and the full value of it as an element in the design is thus obtained, the whole being a striking object from the 24 1675 MonMOUTH, ’ THe BeaurortT Dower House THe Town Hatt, MonMouUTH 25 SS ——< ON : : oa = —L—A Ei Oe =a ee, — . é Qs CO, — aH | He " IAT it oe | Hii i ee HE Hit Ltd: a eeet a i | Li a. ———— LJ Hl Ht a a | —_- it TL as | a tl i , ull il SS Ses iul! t el el Ae 1 | eee (EES Aen mall ae i ini e ii Tt a i | Sale el i Le att la th ‘(UH HHH He ) | i oH WW Minit | 1 | {| i} | \) | }} He aA Hh Ls Vi Wises | tite Hi | | i i WV AY HTH Wh lI Wal ‘it cal (=s—=2—8—8—2— 2 — 2 — 2 2 = 2 | ASR FET PE gt HM Si EX 9 t9 SytENC tofing g a dalavyb>o4aL WHLAo aHL ‘ZIAIC AW aAL qatHLaHL ~—YWT -HSW STI WM ‘SAINTS ANOLS AID. JOO SHLON | 33 HOUSE NEAR THE CHURCH, PAINSWICK, eae GE kS) PAINSWICK is one of those Cotswold towns where good architecture of most periods is to be found. Apart from the excellent and abundant building material to be obtained in the close vicinity, Painswick in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries 34 had a very flourishing cloth industry, motive power for the mills being procured from the innumerable streams that intersect the hills. The clothiers made money quickly, and each generation seems to have been able to build itself fresh houses; nearly all of these are endowed with architectural character of some kind or another. As is the case elsewhere in the Western stone districts the gabled type of house died hard, and when buildings such as this one and Dover House are met with they are usually of comparatively late date. The former is a specially perfect house, though unfortunately quite recently the old sashes with glazing bars and small panes have been removed and plate glass substituted. eerie et er | PE — = — TL oe WH =I eo ae Aco Leet aa ae oe ee ees || 7 i | | il i! i) i d \ ——_ SS ESS Ce. eee =~ = ————l | GIS —_—_ — a A RS EB RTT OA [7B NR Se 40 TT aa | iM : : in ae u fe | i E i E | fl 1] i 2 ~] =| | on [i a r i one ole ane Hi: HC ICC | i ES bs asa ose Eee {0 FEET. ey AOVSE NEAR THE: GHVRCH - FAINS WICK -GLOSTERS AIRE: 35 DOVER HOUSE, PAINSWICK, Ge L720 Tue Hall chimney-piece at Dover House is given on p. 38. The use of Gothic panelling in the two pilasters of the chimney-piece shows the strength of Gothic tradition, even after Renaissance detail was fully mastered. Compare the Doorway at Cirencester (p. 179). The plan here reproduced shows the relation of the newer part to the old two-roomed cottage. On p. 183 is shown a Painswick door somewhat like that of Dover House. DETAIL-OF ENTRANCE DOOR: DOVER: /IOVSE- °, 5 20 2 pe ve = FEET © STAIRS VP DOWN TO CELLAR AITCHEN ‘PLAN: OF DOVER HOVSE-PAINSW/ CK GLOVCESTER SHIRE: 36 Dover House, PAINSWICK, ¢. 1720. 37 oan. oe ee ee iL Se CHIMNEY-PIECE, DOvER House, PAINSWICK. con LL ae P tata if Ly de =k [| Hi Hae aia pines i a ie Ht me | ri ie uit ul ali (4 a . il fe Hae i st ie NE HHE wip ets a AL (Lt “DOVER: HOVSE - PAINSW/CK: ey in Hf al ii | i SAMUEL SALTER’S HOUSE, TROWBRIDGE Tus house, which was built by Samuel Salter, a wealthy clothier and sometime Mayor of Trowbridge, is quite late, and its architectural details closely allied to the later and coarser work to be found at Bath and in the Bath neighbourhood. The main scheme, however, is so good and the roof treatment so thoroughly early in character that the ugliness of some of the detail is redeemed. ‘The house is in a bad state of repair and has ceased to be in occupation; probably, from its position, which encroaches upon the street, it is doomed to early demolition. o2 HP —— | ———] 7. at E a EE Sus oe ag it | rT 5 a IID CU] an pe i] ==! I hi 4 lia SS THE ———— wp ae eae! ————SS SS DEL ope ton PROTECTION, 1 st ale A iT i - mame! AEA (0 Le a ) - SAMVEL.: SALTER’S - HOVSE:-TROWBR/DGE: 40 SAMUEL SALTER’S HousE, ‘TROWBRIDGE. 4I THE MANOR HOUSE, TINTINHULL, SOMERSET, «. 1720 Azout four miles north of Montacute and on the borders of the flat land of Somerset is Tintinhull, a manor anciently belonging to the Napiers of Merchiston, who built a ACO fam an eS AT MARTOCK : SOMERSETSHIRE the present front upon an older house dating from about 1600. The welding together of Classic and Medizeval methods is very markedly shown in this example, which is an almost perfect representation of dignified yet homelike building. The stone used is from the Ham Hill quarries, which are quite near at hand, and in its native air has been preserved in a remarkable manner. The glazing in the circular window and the woodwork of the door are probably of more recent date. In the same neighbourhood as Tintinhull is the small town of Martock: an addition to an old house near the church is illustrated here and on p. 45. The careful setting out and general compactness of the design give it interest. 42 “LUSYAINOG “TINHNILNIT, ‘ASAOF{ YONVIA, AH, 43 TO a aga BOGGSGHHGEEICON a Ie HEE lin He | | = HES ooo = i WAG ‘iae| tee iss eseee OS ee Wi 52) ieeaze Hp] | | li sere e Poe f nanill "i ° i & ll estar ) ea ||EES | Fe= 7 \ Senses [Ill RCE joe TE fee! ) | ¥ | | \ | 4 | | | ie } | | | L\ | CE ‘ie 7 Hi ae Ha ull ue] tEEEEE “Hh | i vem h mrss al Mui |e ES HS NS JA ae See rr EB sila : : al TL it " Fl EE | i a DOC iH o : | Hil Ball Nth i qa | | | at i i THE DOWER HOUSE, WOODFORD, NORTHAMPTONSHIRE IN its present condition, this house loses much of its intended architectural effect, as the West wing has disappeared or was originally never finished. That this wing was at least contemplated is evident from the building as it now exists; in the plate, therefore, it has been restored. From inquiries made on the spot, it appears that the house was built as a dower house for the Knightley family of Fawsley Park, a few miles distant. 46 i=) ; fe a eae ae ae ee ow o : . SIDE VIEW WOODFORD ’ THe Dower House 47 eur Let LL HAR i AAR (elees ( | | if THLE HEH 4) apt aed ai: He | 3 | ize HH ‘ y i) i hi al | i 1 PET | euerelses azz meh TARTU TH WH eT BT TT TT wh Hy! Folin (ih) Hi oe ae eee ( i WM al | ans sF a fear aa WG agg ea Vi i ee ie at Bn BEE | 1 ee a ee rt ee Le Maisie guy W HAE ane fl He ae 7m INN, ton ee soo I Ee ie 1), AAA = Si i Aa | [a Nese | ale y/ tat =“ | ae AEE 1 fo | | ncies | | TATA AT AT TRTEREH | eS Oeeeeeeel 4 VEE: sn) INE peat lt! e MAN WTI vith si aa i es a : ee Tce ie : ia rH AANA - BEL FL fag ee EHC | ee AT i HEE THE Ei mimes Fil seta tee HEL HP HE He ii) | THE a ie cif i zs Hl i ‘i / IL 0 Hi qe LETT RECHT els! ; if ra H | Natyt ey a a lz Plitit HH ity en Hoe e 1 WMC eA | AN] Het tat WOW HU CHTHESH | fy WA RHC 1H I glist | Weta i Wn eH TAAL i | lt _EDOWERTIOSE WIFE QD - DE: (| EE HE +1 EE a foe ao a Es | Baa ina Mince Nits q TET AE rials 1 | 1 Th LH Lh Hd | | HI 1 ait x iV) Q a BY N 5 S WCE ©. FF SQVAAE a ok <¥9y | ee \ epee ti 49 HEE v3 why Gtqgksx x 2 Rezass 2 5 ie a 3 fae OVS E AT =e Wis TONGAN D IexGe. | CASTLETON HALL, NEAR ROCHDALE; LANCASHIRE Ir is not surprising to find that in the north of England there are relatively fewer Renaissance buildings than is the case in the south. For one thing, the older F=4 = tum cS Vy ffm me rk del — ES lee =| es a =a Mes Fs." w [Garden Gerance BA SHALL SHALL Mem (iho T. R. B., 1905 building traditions were bound to be longer lived where the material used did not change, and also where that material was so little sympathetic to the refined mould- ings and accurate masonry which Renaissance architecture required. Such buildings, therefore, as Castleton Hall and Bashall Hall (also illustrated here), become doubly interesting. Here the local sandstone has been used for the walling, and the dressings 590 uld modern bracket 7+ wide :bed mo eee 5 NN NOTE eT UUCHANDAt iv ea Sa, HHT elt radi h et Wiese —a——S ¢ mal \) \ | | er H \ H HH f i) ak Ail FF Mt | ALIL Fp 1 |! i ge z | 5 mh Wit = f i SUT 4 FEY } H HHL || HI CI | | Cp YK | | ys \\\\ | Gy, My CL Y | yl Hien al | yy il it 1 Mil) YY HE cA BS Z| T 9 || EAH x) y , A\) 1 ( \ Hl H Hh} 4 Lu | | | i 1 | tH a == ee AU TU — ER RY _ rH—— 4.3] 4 \ fi i a i i (Mh = = a A a fe SAS LG A a i= ee ri = = 7 ay ih | i | thy 1) Lat — Thad —— ae Ea i h ine Hilt pu I ‘a ik I! Bi qe = =H nalts : Tie) a i pti locity | = = Te fat ale SSS TTT. T) ail, Hitt oa ag fle \\ \\Y rz = ian At i "Lua ra i We | Hl iC iLC TET i int | : iit HHH An er ‘ome na ik if la ti nity i a 51 T R.BRIDSON MENS! ET DELT 1903. 8 Ty I T ee | SS —— S I ——— - — — SSS —— a == == —— The newer wing Zi GrASS T iL. je fs ON ERASE EE Rochdale Lancashyre a ria : ee see eA gion oe WAS oN Um. gt) U6 apy NOG 40" Ale aah amas as Ae Aq, Oo aa) go. ar ge ga aay ast Sf ay 38 39 Ao = ill Hy CAN: = q|| Weave ee R We = || 8% ‘ : LT | | ae \ Wi Hi 1] tl Bee Meanvnvsranns in aa | if \ |, SIE, | i} p ) \ ! SE i ee OUT | | AEE ll aa ey, | SRO. URES —— —— 5 j = r = — —— ie ae Sot. anaes ee emery Weed le. °, i | a | SET BEER ————————— ony = SS TH ——= s t) sa | "EST D_* ribstone Doorway] ANE + SIDE oe FARM &-é:: nt (Citheroe 1: Bo Betas 52 made out of millstone grit as had always been the case and still is when the stone has to be worked. ‘The prominent, irregular, dark quoins on light sandstone rubble are exactly like the older work, and very effective. The roof is covered with Lancashire grey stone slates. The big scale of this house should be noted and compared with Foxdenton Hall, another Lancashire house (p. 132); the window openings here are over 5 feet wide and 11 feet high, while the cornice has a projection of 2 feet 103 inches. At Bashall Hall the rough rubble wall has been rough-casted, producing with the gritstone details an extremely pleas- ing effect. On the opposite page is shown a good specimen of an unusually ornate farmhouse doorway and name STONE HALL, NEAR WIGAN. panel over, all in gritstone. ‘he carving round the panel is of the same type as the ornament that was so often put upon oak furniture and fitments in this and earlier periods. On this page appear views of Stone Hall, near Wigan, and of a small Renaissance addition to a mill at Gisburn, between Skipton and Clitheroe. ‘The latter shows a curious and perhaps slightly ungainly attempt to graft Renaissance features on to the old traditional Lancashire building. Part OF MILL, GISBURN, YORKS. =| AES th Samak LLOYDS BANK, CIRENCESTER . iy } } eee | jana Ir only on account of its good proportion and the telling effect of its large plain surfaces, this house is worthy of study. Notwithstanding its late date, probably about 1780, it is singularly free in design, and with all its ““Adamesque”’ detail (see window, also illustrated) there is a tradi- tional feeling in the whole scheme. 54 THE MARKET HOUSE, TETBURY . : - : q THE sides of this building have been somewhat spoilt by alteration, but the north end, here shown, still retains its quaintness and breadth. ‘The date of the building is about 1700. ee et a eke iT, 55 | ; j 4 STREEA UAT hE tine: SOME country towns are particularly rich in architectural work that is full of traditional element. Sometimes, too, it is possible to find the several steps of traditional evolution side by side; the street at Tetbury is a good example of this. The drawing on the opposite page gives a detail of the doors of the nearest house in the view. 56 . 57 8 COXWELL STREET, CIRENCESTER Sas THE large house in Coxwell Street, Cirencester, is a fine specimen, and shows the effect that can be easily obtained by symmetry and a repetition of features. 58 SCHOOL AT CIRENCESTER, ae Sr aC This building possesses a distinctive characteristic in the rather large space between the tops of the first-floor windows and the cornice, a feature which is a little unusual. . Bows AL LECHLADE, 1707 IN nearly every town of the Cotswolds at least one interesting example of Renaissance methods can be found, and Lechlade is by no means an exception to this rule. As a very suitable street front for quite a small house it would be difficult to find a match for the specimen reproduced overleaf. ‘The mouldings are particularly good: but, unfortunately, the mullions of the lower windows are gone; these have been restored in the drawing. 59 ~~ Coll Sor. “ATVIHOD 1A INOWa Laates —~ (ETRE TTEE, IEC A EIR, | = 60 LINDEN HOUSE, CIRENCESTER WINDOW JAMBS LOWER a — a (< ‘ “he v J 4 yo * f es ‘ . " : * ae . . Y.» Wy ? oe AP atten aie She dines) Fak i ® ‘ jee Oo EDRE APS Pest, 2, ‘ Hy KI BIN tere al nt PARRA LIL a BATT ‘pal slat S| : = hed wr or THC oy Lab OSS = iaieia! = Es SB: i ee at na een ae =e See i | Uy a : [hs ih Resta ern y nee ty ih q ie Er r F A {_J HH Th i! hid a Cy = lal = 1 = o ee nog SaaS ee ne ee LJ patztea Fs Scere 3 rete FOTO PO Fase 2 e Yy < = ei © OC r G 4 < KW I i Wy . He i 4 a 67 THE LATIN SCHOOL, WARMINSTER (continued). the school at Warminster. He may also have written the inscription on the tablet over the entrance. The large door was constructed of oak brought from the park at Longleat. It is of interest to note that Dr Arnold of Rugby received his early education in this school, which he first attended in 1803. Here, as at the Beaufort Dower House at Monmouth, though thirty years separates the erection of the buildings, the use of the mullion without an architrave still survives; nevertheless, the Renaissance stamp of the building is unmistakable, even if the delicately designed central doorway is left out of the question. In its details this feature is quite free from that coarseness which characterises the work of the first decade of the eighteenth century in the neighbourhood of Bath. War- minster may be said to be at the southern limit of this district. The general view of the school shows the good effect of the very random walling. House AT 'TEWKESBURY (see p. 65). HousE AT WARMINSTER (see p. 70). HOUSE OVERLOOKING THE CHURCHYARD, CIRENCESTER THE house at Cirencester is really the back of an older building fronting on to the Market Place. This side shows good setting out, and an unusual kind of architraved window. ‘The stonework is whitewashed over. 68 oll LF seen Lee may ay ee Pe a nr Fe e WARMINSTER. THE LaTIN SCHOOL, CIRENCESTER. ? HOUSE OVERLOOKING THE CHURCHYARD HOUSE IN VICARAGE STREET, WARMINSTER Tuis is a late house of a rather pleasing type, with a mansard roof covered with stone slates. The small square blocks of masonry give the building a character quite its own. Here, again, proportion has been spoilt by the substitution of plate-glass for the old barred panes; these have been consigned to a garden shed at the back, whence their restoration could easily be effected. On p. 68 is shown another interesting house at Warminster. 79° ry li” >» Ig? is (CWRE xt Ys CORNICE B: MODERN STONE HEAD AND JAMBS oO rset OF NERE Se HOVSE: OAS NEES CARY. (Oo ETTNG I IN-A- FARMHOVSE: CASTLE MOmrALL. SAINTS PLACE, STAMFORD, 1683 (Sez ILLUSTRATION ON NEXT PAGE) THE Renaissance houses at Stamford are very well known, and many of them have been already illustrated, notably in Messrs Belcher & Macartney’s folio volumes, but for some reason or other this house has not appeared before. ‘The wide window openings are rather characteristic of Stamford work, and the ingenious method adopted to keep the steps from coming out too far upon the footway, as well as the mounting gate at the top of the flights, should be noted. fs Pa vlids 10 a wo Fear Po Be Hh A Ae ee ee et ES. LL SAINTS PLACE: STAMFORD Hh | | nit a — Hi MN Al fa t E || Wh . 4 bAS git! ul ah i y) oo eet AWAY | L Vf ex ti ia =a) | | er ba aH HL i i Ail | \7i KiB eh il WARE H | ! {i HH | Hu Q | —————— ae i Hi P14) wey Und Hi i= | a allt ll i il | qT | | qi i H | 1 i Wi a | ll i Hn tH a tH : ail= i | At Wie HH | TH HEH | = HOH Aa UHEACEEEH { a 3s iy iia. Pot | Se fae meclalalalala prea on +! 1: aaa ep aman a oe seni [ Hes as ma. W|I) (- i an : — = =e — =| 7 ail : tog SI dS reehgee Sigsdzs BESS SE FLAS Sy —r he TI | aan) | | / : , t ie tl | it ut | He mt if ih eT NH HATE nH tt i hile Mi ply! ‘| at ti) iu | Eee H HE tHe i aS | put = i T | He go 8 , [a ‘= EE: EE MHRA HF Seem POM ny ARMS a/ NA EITASTONE- STAFFORDSHIRE - MAIN CORNIG E /er6m X sr b6in W/NDOW ARCHITRAVE AND S/LL. rH i 4 i H ] | G = Alea. : : " Wf | a >\ ae 7 AB y Y 7: ar 2 LU i fs Tal it Ba B n et i r if A ] l mi il : pli LL ; EEE ay | A > : e ee 12) Se i PART: OF -THE -BLVECOAT -SCHOOE* FRO 78 CENTRAL PART of the BLUECOAT SCHOOL, FROME, SOMERSET THE portion shown opposite is the central feature of an otherwise dull front, which extends for some distance on both sides. The date of building is 1720, and the details are extremely good, notably the doorway. Poni HOUSE, WOOTTON BASSETT Wootton BassetT is on the fringe of the Bath stone district, and most of the houses are brick built. This exception is interesting for the curious attempt it shows to find some variant on the usual type of pediment. The result is hardly a success. Sue_L Hoop at TETBURY. The details throughout are very well executed; the doorway, with its shell hood, is exceptionally good. The date of building is unknown, but cannot very well be earlier than 1720. A simpler stone shell hood from Tetbury, in much the same neighbourhood, is shown here. i) BANK HOUSE, WOOTTON BASSETT “ We wa fae pee 4 ae * ze t bs 80 i HTH iil it a na Gel ||| | tf yt |e | iE a a cl aA MEE i i a | aoe iy) soem = | ereeeee F | 4) | ait ci esi aS Hit Gg a y = ne WA rae = ae 1 —e— I) om em || = SSS 2iS=l=— |= S(- 1 7 | NT WW L//AE3 ae: , ae HU ACO NW reN or == : made | o Mac uF le i ae i a rl slp in Ht eit i EET a ae - BANK : HOVSE? WOOTTON -BASSETT:/N:! THE? COVNTY: OF: WILTS ° va ee." ngage pment $2 BANK HOUSE, WOOTTON BASSETT A HOUSE IN BISLEY STREET, PAINSWICK OO tsi en 1 Tuis is the latest in date of the Painswick houses illustrated. It has a dainty stone front, but is rather the prototype of many stucco houses of a much later date which have brought this kind of work down to a low and commonplace level. 83 LEBURN HOUSE, BAMPTON, NORTH DEVON THE stone quarried at Bampton is coarse and rubbly, and unfitted for fine dressing. Nevertheless, by dealing broadly with the whole scheme, and keeping his pilasters gp Ss FSS eis ee ane Ee asi to a rn Sg rs mage ‘io / — —| eseean oy Y y el — | L as much like piers as possible, the builder of Leburn House has contrived to give his rugged material a certain amount of architectural quality. The big scale of the setting out and of the fine-coved cornice are a foil to the rough masonry. The elevation of No. 8 Silver Street, Bradford-on-Avon, shows another pilaster treatment, much more “Palladian” in character and quite scholarly, yet with elabora- tion so well balanced and distributed that the whole is entirely satisfactory. 84 ON. N, NortH Dey N House, BAMPTO LEBUR \\\\ ii | led — |S = —=il BH ie lS Seta NWT HN = gl are ie HA SOR ST MOR 1 A RED alll | [ ale i | | 2 HA ap | i il s | | a | | ~ iat i | N HA % itil : =. i) || oo | ‘ HH | lal li iH igenune TO E maces HAL Le CY CUCL OULU mOUSE IN KING STREET, LYNN REGIS, NORFOLK emp aeeeee ee : ————— on =a A AE agege BASS ee es eo egike [J i UJ i) real Oy GG Fao gz I a olall co rH L | A:-HOVSE-IN-KING ‘STREET: LYNN-REG/S: NORFOLK ILLUSTRATES a type of stately and academic house which is fairly common among quite late work in many towns where stone is plentiful. This is a very good specimen of its class; it is built of Ketton stone, and is in good preservation. 87 KIRKLEATHAM HOSPITAL, NEAR REDCAR, YORKS THIS imposing almshouse, consisting of a chapel, two school-houses, lodgings for ten old men and ten old women, with a library and other buildings, was erected between 1709 and 1742 by Sir William Turner and his son Chomley Turner. ‘The — 88 buildings are arranged round three sides of a quadrangle, in the centre of which is a statue of Justice, blindfold, and with sword and scales. The materials are red sandstone and dark red bricks; the chapel is fitted with very good stalls, the carving in particular being excellent. ee : CULVERTHORPE HALL, NEAR SLEAFORD, LINCOLNSHIRE. 7c. 1730 CULVERTHORPE HALL stands on the edge of the fen land, south-east of Sleaford. Though belonging rather to the stately type of house, a type which is perhaps a little out of place amongst the other buildings illustrated, this example has been included because of the combination of the “grand manner”’ with a big and bold roof treat- ment. An arrangement of this kind is rarely met with, and well demonstrates that even an academically designed building can carry a traditional roof without loss of stateliness. The design generally has been well thought out; reference to the plan (below) will show how the older stable and other out-buildings were brought into relation with the house. On the east and west sides are the beginnings of segmental arcades, which were to connect the main block to the out-buildings, but were never com- pleted. ‘The plan of the forecourt is interesting. SHRVBBERY SHRVBBERY AREA _ HA Snass GRAVEL WALK i LL SAAMI | x: = O FEET i Cl BVIL SY GRASS PLOT 62 FEET DIAM: SN SGV STABLE SSSVo LAs THE PARK THE PARK CuLVERTHORPE HALL PLAN SHEWING LANCOLNSHIREB ForEcourmr ETc: LS M.B. MENS: Er- DEL- gore ‘AUIHSNIOONI'T “TIVH AdUOHLYAA TAD gi Yall ——— z TS hae - a LN "ia 5 AE See et ee | | RR BRR9 Hee i i RRARRANT | -. 2 = a | <1] r = -] =ieam=> ae Ge an a oe eS sl — oon meet) SSS si Be te te ( 1 a ( E yaa hi e VN ss AE = (5: | c qi faare al ain { [ee Nit \ a as | -+H ie Body r i eth tis c i Pa ll SRiGamma| ity Hin [kal at io i . HT i 1] | | | Hi | / i) nea ies CULVERTHORPE HALL. ELEVATION. CVLVERTHORPE BAe LIINGS WINDOW CONSOLES FIRST FL@R SON (/ Ox A °, Y Ng, > \ XR rw (Rox Xs QR Sae / ) a Y wes SS f] WW v L»® COPY BALVSTRADE TO BACK STAIR: CVLVERTHORPE HALL - LINCS: a3 | 5 Sa iy "Al i | -_————_] 2S SS ) a eye: ee ite SORTER’ MARKET. BARNARD CASTLE, ad yr TuoucH Butter Markets are hardly domestic buildings, except in a very indirect way, they are usually small, and often very unpretentious, and thus have not received the attention they sometimes deserve. ‘This, and the plate of Bungay which follows it, have been included as two Renaissance examples, because of their architectural interest and their original treatment. 95 BuNncAy BuTTER MarkKET, 1789. 96 THE MASONIC ROOMS, BLANDFORD FORUM i l | } Wa Ha | Nh: =: « —— aes I ——————_—_—Ss = ——— = == = —- { = == — = TA —— et * == = —_ ——— ——— Ss -ROOMS:B THE interesting part of this building, date about 1750, is the large bay window abutting upon the street. The architraves, pilasters, etc., are in wood, and deserve to be recorded in a measured drawing. 97 S, THE OLD HOUSE, BLANDFORD FORUM, DORSET THIS curious and interesting structure, from its position in the outskirts of the town, escaped the fire which almost destroyed the town early in the eighteenth century. It is said to have been built in 1660 by Dr Joachim Frederic Saggitary (who died at Blandford in 1696, aged eighty years). ‘Though the elaborately designed front is very one-sided and unsymmetrical, the block taken together makes a quite regular whole. ‘The carefully executed rustication, the splendid roof, and the bold, if rather unorthodox chimneys, produce a very striking effect: the arrangement of the roof- covering material, upper half of tiles and lower half of stone slates, is probably unique, and was surely dictated by the huge size of the roof itself. A regular progression of stone slates properly diminishing from the top course would have made the lower courses of an impossible scale. Within the house there is a good staircase, and some very well panelled rooms. Compare the cornice of this house with that of the Garden House at Poundisford Park (p. 149). THE FREE SCHOOL, WATFORD, HERDS 1704. Tus school is situated close to the Parish Church; over the entrance door are the arms and crest of Chilcott, carved in stone, and beneath the inscription, which records the date of the school’s foundation: ‘“ANNO DNI; 1704. THIS FREE SCHOOL WAS BUILT AND ENDOWED FOR THE TEACHING OF POOR CHILDREN AT THE PROPER COST OF MRS ELIZABETH FULLER, OF WATFORD PLACE, THE ONLY DAUGHTER OF MR JOHN COMYNE, ALIAS CHILCOTT, OF TIVERTON, IN DEVON- SHIRE, AND OF LONDON, MERCHANT, WHO DYED YE II1TH OF NOVBR., 1709, AGED 65. SILVESTER CHILCOTT, GENT., BROTHER OF THE FOUNDRESS OF THIS SCHOOL, HAS MADE AN ADDITION OF {20 A YEAR FOR EVER.’ On the ground floor, in addition to the boys’ schoolroom, is the Trustees’ room and a kitchen. . The first floor is divided into five rooms: two of these were allotted to the master, two to the mistress, the fifth having been used as the girls’ schoolroom ; over these are the attics. It is interesting to note that the endowment of the school amounted to only {52 per annum, and on this we are to believe that not only were the master and mistress supported, but also forty boys and twenty girls were clothed (or “partly clothed,” as the Deed says) and provided with books, the necessary firing and lights procured, repairs to the building carried out, and “‘a proper dinner”’ provided once a year for the scholars and Trustees! As years went on this meagre endowment was found insufficient, and from time to time various additions were made by benefactors, until in 1868 the original endowment was increased to about {230 per annum. The Free School was finally closed in 1882, and the building was afterwards purchased by subscription and handed over to the Vicar to be used for Parish purposes. I0O ZA tN TTT A MAIN CORNICE DOOR DETA/LS “aN Vj a MHA Oe CS -_——-A —— S SS SS, RS — ——=s — BS oo Spey Fo a= == ee | SEER Ss _— = —— ee 2 Se 4 aaa SSS SSS Sy Serer ce ee Somat Se 2S Eases St a | SSS et LE ESS es inti aut | ih i | Ht == ==2 Se Hl 7 HM Whi \ SSS ney \ XS A> f x \\ il ese a = ae | aa INSCRIPTION | = 4 ——) —<—<$<—$—$—$—<<$— SS Sam = |AELE iN Hl Geese “Uno Wi we TnOe stor 57 ger 5: SCALE OF FEET = sl 70 4°oO THE FREE SCHOOL, WATFORD, HERTs. IO! MBs MENS & DEL 1901 5 /0 1S SCALE OF INCHES 20 o , : E ns : ; Be cae i | 4 rrritn 2, ay THE FREE ScHOoL, WarTorp, HERTS. DITCHINGHAM HALL, NORFOLK, 102 ft aie eee LOU She Als DIRCHINGHAM NORFOLK (SHOWN OVERLEAF) THE admirable handling of the brickwork in this house gives a special interest to an otherwise ordinary front. ‘The two kinds of bricks used are reds and brindles, the red dressings to the angles and windows are rather wider than is usually the case. Facing this page is a view of a later house in the neighbourhood (Ditchingham Hall) treated in much the same manner. Below is a view of an Inn at Newent, with wood mullioned windows and a good hood; the brickwork has been whitewashed over. Tue ‘“ Brack Doc” INN aT NEWENT. 103 =| | | A} Ait HOW | NTH SA HTH 4S cf i i MoT oT yea oO PRU HM AE He AA aE TT Hi Ca eat it TF u ies abil abil iltitii® fe Intl ifalahide tila i me Aiding car RRRET Ana Suen ie MY GET autre A ADRAT AN NBA URUHONG inn HES ee a cana | ARATE TROPA HL SH wae ee ai Hil == hearin jE EEE Hy ES ajfelinl stingy Rr at SF onnTr ee te tae na ayn rae radia PS eeu td ee alt Haftieaifiat ee in ajarnacafegipaya TELAT GGA GAG EAGLES a eee BHERE| ii HW, ESEEBEES| i nt ia ‘fel ARE an TE i rt) il eta i ne alt ae iN ul 2am lil: Chil i | CW Tl fe (shah z fi Hi BSTISSS iii: ||) mo ulin nant it i an nee il i Ena ay RTE Hl a ent it SCH Gee ee EL rade) (igi ve et =< a Sta == Welt I] in cere \y \ = HAUYUHUPAROR IT ret ate edevlaiegateadeyatialy ne ———— == er as a ee 0 ae os ——— - =e ‘cn amms == i= Gee em aE cy es Nt AEE i at jl] AR al dh =o = = a——T_ _! =o =z = = =—S = <= Sa. [Sea c S. Carer rE cee ue HAH AN OATH oH ae GES HEE ae 5S 355 FE Se =" =a NN Ste Co Samm e =a ee att apie a ot CLG EH HOE Hh ae SS Nidal RAREST up page sae cee rity A fi h in Pe 1. ii adits Cn 4 ite TERME hee Le AH aM A-HOVSE-AT- DITCHINGHAM -IN -NORFOLK : - 104 THE TOWN HALL, AMERSHAM, BUCKS AMERSHAM is one of the few towns left in England that when this book was first published had not been robbed by modern necessities and usage of that indescribable feeling of antiquity and rural quietude which are always associated, rightly or wrongly, with the lesser known country towns. It still possesses a wide main street lined with old houses, and with a Town Hall or Market-house standing alone in mid-road. ‘This 105 14 Town Hall, which was built in 1682 at the expense of Sir William Drake of Shardeloes, has evidently not been altered in any respect. Brown Willis, writing in the latter half of the eighteenth century, says of it, “a very neat Town Hall, which is the handsomest in the country, the building being of brick, standing on arched pillars, and embellished with free- stone at the corners, with a lanthorne and clock at top.” ‘The setting out and design of the windows on the south front, shown in the illustration, are very good. At the north end of the town are some neat almshouses founded by the Drake family in 1617. Amersham seems to have been an im- portant place in the seventeenth century: John Hampden presided here as a _ magistrate, Edmund Waller, the poet, sat as member for it during three Parliaments, and Richard Baxter devoted much attention to the inhabitants dur- ing his Nonconformist propaganda. Near Amersham is Chesham, also with a quaint ‘Town Hall (illustrated here). THE SCHOOLHOUSE, RISER DERBYSHIRE BUILT in 1706 at the expense of Mrs Elizabeth Gray, whose monogram is over the doorway. ‘This house was previously used as a rectory, but is now a master’s house. The whole makes a fine rectangular block, and the details and carving are good; the heads on the key-blocks, representing Ceres, Pomona, and other deities, are very well done. Internally the building has been completely altered. | Sart Z ae STONE MONOGRAM RISELEY a ee 106 a on a fen|=lne0 OWE cco HH eh ee [ | {nates FE ces, Rl aaa ( ng cla lg | ann TL fee |=|"o0 1 oan CLO oon ='s08 Coo Ooo Ho Co ee calgon cal a = a SMOdNIM YFddi/ iss J Til ey Peas 1 MOIGN/M FAYLNIZ QL ‘OLA NOLLWAGTY INOW] “ASIST ~ ASAOLT~ TOOHOC [LA “SMOGNIM YFMO7 * FAVYALINOSY 107 REDDISH HOUSE, BROAD CHALKE, WILTS Snipes qe: — E S si i 5 HA : S LOU TT Tt | Hii il | g | & i CICay||| CICe Mit dl iu = willl a Py = E = = o, == er ml | -SIF 2 Sa) E i = : ————— ! eee! Beer REDDISH *HOVSE: BROAD - CHALKE - WILTSHIRE = Tus charming little front has suffered somewhat by the removal of the original wood cornice, and the substitution of a brick one of little projection and poor design. ‘The restoration of the cornice has been made in the drawing. 108 HEALE HOUSE, WOODFORD, WILTS HOousE IN THE CLOSE, SALISBURY. HousE AT ARUNDEL, SUSSEX. Heate House, though a good deal pulled about by alterations, still retains some architectural character. It was built about 1700. The houses in the Close at Salisbury and at Arundel illustrate fairly common types of bay-windowed houses, ~ while overleaf (House at Halesworth) is shown a later example. 10g LONGNOR HALL, NEAR SHREWSBURY, SALOP, AND TWO SUFFOLK HOUSES LONGNoR HALL, SALOP. House aT HALESWORTH, SUFFOLK. Door, LONGNoR HALL, SALOP. HousE AT SAXMUNDHAM, SUFFOLK. Loncnor Hatt, date 1670, shows brickwork with stone dressings, and a well-designed doorway. The house at Halesworth gives another example of a symmetrical arrange- ment of bay windows, later than those shown on p. I09, IIO HOUSE NEAR THE CHURCH, NEWENT, GLOS. itil) at ae a eB ALTHOUGH built of the very simplest materials, and with no elaboration in detail, this building is full of charm. Many a country town has examples of this work, and the simplicity and restraint with which they are handled, and the invariable fitness of design, are constant sources of delight. Cf. the house at Saxmundham opposite. : III THE CUSTOM HOUSE, DARITMOU ie me es Tus house faces on to the river at the seaward end of the town. ‘The red brickwork is now painted white, and the steep roof is covered with small Cornish slates, so encrusted with lichen that the joints have almost disappeared and the roof looks like one unbroken mass. ‘The sashes of the upper windows have probably been renewed at some time, as both sets of windows would have been originally divided up into small panes like those on the ground floor. NU ae ecren x <3 ) aA IEEE I NS ES — ol cael WML TY Bao Sn oy iy haa i eS =n i F 2gas. it) . ee = NN ss = 1 42 43 3a 25 26 27 28 ag jo 31 3x 33 94 95 396 37 38 ® AO THE + CVSTOM + HOVSE - AT: DARTMOVTH: 1739 T. R. B., 1905 112 rt . % DARTMOUTH. ’ THe Custom HOoUusE 15 113 iil & — Li en “AMUUNG ‘ASNOH NOLIVHSUVD 114 CARSHALTON HOUSE, SURREY. Tuts fine specimen of the old English brick mansion was built in 1719 by Sir James Fellowes, sub-governor of the South Sea Company, on the site of an older house demolished to make way for the pre- sent. ‘This older house had been the residence of Dr Radcliffe, the founder of the Radcliffe Library at Oxford, to which he bequeathed £40,000. Dr Radcliffe was physician to William III, and later to Queen Anne, and was famous not only for his great skill, but also for his bluntness of manner, which spared no rank, how- Sven exalted. Sir J. Fellowes, to whom Aubrey dedicates a map in his second volume, paid £3500 for the property, and in addition to building the house, laid out the grounds in a formal manner, and caused the garden pavilion to be erected. The house is now (1905) occupied as a convent, and some of the buildings, notably the Dovecote, have been already destroyed. Most of the interior work is in good preservation, and like the Blue Parlour, given on p. 120, extremely scholarly and refined. The same can hardly be said of the Water Pavilion (pp. 118 and 119), at least so far as its semi- Gothic tower is concerned; neverthe- less, this is a picturesque block, quite in a class of its own, and it is to be hoped it will be preserved. Beneath the tower is a pumping engine, dated 1784, worked by a water- wheel in the River Wandle, which flows under the Pavilion; water is thus pumped CAMBLESFORTH HALL, YorKS. up to the tank on the tower. The plan of the Water Pavilion is given on p. 118. Camblesforth Hall, shown here, is another of these fine brick houses. y) OT SS SS == DOOR HANDLES -CARSHALTON— Brass Door PLATE AND HANDLES, BLUE PARLOUR, CARSHALTON. 1 & Heres peewee I15 ELH EH EE | Hl =i M.B. MENS. E71 DEL. 1 gor. A A | sy AY i 1H) out eet ! l Qo ’ i] ae ie Carfhalton FToufe. The Dovecote 116 of s Tera ese Wee aa laiah on i ie iH | we i i ARR it tt en dw int = = ia = oe | iH Mn om i roe od roe coon WL aco ro rH rn an = i a Cee Ill IC HN ee a i i (aa) ro E Mn) aa i | = SEA = LH TT i=) in =n a i u Hh O00 i Hh] 008 | =| i i cO eS|CCCe= 0 oT r on [mo 08) = |sn0)| == n= = Oe a rT ji i cI CSS Oe oo) - LNOW] =a ———— ED - ASAOLI HLAOS GHL; NOWUIVHSUVZ) | 117 «mt tyne Hitt HUGHUUUUUUUOOGOUOUAUULOONOUOAUUGED of} ‘es TAT aaa eA MT = aj ems | ‘ue | — | omy t = = (anti ik SS fy = A i ae | palelitititity, E abalitenit iitihactasllitsttatitsltalilillitilill | enetil cae E [Ao iti HH i; a i | al Hain aa all a ail il ip! sits ! ia if feat Mlle ise 118 SECTION A A WEST ELEVATION THE WATER PAVILION, CARSHALTON HOUSE. rT 3 0, “Bg - ty 7B Mey LP, yy” Gere * Ay > 8 EX fine “ a ai eT \ EN 119 CARSHALTON HOUSE. THE WATER PAVILION r IE MT = & L = : ee ——=4 | =e he ine oe i i t i HH \ \ ce It, HAM a \ = 1 alalcQuttal 1 : ( i yr ree i = ¥ Ln —— [| Mi —— ; is ike aoe See = ace 2 Sa Sa rT = — a A U7 SHEE | | TUCO i i, =e I = = = = Moo — === (=. MMM i i i ial iene MW i We fl er sell ii : if ag i J = =e mit f Li | i if a Hh 0 PF poe al PHHEEe A AWE i MI: =— Ba eee TNT) == ee Bs* Sn: iE = See cow E fn esi =a 2 = = = Be ernie — ne - Ss es ee Se aS 1), — — fe = Ba = S Si = SI sf = ; Zz 3 => ; 4 Sh al 5||Z T rE | eT! A — ¥ | SY WH — | a - tl = a MI H a — | I22 | TT ty y i — (J (ea 7 a (i | FOXDENTON HALL, LANCASHIRE In the flat parts of Lancashire there are a few examples of Later Renaissance houses. Foxdenton Hall is on the outskirts of Oldham, and, though it is now only occupied by mill hands, it was once an important mansion. The front shown has this peculiarity that the windows have been spaced out at equal intervals right across the front, the fact that the spacing in the wings should be treated apart from the rest having been quite ignored. The roof has stone slates, and the cornice, door, and hood are of wood. The basement is of rubble walling with mullioned windows, a common arrangement, even in quite late houses. BISHOP SETH WARD’S HOSPITAL, BUNTINGFORD, 1689 Tuis delightful little building, like the better-known College of Matrons at Salisbury, owes its existence to the munificence of Bishop Seth Ward, who was born at Bunting- ford in the year 1617. He learnt the rudiments of learning at the Grammar School in his native town, and thence removed to Sydney Sussex College, Cambridge, of which he was afterwards chosen Fellow. Upon leaving the University he was for some time tutor in several families, and in 1649 was appointed Savilian Professor of Astronomy at Oxford, a chair subsequently occupied by Sir Christopher Wren. During the Civil War and the Commonwealth he was imprisoned for his opposition to the ruling powers, but after the Restoration, in 1661, he was made a Fellow of the Royal Society and Dean of Exeter, being sub- sequently promoted to the See. Afterwards made Chancellor of the Order of the Garter, by his influence he occasioned that office to be annexed to the See of Salisbury, to which he was translated in 1667. For some time before his death in 1689 he lost his reason, and exhibited a melan- choly picture of mental imbecility; he is buried in Salisbury Cathedral. 153 In addition to the two foundations mentioned above, he instituted four scholarships at Jesus College, Cambridge, open to natives of Hertfordshire who had been educated at the Grammar School at Buntingford. Like the College of Matrons, the plan of this building is composed of a main block and two projecting wings. An examination of the drawings will reveal many similarities in the details, but there is more restraint and simplicity in the Buntingford example, excluding the probability that the two were designed by the same hand. ‘The plan is here shown. : lo oH 10 15 20 25 Zo scale ——E——E————E—E———————————SEEESSS SS of feet. Three Steps, rising J8 inches lead up trom the Road, two without & one within the Enclosing Wall~ The Pavors are of Portland Stone- The Cobbling 1s of Flint Pebbles. | Parlour: Reet Parlour: eecistes fb. Plan of B? Seth Ward's Hospital at Buntingford to show the 134 B?SetruH Warp’s HosprtaL: BVNTINGFORD- i} | 1] ET WU | iq =(a8—8= =I | At I = ==> aH Wi eeaediee| HN | ere ismenaas CTH Ii i = | UHV UV EE : =5 Eieere= I CHa t IL serait af to BAL eat HA I 4H He FH | Ii wile | | iH ———— TT} I BY tt Ba —————SS i E i = SJ _————— ————————— i} ! iH a i a =anss WE | == om a WH MANTA OU sannnneanassnnani | 1 LR TN r VT ABE A A LE HAW AH Lh 1 A ! Lt i im | WAH WA ABA HS Miliny WITT i | Ml y ti Hi Niits i WW, 4 is i A ad yy i= OHH) a 7 Be || O4 = A Wa] | ee a viet Ml i > ire 8 ! iH f p 4 Saas Se |=_= == - vo} eeeeeneeeene 2 = ef | ——J ay] =, | i} H | | H a | Mi I 2 Sea AT | BUTT EH TTHTEATHI iH Bias i AEE | | EH ma | Cee | EH be | | St a qin | iH A a BY Fe a ea Siete stata t Winfetaady ' 4) ERC Pee knan te | Bit tae retest PHO BH EH sti etupereys | Stearetten WAG =; Opbs ie 1 I r Batters ‘ll Si lippeseee Hl) St asat i} 1H EVI EAT Wh | 5 Il Hy | | Hy) yeu | BUTT THATTTMHTAT TVET beds] SS BR ATTATY ete BRAT TATATTT TAT ATTAATTVAT TOUT HAE i EUITTAUUATTUAA AT THUAAT TTA THU aH 5 —ae F | Wl | Wits | Le a a EH WS nin HAITI | Al | Hi WU Bly I SM Mil ETH . A } 2 : LE Bes i ))) a ee St | : P= qi ja. stil seeltn tite vay: ai fEIL Din! a 7 H AA | SS 14 } 14) |) Se fan NFS) ==8-88 ee al (| BS Sih esa ee == bad HASH LH (= Te a A Ht F | Wi Di added i] COLLEGE OF MATRONS, SALISBURY Sivxz Door: & ae 6 CormceéCap toTvrvret: pe Se | Bes RO RX ule) Daher: ~ oy A) PS BS “im AGI SEG KG s EEE SEE: ‘ig =it Pa a Est - Ba! ie ———aee ai=I os a ae = es O | MTT HHH | MENS: & DEL: 1g0% Tus, the Widow’s College or Collegium Matronarum, was built by Bishop Seth Ward in 1682, and endowed with revenues for the maintenance of ten widows of clergymen of the Established Church. It stands within the Cathedral Close, and, for interest, well holds its own among the many excellent Renaissance buildings adjoining. St John’s Hospital, Heytesbury, near Salisbury (shown in the upper illustration opposite), is also a well-designed almshouse. 136 ST Joun’s HospitaL, HeyTeEspury. COLLEGE OF MATRONS, SALISBURY. 137 dats dtsehasadsdee.. 18 CLIFFORD CHAMBERS, NEAR STRATFORD-ON-AVON SITUATED on the river Avon. The house itself was built prior to the Renaissance period, therefore the Plate illustrates a later addition to the main structure. The central portion of the front, for the most part, encloses the entrance hall and staircase, the left-hand wing encloses rooms of an earlier period than the front itself, and at the time the building was measured the right-hand wing had not been com- pleted internally, being left without plaster, panelling, or finishings of any kind after the walls and roofs necessary to complete the external facade had been built. ai) CLIFFORD » CHAMBERS = NEAR -STRATFORD-ON-AVON® BROMLEY COLLEGE, KENT FOUNDED in 1666 by John Warner, Bishop of Rochester, and built in 1670 for twenty widows of poor clergymen, each inmate to be allowed {£20 a year, and the chaplain {50. The fine Portland stone entrance is a good’ piece of work, which might have been designed by Wren, though there is no evidence of this other than in the work itself. 140 . * ae Ot ee SPD it MULAN i Doorway, BROMLEY COLLEGE. T41 ‘SuIMeIp oul] Jo ydessojoyd ke ur Ajayenbape ssoidxa 0} a[qissoduir wey & 31 aAIs ssurssorp ou0js puke syoriq Pet PJO ey} JO INopoo [nFANeeq ay} pue “ourNo onbsaznyord syr “Surpyinq sry jo [reyep oy Jo Aporyduns oy J, ‘IQAO SUIOOI YIM JOO puno1s 9y} UO sumOOI UD} ‘Te UT ‘suTeJUOD 4 puR ‘FT Ue Jo WHOF oY) UT st Surpying 9y} jo ued yesouas oy], ‘ABMJOOp souRIJUS 9Y} JOAO UONdrIOSUT ay} SUNT Os—, ‘UdTIOM TOMO} ‘ pue usu spsurs orood xis Joy “sJa3sayoryD jo doysrg ‘suryy Aruazy Jo uuog,, ‘suryy uyof Aq SZor ut aaaqnnog ~SMONE “TIVHDNINYOM “ASNOHSWIV AHL ae rt Hi : Hil me 1H } poo Iisit Nie rH vi Hi Tm l TT ite il | ee = i= a: Pe E a : ees ee Se = oe eS Se i A i i] i] ‘1 HWY ih WA Mi HHT Belt HII 4 i i WAY | UT i ANT 4 M TEE i HH aH iy he al ih ail a HH ANA a Wil i | NATH nu H | | et i ian IH] tall IE 143 A: WINDOW ALMSFOVSE WORMINGHALL BVCKS ANNO-DOMINI - 1675 — "gIZI ‘NOGDNIGAY “IVLIdSOP{ S,.LSINHS (7 P19 + 240 prc4o >~) Ne 8 Le ees feszer(oud cx1d feet HOUSE NEAR THE MAISON DEE: DOVER DaTING from 1665, this is another specimen of robust and interesting brick-work, The pilasters are a trifle finicking, and the original entrance door is badly missed, but the work is good, and as one of a rather rare type, it is to be hoped the building will not be further injured. 145 TOMKINS’ ALMSHOUSE, ABINGDON, ALMSHOUSE i733 ABINGDON is justly famous for its architecture. Not the least interesting are the Almshouses, of which there are several. The southern block of Christ’s Hospital is a bold piece of design, in which the most has been made of the different materials available; the mixture of red bricks with vitrified ends and a small amount of rubbed work to the central feature and over the arches produces a most effective result. The Tomkins’ building has much the same treatment of materials; the drawing shows the entrance gate piers, and the curious archway and clock tower at the back. Between these two is a long and narrow quadrangle, with sets AT SUTTON COURTNEY. of lodgings on either side. meer PEE] fe ‘ | ! a2 eae) a Eas A DSO ED Le. ease a pie The upper illustration shows a portion of a small Almshouse at Sutton Courtney in Berkshire that has somewhat similar brick-work. THE GARDEN HOUSE, EBRINGTON SITUATED in the gardens of Ebrington Hall, which were formerly of considerable extent, laid out here with a terrace and long pond, bordered on each side by high box hedges. The pond is now without water and is partially filled up. From the east, or principal, front of the Garden House a view down the length of the long pond and terrace was obtained. Within the last forty years this building has been somewhat altered, the position of the fire- place has been changed and the south chim- ney-stack built; the outbuilding on the north side has also been erected, and the semicircular flight of steps leading to the entrance door removed. In the Plate these modern alterations have not been shown, and the two dormers in the roof have been omitted. The principal room on the ground floor is panelled, and has a fine plaster ceiling, a photo- graph of a portion of which is given. It is interesting to note that the window openings on the north front have stone mullions and transomes. 147 NS a 5 tcl SE : D Poe 0 Gea ets ai | FA ) sae 1 oe | L] ig (| Wil iN L [Ee=s/| ee | Q 7. a in 4 ini Ag AAMT 4 Sos GEG iy a ue TIE Eo Fi Se TREAT TTT CAAA Ai HAA i all SKETCH RAN- WHISOW AIRCHITRAIVE. — be Lal: rl es ane ee C| (hem ol We : Lal all a a 148 GARDEN HOUSE AT POUNDISFORD PARK, NEAR TAUNTON, SOMERSET Tus is a simpler and less pretentious piece of garden architecture than the building shown on the preceding Plate; it is also earlier, probably about 1675. The fine cast-lead tank at Poundisford Park (see next page) is a good example of a craft which flourished in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Being in a cider county, it is quite properly decorated with a frieze showing the processes of cider making. 149 LEAD Work, POUNDISFORD PARK, TAUNTON. 150 HOUSE eal ASHBURTON, DEVON ae > a a THE small Cornish slates are very suitable for wall-hanging, as they have a soft texture, which, like that of the Kentish tiles, soon acquires a beautiful weathering. ‘The carver of the ornament on the cornice here evidently found it hard to give up his traditional patterns, for he has cut upon the top member the Gothic flowing vine so commonly seen on West Country screens. I51 HOUSE AT BRIDLINGTON, YORKSHIRE In the larger part of the North and East Ridings of Yorkshire, brick is the staple building material, yet really interesting brick-work is not easy to find. ‘This example from Bridlington proves that this designer at any rate fully understood the capabilities of the material he was using. In the building as it now exists the extreme left-hand window has been cut down to form a modern doorway; this door has been omitted in the Plate and a window substituted. It is most instructive to note that the effect of symmetry is not lost, even though the central feature is not really central. Compare Linden House, Cirencester (p. 61). The cornice is of wood with bold carving in the coved portion. The small illustrations show some early brick-work at Burneston, near Ripon, in Yorkshire, which is particularly bold and effective. ALMSHOUSES AT BURNESTON, YORKS. DETAIL AT BURNESTON. 152 HL Ry sal Avivdatil Fi A A tai] RH SHH HH : / SH] aeeeteeees M/S vy ta) ce] BIE Hs yj 2 | | \ } fp eHES Tana = Tn y) i ; fi HEHE TERRE 4 | y ii will a ieee fezeee| Sabadalitatatatatatitihil NS FEA 3 eee if : ieee oo : eee i ce i 2 j ane TE; | cys IF = \\ Bnans ie ol atime: ‘ [Pe i | iia A EI = Oo BAA 4 | oO ami aA 44 444 4 4) 4) 4-4 1 2 2 ! ih He | s\asalte LPEEetr Pea St Cis ere pRAAR 2 9-29-18 2818) . so a A ee Fe en a AIC era } rr B ve HEAH ABA AH H Sao bARA2 5 i vuedidebel ae ate Ik IIa) daa, QAR Gl BAIA Hi RQ co QR 4 RY oh S )~« X % q RS 7 bo ap : “EAREEe Reece: | viii ii ue non ete ral el AGS MENS 153 A-HOVSE:-AT: BRIDLINGTON © YORKSH/RE - A HOUSE. “AT “BEGG: SUFFOLK G bil} vie: 0.8.8 cH HEH “| ———— —Wh SS TW =a] [z TE an eee ———+ hic —iul| no ee _ ww ZA] ZZ aM TA a ——= : ff Sue ii wi OwING to the paucity of good building stone, East Anglia abounds in specimens of excellent brick-and- plaster work. ‘The bricks used are invariably of good colour and texture, and small in size, brick-work rising as much as four courses to the foot being extremely rare in old work in this part of the country. This house and the one shown on the following Plates, both of which are in the same street, give a good idea of the simple and dignified effect that a careful arrange- ment of humble materials can produce. The rather high attic storey on this house gives it a “blocky” appearance, which is not unpleasing. The cornice is of wood. 154 A House aT BECCLES, SUFFOLK. 155 A HOUSE ADT @BECGEES SUFFOLK Tus house is of considerably later date than the preceding one; probably about 1780. The brick pilasters, widely spaced as well as very wide in themselves, seem almost to lose their function as pilasters and become mere buttresses, helping to divide up the front into a centre and two wings. The door, here shown, is a beautiful piece of refined detail. i% ‘ . tata | Sa ‘iam ie : ee a4 [ : ia | | rol | =, Ss = = = SS A Yi WN i | Z | ie HE EE = ——- = = th TE a Hh HE HH H i Ot ———— SS Sa ————— | i ; Oy T 4 [Ss i ah \ x v\ Pale EECOLES 2S ULLOLK: 1] H TUTTE ty | 4 iL! = = F4 A Mi aan AAI ===. i cisco AD tt i Hlth rt Hy} YY Hi if ify a | i UJ J a F A FIOVSE tf a) Ki (HH a HE rl tt XE N ANU \ 157 STANFORD DINGLEY RECTORY, BERKS THIs is a good specimen of the small country house, sound in construction and design, and full of traditional feeling. The building has exactly the amount of architectural element necessary to NG it from dullness. A detail of the door is given on p. 183. RUTLAND LODGE, PETERSHAM In many brick houses of this period much of the charm they possess lies in the colour of the brick-work and the variety which was obtained by the use of different kinds of bricks. A photographic reproduction can give but little idea of these qualities; nevertheless it serves to show the good design and excellent workmanship at Rutland Lodge, which is quite the best of the Renaissance houses at Petersham. 158 " oe ye a * ~? 1a Ar wc ‘ cr te 2.) SCR RST ENA 4 fe oe Ae 9 ge ‘ Cn Oe nt MOREL ROE AOR De eB ah OR eH RMS ES, * > PS Aes RUTLAND LODGE, PETERSHAM, 159 TWO HOUSES AT SAWBRIDGEWORTH, HERTS Two admirable little street fronts of a date about 1740, together with a sketch of a house at Much Wenlock in Shropshire, showing a variation of the usual type of window treatment. i SS SSS HE SNH Ww eel SSeS 1 RTE an u in | ! i Sh [a ———— ANAM IHHHA AHHH g nnn UA i : BB | na i | lle A: BRICK: FRONT: AT: SAWBRIDGEWORTH - HERTFOR DSHIRE | - tt H iil 160 ee it lite | 4 Pad LOT TTT ER | if y ML "A: HOVSE ‘AT. MVCH-WENL OCK - SHROPSHIRE: | iii q i vi \ 8 \ \ A} i Mes il WT \ estil ‘st | I | errant WAAL : aa LT | Ud Nl KH HHH abeee y | SOOO THE | om | Fea RU TTR nec HAHAH TTT HHH i | reel TENT Iu Lt z | MA A-STREET - FRONT: SAWBRIDGEWORTH 21 I 6 HOUSE NOW USED AS A BANK AT NEWENT, GAR he REE UeRe ell, ts Bil 4% p= & Bi best * * VEN Many houses of this type are to be found in country towns, they are usually quite late in date, about 1760, but invariably possess a dignity and restraint which are wholly admirable. Here the lower sash-windows are modern. 162 3 4 : a 2 S ee re eer NT SP ee “LLASSVG NOLLOOAA NI LAAULG VY 163 f ¢ es g ' 3 Bah > Aan f p ~ 4 “ , i . ; . t ‘ / . i - » 1 - ' a a “ Fi | ¥ * ‘ oe a 4A an ¥ ~ \ % ot ae és r RS : fo ya - ‘ << - . Tee 1 re ee ee ee ee eee ee ee ee ae ee ee ee SE ee HOUSE AT GUILDFORD, SURREY. 1732 Tus well set-out and proportioned facade is situated in a by-street at the back of Abbott’s Hospital. The pilasters of the doorway stand upon pedestals, a very unusual arrangement at so late a daté as 1731. The door itself is deeply recessed, and with the panelled reveals makes an effective piece of work. The house at Loddon, shown below, is a little similar to this house, though rather clumsy and much later in date. DANY hws A il ui “3 ie) se i pee a Se |! il (Wt | fi lil Aa oo Hh | : lil ill (at ani ll CSC ia Hat Ta lit il at EU mil aad Raab lt Hf “ hi : ee may Cy Ne instil, eeigaas. ti | NA | | | Hi Lips os Zs a a | (WU Hl i LTT lll al awl It i iii UC LL PIE Miwa le (ij = = = = = = = = = = = = = 2 = 4 = 2. a = so = =. = a q i = Aas AW ii 5 = = SS = ee = = = — - q#4q 4 Oo & qd eo q g X N y v oO sys 6 > ONS & “ny 84 44 q SWS MIGNFAST Bets 4) ope amOeenmdecend A 7 eoeorvrvee PRO BSSSSy Lh 78 A Doorway AT CIRENCESTER, 1695. £79 A Doorway at West WYCOMBE, 1722. 180 i Se = Sire oe Bi ty Sl gm so eS ee "MUOX “ADATIOD S,NVITIA LS ‘ASQOF}T NOLIVHSUVD ‘XOOd NIGUVS) Y 18I A GROUP OF RENAISSANCE DOORS RS ARR DCC CORNICE SCALE OF INCHES - 1 2 SCALE OF FEET: 2OOR JAMB CAP AND NECKING 182 AT no period of architectural history has the doorway been invested with more importance than during the period dealt with. It is not amiss, there- fore, to conclude this series of illustrations with a few simple examples. On this page are shown a fine wooden doorcase and door at Abingdon, and gate piers at Ross, in Herefordshire, with remarkably bold carving and urns. ae x? Te ee ee nth. ei. YS aoe i es act CK Door AT PAINswI EY AT STANFORD DINGL Door Door AT CHICHESTER 183 i t 4 = 4 4 ee arate ps at SCoEAesaerig oat att bebe