Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2015 https://archive.org/details/creatorsofdecoraOOdyer_0 / DUVEEN BROTHERS LIBRARY 720 FIFTH AVENUE NEW YORK INIGO JONES After the original painting by Van Dyke Design for the portico of old St. Paul's by Inigo Jones Design for the central portion of the upper story of the banquet hall, Whitehall, by Inigo Jones CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES Being a Survey of the Decorative Periods in England from 1600 to 1800, with Special Reference to the Masters of Applied Art Who Developed the Dominant Styles By WALTER A. DYER AUTHOR OF "THE LURE OF THE ANTIQUE," "EARLY AMERICAN CRAFTSMEN," ETC. ILLUSTRATED WITri SIXTY-FOUR FULL PAGE* OF p HOTOOX 4 PHS Garden City New York DOUBLEDAY, PAGE & COMP, 1917 Copyright, 1917, by DOUBLEDAY, PAGE & COMPANY n'g£/s reserved, including that of translation into foreign languages, including the Scandinavian 1 y*^r WITHDRAWN FROM *' COOPER UNION- LIBRARY ACKNOWLEDGMENT The greater portion of the material in this book appeared originally in the form of a series of magazine articles in Arts and Decoration, with the exception of the chapter on Jean Tijou, which appeared in The Art World. For permission to republish them in book form, the author desires to render grateful acknowledg- ment to the editors and publishers of those periodicals. W. A. D. r CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE L The Development of Applied Art in England 3 II. Inigo Jones 11 III. Daniel Marot 26 IV. Sir Christopher Wren . . . . . 41 V. Grinling Gibbons ....... 54 VI. JeanTijou 68 VII. Thomas Chippendale 84 VIII. Sir William Chambers 98 IX. Robert Adam 109 X. Josiah Wedgwood 123 XI. George Hepplewhite 138 XII. Thomas Sheraton ....... 154 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Inigo Jones. After the original painting by Van Dyke Frontispiece Design for the portico of Old St. Paul's, by Inigo Jones Frontispiece Design for the central portion of the upper story of the banquet hall, Whitehall, by Inigo Jones Frontispiece FACING PAGE Press cupboard of oak, with typical Jacobean ornament, 1650-1675. In the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York 4 Oak wainscot chair, about 1650. Metropolitan Museum of Art 4 Dining table of the plainer Jacobean type, 1650- 1675. Metropolitan Museum of Art ... 5 Small table of oak and walnut, showing the pop- ular spiral turning. 1660-1685. Metropoli- tan Museum of Art 5 Oak gate-leg table, with carved legs and sup- ports. Restoration period, about 1685. Met- ropolitan Museum of Art 5 Chimneypiece and wall decorations designed by Daniel Marot 12 State bed designed by Daniel Marot . . . . 13 vii Viii LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS FACING PAGE Six chairs designed by Daniel Marot "... 16 Typical Charles II or Restoration chair of walnut and cane, with the Flemish foot. From the Bolles collection 17 English chair of carved walnut of the William and Mary period, showing Marot's influence . . 17 English armchair of the period of William and Mary, showing Marot's influence. Metropoli- tan Museum of Art 20 English cabinet of the period of William and Mary, embellished with marquetry of the Dutch-Italian type. Metropolitan Museum of Art 20 Sir Christopher Wren, after the portrait painted by Sir Godfrey Kneller, owned by the Royal Society 21 The west prospect of St. Paul's Cathedral as de- signed by Wren. Begun 1672, finished 1710. From an old print 28 Wall panels, door, and chimneypiece from a mansion of the period of Sir Christopher Wren, with carving showing the influence of Grinling Gibbons. Now in the possession of the Met- ropolitan Museum of Art 29 High chest of drawers of the William and Mary period, with Flemish paneling. Met- ropolitan Museum of Art 32 Late Queen Anne or Early Georgian highboy, beautifully finished in walnut veneer. Note the Dutch legs, broken arch pediment, and brass fittings 32 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS ix PACING PAGS Early Queen Anne chair, with Dutch back, rush bottom, and Spanish foot. Metropolitan Museum of Art 33 Secretary or bookcase desk with the double-arch top introduced during the time of Queen. Anne. Metropolitan Museum of Art A later Queen Anne chair of the more ornate type, made of walnut decorated with carving and gilding. Metropolitan Museum of Art . . Grinling Gibbons, after the portrait by Sir God- frey Kneller Overmantel from Holme Lacy, carved in oak by Grinling Gibbons, now in the possession of the Metropolitan Museum of Art The Stoning of St. Stephen, the famous com- position carved in wood by Grinling Gibbons, now in the Victoria and Albert Museum. The Bishop's Chair, St. Paul's Cathedral, period ^ of James II. A Restoration type with carving in the style of Gibbons 45 The coat of arms of George I, with a graceful mantling of acanthus leaves. Carved in lime wood by Grinling Gibbons, deeply undercut and unpainted. Metropolitan Museum of Art 45 The Last Supper, the reredos painting in St. James's Church, with a carved frame by Grin- ling Gibbons 48 Carving now over the east door of the Throne Room at Windsor Castle, by Grinling Gibbons 48 33 33 36 37 44 X LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS FACING PAGE Wrought iron gates at Eaton Hall, Chester, de- signed by Jean Tijou and perhaps brought from Hampton Court 49 Detail of the lock rail of the centre gate, east front, Hampton Court Palace, designed by- Jean Tijou. The six-inch rule shows the scale 64 One of the twelve panels in the screen about the Fountain Garden at Hampton Court, de- signed by Tijou 64 Tijou' s design for one of the twelve panels in the wrought iron screen about the Fountain Gar- den at Hampton Court 65 Tijou' s design for the gates and wickets in the fence of the Long Walk, Hampton Court . 65 A Louis XV chimneypiece, showing Chinese in- fluence. From "The Gentleman and Cabinet- Maker's Director," by Thomas Chippendale 68 A walnut veneer chair of the Early Georgian or pre-Chippendale period, when the ball-and- claw foot came into vogue, after 1715. Met- ropolitan Museum of Art .69 An American-made chair after a Chippendale pattern of the ladder-back type. Metropoli- tan Museum of Art 69 A Chippendale chair of the Gothic type. Met- ropolitan Museum of Art 70 A Chippendale chair with a back of the French type. Bolles collection 70 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS xi PACING PAGE A ribbon-back Chippendale chair in the more elaborate manner of Louis XV. Courtesy of Duveen Brothers 71 Mahogany tea stand by Chippendale, with pierced gallery. Metropolitan Museum of Art 74 Mahogany card table with straight legs and carved edges, by Chippendale. Metropolitan Museum of Art 74 One of Chippendale's more extravagant designs. A Louis XV sofa from "The Gentleman and Cabinet-Maker's Director" 74 A china cabinet by Chippendale, in modified Chinese style. Metropolitan Museum of Art 76 Two of Chippendale's designs for clock-cases combining Louis XV and Chinese details. From the "Director" 76 Sir William Chambers, after the portrait by Sir Joshua Reynolds 77 An engraving by Marlow and Rooker showing three of the buildings in Kew Gardens de- signed by Sir William Chambers .... 80 Fireplaces designed by Sir William Chambers. From "The Decorative Part of Civil Archi- tecture" 81 Design for a Greek (Doric) casino by Sir Wil- liam Chambers. From "The Decorative Part of Civil Architecture" 86 One of the Chinese buildings in Kew Gardens designed by Chambers 87 Xll LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS FACING PAG* An Ionic temple in Kew Gardens as designed by Chambers 96 Robert Adam, after a painting in the Royal Institute of British Architects 1 97 Design for a bridge from "The Works in Archi- tecture of R. & J. Adam" 100 Designs for marble chimneypieces with mir- rors, from "The Works in Architecture of R. & J. Adam" 101 Designs for mirrors and sideboard in "The Works in Architecture of R. & J. Adam" . 108 Designs for furniture and decorations for the Countess of Derby. From "The Works in Architecture of R. & J. Adam." .... 109 Mirror frame designed by Adam. Metropoli- tan Museum of Art 112 Urn-shaped knife-boxes of satinwood, Adam style. Metropolitan Museum of Art , . . 112 Sedan chair for Queen Charlotte, from "The Works in Architecture of R. & J. Adam" . 112 Chimneypiece with pewter mountings and steel grate, designed by Adam. Metropolitan Mu- seum of Art 113 Satinwood cabinet in Adam style. Metropoli- tan Museum of Art 116 An armchair in Adam style. Bolles collection 116 Josiah Wedgwood, after the portrait by Sir Joshua Reynolds 117 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Xlll FACING PAGE Part of a dinner service of queen's ware made by Wedgwood at Etruria. Metropolitan Mu- seum of Art 124 Decorative jasper placque probably designed by Flaxman and made at Etruria by Wedg- wood. Metropolitan Museum of Art . . 125 Part of a blue and white tea set of jasper ware. Metropolitan Museum of Art 125 A group of jasper pieces made at Etruria. Met- ropolitan Museum of Art 128 A basalt tea set made by Wedgwood at Etruria. Metropolitan Museum of Art 128 Jasper vase in Classic form made at Etruria. Metropolitan Museum of Art . . ^. . . 129 A copy of Wedgwood's famous Portland Vase made at Etruria after his death. Metropoli- tan Museum of Art 129 A vase of black basalt made by Wedgwood & Bentley. Metropolitan Museum of Art . . 129 Pebbleware vases made by Wedgwood & Bentley. Metropolitan Museum of Art . . 132 A toy teapot in black basalt with encaustic enamel decorations. Metropolitan Museum of Art 132 Nine decorative medallions — Classic figures — in blue and white jasper, by Wedgwood & Bentley. Metropolitan Museum of Art . . 133 A typical Wedgwood portrait medallion — the head of Linnaeus. Metropolitan Museum of Art 133 XIV LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS PACING PAGE Designs for Pembroke tables, from "The Cabi- net-Maker's and Upholsterer's Guide," by A. Hepplewhite & Co 140 Design for a secretary, from "The Cabinet- Maker and Upholsterer's Guide," by A. Hepplewhite & Co 141 Chair designs from the "Guide." The right- hand style is the typical Hepplewhite shield- back; the left-hand one is an instance of overlapping with the style usually credited to Sheraton ^ . . . 144 Design for a sideboard, from "The Cabinet- Maker's and Upholsterer's Guide," by A. Hepplewhite & Co 145 A Hepplewhite settee or window seat, showing the Adam influence. Metropolitan Museum of Art 148 Sideboard attributed to Thomas Shearer. Met- ropolitan Museum of Art 148 An early Hepplewhite chair, showing the Chip- pendale influence. Metropolitan Museum of Art 149 A Hepplewhite mahogany pier table, inlaid with satinwood. Metropolitan Museum of Art 149 An American-made shield-back chair in pure Hepplewhite style. Metropolitan Museum of Art ..... / 156 A Hepplewhite shield-back armchair with cane seat. Metropolitan Museum of Art . . . 156 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS XV FACING PAGE An American-made escritoire in the Hepplewhite style. Metropolitan Museum of Art . . . 157 Tambour desk (open) of mahogany with satin- wood inlay, Hepplewhite style. Metropoli- tan Museum 157 Designs for inlaid clock-cases, from Thomas Sheraton's " Drawing-Book" 164 Designs for richly inlaid pier tables, from Sheraton's "Drawing-Book" 165 Two typical chair designs, from Sheraton's "Drawing-Book" 168 A drawing-table in Sheraton style. Metropoli- tan Museum of Art 169 A typical Sheraton table, with inlay on the front and with tapering reeded legs. Metropolitan Museum of Art 169 An American-made chair from one of Shera- ton's designs, showing the typical rectangular back. Metropolitan Museum of Art . . . 176 A Sheraton secretary or bookcase desk, rich in inlay and fitted with many drawers and pigeonholes. Metropolitan Museum of Art ' 176 An inlaid sideboard with knife cases, a brass candelabrum, and a tambour front. From Sheraton's "Drawing-Book" 177 An example of the decadent style of Sheraton's later years. [ " Herculaniums," from his " Cab- inet Dictionary" ' 177 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES CHAPTER I THE DEVELOPMENT OF APPLIED ART IN ENGLAND LEARNING for its own sake, pure culture and erudition, are not held in as high esteem in America as in some of the European coun- tries. The American mind, as a rule, is utilitarian in type. It desires to know why it learns what it learns, to what use it may put its learning. The average American reader demands some practical raison d'etre for any work which purports to be a study or analysis or investigation in a field that does not obviously touch the manifold interests of his daily life. Hence these introductory remarks. Of late years Americans have been taking a more general and studious interest in that branch of de- corative and applied art which is chiefly exemplified in the decoration and furnishing of their homes. Popular taste has been improving. The American householder has begun to demand something better than the builder's architecture of a generation ago 4 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES and the ready-made hodge-podge which filled the homes of that period. And in looking for that better thing, we have begun to appreciate the fact that there are things worth knowing about the styles that have stood the test of time, the merits of which have been recognized by those qualified to judge. The first step in this movement, for it is a move- ment, was the vogue for so-called American Colonial furniture and its accompaniments which spread over the country a few y^ears ago and which has not yet spent its force. Collecting of the antique became a fad, and manufacturers responded to the demand by the production of more or less accurate adaptations and reproductions. That vogue served a good end. It started popular taste in the right direction, and we have now begun to look farther and deeper for something still better. Gradually we have been getting better educated. We have begun to question whether even Chippen- dale is the last word in all that is fine and desirable in furniture style. Some of us have even begun to discard our highly coloured mahogany for the softer walnut, and to-day the shop windows are display- ing quite as many adaptations of Jacobean and Queen Anne styles as Colonial or Georgian. The thing has come upon us rather rapidly, and Dining table of the plainer Jacobean type. 1650-1675. Metropolitan Museum of Art Small table of oak and walnut, Oak gate-leg table, with carved legs showing the popular spiral and supports. Restoration period, turning. 1660-1685. Metro- about 1OS5. Metropolitan Museum politan Museum of Art of Art DEVELOPMENT OF APPLIED ART IN ENGLAND 5 the time seems to have arrived to give a little more thought to the fundamental truths involved. The furnishing of a home is too important and permanent a matter to be hurried through lightly. We need something more than the hasty advice of a sales clerk. And since the American pocketbook is in- volved, the average American will not fail to see the value of a sound basis for discrimination. What is style? What is its significance? What are the distinguishing features of various styles and periods? By what standards shall we judge of ex- cellence? Is all this talk of styles and periods the mere chatter of a pseudo-artistic cult, or does it in some way vitally concern us? It is not because the average American is greatly interested in so highly specialized a branch of history that the following pages have been written, but in order to give him a comprehensive survey of the subject of style development and the more important and fundamental facts that he needs to know in order to distinguish and appreciate what is going on about him in the realm of home furnishing and decoration. Style, according to Webster, is a mode of presen- tation in any of the fine arts. It is the expression of an instinct, a feeling, an appreciation of the beau- tiful which has changed and developed with the alter- 6 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES ing tastes of mankind. In the field of the decorative and applied arts this feeling finds its expression in form, colour, and ornamental details, based chiefly on what has gone before, showing improvement or decadence with the variation of popular taste, its direction changed by many influences, but develop- ing naturally and steadily through the action of explanatory causes. To understand this develop- ment, one must inquire into the influences which affected it before one can fully comprehend its sig- nificance or become familiar with its manifestations. I shall confine myself to the development of style in England, because therein lies our American heri- tage. Our importations of style from France and other countries have usually proved to be exotic and transitory; the English styles are the ones that have always found the surest welcome in English-speaking America. Whether we recognize them or not, we are living constantly amid reminders of England's artistic past, and a full appreciation of the styles that we are reviving to-day depends upon a knowledge of that past. There are leaders of artistic thought in America, particularly in the Middle West, who deride all this harking back to a dead past, who consider all tradi- tion as trammeling, who seek rapid progress. But DEVELOPMENT OF APPLIED ART IN ENGLAND 7 I do not believe their influence to be firmly grounded or permanent. There have always been men with the itch for novelty, but it has not been their work that has survived, but that of masters who based their creations on established principles, on the ex- perience of their predecessors. Of architecture I shall speak in passing for the reason that the styles of interiors and their furnish- ings often followed or were influenced by the chang- ing styles in architecture, or rather, the same in- fluences affected both. They are parallel and cog- nate arts, and some of the leaders in English style development in all lines were architects. Now it seems to me that the development of architectural and decorative style through succeed- ing periods of history becomes more interesting and more easily understood when we turn our attention to the personalities of the leaders of artistic thought, their lives and purposes, their education, ideals, and traditions. Thus may we reincarnate the decora- tive periods, giving them a human significance in- stead of classifying them entirely by names of mon- archs or dynasties or design types or mere dates. Yet it is not entirely easy to follow this plan through the history of period decoration in England, for the lives of the masters overlapped or left gaps in 8 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES the continuity, and some of them were architects, while others were craftsmen, connoisseurs, or de- signers. Still, a fairly continuous line of artistic descent may be traced from the period of the late Renaissance to the nineteenth century, and the lives of the men involved are not without elements of human interest. It is not likely that we shall ever go back to the Gothic or early Renaissance periods for material for our modern homes. Those periods, while Classic from one point of view, were in a measure unformed, and their conditions were so different from those of modern life that they hold little of interest for any but the student and the connoisseur. And our study of personalities must begin at a later date. In the days of the Tudor period or early Renaissance no such artistic leader appeared. Henry VIII was the patron of the Renaissance, largely because of his anti-Papist and hence anti-Gothic sympathies. He brought several artists, architects, and artisans from Italy, including John of Padua; but of John we know little, and his personality was submerged in the composite personality of Henry's court. During the wonderfully creative period of Eliza- beth's reign, when genius in literature, statecraft, DEVELOPMENT OF APPLIED ART IN ENGLAND 9 and commerce flourished, the art impulse was further quickened, but it found its expression in the work of no single man of power. Elizabethan architecture, furniture, interior decoration, and landscape design are worthy of our study as a starting-point, but not through the personality of a master. It was not, in fact, until the Jacobean period that the real spirit of the Renaissance — a genuine revival of Classicism — took form in England, and the first great exponent of English style, Inigo Jones, lived and wrought his work. This Renaissance spirit, further developed by Sir Christopher Wren, followed by the architects, craftsmen, and designers of the Georgian era, continued alive in England until the dawn of the last century, and produced its men of genius. The history of the decorative styles teaches us clearly that every lasting and deserving development has not been a sudden mushroom growth, respond- ing to the demand for novelty, but has been solidly built upon what went before. The Italian Renais- sance was but a revival of the ancient Greek and Roman Classic at the hands of men of originality and creative power. If, as Mr. Frank Alvah Par- sons and other authorities appear to believe, we are witnessing the birth of a new Renaissance in this 10 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES twentieth century, it behooves us to become familiar with the work of the worthiest of our predecessors and the styles upon which our modern revivals and development are based. A study of the lives of those masters of applied art who created and developed the historic styles of England, their artistic creeds, traditions, and training, should form, it seems to me, the soundest basis for a discriminating understanding of the true significance of those styles upon which we are build- ing an art for the beautification of our modern homes. Beginning, therefore, with Inigo Jones, it is my purpose to consider the lives and personalities of eleven of these leaders of artistic thought in England, tracing, at the same time, the contemporary [develop- ment of styles in the cognate arts. CHAPTER II INIGO JONES (1573-1652) IT IS with Inigo Jones, and not with the unknown artists of the Gothic and Tudor periods, that our present consideration must have its begin- ning. He was the first English architect whose name stands out above the others, the first to reflect the spirit of the Renaissance in its classic purity, though living after what is commonly known as the period of the Renaissance. He has been called "the English Vetruvius" and "the English Palladio." He was the father of the Classic revival in English archi- tecture, the first to discard Gothic elements entirely, and when his background and traditions are taken into consideration, the magnitude of his achieve- ment becomes apparent. He was an artistic prophet who led a people into new paths of thought and appreciation. For though his own work was that of an architect, his influence was felt throughout the entire field of decorative and industrial art. He was, indeed, a dictator of style during the reign of Charles I. 12 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES Before sketching his career in detail, it may be well to glance briefly at the background and tradi- tions to which I have referred. • Gothic architecture, the only style that received serious consideration, had passed through the per- pendicular and florid stage and had become rather confused by the beginning of the sixteenth century, so that architects were at a loss which way to turn for leadership. As has been said, Henry VIII encouraged the adoption of Italian Renaissance ideas, though his influence was as much negative as posi- tive, rather anti-Gothic than pro-Renaissance. Gothic architecture had long been associated with the Ro- man Catholic Church, and the Protestant Henry was eager for anything worth while that would sup- plant it. And undoubtedly he did have consider- able artistic appreciation and enthusiasm. It was during Henry's reign, or about 1524, that Holbein settled in England, but his influence on architecture and decoration was not as powerful as that of John of Padua, who brought the Renais- sance principles direct from Italy. John arrived in England about 1544. By the middle of the century the restless, up- reaching spirit of the Elizabethan era began to make itself felt in architecture, home furnishings, Chimneypiece and wall decorations designed by Daniel Marot State bed designed by Daniel Marot INIGO JONES 13 and gardens, as well as in the more active walks of life. It became an age of poetic appreciation and creation, with an increased taste for luxury, comfort, and beauty in living conditions, and this spirit was seeking for a master mind to direct it. During the reign of Elizabeth, which covered the last half of the sixteenth century, the Gothic tra- ditions persisted, but the spirit of the Renaissance grew ever stronger. More and more attention was paid to the suitable designing of houses and furni- ture. As early as 1575 strict rules of proportion, lost sight of in the elaboration of Gothic details, had become a principle of architecture, and the Greek orders were occasionally employed. More or less Classic porticoes, cornices, columns, and pilasters were introduced, and a new system of fenestration. Doors, walls, and ceilings were richly paneled in oak, fireplaces were improved and became a decora- tive feature of the interior, and tapestries and up- holstery came into more general use. All of this was paving the way toward the Palladian style of architecture and the work of Inigo Jones. Andrea Palladio, of Vicenza, Italy, was born in 1518, in the midst of the Italian Renaissance move- ment. He studied Roman architecture and pub- lished a book on the subject in 1570. He died in 14 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES 1580. To him may be traced the influences which gave direction to the work of Inigo Jones and Sir Christopher Wren, and even to the Adam brothers and our American Mclntire in the eighteenth cen- tury. Jones got his inspiration direct from Pal- ladio and was the chief exponent of the Palladian style, which wrought a complete change in English architecture and sounded the knell of Gothic su- premacy. Inigo Jones was born July 15, 1573, in the midst of the Golden Age of Elizabeth. His father was a cloth maker of West Smithfield, London, and Inigo was probably apprenticed at an early age to a joiner. The father died in 1597, leaving no for- tune, and the boy had to make his own way in the world. He early showed an aptitude for drawing and design and later for landscape painting. It is not known where or how he acquired his technique, but his work attracted the attention of the Earl of Pembroke, who sent him to Italy to study land- scape painting. While at Venice he became in- terested in architecture and he visited Rome, where the ruins fascinated him. In 1604 King Christianus of Denmark sent for him and it is said that he designed the Danish pal- INIGO JONES 15 aces of Rosenborg and Fredericksborg, though he appears to have remained in Denmark less than a year. He then accompanied Anne of Denmark to the English Court, where he became the protege of the Queen and of Prince Henry. In 1605 King James gave a court masque — Ben Jonson's 44 The Masque of Blackness." This was the poet's first royal employment, and Jones was appointed to design the scenery and costumes and to stage the masque. In the course of the next few years he served in a similar capacity in London and Oxford. In 1610 he became a sort of stage manager for the Queen and her court at Whitehall and was appointed Surveyor of the Works to the Prince of Wales. Upon the death of Prince Henry in 1613, Jones went again to Italy, where he made a special study of the works of Palladio. He returned to England in 1615 under the patronage of the Earls of Arundel and Pembroke and was made Surveyor of the Works to the King. His duties included the repairing of the royal palaces, the purchasing of art objects, and the production of masques, though this last activity ceased when he quarreled with Jonson. One of his first commissions was the prepara- tion of designs for the remodeling of Westminster, 16 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES but these were never carried out, though he did superintend the alterations in the Star Chamber. On January 12, 1619, the Banqueting House at Whitehall burned down and Jones was ordered to rebuild it. He rose to the emergency, and by June first the new plans had been approved, the ground was cleared, and the corner stone laid. The new building, in the Palladian style, was completed in 1622. In 1620 he was commissioned to make a study of the mysterious ruins at Stonehenge, which he decided had been a temple of the Tuscan order, built by the Romans and consecrated to the wor- ship of the god Caelus. In this theory he had but few followers even then. In 1618 he commenced work on the chapel at Lincoln's Inn, which was completed in 1623. It was a well proportioned structure, bastard Gothic in style. The Doric pilasters in the crypt illustrate the architect's fondness for everything Roman, and yet the edifice was truer to Gothic traditions than any other of that day. Other works of this period were the Chapel for the Infanta at Somerset House in the Strand, the water gate to the town house of the Duke of Buck- ingham, and the Queen's House at Greenwich, be- Six chairs designed by Daniel Marot o o "3 "> 11 1) c > d >- ,J 5 P OJ .±2 (J l» „ «J O u = c O — ^3 CQ u ^ -a -c u c +■* - r: c 'I* INIGO JONES 17 gun for Anne, queen of James I, and completed in 1635 for Henrietta Maria, queen of Charles I. Then he started on the restoration of St. Paul's, completing the plans and the west portico. Jones continued in office under Charles I and became even more powerful as an arbiter of taste. He built the theatre of the Hall of Barber-Surgeons in Monkwell Street, London; Somerset House, York House, and Ashburnham House, Westminster, and designed the western side of Lincoln's Inn Fields. Finally he planned the square or piazza of Covent Garden for the Earl of Bedford, and a chapel for the square, which was begun in 1631 and finished in 1638. This was his last great work, for though he lived fourteen years longer and made designs for both palaces and private residences, the Civil War prac- tically put an end to building, and most of his greatest tasks were never completed. The fall of royalty was a severe blow to him, and he died, an unhappy man, on June 21, 1652. Inigo Jones took up his residence at Scotland Yard in 1615, and lived there quietly the rest of his life. He was a Roman Catholic and he never married. He was never in perfect health, which perhaps accounts for his occasional tendency to quarrel and for the despondency of his latter years. 18 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES Besides houses, he designed cabinets, grottoes, gates, garden fronts, church towers, bridges, and interiors. In his portfolio were numerous designs for ceilings, walls, wainscot panels and moldings, wall fountains, etc. Largely on account of the war he left no school of design, though one loyal follower, John Webb, kept the Palladian traditions alive until Sir Chris- topher Wren took up the work where Jones had left it. The Palladian style of Inigo Jones was a form of Italian Renaissance based on the Roman and Greek, as opposed to the Gothic. He wrought the eman- cipation of English ideas from Gothic traditions and turned the attention of architects and designers to the fundamental principles of proportion. His style was perhaps weighed down too much by Roman heaviness, especially his mantels and doors, but he led the way to better things. He introduced Greek columns, pediments, and capitals, and his interiors abounded in fluted columns and pilasters and the lavish use of oak. Inigo Jones was undoubtedly born with an eye for proportion, as, I think, was Stanford White, and that means genius in architecture. He was more careful than any of his predecessors of measured INIGO JONES 19 working drawings, and for the first time everything, including details, was drawn to scale. Inigo Jones was a pioneer in English decorative art, but the work of those who followed him was required to complete the artistic revolution which he began. In furniture design it is not altogether easy to trace the influence of Inigo Jones, for there was no equivalent to the Palladian style in Jacobean furni- ture. Still, there was a constant improvement in taste in all the artistic development of the period, with a cordial reception of foreign influences, and Jones undoubtedly was largely responsible for this. The tapestry manufactory at Mortlake, founded in 1619 in imitation of the Gobelin works in France, 1 was one of the most important decorative enterprises of the early Jacobean period, and the general de- mand was for better home furnishings. Sir Henry Wotton, British ambassador to Venice in 1604, sent home some specimens of Italian wood carving and published his "Elements of Architecture." Sir Wal- ter Raleigh sent for Flemish workmen to carve an elaborate oak chimneypiece in Youghal, Ireland. These and similar instances were indications of a popular trend toward something different and better. Jacobean furniture design and architecture were Sir Christopher Wren, after the portrait painted by Sir Godfrey Kneller. Owned by the Royal Society INIGO JONES 21 carved, and cupboards, the ancestors of the modern sideboard. The term Jacobean or Stuart is rather loosely given to the greater part of the century, from the beginning of the reign of James I in 1603 to the end of James IPs reign in 1689. But since this interval included two distinct periods of style development, it seems logical to divide it into the Jacobean period, comprising the reigns of James I and Charles I (1603-1649), and the Restoration period, including the reigns of Charles II and James II (1660-1689), with the unproductive Commonwealth or Crom- wellian period intervening between the two. Gradually furniture design emerged from the crudities and limitations of the Gothic, though re- taining some of the Gothic traditions of sturdiness and virility. Eventually the Jacobean period saw the triumph of those foreign influences which began to be felt as early as the reign of Henry VIII. At first, under James I, the styles continued in a transition state, Tudor in feeling, reflecting the in- fluence of the preceding century. Renaissance de- tails were added, producing furniture rather more formal and less original. Designs became flatter and the treatment of floral ornament more stiff and conventional, the ornaments being often applied. 22 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES The Tudor style died hard, but at length the Renaissance influence became dominant. Growing political and commercial intercourse with the Low Countries had its effect, Dutch and Flemish arts were introduced, and also the styles of France under Louis XIII and Louis XIV. Most of the Jacobean furniture was rectangular in form and heavily underbraced, the legs of chairs and tables perpendicular, chair backs straight and seats flat. But though the forms were severe, the decoration was noteworthy, chiefly flat surface orna- ment and carving in low relief. The most prominent details were strap-work; half balusters, spindles, and drops; a running pattern of contiguous or overlapping circles or figure eights; semi-circles filled with petals; carved jewels and bosses; geometrical arrangements of panels, such as the lozenge within a square or rectangle; the rounded arch, and more or less elab- orate double scrolls. Mouldings and panels were much employed. The spiral form was often used in chair legs, cupboards, and chests of drawers, not turned on a lathe, but laboriously carved out by hand. A favourite ornament for table legs, posts of bedsteads, and the supports of cupboards and cabi- nets, was the swelling bulb, usually carved, a sur- vival of the Tudor period. INIGO JONES 23 As the period progressed, the strap-work became more and more intricate, and some of the finer pieces of furniture were inlaid with holly and other light woods. Carved figures were gradually sup- planted by turned supports and uprights, and flat surfaces were more completely covered with geo- metrical panels and decorated with applied orna- ment in real or imitation ebony. Oak was the universal furniture material of the Jacobean period, but toward the end exotic woods began to be imported into England and the Low Countries. Where marquetry had hitherto been chiefly in ebony and ivory, Brazilian kingwood and other highly coloured woods began to be used for inlay, and furniture was made occasionally in wal- nut, cedar, pear wood, etc., as well as in oak. The most prominent pieces of furniture of the period were chairs, tables, chests, and cupboards, heavy in form and carpenter-made, but beauti- fully carved in sharp, low relief on their broad sur- faces. Chairs were less common at first than joint-stools, forms, and benches. The chairs were of the wainscot type, more or less carved, or else plain turned chairs with three or four legs. Then more elaborate turning was introduced and lighter forms of the 24 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES wainscot chair. One type had no solid panel in the back, but two or three open arches. During the reign of Charles I twisted, spiral, and turned work became more common on the chairs, indicating Dutch influence, and a French chair was introduced, lighter than the wainscot, with turned legs and back and seat of leather or embroidered fabric. The typical table was a heavy, rectangular affair of oak, though not so cumbersome as the Elizabethan table, with bulb-turned supports and often rails carved in arabesques or lunette patterns. Less common was a lighter, smaller table, w T ith a single hinged leaf and a swinging leg to support it — the forerunner of the gate-leg table which was not fully developed until the period of the Restoration. Oak chests and cupboards were common, the latter, prototype of the sideboard, being perhaps the most truly typical piece of furniture of the period. The earlier ones were chest-like, but they soon took the form of a raised dresser. Two types were de- veloped—the press cupboard and the court cupboard. The former was closed in front, and the latter open below — a sort of chest on spiral, turned, or carved supports. Most of these cupboards were richly carved and paneled. Toward the close of the period the chest of drawers appeared. INIGO JONES 25 Such, then, was the furniture of the period of Inigo Jones — still heavy in form, but showing a vitality in style that we have lately begun to appre- ciate, and leading up to the more elegant creations of the period of the Restoration. CHAPTER III DANIEL MAROT {Circa 1661-1720) WHILE Sir Christopher Wren was the im- mediate successor of Inigo Jones, and the mantle of the master of English archi- tecture fell upon him, his ripest work was not done until the reign of Queen Anne, and meanwhile the period of the Restoration and the Dutch invasion had added their part to the development of Eng- lish style. And since the Anglo-Dutch period had its own man of genius, a contemporary of Wren and Gibbons, it seems logical to introduce him at this stage in our history, though he was not an English- man, nor, strictly speaking, in the direct line of English artistic succession. I refer to that remark- able French designer, Daniel Marot. Marot himself produced less effect, perhaps, on English styles than did some of the other masters whom we shall discuss, though a clever designer of notable work; he was rather the most prominent figure in a period of style development which had a profound influence on subsequent periods. He 26 DANIEL MAROT 27 typified the swing of British taste away from pro- vincialism and toward greater luxury and ornate- ness. As Inigo Jones was rounding out an honourable career, the revolution took place which resulted in the establishment of the Commonwealth under Cromwell. For ten years artistic development in England was at a standstill. We sometimes hear of the Cromwellian style, but it was rather an austere lack of style. The period of the Common- wealth was a passing phase of restriction. With the accession of Charles II to the English throne in 1660, a decided reaction took place. The traditions of both the Jacobean period and the Cromwellian era were largely forgotten so far as furniture and decoration were concerned, though in architecture Wren soon took up the work of the Palladians where Jones left off. Levity and gaiety became a marked characteristic of the life of the English court, and this was reflected in the homes of the people. Walnut replaced English oak as the popular furniture wood, and a much greater ornate- ness and freedom of line became the rule in furniture design, with much carved scroll work, luxurious up- holstery, and the increasing popularity of inlay. The interregnum of the Commonwealth was bar- 28 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES ren of artistic production. A severe, undecorative type of furniture, including a development of the wainscot chair with leather seat and back, was in favour with the Roundheads, and has been unde- servedly dignified with the name of Cromwellian style. With the return of Charles II to the throne in 1660, a reaction became immediately evident, and a taste for greater comfort, refinement of ornament, and elegance of form. Louis XIV was King of 1 France from 1643 to 1715, covering the reigns of Charles II, James II, William and Mary, and Anne. : Charles II brought back with him the manners and tastes of France, Dutch and French importations : became the vogue, and the Louis XIV influence was dominant in England for years. Dutch and Flem- ish workmen were introduced and the Continental spirit prevailed. In the form and ornament of furniture of the period we can trace the French influence, with a tendency toward lighter, more graceful effects. The architectural note in furniture disappeared almost entirely. Italian, Spanish, and Flemish details are to be discovered in the English style. Turned work and spirals were used on chair and table legs. A higher relief ornament of Baroque curves, twisted and reversed, supplanted the straight The west prospect of St. Paul's Cathedral as designed by Wren. Begun in 1672, finished in 1 710. From an old print Wall panels, door, and chimneypiece from a mansion of the period of Sir Christopher Wren, with carving showing the influence of Grinling Gibbons. Now in the possession of the Metropolitan Museum of Art DANIEL MAROT 29 lines, simple curves, and low relief ornament of the Jacobean period. Inlay was indulged in more freely, and pierced carving and cut work of scrolls and double scrolls, etc., on the backs, legs, and under- braces of chairs. The tulip and other foreign design details appeared in the carving, and a peculiar hook- like Flemish double scroll on the legs of chairs and tables, the forerunner of the cabriole leg. Walnut at once began to be more popular than oak, and by the end of Charles IFs reign was the fashionable cabinet wood. Oak, however, was still used for wainscoting and cedar for doors, and pine occasionally for purposes of painting or gilding. About 1675 clocks and small tables began to be decorated with marquetry, and inlay of lignum vitae, amboyna, rosewood, sycamore, ebony, ivory, mother- of-pearl, and other materials increased in popularity. At first the designs were largely the acanthus, foli- age, scroll-work, etc., of Italian inspiration, used in the Dutch method. Cane panels and insets became popular for the seats and backs of chairs, as well as upholstery. Cane furniture was received by Holland from Spain and Italy, and was introduced into England. Expen- sive textiles and embroideries became more common in upholstery. 30 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES The typical chairs of the period were a distinct innovation. They were of beech or walnut, with high, narrow backs. Seats and backs were of cane, upholstery, or tooled leather. They were often sur- mounted with a crown or Tudor rose, and the carved and pierced scroll-work of the cresting, sides of the back, and underbraces showed unmistakable evi- dences of foreign influence. In general, there were two types, Flemish and Spanish. The former had a cane panel in the back with a carved border of scroll- work, supported by turned or twisted uprights. The legs were usually roughly S-shaped, with the Flemish scroll foot and a broad scroll-work underbrace in front. The Spanish type had a solid back of cane or tooled leather, turned legs, and the flaring Spanish foot. Table legs became slenderer and more elaborately turned. Long oak dining-tables, with turned legs and carved aprons, gave place to walnut dining- tables with two leaves. The most noteworthy in- novation of the period, however, was the gate-leg table, which had just begun to make its appearance during the reign of Charles I and which owed its introduction largely to the need for a small, light table to serve the growing vogue of tea, coffee, and ;oa drinking and card playing. It had a round, DANIEL MAROT 31 oval, square, or oblong top, with two hinged leaves supported on legs which pulled forward like gates. Eight or more turned legs and supports were its noticeable feature, and when closed it was narrow and occupied small space. Ordinary chests gradually gave place to chests of drawers and cupboards with drawers. These, together with cabinets, clock cases, etc., were often elaborately inlaid. The beds, however, continued to be large and heavy, with clumsy testers and stuffy hangings. In 1685 the persecution of Protestants in France and the revocation of the Edict of Nantes by Louis XIV sent many refugees into England. Among them were skilled designers and workmen who brought their styles with them, so that the English furniture of the time of James II was noticeably Louis XIV in character. When James departed in 1689, leaving the Eng- lish throne to Mary and her royal consort, styles underwent a subtle change. The Dutch William imported Dutch workmen who added to the style of the previous reign a touch of what had been the Dutch development of the Italian Renaissance and the later French styles. The chairs, for example, while still showing a general similarity of line to 32 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES those of Charles II, became somewhat heavier. The predominating type had turned or carved legs, with curved, crossed stretchers, and carved, uphol- stered, or cane backs. The Spanish and Flemish feet vanished. It was at this time that Daniel Marot came to do his work in England. To begin with, Marot had every advantage of training and tradition. He lived and learned dur- ing the progressive artistic period of Louis XIV and was associated with the artistic leaders of his day. He came from a family of craftsmen and de- signers. His grandfather, Girard Marot, was a skillful and successful cabinet-maker. His father, Jean Marot, who was born about 1620, became an architect of considerable importance in Paris, and also a clever engraver. Daniel was born in Paris in 1661. (The date is doubtful; some biographers have placed it as early as 1650). He probably worked for his father for some years, and learned from him the arts of design- ing and engraving. But Daniel had a more fertile and versatile mind than his father, and it was not long before he was seeking greater scope for his activities. He caught the spirit of the Louis XIV * * 2 ^ CUD. £ ~ ~ ~ UJ -C c ■= c c <2 ■£ ^ C (L> o % a>, . « o »- a. CD ^ .,5 O is 8. O rt v- _ a» _ %»~ I a; •C O u . O D- "O o j= o c i: J3 2 * •< O 03 D. U 3 C ^ r- ^ ^ ° '> 5 £= -a ^ »- CD CO £ C 'u. d) T3 C P 2a +^ 3 3 c OJ C-J D. 3 3 >- P3 ■5 E 2 3 O DANIEL MAROT 33 style, with all its baroque luxuriance, and by 1680 he had become one of the leading designers of the day. Le Brun was at this time engaged in his tapestry works and was drawing on the best artistic tal- ent in the land. He made use of Marot's skill, as, well as that of Jean de Pautre, Andre Charles Boulle, and others of less prominence. From these two masters particularly young Daniel learned much. He is known to have done considerable work for Boulle, especially the designing of bracket clocks in a style which we find echoed by Chippendale later. But the Marots were Huguenots, and in 1685 they fled from France with their fellow Protestants. Daniel, like many others, went first to Holland, and there he found a ready welcome. For his fame had spread across the border, and William, the Stadt- holder of Orange, with all his peculiarities, was a man with a ripe appreciation for artistic excellence. William commanded his services at once, and Marot designed and installed new decorations for the palace at Loo, near Zutphen. Later he designed the interiors in the Chateau de Voorst. This work was all in the French manner of the period, but the Dutch environment no doubt had 34 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES an influence on Marot and his style was modified thereby. When the Stadtholder became William III of England, in 1689, he sent for Marot. The records are not very clear or uniform on this point, but it is believed that Marot went to England in 1689, and became royal architect and Master of the Works. This position must have given him greater power over the trend of artistic taste in England than he has generally been credited with. Of his architec- tural achievements, little is known; no English building of note has been attributed to him. His work was chiefly in the designing of interiors and furniture, and though little remains to which his name can with certainty be attached, he left his mark on the styles of the period. His principal known work was the adornment of Hampton Court Palace. No doubt he worked with Wren in the construction of the new wing, and he designed most of the new furniture which William caused to be placed in Hampton Court and Wind- sor Castle. He probably designed the great bed of state, and other beds, chairs, mirrors, etc., were built to his design for the royal palaces. It is likely, too, that he designed decorations and furni- ture for other mansions and palaces in the realm. DANIEL MAROT 35 In 1698 he redesigned some of the gardens at Hamp- ton Court. The date of Marot's death is not definitely known. He was still alive in 1718, and it is thought that he died in England shortly after that. No por- trait of him has been left to us, and we do not know what sort of man he was. But we do know some- thing of his style. If he was not a man of genius, he was at least highly gifted. Fortunately, Marot was an engraver as well as a designer, and many of his designs, in France and later, were engraved on copper and printed for the use of cabinet-makers and manufacturers. A num- ber of these plates were brought together in 1712 at Amsterdam and printed in a book called "Oeuvre da Sieur D. Marot, Architecte de Guillaume III, Roy de la Grand Bretagne." Later another book of engravings appeared, entitled "Nouveau Livre d? Ornaments pour UUtilitee des Sculptures, etc. D. Marot, Architecte de Guillaume III, Roy (f Angle- terre, etc.' 9 While in Holland he published six plates of ironwork designs. " Das Ornamentwerk des Daniel Marot" was published in Berlin in 1892, from old plates. These designs show a large, powerful, if elabo- rate style, bearing the earmarks of Louis XIV. 36 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES Marot's work, like Boulle's, was sumptuous, even extravagant. His scope was broad, his pencil facile and clever. His interiors were often rich and harmonious, if somewhat over-elaborate. He designed fireplaces, chimneypieces, and panels for walls and ceilings. His designs for carvings included mouldings, cupids, and swags or festoons that suggest Gibbons's later work. He designed all sorts of furniture, girandoles, wall brackets, decorative sculpture, fountains, monu- ments, picture and mirror frames, garden vases, garden plans, ironwork, and state coaches. His textile designs were also noteworthy, and included embroidery, petit point, velours patterns, etc. He was, moreover, a prolific designer of gold and silver plate, including tea urns and cream jugs. His chairs were heavy, elaborate affairs, suggest- ing at once Charles II, Louis XIV, and Dutch in- fluences. His state beds were huge, with mag- nificent carved headboards, often capped with plumes and with voluminous draperies of silk or velvet. He also designed the remarkable silver-plated furniture for which the monarch showed a strange preference. Finally, he was a designer of clocks and watches, the tall-case or grandfather clock owing its develop- ment in a large measure to him. Grinling Gibbons, after the portrait by Sir Godfrey Kneller Overmantel from Holme Lacy, carved in oak by Grinling Gibbons, now in the possession of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York DANIEL MAROT 37 One of Marot's design motifs, which he did not learn from Boulle, was a head or pictorial subject, often carved, inserted in medallion form in a heavy framework of ornament. In some of his pieces inlay took the form of geometrical, floral, and ani- mal patterns, combined with marquetry in warmly tinted exotic woods, all marked by an unsurpassed degree of excellence in workmanship. The furniture styles of the William and Mary period deserve to be better known. They have com- monly been confused with the styles of the Restora- tion on the one hand and of Queen Anne on the other, though they are distinct from either. The confusion of William and Mary furniture with that of Louis XIV is more natural, since the resemblance is greater. However, there is already to be observed a tendency among modern designers of reproductions to popu- larize the William and Mary style, and we are likely soon to value it more highly. The furniture of this period was perhaps better suited to domestic uses than any that preceded it, though the Queen Anne furniture surpassed it in this respect. The demand for greater comfort con- tinued, as well as the demand for tasteful ornament. William's nationality, the close commercial rela- tions with Holland, the importation of Dutch work- 38 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES men, and the influence of Daniel Marot were all factors in the style development of the period. The popularity of Flemish features gave way presently to the Dutch and Huguenot influence, and William and Mary furniture is, at bottom, Louis XIV in style. And the Louis XIV style, it should be re- membered, was based on the Italian. Marot's designs, though somewhat more elaborate and florid than most others, were fairly typical of the period. They show considerable carving, but this gradually gave place to inlay, especially on the flat surfaces of cabinets, chests of drawers, etc. Turning continued in vogue, and japanning became popular. During the reign of William and Mary the age of walnut was at its height, though walnut continued to be the fashionable cabinet wood until it was superseded by mahogany in the eighteenth century. Marquetry of the Dutch type was most popular from about 1675 to 1700, and elaborate inlay work was done on oak, walnut, chestnut, and beech in various exotic woods and other materials. The designs were largely realistic foliage and flowers in the Dutch style, giving place later to intricate scrolls. One of the most noteworthy developments of the period was the high chest of drawers, which became DANIEL MAROT 39 known in Queen Anne's day as the highboy (French haut-bois). At first this was comparatively small and stood on short bracket or ball feet. Later the drawers were mounted on six legs, usually orna- mented with a bulbous or cup-shaped form in the turning, fixed to a shallow plinth, or joined near the floor by a curving underframe. It was capped by a straight cornice and was frequently embellished with marquetry of the Italian or Dutch type. It was usually made in two sections, an upper and a lower, for ease in moving. There was also a Dutch type of desk, similar to the later secretary. The chairs followed the Continental lead in form and ornament. The transition was gradual from the Spanish-Flemish type to the Dutch adaptation of Louis XIV. The legs of chairs and tables often showed the cup-shaped turning, with the waving line in the underbracing. Cane and upholstery con- tinued in use in the chairs, but solid backs of cane took the place of the narrow panels of the Restoration. In the following reign of Queen Anne (1702-1714) furniture styles underwent a further change, and Marot's influence appears to have waned. A dis- cussion of the styles of this period will be reserved for another chapter. Marot's style was marked by an elaboration of 40 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES detail which was also noticeable in a few other decorative lines during the last decade of the seven- teenth century. Jean Tijou's book of designs for wrought ironwork, published in 1693, shows some- thing of this. So do the wood carvings of Grinling Gibbons. There was a noticeable artistic kinship among these men. Meanwhile, architecture had been following a development of its own, strongly influenced by the French, but nevertheless a true development of the Palladian treatment of Inigo Jones. Sir Chris- topher Wren had been doing his earlier work in this period, and the achievements of that remarkable man will be made the subject for the next chapter. CHAPTER IV SIR CHRISTOPHER WREN (1632-1723) THE work of Sir Christopher Wren, mathema- tician, scientist, and architect, a man of ex- traordinary powers, marks, in many respects, the climax of Classic style development in England. As I have before pointed out, the period of the so- called English Renaissance fell in the first half of the sixteenth century, when the influence of Henry VIII and John of Padua were paramount. But the real Renaissance, slow to mature, came to its own in England nearly two hundred years later, when Sir Christopher Wren, following the pioneer work of Inigo Jones, developed that form of Classicism which is largely Renaissance in spirit, but which is usually termed Early Georgian to distinguish it from the later Classic renderings of Adam and Chambers. The term is somewhat of a misnomer, however, since Wren was at the height of his power before the reign of George I. Wren was England's greatest architect. That was partly because of his genius, partly because of the 42 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES unusual opportunities that fell to his lot. He was, moreover, the chief conservator of England's highest artistic traditions. Of all the masters of architecture and applied art in England, his achievements were the most noteworthy, his influence the most lasting, his figure looms largest. Christopher Wren was born in Knowle, Wiltshire, October 20, 1632. He was a son of Dr. Christopher Wren, a noted mathematician and fellow of St. John's College, Oxford, and a nephew of the Bishop of Ely. He was an uncommonly precocious boy, and as early as 1644 he was described by Evelyn as "that miracle of a youth." He entered Oxford University when about fourteen years of age and promptly dis- tinguished himself for his unusual ability in mathe- matics. Incidentally, he dabbled a bit in poetry. In 1652 he received the Master of Arts degree for his work in mathematics and was made a fellow of All Soul's College. He then became interested in astronomy, and in 1657 was made Professor of Astronomy at Gresham. In 1661 he became Savilian Professor of Astronomy at Oxford. In 1663 he was elected a fellow of the Royal Society, and contributed many learned trea- tises. He also produced, about this time, a num- SIR CHRISTOPHER WREN 43 ber of important inventions and discoveries in the field of mechanics. Architecture, however, was to become Wren's great work in life, and all this time he had been studying that subject and gaining skill in drawing. Even during the period of the Commonwealth, when building and architectural development were at a standstill, and furniture reverted to a styleless type, Wren had been studying both current tastes and historic architecture. His first architectural work of significance was the chapel of Pembroke College, Cambridge, a com- mission which he obtained through the influence of his uncle, Bishop Matthew Wren. This was com- pleted and dedicated in 1665. This and other work attracted attention. Following the tradition of Inigo Jones, Wren sought to produce beauty through proportion rather than ornament. In this he was so successful that in 1661 he was introduced to Charles II, probably by Evelyn. Jones and Webb were dead and Sir John Denham, Surveyor of the Works, was not their equal in ability. The king, therefore, engaged Wren to assist Denham in the completion of the palace at Greenwich. Work- ing under Denham, Wren had an opportunity to study the work of Inigo Jones. The Puritans had SIR CHRISTOPHER WREN 45 To give a list of Wren's London buildings in their chronological order is impossible, for their number was great and work on the various ones overlapped. Between 1668 and 1718 he designed or built at least fifty-five churches and a dozen important public buildings. There were theatres, palaces, hospitals, public halls, and private mansions too numerous to mention in detail. One of his biographers, James Elmes, gives a list of 132 notable works. Unfortunately, a number of Wren's churches have since been destroyed or have been hopelessly altered, but enough of his work remains to give a fairly clear idea of the volume and dignity of it. Per- haps the most famous of his London buildings were the Church of St. Stephen in Walbrooke, St. Mary- le-Bow, the Monument, and the Cathedral of St. Paul. St. Stephen's was built between 1671 and 1677, with huge Doric pillars 202 feet high. For taste and proportion it has been considered the equal of anything in Italy. St. Paul's, however, was Wren's most monumental work. It was built be- tween 1675 and 1710 and included a wonderful amount of detail work, the most notable of which were the carvings of Grinling Gibbons, of which more anon. 46 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES Outside of London, one of the first of the more notable buildings of this period was the theatre at Oxford, completed in 1669. The Seaman's Hos- pital at Greenwich is considered, in many respects, the finest of Wren's work and the most noteworthy building of its kind in England. Wren's alterations in Hampton Court Palace, which were begun in 1689 and finished in 1718, are also famous. In 1673 Wren resigned his professorship at Ox- ford to devote his entire attention to architecture. In 1674 he was knighted for his services. In 1675 he was appointed chief advisor in the establish- ment of the royal observatory at Greenwich. About this time Wren married the daughter of Sir Thomas Coghill, by whom he had one son, Christopher. She died, and he married an Irish lady, a daughter of the Baron of Lifford. In 1680 he was elected president of the Royal Society and was appointed architect of Chelsea College. In 1684 he became Comptroller of Works of Windsor Castle, and in 1688, on the death of Denham, he became Surveyor-General. He was twice a member of Parliament, in 1685 and 1700. In 1718 Wren, through a court intrigue, was ousted from his position and retired from active life. Up to this time he had lived in Scotland Yard, SIR CHRISTOPHER WREN 47 near the former home of Inigo Jones. In 1718 he moved to St. James Street, Westminster. Wren died on February 25, 1723, at the age of ninety-one, and was interred with honour in St. Paul's. The cathedral had been completed, and Wren, unlike Inigo Jones, lived to see the crowning of his work. He was a small, slight man, naturally frail, but he managed to retain good health and enjoy an unusually long life of activity, largely be- cause of his exemplary habits and his practical knowl- edge of physiology. He was modest, devout, virtu- ous, companionable. He left St. Paul's, England's noblest temple; Hampton Court, England's largest and finest palace; Greenwich, England's most beautiful hospital, not to mention a dozen other buildings that stand pre- eminent. Wren was twenty years old when Inigo Jones died, and he followed the Palladian, anti-Gothic traditions of his predecessor. He was an even greater stickler for pure proportion than Jones, many of his buildings being almost devoid of added ornament. In his domestic work he created the best of what has come to be known as the Queen Anne style. Unlike Jones, Wren never visited Italy, and owing to his studies in France he was chiefly influenced by Wrought iron gates at Eaton Hall, Chester, designed by Jean Tijou and perhaps brought from Hampton Court SIR CHRISTOPHER WREN 49 sound understanding of the principles of decorative art — a desire that survived him for nearly a century. He founded a school and lived to see it flourish. His work was carried on more or less consistently by Burlington, Vanbrugh, Hawksmoor, Gibbs, Archer, James, Kent, Campbell, and other architects of less distinction, and later Sir William Chambers and Robert Adam fell heir to the Classic inheritance. Through the influence of Jones and Wren the Palladian tradition found expression in the interiors of the Queen Anne period in spite of the popularity of furniture of the Dutch type. On the actual de- signing of furniture, however, it does not appear that Wren attempted to exert any appreciable in- fluence. It was following an evolution of its own. I have already spoken of the furniture styles of the William and Mary period in the chapter on Daniel Marot. Toward the end of that period and at the beginning of Queen Anne's reign (1702-1714) Dutch elements continued to dominate, Dutch lines becoming more marked in the form of the furni- ture, while the French elements of Louis XIV were largely abandoned, to remain in the background until Chippendale and his contemporaries introduced the Louis XV style. The flamboyance of the Restora- tion and Marot types of ornament gave place to a 50 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES decorative style in furniture which, if less elegant, possessed more inherent grace and virility. As the period advanced, foreign elements were largely assimilated and something approaching a distinctly English style was developed. For this reason, if for no other, the Queen Anne styles de- serve a higher rating than they have sometimes re- ceived. The forms were better adapted to use than any that had preceded them. They tended toward greater comfort, lightness, and simplicity. Curves appeared more abundantly, especially in the legs and backs of chairs. Rectangular forms were modified. The straight turned leg gave place to the cabriole and underbracing largely disappeared. The cyma curve was generally adopted in chair backs, the legs of chairs, tables, highboys, lowboys, etc.; on the scroll tops of highboys and secretaries, and on the aprons of highboys, lowboys, etc. The mirror frames of the period showed the same motif. Carv- ing became more restrained and simpler in design. In general, more attention was paid to form than to ornament. Walnut continued to be the popular wood, and veneering was more generally employed. The fash- ion for marquetry gradually declined. Incidentally, there grew up a craze for lacquered furniture, and SIR CHRISTOPHER WREN 51 this, with the attendant vogue for Chinese orna- ment, carried further at a later date by Chambers and Chippendale, presented the one confusing and discordant decorative element of the period. The typical chair of the period was relatively large, with simpler, more graceful lines than those of the previous period, and was, in general, the forerunner of the Chippendale chair. The seat was broad and deep, with curved outlines. The back was still comparatively high and narrow shouldered, shaped for comfort, and tilted back from the perpendicular. The outline was a continuous curve, and in place of the rectangular panel of the Restoration there was a broad, vase-shaped or fiddle-shaped splat. The typ- ical leg was the cabriole or bandy-leg, with the round Dutch foot; the ball-and-claw foot was of later date. Often the front legs only were cabriole, the back legs being straight or slightly curved. Carving was reduced to a few details, such as a shell on the knee of the leg and in the middle of the top of the back. Most of the chairs were of plain or veneered walnut, though a few were more elabor- ately decorated with carving and gilding or lacquer. The roundabout or corner chair was an introduc- tion of this period, and also the banister-back, slat- back, and Windsor chairs of the cottages, though 52 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES these were not in the direct line of style develop- ment. Styles in tables followed a development similar to that of the Queen Anne chair. Various sorts of small, light tables and stands were a feature of the period. The tripod stand was introduced and tray- top tables, small leaf tables, and a variety of tea, card, and side tables were popular. The high chest of drawers was developed into the highboy, in which the six turned legs gave place to four cabrioles, and brass drawer pulls and escutcheons became common. A double round arch was used at the tops of highboys, bookcases, etc., and later the broken arch or sw T an-neck pediment was introduced. The lowboy, or dresser, was similar to the lower part of the highboy, without the upper chest of drawers. Bureaus, cabinets, corner cupboards and double chests of drawers were all representative of the period. The slant-top desk or scrutoire, with brass fittings and short cabriole or bracket legs, came into vogue, and the tall clock case was improved and often pro- vided with the broken arch pediment at the top. For the first time the bedstead underwent a genuine im- provement, becoming lighter, with slenderer posts, cabriole legs, and the broken arch on the headboard. The typical Queen Anne mirror frame was a flat SIR CHRISTOPHER WREN 53 piece of walnut, shaped with a jigsaw and orna- mented with a moderate amount of gilding. During the reign of George I (1714-1727) and the early part of George IPs reign, furniture styles underwent a gradual transition from Queen Anne to Chippendale. The ball-and-claw foot on the cabriole leg came into vogue about 1715. The French influence again began to make itself felt. An increasing fondness for lacquered furniture and Chinese types of ornament and form became manifest and various other elements entered in, so that the way was prepared for the versatility and occasional extravagances of the Chippendale period which followed. The introduction of mahogany, too, made a vast difference. In fact, there were so many influ- ences at work that no genuine Classic revival in fur- niture is noticeable, in spite of Wren's predominance in the field of architecture, until the time of Robert Adam. For the moment the development of style in architecture and furniture, though each undoubtedly felt the influence of the other, was traveling along separate lines, which did not converge for fifty years. Meanwhile, we will turn back to the days of Sir Christopher Wren for a consideration of the special contributions of Grinling Gibbons and Jean Tijou to the decorative styles of that period. CHAPTER V GRINLING GIBBONS (1648-1721) IT IS possible that Grinling Gibbons, in spite of his genius as a craftsman, might have lived and died in comparative obscurity if it had not been for the fact that the spirit of the times in which he lived demanded just the sort of work he could do so marvelously well. Sir John Evelyn discovered him and Sir Christopher Wren took him in hand and made the most of his talents, for Wren's work de- manded interior embellishment and that was just what Gibbons could supply. Grinling Gibbons was a wood carver who did most of his work under Wren in the latter part of the seven- teenth and the early eighteenth centuries. In some way he acquired the spirit of the Italian Renais- sance in his work, and this fitted in admirably with the work Wren was doing in architecture. Wainscoting of wood had been in vogue since Tudor days. Oak persisted, even after walnut had become popular for furniture. Inigo Jones, who founded the school of Classicism to which Wren 54 GRINLING GIBBONS 55 belonged, introduced the use of painted soft woods in interiors, and Wren followed his example. To this fact was due much of Gibbons's success, for he possessed hardly the patience to conquer the tough-grained oak. It was customary to have the wainscot panels set by joiners and finished by carvers. Jones was handicapped by a paucity of good workmen, and would doubtless have left more noteworthy exam- ples of interior carving if he could have found craftsmen skilful enough to execute it. But he stimulated the development of good workmanship, so that Wren found himself born under a luckier star. Both Wren and Gibbons owed much to their predecessor for breaking the road they were to travel. Wren was a broader man than Jones, and his opportunities were far greater, and Gibbons, his employee and collaborator, was swept up to fame with him. Gibbons was the greatest carver before Chippen- dale, though not the first. Nicholas Stone, a sculp- tor, achieved prominence during the reign of James I. He was followed by his son, John Stone, who was followed, in turn, by Caius Gabriel Cibber. Gibbons, who came next, struck a new note in carv- ing, and his fame outshone that of his predecessors. 56 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES Details of the private life of Gririling Gibbons are somewhat meagre. The date and place of his birth have long been a matter of controversy. The most persistent account has it that his father was Simon Gibbon, an English carpenter, who had worked under Inigo Jones and who migrated to Holland during the slack times of the Common- wealth. Grinling, according to this story, was born in Rotterdam on April 4, 1648 (the date is pos- sibly a matter of conjecture), and returned to Eng- land with his father in 1667, when he was nineteen years old. Other chroniclers state that his parents were Dutch and that he was one of many Dutch craftsmen to settle in England at that time. The family located in Yorkshire where, it is said, Grinling served an apprenticeship to Etty, the architect. Later they moved to Deptford, and here, it is sup- posed, Grinling learned and worked at the trade of ship carver. Another account makes the elder Gibbon a Dutch- man who had migrated to England early in life, and states that Grinling was born in Spur Alley, the Strand, London, and afterward moved to Lud- gate Hill. The name was undoubtedly spelled without the final "s" originally, and some biographers cling to GRINLING GIBBONS 57 that spelling, but as Grinling himself adopted the additional "s," Gibbons has become the generally ac- cepted spelling. Wherever Grinling was born, and whether his father was a carver or not, it is difficult to under- stand where he gained his superb technique and his comprehension of the Renaissance spirit. Per- haps Etty was his teacher, or possibly some obscure master in the shipyards of Deptford deserves the credit for developing a genius. At all events, he appears to have migrated to London, and in 1671 he was working in a little shop, unknown and unappreciated, when Sir John Evelyn, the diarist, chanced upon him and was amazed by the extraordinary strength and finish of his work- manship. Evelyn thus records the meeting: "This day I first acquainted His Majesty with that incomparable young man Gibbon, whom I had lately met with in an obscure place by accident as I was walking near a poor solitary thatched house in a field in our parish near Sayes Court. I found him shut in; but looking through the window I perceived him carving that large cartoon or crucifix of Tintoretto." In this seclusion he worked so that he might, according to Evelyn, "apply himself to his profession without interruption." On asking 58 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES the price of the carving Evelyn was told that £100 would purchase it. Evelyn continues: " In good earnest the very frame was worth the money, there being nothing in Nature so tender and delicate as the flowers and festoons about it, and yet the work was very strong." The object which chiefly engrossed Evelyn's at- tention was a representation of the stoning of St. Stephen, wrought in marvelous detail. It was made of pieces of limewood and lancewood, glued together to make a block 4 ft. A\ in. x 6 ft. \ in., with the carving some 12 inches deep. This work of art was eventually purchased by Charles II, on Evelyn's recommendation, and is now in the Victoria and Albert Museum. Gibbons was introduced by Evelyn to the King, who gave him a place on the Board of Public Works. Sir Christopher Wren had recently been made Sur- veyor of His Majesty's Works, and was already at work on his plans for the rebuilding of St. Paul's Cathedral, but it was Hugh May, Comptroller of the Works, who first took Gibbons in hand and set him at work on Windsor Castle. This carving made him famous. In 1678 he carved two great chimney- pieces for the Queen's privy chamber and the King's drawing room, with festoons of fishes, shells, and GRINLING GIBBONS 59 other marine objects. A remarkable composition of the star and garter, pelicans, doves, and palms, carved in the wood of the lime tree, showed a won- derful perfection of finish. At Windsor, too, he did carvings for the chapel and halls, and carved a pedestal for the equestrian statue of the King, with exquisite details of fruit, fish, and marine symbols. All this so pleased the King that Gibbons was ap- pointed Master Carver, a post which he retained under several succeeding sovereigns. After his success at Windsor, Gibbons found no lack of work to do for private and public buildings. One of his first commissions was for the seat of the Earl of Sussex at Cassiobury, Hertfordshire, where he carved a noteworthy staircase and decorated most of the rooms. This commission was fol- lowed by many others. Wren, who had naturally taken notice of Gib- bons's work, and who had probably employed him occasionally, now became his chief patron. St. Paul's had been building for several years when, about 1693, Gibbons was employed to do the carv- ing. His work here extended over four years, 1694-7. All of the best artisans of the day were employed in the cathedral, including Jean Tijou who did the ironwork. Gibbons carved the choir stalls, 60 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES organ cases, screens, and other portions, including the library. Wren designed the general scheme, but Gibbons drew the details and he and his workmen did the carving, for by this time he had skilled work- men under him. His own chisel, however, was much in use on the finer work. The St. Paul's carving is partly in oak, partly in Gibbons's favourite limewood. When this work was completed, Gibbons con- tinued under Wren at St. James's, Westminster; Trinity College chapel and Queen's College, Oxford; Trinity and Pembroke Colleges, Cambridge, and many other notable buildings. In 1714 Gibbons was appointed Master Carver to George I, but the post proved to be an empty honour. A more con- ventional and architectural mode of decoration had come into vogue, and though Gibbons lived and doubtless worked several years longer, his chief activities belong in the late seventeenth century. His last known work was at Hampton Court Palace in 1710. For many years Gibbons lived in Bow Street, Covent Garden, and he died there on August 3, 1721. He was buried with honour in St. Paul's. In 1722 many of his treasures were sold at auction. The list of his works is long and varied. Wren GRINLING GIBBONS 61 employed him on the palace and chapel at White- hall for James II, on Kensington Palace for Wil- liam III, and on Hampton Court Palace. A number of Wren's London churches contain carvings in Gibbons' s manner, though not all are authentic. He did, however, do the work in St. James's Church, Piccadilly. One of his most remarkable carvings is here — the reredos carved in cedar within a curved marble pediment over the picture of the Last Sup- per. The baptismal font at the west end of the church is one of the few known examples of his work in stone sculpture. Gibbons executed carvings in various halls and semi-public buildings in London and at Chelsea Hospital. In addition to the private mansions and country houses already mentioned, his work was to be found at Petworth, Burleigh, Chatsworth, Belton, Hackwood, Badminton, Holme Lacy, Sud- bury Hall, Blenheim, and several others. The carv- ings in Petworth House in Sussex and at Holme Lacy are perhaps the most famous of these. Holme Lacy was the seat of the Scudamores, and was famous for the splendid carved decorations in all the principal rooms, for which Gibbons was em- ployed. It is only at Petworth that he exceeded, on domestic interiors, the fineness of his work at 62 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES Holme Lacy. One of the most superb examples of his skill is a large chamber at Petworth, enriched from floor to ceiling with swags, festoons and me- dallions. He is also credited with the base of the statue of Charles I at Charing Cross and of that of Charles II at the Royal Exchange, and probably executed the bronze statue of James II in the privy gardens at Whitehall. He carved the wooden throne at Canterbury and a magnificent tomb for the Vis- count Camden in Exton Church, 22 feet high and 14 feet wide, bearing many bas-reliefs including figures of members of the family. Picture frames, chimneypieces, doorways, etc., were his delight. Some of his panels are so like lace or embroidery that the beholder is impelled to feel of them to make sure they are of wood. Gibbons, indeed, could make fruit and flowers, carved in wood, look positively real. His work is characterized by a wonderful lightness, grace, and lack of conventionality. His compositions are bal- anced, but his details are the last word in realism. He worked with an infinite variety of forms, his favourite details being vine leaves and grapes, wheat ears, hop blossoms, pea pods, poppy heads, sun- flowers, guelder roses, pomegranates, crabs, sea shells, cherubs' heads, lace work, birds, and wonder- GRINLING GIBBONS 63 ful combinations of fruits, flowers, and foliage. For delicacy and elaboration of detail, his work has never been surpassed. He made use of various woods, preferring the softer, more closely grained sorts. He worked in lime, pear, cedar, and box, usually; rarely in oak, sycamore, walnut, olive, ebony, and elm. Probably he would never have used the tough oak and wal- nut at all but for the fact that they were the woods most in demand at that time for wall panels. The choir stalls at St. Paul's, perhaps his most famous work, are in oak. But his favourite medium was the wood of the lime tree, which his sharp tools could carve so surely and rapidly. This wood is light coloured, not unlike satinwood when polished — perhaps even lighter in hue — without the sheen in the grain which distinguishes satinwood. The grain is very even and not marked, and the wood is in texture somewhat like box, though much softer. This wood Gibbons could finish so smoothly with his tool that no sandpapering was necessary or desir- able. He never painted it when he could avoid doing so. Undoubtedly, Gibbons derived direct inspiration from Inigo Jones, for it is possible to trace in some of the work produced or influenced by Jones the 64 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES beginnings of the style developed by Gibbons. A room at Wilton, for example, which was executed by Jones, contains carvings of fruit and flowers and cherubs' heads which strongly suggest Gibbons. This style of carving, however, was nobody's ex- clusive property. It was an Italian Renaissance style, or, more specifically, Florentine. A study of both Italian and Dutch carving of the period sug- gests the possible source of Gibbons's inspiration, though it cannot fully explain it. It is not sup- posed that Gibbons studied on the Continent, yet he introduced a foreign style into England and de- veloped it to its highest point of perfection. Gibbons was in the highest sense a craftsman, possessing at once skill of the hands, imagination, and artistic ideals. He was a clever draftsman and with the carver's tools was marvelously swift and sure. His natural aptitude for design in some way became an educated taste, though culture never robbed it of its freshness. His details showed an almost barbaric realism, while his main schemes of grouping displayed a thorough understanding of the basic principles of decorative design. • The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, possesses two excellent examples of the work of Grinling Gibbons. One is from the overmantel of Detail of the lock rail of the centre gate, east front, Hampton Court Palace, designed by Jean Tijou. The six-inch rule shows the scale One of the twelve panels in the screen about the Fountain Garden at Hampton Court, designed by Tijou GRINLING GIBBONS 65 the saloon or drawing-room at Holme Lacy. It measures 16 feet 5 inches high by 8 feet 10 inches wide. The carving is in the form of a frame for a Van Dyke portrait. It consists of a double swag and two long, pendent garlands, with a rectangular panel at the bottom. The central ornaments of the two swags are a spread eagle and an intricately twined monogram. Unlike most of the carvings at Holme Lacy, this one is of oak, gilded. The other example is a smaller panel in Gibbons's later style, probably from some church. It is of limewood, deeply undercut, unpainted, and shows the royal arms of George I supported by the lion and the unicorn, and surrounded by a graceful mantling of acanthus leaves. Gibbons was versatile within the limits of his craft. He carved all sorts of things, from an imita- tion point cravat in limewood to the interior of England's greatest cathedral. He was at his best, perhaps, in mirror frames, wall panels, and me- dallions, and in chimneypieces. He probably de- signed some furniture to fit special requirements, but his work in this field was limited. His style of carving is to be seen sometimes on chairs and on the stands of lacquer cabinets, but his influence on furni- ture design, like Wren's, was rather general than par- 66 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES ticular. Nevertheless, his genius and example came to be felt in carving of every kind of movable furni- ture. As one writer puts it, Gibbons made carving popular and Chippendale possible. It was rather as an interior decorator in wood that he excelled, and his real mission in the development of English styles was the creating of a more refined popular taste in this field. He became popular and hence much imitated at one time, and he left several pupils or apprentices who may be said to have formed a school of wood carving, but he was really not a teacher, and to a large extent his art died with him. He left no equals and the vogue of Italian gesso, followed by the fashion for compo, introduced by the Adams, drove out his imitators. Indeed, his work appears as a sort of isolated episode in the history of English decorative art, which nevertheless left permanent impress on popular taste. In its sumptuous effect, combining richness of orna- ment with vivacious lightness of line and detail, the carving of Grinling Gibbons is typical of a period when the Classic dignities of Sir Christopher Wren's architectural style were beginning to feel the soften- ing influence in details of decoration which, a genera- tion later, was to develop into the fantastic gaiety of French rococo, of which Thomas Chippendale was GRINLING GIBBONS 67 the foremost exponent. As Wren was the out- standing artistic mind of the period, Gibbons was its master technician, and his remarkable work left its imprint on all the arts of the time, and on much succeeding work of the next hundred years. Certainly his contemporaries thought well of him. Evelyn, who was perhaps prejudiced in favour of the man he had discovered, called him " the greatest mas- ter, both for invention and rareness of work, that the world ever had in any age." CHAPTER VI JEAN TIJOU BEFORE leaving the period in which Sir Chris- topher Wren was the dominant personality, there remains one other master of design to consider, a contemporary of Grinling Gibbons, his fellow worker, and in many respects his artistic [equal. I refer to Jean Tijou, who designed the ornamental ironwork, as Gibbons executed the wood carving, at Hampton Court, St. Paul's, and numerous private mansions. Living as we do in an age in which applied art of a reasonably high order is a common matter, when sculpture, mural decoration, ornamental metal work, and other forms of decoration of considerable merit are to be seen in every public building of importance, and well-designed furniture and decorations are avail- able for every home, we are likely to lose sight of the fact that these things are but the heritage of a by- gone age, when master craftsmen, with meagre tradi- tions and education, and with more primitive tools than ours, created works of art and originated types of design which we so blithely borrow. For this is, 68 rt ^3 5^ c « "5:= >- rt O Xx o O o «+- • -> p • — rt a _ u a »- o 2 * o a c a > o u Z I g < Cm u JEAN TIJOU 69 after all, a machine-made age in which we live, and objects of art are so easily obtained that we are prone to lose our reverence for the sources of genius from which they sprung. It is difficult for us to visualize the painful processes by which a Benvenuto Cellini wrought his masterpieces. When we look upon the wonderful wrought ironwork of the seventeenth cen- tury we forget that these elaborate gates and balconies had all to be wearily forged by hand, with a doubt as to whether so new a thing would be successful. It is perhaps not strange, therefore, that the name of Jean Tijou has long remained unfamiliar to most of us, and that we have failed to know or appreciate the wonderful ironwork which he designed in England at the close of the seventeenth century. Ironwork had not been one of England's great arts. It never reached a high point of merit until the period of revival beginning with the reign of Charles II — the Restoration. The vogue for it, however, in- creased during the reign of William and Mary and continued through the Queen Anne and early Geor- gian periods. It was largely in the spirit of the French art of Louis XIV. Following the lead of Hampton Court, every important country seat and mansion in England was adorned with magnificent forecourt and garden gates, screens, and balustrades 70 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES of hand-wrought iron, often painted blue or green and gilded. An unfettered expression of craftsmanship marked the period. It resulted, naturally, in a re- markable development in the art and skill of designers and smiths of whose personalities we know extra- ordinarily little. During the reign of James I the art of gardening and landscape architecture received attention which had hitherto been largely lacking in England, in spite of the early interest of Elizabeth's time. During the period of the Restoration there was a further re- vival of interest in gardening, with a demand for ornamental gates and fences and a consequent im- pulse given to the ironworker's craft. Daniel Marot had designed the garden gates at the Chateau des Maisons near Paris and his designs were published. English designers followed his lead. Charles II caused gardens to be laid out at St. James's, Greenwich, and Hampton Court, and many private gardens followed. In 1670 Sir Christopher Wren was called upon to repair the fences and make new gates for the royal parks, but his work in this field was of only moderate merit. However, as the demand for more elaborate work continued, taste improved. As a matter of fact, neither Inigo Jones nor Wren had made use of much ironwork prior to Tijou's A ribbon-back Chippendale chair in the more elaborate manner of Louis XV. Courtesy of Duveen Brothers JEAN TIJOU 71 time. Apparently they did not foster the taste for it. What little work Wren did was very simple. The grilles for the cloisters of Trinity College, Cambridge, built by Wren in 1878, were his most noteworthy de- signs. They were executed by one Partridge, who is known merely as a London smith. But fine work had been done in France for Louis XIV, at the Palais Royal and a number of churches, and the desire in England for decorative work in the French manner became too strong to be resisted. Then came Jean Tijou, a Frenchman, to add a new expression to the rapidly developing art instinct of England. Most of the masters of applied art in England were native born, but two of them, Marot and Tijou, were Frenchmen who did their work under foreign auspices. Of Tijou we know amazingly little, considering his prominence at court. For some unknown reason Sir John Evelyn, the diarist, who had not a little to say about Grinling Gibbons, does not mention Tijou. For the little data that has been gathered we are indebted largely to Mr. J. Starkie Gardner, Tijou's chief, almost his only, biographer. We do not know the date or place of Tijou's birth, save that it was in France, his residence in England, nor the date of his death or his place of burial. Noth- 72 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES ing is known of his previous work in France or Hol- land, nor of the sources of his training. Nothing has been recorded regarding his family beyond the fact that he had a daughter who was married to a suc- cessful French artist in England, Louis Laguerre, at the Church of St. Martin' s-in-the-Fields. It has been stated that Tijou was, like Marot, probably a French Protestant refugee to the Nether- lands, who came to England in the train of William of Orange, but Mr. Gardner is inclined to doubt this. Laguerre was a Catholic who had been educated for the priesthood, and it is more likely that both men came from French Catholic families of the better class. Tijou may merely have migrated to England in search of broader opportunities. In any event, he was no novice when he reached London. This was at the beginning of the reign of William and Mary, by whom Wren was retained in the office of Surveyor. Almost immediately we find Tijou at work on some of Wren's buildings. Rumour has it that Tijou made his home somewhere in Soho, but he must have lived much of the time at Hampton Court. Part of the work for St. Paul's Cathedral was executed at Hampton Court and brought to London by water, though by 1699 the forging was evidently done at Piccadilly. JEAN TIJOU 73 William of Orange ascended the English throne in 1689, and he and Queen Mary were Tijou's lifelong patrons. Under their patronage he became Eng- land's greatest designer of richly wrought iron. As has been stated, nothing is known of Tijou's death. He seems to have disappeared from England about 1712. The last documentary evidence of his existence in the St. Paul's records is dated 1711. He is thought to have returned to France, but his name appears nowhere among the French designers or ironworkers, and no trace of death, burial, or will has been found. Such are the meagre details of the life of one who left a lasting impress on the art life of England. Tijou was not himself a smith, but a designer and contractor for ironwork. The ironwork at Hampton Court Palace is, with few exceptions, the most famous in the world, and the best of it was designed by and executed for Tijou under the supervision of Sir Chris- topher Wren. Wren, soon after the coming of William III, began his additions to Hampton Court, and within a year Tijou rendered a bill for six iron vanes, "finely wrought in Leaves and Scroll worke," amounting to £80, and also for an iron balcony for the Water Gallery, which was taken down in 1701. In 1690 he rendered his 74 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES second bill of £755 7s., for gates, pillars, and panels for a screen encircling the Fountain Garden at Hamp- ton Court, which was completed about 1692. Tijou was, indeed, responsible for most of the ex- quisitely wrought iron gates and fences surrounding the private gardens of Hampton Court. In 1698 the Fountain Garden was redesigned and enlarged by Daniel Marot, and in 1699 this work was pushed. Tijou took the contract for a large amount of metal work, but it is probable that some of these later bills were never paid. The screen around the Fountain Garden was one of Tijou's most noteworthy achievements. It eclipsed everything that had previously been done in this line in England. Nothing so extensive had been done anywhere in Europe, and nothing in wrought iron so rich and florid has been produced for any garden since. The screen or fence was ten feet high, and included twelve strikingly bold, richly designed panels, all different in details but harmonious in general effect, separated by stately pilasters surmounted by royal crowns and buttressed by scroll-work supports. In the centre of each panel was displayed a square built about a rose, thistle, garter, or some badge, emblem, or cypher of the British royalty or nobility, supported by elaborate acanthus and scroll-work designs, in- JEAN TIJOU 75 tricate but perfectly balanced and harmoniously ar- ranged. The acanthus designs and arabesques were in the most florid taste of Louis XIV, but the pilasters were dignified and English in spirit, expressing, per- haps, Wren's influence. Other examples of Tijou's richest work were the three fine gates in the east or garden front of the palace, a pair of magnificent gates and wickets which separated the Long Walk from the Home Park, and a pair of gates, made in 1694-6, which still close the arched entrance to the Queen's side of the palace. The famous Lion Gates of Hampton Court are of the later period of George I, and are inferior copies of Tijou's gates at the Long Walk. A plainer railing, nearly 500 yards long, separating the gardens and the Park, was set up by Tijou in 1700. The picturesque railing of the garden terrace, with its simple but finely proportioned pilasters and panels, the balustrade with ovals at the head of the water features of the Park, and the railing of the Orangery were all in Tijou's style and were probably designed by him. He was also responsible for the variously designed stair rails in the palace which ornamented the back stairs to the royal apartments, now used as private apartments. They were built about 1696. The King's 76 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES staircase, painted by Verrio, and with a balustrade by Tijou, was completed in 1699. The Hampton Court gardens were remodelled by George III, and much of the ironwork was scattered. Some of it, fortunately, found its way to South Ken- sington and other museums, and some of it has since been restored. The ironwork at Hampton Court used to be attri- buted to Huntington Shaw of Nottingham, but that injustice has been rectified, though Shaw has a monu- ment to his memory and Tijou has none. Probably Shaw was associated with Wren and Tijou as an exe- cuting smith on the work at Hampton Court, St. Paul's, and elsewhere. Tijou designed iron gates for a number of private mansions in and about London and also for country estates, notably Carshalton in Surrey, Burleigh House near Stamford, Wimpole, the Earl of Rad- nor's seat in Cambridgeshire, and Burley-on-the- Hill in Rutland. The pair of gates at Eaton Hall, Chester, designed by Tijou, may have been brought thither from Hampton Court. The gates of the chapel at Bridewell, of the Clarendon Printing House, and others have been attributed to him. About 1694 he designed a stair balustrade and balconies for Chatsworth, seat of the Duke of Devonshire. JEAN TIJOU 77 At Drayton House in Northamptonshire there is a quantity of fine ironwork that is supposed to have been designed by Tijou, though its authenticity is not certain. It was made to the order of the Baron- ess Mordaunt, later Duchess of Norfolk, who married Sir John Germain and set up an elaborate establish- ment in 1700. Next to Hampton Court, Tijou's most important work was done at St. Paul's. He was employed here for twenty years and he never worked to better purpose. For sheer beauty, some of the ironwork at St. Paul's has never been surpassed. In discussing this work it must be borne in mind that Tijou was not a practical smith, but a designer. It is not known that he ever wielded the hammer. But he was also a contractor or directing master, with skilled artisans working under him. Wren had charge of the work at St. Paul's, and doubtless he was Tijou's superior, with power to approve or reject any of Tijou's work. For some reason, however, perhaps connected with court in- fluence, Wren appears to have disturbed Tijou very little, so that one gains the impression that he worked almost independently. Nevertheless, it is noticeable that Tijou's work at St. Paul's was more restrained than at Hampton Court, indicating that 78 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES Wren found some way in which to make his influence felt. The progress of Tijou's work at St. Paul's can be traced in the official accounts, in which he is usually referred to as "John Tijoue, smith." The first mention of his name in these documents appeared in 1691. In that year and in 1692 he executed some windows. These were not particularly ornamental. By 1696 he had done considerable fine work in the choir, including an iron screen under the organ case, now incorporated in the sanctuary screen. In 1699 he was paid £160 for a pair of gates, with wickets, at the west side of the south portico, which are still in existence; and £265 for a range of desks for the choristers, which have since been destroyed. Particularly remarkable for their fine workmanship and graceful artistry were the gates at the ends of the choir aisles and the altar rails, for which we find him credited with £540 and £260 respectively in 1705. Critics have pronounced this the finest ironwork, all things considered, in England. In 1706 he completed the ironwork of the round staircase in the southwest tower and various other work in and about the cathedral. The entries for his work continue up to 1711. Tijou had numerous apprentices and helpers, and, JEAN TIJOU 79 indeed, founded a sort of school of ironwork design. Robert Bakewell of Derby, Roberts Brothers, William Edney of Bristol, and other disciples of Tijou out- side of London continued his style of work till after 1720. Among the smiths in London who worked on St. Paul's and who were undoubtedly men of rare skill, were Partridge, Thomas Robinson, Thomas Coalburn, Warren, and George Buncker. Robin- son is known to have done some especially fine work, but on the whole we know very little about these men. Like Marot and other architects and designers of the period, Tijou prepared and published for sale a book of designs. It was entitled "A New Book of Drawings' Invented and Desined by John Tijou," and it was published in London in 1693. It con- tained twenty plates, including designs of work planned for Hampton Court, Trinity College Li- brary, Burleigh, Chatsworth, and elsewhere. Some of these designs were modified more or less before [being executed, and there were other designs in the book which probably were never executed. In fact, some of them do not appear to be practicable. The designs are decidedly French in feeling, with the spirit of Louis XIV predominant. Marot's in- fluence is evident. Tijou was naturally in sympathy 80 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES with Marot's artistic creeds, and the latter was prac- tically an arbiter of taste during the reign of William and Mary. At some time between 1686 and 1689 Marot had published in Holland a book containing six plates of ironwork designs, and Tijou's appear to have been based on these. Marot, however, only gave direction to a style which Tijou developed much farther. Tijou's book is now rare and very valuable. Tijou's designs were beautiful as a whole and in detail. They were well balanced, symmetrical in every part, sectionally harmonious, minutely stu- died. They covered broad expanses with remarkable consistency; weak spots were avoided. In technique and plan they should be an inspiration to modern decorative designers. Tijou's style, like that of Daniel Marot and Grin- ling Gibbons, was of Italian derivation, filtered through Spanish, French, Flemish, and Dutch media. It showed the same tendency toward the elaborate and florid, with a wealth of acanthus leaves, scroll work, draperies, rosettes, masks, eagles' and cocks' heads, heraldic emblems, figure work, etc. Like Gibbons, he loved a lace-like pattern as well as a bold sweep of curve. He followed Marot in the use of monograms and cyphers of delicately interlaced openwork in place of heavy, solid shields. JEAN TIJOU 81 If Tijou lacked anything, it was that sense of proportion and fitness, of restraint and Classic feel- ing, that guided Sir Christopher Wren. Had it not been for the steadying influence of Wren, the exuberance of Marot, Gibbons, and Tijou might have swept England into such artistic extravagances and absurdities as marred the French style of Louis XV. However, Tijou' s later designs showed more restraint, perhaps due to Wren's constant editing at St. Paul's, though he was never held back by the practical limitations of smithcraft. Though some of his de- signs were impossible of execution, in the main he forced the smiths to rise to meet his requirements. It is strange how little fame has been accorded Tijou and his work. It was Shaw and not Tijou whose statue was selected to represent English smithcraft on the fagade of the Victoria and Albert Museum, and in other ways he has suffered injustice due to errors. But that hardly explains why Tijou's name should not be as well known as that of Grinling Gibbons, his contemporary and fellow worker under Wren, with whom he may be favorably compared as an artist. Mr. Gardner appears inclined to attribute the fact to a deliberate attempt on the part of Tijou's contemporaries to ignore him. Wren never mentioned Tijou once in his memoirs or else- 82 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES where, while he was not at all niggardly in his praise of Gibbons. Evelyn and other writers of the period frequently mention Gibbons and others; they pass over Tij ou's name in silence. Tijou retained the favour of William and Mary and Queen Anne, and he obtained plenty of private commissions for work; he was apparently no social outlaw. The matter is inexplicable, but the fact remains that history has slighted him, and it is high time to make amends. For Tijou stands at the head of his craft among the creators of English styles. His designs for balus- trades, balconies, screens, gates, staircases, railings, panels, and smaller objects are conceded to be the finest examples of decorative ironwork in England. He exerted an immense and immediate effect on the craft, and it is not too much to say that his influence extended to other fields as well. Undoubtedly he shared with Gibbons an oppor- tunity such as is given to few men, but he made the most of it. A clever draughtsman, a consummate artist in a difficult medium, with an extraordinary feeling for perfection of ornament, his name deserves a place among those of the masters. • The Classic creed of Sir Christopher Wren and the foreign influences introduced by Marot, Gibbons, and Tijou, produced an almost equal effect on the JEAN TIJOU 83 furniture design of the period. During the reigns of Queen Anne and George I these elements were largely assimilated and Anglicized, but there remained a freedom from trammelling restraint which Sir Wil- liam Chambers and Thomas Chippendale took advan- tage of, for they, too, borrowed from foreign sources, until Robert Adam and the later Georgians intro- duced a revival of the Classic spirit that was more nearly akin to that of Wren. CHAPTER VII THOMAS CHIPPENDALE {Circa 1710-1779) THE Georgian Period, comprising roughly the last three-quarters of the eighteenth century, was a golden age in the development of Eng- lish style, and the names of the masters are many. Architecture and the various crafts and industrial arts received a strong forward impetus. Sir William Chambers, Thomas Chippendale, Robert and James Adam, George Hepplewhite, Josiah Wedgwood, and other contemporary designers, craftsmen, architects, and connoisseurs all added their personalities to the styles of the period, and from a chronological point of view it matters little which of them is given first consideration. But since of all the applied arts of the time furniture-making seems to have left the most lasting impression, it may be most logical to give primary consideration to Thomas Chippendale, the first and most famous of the Georgian cabinet- makers, and the first English craftsman to rob the reigning sovereign of the prerogative of giving his name to a period. THOMAS CHIPPENDALE 85 The transition from the Queen Anne to the Georgian styles was gradual and Chippendale's early work was done in this early Georgian or transition manner, before the Chippendale period ac- tually began. The furniture of this time showed a tendency to drop the Dutch characteristics of the Queen Anne period. Chair backs became somewhat shorter and more varied in outline. The cabriole leg persisted, to be sure, but the ball-and-claw su- perseded the Dutch splay foot. This transition period, too, was marked by the gradual substitution of mahogany for walnut as the fashionable cabinet wood. Mahogany furni- ture was probably made in England as early as 1715, but did not reach the zenith of its popularity until about 1745. It is too much to say that Chip- pendale made mahogany popular; perhaps it was the mahogany that made Chippendale popular. At any rate, the new taste found its highest expression at his hands in the new wood. He began work- ing obscurely in walnut and other woods in the tran- sition styles about 1730, and did not emerge with a real style of his own until about 1745, when he adapted mahogany to the uses of French rococo carving. His greatest influence as a creator of style extended from 1750 to 1770. 86 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES The date of Thomas Chippendale's birth is not known. He is said to have been born in Worcester- shire about 1710. and to have been the son of Thomas Chippendale, a cabinet-maker, wood carver, and maker of mirror frames. Thomas the younger very likely learned his trade from his father, and it is quite possible that the father originated some of the styles that were later developed by the son into a Chippendale type. Information regarding his early life is scanty. Father and son moved to London about 1727. Thomas married Catherine Redshaw, of St. Mar- tin's-in-the-Fields, on May 19, 1748. In 1749 we find him established in a shop in Conduit Street, Long Acre, London. In 1753 he moved to 60 St. Martin's Lane, where he took three houses adja- cent to his own and established a large cabinet- making and upholstery business. In 1755 he was burned out, but rebuilt at once. At that time he was employing twenty-two work- men; later his employees are said to have numbered a hundred. Here he lived during the rest of his life. In 1760 he was elected a member of the Society for the Encouragement of Arts, Manufactures, and Com- merce. For a time he was in partnership with James Rannil, who died in 1766. One of the Chinese buildings in Kew Gardens designed by Chambers THOMAS CHIPPENDALE 87 Chippendale started in business as a cabinet-maker. Later he became also an interior decorator and general furnisher, executing his own designs and also those of Adam and others. In 1752 he had some of his designs printed, and issued the first edition of his book, ' 'The Gentleman and Cabinet Maker's Director," in 1754. The second edition appeared in folios during 1759, 1760, and 1761, and these were brought together in book form in 1762 as a third edition. Of these books, which became very popular and which had much to do with his fame, I will speak again later. Thomas Chippendale died on November 13, 1779, and was buried at the Church of St. Martin' s-in- the-Fields. He left a widow, Elizabeth, apparently his second wife, besides three sons and a daughter. His eldest son, Thomas, carried on the business successfully until 1796 in partnership with Thomas Haig, a former bookkeeper of Chippendale's. Of the private life and character of Thomas Chip- pendale we know surprisingly little, considering his prominence in his craft and the influence which he exerted on the fashions of his time. He was evidently no aspirant for social dist'nction, though in the course of his life he mingled with the nobility and with families of wealth. He was a quiet man, at- tending strictly to business, and ever industrious. 88 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES He possessed a combination of business ability and the ideals of craftsmanship to a greater degree than any of his contemporaries, and was the most suc- cessful of them all. He was, first of all, a born and trained artisan, and, second, a progressive busi- ness man capable of managing affairs on a large scale. As an artist, in the strict sense of the word, he perhaps fell short of the highest distinction, for he lacked something of the touch of original in- spiration, though he possessed a remarkable feel- ing for line and proportion. It was a noteworthy fact regarding the cabinet- makers of the period that they were able to pub- lish their trade catalogues at a profit, which indi- cates the popular demand for better things in household furnishings. Chippendale was not the first to publish such a book, nor was he the first in the field with the type of designs that made him famous. As early as 1719 William Halfpenny began publish- ing his designs, and the following published books prior to Chippendale's: William Jones in 1739, Batty & Langley in 1740, Abraham Swain in 1745, Edwards & Darley in 1750, Thomas Johnson in 1750, Mattheas Lock in 1752, William Halfpenny the younger in 1750-52. Many of these, notably Johnson, Lock, Halfpenny, and later Ince & Mayhew, published de- THOMAS CHIPPENDALE 89 signs in the same French, Gothic, and Chinese styles that Chippendale used. Chippendale's "Director" sold for £3 13s 6d. Copies are worth to-day from $50 to $100. It was the most extensive and important of the books of the sort published up to that time. The full title was "The Gentleman and Cabinet Maker's Director, being a large collection of the most elegant and useful designs of household furniture in the most fashionable taste." It contained upward of 200 plates in the 1762 edition, and was signed "Thomas Chippendale, cabinet-maker and upholsterer, Lon- don." The designs included chairs, sofas, beds and couches, tables and stands, dressing tables and commodes, library tables and desks, chamber organs, library bookcases, cabinets, candle stands, lanterns and chandeliers, fire screens, brackets, tall and bracket clock cases, pier glasses, picture and mirror frames, girandoles, chimneypieces, stove grates, and various ornaments. Chippendale was less an originator of styles than an adapter and a close observer of the trend of the times. He developed, improved, and beautified the styles which the popular taste demanded to a greater extent than any of his contemporaries except Adam and Hepplewhite, who followed somewhat different 90 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES lines. The designs of his contemporaries show the same tendencies of taste — French, Gothic, and Chinese. He began first with late Queen Anne types, mak- ing bandy-legged, fiddle-back chairs, among other things, very broad in the seat and with ball-and- claw feet. As the style of the transition period ad- vanced, Chippendale improved this style, piercing the splat, enriching his work with rococo carving after the French manner, beautifying the cabriole leg, and adopting a squarer form of chair back with rounded corners, to be followed soon by the bow- shaped or slightly curved top rail which became an essential characteristic of many of his chairs. Thus, gradually, his style became more and more French in type. Up to this time Chippendale had worked largely in walnut, but the demand for mahogany and finer carving became irresistible, and Chippendale cut his cloth to fit his patrons. The attempts that are often made to divide Chip- pendale's work into three distinct periods — Anglo- Dutch, French, and Chinese-Gothic — are somewhat misleading, for, though fashions changed, there were no such sharp divisions as these. He began to design furniture in the Louis XV manner about THOMAS CHIPPENDALE 91 1745, and he continued to produce French designs up to the day of his death. He was wise in his se- lection of French motifs. In some cases he actually copied French designs. He used rococo carving freely, though it was always well executed. His best work is found in the fairly unmixed French designs of 1750-60. After that the combination of rococo and Chinese, with a dash of Gothic, proved too much for him. During his best period, when he made his famous ribbon-back chairs, mahogany rose to the height of its popularity. He still made his ladder-back chairs and other pieces in walnut occasionally, but his more fashionable customers demanded mahogany, and this was the material he used in his more elab- orate and expensive work. It proved to be the best possible medium for the pierced backs of his French chairs with their somewhat intricate carving, and for the even more involved work of his Chinese mirror frames and other pieces. He preferred a rich, dark mahogany of uniform colour and grain. Even after the popularity of walnut waned he con- tinued to use it to some extent, as well as maple, cherry, and birch. But it was Chippendale who dis- covered and developed the wonderful qualities of mahogany and first learned how to use it to its 92 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES greatest advantage. Many of his chairs in the Chinese style, made to suit a popular taste, were of beech, perhaps for cheapness. It may have been for this purpose, too, that straight, square legs began to appear more and more frequently on his chairs and tables. Some of the best of Chippendale's designs ap- peared in the first edition of his book. The last edition shows a decided deterioration and a leaning toward grotesque mixtures of style — Chinese ugli- ness and rococo extravagance. It is only fair to say, however, that Chippendale's cabinet work was better than his books of designs. It is doubtful if he ever executed half of these himself, while it is known that he made a good deal of furniture to order, drawing exclusive designs not to be found in his books at all, and that in such furniture we find him at his best. It is rather surprising that in an age when good taste was so noticeable in England, the Chinese and Gothic fads should have taken so strong a hold, and that Chippendale should have allowed himself to be so completely swayed by the popular vogue. It shows that he was a follower rather than a leader. Both these styles, if they may be dignified by the name, were ephemeral, but they made a strong THOMAS CHIPPENDALE 93 impression while they lasted. Neither the Chinese nor the Gothic designs in vogue were true to au- thentic originals, but Chippendale's clientele evi- dently did not include many sticklers for purity of style, and he failed to rise above them. In the Chinese introductions, it matters little whether Chippendale followed the lead of Sir Wil- liam Chambers or vice versa. The taste for Chinese effects had been popular for some time, due to the growth of England's trade with the Orient. Chinese lacquer and imitations of it, as well as Chinese porce- lains and other objects, had been in vogue since the previous century. Chippendale's Chinese designs were in great variety, and were characterized by pa- goda tops, latticework, straight legs, fretwork carv- ing, and elaborate ornamentation. The patterns in Gothic feeling were in response to a sort of Gothic revival about 1750, due largely to the influence of Sir Horace Walpole and his vagaries at Strawberry Hill. Chippendale's shop turned out in considerable quantities chairs, card tables, sofas and settees, desks, bureaus, cabinets, bookcases, tea stands mirror cases, and some beds and long clock cases. He was at his best in his chairs, and their designs display a wonderful variety of detail. In most cases 94 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES they satisfy the artistic sense. In his early ones the backs were more open and the lines better suited to the human anatomy than those of the Queen Anne period. His splats were always joined to the seats and not to crosspieces. Most characteristic were his French types, the ladder-back, and those with Chinese fretwork and Gothic patterns in the backs. His typical chair legs included the cabriole, with rococo carving and the ball-in-claw foot, the straight, square leg, and the carved Chinese leg, also straight. Many of his settees were made like two or three of his chairs joined side by side. His card tables usually had cabriole legs, intri- cately carved, with ball-and-claw feet, or the straight Chinese legs. He made long serving tables, but no sideboards, the sideboard being a later introduction of Hepplewhite and Shearer. His beds were as elaborate as those of Daniel Marot in their way, often having pagoda tops and showing mixed styles, mostly bad. His mirror frames, in French rococo and Chinese carving and pierced work, were very elaborate, and were often made of pine and gilded. He made a few walnut and mahogany clock cases, though most of the clock cases attributed to him were undoubtedly made by his imitators. He is known to have ex- ecuted a few elaborately carved overmantels. THOMAS CHIPPENDALE 95 So many of his designs were used by others that it is almost impossible to identify Chippendale's own work. Some pieces in his style were even executed in America. A few chairs, small fretted tables, book- cases, and screens are about all that we can surely assert were turned out by the master. Known work of his is to be found in England in Claydon House, the seat of the Verneys in Buckinghamshire, which contains chambers by him executed in the Chinese style; in Harewood House, Yorkshire, which also contains some of Adam's work; at Stourhead in Wiltshire, and Rowton Castle in Shropshire. Some of this made-to-order work was very fine, while some was elaborately upholstered, gilded, painted, lacquered, and mounted with metal — often in very bad taste and very expensive. But here again we must blame the client as much as the craftsman. In his regular trade work, Chippendale used gild- ing on his mirror frames, chimneypieces, girandoles, etc., but he usually avoided paint, gilding, japan, or inlay except on specially ordered work. For his ornamentation he depended almost entirely on carv- ing. His construction was generally solid, strong, and honest, his materials the best obtainable. To endeavour to form a comparative estimate of Chippendale's place among the creators of English 96 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES style is a thankless task. His work has been both praised inordinately and abused unjustly. It is largely a matter of taste. But he hgts been generally considered to be England's greatest cabinet-maker, and the judgment of the years must count for much. For my own part, I fail to gain the same thrill of satisfaction from a contemplation of his work as from the more restrained and chaste productions of Sheraton, Hepplewhite, and our own Duncan Phyfe. No man who dealt with such a perfect chaos of style deserves, it seems to me, the very highest rank, and I cannot help feeling that he has been generally over- estimated. He was the great borrower, the great adapter, and, as a rule, he improved upon what he borrowed. He was the chief figure of a remarkable school of craftsmen. Let him retain his laurels. One critic calls attention to these facts: Chip- pendale's style was generally heavier and less severe in ornamentation than the slender and tasteful de- signs of Hepplewhite and Sheraton. Though elab- orate and often delicate, his designs were over- wrought and lacking in architectural feeling. Though usually considered the master of them all, he does not survive the most searching tests. In general, he reflected the culture of his day with more virility than his French and English contemporaries. An Ionic temple in Kew Gardens as designed by Chambers Robert Adam, after a painting in the Royal Institute of British Architects THOMAS CHIPPENDALE 97 It was Thomas Sheraton who, in 1793, said of his work: "As for the designs themselves, they are now wholly antiquated and laid aside, though possessed of great merit according to the times in which they were executed." Sic transit gloria mundi. For Chip- pendale's fame did fade rather abruptly, not to] be revived for a century, and other styles superseded his. Those who immediately followed him — Ince & Mayhew, Robert Manwaring, and others — did little more than copy him, but about 1765 a reaction to the Classic set in and Robert Adam came into his own, with Hepplewhite, Shearer, and Sheraton, fol- lowing the trend of the times into paths of greater restraint and delicacy of feeling. CHAPTER VIII SIR WILLIAM CHAMBERS (1726-1796) OF THE English architects of the Georgian Period, the two greatest were undoubtedly Robert Adam, who pouplarized a revival of Classic forms, and Sir William Chambers, who typified the ultra-fashionable taste of his time. In many respects Chambers's life and personality are more interesting than his work, though he exercised, by reason of his talents and social position, a strong influence on the styles of that day. His grandfather was a Scotchman who had sup- plied Charles XII, King of Sweden, with military stores and money. Sweden repudiated this debt, with others, and Chambers's father went to Sweden to recover what he could of the lost fortune. William was born in Stockholm in 1726. The family returned to England in 1728 and set- tled in Ripon, in Yorkshire, where William re- ceived his school education. At the age of sixteen the boy, who had a taste for travel and adventure, shipped as super-cargo in a ship of the Swedish 98 SIR WILLIAM CHAMBERS 99 East India Company, and made at least one trip to China. He had a natural interest in design and some skill in drawing even at this age, and while at Canton he made numerous sketches of Chinese buildings, gardens, costumes, etc. It is probable that he made one other voyage to the Orient, and in some way he acquired a working knowledge of architecture. William's brother, John, also went to sea and sub- sequently acquired a large fortune in the East In- dia trade, but William decided against a com- mercial career. At the age of eighteen he quitted the sea to devote his attention to the study of archi- tecture. Two or three years later he went to Italy, where he made a study of Roman ruins and also the work of Palladio and other Italian architects of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, making a large number of measured drawings. From Italy he went to Paris, where he studied French architecture un- der Clerisseau, from whom he gained also great skill with the pencil. Chambers returned to England in 1755, in the company of Cipriani and Joseph Wilton, the sculp- tor, whose beautiful daughter he soon after mar- ried. He started his career as a practising archi- tect in Russell Street, London, near Covent Garden, 100 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES later taking a house in Poland Street. He pos- sessed but a small fortune, but the merit of his work, his facility in making influential acquain- tances, and the good luck which attended him through life, secured for him the patronage of Lord Bute and Mr. John Carr of York, who introduced him to the royal family and secured for him the position of drawing master to the heir apparent. Chambers's first work of importance was a villa for Lord Bessborough at Roehampton in Surrey, the portico of which was particularly admired. In 1757 he published his first book. It consisted of en- gravings made from the sketches he had executed in Canton, and was called " Designs for Chinese Buildings, etc." His taste in this was much criti- cized at the time, but the book at least served to bring him into greater prominence. The designs apparently appealed to the Princess Dowager Au- gusta of Wales, for she engaged him as architect for the gardens of her new villa or palace at Kew. This work occupied him from 1757 to 1762, and made his reputation as the most fashionable archi- tect of his time. In 1759 he published his "Treatise on the Dec- orative Part of Civil Architecture," which was en- thusiastically received and which, in many respects, SIR WILLIAM CHAMBERS 101 was his most notable work. It contains an appre- ciation of Greek architecture which has become a classic, and the book, which has been republished many times, is still one of the standards. "A Treat- ise on the Five Orders of Architecture," by Fred T. Hodgson, a valuable and practical work of ref- erence published as recently as 1910, is based upon Chambers and is illustrated with Chambers's draw- ings. Though the work at Kew Gardens had brought him into prominence, it was this book, the most useful volume on the science of architecture which had appeared up to that time, that firmly established his reputation both as an author and as an archi- tect of judgment, scholarship, and taste. In 1761 he became a member of the Society of Artists and began to exhibit with them at Spring Gardens. The work at Kew Gardens so pleased the royal family that in 1763 Chambers published a book con- taining his designs and descriptions of them. This aroused considerable controversy among the critics. The complete title of the work was "Plans, Eleva- tions, Sections, and Perspective Views of the Gar- dens and Buildings at Kew in Surrey, the Seat of Her Royal Highness, the Princess Dowager of Wales." 102 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES In 1768 Chambers was largely instrumental in founding the Royal Academy of Arts. Sir Joshua Reynolds became its first president and Chambers its first treasurer. In 1771 Chambers sent a set of finished drawings of his Kew designs to the King of Sw r eden, who made him a Knight of the Pole Star. George III of England, who had been the architect's pupil when Prince of Wales, and who undoubtedly had be- come much attached to his tutor, allowed him to assume the title of knight in England, and he be- came Sir William. The king also appointed Cham- bers chief architect. Under Burke's regime he was also appointed Comptroller of His Majesty's Works, and later, Surveyor-General. In 1772 he published "A Dissertation on Oriental Gardening," and as before, w T hen he ventured into the realm of Chinese design, he aroused much ad- verse criticism. Undoubtedly he went too far, some of his statements being quite absurd, but his offi- cial position saved him from serious loss of repu- tation. In 1774 Chambers revisited Paris and in 1775 he was appointed architect of Somerset House, his greatest monument, at a salary of £2,000 a year. The present structure is his design, the Strand SIR WILLIAM CHAMBERS 103 front being an enlarged and improved copy of an old palace built by Inigo Jones. Chambers lived for many years in Poland Street and then built himself a house in Berners Street. Later he moved to Norton Street, where he died. He also had an official residence at Hampton Court Palace and a country house near Hounslow called Whitton Place. He gradually retired from active life and business and spent his latter years in the enjoyment of his many friendships. He was a sufferer from asthma, and after a long and severe illness he died on March 8, 1796, in the seventy-first year of his age. He was buried in the Poets' Corner, Westminster Ab- bey. He left a considerable fortune to one son and four daughters. Chambers was a man of marked social gifts, which helped to make his career successful. He was a man of taste and culture, and he exerted a considerable influence on cabinet-making and interior decoration as well as architecture. He had a host of distinguished friends, including Dr. Johnson, Goldsmith, Reynolds, Burney, and Garrick, and spent much of his leisure time at the Architects' Society, which met at Thatched House Tavern. Chambers's fame as an architect rests chiefly on 104 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES his work at Somerset House and the summer houses in Kew Gardens. These latter, following the doubt- ful taste of the Princess, included both Classic and Oriental designs — Roman temples and Chinese and Turkish treatments. The most important of them was the famous pagoda which is still standing, a tall structure not without grace of line and detail. These buildings have been so widely criticized, both favourably and unfavourably, that his really able and clever work in landscaping at Kew has been often lost sight of. At Somerset House, which Chambers recon- structed, he worked in a more serious and perman- ent style. There were some incongruities in it, and he felt it necessary to remove the famous fa- cade of Inigo Jones at the water front, for which he was obliged to undergo much adverse criticism. Nevertheless, it was a great work in which he kept alive the Classic tradition. Robert Adam, whose life and work will be dis- cussed in the next chapter, was a more popular archi- tect than Chambers, but the latter managed to se- cure a goodly portion of the fashionable work of the day. He built a number of town and country houses of distinction for men of wealth and title. Among these was the villa of the Earl of Bessborough at SIR WILLIAM CHAMBERS 105 Roehampton, the Earl of Pembroke's seat at Wilton, and the Duke of Bedford's house at Bloomsbury. He designed and built mansions for Earl Gower at Whitehall, for Lord Milbourne in Piccadilly, for Lord Abercorn and Viscount Midleton. He was also employed by the Duke of Marlborough at Blen- heim. He built Duddingston House near Edin- burgh, and in Ireland a fine casino for Lord Charle- mont at Marino, near Dublin. He also designed the market house at Worcester. Among his recognized masterpieces were the stair- cases in the houses of Lord Bessborough and Lord Gower and at the Royal Antiquarian Society. The terrace behind Somerset House was a bold and suc- cessful composition. In his interior work Chambers introduced more graceful lines and less formal ornament, and in this field doubtless deserves greater credit than has been generally accorded him. It was Chambers who introduced the often-misused marble mantel. He also designed furniture in Chinese and other styles. His most elaborate piece was a combined bureau, dressing-case, jewel cabinet, and chamber organ, made for Charles IV of Spain in 1793. He also designed the state coach for George III of England, which is now in the Victoria and Albert Museum. 106 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES Chambers's name has inevitably been associated most often with the whimsical vogue of Chinese design in the eighteenth century, and there has been considerable useless controversy as to whether Cham- bers or Chippendale was chiefly responsible for this. As a matter of fact, neither of them was, but both merely sought to satisfy an insistent demand. The fondness in England for things Chinese dates back well into the previous century, when Oriental impor- tations became common in the London and Liver- pool markets. English imitations of Oriental lacquer were popular in Queen Anne's time, and intermit- tently up to 1780. The fashion was merely revived by Chambers when his book appeared in 1757. Edwards & Darley, Thomas Johnson, William Halfpenny, and others had manufactured furniture in the so-called Chinese style before either Chippen- dale or Chambers published his book. Half- penny also published an architectural volume, "New Designs for Chinese Temples," etc., in 1750. Chip- pendale's work marked rather the culmination of the Chinese style in furniture, and Chambers's in architecture. The aim of the latter was to correct popular misapprehensions, though in this he did not greatly succeed. The Chinese in vogue consisted largely of poor copies of the decorations on Oriental SIR WILLIAM CHAMBERS 107 paper hangings and porcelain and slipshod adapta- tions of Chinese styles in furniture. Chambers had measured drawings to help him, though he never came very close to the true spirit of the Chinese. But though Chambers was undoubtedly fascinated by the Chinese style, he nevertheless gained a place among those masters who perpetuated the Classic traditions. In this the work of Robert Adam over- shadowed his, but in his more chaste and conven- tional work he adhered to the manner of Jones and Wren. His exteriors were bold, uniting the grandeur and luxuriance of the Roman, Florentine, and Genoese schools with the severe correctness of the Venetian. He exhibited no startling mannerisms, his style ranging somewhere between the ponderous, imposing style of Vanbrugh and the lighter, mora chaste style of Adam. His only known work in the Gothic style is to be found in the additions and alterations at Milton Abbey in Dorset. At a time when good architecture was the rule, Chambers stood with Adam in the first rank, in spite of his mistakes and extravagances. Though not an artist of great originality or imagination, he was, ex- cept for his Chinese vagaries, a conservator of the best traditions, a thorough student of the science of architecture, a careful designer, and a clever adapter. 108 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES He stood always just a little in advance of the fashions of the day. Thomas Hardwick, his most sympathetic bio- grapher, speaks of Chambers as genial and socially inclined, and says of him: "The natural endowments of his mind, accompanied by industry and persever- ance, and above all by integrity and honourable con- duct through life, raised him to the head of his pro- fession and gained him the esteem and veneration of the scholar, the admiration of the artist, and the love and respect of those who looked up to him for protection and support." Of the "Treatise" Hard- wick says: "The truths it inculcates and the propor- tion and forms it recommends, the result of long ex- perience and repeated observation of structures which have stood the test of centuries, cannot fail to impress upon every mind that there is a criterion of taste in architecture as well as in the other liberal arts — that genius is consistent with rules — and that novelty is not necessarily an improvement." CHAPTER IX ROBERT ADAM (1728-1792) THE work of Robert Adam in England marks a distinct change in public taste — the over- throw of most of what Chippendale stood for, and a return to Classic restraint and a greater delicacy and chastity of ornament. It is not difficult to account for this. Both France and England were becoming weary of rococo and baroque extravagance, and the eyes of designers were turned upon Italy. The public had become familiar with the results of the excavations at Herculaneum after 1738, with those at Pompeii after 1748, and with the engravings of Roman designs by Giovanni Piranesi after 1748. People were becoming more familiar with the Classic 'styles. As a result, we have in France the revolt from the florid style of Louis XV to the greater severity and restraint of Louis XVI. In England, which largely followed France at this time, we find a cor- responding change, which was formulated and or- ganized into current style by the Adam brothers. 109 110 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES Many English architects, decorators, and cabinet- makers followed their lead, and a Classic revival ensued. Chinese, Dutch, and rococo were banished together, and a new style in furniture and decora- tion caught the popular fancy. In this movement Robert Adam was the leader, and his influence, para- mount from 1764 to 1784, persisted for half a cen- tury, strongly affecting the work of Hepplewhite, Sheraton, and all their contemporaries. Robert Adam, the most prominent of a gifted family, was the second of six children of William Adam, a Scotchman, of Maryburgh, the two young- est being daughters. The father was an archi- tect of distinction, who designed Hopetoun House, the Royal Infirmary at Edinburgh, and other note- worthy buildings, and who held the appointment of King's Mason at Edinburgh. Robert was born July 3, 1728, at Kirkcaldy, County of Fife, Scotland. He was educated at the University of Edinburgh and later studied architecture in England. About 1754 he started for a tour of the Conti- nent. Historians differ as to the dates of his itin- erary. It is generally supposed that he studied in France for a year or two under the French archi- tect, Clerisseau, or at least became his friend, and he may have made several trips into Italy. Dated ROBERT ADAM 111 drawings now in London would indicate that he was at Nimes, France, in December, 1754, near Genoa in January, 1755, and at Rome in 1756. At any rate, in 1757 he visited Italy with Clerisseau and two draughtsmen, and made a number of draw- ings of Roman ruins. From Venice he went to Spalatro in Dalmatia to study the ruins of the Palace of Diocletian there. Hitherto, most of the travelling architects had studied the ruins of public buildings; Adam desired a correct idea of a Classic building of a residential character. His credentials proving defective, he was arrested as a spy, but was released and visited the ruins. These he found in rather bad condition, but he made complete drawings of the fragments in five weeks. His journal of this trip was published in the "Library of Fine Arts." He continued on his travels a few months longer and then, in 1758, returned to England. In London he established himself with his brother James as an architect, and was soon widely employed by the gentry and nobility, becoming a more popular archi- tect than Sir William Chambers. He became a fellow of the Royal and Antiquarian Societies, and on December 2, 1761, at the age of thirty-five, he was appointed joint architect to the King and Queen with Chambers. 112 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES In 1764 he published a folio volume of engravings by Bartolozzi of his Dalmatian drawings, entitled "Ruins of the Palace of the Emperor Diocletian at Spalatro." In 1768 he resigned his royal office to become a member of Parliament for Kinross. In 1769 the four brothers started the building of the Adelphi, a huge collection of wharves, arches, and viaducts on the Thames, with access from the Strand — the first great office building in London. They overcame serious opposition, but the building was never a commercial success. In the end it was disposed of by lottery, and the brothers are sup- posed to have realized a substantial profit. In 1773 R. & J. Adam began the publication of their "Works in Architecture" in folio parts. Vol- ume I, brought together in 1778, contained The Seat of the Duke of Northumberland at Sion, The Villa of Earl Mansfield at Kenwood, The Seat of the Earl of Bute at Luton Park, Public Buildings, and Designs for the King and Queen and Princess Do- wager of Wales. Volume II, published in 1779, contained The House of the Earl of Derby in Gros- venor Square, The House of Sir Watkin Williams Wynn, Bart., in St. James's Square, The House of the Earl of Shelburne in Berkeley Square, The Seat of the Duke of Northumberland at Sion (continued), Mirror frame designed Urn-shaped knife-boxes of satinwood, Adam by Adam style. .Metropolitan Museum of Art Sedan chair for Queen Charlotte, from "The Works in Architecture of R. & J. Adam" Chimneypiece with pewter mountings and steel grate, designed by Adam. Metropolitan Museum of Art ROBERT ADAM 113 and Various Designs of Public and Private Buildings. The balance of the firm's more important drawings were brought out in a posthumous volume in 1822. The original designs of the firm are preserved in the Sloane Museum. There are thirty volumes of them, three of which are devoted to furniture. Miscellan- eous drawings have been collected and published from time to time since. On March 3rd, 1792, Robert Adam burst a blood vessel in his stomach and died at his home in Albe- marle Street, London. He was buried with high honours in Westminster Abbey. Robert's brothers all achieved distinction. John, the oldest, remained in Scotland, where he suc- ceeded his father as King's Mason in Edinburgh. The others all went to London. Robert was always the dominant figure, William, the youngest, being little more than his assistant. James, however, would have been an architect of note in any event, and his name is often associated with Robert's in giving credit for the Classic revival. The two worked together on almost all the important works, and any discussion of the style must refer to their joint product. James studied abroad shortly after Robert's return to England. In company with Clerisseau and Zucchi, he visited, in 1760-1, Verona, 114 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES Padua, Vicenza (where he studied the works of Pal- ladio), Venice, Florence, Pisa, Rome, Pompeii, and Naples, taking notes and measurements, and making drawings. He was appointed Master Mason of the Board of Ordnance for North Britain, and on Rob- ert's death succeeded him as royal architect. He was the author of "Practical Essays on Agriculture" and was writing a history of architecture when he died of apoplexy at the house in Albemarle Street on October 20, 1794. The brothers were always active in their profes- sion, and during the year preceding Robert's death they designed no less than eight public and twenty- five private buildings. Their work included the restoration of part of Whitehall, the building for the Society for the Encouragement of Arts, Manufac- tures, and Commerce in John Street, work on the royal palaces, the parish church at Mistley, Essex, the Hall of Records or Registry Office in Edin- burgh, the British Coffee House, London, the alter- ation and redecoration of the Theatre Royal in Drury Lane, new buildings for the University of Edinburgh, White's Club, Caenwood near Hamp- stead, Osterley near Brentford, Lansdowne House in Berkeley Square, Luton House in Bedfordshire, the Infirmary at Glasgow, and numerous town ROBERT ADAM 115 houses in Portland Place, Stratford Place, and Fitz- roy Square. The house at 25 Portland Place was built and fitted up for Robert Adam's own use. Kedleston Hall in Derbyshire, in spite of a peculiar arrangement, possesses unusual merit, being an adaptation from Palladio. Perhaps the firm's most celebrated designs are those of the college buildings and Registry Office at Edinburgh. They are well balanced and true to the best Classic traditions. Robert Adam's name is known as much for his work in interior decoration and furniture design as for his architecture. His room arrangements, his ornamental ceilings and chirnneypieces, and his fur- niture represent a greater unity and architectonic quality in the ensemble than is to be found in the work of his predecessors or contemporaries. Nev- ertheless, he was an architect of the first rank and a creator of the Georgian style. His exteriors fol- lowed Palladio in effect, being rather formal in their classicism and lacking the grace that distinguished the work of Sir Christopher Wren. He patented a stucco for covering brick walls, which he used with greater success than did the architects of a later period. His decorative work was rich, refined, chaste, and probably of more lasting value than his architec- 116 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES ture. The Pompeiian influence is strongly apparent in his interiors, which are generally delicate and satis- fying, though some critics call them attenuated, copying the delicacy rather than the richness of the antique. Certain it is that he had a rare feeling for perfection of detail and balance of ornament, as well as for the value of open spaces. Adam's name must be considered along with the names of Chippendale, Hepplewhite, and Sheraton in the development of English furniture styles, though he was not a cabinet-maker. He was one of the first to consider furniture fully worthy of an archi- tect's attention, and finding nothing to fit in with his Classic interiors, he designed it to suit his walls and panels. In fact, he designed the entire equip- ment of many houses, down to counterpanes and work-bags. These furniture designs were executed for the firm by cabinet-makers of the period and go, quite properly, by the name of "Adam furniture." The quantity of it being relatively small, it is seldom to be found in this country. For the most part it is Louis XVI in type, though with less rectangu- larity. In 1769 Adam made a few designs with Chinese details; in 1772 he used a lyre back, prob- ably borrowed from France, and later employed by Josiah Wedgwood, after the portrait by Sir Joshua Reynolds ROBERT ADAM 117 Sheraton and Phyfe; in 1777 he introduced an oval chair back with a touch of the Empire feeling, sug- gestive of Hepplewhite. In general, however, his designs were Classic and somewhat formal. As a furniture designer, in fact, he was not the equal of Hepplewhite, Sheraton, or our Duncan Phyfe, but he paved the way for them and they owed him the greatest possible debt. Adam's chairs were simple and chaste, lacking something of the grace that distinguished Shera- ton's. They were generally small and fine, with backs low and narrow, and with arms but slightly upholstered, if at all. The legs for the most part were straight, the cabriole leg being entirely aban- doned by Adam. Often they showed a Classic, sweeping curve. His sofas were delicate in appear- ance, with an inclination to Classic effects, and he designed a graceful but frail and comfortless couch with straight arms and no back. For his dining-rooms Adam designed a serving table flanked by urns on pedestals, which was later developed into the sideboard by Shearer and Hepple- white. He designed also bookcases, commodes, brackets, clock-cases, candelabra, mirror frames, con- sole tables, and numerous other pieces, generally adapting Classical forms to modern uses more sue- 118 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES cessfully than any previous English designer. He designed also carriages, plate, and other household fitments, and a famous sedan chair for Queen Char- lotte. Adam followed the fashion of his day in the use of mahogany, but he was most fond of using satin- wood, a new material which he did much to introduce to popular favour, and which was well adapted to his style. As a distinct departure from Chippendale's work, Adam used but little carving and that fine and in low relief. He used but little inlay until about 1770, when he began to employ colour, gilding, mar- quetery, and even ormulu ornaments. His favourite form of decoration, however, was painting, and he may be said to h&ve introduced a new idea in furni- ture — colour value. He borrowed his idea for painted furniture from France, and he had his work done by the best talent available. In this he owed much to the imported artists, Pergolesi, Antonio Zucchi, Cipriani, and Angelica Kauffmann. While James Adam should not be deprived of the credit due him for his part in the work of the firm and the development of the Adam style, neverthe- less the interest of biographer and critic finds itself fixed inevitably on the life and achievements of Robert. He was not as scholarly as Chambers, not ROBERT ADAM 119 as deep a student of architecture, but his touch was more graceful and the tendencies of his original crea- tions were better directed. The defects of his archi- tectural style were many and obvious, but he pos- sessed in a marked degree a fine sense of proportion, symmetry, balance, and distribution of ornament, and he formed a style notable for its Classic restraint and elegant taste. Like Chippendale, he was a wide borrower, borrowing, indeed, from Chippen- dale himself, and, like Chippendale, he was a clever adapter, with a greater sense of artistic propriety than Chippendale possessed. Adam's critics differ somewhat widely in their ap- praisal of his work, but all agree as to the importance of his introductions in the development of English style. As one critic says, he turned the tide of style single-handed, postponing for half a century the decline and fall of good taste. His estimate of his own work, as expressed in the preface to his book, was to the effect that his style had "brought about, in this country, a kind of revolution in the whole system of this elegant and useful art" — an ambitious state- ment but literally true. Another critic asserts that Adam rang the changes on a few motives, and that his style, though full of lightness and elegance, was un-English and lacking in 120 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES familiar charm. There is something in this undoubt- edly, and it may be further admitted that much of Adam's ornamental work was over-refined and lack- ing in the sturdiness and virility that we look for in an artistic contribution of permanent value. But the fact remains that Adam's influence on the de- signers, architects, decorators, and cabinet-makers of his day, even to the greatest of them, was of the highest potency, and we are always in deep debt to any master whose leadership is in the direction of restraint and away from extravagance. Still another critic, referring to Adam as the most celebrated architect of his day, points out the defects and inequalities in his style. Many of Adam's de- signs, he says, were tawdry and flimsy, but they had also many excellencies. He possessed genuine in- ventive genius. His exterior architecture was often petty and commonplace, his real forte being [interior decoration. England is indebted to him, this critic concludes, for much of the comfort combined with elegance which characterizes her homes to-day. A writer in the "Dictionary of National Bio- graphy," speaking of the brothers Robert and James, sums up their merits as follows: " Of their decorative work generally, it may be said that it was rich but neat, refined but not effeminate, chaste but not ROBERT ADAM 121 severe, and that it will probably have quite as last- ing and beneficial effect upon English taste as their architectural structures." Finally, to quote a contemporary, the Gentlemen's Magazine for March, 1792, said: 44 Mr. Adam pro- duced a total change in the architecture of this coun- try; and his fertile genius in elegant ornament was not confined to the decoration of buildings, but has been diffused into almost every branch of manu- facture." From John Swarbrick and Adam's other bio- graphers, we are able to gain a fairly vivid idea of his personality. In the first place he was a man of na- tural good taste and with a decided talent for design. Incidentally he enjoyed a considerable reputation as a landscape painter. His canvases showed a rich appreciation of composition, and of light and shadow. In the second place, he was well educated and enjoyed greater opportunities for travel and study than most of his contemporaries. Intellec- tually he was a broader man than Chambers. Withal he was practical — an artist but no dreamer. The material and artistic sides of his nature seem to have been equally developed, and he was a successful business man. Even his Spalatro book was pub- lished at a profit. And he achieved his success in 122 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES spite of his Scottish parentage, at that time not a popular asset in London. He was undoubtedly lucky and presented his ideas at an opportune mo- ment, but he had the enterprise, force, and vision to make the most of the situation. He attracted notable friends from the first and must have had a magnetic personality as well as a dynamic character. He is said to have had pleasing manners and a reputation for moral integrity. He was self confident and pushing — doubtless conceited — all of which contributed to his remarkable suc- cess. He was not a pioneer like Inigo Jones; I hardly think his genius could be rated in the same class as that of Sir Christopher Wren; but, considering the whole of his character and achievements, I am in- clined to consider him the foremost figure of the Georgian Period in the development of style and in artistic leadership. CHAPTER X JOSIAH WEDGWOOD (1730-1795) OF THE dozens of clever and successful Eng- lish potters of the eighteenth century, most were borrowers in the field of design; few may be said to have been creators of style. To Jo- siah Wedgwood alone may rightly be given the title of master. More than this, he takes a place along- side of Robert Adam in the refinement of English taste, the revival of Classical forms, and the stem- ming of the tide of vulgarity. A contemporary of Adam, his work ran parallel to that of the architect- decorator, and his artistic creed was much the same. Wedgwood's pottery was unquestionably the fin- est that England ever produced, in workmanship, design, material, and colour. When he started in the potter's trade, most of the tables of the middle classes in England bore only crude clay dishes, pewter, and woodenware. Salt-glaze and imported porcelains were too costly, and it remained for Wedgwood to provide those tables with good ware, perfect in form and materials, at low cost. But he 123 124 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES did more than this: in his finer ware he created works of art that are still the envy of sincere crafts- men and that rivalled the best work from the Con- tinent. The story of this greatest of English potters is inspiring. Starting with a poor education and an entailed estate, he had to make his own fortune, and he became successful commercially as well as artis- tically. His was a rare combination of ability. He discovered and invented new kinds of earthenware and introduced new and better styles. He acquired considerable scientific knowledge and his life was one of great civic value in his community. And above all, his life and work were guided by the purest ideals of craftsmanship. Josiah Wedgwood has been fortunate in his bi- ographers. A. H. Church, Samuel Smiles, Eliza Meteyard, Frederick Rathbone, Llewellyn Jewett, and others have contributed to a fairly voluminous Wedgwood literature which well repays the read- ing. I shall attempt only the briefest outline of Wedgwood's life and work, leaving it to these au- thors to satisfy a desire for a more complete and de- tailed account. Josiah Wedgwood came from a family of potters which, through three generations, had been prom- Part of a blue and white tea sel of jasper ware. Metropolitan Museum JOSIAH WEDGWOOD 125 inent in Staffordshire in the development of the industry through the seventeenth and early eigh- teenth centuries. His grandfather, Dr. Thomas W. Wedgwood of Burslem, was one of the best of the early salt-glaze potters. Josiah was the young- est of thirteen children of Thomas and Mary Wedg- wood, and was born in Burslem in 1730, being baptized in the parish church on July 12th of that year. The father, who owned a small but thriving pottery there, died when Josiah was nine years old. Josiah went to school at Newcastle until he was ten years old, and then, on account of the family's reduced circumstances, he was obliged to leave school and go to work. He was set to learning the art of "throwing" clay, and became extraordinarily skil- ful with the potter's wheel. When about twelve years old, Josiah was stricken with smallpox, which left him with a diseased knee from which he never recovered and which for many years caused him great pain and inconvenience. His eldest brother, Thomas, had succeeded to the father's business, and in 1744 Josiah was appren- ticed to him. For two years he continued his work as "thrower," but at last his lameness compelled him to give it up. His misfortune, however, brought its compensation, for he was now enabled to devote 126 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES more of his attention to the ornamental side of the business and to experimentation in the production of agate and tortoise-shell wares. He rapidly de- veloped an intense interest in the curious and the beautiful. At the end of the apprenticeship, Thomas, not in sympathy with his brother's progressive views, re- fused to take him into partnership, and in 1752 Josiah left Burslem and went into partnership with Thomas Alders and John Harrison at the Cliff Bank Pottery, near Stoke, who made mottled and marbled wares, some salt-glaze, and tea sets of black Egyptian. Young Wedgwood was instrumental in greatly improving these wares, but the partnership failed to prove satisfactory, and he left after a year or two. The young potter, in fact, had been sadly ham- pered in his career until, in 1754, he was taken into partnership by Thomas Whieldon of Fenton Low, one of the most eminent potters of his day and a man of progressive ideas. This was the turning point in Josiah's fortunes. With Whieldon, he produced several new wares, including a highly glazed green ware in the form of leaves, fruits, and flowers. In 1758 this partnership came to an end, and early in 1759 he returned to Burlsem and leased the Church- JOSIAH WEDGWOOD 127 yard works, which he operated in a small way. Within a few months he had formed a new associa- tion with his cousin Thomas, which later grew into a partnership. From relatives they rented for £10 a year a cottage, with two kilns, some work sheds, etc., known as the Ivy House works. Here Wedg- wood began to put into operation the results of his studies in ceramic chemistry. The cousins had but small capital, and at first made popular wares — salt-glaze, and green and yellow glaze — working gradually into tortoise-shell and marbled plates and flower vases, white stoneware, and green-glazed earthenware. Josiah invented a secret process for firing the glaze, and at first made most of his own models and moulds, mixed his own clay, super- intended the firing, and ran the business end. This early work was not marked. The factory turned out small wares in considerable quantity, but all were distinguished by perfection of workmanship. In a year or two the cousins enlarged the works, engaged more workmen, introduced a system of division of labour, and improved the kilns and mechanical appliances. In 1762 they leased the Brick House and works, known also as the Bell works. Here they remained until their final removal to Etruria in 1773. It was at about this time 128 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES that Wedgwood improved his white earthenware and cream-coloured ware which first brought him into prominence. This cream-coloured ware, made of the finest clays of Devon and Dorset, was better than any- thing of the kind before produced in Stafford- shire. In 1762 Wedgwood presented a service of this ware to Queen Charlotte and in 1763 he had it pat- ented. In this year he was appointed potter to the queen, and later to the king. He gave the name queen's ware to the new pottery. The royal patronage doubtless helped him, for his business began to thrive. Gradually he turned his attention more and more to artistic productions. The revival of Classic forms, such as Robert Adam introduced, interested him deeply, especially the discovery at Pompeii and elsewhere in Italy of old Greek and Tuscan vases. This interest was wide- spread throughout Europe. In England Adam and Wedgwood were its most successful and faithful exponents. Wedgwood began to study also the later phases of Greek art. He adhered throughout to his ideals of mechanical accuracy and perfection and exerted a great influence on the taste of his time. He became, in fact, the world's most successful and orig- inal potter, and his work influenced all that followed. A basalt tea set made by Wedgwood at Etruria. Metropolitan Museum JOSIAH WEDGWOOD 129 On January 25, 1764, Wedgwood was married to a distant cousin, Sarah Wedgwood, in the parish church at Astbury, Cheshire, and brought her home to Brick House. It was a happy marriage; Sarah became a model wife and mother and took a great interest in all her husband's ^ambitions. She was the mother of a considerable family of sons and daughters, one of the latter becoming the mother of Charles Darwin. Not long after his marriage Wedg- wood, unable to endure longer the agony caused by his lame knee, had his leg amputated. About 1766 Wedgwood began making his black basalt ware. This had been made in a crude form in Staffordshire and had been called Egyptian black, a ware owing its colour to the introduction of iron. Wedgwood greatly improved this, making it richer in line, finer in grain, and smoother in sur- face, and calling it black porcelain. During the following two years Wedgwood was very busy and felt the need of a special outlet for his goods in London and also of a partner to share his business responsibilities. As early as 1766 he began talking of plans of expansion with his friend Thomas Bentley, whom he had met in Liverpool in 1762. Bentley was a widely travelled man of taste and education, as well as an experienced merchant 130 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES and a born salesman. He is described as handsome and courtly. He and Wedgwood acquired a great mutual esteem for each other, and in 1767 they agreed upon a partnership which was completed in the following year. From that time the Wedgwood ware began to be marked with the names Wedg- wood & Bentley, or the initials W. & B. A shop was opened in St. Martin's Lane, London, in 1768, and Bentley settled there to look after the sales. This arrangement proved most profitable for all concerned. The business continued to grow until finally the firm built a new factory at Etruria, near Hanley. Here also Wedgwood built a fine mansion for him- self. The new works were formally opened June 13, 1769. The scope of the business was greatly enlarged and included the manufacture of cameos, medallions, miniature sculptures, painted vases, etc. It was at Etruria that the finest of the Wedgwood wares were made, many special orders being ex- ecuted for European royal families and other emi- nent persons. The firm employed the most able and talented artists available, including John Flax- man, an artist and sculptor of rare Classic taste, whose work is now highly prized by connoisseurs. All of which helped greatly in raising the standard of the national taste. JOSIAH WEDGWOOD 131 In 1774 new quarters were fitted up in London for Mr. Bentley, in Greek Street, Soho, and were called Portland House. In 1773 Wedgwood began making a tinted terra cotta which he perfected until in 1776 he was pro- ducing his famous jasper ware, perhaps the best known and most highly prized of all his inventions. Thomas Bentley died November 26, 1780, and Wedgwood, nearly overwhelmed by his loss, carried on the ornamental end of the business alone. In 1788 his cousin Thomas, who had been in charge of the so-called useful wares, also died. The burden of responsibility was too much for Wedgwood, and in 1790 he took into partnership his three sons, John, Josiah, and Thomas. In 1793 his nephew, Thomas Byerley, was also taken in, and the firm became Wedgwood, Sons & Byerley. Josiah Wedgwood the elder partially retired from business in 1790, and during the last five years of his life he was afflicted with ill health. He died at Etruria on January 3, 1795, at the age of sixty-five, rich in honours and friends, and leaving an estate of over £500,000. He was buried in the churchyard in Stoke. Though the works were carried on after his death, his personal supervision and inspiration could never be replaced. 132 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES Josiah Wedgwood was a man of genius in art, an earnest man of interesting personality and sterling character, a man of intellect, patience, perseverance, courage, and high ideals. He was so- cially inclined, entertained much, and drew about him many warm friends, including some of the most eminent men of his time. He was a collector of books, engravings, and objects of natural history, and took great delight in the improvement of his garden and grounds. His sympathies were all with the patriots of the American Revolution, and he was an advocate of the abolition of slavery. Lacking the opportunities of an early education, his mind was ever vigorous and he acquired consider- able scientific knowledge. He was accustomed to send the results of his experiments and investiga- tions to the Royal Society, and his scientific writings were always sound and sane. He invented a pyro- meter for recording the higher degrees of heat. He was a fellow of the Royal and Antiquarian Societies, and in 1786 he was the promoter and founder of an association in London called The General Chamber of the Manufacturers of Great Britain. Wedgwood's activities, in fact, were many and varied outside of his business. He always took a great interest in the welfare of his workmen and Pebble-ware vases made by Wedgwood & Bentley. Metropolitan Museum of Art A tov teapot in black basalt with encaustic enamel decorations. Metropolitan Museum of Art / 5 JOSIAH WEDGWOOD 133 built a model village for them at Etruria. He recognized the need for better transportation facili- ties in Staffordshire if business was to expand, and proposed a canal to be built connecting the Trent and Mersey rivers. He was the chief agent in ob- taining an act of Parliament authorizing the building of this canal, and in spite of the opposition of landed interests, he saw it through. The first turf was cut on July 17, 1766, and the Grand Trunk Canal, ninety miles long, was completed in 1770. Wedg- wood also planned and carried into execution ten miles of turnpike roads, and he assisted in the im- provement of Burslem by the building of schools, chapels, a town hall, and a public market. In connection with the production of Wedgwood's finer wares, and the designing of those Classical forms which helped to make him famous and to raise the artistic taste of England, a word of credit should be given to John Flaxman. Flaxman, whose father was a seller of plaster casts, was the second son and was born July 6, 1755. While a boy he amused himself with drawing and modelling and reading Classic fables. When twelve years old he won first prize for a model from the Society of Arts, and again when he was fifteen. From 1767 on he was an important contributor to exhibitions. He became a 134 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES sculptor of ability and designed and executed a number of public monuments. Bentley discovered him before 1775, and Wedgwood took a great interest in his career, sending him to Rome to study, and helping him in other ways. He was the designer of some of the most exquisite of the relief decorations used on the jasper ware. A volume might be written — in fact, volumes have been written — describing ? ! the various Wedgwood wares. Only the briefest possible resume can be given in a chapter of this scope. The chief wares were the cream-coloured or queen's ware; variegated or terra cotta ware, resembling porphyry, granite, Egyptian pebble, etc.; basalt, or black porcelain; a white porcelain biscuit, smooth and wax-like, with prop- erties like the basalt; jasper ware; bamboo, or cane- coloured biscuit porcelain, similar to the white; and a porcelain biscuit hard as agate, impenetrable by acid or liquid, and used for mortars and pestles, chemical vessels, etc. Briefly, the queen's ware was light and durable, clear in tone, and offered a good background for dec- oration. It was made in dinner sets, basket-work dishes, vases, and various odd pieces. The black basalt was perhaps the most solid pot- tery ever produced. It was as hard as natural stone, JOSIAH WEDGWOOD 135 capable of receiving a high polish, resistant to acids and fire, fine in grain and texture. It was made in tea sets, vases, placques, busts, and medallion por- traits in plain black, and was also used to receive encaustic painting. The jasper ware Wedgwood himself described as "a white porcelain bisque of exquisite beauty and delicacy, possessing the quality of receiving colour throughout its whole substance. This renders it particularly fit for cameos, portraits, and all subjects in bas-relief, as the ground may be made of any colour throughout and the raised figures in pure white." Many colours were employed, including at least five tones and hues of blue derived from cobalt, six tones of green, three tones of red from orange to terra cotta, lilac, rose, plum, chocolate, buff, brown, canary-yellow, black, and four distinct whites. Previous to 1781 the jasper ware was used almost ex- clusively for placques and cameos. Then Wedg- wood turned his attention to vases, adapting the forms largely from the antique. After 1780 all sorts of articles were made in this ware. The incident of the Portland vase is worthy of mention. The original Portland or Barberini vase was a famous antique glass amphora which was dis- covered about 1625 and was acquired by the Duchess 136 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES of Portland in 1785 after a troubled history. This vase was copied wonderfully by Wedgwood in blue- black jasper with white relief figures. He is supposed to have made fifty copies, though others were made later. For the best of them he charged £50 each. It is said that about twenty of the original fifty copies are extant in museums and private collections, chiefly in England, but the authenticity of some of them is disputed. They are very valuable, one having been sold in 1890 at Christie's in London for £200. Some of Wedgwood's most decorative and most minutely perfect work is to be found in his cameos and medallions. They were made chiefly in black basalt and jasper ware, and included reliefs and intaglios. Among the subjects most prized by collectors are the classical and historical subjects, and the "heads of illustrious moderns." The commonest size was 2 by 11 inches, in oval form. Most of the genuine Wedgwood ware bears the potter's mark. Prior to 1768, on the queen's ware, the single name Wedgwood appeared in fairly large capitals. About 1768 the name was used in four different sizes of type. From 1769 to 1780 the firm name Wedgwood & Bentley appeared. The two names, one above the other, were used in four JOSIAH WEDGWOOD 137 sizes. The names were also used in raised letters in a circular impressed mark, usually a little over an inch in diameter, the word Etruria being added on the later basalt, Etruscan, and variegated vases. On the small basalt intaglios the initials W. & B. were sometimes used. After Bentley's death the single name Wedgwood was again used in six different sizes. This brief outline is hardly sufficient to guide the novice in a study of Wedgwood wares, but it may suggest a course of more thorough investigation. The artistic beauty and variety of these objects will well repay the study. For Wedgwood was more than a successful potter. Like Adam he introduced Classic forms in pottery following the vogue of Chinese, as Adam superseded Chippendale. Wedg- wood's life and work are fairly well known, but he has seldom been credited with the influence he exerted on the general trend of artistic taste and appreciation in England. CHAPTER XI GEORGE HEPPLEWHITE {Circa 1720-1786) GEORGE HEPPLEWHITE comes very near to being a myth. His personality is elu- sive; the very proof of his existence depends largely on circumstantial evidence. He was, how- ever, an individual to be reckoned with in any study of the development of style in furniture. He is not to be explained away as a mere name given to a school. There was a personality there which im- pressed itself on the taste of his period, and for years Hepplewhite has shared with Chippendale and Shera- ton the honour of creating or fostering that national taste for artistic beauty in furniture which reached its zenith in England between 1780 and 1800. Of biographical data very little exists. Even the dates of his birth and death are not certainly known, and the spelling of his name has been a matter of controversy. In the first edition of his book it was spelled "Heppelwhite," and this spelling has appeared occasionally elsewhere. In the later editions, how- ever, the name appears as " Hepplewhite." 138 GEORGE HEPPLEWHITE 139 George Hepplewhite was born— no one knows just where — at some time during the first half of the eighteenth century, and was apprenticed to the Gillows at Lancaster. Later he carried on a cabinet-making business in Redcross street, Parish of St. Giles, Cripplegate. He must have died in 1786, for the records show that on June 27th of that year the administration of his estate was granted to his widow, Alice Hepplewhite. He left a profitable business and property of considerable value. After his death the business was carried on by his widow and partners, trading as A. Hepplewhite & Co., and it is their name which appears on the catalogue of his designs which was published two years after his death. No record has been left as to the sort of man Hepplewhite was. We can only argue from his work and success that he was a man of taste and skill, educated at least in his art, and possessed of business ability second only to that of Chippendale. He was the most prominent cabinet-maker and furniture designer in England at a time when this was a pros- perous and populous industry. The only visible evidence we have of his work is in his posthumous book. It is known that he made 140 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES furniture after his own designs, but many others made use of them also, so that to-day we have but slight means of identification. The full title of the book, which is descriptive of its contents, is as follows (taken from the third edition): "The Cabinet-Maker and Upholsterer's Guide, or, Repository of Designs for Every Article of Household Furniture, in the Newest and Most Approved Taste, Displaying a Great Variety of Patterns for Chairs, Stools, Sofas, Confidante, Duch- esse, Side Boards, Pedestals and Vases, Cellerets, Knife-Cases, Desk and Book-Cases, Secretary and Book-Cases, Library Cases, Library Tables, Reading Desks, Chests of Drawers, Urn Stands, Tea Cad- dies, Tea Trays, Card Tables, Pier Tables, Pem- broke Tables, Tambour Tables, Dressing Glasses, Dressing Tables and Drawers, Commodes, Rudd's Table, Bidets, Night Stands, Bason Stands, Ward- robes, Pot Cupboards, Brackets, Hanging Shelves, Fire Screens, Beds, Field Beds, Sweep Tops for Ditto, Bed Pillars, Candle Stands, Lamps, Pier Glasses, Terms for Busts, Cornices for Library Cases, Wardrobes, etc., at large. Ornamented tops for pier tables, Pembroke tables, commodes, etc. In the Plainest and Most Enriched Styles, with a Scale to each, and an Explanation in Letter Press. Design for a secretary, from " The Cabinet-Maker's and Upholsterer's Guide," by A. Hepplewhite & Co. GEORGE HEPPLEWHITE 141 Also the Plan of a Room showing the Proper Distri- bution of the Furniture. The Whole Exhibiting near three hundred different designs, engraved on one hundred and twenty-eight plates. From Draw- ings by A. Hepplewhite & Co., Cabinet-Makers." The first edition of this book was published in 1788, the second in 1789, and the third in 1794. It was a businesslike book for the trade, and the most notable of several similar works published by others at about the same time. In the preface Hepplewhite states his creed as follows: "To unite elegance and utility, and blend the useful with the agreeable, has ever been considered a difficult but an honourable task." It is the simple statement of a true craftsman, and might have come from the pen of John Ruskin or William Morris. Postponing for the moment a general criticism of Hepplewhite' s work, the impression one receives from looking through his book is of a lack of uni- formity. Some of the designs are fine and grace- ful, some heavy and bordering on ugliness, which adds some colour to the theory that not all the de- signs in the books were by Hepplewhite himself. It is perhaps not too much to assume that his pencil was responsible for the best of them. Some of the rectangular-backed chairs strongly suggest Sheraton; 142 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES the sofas are hardly compelling in the main; the girandoles, pier glasses, etc., are very fine and delicate and are decidedly of the Adam type; the sideboards show no drawers, but are equipped with vases and pedestals at the ends and with knife-boxes on top; the chairs and small tables make decidedly the best showing; stools and other pieces are strongly Louis XVI in style; the beds somehow fail to satisfy; something seems to be wrong with their propor- tions, though the pillars are in most cases very graceful. So much of an impression may be gained through a hasty study of this book. Though the ' ' Guide" was published after Hepple- white's death and was doubtless prepared toward the close of his life, many of the designs may have been drawn some time before. He had undoubtedly been in business for several years and had probably been making furniture of this type. He was almost certainly a competitor of Chippendale, and his best work probably antedates the publication of his book by upward of ten years. To return to Hepplewhite's place among the Georgian designers and craftsmen, his detractors are inclined to point out that his name has been given to a school or a fashion which he did not create. They assert that he did not originate the GEORGE HEPPLEWHITE 143 so-called Hepplewhite style, but was merely one of many exponents. They point out that others were working in this style, and that the Gillows preceded him, while Adam was the real source of its prin- ciples. But every school and movement has its leader, and Hepplewhite was undoubtedly the supe- rior of his contemporaries. He was constructive, and he did more than any other to crystallize the new taste. It is also true that most of the so-called Hepple- white furniture was not made by Hepplewhite, but only controversialists need attempt to distinguish between the actual work of his shop, the designs shown in his book, and the work of his contempo- raries working along parallel lines. Call it the work of a school and not of an individual if you will, or the normally developing fashion of an hour, it ex- hibits too many excellences not to confess to the parentage of a master, and Hepplewhite must have been that master. And what one of the masters was entirely orig- inal? The great master always knows how to ap- ply and adapt the work of others. Like Chippen- dale, Hepplewhite borrowed freely, from both France and England. He and Sheraton were fortunate in coming after furniture making had been established 144 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES as one of the fine arts, and there was a mass of material for them to draw from. It was to Adam that Hepplewhite owed his greatest debt. It was Hepplewhite's aim to break away from the Chip- pendale style and to combine elegance with light- ness, and in the Adam introductions he found the most available material for this. From Adam he took the tapering leg which he did most to popularize, the oval chair back, and painted ornament. In fact, there is such a merging of styles from Adam to Hepplewhite and Sheraton that it is often impossible to draw sharp lines of distinction. Granting all this indefiniteness, it is still possible to make some sort of critical study of what is gen- erally considered as Hepplewhite's contribution to the style of his day. He was, first of all, an ex- ponent of elegance. That was the keynote of his style. He pared away all clumsiness from his de- signs. Their extreme fineness, in some cases, pro- duces almost the effect of weakness, but he was a thorough enough craftsman to offset this with ex- cellence of construction in the work which he actu- ally executed himself. Hepplewhite's style lies somewhere between the rococo and the Classic. He broke away from Chip- pendale, though he was not a thorough Classicist GEORGE HEPPLEWHITE 145 like Adam, nor did he ever achieve quite the per- fection of delicacy reached by Sheraton. On the other hand, he possessed balance and restraint and common sense, and he avoided the ultra-fantastic which neither Chippendale nor Sheraton was guilt- less of. On the whole, his style was more distinctly English than Chippendale's, and if he was not a student of the Classic like Adam, he at least ab- sorbed much of the Classic feeling. The Hepplewhite designs show an absorption rather than an adoption of foreign styles, though they were strongly influenced by the style of Louis XVI, as Chippendale's were by that of Louis XV. They are characterized by comfort rather than arti- ficiality of ornament. Hepplewhite was a mechani- cal rather than a free-hand designer like Chippendale, and his designs show technical excellences that were undoubtedly the result of his practical training. The popular taste at this time was veering away from solid mahogany, and lighter woods, such as satinwood, chestnut, sycamore, and stained woods, were coming into vogue, beech being used to a considerable extent for painted furniture. Hep- plewhite, however, clung largely to mahogany, using satinwood and rosewood moderately to meet special demands. His chairs were mostly solid mahogany, 146 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES his sideboards sometimes veneered. He occasion- ally painted or japanned his furniture after the Adam manner, some of this being fine, though much of it lacked durability. Hepplewhite, though not a master carver like Chippendale, used carving with greater restraint and most effectively. It was mostly in low relief. It was in inlay, however, that he excelled, and he produced some ofj the most refined and tasteful in- lay to be found on English furniture. On the doors of wardrobes and the fronts of drawers he used a veneer of the beautiful curl mahogany that came into favour about 1760, while on the fronts of his solid mahogany tables, sideboards, and bookcases he substituted for carving an inlay of low-toned contrasting woods in simple patterns. The legs of his tables and sideboards were frequently orna- mented with delicate vertical patterns in sycamore and tulip wood. He was fond of using narrow lines and bands, herring-bone patterns, the meander pattern, and the Greek fret, while the wheat ear appears constantly in his inlay and carving. Hepplewhite introduced the tapering, square leg — often tapered on the inside faces only — usually ending in the spade foot, which added a needed look of strength. He also began the use of turned legs, GEORGE HEPPLEWHITE 147 not to be found in Chippendale's work. The cabri- ole leg he discarded altogether. On some of his larger pieces he used the short, hollowed-out bracket or French foot. He was fond of inserting small ovals in his chair backs, and he often used the Prince of Wales feathers in delicate carving, com- bined with inlay in coloured w r oods. The urn-shaped finials and Classic pediments found in his designs were borrowed from Adam. His finest and most elaborate inlaid work, perhaps, is to be found on his table tops. Hepplewhite's furniture was unequal in quality. His chairs, sofas, and sideboards were among the best ever made in England, and he is chiefly re- membered for them. His shield-back chair is per- haps his best known and most highly appreciated design. Moden designers of chairs probably owe more to Hepplewhite than to any other. Like Chippen- dale, he devoted his best efforts to the chair. Hep- plewhite chairs are refined and elegant in propor- tions, and are almost always stronger than they appear. The designs are structurally sound. They were generally smaller than those of Chippen- dale, partly because hoops had gone temporarily out of fashion. 148 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES They are best known for their oval, heart-shaped, and shield-shaped backs, and their straight, square, tapering legs, often ending in the spade foot. The typical Hepplewhite chair back is a thing of, rare beauty of curve and proportion. It was rarely up- holstered, but formed an open or pierced frame within which there appeared an infinite variety of patterns. These were sometimes curving upright slats, some- times a single pierced central splat, nearly always ex- quisitely carved in low relief. The designs include simple flutings, Classic details, representations of urns with drapery or festoons, the husks and ears of wheat, and the three feathers of the Prince of Wales. This last was used more often in the oval- backed chairs, the back of which usually enclosed a fan-shaped splat. He also designed a square- backed chair with four or five upright slats. The shape of the shield-back varies from round to pointed, but the top is nearly always a graceful, swelling curve, sometimes called camel-back. The shield rests on upright supports at the sides, which blend gently with the curve of the back. It is said that the Gillows may have originated the shield- back, but Hepplewhite was at least its most con- sistent and successful user, and most of its details were certainly original with him. Sideboard attributed to Thomas Shearer. Metropolitan Museum GEORGE HEPPLEWHITE 1 J 9 Hepplewhite's armchairs were, for the most part, similar to his side chairs — perhaps a trifle broader — with arms attached about half way up the back and curving throughout their length, with all harsh angles avoided. Hepplewhite chair seats were most often upholstered in coloured and figured haircloth, held in place by straight or waving rows of brass- headed nails. Most of Hepplewhite's chairs were of solid ma- hogany, depending for their ornament on line and carving. Occasionally, however, he used a fine satinwood inlay, and a few of his later chairs were japanned or painted with musical trophies, floral motifs, etc. — elegant and pleasing but not permanent. Hepplewhite did much to develop the sideboard for both use and beauty, and introduced many articles for tea service, such as urn stands, tea trays, chests, and caddies. Adam and others had designed serving-tables, flanked by pedestals used as cellerettes and plate warmers and surmounted by hot-water urns. Knife-boxes were used on the tables and a girandole suspended above. Hepple- white (or Shearer, of whom I shall speak pres- ently) combined these into one piece. Cupboards and drawers were first built into the ends of the table to contain silver, and the knife-boxes were 150 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES abandoned. Then the table and pedestals were united into a single piece. Hepplewhite's sideboards are distinguished by their beautiful serpentine fronts. These differ from Sheraton's in that the end curves are concave, while Sheraton's are convex. There are four legs in front and two or four in back. These sideboards were often embellished with fine inlay of satinwood, tulip wood, sycamore, ebony, rosewood, maple, yew, holly, etc., with little or no carving. They were perhaps the most admired of all his designs, with the possible exception of his chairs. As a matter of fact, however, credit for the in- troduction of this piece of furniture is not due to Hepplewhite, but to his friend and collaborator, Thomas Shearer. Less is known about Shearer, even, than Hepplewhite. He may have been em- ployed by the latter. At all events, his fame was overshadowed by that of Hepplewhite. He was the author of most of the designs in "The Cabinet- Maker's London Book of Prices and Designs," a book published for the trade in 1788. In this ap- pears the Shearer sideboard which Hepplewhite is thought to have adapted. The book is also strong in bookcase designs and contains screen writing- cases, library bookcases, wardrobes, bureau book- GEORGE HEPPLEWHITE 151 cases, writing and dressing-tables, ladies' work tables, etc. We have no evidence that Shearer designed chairs, apparently leaving that field to Hepple- white. Shearer had a keen eye for simplicity of design and delicacy of proportion. Some of his pieces are unsurpassed for dainty and slender elegance. His use of inlay was graceful and restrained, and no one ever used the curve to better purpose. Both Hepplewhite and Sheraton owed much to this ob- scure craftsman. Of other pieces Hepplewhite designed and prob- ably constructed a wide variety, though not all of equal excellence. His sofas were given serpentine, convex curved, or straight backs, upholstered. His only open-back design was the bar-back or four- shield, like a row of chair backs. His French designs are considered the most successful. He designed window seats similar to Adam's, Louis XVI in type, elegant in their simplicity, with no backs and with the ends or arms rolling gracefully outward. He made dressing-tables with heart- shaped mirrors, Pembroke tables with two-hinged leaves, card tables, and pier tables with semi-circular tops. His bedroom furniture was often charming, with 152 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES beds, wardrobes, commodes, dressing-tables, etc., more complete and less heavy than they had been previously. His bedsteads were handsome, with carved and reeded pillars, and his wardrobe sup- planted the old highboy. In his mirror frames he took a leaf from Adam's book. They were made largely of compo and were very delicate and fragile, with Classic ornament predominating. His smaller pieces show much grace and avoidance of over-ornamentation. They in- clude urn-shaped knife-boxes in mahogany and satinwood, a great variety of inlaid tea caddies, graceful fire screens, work tables, dressing-glasses, and little inlaid stands. He probably made no clock cases, but his influence is to be seen on those of the period, with their inlay of lines, bandings, and sand- burnt ovals and shells. It is difficult to arrive at a comparative estimate of Hepplewhite's position in the Hall of Fame. We know so little about him; his own work as a cabinet- maker is so difficult to identify; so little is known as to just how far his designs should be credited to his own originality. We may safely conclude, however, that he was a man not without force, imagination, originality, and artistic resources. He had an eye sensitive to design, and he must be given credit for GEORGE HEPPLEWHITE 153 the general high level of his design, proportion, and workmanship. Lightness, delicacy, grace, and re- finement characterize his style and give us an inkling of the character of the man. He may be reckoned something of a pioneer, for he was one of the first of the cabinet-makers to break away from Chippendale domination. Adam undoubtedly influenced his style, but did not entirely determine the best of Hepple- white's designs. George Hepplewhite was at least a practical cabinet-maker of independent if not ori- ginal ideas, and his work certainly produced a pro- found effect on the style of the period. Personally, I have always felt that Hepplewhite, if he deserves credit for all that bears his name, was a greater designer than Chippendale, a man with a better balanced mind and a truer sense of line and proportion, though I know that Chippen- dale has generally been considered the greatest of the Georgians. R. S. Clouston, the English au- thority, says: "I am unable to rank Hepplewhite with Chippendale on the one side or Sheraton on the other, either in construction or design, yet there is an undefinable charm about his work, even when faulty by rule, which, like some old song, touches a higher and more human note than can be attained by mere correctness." CHAPTER XII THOMAS SHERATON (1751-1806) OF ALL the English craftsmen and masters of design and applied art, Thomas Sheraton was one of the most interesting in point of character. His passing, at the beginning of the nine- teenth century, marked the end of the Golden Age of English cabinet-making. He was the last, but by no means the least, of the creators of English styles. His fame as a cabinet-maker and furniture designer ranks next to that of Thomas Chippendale, and those who believe that he was Chippendale's superior, that he never had an equal in his particular field, are able to support their contentions with sound argument. Thomas Sheraton was a genius, if there ever was one. Thomas Sheraton and George Hepplewhite were contemporaries in London; but in the development of style, Sheraton followed Hepplewhite. Hepple- white' s designs were the first to achieve popular- ity; Sheraton's were the last to give way before the invasion of barbarism. 154 THOMAS SHERATON 155 Sheraton was born in humble circumstances at Stockton-on-Tees in 1751, three years before Chip- pendale published his " Director." He was a coun- try lad who somehow managed to pick up a fair but unbalanced education. He never received ade- quate specialized training. He taught himself draw- ing and geometry, and was probably apprenticed to some local cabinet-maker. In early life he referred to himself as a mechanic, with small advantages of academic education. Little is known of his work until he went to London about 1790, when he was nearly forty years old. He was just a poor journeyman cabinet-maker and Baptist preacher. All his life religion played an im- portant part in his affairs. He was, in short, a strange blend of mechanic, inventor, artist, mystic, and religious controversialist. His parents had been Church of England people, but he became a zealous Baptist, preaching occasionally in Baptist chapels, and issuing pamphlets on religious topics. In London he opened a shop in Soho. He was not a good business man, and he never achieved the commercial success of Chippendale or Hepplewhite. In fact, his output was very small. He is suppposed to have made and sold some furniture of his own and to have executed orders for the Adam broth- 156 CREATORS OF DECORATIVE STYLES ers. But it is doubtful if he ever executed many of his most cherished designs, and it is probable that most of the furniture attributed to him was built by others after the drawings in his books. After 1793 he practically gave up the cabinet-making business and became a designer and a publisher of books. It is upon these that his fame chiefly rests, though there is evidence to prove that he was him- self a workman of rare gifts. His first essay in the publishing field was a series of eighty-four designs, not dated, and now very rare. His " Drawing Book," of which I shall speak later, appeared in 1791, in quarto form, with 111 plates. An "Accompaniment" and "Appendix" were pub- lished during the following two years. A second edition appeared in parts from 1793 to 1796, with 119 plates, and a third edition in 1802, with 122 plates. In 1803 his "Dictionary" appeared, and in 1804-7 his "Encyclopaedia," in 125 parts, of which he lived to publish only thirty. There was also a posthu- mous volume by him, published in 1812, made up chiefly of plates from the "Dictionary" and "Ency- clopaedia," and called "Designs for Household Furni- ture." These books were all published by subscription, and none of them made any money for their author. ■a* |§ C ZJ i-