Victorian Gothic furniture

The term “Victorian Gothic” is a bit misleading, in that the gothic period in art, architecture, design and literature began several decades before Queen Victoria came to the throne of Great Britain in 1837 and had run its course long before her death in 1901. Indeed, the Great Exhibition of 1851 contained very few examples of gothic style among the many hundreds of pieces on display, because the style was by then largely on its way out. It is therefore necessary to look at the development of furniture design from around 1800 in order to understand it fully.

The fashion for all things gothic, although it had been lurking in the background for some time (for example, Thomas Chippendale used gothic motifs in some of his designs in the mid-18^th century), took off when England’s emerging middle class sought to spend their new-found wealth on design that was noticeably “English”.  An important reason for this was that Britain was at war with Napoleonic France until 1815 and there was a conscious desire not to copy French design, whether Classical or Rococo.

The trend was to look backwards in time to the medieval period, when English armies were defeating French ones at Agincourt and elsewhere, and massive cathedrals were being built at places such as Salisbury and York in a distinctively gothic style. Despite the fact that these buildings were inspired by similar creations across Europe, especially in France, these were thought by many to be quintessentially English and thus to be the style to emulate in the early 19^th century.

In terms of furniture design, a considerable amount of imagination was applied in the drive to go back in time, given that hardly any pieces of genuine medieval furniture had survived, and those that had done so were noticeably simple in form and style, and a long way from some of the extraordinary pieces that appeared during the pre-Victorian and Victorian eras.

The features that were characteristically gothic were the same in terms of both architecture and furniture design. Chairs, beds, cabinets and buildings likewise sprouted pinnacles and arches, crockets (projecting carved leaf shapes), flower balls, clusters and carved figures. Beds were designed that looked like medieval tombs and couches were built with decoration that could have come straight from a 13^th century cathedral.

It should therefore come as no surprise that gothic furniture survived longer in ecclesiastical settings than in domestic ones. The novelty of living in what looked like a medieval monastery, with its dark oak or mahogany furniture in rooms dimly lit by narrow pointed windows, soon wore off. Indeed, very few houses were ever furnished entirely in gothic style, which was considered more suited to the “serious” rooms such as the hall and the library rather than the bedrooms and drawing room in which people wished to relax.

However, gothic church furnishings stayed in vogue for much longer, even into the 20^th century. A good place to see gothic furniture today is a typical church, be it Anglican or Nonconformist, that was built during the Victorian vogue for church building and which has not undergone subsequent modernisation.

The most significant designer of gothic furniture during the Victorian period was the last great exponent of this style, namely Augustus Welby Northmore Pugin (1812-52). His name will always be associated with the Houses of Parliament in Westminster, which were rebuilt, after a disastrous fire, between 1840 and 1865. Pugin worked alongside the architect Sir Charles Barry from 1844, although he did not live to see his work completed. Pugin was responsible for many of the internal elements of the Houses of Parliament, including the furnishings, and he embraced the gothic ethos in everything he did. Whereas many designers tended to start with a basic form and add gothic ornamentation as an afterthought, Pugin’s pieces were gothic through and through, which made them convincing. It is easy to apply gothic principles in a way that makes the finished result look cheap or even ridiculous, but Pugin’s pieces had an integrity which no other designers of his time could equal. Items such as the gilt throne from which the Queen opens Parliamentary sessions in the House of Lords are at the pinnacle of gothic design and are entirely correct in their setting.

Some of the best surviving gothic furniture was produced by unknown designers in provincial factories. This was often mass produced, but gothic decoration was applied sparingly to give the pieces a little bit of character. One can find, for example, kitchen cupboards with panels in the shape of arched church windows, or otherwise simple chairs with a gothic design on the back.

Everything that bears the label “gothic” has to do with fantasy in some shape or form, whether it be gothic novels such as Mary Shelley’s “Frankenstein” or the follies built by Victorian landowners for no purpose other than to catch the eye. This is because the gothic ideal was based on an imaginary concept of a remote past. Good gothic architecture and design therefore appeals to the imagination, although the worst can rightly excite mockery and ridicule for being “over the top”.

A good place to see some excellent Victorian gothic furniture is Windsor Castle, the interiors of which were designed by Sir Jeffry Wyatville for King George IV in the gothic style. Another place is, as mentioned above, the Houses of Parliament, and there are also some typical gothic pieces in London’s Victoria and Albert Museum.

© John Welford

Shaker furniture

Shaker furniture derived from the beliefs and practices of a religious group that was never particularly numerous and which only had a relatively short lifespan as an active movement. However, the artefacts which its members produced, particularly their furniture, have had a lasting appeal. Indeed, they have influenced and inspired many later designers, especially those of a functional and minimalist turn of mind.

The origin of the Shakers, or “Shaking Quakers”, was in 18^th century England when a young Quaker woman, Ann Lee, founded a small sect of her own, the members of which emigrated to the Colonies in 1774. They set up a community at Watervliet, New York, where they could farm and practice their religion. Other communities were later established, although at their height, in around 1860, the Shakers only had some 6,000 members.

At the heart of Shaker belief was simplicity, austerity and hard work, with little room for frivolity and certainly none for luxury. Pleasures were few and far between, “letting go” being confined to the music and dancing of their religious celebrations, which is where the “Shaker” nickname originated. One pleasure they denied themselves was sexual intercourse, even in marriage, so families could only be formed by adoption. Many Shakers of later generations had been orphans who were adopted and brought up by members of the sect.

Shaker furniture reflects these beliefs not only in its pure functionality and lack of decoration but also in its excellent workmanship. “Mother Ann” had stated: “Do all your work as though you had a thousand years to live, and as you know you must die tomorrow”. This meant that, whether a Shaker was baking a loaf or making a chair, the result had to be as close to perfection as possible. This attention to quality is one reason why so much Shaker furniture has survived to the present day.

Another reason is that the relatively small number of Shaker craftsmen did not confine themselves to making pieces for the use of their own community. The items they made, particularly chairs, were not only well-made but, because they used only as much wood as was essential to the construction, cheap to make. Thousands were therefore sold outside the Shaker settlements, throughout much of the 19^th century.

Mother Ann’s stipulations virtually dictated the Shaker style: “Whatever is fashioned, let it be plain and simple, unembellished by any superfluities that add nothing to its goodness or durability.” This meant that carving, inlays and veneers were out, and turning (on a lathe) was only used for functional purposes. The items made were limited to what was actually needed in a home, namely chairs, tables, stands, beds, cupboards, chests and clocks. Shakers believed in cleanliness, so the furniture was made to be easily moved in order that rooms could be swept frequently.

The typical Shaker side chair was of a ladder-back design with three slats, these being flat at the base and rounded at the top, also slightly concave to fit the user’s back. A double set of box-stretchers on the legs provided structural soundness, and the seat was of woven rushes or tapes. The only concession to decoration was an acorn-shaped finial at the top of the rear uprights. One design of side chair enabled the back to be tipped backwards without the feet leaving the floor. Most chairs were made from maple, although birch, cherry and other woods were also used.

Despite the overall austerity of Shaker life, they were not ascetics and the craftsmen did seek to make their furniture comfortable, at least by the standards of the day. A notable item of Shaker construction was the rocking chair, five different types of which can be identified. Shaker designers were particularly inventive, and some rocking chairs were made with drawers incorporated in the arms so that elderly Shaker women could have their sewing things close at hand. Many rocking chairs were made for sale to outsiders, and can sometimes be found with the original label in place to indicate its size, these varying from “1” to “8” to suit the size of the buyer.

Chests were made with simple, moulded edges and turned wooden knobs, as brass (etc) handles would have been ostentatious.  However, wrought-iron was used for catches on cupboard doors and for hinges. There was no call for huge chests, such as the “highboy”, because Shakers were limited in what they were allowed to possess and thus each member only needed a few drawers and cupboards. Shaker chests are therefore typically either five feet high with four full-width and four half-width drawers, or three feet high with three full-width and two half-width drawers. Some chests were made with drop-leaf tops so that they could double as tables.

Shaker dining tables are less likely to be encountered because Shakers ate communally at one long table, with men and women eating at different sittings. As these tables, of a trestle type with a shoe foot and underbracing, were typically eight feet long, they are not particularly suited to modern homes. However, one example that has survived is twenty feet long!

Although tables are scarce survivals, small round and square-topped stands are encountered far more frequently. These were required furniture in Shaker homes, with the rules stating that “one or two stands should be provided for the occupants of every retiring-room”. Stands were adapted for use in workrooms, with drawers underneath the top, and as candlestands and washstands.

Shaker beds were always single beds; with sex being off the menu there was no call for doubles! The common width was three feet, and they had a simple headboard and footboard. They were provided with wooden castors so that they could be moved for cleaning purposes. A concession to comfort was made with the provision of lightweight slats that would “give” with the body and could be easily replaced if they broke.

Some excellent child’s cots have survived, these being on rockers so that an adoptive mother could settle a crying child while lying in bed.

Although Shaker life and culture is now only of historical interest, with a number of their homes and settlements having been preserved, pieces of their furniture still appear for sale from time to time and are likely to command good prices. More importantly, perhaps, several aspects of their design have been imitated by later designers and incorporated in modern lifestyles where simplicity and good workmanship, without sacrificing comfort, are valued.

© John Welford

Regency furniture

The term “Regency”, when applied strictly, refers to the nine years between 1811 and 1820 when King George III’s eldest son ruled as the Prince Regent during his father’s mental incapacity. When the king died in 1820 the Prince Regent became king in his own right as George IV.

However, the Regency period is often taken to mean a wider span that includes the whole time during which Prince George was a major influence on taste and style, thus going back to at least 1800 and also including the years of George IV’s reign (1820-30). It should be remembered that the archetypal palace of the Regency, namely the Royal Pavilion at Brighton, was begun as far back as 1787 and not completed until 1823. Indeed, the period might even be considered as lasting until 1837 when the accession of Queen Victoria brought with it a very different era in British style and attitudes.

In terms of architecture and furniture design, the Regency period was one of considerable elegance and refinement, but with elements of the bizarre that could sometimes stretch good taste to the limit. Alongside the splendid terraces designed by John Nash one must set the Brighton Pavilion which brought India and China to the Sussex coast. Or, to quote Sydney Smith: "It looked for all the world as if the Dome of St Paul's had come down to Brighton and pupped."

One strong element in furniture design was the introduction of ancient Egyptian features that followed the discoveries made in that country during the late 18^th century. This trend had come via France, especially during the short period after 1802 when England and France were at peace. For a time everything was adorned with sphinxes, sun-discs, draped heads, papyri, crocodiles and lotus buds, with copious use of hieroglyphs although nobody had a clue what they meant.

The designs of George Smith, published in 1808, were highly influential on furniture makers, and included elements from Greek, Roman, Chinese and Gothic sources as well as Egyptian. Some extraordinary pieces were produced that included crocodiles and dolphins as structural elements of couches, tables and chairs.

The Regency period was one in which many people were able to better themselves by succeeding in the trades and businesses that the Industrial Revolution had engendered. The new middle class sought to use its modest wealth by copying the aristocracy and therefore provided a ready market for furniture designers who could combine utility with elegance, but the smaller homes of the merchant class were not suitable locations for the extravagances that the Prince Regent and his circle would have commissioned. Some of the best Regency taste is therefore seen in items such as pianos of various shapes and sizes in which veneers and brass inlays add considerable beauty given that this popular item of the middle class drawing room was also a substantial piece of furniture.

Brass was indeed a popular feature of Regency furniture, especially in the latter part of the period. Brass decoration was used in thin string-lines and beading and also in broader panels and floral forms, developing eventually into full panels of brass marquetry. By 1820 brass had virtually replaced boxwood and ebony for inlays on furniture of all types.

After 1815, with the final defeat of Napoleon, French taste was again welcome in England, and furniture makers began to make pieces in imitation of Louis XIV and XV styles. This trend was led by a decided shift in attitude on the part of the Prince Regent himself, and ironically this was to lead to the demise of a distinctive Regency style.

One aspect of this process was the use of native timbers in preference to exotic veneers, with solid oak now often being used. This led to furniture with a much heavier appearance which was therefore less frivolous than what had gone before. The foundations of Victorian style were thus being laid even before the Prince Regent had succeeded as king.

Examples of Regency furniture can be seen, not surprisingly, at the Royal Pavilion in Brighton, as well as at London’s Victoria and Albert Museum. There are also some excellent specimens at the Bowes Museum in Barnard Castle, County Durham.

© John Welford

Queen Anne furniture

The reign of Queen Anne (1702-14) marked a period in English furniture design that was characterised by functionality, comfort and elegance. Queen Anne furniture is generally regarded today as the most popular of all English styles, although it derives more from the work of independent craftsmen than professional designers.

The style began as a simplification of its 17^th century ancestry, the elaboration of which during the William and Mary period had betrayed continental, particularly Dutch, influences. With the growth of affluence in England, patrons of fine furniture no longer felt the need to copy foreign tastes and could commission pieces that suited their need for practicality.

This was an age during which many great houses were built in England, most notably Castle Howard and Blenheim Palace. The furniture designed during this period reflected the architecture in that it was essentially English in style, unlike the high crested and pedimented pieces from the previous reign that seemed to imitate the pointed gables of Dutch houses. With Queen Anne furniture, the centre of gravity is lower and the pieces appear more stable and solid.

The woods used in Queen Anne furniture were more restricted than in the previous century, with imported rosewood and kingwood becoming unfashionable and the preference being for English elm and walnut. These also produced delicate and beautiful veneers that took over from the fashion for marquetry and parquetry. Unfortunately, elm has proved over the years to be highly susceptible to woodworm attack, and good quality elm furniture of this period is therefore uncommon today.

The lifestyles of wealthy people during Queen Anne’s reign are reflected in the types of furniture that they commissioned. Dressing-mirrors appeared that were pivoted between two uprights mounted on a stand including drawers and often a small writing flap, so that elegant ladies could write billet-doux while being attended to by their maids before going to a ball or reception.

For men, bachelors’ chests were made both for storage and to provide a folding table top. These were used when travelling, to make up for the unfurnished nature of rooms in inns and lodgings.

Card-tables were developed to suit the growing fashion for four-handed games such as quadrille and ombre. Many have survived due to their usefulness for whist and bridge.

The tallboy, a chest resting on top of a slightly broader chest, thus providing drawers from floor to near the ceiling, was developed to replace the earlier chest on a stand.

Queen Anne chairs achieved a degree of elegance not seen before, and specialised chair-makers concentrated on the specific skills needed to produce high-quality pieces. Curved backs gave extra comfort, and the use of mortice and tenon joints gave added strength that enabled stretchers between the legs to be dispensed with.

The cabriole leg, although not universal, is a distinctive innovation of this period. This is a double curve, both convex and concave, in the same member, which gives movement and a natural appearance to the legs of chairs, settees and tables. The form was capable of being developed into a number of variations, some more complex than others.

Britain was at war during much of Queen Anne’s reign, but peace came with the Treaty of Utrecht in 1713 and with it a greater interest in ornamentation in furniture design. This came largely from French influence and produced, for example, foliage carving and highly stylised scallop shells. These trends continued after Queen Anne’s death in 1714 into the Georgian period, when other continental trends came into vogue with the Hanoverian succession.

Fine examples of Queen Anne furniture can be seen at London’s Victoria and Albert Museum and country houses such as The Vyne in Hampshire and Oxfordshire’s Blenheim Palace.

© John Welford

Elizabethan oak furniture

A considerable amount of oak furniture has survived from the reign of Queen Elizabeth I (1558-1603), partly because of the material in question and partly because much of it was made for the great houses built by men who achieved fame and fortune in that era. Where the houses have survived, so have many of the pieces that furnished them.

Elizabethan furniture

After the defeat of the Spanish Armada in 1588, wealthy Elizabethans felt more secure than their ancestors had done for centuries, and they wished to settle down to lives surrounded by comfort and ostentatious decoration. Massive, well-constructed and richly carved oak furniture was therefore typical of this age.

This was also the age of the triumph of Protestantism, so much of the furniture was influenced by northern rather than southern Europe, with classical features less obviously apparent than those typical of Germany and the Low Countries.

England was also well supplied with oak trees, which provided timbers not only for the Navy but also for craftsmen who could work the wood into panels and frames, the panels often being richly carved. Frames were made with mortise and tenon joints, the mortise being the socket into which the projecting tenon fitted exactly. The fixing was often done by knocking in wooden pegs.

Chairs

Elizabethans valued their furniture, with special respect being paid to items that were used by important people, such as the master of the house. Only he would sit in the imposing panel-backed chair at the head of the table, with the rest of the family sitting on stools or benches. The master’s chair would often have carved panels on the sides and front, as well as the solid back. Many of these chairs have survived to the present day.

However, changes in chair design occurred during the period, with later chairs being lighter and, indeed, more comfortable to sit in, with curved arms and fewer panels. Another development was the “back stool”, literally a stool with a back, designed for use around dining tables as opposed to having one’s back against the wall as in old-fashioned great halls.

Many pieces were known to have been upholstered with velvet or silk, but these additions have not survived.

Tables and cupboards

The Elizabethans invented the draw table, which could be extended to almost double its length or width by pulling extra leaves out from underneath the top. Such tables would have been very useful in smaller houses where space was at a premium.

Another innovation was the “court cupboard”, with “cupboard” to be understood as a “cup board”, a board for storing cups (etc). The word “court” may be of French derivation, meaning “short”. The court cupboard was an open three-tiered side-table designed for housing and displaying the family’s best crockery. The cupboard was therefore also a prestige piece, often highly decorated with inlay or strap-work (intricate repeated geometrical carving in low relief), and with legs in the shape of heraldic beasts. Later cupboards were made with doors, so that they began to resemble what we now understand by the term.

Beds

Wealthy Elizabethans gave much attention to their beds, and some spent huge amounts of money on these items. Shakespeare himself is known to have taken great pride in his beds, only bequeathing his “second best bed” to Anne Hathaway.

A wonderful example of an Elizabethan oak bed can be seen in London’s Victoria and Albert Museum. This is the Great Bed of Ware, which was known at the time of its construction to be remarkable, as it gets a mention in Shakespeare’s “Twelfth Night”. It is a massive construction of the “four poster” type, having pillars that support a heavy “roof” from which draperies would have hung to provide complete privacy. The bed is about 11 feet square with intricate carvings over practically the whole surface, and especially the headboard.

With a few exceptions as noted above, Elizabethan oak furniture was very right-angled in appearance, with every element being either vertical or horizontal. There were very few curves or diagonals, which accorded with the preferred styles of architecture and garden design of the time. However, what might otherwise have given an image of severity or coldness was countered by the delight taken in carved decoration and in the warm colouring of the wood itself, which was often highly polished to bring out the rich dark sheen of one of the most beautiful of timbers.

© John Welford

Early Italian furniture

During the early Renaissance period (up to around 1500) wealthy Italians paid little attention to how their homes were furnished. They were far more interested in the works of art and statuary that they had commissioned; after all, if you had paid a considerable sum of money to have a fresco painted across your living room wall you would not then order large pieces of furniture that obscured it!

Towards the end of the 15^th century we find the ruler of Florence, Lorenzo the Magnificent, who was one of the prime movers of the Renaissance and patron of artists such as Botticelli, Leonardo and Michelangelo, cautioning his son against overdoing the decoration and furnishing of his home. It was considered poor taste to flaunt your wealth in this way.

To furnish your home you would rely on simple tables and chairs or benches, perhaps dining off oak boards laid across trestles that could easily be moved when the meal was over. In the bedroom, rugs and cushions dominated, the bed itself being on a raised dais. Wall decoration consisted of painted leather draperies or woven tapestries.

The chief item of furniture, throughout the house, was the “cassone” or large rectangular chest that served mainly as a storage facility but also for seating or a table surface. It was the custom for brides to be given a cassone at their wedding and for their possessions to be carried in the cassone through the streets to their new home, with the whole town cheering the happy couple. The cassone therefore became the focus for decoration in furniture, with other items largely neglected.

Taste in furniture throughout this period relied on correct proportions and lines that could be defined as architectural. The furniture had to suit its surroundings and, apart from some cassoni, not be the centre of attention in a room. However, as the 15^th century ended and the 16th century began, certain developments in furniture took place that started to challenge this general attitude.

An early type of chair was the “Savonarola” (also called a “Dante”) that was designed to be folded and moved when not in use. This was based on an X-shaped cross-section with a central pivot below the seat. Many such chairs were elegantly curved and modestly carved, and it is remarkable that such care was lavished on making chairs that were so utilitarian.

However, with the development of fixed dining tables, with solid carved legs, came the need for chairs that matched them, so the “sgabello” was designed for this purpose. This was basically a stool, but it could be richly carved and/or gilded. Some examples resemble Roman triumphal arches in their general shape, even down to an ornamental frieze near the top.

In the bedroom, the cassone ceased to be the sole means of storing clothes and linen when the “cadenza” or side-cupboard was developed. The typical style of bed would have a stout column at each corner standing about four feet high, ornately carved and sometimes gilded.

Another development from the cassone was the “armadio” or high enclosed cupboard, some examples of which show distinctly architectural influences with columns, friezes and pediments.

As the 16^th century advanced, furniture decoration became influenced by mannerism, with its preference for artificial as opposed to natural design elements. Some later pieces appear exaggerated and over-ornamented by comparison with the “purer” forms of the early Renaissance. For later artists and designers, this was when the rot set in, the turning-point being the era of Raphael (who died in 1520), hence the desire of the 19^th century “Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood” to emphasise the restrained taste and naturalism of the earlier period.

Examples of early Italian furniture can be seen in museums and galleries including the Louvre in Paris, the Victoria and Albert in London and the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York.

© John Welford

Early American furniture

This article is concerned with domestic furniture produced in the American colonies in the 17^th century. Most of what survives from this period belongs to the later years of the century, because the pieces put together by the earliest settlers would have been of relatively low quality, required for immediate use and broken up when their useful life was over. However, a considerable amount of furniture, built by talented craftsmen especially during the final quarter of the century, was treasured and passed down through the generations. Some excellent pieces can now be seen in museums and preserved colonial homes.

Many surviving pieces were built using local oak which was lighter in colour than that found in Great Britain, which is a good clue when one is trying to distinguish furniture from the two regions. Other woods were also used, such as pine and maple, but, as these tended to be less durable, fewer pieces have survived.

Craftsmen who emigrated to the colonies tended to make furniture in the styles that they had been accustomed to “back home”, but, being out of touch with the changing tastes of the home country, they would stick with what they knew and train their apprentices accordingly, such that one finds “Jacobean” style pieces (i.e. early 17^th century) being produced decades after they had fallen out of fashion in Britain.

The furniture that typifies this period tends to fall into a small number of categories, in particular chairs, chests and cupboards. This is because such items were valued for their function at the time and so greater care and expense was devoted to their manufacture, which in turn meant that they had greater intrinsic worth that caused them to be preserved for future generations.

In terms of chairs we are talking about those that would have been sat in by the head of the household, whereas other family members would have used stools or benches. We can imagine that men who had arrived in the colonies as children or youths, and had subsequently done well for themselves, would have wanted to commission chairs of a type that they remembered their grandfathers sitting in back in England. There is therefore an old-fashioned look to many such chairs, even for the time when they were made.

One type of wooden armchair was the “carver”, named after John Carver, the first Governor of Plymouth Plantation. This was stoutly built, with turned uprights and a rush seat. The back had three horizontal members, of which the lower two were connected by three turned uprights. The chair was usually of generous proportions, as might support the no-longer-slim head of a household. The term “carver” has been misused to mean any later style of wooden armchair, but it properly belongs to the style mentioned above.

Another style was the “brewster”, named after another New England worthy, this being similar to the carver but with different arrangements of turned uprights on the back and below the seat. Also popular were “slat-back” chairs with three broad pieces of wood forming the back.

Chests, used to store clothing and valuables, were themselves highly valued and considerable attention was paid to their construction and decoration by highly skilled craftsmen. These were often “hope” or “dower” chests, made to contain a bride’s trousseau and offered as a wedding present by her parents or new husband. They therefore performed a similar function to the “cassone” that is typical of Renaissance Italian furniture, and are sometimes marked with names or initials and dates. We know the name of one chest-maker, Nicholas Disbrowe, because he inscribed a piece, made in the 1680s, with his own name and that of the young lady who was to own it. Perhaps he was her fiancé and this was his gift to her.

These chests started as large boxes with hinged lids, but then some makers added drawers at the base, which in turn led to later pieces becoming chests of drawers with the lid being dispensed with altogether. They were often highly decorated with turned elements and carved or painted panels, although the painting was decorative rather than figurative. Typical motifs for carving were tulips or sunflowers. As with most furniture of the period, such chests were solid, square and bulky, although there are examples that show a more delicate, French influence, these being typical of the more refined society of early 18^th century Boston.

Cupboards followed English lines, particularly the two-tiered style typical of the Elizabethan and Jacobean eras but produced as late as the 1680s in the colonies. Ornamentation was often in the form of applied turned sections, split in half and painted black to provide a contrast with the natural colour of the wood. However, red and yellow were also popular paint colours, which would have added a measure of brightness to a poorly lit room.

Less attention was paid to the construction of items such as large tables, which were often made to be taken apart when not required. Some smaller tables survive, these following Dutch rather than English prototypes, with turned legs and small drawers with carved fronts. Gate-legged tables were produced towards the end of the century, these enabling a hinged top to be supported when required.

The impression might have been given here that early colonial life was austere and lacking in comfort, but this would not be a fair assessment, as many of the items that would have provided comfort, such as curtains, cushions and covers for chairs and tables, have not survived, although we know about them from inventories and wills.

The American colonies produced some notable pieces of furniture, well-made and pleasing to the eye, although it is doubtless the case that what we see today are the exceptional pieces, owned by wealthy families, and much of the furnishing of a typical colonial home would have been of much lower quality. That said, 18^th century America was able to produce a number of skilled craftsmen who were able to pass their techniques on to the following generations.

© John Welford

Biedermeier furniture

The name Biedermeier refers to the period 1815-48, particularly in Central Europe. Historically, the two dates represent the Congress of Vienna that redrew the map of Europe after the Napoleonic Wars and the “Year of Revolutions” that convulsed many European capitals and ushered in a new era of unrest.

Socially, this period saw the rise of the middle class (or “bourgeoisie”) but also a self-imposed modesty brought about by difficult economic conditions. People looked to live in some degree of comfort, as befitted their status and the fact that the focus was now placed on the home environment in a more peaceful era. However, with money in short supply, elegance and comfort had to be affordable.

“Biedermeier”, as a term, derives from two comic characters, named Biedermann and Bummelmeier, who appeared in poems published in a Munich literary magazine late in this period and which were later satirized for their “petit bourgeois” sentiment under the combined name of Biedermeier. As with most epochs, it was only recognised and named long after it had ended.

In terms of furniture design, Biedermeier marks a transition between the classicism of the “Empire” period and the diverse trends of the later 19^th century (neo-Rococo in southern Europe and neo-Gothic in the north). In general, the emphasis is on elegance without undue ostentation, and the results are often very appealing to a modern eye.

One of the most popular forms of furniture was the sofa, which could seat up to four people in comfort. The frames were elegantly styled with gentle curves and minimal decoration, and they were well and tastefully upholstered. The proportions were generous enough to provide good support, and thus comfort. Armchairs were made according to the same principles.

Middle-class European people tended to live in houses with large high-ceilinged rooms, by modern standards, and they needed large pieces of furniture to fill them. Biedermeier pieces therefore tend to be quite bulky in appearance and not well suited to modern homes. These included highly polished grand pianos which would double as surfaces for the display of clocks, porcelain and floral decorations.

However, the cupboards and tables of the period were always functional first and decorative second. That said, the use of highly polished mahogany would give a large sideboard, for example, a real presence in a room. Some pieces show their “Empire” ancestry with gilt plaster and decorative columns, but these features are rarely overstated.

As the Biedermeier period reached its end, differences could be detected between, for example, the furniture produced in the southern German states (and Austria) and in Prussia, etc. Southern taste was for lighter fruitwoods such as cherry and maple and there was only limited use of inlays and veneers. Pieces would be made with increasing delicacy, with curved legs and a degree of carving. Further north, mahogany would be preferred, with more severe lines and darker coloured upholstery.

The Biedermeier period was not just one of interior design but of the entire culture of the middle class. The trends in design mirror those of the culture, with Vienna moving towards the “waltz era” of the Strausses and Prussia becoming increasingly severe and militaristic.

The almost “anti-heroic” style of the Biedermeier era could not last. Modesty was not to the taste of southerners, especially when economic conditions relaxed enough to allow them to indulge in greater luxury. Likewise, Prussia under Bismarck and the Junkers had little interest in being anti-heroic. The Biedermeier pieces that we can see today do, however, attract the eye and are well worth seeking out as objects of aesthetic delight, being evidence of what has been described as “the quiet happiness of Biedermeier”.

© John Welford

Arts and Crafts furniture

The Arts and Crafts Movement of the late Victorian period (spilling over into the early 20^th century) had its origins in the Gothic Revival and the writings of art critic John Ruskin, but was really sparked by the ideas and enterprise of the artist, designer and writer William Morris (1834-96). On moving into his newly built “Red House” in 1860 he was dismayed to find that the furnishings then on offer for purchase were not to his liking, so he set up a company, with some like-minded friends, to make good the shortfall, with the emphasis being on good design and honest craftsmanship.

Morris’s lead was soon followed by a number of other craftsmen, designers and architects, some of whom formed themselves into guilds and societies which aimed to further the cause of combining artistry and craftsmanship. The first such guild was the Century Guild, founded in 1882 by the architect A H Mackmurdo, and  this was followed in 1884 by the Art Workers Guild, which was the first to use the term “Arts and Crafts”. In 1888 C R Ashbee opened his Guild and School of Handicraft in London’s east end, with the declared aim of “making useful things, making them well and making them beautiful”.

Prominent figures in the movement included the brothers Sidney and Ernest Barnsley and Ernest Gimson, all of whom were architects who had been greatly influenced by William Morris. They started, as Kenton and Company, by designing furniture that was then built by professional cabinet makers. However, in 1893 the three founders moved to the Cotswolds where they not only designed furniture but also constructed some of it themselves. Sidney Barnsley, in particular, became a skilled craftsman, whereas Ernest Barnsley continued to work as an architect as well as designing furniture, and Ernest Gimson worked mainly at the drawing board and employed highly skilled cabinet makers to build his pieces.

They preferred to work in oak and produced large flat surfaces that were free of carving or other ornamentation. Their early pieces were simple in design, in order to be affordable by ordinary middle-class people, but, as their reputation grew, they produced pieces of greater sophistication. A notable feature of their work was the way in which they used the available materials to best effect and allowed the quality of the timber, and the workmanship, to speak for themselves. Gimson, in particular, paid minute attention to detail and would modify designs to suit the timber or construction. Blacksmiths were employed to make items such as hinges and handles that were designed to fit individual pieces. This practice was entirely in line with William Morris’s philosophy.

The Cotswolds grew as a centre of furniture production when, in 1902, C R Ashbee moved his School of Handicraft to Chipping Campden. He employed around 50 craftsmen whom he encouraged to work together so that their varying skills carried the message that form and function were integral to every piece. Ashbee’s designs were less sophisticated than those of Ernest Gimson, and some potential buyers, especially in continental Europe, thought them to be rather primitive in concept.

E W Godwin, another designer who started as an architect, incorporated the contemporary trend for favouring Japanese motifs and designed pieces that were much lighter and more graceful than those more typical Arts and Crafts pieces that retained the heaviness of their Gothic forbears.

W R Lethaby had been a member of Kenton and Company who set out on his own to design pieces that used a wide range of materials including polished mahogany, used as inlays, and unstained oak. He incorporated a greater degree of decoration than some of his colleagues, with his main inspiration being the designs of William Morris.

Many later designers, including Ambrose Heal and Gordon Russell, acknowledged their debt to the Arts and Crafts movement, the influence of which has lasted down to the present day. The idea that pieces of furniture could be well-made, functional, and also pleasing to the eye and the hand is one that clearly had much to recommend it. The fact that craftsmanship was at the heart of the movement, and the Arts and Crafts workshops laid considerable stress on quality of workmanship, has meant that many original pieces have survived to the present day, which in turn has meant that prices for collectors are not exorbitant.

There are fine collections of Arts and Crafts furniture at London’s Victoria and Albert Museum and the William Morris Gallery in Walthamstow.

© John Welford

Art Nouveau furniture

The Art Nouveau movement owed much to the revolution in artistic taste inspired by the writings of John Ruskin and William Morris in late Victorian England. However, England did not prove to be a fertile seedbed for what is generally known as Art Nouveau, in that most of those designers who were imbued with Morris’s ideas turned their attention to what became the Arts and Crafts movement. Instead, Art Nouveau flourished particularly in continental Europe, with the greatest contributions, certainly as far as furniture design was concerned, being made in Belgium.

The guiding principle of Art Nouveau, as with Arts and Crafts, was that artists had a duty to involve themselves in the lives of ordinary people, especially where these had been cheapened by the industrialisation of society. This could be done by making objects that were both functional and beautiful, thus raising the spirits of people and breaking down class barriers. In practice, it was the growing middle class that had most to gain from such movements, especially in Belgium where the market for Art Nouveau design was driven by the growing wealth of a small country through industrialisation and colonial expansion.

The main characteristic of Belgian furniture of this period was its architectural quality, which is not surprising given that many of its exponents were also architects. They designed furniture to fit specific architectural environments, and the impact of many such pieces is lessened when taken away from those settings. The curves that are inherent in Art Nouveau furniture would match those of the internal and external décor of their buildings, and the design would extend to all aspects of a living space, including walls and floors.  

To the exponents of Art Nouveau, the importance of the curve lay largely in the fact that Nature abhors straight lines and Art Nouveau aimed to produce a stylised form of Naturalism.  Flower stems and heads are typical elements of Art Nouveau decoration, and their shapes and flows had a marked influence on furniture design in this idiom.

A prominent figure in Art Nouveau furniture design was Gustave Serrurier-Bovy (1858-1910), who gained his inspiration from English sources and imported furniture from the London store of Arthur Liberty. He soon developed his own style, based on movement and controlled curves. He also favoured the use of tropical woods, such as mahogany and citrus, that were available in Belgium as a result of that country’s ruthless exploitation of its Congo colony. He never used any surface ornament on his furniture, as he believed that this belonged to the window-panes and walls of a room. The controlled lines of his furniture speak for themselves.

Victor Horta (1861-1947) believed that all the elements of a house should harmonise to produce a unified whole, so when he built his own house in Brussels he also designed every piece of furniture that went into it. Curve and counter-curve were set against each other in perfect rhythm, typified by the rounded angles on his chairs and tables together with a restrained use of subtle moulding.  Horta was also careful in his choice of wood tones, so that the colours of his furniture harmonised with the door-frames and panelling of his rooms.

Henry Van de Velde (1863-1947) was more experimental. He developed a flowing line in his designs that resembled the movement of waves. This included using parallel elements, such as in chair backs and sides, that were both functional and decorative. He paid particular attention to the emotive effects of his pieces, again regarding furniture as an integral part of a space for living in. Van de Velde was a skilled painter, and he was greatly influenced by this background when designing pieces to fit a room, in that the shapes and proportions of everything in the room had to combine to make a pleasing whole.

Although Art Nouveau, in all its aspects, was a short-lived movement that would soon be overwhelmed by the brutalism of the 20^th century, it inspired many later designers who agreed with its principles, and it is possible to identify elements of Art Nouveau in some areas of modern design.

Victor Horta’s house in Brussels, mentioned above, is now the Musée Horta. Although most of the original pieces of furniture are no longer there, they have been replaced by similar pieces that retain the atmosphere that Horta wished to achieve.

© John Welford

American Chippendale furniture

The name of Thomas Chippendale is synonymous with the finest furniture produced in England in the 18^th century, and the styles that were influenced by it in later years. What may be less generally appreciated is that many Americans, in the pre-Revolutionary colonies, were also admirers of Chippendale furniture to the extent that they patronised local cabinetmakers who worked in the Chippendale style, producing a specifically American version as a result.

There were two Thomas Chippendales, father and son, but it is the father (1718-79) who is the more famous, particularly because he compiled “The Gentleman and Cabinet-Maker’s Director” (first published in 1754). This was a pattern-book containing illustrations of designs for many types of furniture that Chippendale was able to produce, although it is thought that not all the designs were original to him. During the later 18^th century everyone with enough money was keen to furnish their homes with the very best that money could buy, and to follow the latest fashions by jumping on the Chippendale bandwagon.

The craze spread abroad, including to the American colonies, where many wealthy people were keen to retain their links with the home country and to be seen as being just as sophisticated and up-to-date as their cousins back in England. The Chippendale influence spread through the colonies, including those which were not peopled primarily by those of British descent. Clearly, importing one’s furniture from England was not always possible, and would always add greatly to the price, so a market was therefore created for “home made” fine furniture, using the “Director” as a guide to what was wanted.

The first American Chippendale cabinet-makers were based in the northern colonies, including the Quakers William Savery of Philadelphia, and the related Goddard and Townsend families of Newport, Rhode Island. The latter families produced some twenty fine cabinet-makers across three generations. Records show that, shortly before the War of Independence, there were about 150 skilled furniture makers and carvers in Boston alone. In the south, some of the cabinet-makers were actually slaves who were highly skilled and thus valued for their excellent products.

American versus English

One major difference between English and American Chippendale was the raw materials that were available. Although mahogany was used both in England and America, the tendency in Connecticut, for example, was to favour cherry as a material. Throughout the colonies, the framework of “carcase” pieces, such as chests and desks, was usually made from softwoods whereas the English practice was to use hardwoods such as oak.

Another favoured wood was Virginian walnut, especially the variety that has a reddish colour similar to mahogany.

A particular feature of American Chippendale is the block front, which is absent from the “Director”. In block-fronted furniture, the centre part of the front recedes in a shallow concave curve but right and left are slightly convex. In a three-drawer unit, the central drawer would therefore by slightly recessed in contrast to those on either side. This style is known to have existed in America before the Chippendale era and was simply tacked on to American Chippendale.

Another American peculiarity is the “highboy”, which contrasts with the English “tallboy”. Whereas the tallboy consisted of a chest standing on top of another chest, the lower part of the highboy is a much lower stand, with drawers, supported on cabriole legs. The top of the upper part is often surmounted by a carved swan-neck broken pediment, or “bonnet top”. (The illustration is of a highboy made in Philadelphia).

The highboy was designed as drawing-room furniture, as was the “lowboy”, which was basically the lower part of the highboy but with extra embellishments, including brass handles that were often imported from England. By contrast, the English tallboy was normally used as bedroom furniture and was more utilitarian than decorative.

In chairs, the American tendency was for Queen Anne style backs and seats to accompany the “pure” Chippendale frame, and for “dowel and tenon” jointing to be used whereas this method only appeared in less sophisticated chairs in English Chippendale.

Chippendale styles in England later developed into a number of forms under foreign influences, producing “Chinese”, “Gothick” and “French” Chippendale. However, these influences had much less impact across the Atlantic, where the Chippendale form remained much simpler. Much of the more complex carving and gilding seen, for example, on mirrors in American Colonial houses was the result of importing rather than local production.

The end of American Chippendale

American Chippendale ends quite abruptly with the Revolution. This was mainly because of the wish to break with the old country and not to be seen as having sympathies with the enemy state from which the former colonies had gained their independence. The new country wanted to go its own way in matters of personal style as in so much else, although, curiously enough, the preference of Thomas Jefferson for the Palladian style, as seen at Monticello, was scarcely original. The main thing was that it was not English!

The pieces of American Chippendale that can be seen today in museums and surviving houses of the period bear witness to an age of elegance that has not been matched since. The furniture is solid, practical, and not over-elaborate. The wood has matured into rich and beautiful shades. While clearly of the highest quality, it is not ostentatious in the way that much European furniture of the time (particularly French) clearly was. These were pieces made for people with money, but who also had a Puritan ancestry that would not allow them to boast too much of their wealth.

© John Welford