xx QUEEN ANNE’S GATE

London SW1

A Report on the Early Painted Schemes Following an Examination of the Paint on Various Surfaces Patrick Baty 12th August 2010

xx QUEEN ANNE’S GATE London SW1

A Report on the Early Painted Schemes Following an Examination of the Paint on Various Surfaces

A BRIEF SYNOPSIS

Exterior The external joinery appears to have been painted on seventy-one occasions since the house was built in 1705. This suggests that the exterior was repainted on average every 4.2 years. Offwhite and pale stone colours have been used on each occasion. Information provided by the paint suggests that the sashes were replaced soon after the Second World War. The overdoor of the doorcase was stripped at the end of the first half of the twentieth century or possibly just before the War. It seems that the narrow windows on the first and second floors of the front façade were bricked up towards the end of the third quarter of the eighteenth century (i.e. ca.1750-75). It is possible that the one on the ground floor was bricked up ca.1860-70.

Interior The interior seems to have been painted on average once every ten years. The colours and finishes that were used reflected those have been found when examining other buildings of the same period. For the most part, stone and grey colours in their various forms were employed in oil paint on all wooden surfaces. Dark browns and black were also found on skirtings although the use of dark colours ceased by the early nineteenth century. Many of the earlier schemes were given a superficial coat of oil glaze in order to provide a shinier finish. (Probably) in the first quarter of the nineteenth century a series of alterations were made: a) The arch and door at the base of the stairs were inserted; b) The front door was replaced; c) The doors in the front room on the first floor were replaced / inserted; 1

d) The chimneypieces in the front and rear rooms on the second floor were inserted. As far as the existence of a closet in the front room on the ground floor, it is possible either; a) That a closet existed from the start and that the interior was painted on every occasion that the room was painted until the early nineteenth century when it was not repainted for about sixty years; or b) That a closet did not exist until the early nineteenth century and that it was removed about sixty years later. The grained scheme in the front room on the first floor had been applied in the first quarter of the twentieth century. The panelling that had been exposed recently in the NE corner of that room displays late eighteenth century decoration. The paint stratigraphy appears to be sound on the surfaces that were sampled. However, it must be understood that many areas were wood grained at some stage and will have had several coats of gloss varnish applied. As paint does not sit happily on varnish it is possible that overlying layers might shear off if the surface is knocked. Short of sanding down through the varnish little can be done about this.

2

xx QUEEN ANNE’S GATE
London SW1

A Report on the Early Painted Schemes Following an Examination of the Paint on Various Surfaces

Introduction
I was asked by Mr xxx xxx, of xxx Architects, to carry out an examination of the paint in various areas of xx Queen Anne’s Gate, Westminster. The purpose of the analysis was to establish what could be learnt of the earlier decorative schemes and to make an assessment of the integrity of the paint layers.

Brief Background to the House1
The house was originally known as No. x Queen Square.2 Now No. xx Queen Anne’s Gate, it is one of the earliest houses to be occupied and built in the square, the first occupant being recorded in 1705. The names of the occupiers of the house before 1840, according to the ratebooks, are as follows: 1705-18 1719-21 1722-23 1724-30 1732-35 1736-41 1744-59 1760-61 1763-72 1773-76 1777-79 1780 1782-88 1789-95
1

Wm. Smith Nic. Lowndes Capt. Davenport Mary Price Lady Pickle Ric. Wallace Mrs. D’eath Mrs. Treasure James Random Mary Clinker William Fathom Phoebe Greaves Catherine Smollet Rev. Dr. H. Grantly

(Survey of London 1926, 116). Information also taken from the Historic Buildings Report prepared by xxx Architects in May 2010. 2 It was still marked as such in John Rocque’s map of 1738 and listed as such in (Westminster Poll Book 1774, 1818 & 1841).

3

1797-1803 1806-22 1825-

Wm. Bold Admiral Slope3 Maria Harding4

In 1926 the house was occupied by the architect xx xxx. The freeholder at that time was Mountvernon Estates Ltd. After the Second World War planning permission was granted for Nos. xx and xx to be used as offices and an opening was formed in the party wall. It is not known when this happened exactly, but it is possible that the window sashes were replaced at the same time.

Areas Examined
Elements of the following areas were examined: 1) Ground Floor a) Entrance Hall b) Front Room c) Rear Room 2) First Floor a) Stairs and Landing b) Front Room c) Rear Room 3) Second Floor a) Front Room b) Rear Room 4) Exterior

Investigation of Samples
A total of 72 samples were taken by Patrick Baty during a number of visits made between May and August 2010. This report contains the following: a) Appendix One - Photographs of the location of sampling; b) Appendix Two - Photomicrographs of relevant cross-sections;
3

He appears as Henry Slope, Gentleman, in the Westminster Poll Book of 1818. 4 This was Ann Maria Harding of x Queen Square West, who was obviously still there in 1834 as she had a counterpane stolen on 15th September of that year. Old Bailey Proceedings, 24th November 1834. Reference Number: t18341124-115. http://www.oldbaileyonline.org/browse.jsp?path=sessionsPapers%2F18341124.xml

4

c) Appendix Three - A list of the samples taken; d) Appendix Four - Some pigments mentioned in the text; e) Appendix Five – Graining; f) Appendix Six - A Contemporary Account of House Painting Colours and Prices; g) Appendix Seven - Some References To Dark Brown Doors and Skirtings; h) Appendix Eight - Some information on the analysis techniques; and i) Bibliography.

Limitations
Occasionally in this report an effort has been made to suggest possible dates for a number of the schemes found during analysis. It is believed that to provide some sort of context for the sequence of paint layers will be of more use than to offer no suggestion at all. Where dates have been proposed they may have been based on a number of factors: a) The position of a particular layer in relation to known events; b) The occurrence of pigments with a known date of introduction; c) The position of a scheme in the sequence of coatings applied to a surface (i.e. those applied first will be earlier than those at the top). Often, by dividing the age of a surface by the number of schemes applied to it, an approximate repainting cycle can be obtained; Any dates given are indicative only, and there will be instances where these may be amiss by 1015 years or even longer.

Some Notes on Terminology
The following terms appear throughout the report. Scheme A series of coats of paints usually applied within days of each other when (re)decoration is carried out. A scheme in oil paint may consist of a primer (initially), one or two undercoats and a top / finish coat A paint made up of a white pigment such as chalk, or lead white, with no visible colouring matter (pigment) added. The overall effect would often have been of an off-white due to the inherent yellowness of the pigment and / or the medium. A paint consisting of a white pigment such as chalk, or lead white, with small amounts of visible colouring matter (pigment) added. Sometimes, however, a very small quantity of blue or black was added to a white paint to make it appear “whiter” (i.e. to appear white). It is sometimes difficult to judge when pigment was added to correct the inherent yellowness of some paints or to impart a slight tint. At the other end of the scale the difference between an off-white and a pale stone colour is minimal and, as a result, inconsistencies in description are likely to occur. 5

White

Off-White

Stone Colour A variety of colours ranging from off-whites to quite dark shades. Designed (broadly) to resemble the colour of stone in its many forms (e.g. Bath stone or Portland stone). The difference between a pale stone colour and an off-white is minimal and, as a result, inconsistencies in description are likely to occur. It is very difficult to interpret the depth of a colour when viewed as a cross-section under the microscope. The large amount of light used to illuminate the sample combined with the magnified detail causes distortion. The only way of getting a closer idea of the depth of colour is to remove a small lump of the substrate, to carefully expose the relevant layer and to leave it exposed to UV light for a period of time. This is not always practical, especially when sampling a room in an inhabited building. For that reason a general description of the colour is given. By definition this may sometimes be misleading. The rule of thumb is that colours are invariably darker than they appear in a photomicrograph.5 If anything, the descriptions of the colours in this report are likely to err on the paler side.

Summary of Findings
General The evidence, in the form of the repainting cycle6 provided by a sample of paint from the external cornice has enabled a reasonably precise date to be suggested for other elements and schemes on the outside of the house. This information, where it can be linked with the interior, has led to further suggestions for possible dates for the introduction and alteration of a number of interior elements. However, whilst the repainting cycle is very helpful for dating exterior schemes, where the protective function of paint is necessary, it is less so for the interior. Although one can obtain a very rough idea of the treatment of the interior at various stages any suggestion of a date must be treated cautiously.

Detailed Analysis of Samples

5

(Baty 1995:1, 27-37) (http://bit.ly/v5zhF). (Baty 1996:2, 9-15) (http://bit.ly/10s8kc). As an indication of this one might compare the photomicrograph of QAG/15 in Appendix Two with the photograph of the Ground Floor front room – North wall, NE corner in Appendix One. What appears to be a dark green in the photograph seems much paler (as the top layer) in the photomicrograph. See also QAG/68 in Appendix Two. 6 Although only intended as a rough guide to the dating of layers, this simple device of dividing the age of the building by the number of schemes usually provides worthwhile information. This technique has been written about in American technical publications (e.g. Doonan 1982, 27-29) but has also been dismissed as being unscientific by other writers (Welsh 1986, 4-5).

6

Exterior General Samples were taken from these external surfaces: 1) Timber cornice; 2) Sash windows, and 3) The doorcase. Timber Cornice A ‘scab’ of paint that had fallen from the timber cornice was provided by one of the workmen on site. In view of the apparent completeness it was prepared as a cross section and examined under the microscope (see photograph and photomicrographs of QAG/65 in Appendix Two). The sample was intact and although none of the timber substrate was attached the original red oxide7 primer was present at the bottom of the first scheme. A total of seventy-one schemes can be seen. If one assumes that the exterior of the building was last painted in about 2005 and if one divides its age by the number of schemes it can be seen that the repainting cycle was approximately 4.22 years.8 The first fifty-six schemes were carried out in a variety of stone colours (pale and darker) and offwhites in paints based on lead white.9 The upper face of each is clearly marked by a thin layer of dirt, which helps with the interpretation enormously. Two schemes of zinc-based10 paint can be seen and these were followed by a sequence of paints based on a combination of zinc and titanium dioxide11 initially and then on the latter pigment alone.

7 8

See Appendix Four for more information on this and other pigments. (300 years divided by 71 schemes equals 4.22 years). This kind of redecoration cycle is exceptional and is seldom encountered. The rear tripartite windows of Home House, in Portman Square, were found to have had a repainting cycle of about 4 to 4.2 years between 1773 and 1985, while the front façade had one of about 4.8 years (Baty 1998:1, 5). The railings of No 6 Fitzroy Square, London WC1, (built 1790-94) were found to have had a repainting cycle of 4.7 years (Baty 1996:1, passim). A 6-7 year cycle is not unusual on buildings dating from the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries and this has been found throughout the United Kingdom. See for example: a) King Charles Block, Old Royal Naval College, Greenwich (Baty 1995:2, 8); b) 26-31 Charlotte Square, Edinburgh (Baty 2000:2, 15). c) The Travellers’ Club (Baty 2008, 4). Although the terms of the lease would probably have stipulated a four year cycle of decoration initially, as in that of the Athenaeum Club, next door, there is no evidence to suggest that this was adhered to for very long. 9 Until the second half of the 20th century the main constituent of most architectural paints was lead carbonate, a white compound derived from metallic lead. Throughout this report it is referred to as "lead white". See Appendix Four. 10 Although introduced towards the end of the nineteenth century paints based on zinc oxide tended to be seen in the first half of the twentieth century and up to the 1960s. See Appendix Four for some information on this pigment. Marked as ZnO on photomicrographs. 11 See Appendix Four for some information on this pigment. Marked as TiO2 on photomicrographs.

7

It is particularly interesting to see that the last fifteen schemes reflect what has been found when examining many London exteriors,12 notably: a) The first occurrence of a paint based on pure titanium dioxide at the end of the 1960s / beginning of the 1970s (scheme 62); b) The use of zinc-based exterior paints in the years following the Second World War (schemes 57-58); c) The poor condition of the paint layer that was exposed during the Wartime years when maintenance was not carried out (scheme 56); and d) The lack of dirt on the upper face of those schemes applied after the introduction of the Clean Air Act in 1956 (scheme 58+). The paint layers applied to the external cornice are therefore a very accurate method of showing us how the exterior joinery of the building had been painted at four-yearly+ intervals. Fortunately this has also helped with the dating of some of the interior schemes as will be shown below. Sash Windows A photograph of the exterior of Nos. 17 and 19 taken in 1886 shows the windows of 19 without glazing bars but with sheets of plate glass.13 However, a watercolour of 1852 suggests that glazing bars existed at that time.14 It is therefore thought that the plate glass must have been introduced between 1852-1886. The external face of the top sash of the centre window on the first floor was sampled (see photomicrograph of QAG/38 in Appendix Two). The wood was first painted with a zinc-based paint in an off-white colour. The second scheme was identical. Three schemes of a cream colour in a paint based on a combination of zinc oxide and titanium dioxide were next employed and the last ten schemes were based on titanium dioxide alone. It will be remembered that exactly the same sequence was found as the upper layers on the cornice and so this suggests that the sash was a replacement of the early 1950s.15 As will be seen below, the inside face of two sashes that were sampled also started with zincbased paint, which suggests that at least two were replaced in the 1950s.16 It appears from evidence provided by the old shutters for the narrow window on the second floor that those window openings on the first and probably the second floors of the front façade were bricked up when the seventh scheme in that room was applied. It is possible that this took place towards the end of the third quarter of the eighteenth century (i.e. ca.1750-75) (see
12 13

This is all very similar to what was found on the front façade of the Travellers’ Club (Baty 2008, passim). (email Baxter - Smyth 7th May 2010). Photo: Queen Anne’s Gate, ca.1886. 06/477 by Henry Dixon (1820-93) Published by Society for Photographing Relics of Old London. http://bit.ly/d3Wlw0 14 See watercolour by T.H. Shepherd in Appendix One. 15 One imagines that the fitting of new windows became possible after the removal of building controls in October 1954. 16 It is highly likely that all sashes were replaced at the same time, but further samples would be necessary to establish this.

8

photomicrograph of QAG/52 in Appendix Two). In view of the evidence provided by the possible closet in the front room on the ground floor it is likely that the narrow window in that room was bricked up ca.1860-70. The Doorcase Two samples were taken from the overdoor of the doorcase. Both were found to display an almost identical sequence to that on the sashes (see photomicrograph of QAG/53 in Appendix Two). However, there is an extra zinc-based scheme at the bottom of the sequence and this has a clearly defined layer of dirt on it. Careful examination of the substrate shows that the wood had been stripped of paint in the ca.1940s, possibly even just before the War as traces of red oxide (from the original primer) can be found (see photomicrograph of lower level of QAG/73 in Appendix Two).

Interior General Approximately thirty separate schemes have been identified on the panelling of the entrance hall, which suggests an average repainting cycle of about ten years.17 As far as other domestic London houses of the same period are concerned it may be of interest to learn that the average repainting cycle in the entrance hall of three other early eighteenth century interiors was as follows: 1) 2) 3) No 56 Artillery Lane, in Spitalfields, had a 7 year repainting cycle.18 Nos. 23 and 25 Brook Street (the houses occupied at one time by Jimi Hendrix and George Frideric Handel) the average repainting cycle was 8 years.19 36 Craven Street (the London house occupied by Benjamin Franklin from 1757-1762 & 1764-1772) was found to have been 8-9 years.20

Of course, this in itself means little, and the house is likely to have seen very different use. This information is included to support the findings of the analysis and to show that the full sequence survives on many of the painted surfaces. The painted surfaces in the house were found to have been painted on between twenty-six and thirty-three occasions. The Front Room on the ground floor seems to have been painted the most often. When one considers the number of decorative schemes that were encountered in the house a clear
17

Although one is tempted to append dates to individual interior schemes using the repainting cycle this can lead to distortion as decoration was frequently based on fashion rather than necessity. Nonetheless, it can provide a rough framework. When combined with matters of style a more accurate indication of date is possible. 18 (Baty 2006, 16). In the nineteenth century Spitalfields had seen a steady decline in wealth of the area. Even by 1807 some of the streets had been taken over by common lodging houses and much of the population was classed as poor (Weinreb & Hibbert 1983, 808). 19 (Baty 2000:1, 9). 20 (Baty 1998:2, 12). It is appreciated that these buildings are in different parts of London, which may also have some bearing on the frequency of decoration.

9

hierarchy becomes apparent. In common with the other houses of the same period, that are listed above, the further up the building the fewer the number of decorative schemes: Floor Ground Area Entrance Hall Front Room Rear Room Stairs Front Room Front Room Rear Room Approximate Number of Schemes 31 33 27 31 20 (early 20th C scheme had been retained) 26 26

First Second

The average repainting cycle was between nine and eleven years. As expected, the colours and finishes that were used reflected those that have been found when examining other buildings of the same period. For the most part, stone and grey colours in their various forms were employed in oil paint on all wooden surfaces. Dark browns and black were also found on skirtings although this ceased by the early nineteenth century when such a treatment would have been considered old-fashioned.21 It was interesting to see how the first few schemes of paint on the panelling were given a thin coat of oil glaze in order to provide a semi-gloss finish. In spite of modern notions of eighteenth century practice, such a finish was considered highly desirable, as can be seen in the following quote of 1723: "Take notice also, That all simple Colours used in House Painting, appear much more beautiful and lustrous, when they appear as if glazed over with a Varnish to which both the drying Oyl before-mentioned contributes very much, and also the Oyl of Turpentine, that the Painters use to help to make their Colours dry soon..."22 It appears that the house had been extensively refurbished on at least two occasions - once in the ca.1820s,23 and once in the immediate post-War period. Clearly other works have taken place.

Entrance Hall The entrance hall has been painted on about thirty-one occasions. Panelling It seems that the wood in the entrance hall was primed initially with a thin size-bound wash of red oxide (see photomicrographs of QAG/55 in Appendix Two). This form of primer has been

21

See Dr Bristow's comments on the move away from brown on skirtings (Bristow 1996, 1:131). See also Appendix Seven. 22 (Smith 1723, 41). It is also appreciated that a shinier finish would have reflected light more. 23 This could have been when the house was occupied by Ann Maria Harding, who is known to have been there between 1825 and at least 1834 and probably later.

10

seen before, notably on the original panelling of Nos. 23 and 25 Brook Street.24 An undercoat and then a top coat consisting of lead white with small amounts of yellow ochre and charcoal black25 were applied. The overall effect was of a stone colour.26 A mid-sheen finish would have been given by a lead white and linseed oil paint of the sort used here. However, it does appear that the first few schemes had a thin layer of oil glaze applied to the surface which would have given a semi-gloss finish.27 The second scheme was very similar, although the colour of the top coat seems to have been slightly darker. On the third time that the entrance hall was painted the colour was changed from a stone colour to a grey of a type that would have been known as “Lead Colour”. 28 The paint was based on lead white and tinted with charcoal black. A thin layer of oily glaze is visible on the upper face, once again. The lead colour was repeated twice more – the first being slightly darker than the second. No oil glaze is apparent on either occasion although it has been found on equivalent schemes on the staircase balustrade (see photomicrograph of QAG/72), where it was probably applied in order to make those surfaces more wipeable. The sixth and seventh schemes were slightly lighter and in paler stone colours. Off-white /pale stone colour was used on five subsequent occasions, with a darker layer amongst them. This darker layer is found throughout the house and is the scheme that is visible on the recently exposed panelling in the NE corner of the front room on the first floor (see below and photograph in Appendix One). The thirteenth scheme is significant because it marks a period of change within the entrance hall. At this point the arched door between the hall and the base of the stairs was inserted (see photomicrograph of QAG/58 in Appendix Two and photograph in Appendix One). This has been described as being of ca.1800 appearance, but may be twenty or so years later.29 The two subsequent schemes were much deeper and warmer – probably a salmon pink30 – and
24

These houses were examined as part of the restoration of the Handel House Museum, in 2000 (Baty 2000:1, passim). A few years after this it was more normal to find timber being primed with a paint based on lead white and containing sufficient red lead to speed up the drying time. 25 See Appendix Four. 26 Stone colour was one of the so-called ‘Common Colours’ in frequent use by the eighteenth century housepainter. See Appendix Six for a contemporary account of house-painting practices. 27 See the photomicrographs in Appendix Two that have been labelled with “Glaze layer” for a clear illustration of this. This finish was also found on the early layers in the Benjamin Franklin house, in Craven Street, where it has been replicated (Baty 1998:2, 13). See quote above. 28 Lead colour was encountered when carrying out the analysis of the Handel House Museum and it is that colour that has been reintroduced (Baty 2000:1, 1). 29 (xxx 2010, 9). 30 See note on Salmon pink below, which might support the suggestion that the previous scheme dates from the ca.1820s.

11

these were followed by a yellowish pink in which can be seen particles of vermilion.31 The seventeenth scheme was noteworthy in that it was a grained one, which was protected by a coat of varnish that is quite clear in cross section.32 The wood being imitated was not that dark as the ground coat was a pale stone colour. This was obviously ‘carried over’ a couple of times as it was given two further coats of varnish (see QAG/55).33 Its appearance at this time would have been closer to a mid oak colour. Three more schemes of pale stone-coloured paint on a lead white base can then be seen. The twenty-second scheme is also significant because it was the first to have been applied in paint based on zinc oxide. From information obtained from the painting of the window sashes it is thought that this paint may have been applied in the 1950s. Two more zinc-based schemes were employed before the first of the final sequence of five or six schemes of paint which were based on titanium dioxide. The lower wall appears to have been painted in the same manner as the upper wall except that it seems that rather than having been grained a second time a further coat of varnish was applied on top of the previous (re-varnished) graining (see photomicrograph of QAG/62 in Appendix Two).34 Chair Rail The chair rail has also been painted as the lower and upper wall (see photomicrograph of QAG/56 in Appendix Two). Front Door It seems, from the paint layers, that the front door dates from the time when the entrance hall underwent modifications and the arch was inserted. This work probably took place in the first quarter of the nineteenth century. Skirting The skirting fascia, at least on the left hand side of the hall, is not original and appears to date from the early twentieth century (see photomicrograph of QAG/57 in Appendix Two). It seems to have been applied when the graining was replaced by paint. However, information provided by the skirting on the first landing suggests that it might have been black originally and in very dark colours until the end of the eighteenth century (see below) (compare photomicrographs of QAG/57 and /48 in Appendix Two).35 It was interesting to note that the plinth block of the (later) arch, that appears to have been inserted about thirty years later, was painted off-white originally.
31 32

See Appendix Four for some information on this pigment. See Appendix Five for some information on graining. 33 By "carried over" is meant that while other elements were repainted, the woodwork was merely washed, and the graining possibly repaired where necessary. In 1904, John Rea was quoting a price of 4d per square yard for cleaning and touching up a grained scheme, compared to 1s 3d for a new oak scheme (Rea 1904, 348). It is worth noting that rather than being carried over a second occasion, the door architrave to the rear room on the first floor was re-grained (see photomicrograph of QAG/49 in Appendix Two). 34 Or at least this was the case with the area sampled. 35 See Appendix Seven for an account of dark skirting fasciae.

12

This was in the context of a black skirting fascia.

Staircase The surfaces on the stairs seem to have been painted on about thirty-one occasions. Samples taken from the panelling on the lower stairs and on the first floor landing show that the treatment of the entrance hall has been extended up the stairs as one might have expected. Once again, the wood was primed in the same manner as in the entrance hall, with a thin wash of red oxide having been applied to the timber (see photomicrograph of QAG/44 in Appendix Two). Panelling The first scheme of a glazed stone colour was employed on the panelling; the window shutters the doors and on the architraves (see photomicrographs of QAG/64 and /49 in Appendix Two). As far as the panelling was concerned, subsequent schemes appear to have been very similar to those found in the entrance hall, with a sequence of stone colours (pale and darker); salmon pinks; off-whites and wood graining. Throughout the building’s existence the panel beds and their surrounds have been painted in the same way. The shutters on the first half landing have been painted as the wall panelling (see photomicrograph of QAG/64 in Appendix Two). Skirting The skirting fascia on the first floor landing (and probably on the ground floor, as well) was painted black originally (see photomicrograph of QAG/48 in Appendix Two).36 A deep yellowish brown replaced this, which in turn was succeeded by a sequence of red-brown and blacks. It appears that it was first treated as the panelling (in a pale stone colour, in this case) at the end of the eighteenth / beginning of the nineteenth centuries. The skirting has been painted as the panelling on most subsequent occasions. Black has been used recently and was also employed as part of the scheme that related to the insertion of the arched door at the base of the stairs. Door Architrave The architrave to the door of the rear room on the first floor was painted in the stone colour of the panelling on the first two occasions that this area was painted (see photomicrographs of QAG/49 in Appendix Two). A dull dark green that was composed of yellow ochre and charcoal black was employed on the third occasion – within the context of lead-coloured panelling. A deep reddish brown was applied on the fourth occasion, once again this sat alongside lead colour on the panelling.37 The remaining schemes were almost identical to those on the panelling, although it is worth
36 37

See Appendix Seven for some information on the use of dark colours on skirtings and doors. This has also been found in No. 25 Brook Street, the Handel House Museum (Baty 2000:1, passim).

13

noting that when the graining was carried over for the second time in the entrance hall the architrave was re-grained. Door The door on the first floor landing that leads into the front room was thought to be an early survival. The side facing the stairs was sampled but it appears that it was introduced as part of the early nineteenth century refurbishment (see photomicrograph of QAG/69 in Appendix Two and photograph in Appendix One). Comparison of the cross section with that taken from the arch in the entrance hall shows a near identical stratigraphy (see /58). The first scheme applied to the door was an off-white. No indication of red oxide having been used to prime the wood was found. In recent years the stair-side of the door has been boarded over and comparison with a cross section taken from the panelling on the first floor landing shows the level at which that happened (compare photomicrographs of QAG/69 with /44). The last scheme on the door was in a paint based on titanium dioxide, which suggests that the boarding-over took place at some point from the 1960s onwards. It is understood that other doors to the stairs have been replaced. Staircase Balustrade A newel post, baluster and the handrail were examined in order to establish their treatment. The newel post and baluster were found to display an identical sequence of coatings (see QAG/72). Furthermore, comparison of the samples taken from the newel post with those from the panelling on the stairs shows that until relatively recent years the two surfaces were painted in the same manner (see QAG/72 and /44 in Appendix Two). It was interesting to see that a thin layer of oil glaze was applied to the early paints on the newel post and balustrade, presumably in order to make them more wipeable. The handrail was sampled beside the newel post on the first half landing. Only two coats of tinted varnish could be seen. These are thought to be of twentieth century type.

Ground Floor – Front Room The front room on the ground floor has been painted on about thirty-three occasions. Panelling The wood was primed in the same manner as the entrance hall and stairs – a thin coat of sizebound red oxide was brushed onto the wood (see photomicrograph of QAG/2 in Appendix Two). After a lead-based undercoat a finish coat in a stone colour was applied and this was followed by a thin layer of oil glaze, as described above. The second scheme was slightly darker and displays a greater amount of yellow ochre and carbon black pigment. This was also given a superficial layer of oil glaze as was the third scheme, 14

which was almost identical. Two schemes of lead colour can next be seen and these appear to be very similar to the two employed on the staircase at the same time.38 It is thought that these two schemes may have been visible during the second half of the eighteenth century.39 There were a number of times that schemes employed in the front room on this floor related to those on the staircase. A dull dark green composed of yellow ochre and charcoal black – an olive green – was employed next. This colour had been revealed by the rudimentary exposure on the panel bed of the chimneybreast.40 A very similar colour has already been found as the third scheme on a door architrave on the first floor (see above), but it is unlikely that these are contemporary. The use of this colour is slightly curious at this time as it is generally understood that there was a tendency to adopt paler colours from the 1730s/40s.41 This use of such a dark colour in the room was not repeated, other than the brown that was applied towards the end of the century and which can be seen on the newly-exposed panelling in the front room on the first floor (see photograph in Appendix One). It can be seen that it was replaced quite quickly by a stone colour. It is known that the dark green was a short-lived scheme because of the number of ‘extra’ schemes that can be found in this room when compared to those on the staircase (four compared to two).42 Pale colours, mainly stones and greys, were employed until probably the second quarter of the nineteenth century when the salmon pinks43 that have also been found on the staircase were introduced. It is only in recent years that the panelling has been picked out in two colours. There have been a number of alterations in this room, notably with the chair rail (see QAG/5 in Appendix Two). It is also clear that something has been fitted to the lower wall to the right of the R/H window as an area of a dark green can be seen – see photograph in Appendix One and photomicrograph of QAG/15 in Appendix Two. This probably took place in the 1960s as the dark green is a paint based on a mix of zinc oxide and titanium dioxide. A comparison of two samples – one from the panel bed on the window wall (QAG/2) and the other from the NE alcove (QAG/14) suggests that the alcove had not been painted for many years. It seems that a closet might have been formed in the alcove. The photomicrograph of
38

Although a glaze layer cannot be seen on the paint in the ground floor room at this time it does appear on the corresponding paint on the staircase balustrade, where the more wipeable finish that it presented would have been of practical use (see QAG/72). 39 The house at No 25 Brook Street that was occupied by George Frideric Handel was also painted in a lead colour at this time (Baty 2000:1, passim). 40 See photograph in Appendix One. 41 The change from dark colours to paler ones has been observed on a number of early eighteenth century houses, notably Wxxx, in Wiltshire (Baty 2000:3, passim) and Newhailes, in East Lothian (Baty 1998:3, passim). However, this fashion may have been slow to be adopted. 42 It is the subsequent use of salmon colours and graining that enable these comparisons to be made. 43 In the 1840s David Ramsay Hay, House Painter and Decorator to the Queen, wrote: “During one season salmon colour, as it is called, reigns supreme; then sage green succeeds salmon; drab follows sage or slate; and then all varieties of crimson put out the drabs.” (Hay 1847, 63-4). Small particles of vermilion can be seen in the stratigraphy (see Appendix Four for more details).

15

QAG/2 shows at what stage the alcove was not painted. There are two ways of interpreting this information: c) That a closet existed from the start and that the interior was painted on every occasion that the room was painted until the early nineteenth century when it was not repainted for about sixty years;44 or d) That a closet did not exist until the early nineteenth century and that it was removed about sixty years later. A watercolour of part of the façade and dated 1852 exists (see Appendix One). In this the narrow window in the room is clearly shown. This may suggest that the closet was lit by the window, which might have been blocked up when the closet was removed ca.1860-70. A sample was taken from the panel bed on the chimneybreast wall to see if there was any evidence of applied decoration / a painting. There is no indication of either (see photomicrograph of QAG/20 in Appendix Two). The panelling on the partition between this room and the entrance hall dates from the twentieth century. Skirting In common with that on the staircase very dark colours were employed on the skirting fascia on the first ten or so occasions – probably until the end of the eighteenth century. The colours ranged from black through red-brown to yellow-browns (see photomicrographs of QAG/18 in Appendix Two).45 The pigments employed were largely black, yellow ochre, red ochre and red lead.46 Shutters and Windows A sample taken from the L/H shutter of the R/H window suggests that it is not original (see photomicrograph of QAG/26 in Appendix Two). Comparison with other elements shows when it was introduced (see QAG/ 2; /3; /14 & /20) and it is thought that this might have been at the end of the eighteenth century. The first scheme on the shutters was the dark layer found throughout the building and on the newly-exposed panelling in the corner of the first floor front room (see photograph in Appendix One). The sashes are certainly known to have been introduced after 1886.47 However, using the evidence provided by the paint on the external cornice it is now possible to conclude that at least two of them were replaced in the 1950s. The first scheme was in a zinc-based paint that was applied over a lead-based ‘pink’ primer48 (see photomicrograph of QAG/25 in Appendix Two).
44

A document dated 1726 refers to the house “having three storeys with two rooms and a closet on each floor”. The rear rooms certainly do show evidence of having had a closet – perhaps that is what was meant (Survey of London 1926, 116). 45 An example of the sort of colour employed can be seen in the photograph of the recently revealed panelling in the front room of the first floor in Appendix One. 46 See Appendix Four for more details. 47 (email Baxter - Smyth 7th May 2010). 48 This sort of primer is characteristic of the early 1960s (Holloway 1961, 1:87).

16

It appears from evidence provided by the old shutters for the narrow window on the second floor that those window openings on the first and second floors of the front façade were bricked up when the seventh scheme in that room was applied. It is possible that this took place towards the end of the third quarter of the eighteenth century (i.e. ca.1750-75) (see photomicrograph of QAG/52 in Appendix Two). This bricking-up may relate to the introduction of the L/H shutter of the R/H window as the two events seem to have taken place at a similar time. As has been mentioned, the narrow window on the ground floor was still open in 1852 (see watercolour in Appendix One) and may have existed until the closet in the front room was removed – ca.186070.

Ground Floor – Rear Room As it had been suggested that the chimneypiece in this room might be a later addition samples of the paint were taken from both it and the panelling. The sample from the panelling shows that this room was not painted as frequently as the front room on the ground floor although there are a number of schemes shared with other rooms (see photomicrograph of QAG/51 in Appendix Two). Approximately twenty-seven schemes have been identified. The first scheme was a dark lead colour that was applied over a very thin wash of red oxide in a size medium. Comparison with the sample taken from the chimneypiece (QAG/50) shows quite clearly that it displays the same sequence of coatings and that the initial scheme was also a dark lead colour. There is no doubt that the chimneypiece is an original feature and has always been in this room. The dark scheme that has been revealed in the front room of the first floor is also evident in this room, but here it is the seventh. On the stairs the dark scheme is the ninth and in the front room of the ground floor it is the eleventh. The suggestion is that this rear room was not decorated as frequently as the others. It was also noticed that ovolo mouldings were used in the front rooms while rear rooms had simple plain panelling – another expression of hierarchy. Another similarity with other rooms is the use of two schemes of salmon pink in the first half of the nineteenth century.

First Floor – Front Room This room had been “…transformed in the late 19th or early 20th century into a gentleman’s library and picture gallery.”49 Analysis has established that many of the decorative schemes relate to those found on the stairs and in the ground floor front room. A total of twenty schemes were revealed, but the last of these seems to have been a grained one that survived from the first quarter of the twentieth century.

49

(xxx 2010, 10).

17

Having already taken the paint samples from this room it was discovered that earlier panelling had been uncovered in the NE corner (see photograph in Appendix One). A return visit was made and samples taken of the panelling and skirting fascia in that area. Panelling By the time that the initial samples were taken the panelling had been well rubbed-down prior to redecoration (see photographs in Appendix One). However, sufficient evidence remained to be able to identify all the decorative schemes that had been applied (see photomicrograph of QAG/28 in Appendix Two). The panelling had originally been primed with red oxide, as was found to be the case in the other rooms. The first scheme was a stone-coloured one. Stone colour was also employed on all elements of the panelling (except for the skirting fascia) on the second occasion that the room was decorated. Lead colour was applied on the third occasion. It will be remembered that this pattern was also found in the entrance hall and stairs – two stone colours followed by a lead colour. The fourth scheme, however, was a dark green – an olive colour. This same colour has also been found on the panelling in the front room of the ground floor and on the door architrave on the first floor landing, but at a slightly different stage.50 Four subsequent schemes of stone colours can next be seen and these were followed by a pale stone first coat on top of which was a thin dark brown layer.51 It is this ninth scheme that has been revealed in the NE corner (see photograph in Appendix One and photomicrograph of QAG/68 in Appendix Two). This scheme was much darker than most of the other ones and has been found in a number of the other rooms, for example - in the ground floor front room (QAG/2); the ground floor rear room (QAG/50); the stairs (QAG/44) and the entrance hall (QAG/62). From its position in the stratigraphy it is thought that this dark scheme would have been applied at the end of the eighteenth century. Lighter stone colours were employed on the next four occasions and then the familiar salmon pink schemes can be seen in cross section. In the second half of the nineteenth century the panelling was grained in imitation of wood (see photomicrograph of QAG/30 in Appendix Two). This has also been found at the same level elsewhere in the house. The window seat below the centre window was also grained at this time (see photomicrograph of QAG/36 in Appendix Two). The graining on the panel surrounds was carried over a couple of times by being given a coat of varnish. However, the window seat was re-grained and subsequently painted brown (compare QAG/30 and QAG/36). Presumably this was necessary because it would have received more
50 51

This early sequence is well illustrated in the photomicrograph of QAG/36 in Appendix Two). This dark layer is curiously thin and the exposed panelling seems to display an almost translucent surface. Whilst not a glaze, perhaps the intention was to suggest wood? Realistic imitations of wood grain became fashionable from the late 1820s and continued throughout the nineteenth century. This was certainly earlier.

18

wear and tear. The existing graining was the twentieth scheme to have been applied in the room and probably dates from the first quarter of the twentieth century. It seems likely that it relates to the occupation of the house by xxxxxxx. Both the panel beds and the panel surrounds had been painted in the same way whenever the room was decorated. Skirting The skirting fascia in the SE corner was sampled and only found to display the last four decorative schemes that were applied in the room (see photomicrograph of QAG/33). It is thought that this element dates from the last quarter of the nineteenth century. However, the area of exposed panelling in the NE corner shows how the skirting was painted initially (see photomicrograph of QAG/67). A dark brown paint consisting of red ochre and black with a little lead white was applied when the skirting was first painted. Similar coloured paints were employed on the subsequent eight occasions and the exposed scheme indicates the sort of depth of colour used. Doors The stair side of the door leading to the landing was found to date from the early nineteenth century refurbishment and it seems likely that the double doors also date from that time. Window The sashes were replaced at the same time as those on the ground floor, probably soon after the Second World War (see photomicrograph of QAG/37 in Appendix Two). The narrow window had been bricked up by 1852 (see watercolour in Appendix One).

Second Floor – Front Room Following a request to carry out an analysis of two of the chimneypieces on the second floor a further visit was made to the house.52 In order to put the paint layers on the chimneypiece in context a sample was also taken from the panelling on the east wall (see photomicrograph of QAG/40 in Appendix Two). The first scheme on the panelling was a stone colour as was the second. Lead colour was then employed on the next two occasions. It will be remembered that the same sequence was encountered on the panelling of the entrance hall and stairs (see above). Subsequent schemes have some similarities with those in other areas of the house – stone colours; greens and salmon pink all having been employed at various times. Most of the paints applied to the chimneypiece appear to have been off-white or pale stone52

(email Smyth – Baty 27th May 2010).

19

coloured (see photomicrograph of QAG/39 in Appendix Two). There appear to be about thirteen or fourteen separate schemes, the first of which relates to the scheme before the salmon pink scheme. This suggests that the chimneypiece might date from the end of the first quarter of the nineteenth century – possibly when other alterations were taking place in the house. Narrow Window While in the room it was noticed that the panelling that had been used to cover the blocked-up narrow window was constructed from the original shutters for that window (see photograph in Appendix One). This was thought to be important as it might shed light on the bricking-in of the windows. A sample was taken from the reverse of the original shutter and found to display six decorative schemes (see photomicrograph of QAG/52). These schemes were identical to those found on the panelling – two stone colours, two lead colours and then a further two stone colours. This suggests that the window in this room (and probably the one on the first floor) was bricked up in the third quarter of the eighteenth century.

Second Floor – Rear Room A sample was taken from the chimneypiece and also the panelling on the east wall in order to learn something of the date of its insertion. The panelling was painted in exactly the same manner as the front room initially. The first two schemes were in stone colour and then two more in lead colour followed by two more in stone colour (see photomicrograph of QAG/42 in Appendix Two). The remaining schemes on the panelling were pale stones and off whites, although the salmon and green schemes that were found in the front room were also employed. The chimneypiece was initially painted in a pale stone colour (see photomicrograph of QAG/41 in Appendix Two). The same colour was employed on the second occasion and then green was used – the same green that was applied to the panelling after the salmon colour. As the following (fourth) scheme on the chimneypiece was a grained one and as this follows the salmon scheme both in this room and elsewhere in the building (for example on the panelling of the stairs – see QAG/44) it seems that this chimneypiece might have been installed at the end of the first quarter of the nineteenth century – probably at the same time as the one in the front room. When compared with the sample from the arched doorway in the entrance hall (QAG/58) one is tempted to say that the chimneypieces were installed at the same time.

Recommendations
It is not known at this stage what the intention is as far as the re-decoration of the house. As the building has undergone certain changes it may not be realistic to try to recreate one of the eighteenth century schemes. The elements introduced in the first quarter of the nineteenth 20

century might not sit well with some of the colours of a hundred years before. Consistently, single colours have been used on most surfaces in each room - the notable exception being the skirting fasciae. On many occasions the whole house has been painted uniformly – or all but. This was very much the pattern for panelled houses of the early eighteenth century. In view of the preponderance of stone-coloured schemes my recommendation would be that such a colour be adopted throughout the house. A black skirting fascia might be considered in the entrance hall and stairs. The paint stratigraphy appears to be sound on the surfaces that were sampled. However, it must be understood that many areas were wood grained at some stage and will have had several coats of gloss varnish applied. As paint does not sit happily on varnish it is possible that overlying layers might shear off if the surface is knocked. Short of sanding down through the varnish little can be done about this.

Patrick Baty BA (Hons) FSA Scot FRSA 12th August 2010 Papers and Paints Ltd. 4 Park Walk London SW10 0AD

21

APPENDIX ONE LOCATION OF SAMPLING

55 63 54 56 58 62 60

57

Entrance Hall: Arched Door to Base of Stairs 22

43 44

45

49

46

47

48

Panelling

Architrave

64

Staircase

Shutter 23

2 1

3

Ground Floor: Front Room NW Corner

4

11

Ground Floor: Front Room North Wall - Centre
9

10 21 25 26 5 7 6 8

24

10 11

9 5

7

Ground Floor: Front Room North Wall - Centre

6

8

16

Ground Floor: Front Room North Wall - NE Corner

15

17

Exposed 1960s+ scheme

18

25

Ground Floor: Front Room NE Corner

24 14

12

13

20

Ground Floor: Front Room Chimneybreast

19 Exposure

26

51

Ground Floor: Rear Room. Chimneybreast

27

34 31

32

29 28 27

30 & 35

33

First Floor: Front Room. SE Corner

28

37 38

36

First Floor: Front Room. North Wall

39 52

40

Second Floor: Front Room. East Wall 29

41

42

Second Floor: Rear Room. Chimneypiece

65 & 66

38 53 53 73

73

Exterior: Doorcase

Exterior: Cornice

30

40

Second Floor: Front Room – Dark Green

31

1st & 2nd floors: Narrow windows have been blocked up

Ground floor: Narrow window prior to blocking up Note also Glazing bars

Queen Anne’s Gate T.H. Shepherd 1852

32

APPENDIX TWO PHOTOMICROGRAPHS

Existing

TiO2

Zinc oxide

2x re-varnish

Graining Salmon pink

Hall door here 3rd lead colour

Dark layer Stone colours 1st lead colour

2nd stone 1st stone

Photomicrograph of QAG/55 (upper layers) (x200 digitally reduced) Ground Floor: Entrance Hall - Panelling on LHS. Upper wall. 2nd stile from SE corner

33

1st lead colour

Yellow ochre Glaze layer

Red lead 1 stone Glaze layer Red oxide
st

Wood

Photomicrograph of QAG/55 (lower layers) (x500 digitally enlarged) Ground Floor: Entrance Hall - Panelling on LHS. Upper wall. 2nd stile from SE corner

Graining Vermilion

Yellowish pink Salmon Pinks 1st off-white

NB No obvious red oxide

Wood

Photomicrograph of QAG/58 (lower layers) (x500 digitally enlarged) Ground Floor: Entrance Hall - Arched doorway. Plinth block on LHS 34

Existing

TiO2 Zinc

Re-varnishing

Graining Salmon pinks

Dark layer

1st lead colour

Glaze layer 2nd stone Glaze layer 1st stone

Red lead

Red oxide

Wood

Photomicrographs of QAG/62 (x200 & x500 digitally altered) Ground Floor: Entrance Hall - Panelling LHS. Lower panel bed next to arch to back of stairs 35

1st lead colour

Glaze layer on 2nd stone

Glaze layer on 1st stone

Wood

Photomicrograph of QAG/56 (lower layers only) (x500 digitally reduced) Ground Floor: Entrance Hall - Panelling on LHS. Chair rail

Existing

TiO2 Zinc

Pale brown

Wood NB No obvious red oxide

Photomicrograph of QAG/57 (x200 digitally enlarged) Ground Floor: Entrance Hall - Skirting fascia on LHS 36

Existing

NB last layer on first floor door (/69) TiO2 Zinc

Graining

Re-varnish

Dark layer

3rd lead colour

1st lead colour

1st stone Red lead Charcoal black 2nd stone

Split

Yellow ochre

Red oxide

Wood

Photomicrographs of QAG/44 (x200 & x500 digitally altered) Staircase: First Floor Landing. Upper wall panelling 37

Black

Black

TiO2 Zinc

Graining

Black

Salmon pinks

Brown layers

Brown

1st black

Wood

Photomicrograph of QAG/48 (x200) Staircase: First Floor Landing. Skirting fascia

38

Existing

TiO2

Zinc oxide

Re-grain Graining

Salmon pink

Dark layer

Dark green Red brown 2nd stone Split

1st stone

Red oxide

Wood

Photomicrographs of QAG/49 (x200 & x500 digitally altered) Staircase: First Floor Landing. Door architrave to rear room

39

Existing

TiO2

Zinc

Graining

Dark layer

1st lead colour

Split

1st stone

Red oxide

Wood

Photomicrographs of QAG/64 (x200 & x500 digitally altered) Staircase: 1st half landing. R/H shutter. Outer face 40

Existing

Green 2

Zinc

Graining Existing sashes introduced here post War Pink Closet removed here?

Green 1

Salmon pink

Closet formed here? Dark layer Existing shutters introduced here

Dark green

Split

2 x lead colours 1st stone

Photomicrograph of QAG/2 (upper layers) (x200 digitally altered) Ground Floor: Front Room. Window wall. Panel bed to LHS of L/H window 41

2nd lead colour 1 lead colour 3rd stone Glaze layer
st

Yellow ochre 2nd stone Carbon black 1st stone

Glaze layer

Red oxide

Wood

Photomicrograph of QAG/2 (lower layers) (x500 digitally altered) Ground Floor: Front Room. Window wall. Panel bed to LHS of L/H window

Lead colour

Dark green 2 x lead colours 3rd stone 1st stone

Wood

Red oxide

Photomicrograph of QAG/3 (lower layers) (x500 digitally altered) Ground Floor: Front Room. Window wall. Panel Moulding - bed to LHS of L/H window

42

Existing

Green 2

Zinc

Existing sashes introduced here post War Black

Green 1

Vermilion Salmon pink

Dark layer

Existing shutters introduced here

Dark green

1st lead colour

Photomicrograph of QAG/3 (upper layers) (x200 digitally altered) Ground Floor: Front Room. Window wall. Panel Moulding - bed to LHS of L/H window

43

Existing

Green 2 TiO2 & ZnO

Wood

Zinc

Photomicrograph of QAG/5 (x500 digitally altered) Ground Floor: Front Room. Panel between windows. Chair rail 33cm from R/H side

Green 2 TiO2 & ZnO

Zinc

Green 1 Salmon pink

Graining

Dark layer

Photomicrograph of QAG/15 (upper layers) (x200 digitally reduced) Ground Floor: Front Room. Lower wall to RHS of R/H window. Panel bed. Exposed green

44

Existing

Green 2 TiO2 & ZnO Zinc

Existing sashes introduced here post War Black Green 1

Salmon pink

Red brown

Yellow brown

Photomicrograph of QAG/18 (upper layers) (x200 digitally enlarged) Ground Floor: Front Room. Window wall. Skirting fascia to RHS of R/H window

45

Yellow brown Red brown

1st brown

Red oxide on wood

Photomicrograph of QAG/18 (lower layers) (x500) Ground Floor: Front Room. Window wall. Skirting fascia to RHS of R/H window

3rd stone

2nd stone 1st stone

Red oxide Wood

Photomicrograph of QAG/14 (lower layers) (x500) Ground Floor: Front Room. Upper wall. Panel bed 38cm from RHS

46

Existing

Green 2 TiO2 & ZnO

Zinc

Existing sashes introduced here post War Green 1

Existing shutters introduced here

Dark layer

Dark green

2nd lead colour 1st lead colour Split

Photomicrograph of QAG/14 (upper layers) (x200) Ground Floor: Front Room. Upper wall. Panel bed 38cm from RHS

47

Dark layer Existing shutters introduced here

Dark green

2 x lead colours

2 stone colours

Photomicrograph of QAG/20 (mid layers) (x200) Ground Floor: Front Room. Chimneybreast. Panel bed lower LHS

48

Existing

Green 2 TiO2 & ZnO Zinc Existing sashes introduced here post War

Graining Salmon pinks

Dark layer

Split

Photomicrograph of QAG/26 (x200) Ground Floor: Front Room. R/H window. L/H shutter – outer face

49

Existing

Green 2 TiO2 & ZnO

Zinc

Zinc

Wood

Pink primer (lead-based)

Photomicrographs of QAG/25 (x200 & x500) Ground Floor: Front Room. R/H window. Lower sash – bottom rail

50

Existing

Salmon pinks

Dark layer

Lead colour Split

Lead colour

Red oxide Wood

Photomicrographs of QAG/50 (x200 & x500) Ground Floor: Rear Room. Chimneypiece. L/H upright

51

Existing

Salmon pinks

Dark layer

Split

Lead colour Wood Red oxide

Photomicrograph of QAG/51 (x200) Ground Floor: Rear Room. Chimneybreast. RHS. 20cm above level of mantel

52

Graining (later layers abraded) Salmon pink

Dark layer

Exposed scheme (see QAG/68) Dark green

Lead colour

2nd stone

1st stone

Split

1st stone

Red lead

Wood

Photomicrographs of QAG/28 (x200 & x500 digitally enlarged) First Floor: Front Room. S wall. SE corner. Panel bed above chair rail

53

Existing graining Graining

Re-varnish

Salmon pinks

Dark layer

Dark green Lead colour

2nd stone 1st stone

Photomicrograph of QAG/30 (x200) First Floor: Front Room. S wall. SE corner. Lower wall, stile between 1st and 2nd panels
Existing graining

Graining Graining

Wood

Photomicrograph of QAG/33 (x500) First Floor: Front Room. S wall. SE corner. Skirting fascia

54

Existing

Graining

Graining

Salmon pinks

Dark layer

Exposed scheme (see QAG/68)

Dark green Lead colour

2nd stone

Dark green Lead colour

2nd stone 1st stone

Red oxide Wood

Photomicrographs of QAG/36 (x200 & x500 digitally enlarged) First Floor: Front Room. N wall. Window seat below centre window 55

Existing

TiO2

TiO2 & ZnO

Zinc

Photomicrograph of QAG/37 (x200) First Floor: Front Room. N wall. Centre window. Top sash. Inside face

1st lead colour 2nd lead colour

2nd stone

1st stone

Red oxide

Wood

Photomicrograph of QAG/40 (x500) Second Floor: Front Room. East wall. SE corner. Upper wall. Rail above chair rail

56

Existing

Zinc

Green

Salmon pink Chimneypiece installed here

1st lead colour

Split 1st stone

Photomicrograph of QAG/40 (x200 digitally enlarged) Second Floor: Front Room. East wall. SE corner. Upper wall. Rail above chair rail

57

13th Existing

10th 9th TiO2 8th zinc 5th 7th 6th -Zinc

4th

3rd 2nd

Wood

1st

Photomicrograph of QAG/39 (x200) Second Floor: Front Room. Neo-classical chimneypiece. Mantel LHS

Existing

2nd lead colour 1st lead colour Glaze layer

2nd stone

1st stone

Red oxide

Wood

Photomicrograph of QAG/52 (x500) Second Floor: Front Room. NE corner. Old narrow shutters nailed together

58

Existing

TiO2

Zinc

Green

Salmon

Stone colours 2nd stone 1st lead colour

Red oxide

1st stone

Wood

Photomicrographs of QAG/42 (x200 & x500 digitally adjusted) Second Floor: Rear Room. Wall to RHS of chimneypiece

59

Existing

TiO2

Zinc

Graining

Graining Green

1st stone

Wood

Red oxide

Photomicrographs of QAG/41 (x200 & x500 digitally adjusted) Second Floor: Rear Room. Chimneypiece. Mantel RHS

60

Existing

TiO2

TiO2 & ZnO

Zinc Dirt

Wood

Photomicrograph of QAG/53 (x200) Exterior: Doorcase. LHS upper fascia

61

Existing

TiO2

TiO2 & ZnO

Zinc

Split

Photomicrograph of QAG/38 (x200) Exterior: First Floor. Front Room. N wall. Centre window. Top sash. Outside face

62

Existing TiO2 (later boarded over) Zinc

Compare with /44 to see missing layers

Grained

1st off-white Grained Split TiO2

Grained Salmon pinks

1st off-white

Wood

NB no obvious red oxide

Photomicrographs of QAG/69 (x200 & x500) First Floor: Landing. Outer face of door to front room. Hinge style

63

Existing

TiO2

Grained

Grained

Salmon pinks

3rd lead colour 1st lead colour 2nd stone colour 1st stone colour

3rd lead colour Glaze layer 1st lead colour 2nd stone colour Glaze layer 1st stone colour 2nd lead colour

Wood

Photomicrographs of QAG/72 (x200 & x500) Staircase. Newel post on 1st half landing 64

Existing (exposed) scheme

stone

stone

stone

stone

Yellow ochre Olive green

Split Lead colour

2nd stone

1st stone

Wood

Red oxide

Photomicrographs of QAG/68 (x500) First Floor: Front Room - E wall. NE corner. Lower wall panel

65

1st scheme

Wood Red oxide

Photomicrograph of QAG/67 (x500) First Floor: Front Room - E wall. NE corner. Skirting fascia

Dirt layer

1st pale stone

Photomicrograph of QAG/65 (x200) Exterior: Timber Cornice (lower layers)

66

TiO2 TiO2 + ZnO WWII Zinc Dirt

Poor maintenance and dirt + WW2

Upper layers

Photomicrographs of QAG/65 Exterior: Timber Cornice

Dark layer

‘Scab’ of paint from timber cornice

1st scheme

67

Original undercoat

Wood

Red oxide

Later paint

Red oxide

Original undercoat

Photomicrographs of QAG/73 (x200 & x500) Exterior: Doorcase – lower layer 68

APPENDIX THREE CROSS SECTIONS MADE Cross sections in bold have been photographed and appear in Appendix Two.

Ground Floor – Front Room QAG/1 Window wall. R/H stile of panel to LHS of L/H window 30cm above chair rail QAG/2 Window wall. Panel bed to LHS of L/H window 30cm above chair rail QAG/3 Window wall. R/H panel moulding to LHS of L/H window 30cm above chair rail QAG/4 Window wall. Chair rail to LHS of L/H window QAG/5 Window wall. Panel between windows. Chair rail 33cm from R/H side QAG/6 Window wall. Panel between windows. Chair rail 14cm from L/H side QAG/7 Window wall. Rail below chair rail. 53cm from LHS QAG/8 Window wall. Lower panel below chair rail. 53cm from LHS QAG/9 Window wall. Upper wall. Rail above chair rail. 53cm from LHS QAG/10 Window wall. Upper wall. Panel bed. 53cm from LHS QAG/11 Window wall. Upper wall. Panel bed. 17cm from LHS QAG/12 E wall. NE corner. Upper wall. Rail above chair rail 38cm from RHS QAG/13 E wall. NE corner. Chair rail 38cm from RHS QAG/14 E wall. NE corner. Upper wall. Panel bed 38cm from RHS QAG/15 Window wall. Lower wall to RHS of R/H window. Panel bed. Exposed green previously covered over QAG/16 Window wall. Lower wall to RHS of R/H window. Rail below chair rail. Exposed green previously covered over QAG/17 Window wall. Lower wall to RHS of R/H window. Panel bed to RHS of exposed green QAG/18 Window wall. Skirting fascia to RHS of RH window QAG/19 Chimneybreast. Panel moulding lower LHS QAG/20 Chimneybreast. Panel bed lower LHS QAG/21 R/H window. L/H shutter. Inner face (aged paint) QAG/22 Blockboard panelling from wall adjacent to Entrance Hall QAG/23 Door. Architrave. RHS QAG/24 Bead on LHS of chimneybreast. 68cm above chair rail QAG/25 RH window. Lower sash – bottom rail QAG/26 RH window. LH shutter – outer face

Ground Floor – Rear Room QAG/50 Chimneypiece. L/H upright QAG/51 Chimneybreast. RHS. 20cm above level of mantel on return of SE corner

69

APPENDIX THREE (continued)

Ground Floor – Entrance Hall QAG/54 Arched door between hall and base of stairs. LH architrave QAG/55 Panelling on LHS. Upper wall. 2nd stile from SE corner QAG/56 Panelling on LHS. Chair rail QAG/57 Skirting fascia on LHS QAG/58 Arched doorway. Plinth block on LHS QAG/59 Inside face of front door. Lock stile 70cm up QAG/60 Door between hall and base of stairs. Hall face. Hinge stile 70cm up QAG/61 Front door. Architrave. Lock stile / RHS 160cm up QAG/62 Panelling LHS. Lower panel bed next to arch to back of stairs QAG/63 Panelling LHS. Upper panel bed next to arch to back of stairs

Staircase QAG/43 QAG/44 QAG/45 QAG/46 QAG/47 QAG/48 QAG/49 QAG/64 QAG/69 QAG/70 QAG/71 QAG/72

1st Floor Landing. Upper wall panelling. 2nd stile from NW corner 1st Floor Landing. Upper wall panelling. 2nd panel bed from NW corner 1st Floor Landing. Chair rail 1st Floor Landing. Rail on lower wall below chair rail 1st Floor Landing. Lower wall. Panel bed 1st Floor Landing. Skirting fascia 1st Floor Landing. Door architrave to rear room RHS 1st half landing. R/H shutter. Outer face. Bottom R/H stile 1st Floor Landing. Outer face of door to front room. Hinge style Staircase balustrade. 4th baluster from 1st half landing Staircase handrail. By newel post on 1st half landing Staircase. Newel post on 1st half landing

First Floor – Front Room QAG/27 S wall. SE corner. Rail above chair rail QAG/28 S wall. SE corner. Panel bed above chair rail QAG/29 S wall. SE corner. Panel bed above chair rail – had been covered by a shelf QAG/30 S wall. SE corner. Lower wall, stile between 1st and 2nd panels from corner QAG/31 E wall. SE corner. Stile in the corner QAG/32 E wall. SE corner. Upper wall. Panel moulding. Central stile between panels QAG/33 E wall. SE corner. Skirting fascia QAG/34 E wall. SE corner. Upper wall. Central stile between panels QAG/35 S wall. SE corner. Lower wall, stile between 1st and 2nd panels from corner QAG/36 N wall. Window seat below centre window QAG/37 N wall. Centre window. Top sash. Inside face QAG/38 N wall. Centre window. Top sash. Outside face QAG/67 E wall. NE corner. Skirting fascia QAG/68 E wall. NE corner. Lower wall panel

70

APPENDIX THREE (continued)

Second Floor – Front Room QAG/39 Neo-classical chimneypiece. Mantel LHS QAG/40 East wall. SE corner. Upper wall. Rail above chair rail QAG/52 NE corner. Old narrow shutters nailed together to fill old window aperture QAG/74 East wall. NE corner. Exposed panelling – upper wall Second Floor – Rear Room QAG/41 Chimneypiece. Mantel RHS QAG/42 Wall to RHS of chimneypiece

Exterior QAG/38 QAG/53 QAG/65 QAG/66 QAG/73

First Floor front. Centre window. Top sash. Outside face Doorcase. LHS upper fascia Wooden cornice at front Wooden cornice at front Doorcase. Swag: bottom L/H

71

APPENDIX FOUR SOME PIGMENTS FOUND IN THE HOUSE White Lead "White may be said to be the basic colour in all painting practice, for few pigments are used without the incorporation of some white to give body (opacity) or to reduce colour strength. Until some fifty years ago [about 1900] white lead was the only white pigment produced in any great quantity, but since then other whites have been introduced which have practically superseded white lead for some purposes, notably interior painting. In spite of certain drawbacks, however, white lead remains unsurpassed for exterior painting. The other principal basic whites used in this country are zinc oxide, lithopone, antimony and titanium".53 Zinc Oxide Zinc oxide is a bright white pigment that is non-poisonous, and is not discoloured by sulphurous fumes. These properties led to its consideration as a replacement for white lead towards the end of the nineteenth century. One of the earliest references to it appears in a book of specifications published in 1859.54 In this instance it was recommended in rooms with gaslights where the "clearness and brilliancy" of the white was to be preserved. Its chief disadvantage is the hardening effect it has on oil, which causes it to produce a hard nonelastic and brittle paint film. This may lead to premature breakdown of the paint on external surfaces by cracking or chalking unless corrected. In mixture with white lead it produces a very good paint. The zinc hardens the lead and helps it to maintain colour in a smoky atmosphere, while the lead moderates any hardening action of the zinc and so prevents brittleness. Paints containing such a blend of lead white and zinc oxide were used in the first quarter of the twentieth century. The use of zinc oxide appears to have reached its peak in the second decade of the twentieth century. It was at this time that Arthur Jennings, the prolific writer on paint, wrote: Before 1914 nearly the whole quantity of zinc oxide used in this country was imported from France, Belgium, Holland, and the United States of America, but since that time several factories have been started in England, and the present produce has already reached an output almost sufficient to fill all home requirements.55 Its appearance in paint stratigraphy usually indicates the period ca.1890-1960.

Titanium Dioxide A pigment known as titanium white, which was a combination of titanium oxide and barium sulphate was introduced into Britain in 1921, and this rapidly became established as one of the staple pigments for paint manufacture. Towards the close of 1927, however, as a result of long experience and research, the difficulties of preparing a satisfactory pigment from the
53 54

(Hurst 1949, 61). (Donaldson 1859, xxi). 55 (Jennings 1921, 1:184-185).

72

APPENDIX FOUR (continued) pure oxide were finally overcome, and a pigment of brilliant whiteness and intense opacity was introduced containing approximately 98 per cent titanium oxide. The outstanding qualities of this were soon recognised, and by the late 1940s it had largely superseded the original type of pigment for many purposes, although the composite pigment was still manufactured and used for a while. It has been the prime white pigment in house paints for the last forty years. Red Lead John Smith described very clearly the manufacture of red lead: this colour is made out of common lead, by first reducing it to a litharge; and that litharge being afterward ground to a powder in a mill is afterward conveyed into a hot furnace, for that purpose, where 'tis continually kept stirring with an iron rake, till it has attained to the colour of a fine, pale red.56 This pigment had a very mixed reputation, and was often used more for its drying properties, than its orange-red colour, which was liable to turn black in oil. Whittock said, however, that it kept its colour in water-based media, and was consequently, sometimes, used in distemper.57 T.H. Vanherman (a London colourman) found little use for its colour in house-painting, except as a ground for mahogany graining.58 As well as being used in the manufacture of drying oils, this pigment came to replace Spanish brown or red oxide as a priming colour. Its quick drying nature was of considerable use at a time when a coat of oil paint could take several days to dry, and the decoration of a room, perhaps, a week. The addition of red lead to the undercoats would ensure that these would be ready to receive the finish coat as soon as possible. One consequence of this characteristic was that it was somewhat difficult to work with, hardening into an unmanageable mass,59 and adhering: so strong to the bottom of the paint-pot, that it proves a troublesome task to liberate it and bring it into a working condition again.60 On internal surfaces the pigment was often mixed with size and used to kill knots, prior to painting. Towards the end of the nineteenth century primers based on red lead dispersed in linseed oil began to be used on structural steelwork. Their use continued until the late twentieth century when the toxic nature of red lead became a concern.

56 57

(Smith 1687, 21). (Whittock 1827, 10). 58 (Vanherman 1829, 29). 59 (Tingry 1830, 106). 60 (Vanherman 1829, 29).

73

APPENDIX FOUR (continued) Yellow Ochre / Yellow Iron Oxide In common with the umbers, the earth pigments designated ochres (or oxides) saw constant use in house-painting, not only were they readily obtainable, but they encompassed a large range of hues, both in their natural and their calcined state. The Swiss, Pierre Francois Tingry explained how readily they were obtained: Ochres are easily purified by simple washing. They mix readily with water, and the sand and stones which they contain being heavier than themselves, subside. The water, turbid with the ochre, is decanted, by making it pass into a trough lower than the vessel in which it was washed; when the ochre has subsided the clear water is drawn off. The ochre is then taken out, and being dried is divided into small masses.61 John Smith mentioned the two basic types: Yellow Oaker, Is of two sorts; the one gotten in England, the other brought from beyond the Seas: the one is light Yellow, much like the colour of Wheat straw; the other is somewhat of a deeper colour.62 The second edition clarified this, by referring to the first as "Plain-Oaker" most of which was found in the Shotover Hills near Oxford,63 and the other as "Spruce-Oaker".64 The former displayed many of the best properties for a house-painting pigment, being described as a "Colour, that with pains, will grind very fine, it bears an excellent body, and resists the weather well".65 A darker ochre called "Common Brown or Bristol Oker" by John Pincot was recommended for filling imperfections in the body work of carriages, presumably a greater capacity for drying rendered it useful for this purpose.66 This facility for drying could relate to the confusion mentioned earlier under Umber, where Tingry recorded the use of the name Brown ochre as a synonym for umber. Robert Dossie pointed out that its colour was as a result of calcination "either by subterranean fires or artificially".67 As well as various sorts of yellow and brown, Tingry told us that: Many of the yellow ochres when burnt become of a red colour, and are then occasionally used for more delicate processes.68

61 62

(Tingry 1830, 74). (Smith 1676, 22). 63 A very detailed account of where to obtain this Oxford ochre is given in (Plot 1677, 55). 64 Dr. Harley suggests that spruce was an old form of Prussia or Prussian (Harley 1982, 89). 65 (Smith 1687, 22). 66 (Pincot ca.1811, 31). 67 (Dossie 1796, 1:104). 68 (Tingry 1830, 73).

74

APPENDIX FOUR (continued) In this state the pigment was generally known as light red. Hay accounted for the wide variety of colours, and told us that its price varied with the shade: They are a native earthy mixture of silica and alumina, coloured by oxide of iron, with occasionally a little calcareous matter and magnesia, and are found between strata of rock and sand. Ochre varies in...price from 1d. to 1s. per lb.69

Red Ochres / Red Iron Oxides Red ochres came in many different forms, and provided a number of reds for the house-painter during the period under review. Spanish brown, Venetian red, and Indian red, when in their natural state, were pigments used as they were found, while light red was made by calcining yellow ochre, and English red was one of a large number of artificial red oxides produced from the by-products of certain industrial processes. These latter appeared, largely, as a result of the Industrial Revolution. The natural red ochres were obtained from many locations, and prepared very simply: Ochres are easily purified by simple washing. They mix readily with water, and the sand and stones which they contain being heavier than themselves, subside. The water, turbid with the ochre, is decanted, by making it pass into a trough lower than the vessel in which it was washed; when the ochre has subsided the clear water is drawn off. The ochre is then taken out, and being dried is divided into small masses.70 Spanish brown was described by Smith as coming from Spain, the best of it being of a deep bright colour, although inclined to be gritty.71 He went on to say that it was the only colour used in priming woodwork, not least for its cheapness. Tingry mentioned the west of England72 as being the more likely source of this pigment,73 and Robert Dossie suggested that it was probably brought from abroad originally, at a time when it would have been much finer than now "dug up in several parts of England". He confirmed that it was mainly used as a primer for coarse work by house-painters, needing no other preparation than "freeing it well from stones and filth".74 Pincot pointed out that in new houses the inside work may be primed with "strong double size, just stained with a little Spanish Brown, merely to see where the brush has been".75 The naming of colours has always given rise to confusion, the Frenchman Watin referred to a red ochre imported from England, which he called "rouge brun", or "brun-rouge

69 70

(Hay 1847, 108). (Tingry 1830, 74). 71 (Smith 1676, 14). 72 Probably the Forest of Dean and the Mendip hills, in Somerset. 73 (Tingry 1830, 73-74). 74 (Dossie 1796, 1:59). 75 (Pincot ca.1811, 38).

75

APPENDIX FOUR (continued) d'Angleterre", which was used in oil and distemper, and for the painting of floors and carts.76 This English brown red was probably the same as the English red mentioned by the author of the Pocket Manual and by George Field, who described Prussian red as the same pigment.77 In his later work, Smeaton was more precise, calling them both colcothar of vitriol (q.v.).78 However, although, in the nineteenth century, they were both regarded as artificial iron oxides, the Frenchman Jean Watin clearly states that Prussian red was "une terre calcinée donnant une rouge imitant le vermillon", indicating a brighter red than the English variety.79 Either the name was given to a similar pigment, or Watin was confusing it with something else. In a similar fashion, Venetian red was brought from Venice; but it was also produced in France, Germany, and many other places, according to Tingry.80 Both Peter Nicholson, and Whittock, lifting the words from Dossie, described it as being a native pigment, inclining to the scarlet, and being used in the imitation of mahogany.81 It was grouped with Spanish brown and light ochre, by David Hay, as being amongst the coarse red pigments.82 Field, however, indicated that it was prepared artificially from iron sulphate [often known as green vitriol] in the manufacture of sulphuric acid. He gave the alternative name of scarlet ochre.83 A more prized red earth was that known as Indian red, which Dossie said had originally been imported from the East Indies, but since the manufacture of the artificial variety from caput mortuum,84 was no longer imported.85 Field, writing over fifty years later, described it as a purple-russet iron ore brought into the country from Bengal, and "now obtained abundantly" from "respectable colourmen".86 He gave the name Persian red as an alternative, which is similar to the Persian ochre which Tingry presumed came from Persia, and called a "a dear colour" used mainly in portrait painting.87 A red iron oxide with the rather exotic name of colcothar of vitriol, was: the purplish red peroxyde of iron, made by adding solution of soda to the solution of sulphate of iron or copperas, is another red used by the house-painter. It produces the chocolate paint so much in use for the woodwork of kitchens, servant's halls &c.. It is APPENDIX FOUR (continued)
76 77

(Watin 1778, 23). (Pocket 1825, 96; Field 1850, 45). 78 (Gilder's ca.1827, 32). 79 (Watin 1778, 23). 80 (Tingry 1830, 73). 81 (Dossie 1796, 1:59; Nicholson 1823, 413; Whittock 1827, 10). 82 (Hay 1847, 113). 83 (Field 1850, 45). 84 The ferric oxide residue obtained as a by-product in the manufacture of fuming sulphuric acid (Harley 1982, 121). Caput mortuum literally means death’s head. The name originally derived from alchemy where it was used to denote the residue after an alchemical operation such as distillation or sublimation. 85 (Dossie 1796, 1:58). 86 (Field 1850, 44). 87 (Tingry 1830, 73).

76

cheap in price, and very durable.88

Charcoal Black According to Tingry, black of a bluish hue was produced by the burning of vine twigs, which, when ground carefully, and mixed with white produced a silver white.89 Beech charcoal was credited with a very similar tone, and bearing in mind the European origins of this work, it is more likely that in this country, beech rather than vine twigs would have provided the source. The few references to this pigment that occur appear to be derived from the above source, and even fewer give an indication of its usage. Nicholson in his The Mechanic's Companion, of 1825, mentioned it being used in small amounts to brighten up the last two coats of a surface being painted in white with oil.90 Pincot suggested Prussian blue, or black, for the same purpose. Perhaps when one considers the practical nature of Pincot's writing, and his long experience of the trade, the addition of a blue that held a key place on the house-painter's palette seems more likely in everyday work, than a black reserved for this purpose alone.91 In finer work, one may expect a charcoal black to have been used in the way that Nicholson described, and the author has encountered it in at least one late eighteenth century house.92

Carbon Black Lamp black was the soot collected after burning the resinous parts of fir-trees. It came mostly from Sweden and Norway, although it was manufactured on a large scale in Germany at the beginning of the nineteenth century.93 John Smith referred to its being "made up in small boxes and barrels of deal, of several sizes, and so brought over to us".94 It was the most commonly used of the blacks, being cheap and plentiful. It was a very fine pigment, that would serve most needs, without grinding, if mixed up well with linseed-oil. If used in this manner, however, the greasiness would retard its drying time, unless a drying agent were added.95 Blacks, of various forms, were often added to white paint in order to combat the inherent yellowness of a lead white and linseed oil paint.

APPENDIX FOUR (continued)
88 89

(Hay 1847, 113). For an account of its use on exteriors see: (Baty 1992, 44-47). (Tingry 1804, 350). 90 (ibid., 406). 91 (Pincot ca.1811, 17). 92 The investigative work at Uppark, in Sussex, has shown that a charcoal black was used in the upper layers of the white painted woodwork in many of the rooms. 93 (Tingry 1804, 347). 94 (Smith 1687, 16-17). 95 (Pocket 1825, 89).

77

Vermilion The pigment known as Vermilion, is a bright scarlet pigment produced by combining sulphur and mercury, the result being red mercuric sulphide. Cinnabar is the natural form, which was less common, but often preferred, because of the tendency of the early colour-shops to adulterate the artificial variety with red lead. There were two methods of producing this pigment, the one known as Dry-Process, and the other as Wet-Process. The Chinese are believed to have invented the dry-process, although Amsterdam became the principal centre for its manufacture in Europe in the early seventeenth century. It is still available in mainland China, and the author has recently obtained a quantity from Guangdong province. When viewed under the microscope, the particles of dry-process vermilion are irregular, and clearly made by pulverising lumps. The larger particles tend to be elongated, reflecting its columnar structure. By the end of the seventeenth century, Gottfried Schulz, a German, had discovered an easier, and less expensive method of manufacturing the pigment. This was done by heating the black mercuric sulphide in a solution of ammonium or potassium sulphide. It soon became the favourite method of production in the West, being known as English or German vermilion. The particles of wet-process vermilion are fine and uniform in size, which is a characteristic of a chemically precipitated product.96 Its price in the late 1840s varied from three shillings to six shillings per pound.97 As a benchmark, the ubiquitous yellow ochre varied from 1d. to one shilling per pound.98

96 97

(Gettens et al 1993, 159-165). (Hay 1847, 110-12). 98 (Ibid. 108).

78

APPENDIX FIVE GRAINING The imitation in paint of materials usually more expensive, or exotic, is thought to have been carried out since ancient times. As a means of decoration in interiors, Wyatt Papworth believed that: The processes of graining and marbling may be traced back as far as the time of James VI of Scotland, (1567-1603).99 The growing use of softwood for the building and internal cladding of houses in the late seventeenth century, led to an increased demand for the painted imitation of woods in this country. In his second edition, Smith referred to the imitation of "Olive Wood" and "Walnut Tree", and described them being veined over with a darker pigment.100 Ian Bristow's commentary on the seventeenth century decoration at Dyrham Park, in Gloucestershire, lists a number of painted woods, referred to in the accounts for the house; amongst them cedar colour, walnut colour, wainscot colour, and princes-wood colour.101 At first sight, such names might be understood to imply merely the colour and tone of these woods, but in this early period, either the colour or the imitation of a wood could be indicated,102 and it is usually context or recorded price that makes clear what had been carried out. A clue to some of the conventions of the day can be obtained from a letter of 1700 that accompanied three samples of graining prepared for a client: B, ye properest for a Bedchamber, if well performed (withe the pencil), and not tou mucht withe a brushe as is the common way, it will requier moor skill to paynes & will coste the moor, it represents a Light wall-nut tree color as I have seen some cabinets, and is proper for Antirooms & Bedchambers, the other A is a dark wallnut tree & will require a glossey varnishe and is very proper in Light chambers - C is a wainscot color muche in voge (since wright wainscot is subject to (since wright wainscot is subject to groe dark and in spots ,) and generally speaking ye use at present is a flate color that of torteschall103 [italics mine].104

99

(Papworth 1857-58, 9). (Smith 1687, 52). 101 (Bristow 1979, 141). Prince wood, or prince's wood, is a dark-coloured and light-veined timber produced by two West Indian trees, Cordia gerascanthoides and Hamelia ventricosa; also called Spanish elm. SOED 1986. S.v. "Prince-wood." Sir Roger Pratt, writing in the 1660s in his capacity as architect of Kingston Lacy Hall, Dorset, listed three of these four woods, making no mention, however, of wainscot (Gunther 1928, 282). 102 Smith, in dealing with umber, said that "it resembles the colour of new oaken wainscot the nearest of any colour in the world" (Smith 1687, 27). The earliest use of the word "graining", encountered by the author in a published text, is in a list of painting prices of 1786 (Pain 1786, 14). 103 "Flate color" probably refers to the low sheen on tortoiseshell. 104 (Winde 1700, quoted in Beard 1981, 60).
100

79

APPENDIX FIVE (continued) Not only could wood be represented in light and dark forms, but the finish could also vary in levels of sheen, some combinations being more appropriate than others. Olive wood and Walnut appear in the 1788 edition of Smith,105 yet by this time, the use of both of these woods was probably rather old-fashioned, being replaced by wainscot (or oak), and mahogany, which began to feature in price books of the period.106 It appears that, once again, the architect Sir John Soane was amongst the first to introduce new ideas. His use of graining to imitate light oak or satinwood on the dado and skirting of his Dining Room at 12 Lincoln’s Inn Fields in 1793 was some years before any other recorded use.107 No mention of graining is found in the first English edition of Tingry, of 1804, which is no doubt a reflection of both the book's continental origins, and the fact that the process had not yet become fashionable again. In England, however, during the next ten years, a rekindled interest in the technique of imitating woods in paint developed. Papworth recalled a friend saying that: …the doors of the Chapel in Conduit Street, Bond Street, attracted much attention from the novelty of their being grained to imitate wainscot, done perhaps, about the year 1810 when a new front was given to the building. From some letters in my possession I find that mahogany was imitated in 1815, and maple wood in 1817.108 Price books of the time reflect this growing interest in fancy woods, and Laxton's The Improved Builders' Price Book of 1818, contains an early and wide range, amongst them: new wainscot, white oak, old or dark oak, air wood, satin wood, Hispaniola mahogany, coromandel wood, amboyna wood, yew tree and black rose wood.109 By the 1820s the interest was such that even Butcher had changed the original list of woods mentioned by Smith, deleting olive wood, and adding mahogany and wainscot110 to the walnut already listed. Smeaton, reflected this, and added satin wood and two varieties of rose wood.111 Whittock confirmed the approximate date of this renewed enthusiasm, in his work of 1827: The very great improvement that has been made within the last ten years [italics mine] in the art of imitating the grain and colour of various fancy woods and marbles, and the facility and consequent cheapness of this formerly expensive work, has brought it into general use; and there are few respectable houses erected, where the talent of the decorative painter is not called into action, APPENDIX FIVE (continued)
105 106

(ibid., 5). (Pain 1786, 14; Taylor 1813, 125). 107 (Bristow 1996:1, 208-09). 108 (Papworth 1857-58, 9). 109 (Laxton 1818, 99). 110 (Butcher 1821, 3). 111 (Pocket 1825, 105, 109, 160-62; Gilder's ca.1827, 49, 51-52, 189-90).

80

in graining doors, shutters, wainscots, &c.112 He went on to tell us that: Much has certainly been done by modern decorative painters, within the last fifteen years.113 One of the features of this new trend was the extent to which some house-painters developed the art of imitating the natural product. Whereas the late seventeenth century representations of woodgrain are almost theatrical in their handling, in that they only read as wood from a distance,114 the early nineteenth century grainer was encouraged to observe nature, for the "foundation of his future proficiency"115 and to produce realistic specimens. Whittock, as well as producing actual coloured examples of many of the popular wood effects in his The Decorative Painters' and Glaziers' Guide, gave an indication of where such woods might be used. Writing some twenty years later, Hay showed how this had changed by the end of the period: [Of Oak, or Wainscot] 1827 Oak is the wood that is commonly preferred to any other for outside work...preferred to any other wood for doors and shutters where strength is required. The decorative painter, therefore, who considers propriety, will generally recommend the imitation of oak for street doors, shutters, &c..116 1847 Imitation oak has been greatly used in halls, staircases, libraries, and dining-rooms, and it will be observed, from the description of the process, that it must be very durable.117 It appears that the fashion for a wide variety of fancy woods began to wane within a few years, and Vanherman told us that, having "formed a considerable part of the decorative system", graining and marbling are "now giving place to the plain and simple".118 The two reasons given for this change being, the: additional expense to the painter's bill, and the short-lived beauty they exhibit; for being generally executed in water colours, and then varnished, should this covering crack and chip, the work will consequently look shabby, ragged, and mean.119 APPENDIX FIVE (continued)
112 113

(Whittock 1827, 20). (ibid., 46). 114 See the walnut graining, carried out by Sergeant Painter Robert Streater, on the panelling of Apartment 7 at Hampton Court Palace, and exposed by Catherine Hassall a few years ago. 115 (Whittock 1827, 20), 116 (ibid.). 117 (Hay 1847, 140). 118 Vanherman 1829, 40). 119 (ibid.).

81

He added that: Graining, like diamonds in portrait painting, should be sparingly employed for its scarcity constitutes in a great measure its value.120 The process of graining was, inevitably, labour intensive. Papworth, relying heavily on Hay's description,121 said that: in the first instance [it is] the same as for ordinary painted work, but it requires more care in obliterating the marks of the brush. The last coat, instead of being flatted, is composed of equal portions of oil and spirits of turpentine, and is brought up to the colo[u]r characteristic of the wood to be imitated.122 When this ground-work was quite dry, a thick layer of a semi-transparent paint was prepared, in the colour of the wood to be imitated. This was laid smoothly over the ground-work, after which a graining comb,123 made of steel, ivory, horn, or wood, was: drawn through this composition, by which it is separated upon the ground-work into minute portions, representing the grain of the wood.124 The heart grain and flowers would then be wiped out using a thumb nail, or a piece of horn, covered with a cloth. This was left to dry before being overgrained with a transparent layer of oil or water colour. Two or three coats of an oil varnish based on a resin such as copal would then be applied.

120 121

(ibid., 41). (Hay 1847, 137). 122 (Papworth 1857-58, 9). 123 These combs were made in a range of sizes, a number being illustrated on plate II, facing page 22 of Whittock's The Decorative Painters', and Glaziers' Guide. Tingry tells us that they were obtained at the comb-makers in London (Tingry 1830, 282). 124 (Hay 1847, 138).

82

APPENDIX SIX A CONTEMPORARY ACCOUNT OF HOUSE PAINTING COLOURS AND PRICES The following is taken from William Salmon's Palladio Londinensis, which was first published in London in 1734. For nearly forty years (until 1773 when it was superseded by William Pain's publications) this remained a standard builders' manual, and in that time it saw more editions than any of the other books of its kind.125 The paints and materials mentioned were to be had from the premises of Alexander Emerton, who was a Colourman, at the sign of the Bell near Arundel Street, in the Strand. These premises were half a mile away from 36 Craven Street.126 In 1741, Elizabeth Emerton advertised that she was continuing the business of her late husband. By 1744, however, Alexander's brother Joseph had taken over the firm, which was still trading under the name Emerton and Manby a number of years later.127

p.55 Sect. VII. of PAINTERS Work PAINTERS Work is measured in the same manner as the Joiners, only with this difference, that instead of accounting the Doors and Window-Shutters Work and half, they have double Work, as being painted on both sides; and they also measure all Edges, &c. where the Brush goes. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Sash-Frames, Sash-Lights, Window-lights, and casements, are done at per Piece. Modillion, and other Cornice, at per Foot running Measure. Outside Painting three times in Oil is worth, if well done, from 6d. to 8d. per Yard. Inside Painting, new Work, of common Colours, at 6d. per Yard. Inside Painting, old Work, of common Colours, at 4d per Yard; but of extraordinary Colours, as Olive Colours, at 8d. per Yard. Prussian blue, at 8d. per Yard. Greens, at 12d. per Yard. Sash-Frames, at 12d. each. Sash-Lights, at 1d. each. Window-Lights and Casements, at 3d. each. Iron bars, at 1d. each, or more if very large.

125 126

(Harris 1990, 404). The business was well known at the time and evidence has been found for paint from Joseph Emerton having been bought in 1742 by Sir James Dalrymple for use in his house at Newhailes, East Lothian (Baty 1998:3, 23). 127 (Bristow 1996:2, 91-92).

83

APPENDIX SIX (continued)

12 13

Modillion Cornice, from 6d. to 12d. per Foot running. Common outside Cornice 2d. per Foot running.

NB All carving in Rooms and out-side Frontispieces to Doors, &c. are so various, that they must be valued by the Time and Materials expended.

of Colours used in House-Painting.
PAINTING, if not the chief, is as necessary a Part of Building as any other whatever, both for Use and Ornament, the doing of which well and often being the surest way of preserving all the rest, instances of which may be seen in several Buildings, about London, where the Misfortunes of the Builders have prevented them from finishing their Works, it may be observed that the Sash-Frames, Sashes, Window-Shutters, Doors and Door-Cases, for want of Painting, in a very few Years, are so much decayed, that were those Buildings to be made tenantable, most of the outside Timber-Work must be renewed; Iron-Work, tho' of a much stronger Nature than Timber, if not well secured by Painting, is likewise subject to the same misfortune: On the contrary, where Timber-Work is often painted it will endure many Ages, no Weather being able to penetrate thro' it as to the ornamental Part, there is no gentleman but must allow that there is a great difference between a clean painted Room, and one that hath not been painted, or where the Painting is foul. I shall be the more particular under this Head, Of Colours. Painters Work being very expensive, and this being the only part in Building wherein a Gentleman can be assisting either by himself or Servants, it being almost impossible for any Gentleman to do either Masons, Bricklayers, Carpenters, or Smiths Works; whereas it is well known and daily experienced since the Advertisement of ALEXANDER EMERTON, that several Noblemen and Gentlemen have by themselves and Servants painted whole Houses without the Assistance or Direction of a Painter, which when examined by the best Judges could not be distinguished from the Work of a professed Painter. And that which conduces most to this Practice is the vast Disproportion between the Prices which Painters charge for their Work, and the Expence which Gentlemen are at in this Method of Painting, which at the utmost doth not amount to one fourth Part of the Painter's Price, to prove which I shall proceed to the Prices of Colours, and likewise shew what Number of Yards one Pound of each Colour will paint. First Primer ground in Oil, at 36s. per 112lb weight or 4d. per lb. One pound of which will paint 20 square Yards. Second Primer ground in Oil, at 36s per 112lb or 4d per lb. One Pound of which will paint 12 square Yards.

84

APPENDIX SIX (continued) Best White Lead ground in Oil, at 36s per 112lb or 4d per lb. One Pound of which, with two Pennyworth of Oil, will paint 8 square Yards; which is three Farthings per Yard, for which Painters usually charge 4d per Yard. Pearl Colour, ground in Oil, at 4d and 5d per lb. Lead Colour, ground in Oil, at 4d and 5d per lb. Cream Colour, ground in Oil, at 4d and 5d per lb. Stone Colour, ground in Oil, at 4d and 5d per lb.128 Wainscot, or Oak Colour, ground in Oil, at 4d and 5d per lb. One Pound of any of these Colours, with Oil, will paint 8 square Yards, for which Painters usually charge 4d per Yard. Chocolate Colour, ground in Oil, at 6d per Yard. Mahogany Colour, ground in Oil, at 6d per Yard. Cedar Colour, ground in Oil, at 6d per Yard. Wallnut-tree Colour, ground in Oil, at 6d per Yard. One Pound of any of these Colours, with Oil, will paint 10 square Yards, for some of which Painters usually charge 4d per Yard, for others more. Gold Colour, ground in Oil, at 8d per lb. Olive Colour, ground in Oil, from 8d to 12d per lb. Pea Colour, ground in Oil, from 8d to 12d per lb. Fine Sky Blue mixed with Prussian Blue, ground in Oil from 8d to 12d per lb.129 Orange Colour, ground in Oil, at 12d per lb. Lemon Colour, ground in Oil, at 12d per lb. Straw Colour, ground in Oil, at 12d per lb.

128 129

Variants on this were used for most of the eighteenth century. A number of rooms in the house were painted with this colour in the early nineteenth century.

85

APPENDIX SIX (continued) Pink Colour, ground in Oil, at 12d per lb. Blossom Colour, ground in Oil, at 12d per lb. One Pound of any of these Colours, with Oil, will paint 8 square Yards, for some of which Painters usually charge 10d or 12d per Yard, for others they will expect more. Fine deep Green, ground in Oil, at 2s 6d per lb.130 One Pound of which, with Oil, will paint 20 square Yards, for which Painters usually charge 12d per Yard. Oils used in House-Painting, are Linseed Oil at 10d per Quart. Turpentine Oil at 12d per Quart. Best drying Oil at 12d per Quart. Painting Brushes of several Sizes, from 2d to 6d each. Putty, at 4d per lb. Double Size used by the Painters for priming new Work, at 4s per Firkin, or 2d per Quart. Single Size, at 18d per Firkin, or 1d per Quart. These Colours, with all other Materials used in Painting, are prepared in the best manner, and sold by ALEXANDER EMERTON, Colourman, at the Bell over against Arundel-street near St Clement's Church in the Strand, London. He likewise gives printed Directions for the using his Colours, or procures Painters to work for Gentlemen by the day.

130

This was the colour bought by Sir James Dalrymple in 1742 for his house at Newhailes, East Lothian (Baty 1998:3, 23).

86

APPENDIX SEVEN SOME REFERENCES TO DARK BROWN DOORS AND SKIRTINGS

1) Dr. Steven Parissien. RICS Diploma in Building Conservation. Module 11. "The Historical Development of Interior Design 1600-1939." Course notes. (Referring to William Salmon's list of colours in Palladio Londonensis (1748):) "In contrast, chocolate brown was very commonly used for internal woodwork, particularly for skirtings and for doors; it was not only cheap and practical - scuffing showed far less on a dark than on a light background - but also aesthetically pleasing, terminating the light-coloured wall above in a very effective fashion." ---------------2) Sally Jeffery. The Mansion House. Phillimore. 1993. p.134. On 19 November 1761, Rowe was ordered to paint all the doors of the two principal storeys a mahogany colour... --------------3) Ian Bristow. Architectural Colour in British Interiors. London: Yale University Press. 1996. a) pp.59-60 …and in 1781, a visitor to Wimpole Hall, Cambridgeshire, a house where the late Christopher Hussey suggested nothing had been done over the preceding forty years, wrote: "Most of it is furnished in old style, for example, Mama's & my rooms are brown wainscots." b) p.131 It is especially interesting, therefore, that while Chambers may have employed white skirtings throughout the grand rooms in the Strand Block at Somerset House in 1780, technical investigation has shown that in the humbler, more everyday apartments belonging to the Secretary of the Society of Antiquaries and Housekeeper of the Royal Society a "chocolate" skirting was employed in rooms which were otherwise simply painted stone colour (off-white) and hung with wallpaper. This suggests, perhaps, that in more ordinary homes the brown skirting persisted well towards the end of the eighteenth century. c) p.132 Thus at Erddig, DENBIGHSHIRE (now CLWYD), a door was to be painted chocolate colour in 1772 [..The colour of the Paint a dead white as to the skirting board, and shutters, but the door of a chocolate colour..]; while, probably two or three years earlier [1774-75], James Adam directed that the deal doors of the Dressing Room at Nostell Priory were to be painted mahogany colour. ----------------

87

APPENDIX SEVEN (continued) 4) Tasker, John. Bill for redecoration and building work carried out for John Tharp at 20 Portman Square, London (Home House). 1797. (Document lodged in the Cambridge Record Office). p.16 ANTE DRAWING ROOM 53yds Ditto Run of plain skirting brown 0 6 7½ -----------------

5) John Pincot. Pincot's Treatise on the Practical Part of Coach & House Painting. ca.1811 ...if your skirting is to be painted black, leave that to the last... -------------------6) Frank S. Welsh, "The Early American Palette: Colonial Paint Colors Revealed" in, Roger Moss (ed.). Paint in America. The Colors of Historic Buildings. p.70. Blacks Lampblack or bone black was used on skirting fascias, as was dark brown. Sometimes the area around door knobs was similarly painted for the same reason. This use declined after about 1800, and by 1815 was very old-fashioned. --------------------

88

APPENDIX SEVEN (continued) EXAMPLES OF BROWN PAINTED SKIRTING FASCIÆ AND DOORS ca.1757 plus (The following were established by paint analysis)

1) Patrick Baty. Handel House, 25 Brook Street. (House built 1719-23, Handel lives there until 1759) The second, third and fourth schemes on the only original door that survives (2nd floor, rear) were brown. ----------------2) Patrick Baty. Greenbank House, Clarkston, Glasgow. A Brief Report Following an Examination of the Painted Surfaces in the Entrance Hall and Dining Room. 4th July 1999. (Greenbank House was built between 1764 and 1765.) Entrance Hall The skirting was originally a dark red brown. -------------------3) Catherine Hassall. Castletown Cox, [Co. Kilkenny, Ireland.] Initial Investigations on the Decorations. 15th January 1999. (House built ca.1770) Entrance Hall. Skirting painted dark brown. Doors were mahogany. (See also the bill submitted by Pearce Stapleton in 1789, where the skirtings were repainted in brown. Ref. RP.D.71.1) -----------------4) Patrick Baty. An Analysis of the First Scheme in the Rooms on the Ground, First, and Second Floors of 50 North Great George's Street, Dublin. 25th August 1993. (House built ca.1785.) Inner Hall Skirting fascia: sample IH/4A Dining Room Skirting: sample GD/5

Dark brown

Red-brown

89

APPENDIX SEVEN (continued) Drawing Room Skirting fascia: sample 1D/7A Rear Bedroom Skirting: sample 2BR/1

Red-brown

Brown

90

APPENDIX SEVEN (continued) ILLUSTRATIONS THAT INDICATE BROWN DOORS OR SKIRTINGS ca.1757 plus Brown painted skirting 1) Attributed to James Cole the Younger. A Flute Player. ca.1735. Bearstead Collection, Upton House, Warwickshire. National Trust Photographic Library. [pl.107 on p.119 of Charles Saumarez Smith, Eighteenth-Century Decoration. Weidenfeld and Nicolson. 1993.] 2) Artist N/K, Family Group. 1756. Courtauld Institute Galleries. [Pl.200 on p.206] 3) Johann Zoffany, George, Prince of Wales and Frederick, later Duke of York. 1764. (Ibid. pl.244). 4) Johann Zoffany, Sir Lawrence Dundas with his grandson. 1769. (Ibid. pl.253). 5) Attrib. Philip Hussey, An interior with architectural wallpaper. ca.1780. (Ibid. pl.300). 6) Philip Reinagle, Mrs Congreve and her daughters in their London drawing room. 1782. (Ibid. pl.302). 7) Artist N/K, The Tyers family. ca.1785. (Ibid. pl.317). 9) Joseph Bonomi, A dining room for Lambton Hall, County Durham. 1800. (Ibid. pl.378). 10) The Presence Chamber at Kensington Palace, in W.H. PYNE. History of the Royal Residences. 1819. Vol II, pl. facing p.33 (original watercolour by J. Stephanoff in Royal Library drawings, No. 22150) 11) Mary Ellen Best, Dining Room at Langton Hall. ca.1832-34.

91

APPENDIX EIGHT SAMPLE ANALYSIS TECHNIQUES Sample Preparation Procedures Pigments Samples of pigments from specific paint layers were permanently cast in Cargille Meltmount (with a refractive index of 1.66) onto microscope slides. The pigment samples were examined at 500x and 1000x magnifications under both transmitted, and plane polarized light. The pigments were identified using polarized light microscopy (PLM) techniques which allows identification of different pigment particles based on the characteristics of particle shape, colour, refractive index, and optical properties. In certain instances, where further confirmation was required, energy-dispersive X-ray analysis (EDX), using the scanning electron microscope, was carried out. Cross Sections Samples of finish coatings and substrates were removed from representative surfaces in the rooms being examined with a scalpel, craft knife or dental drill. Depending on the material, the samples varied in size from 5mm to 10mm. The samples were divided before casting, leaving a portion of the sample available for future testing. Samples were cast in small cubes in silicon rubber moulds using clear casting polyester resin (Alec Tiranti Ltd, Reading, Berks.). The resin was allowed to cure for 24 hours at room temperature and under ambient light. The cubes were then cut in half to expose the cross sections, and wet polished with 240, 400, 600 and 1200 grade wet-and-dry papers. The cross section samples were examined under visible light using a Biolam metallurgical microscope at 200x and 500x magnifications. Those that appeared to have the full sequence of layers, i.e. that displayed an intact sequence from the substrate through to the final scheme, were examined particularly closely. These intact samples were compared with those samples that were distorted or unclear, and with those that were incomplete. The combined information has provided the details in this report. The cross sections were photographed digitally using a Nikon Coolpix 5000 camera. The best photomicrographs for each element have been included with this report. Photographs were taken at 200x and 500x. A number of the photomicrographs have been digitally enlarged or reduced to fit the page.

92

WORKS REFERRED TO All works that were published appeared first in London, unless otherwise indicated Baty, Patrick. "Palette of the Past". Country Life, 3 September 1992: 44-47. ________. "The Role of Paint Analysis in the Historic Interior." The Journal of Architectural Conservation, March 1995:1. ________. "To Scrape or Not to Scrape ?" Traditional Paint News, Vol 1 No 2 October 1996:2 9-15. Bristow, Ian C.. "The Balcony Room at Dyrham" in National Trust Studies 1980 (1979). ________. Architectural Colour in British Interiors 1615-1840. Yale University Press, 1996 (1). ________. Interior House-Painting Colours and Technology 1615-1840. Yale University Press, 1996 (2). Butcher, W.. Smith's Art of House-Painting. 1821. Donaldson, Thomas Leverton. Handbook of Specifications. 1859. Doonan, Nancy L.. "Historic Exterior Paints." Bulletin of the Association for Preservation Technology (US), vol. xiv, no. 4 (1982): 27-29. Dossie, Robert. The Handmaid to the Arts. 2 vols. Rev. edn. 1796. Field, George. Rudiments of the Painters' Art, or a Grammar of Colouring. 1850. Gettens, Rutherford J., Robert L. Feller, and W.T. Chase. "Vermilion and Cinnabar" in Artists' Pigments: A Handbook of Their History and Characteristics. Vol. 2. (ed. Ashok Roy). Oxford, OUP. 1993. Gunther, R.T.. The Architecture of Sir Roger Pratt. Oxford, Clarendon Press. 1928. Harley, Rosamund. Artists' Pigments c.1600-1835. 2nd edn. Butterworths. 1982. Harris, Eileen. British Architectural Books and Writers 1556-1785. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1990. Hay, D.R.. The Laws of Harmonious Colouring Adapted to Interior Decorations, with Observations on the Practice of House Painting. 6th edn. Edinburgh and London. William Blackwood and Sons, 1847. Holloway, J.G.E.. The Modern Painter and Decorator. 3 vols. Caxton Publishing Company Ltd. 93

1961. Hurst, A.E.. Painting and Decorating. Charles Griffin & Company Ltd. 1949. Hyde, Ralph (ed.). The A to Z of Georgian London. London Topographical Society publication No 126. 1982. Jeffery, Sally. The Mansion House. Phillimore. 1993. Jennings, Arthur Seymour, and Guy Cadogan Rothery. The Modern Painter and Decorator. Caxton Publishing Company. 1921. Laxton, W.R.. The Improved Builder's Price Book. 2nd edn. 1818. 1869. London County Council. Survey of London: volume 10: St. Margaret, Westminster, part I: Queen Anne’s Gate area. 1926. 'No. 19 Queen Anne's Gate', 116-117. Nicholson, Peter. The New Practical Builder. Appended is The Practical Builder's Perpetual Price Book. 1823. Pain, William, & James. British Palladio. 1786. Papworth, Wyatt. "An Attempt to Determine the Periods in England, when Fir, Deal & House Painting were First Introduced." Transactions of the RIBA. 1st series, vol. viii: 1-13. 1857-8. Pincot, John. Pincot's Treatise on the Practical Part of Coach and House Painting. ca.1811. Plot, Robert. Natural History of Oxfordshire. Oxford and London. 1677. Rea, John T.. How to Estimate being the Analysis of Builders' Prices giving full details of estimating for builders, and containing thousands of prices, and much useful memoranda. 2nd. edn. B.T. Batsford. 1904. Salmon, William. Palladio Londinensis. 1734. [Smeaton, G.A.]. The Painter's and Varnisher's Pocket Manual. 1825. ________. The Painter's, Gilder's, and Varnisher's Manual. ca.1827. Smith, John. The Art of Painting. (The Art of Painting in Oyl.) 1676. 2nd edn. 1687. 5th edn. 1723; 9th edn. 1788. [SOED] The Shorter Oxford English Dictionary. 3rd edn., rev., Oxford. Clarendon Press. 1986. Tingry, P.F.. The Painter's and Varnisher's Guide. 1804. ________. Painter's and Colourman's Complete Guide. 1830. 94

Vanherman, T.H. Every Man his own House-Painter and Colourman. 1829. (Originally published as: The Painter's Cabinet, and Colourman's Repository. 1828.) Watin, Jean Felix, L'art du peintre, doreur, vernisseur. Liege, nouvelle edition. 1778. Weinreb, Ben, and Christopher Hibbert (eds.) The London Encyclopaedia. BCA, 1983. Welsh, Frank S[agendorph]. "Who is an Historic Paint Analyst ? A Call for Standards." Bulletin of the Association for Preservation Technology (US), vol. xviii, no. 4 (1986): 4-5. ________. "The Early American Palette: Colonial Paint Colors Revealed" in, Roger Moss (ed.). Paint in America. The Colors of Historic Buildings. Westminster Poll Books, London 1774, 1818 & 1841. Exeter. S.A. & M.J. Raymond, 1996. Whittock, Nathaniel. The Decorative Painters', and Glaziers' Guide. 1827.

Assorted Unpublished Documents xxx Architects. xx Queen Anne’s Gate. Historic Buildings Report & Design & Access Statement. May 2010. Baty, Patrick. "The Royal Naval College, Greenwich, London SE10. A Report Following an Examination of the Perimeter Railings and Two Windows from the King Charles and the Queen Anne Block." 31st December 1995 (2). ________. "6 Fitzroy Square: Notes Following an Analysis of Paint in Various Areas." 27th January 1996 (1). ________. "Home House, 20 Portman Square, London W1. A Report on the First Scheme Following an Examination of the Paint on Various Surfaces." 28th February 1998 (1). ________. "The Benjamin Franklin House, 36 Craven Street, London WC2. A Report on the Early Painted Schemes Following an Examination of the Paint on Various Surfaces." 12th July 1998 (2). ________. "Newhailes House, East Lothian. A Report on the Decorative Schemes Following an Examination of the Painted Surfaces in Various Areas." 26th November 1998 (3). ________. "Some Notes on the Decorative Schemes Found in Nos 23 and 25 Brook Street." January 2000 (1). ________. "A Report on an Analysis of the Paint on the Exteriors of 26-31 Charlotte Square," Edinburgh. 3rd June 2000 (2). 95

________. "Wx House, Wiltshire. A Report on the Decoration Following an Examination of the Painted Surfaces in Various Areas." 26th December 2000 (3). ________. "56 & 58 Artillery Lane, Spitalfields. A Report on the Decorative Schemes Following an Examination of a Number of the Painted Surfaces on the Interior and Exterior." 29th January 2006. ________. "The Travellers Club, Pall Mall. A Report on the Paint Following an Examination of the External Surfaces on the Front Façade." 12th January 2008. Winde, William to Lady Mary Bridgeman. Letter dated 3rd August 1700. (Staffs CRO, Earl of Bradford's Archives, 18/4). Quoted in Beard 1981.

96