Antique 19th Century English Early Georgian Period Furniture
EARLY GEORGIAN PERIOD
THIS period is remarkable chiefly because mahogany as a furniture wood was first used. As early as 1715
a few pieces were made in mahogany, but it was not in general use until 1725-173o. From 1733 onwards, the tax on imported timber being abolished, mahogany came to be used exclusively. It was imported from the West Indies and was of the kind known as Spanish mahogany, a hard, heavy wood, rather inclined to be brittle, but very reliable. Early specimens were finished with linseed oil, this being coated on liberally and allowed to remain for a few days. A polish was then obtained with brickdust rubbed on with a cork. Later varnish was used.
Although in general proportions and form there was no immediate break from what had been common in the walnut period, there came almost at once many changes in detail and construction. It was not simply that a cabinet maker, used to the walnut tradition, would simply substitute mahogany for walnut, and make it otherwise just the same. There was more in it than that, and the root cause was the fact that, whereas walnut furniture was always veneered (except for such parts as legs, which had to be in the solid), mahogany was used in the solid. As a matter of fact such pieces as chairs, which in their nature had to be mostly solid, altered less than any other kinds of furniture because the construction was not affected by the change of wood.
It was pointed out in Chapter V that walnut furniture relied for its decorative effect largely upon the figuring of the grain and upon such details as crossbanding and quartering, which went naturally with veneering. The use of veneer made flat surfaces desirable, and when carving was used at all it was mostly upon the solid parts such as the legs. Now the mahogany first imported was mostly of a plain kind, with not particularly interesting figure, and this plainness must have been very obvious to people who were used to the rich figuring of walnut. Then, again, quartering as a means of decoration was impossible for this essentially belonged to veneering. A quartered panel in solid wood would inevitably twist out of shape and split. Crossbanding again, although not impossible in the solid, was not specially desirable, because it would not stand out well as the grain was not strongly marked.
It therefore became obvious to the cabinet makers that a new form of treatment was necessary for mahogany, and as
FIG. 102. STAGES IN
EVOLUTION OF CHAIR
BACKS.
The development from the
hooped Queen Anne shape
with urn splat is shown
above.
FIG. 103 (right). -
ANY CHAIR WITH CAB-
RIOLE LEGS CARVED
WITH ACANTHUS LEAF-
WORK.
.
a consequence there was a return to the panelled type of door in which the different levels of the panel and the moulding of the framework broke up what would otherwise have been a wide, uninteresting expanse. Carving, too, was revived as a means of decoration, though of a quite different type from that of its last period of popularity in the late seventeenth century.
Fig. tot shows a press made entirely of solid mahogany (except for such parts as drawer sides and so on which are of oak), and it exemplifies well many of these points. The doors, for example, have grooved-in panels of the raised type ; that is, they have a wide chamfer all round at the front, this helping to break up the plainness and add interest.
Use of Veneer Discontinued
Then, again, the drawers stand forward from the front of the carcase and have a thumb moulding worked round, so making their shape well defined, and at the same time helping to make them dustproof. In the best class work the mouldings would probably have been carved—they were never cross-grained as in the walnut work for the same reason that crossbanding was discontinued, the grain was too plain to stand out.
FIG. 104. MAHOGANY SIDE TABLE WITH MARBLE TOP AND CABRIOLE
LEGS.
A bow 1730-
Although made in mahogany this table has many features belonging to the walnut
period, particularly in the shells and pendant husks carved on the knees of the
cabriole legs.
Presses of this kind became general in this first half of the eighteenth century. They were exceptionally deep and gave excellent accommodation. The upper portion was generally fitted with oak trays made to slide forwards, extension runners being fitted to the inside of the doors to give support when withdrawn. Sometimes the doors had what is known as the rule joint at the hingeing edge. It was a similar arrangement to that used in the tops of gate-leg tables of Jacobean times, the sides of the cupboard having a quarter-round shape or moulding at the front edge, and the door a corresponding hollow, so that the one worked in the other as the door was opened. It had its value from the decorative point of view, though the reason for its use was mainly a technical one, since it made the doors flush with the inner surfaces of the sides when opened, so enabling the trays to slide closely between them.
The chair is typical of the upholstered form inade at the time. Note that the winged sides and scrolled arms are similar to those of Queen Anne’s time (compare it with the walnut chair in Fig. 79, P. 101) One feature in which it differs is the carving on the knees and feet of the cabriole
4
FIG. 105. CARVED GILT SIDE TABLE WITH MARBLE TOP,
About 1735•
This table was probably by William Kent, an architect who designed furniture for his houses. It was of an elaborate kind, architectural in character, and a complete departure from the traditional kind being
generally made at the period.
legs. This takes the form of a lion’s head and paw, details used for the first time in the early Georgian period. Other new motifs were the eagle heads with claw feet, masks, and the cabochon detail which resembled the detail of a precious stone cut without facets. At the same time the claw and ball foot continued to be popular, as shown in the dining chair in Fig. 103. Note that here a new detail is the carving of the knee, which takes the form of acanthus leafwork scrolling from the ear pieces down to the centre.
Fig. 102 is of particular interest in that it shows the development from the full Queen Anne rounded back to the straight top rail in common use by the middle of the century. In the left hand example the upright has the typical inward sweep immediately above the seat, and at the top it has a fairly full round sweeping towards the centre. Note, too, that the splat is solid. In the next example the inward sweep is omitted in the uprights, and the curve at the top has become more acute. The splat, too, is pierced. In the third illustration the top rail is more or less flat and the upright has only the slightest curve.
In these early Georgian days there was no such thing as a sideboard. Instead a side table was used, this usually having a marble top, as in the example in Fig. 104. This, although made in mahogany and dating from about 173o, has typical I( walnut ” features, especially in the use of the carved shell and husks on the cabriole legs. We shall see later that the sideboard, as we now know it, was evolved from the side table, separate pedestals first being added to give better accommodation. Later these were joined up to make a single piece. The illustration on P. 4 shows the stages of evolution through which it passed.
An architect who began to make a name for himself in George I’s reign was William Kent, and as he designed a certain amount of furniture for his houses we may conveniently take note of his work here. Kent had travelled in Italy, and on his return was an enthusiastic follower of the Palladian style which had become fashionable in architecture. He was a man of considerable ability, but so far as his furniture was concerned he seemed to strike a foreign note in the scheme of things. It was of a ponderous, extravagant kind, rather the sort of thing one might expect to find in the entrance hall of a theatre than in an ordinary dwelling house. Elaborately scrolled legs, bold masses of carving, heavy classical mouldings, marble tops, and the free use of gilding all seem to suggest that the work would have been better carried out in marble rather than wood.
Fig. 105 shows a side table in the Kent style in which this magnificent treatment is exemplified. It is the work of an architect not familiar with the technique of woodwork. No practical cabinet maker would ever have attempted to design such a piece, and it in no way represents a stage in the evolution of the sideboard. It is just the work of an individualist and seems to fall outside the general scheme of things.