Posts Tagged ‘construction’

CHAIRS AND STOOLS
The chair as we left it in our chapter on Jacobean work was still a sturdily built piece of work though tending to
DETAILS OF THE CONSTRUCTION DRAWING, FIG. 74.
A. Queen Anne tallboy made in two separate parts.
B. Section through the built-up cross-grained cornice.
C. How thin oak back is fixed on.
D. Side viewof drawer showing dovetails.
E. Cut -away view with construction of carcase and drawer.
become lighter. A few were made with stuffed seats, and occasionally upholstered backs were added, but for the most part they were entirely of wood—or possibly were fitted with a leather seat stretched over the rails. This, though being softer than wood, could hardly be called upholstery.
After the middle of the century there arose a custom of using cane for the better type of chair back, and rushes for the commoner type. Upholstery, too, was used, though this did not become really popular until the reign of William and Mary. We may mention here that springs were never used. As a matter of passing interest, it was not until the nineteenth century that these came into use.
Twist Turning.—Caning is usually associated with the tall-back chairs which became popular during the second half of the seventeenth century, and this brings us to an interesting development, that of twist turning. Until about1625 or so only plain, straightforward turning had been attempted. The work was mounted in a curious contrivance known as the pole lathe, over which a long springy pole (hence the name) was suspended from a bracket in the wall. To the end of the pole was fixed a rope which stretched down to a drum attached to the chuck. It was taken a turn around

this and then down to a treadle. Thus when the operator depressed the treadle the work was revolved in a forward motion and the pole above was bent downwards. When the pressure on the treadle was released the pole sprang back, turning the work in the opposite direction.
It is obvious from this that the actual cutting could be done whilst the work was revolving forwards only, and when one considers the toughness of English oak, and the large size in which many of the old bulbous turnings were made, it is not surpri3ing that the turners did not go in a great deal for experiment. However, some ingenious craftsman, probably noticing the spiral made by his gouge as he passed it rapidly along the surface, did try his hand at forming a spiral or twist, and by a combination of pre-

liminary sawing out, rough turning, and use of carving tools to finish off, produced a rather uneven sort of twist.
It was not an easy business, however, one of the chief difficulties being that of making the same number of twists on each of a set of legs, and as a consequence twist turning did not make a great deal of progress until someone thought of making an attachment which would carry the gouge along sideways at a predetermined rate, which was set in accordance with the rate of revolutions of the work. In this way any number of turnings could be made, all exactly alike. There still are a few of these old pole lathes in use in the outlying districts of Buckinghamshire, where turnings for chairs are still made on a large scale.
A chair with twist turnings was given in Fig. 64 on p. 82, and in this we see the passing out of the old oak tradition. Chair making suffered something of a decline in the third quarter of the seventeenth century, at any rate from the point of view of construction. Instead of the seat rails being strongly tenoned between the legs, they were merely placed on top with no stronger attachment than a dowel

turned at the top of the legs. The same thing applied to the top rail of the back, which was simply fitted to dowels at the ends of the uprights. This detail is shown clearly in the chair in Fig. 75, though in this case the front seat rail is still tenoned between the legs.
This chair is fairly typical of the tall-back which persisted until the end of the seventeenth century. Turning was used considerably, even for the tops of the shaped front legs, and it is interesting to note that the back legs splay backwards. Even the early tall-backs did not have this detail, and if ever it were essential in any chair it was in one which was essentially lightly built and had a high back. For a man to lean back even slightly would be dangerous.

The legs are interesting in that they foreshadow the cabriole leg which was shortly to become popular, though when examined closely it is seen that they consist actually of a number of scrolls joined together with floral and leaf carving. Scroll work of this kind was used widely in chairs and stands of all kinds. It is seen in the front stretcher rail and in the back of that in Fig. 75.
Chairs with Cabriole Legs.—The introduction of the cabriole leg seemed to strike a new note in the design of chairs. It was not simply that a new motif was being used, but that the whole conception of the design became altered. Compare, for example, the two chairs on p. 98. It is obvious that the one has turned uprights whilst the other has shaped ones, but, in addition, there is an entirely new spirit in that in Fig. 76. In the earlier example, Fig. 75, one is conscious of a series of parts jointed together in an obvious sort of way. It is not suggested that this is a fault, but simply that the construction is at once apparent. One can count up the parts—two uprights, cresting rail, lower rail, seat rail, stretcher, and so on. And the earlier the chair the more obvious the parts and their purpose becomes.
Now turn to Fig. 76. It is not easy to see where the uprights and the top rail of the back begin and end. They merge one into the other, and the same thing applies to the slat and the rail beneath. The back is one whole, so to speak, and we shall find that this feeling becomes still more apparent in later chairs.
Reverting to the legs again, these are an early form of the cabriole type, and exemplify the Dutch influence which the accession of William of Orange brought with it. The probability is that many of these chairs were the work of foreign craftsmen who settled down here. A cabriole leg is by no means an easy thing to make, and it is doubtful whether a native craftsman could have turned out a really fine shape without previous experience. The awkward point about making the leg is that it is difficult to set down the true shape on paper. It can be drawn at the front, side, and possibly three-quarter positions, but the actual leg is seen from all angles and is normally viewed from above, a viewpoint which the drawing does not present.
Furthermore, in the very nature of the work the guiding lines on the wood are cut away as the work proceeds,

because the whole thing is more or less rounded in section. In actual practice the leg is cut out of a square right through to the over-all shape when looked at from the front. A corresponding shape is cut at the side, this producing a square cut shape. The point to realise is that the cutting

of the first shape automatically removes the lines of the second shape, and it is only by temporarily replacing the sawn-away parts that the shape can be cut true. In any case the resulting shape has only a distant resemblance to the finished line, and it is in the final shaping that experience is needed, because there are no square lines to which to work. Everything is curved in both directions, and it is only by eye that a really fine shape can be produced, one which looks well when seen from every angle. The whole thing is complicated when carving is to appear, because sufficient thickness has to be allowed for this, and the presence of these plain lumps is apt, to give a false impression of the shape as a whole.
We have gone into these practical points at some length because the cabriole leg became so characteristic a feature of

furniture for the following seventy-five years or so. Really fine legs are few and far between, the majority being overdone in the shape, and we shall find that they deteriorated considerably after Queen Anne’s reign until rescued by the school of Chippendale.
In the present instance, Fig. 76, it will be noticed that the legs terminate in a hoof foot, whilst at the top the sides are scrolled in imitation of the horns of the goat. These details are often found in William and Mary furniture, after which they gave place to the turned club foot, with which we shall meet in the next example. In the meantime it should be noted that the legs are still linked together with stretcher rails. It is true that the last-named are on an altogether lighter scale than in earlier pieces (see Fig. 64) and are gracefully shaped, but the chairmaker has not yet felt confident enough to omit them entirely, which was the next stage in the development of the chair.
Another feature of the chair in Fig. 76 met with for the first time is the curve in the rake of the back, and it is interesting to glance at the diagram in Fig. 78, which shows the various stages of development. There is the earliest straight post (J) cut from a square of timber and continuing from leg to back in a straight line. This was used mostly in the old settles of Gothic times (see Fig. 14, p. 23). Then came the idea of setting the back at an angle (K), a phase which lasted until past the middle of the seventeenth century. An example is given in Fig. 37, P. SO. In the same period in a few chairs little blocks were added at the bottom as at L to help to counterbalance the weight. This is exemplified in Fig. 18, P. 25. Next, the legs were at last splayed as at M, though the back still remained straight without any curve (see Fig. 65, P. 82). N gives the next development, as in the chair in Fig. 76, whilst 0 shows the shape which the majority of chairs in the later eighteenth century had, of which Fig. 102 is an example.
A last point to note about the chair in Fig. 76 is the shaped splat. This was something quite fresh (see last example in Fig. 75), and had certain definite stages in development. It is shown in the armchair in Fig. 77 in its most characteristic form. Apart from its shaped edges it follows the general line of the back when viewed from the side.
These two chairs in Fig. 77 exemplify the walnut period in its fullest stage of development in the Queen Anne period. That to the left is especially characteristic in the shape of the back, the splat, and the full cabriole legs with turned club feet. Note that the back is appreciably lower and that the shaping of the uprights has become more pronounced, especially in the rounded shape at the top. The splat, too, is entirely solid and has an urn-like formation.
The fact that the backs were shaped in both front and side elevations made them extremely expensive to produce, and it was for this reason that the square back type to the right in Fig. 77 was made for a more economical job. The uprights merely taper and they are quite straight in their rake. In the best chairs, however, the full shaping was given, and on some models the back was entirely veneered with cross-grain walnut. Another feature to note is the entire absence of stretcher rails.
Just as the development in the shape of the rake of the
.
back can be followed in a series of stages, so the plain shape of the seats developed on certain characteristic lines. These are shown diagrammatically in Fig. 78, from the square boxlike formation of early Tudor times to the tapering shape of the Elizabethan and Jacobean periods, and the elaborately shaped seats of walnut furniture. Later on there was a return to the simpler form.

One other innovation in the walnut period in connection with the seats was the loose drop-in variety shown in Fig. 77

to the right. These were not used exclusively, the ” stuff-over ” method (left in Fig. 77) being also used frequently.
The development of upholstery has already been mentioned, and in Fig. 79 we have the fully upholstered arm-chair of about 1705. The projecting wings and the scrolled arms are especially characteristic, and bear out the prevailing popularity of shaped work.
.
Stools.—The two stools in Fig. 8o are of the William and Mary (left) and Queen Anne (right) periods. In the earlier specimens the legs are actually turned, and the scrolled and recessed detail is carved out of the shape. The shaped stretchers are similar to those already shown in the chest of drawers in Fig. 70, except that the edges are moulded instead of being square. In the Queen Anne stool the stretchers are omitted. The legs are worth noting in that they terminate with spade feet. These are carved out entirely, no turning being used. Other features often found are the shell carving on the knee with the pendant husks below, and the scrolls at the sides immediately beneath the ears.
The day-bed in the form shown in Fig. 67, P. 84, did not last into the eighteenth century. Its place was taken by the settee, which was rather like two or more chairs joined together side by side. There was sometimes a centre leg, though it was frequently omitted.

FIG. 75. TALL-BACK CHAIR WITH UPHOLSTERED SEAT.
Late 17th century.
Note that the top back rail is simply pegged to the turned uprights. The legs which are suggestive of the cabriole shape are in reality a series of scrolls.
FIG.76. WILLIAM AND MARY
CHAIR.
Late 17th century.
The back shows the hoop form in its embryo stage. It has the appearance of a complete thing in itself instead of consisting of uprights, cross rails and slats as in Fig. 75 above.
The legs have the hoof foot and scrolled ears In Imitation of the goat’s horns.

FIG. 77. WALNUT CHAIRS WITH CABRIOLE LEGS AND CLUB FEET.
Early 18th century.
The left-hand example exemplifies the development of double shaped work in
the hooped back. In the less expensive chair to the right the back is raked only,
with no shaping at the front. Note the use of the urn-shaped splat in both
examples.

FIG. 79. UPHOLSTERED ARMCHAIR.
Early i8th century.
Although thickly padded, these chairs were
never fitted with springs. The last named
belong to the 19th century.

FIG. 80. STOOLS OF THE WALNUT PERIOD.
Late 17th century.    Early z8th century.
The legs of the left-hand stool are turned and the carving is cut into the turning.
Note the omission of the stretcher in the right-hand stool. The shell and husk
carving is typical.

FIG. 81. SMALL BUREAU AND BUREAU WITH CUPBOARD.
Late 17th century.    Early 18th century.
The inverted cup shape of the turned legs in the small bureau shows the William and Mary period. The mirrored doors of the cupboard in the right-hand example were a common feature in Queen Anne pieces of this kind.

FIG. 82. SMALL WALNUT WRITING TABLE.
Early 18th century.
This exemplifies well the way in which the construction
was entirely concealed by the use of veneer. The apron
piece beneath the drawers is often seen in Queen Anne
tables.

FIG. 83. QUEEN ANNE PERIOD SECRETAIRE.
Early 18th century.
The front of the upper carcase is hinged so that it drops down and Corms a
writing top. The inside is fitted up for stationery.

FIG. 84. WALNUT VENEERED CHINA CABINET.
Early 18th century.
The barred doors owed their origin to the difficulty of producing glass In
large panes. They were cross-grained with a rib at the back.

FIG. 85. CHINA CABINET WITH BARRED DOORS ON STAND.
Late 171h century.
The craze for collecting china encouraged by Queen Mary was the cause
of the introduction of the china cabinet.

English Antique Jacobean Furniture. Jacobean Chairs.

JACOBEAN PERIOD
THIS chapter carries us from the beginning of the house of Stuart in 1603 until the end of the Common-
wealth in 1660. So far- as domestic furniture was concerned, except for certain smaller details and a few innovations, it differed little from that of Elizabeth’s reign. The same wood (oak) was used, the Renaissance was still the source from which ideas were taken, and the quality of the work was similar. It is dealt with in a separate chapter, however, because it was the last phase in a certain definite technique. Vast changes were at hand, the greatest that have ever overtaken furniture throughout its history, and it is
therefore natural that one should pause and give special
emphasis to a style which had run its course and was to become as dead as the proverbial doornail.
However, these changes are dealt with particularly in Chapter IV, and our present purpose is to see what sort of furniture men were making when James the Sixth of Scotland became the First of England, and during the troublous years that followed, culminating in the declaration of the Commonwealth. It may be objected that Charles II was also a Stuart Monarch, and that his period should be included in this chapter. The changes just mentioned, however, began during his reign, so that although all Charles II furniture is, strictly speaking, Jacobean, much of it is usually referred to as ” Early Walnut,” because of the marked differences in style. The terminology is one of style rather than one of period.
The accession of James did not make a great deal of difference in the lives of the majority of the populace. The stirring spirit of the Renaissance was still a great influence, if in rather diminished form, and the endeavour of men to make their homes more comfortable continued. The journeys of discovery and conquest during Elizabeth’s reign had opened up a new source of wealth, trading had increasedtremendously (itself a source of wealth, and, equally important, to a new class), and these coinciding with the coming of Renaissance gave encouragement to the domestic arts.
The outbreak of war in Charles I reign must have acted as a strong brake on the progress of things, yet it was not so marked as one might have imagined.
A campaign in the north might turn men’s thoughts locally from making, or having made, things for their houses, but in even an adjoining county people might know little of what was happening owing to lack of easy transit. Then, again, during the winter months little was possible in the way of military activities, so that altogether there was more time for craftsmanship than might at first be imagined.
Cromwell’s short protectorship of eleven years or so helped to restore the trade which had been largely lost. His naval victories opened the seas again to our ships, and this is always one of the finest tonics the domestic arts can have.
JACOBEAN CHAIRS
The late sixteenth century chair, as exemplified in Fig. 18, was remarkable more for its massiveness and strength than
comfort, and its direct successor in Jacobean times was little different. It had a similar formation, with panelled back sloping at an angle, semi-scrolled arms, and turned legs. The back was usually carved with various conventional designs of leaf and flower work, arcadings, or
geometrical pattern. Fig. 37 is a typical example. -Note that the scrolled cresting still lies above the uprights and that the ear pieces are retained. Chairs of this kind con-tinued to be made throughout the Jacobean period and in country districts until the close of the seventeenth century.
There were, however, changes at hand. It is obvious that for a chair of the type in Fig. 37 to have any comfort at all it would have to be provided with a cushion—certainly one for the seat and if possible one for the back. One can imagine a man seated by the fireside closely considering the point,

and calling in his carpenter to devise some means of padding the chair. Or possibly a man who had travelled abroad had seen the comfort which foreign countries had attained (they were always before us in this sort of thing), felt something of disgust at the comparatively barbaric state of things which still maintained here, and so set his craftsmen to work out a new idea.
Beginning of Upholstery.—However this may be, it was during the reign of James I that the first upholstered chair made its appearance. Possibly the reader may be surprised that the idea had not occurred to men earlier. Upholstery on a chair seems such an obvious thing. It must be remembered that people’s outlook on life dAers. at various periods. What may seem right to one generation may appear to be merely foolish to another. In early days the chair was a seat of honour ; there would probab’.-,- be only one in even a large hall, and a man using it would not

look specially to find comfort in it. In fact, anything :;n the way of comfort was regarded with a certain feeling of contempt and was felt to be effeminate. Shakespeare, in his Richard III, makes Buckingham say, ” This prince is not an Edward ! He is not lolling on a lewd day-bed.” This day-bed was the counterpart of the modern settee. Presumably, when people were really ill, they stayed in bed. If they got up at all they were expected to go about the ordinary business of the day.

There was something effeminate in the character and habits of James I, and this rapidly showed itself in the Royal court : its manners, dress, conditions, and so on. As a consequence there was a general tendency for men to have a less Spartan-like outlook, and an immediate consequence so far as furniture was concerned was the introduction of the upholstered chair.
One of the finest collections of chairs of this type, dating

from the early seventeenth century, is that at Knole House, near Sevenoaks. Many rooms in this old mansion were refurnished in preparation for a visit by James I, and vast numbers of chairs were made for the purpose. They form an interesting example of how men, once they like an idea, will fly to extremes, for practically every portion of the woodwork is covered with material—even the legs, which obviously would not in any way add to the comfort of the chair.
A popular innovation—or rather revival, for the type had been in use earlier—was the X chair, an example of which is given in Fig. 39. The reason for the name is obvious from the general formation. Note how every part of the framing is covered with material. It is, in fact, very like the collection of chairs at Knole. The provision of the footstool is typical.
It will be realised that upholstered chairs of this kind might be well enough in a great mansion or palace, but would not stand up to the everyday use of busy households in a humbler state of life. These needed something sturdier, and Fig. 38 is an example of the sort of upholstered chair that would have been found in the average well-to-do house. Not that all the chairs were of this kind ; there might not be more than one or two in a whole house, the majority being of the plain wood type, but that such upholstered chairs that did exist were mostly of this kind.
Farthingale Chairs.—We have at this period an interesting example of how costume came to influence the design of furniture. The fashion of the time dictated that ladies should wear the huge farthingale dress, and one can imagine how awkward it must have been for a lady to sit down in an armchair of the kind in, say, Fig. 37. So came into being the farthingale chair, of which an example is given in Fig. 41. The absence of arms allows the dress to spread out at each side without hindrance. The X chair in Fig. 39 would serve the purpose equally well, since there is a deep, loose cushion above the upholstered seat and the arms are low.
Two chairs probably made during the Cromwellian period are shown in Fig. 40. They are of a sound, thoroughly reliable form that would stand up to the hardest wear. That to the left has a covering of leather (so thin that it can scarcely be called upholstery), held on with large roundhead nails, and the front legs have the bobbin turning very popular at the time. The other has a wooden seat, and a point worthy of note is the open back with slats. This marks one more step in the progress of the chair from its heavy, massive formation to the light proportions it was eventually to assume. Note that in both chairs the back legs are still upright and that the stretcher rails are retained, although in that to the right the front one is raised from its former lower position level with the side rails.
The Settle.—Whilst on the subject of chairs, it may be noted that the settle was still made in country districts.

The farmhouse in particular usually had its settle, the sturdy construction and plain form making it more suitable for the rougher conditions inevitable in the country. Another similar piece was that which for some unknown reason has been given the curious title of ” monk’s bench,” though what its possible connection with monks can be is difficult to understand. We refer of course to the settle with the movable back, which was made to tilt and slide forward, so forming a table. The example in Fig. 42 shows this feature, and it will also be seen that the lower portion is in the form of a chest, the lid of which forms the seat. Lunette carving, such as that on the rails, was a favourite form of decoration.

PANELLED BACK CHAIR AND FRAMED STOOL.
First half 17th century.
The construction of the chair is practically identical with that shown on
p. 25, and the general treatment is similar. Note the scrolled cresting
and ear pieces. The stool has the baluster shaped legs popular through-
out Jacobean times.

FIG. 45. SIMPLE FORM OF GATE-LEG TABLE.
First half 17th century.
The workmanship is extremely crude, and is probably that of a country
carpenter. The urn-shaped ends are probably copied from the baluster
turnings of the period.
FIG. 46. DOUBLE GATE-LEG TABLE.
Mid. 171h century.
An altogether better specimen of a table. The use of two gates to each
side is rather unusual.

EXAMPLE
OF THE X PATTERN
CHAIR.
Early 17th century.
This is a type of chair that be ame popular during James I reign. At Knole Park, Kent, large numbers of these chairs still exist. They were made specially in honour of a visit paid by James I.

ARMCHAIR COVERED WITH TURKEY WORK.
First half 17th century.
In this we see the early beginning of the upholstered chair, though in itself it can hardly claim to be upholstered. It Is little more than a covering ,stretched over the framework.

CROMWELLIAN AND YORKSHIRE TYPE CHAIRS.
Mid. 171h century.
The example to the left is typical of the plainer sort of chair made during
the Commonwealth. It has a stout leather covering stretched over the
framework. The other chair is characteristic of the kind made in York-
shire or Derbyshire.

FARTHINGALE CHAIR OF JAMES I TIME.
‘this illustration is intended to show the way in which costume affected
the design of the chair. ‘the huge farthingale dress made impossible
the use of the armchair of the type shown in Fig. 37.

COMBINED TABLE, SETTLE, AND CHEST.
Mid. IVh century.
The rarity of domestic furniture is shown by this piece which series
three distinct purposes. These are popularly known as ” monks’
benches,” though there is not the slightest connection between them and
monks.

. THE SETTLE IN JACOBEAN TIMES.
First half 17th century.
The settle in Fig. 15, p. 23, should be compared with this. Note how the
lower portion is completely open and has turned legs.

CUPBOARDS AND SIDE TABLES
It is a rather curious reflection that so many years should have passed without men having devised any means of locking things away privately except in a chest. It tells its own story, that they should have preferred to use something which could be used conveniently for travelling. Once they came to establish their homes on a more convenient basis, however, the necessity for cabinets to hold valuable or private papers, and cupboards to store various other items became felt. Thus wall furniture became increasingly common.
The early form of side table is given in Fig. 26, a piece dating from about I Soo or soon after. It is virtually a chest, with the corner posts continued downwards to raise it well up from the floor. This was probably its origin. Not that a man, having a chest, would decide that by lengthening the posts he could evolve a sideboard, but that the method of construction was automatically adopted once the idea of a sideboard was thought about. There was probably a subconscious connection between the two ideas, so that it is likely that there was a direct evolution from one to the other. The side table exemplifies the use of the pierced panel, and another point that will appeal to practical readers is the use of the ” mason’s mitre ” in the moulding surrounding the panel. The use of this is explained more fully on p. 44•
Another kind of furniture of the early Tudor Gothic period was the cupboard pure and simple as shown in Fig. 27. It is of the simplest possible construction, consisting of so many boards pegged together and held by the angle plates and strap hinges. Often such cupboards had panels pierced with Gothic tracery designs such as those given on p. IS. In fact A is taken from an old cupboard of the kind. Their purpose was probably to hold food, as the pierced panels gave ventilation.
Of a similar type, but of infinitely better construction, is the cupboard shown in Fig. 28. In place of the planks is a framing of four posts, joined by rails with grooves around their edges to hold panels. Here the last-named are pierced and carved in the form of Gothic windows.
The Court Cupboard.—The development in Elizabethan times is shown in the Court cupboard in Fig. 29. This is worthy of a few moments’ attention because it contains many typical features of the period. It was a cupboard which became extremely popular, probably because it gave good accommodation and there was excellent scope for decorative treatment. Note first the lower doors with their three-panel arrangement. Apart from strength, this had the advantage of keeping the panel width down, and so saving the necessity of jointing up. The framing is channel-moulded ; that is a shallow groove moulded at the sides is worked along the centre of each member.
Incidentally, whilst on the subject of mouldings, it should be noted that in every case they are worked ” in the solid,” the substance of the framing being moulded. It is mentioned here in particular because it will be seen in the next chapter that the tendency in the following century was to use applied mouldings instead.
Attention has already been drawn to the bulbous turnings and their elaborate carving, Fig. 29, and we may now turn to the upper cupboard portion with its sloping sides. It was probably the desire to make space for the bulbous turnings that prompted the cutting away of the cupboard, and at the same time to provide a useful standing space at each side. It will be found that when, later, turning began to decline, the upper cupboard became rectangular in shape, being just set back a few inches from the line of the lower cupboard. Eventually the turnings disappeared almost entirely, being replaced by single drop turnings—but of this we shall see more in the following chapter. It is mentioned here because it helps to explain the reason for the shape of the upper cupboard. The carving in the frieze is a typical Elizabethan detail which continued into the seventeenth century.
BEDSTEADS
Sleeping arrangements in the early years were of the simplest and most primitive form for everyone except the chief persons in the household. The fifteenth century saw considerable improvements in this respect, though it was not until the next century that beds became at all common. There were two kinds, the panelled head and foot (very like the modern form of wood bed), and the four-poster. The last-named developed into a really amazing structure in the time of Elizabeth. That the rooms were abominably draughty is the probable reason for its popularity. The tester or panelling above the bed was hung all round with curtains, so that the sleeper was literally lying in a little room built within the main bedroom. It must have been close and unhealthy, but presumably people preferred that to draughts.
That great importance was attached to these bedsteads is shown by the frequent reference made to them in old wills, and in view of the amount of work put into them they must have been costly things to produce. That in Fig. 31 contains features found in most old beds. Note that the bed frame itself is separate at the foot from the front posts. This was usual in Elizabethan beds, though towards the end of the century the tendency was to join them up.
Figs. 32, 33, and 34 will prove of particular interest to practical cabinet makers and draughtsmen, though they are well worthy of the attention of all students because the sections of mouldings and carved details are extremely important factors when dating a period piece.

Tudor Gothic Period Stools, Chairs and Tables

EVOLUTION OF THE CHEST
We have spoken of the chest as being part of the furnishing of the early house, and we deal with it first, not only because it was a most important piece of furniture, but because so many other pieces were evolved from it. It was used for all sorts of purposes : the storing of clothes or valuables, for a travelling chest, as a seat, or (in the larger sizes) even as a bed. In fact it was its all-round usefulness
that was its great virtue, and accounts for the comparatively large numbers which have survived.
Early Hollowed-out Chests.—In its earliest form it was merely hollowed out of a solid baulk of timber, the lid usually following the line of the trunk in shape and so being rounded. Such chests belong generally to a period before the fourteenth century, after which the more economical method of jointing up timber was evolved. Fig. 2 is an example. It stands in the old church at Harbledown, Kent.
A curious example of how convention sets its stamp on things is shown in the next example, Fig. 3, which exemplifies the next stage in which separate boards were peggedtogether. Note how the lid, although not actually rounded, is raised in the centre and is so a survival of the older hollowed-out solid lid. Another feature of special interest is the way it is hinged. The end pieces into which the lid boards are housed are made extra wide at the back and fit outside the ends of the lower chest portion. Pegs passing through both enable the lid to be raised. It was a system of hingeing (usually termed pin hingeing) which survived until some time during the thirteenth century, when it was replaced by the more convenient metal strap hinges.
Planked Chests.—At the time our story begins—the late fifteenth century—most chests were little more than a series
PROBABLE EVOLUTION OF FORM AND SETTLE.
The construction of the form is practically identical with that of the
planked chest, and it is probable that the one was evolved from the other.
In the same way the early settle was really only a chest with the posts
and back continued upwards.
of four boards nailed or pegged together to form the sides, and a bottom and lid. It was a method of construction about which there was something rather obvious. It was essentially simple, a serious consideration in days when every operation had to be done entirely by hand, and up to a point it served its purpose.
At the same time it had its disadvantages. For one thing it was extremely limited in the form and degree of decoration that could be given (and the Renaissance craftsmen were extremely fond of decoration), and, what was a more serious point, it was not sound structurally. All timber is bound to shrink, and providing the entire shrinkage takes place during the seasoning no harm is done. But this is seldom practicable. A board which has been seasoned for years may still shrink more after it has been worked and built into a piece of furniture.
Now if the grain of these chests is examined (take Fig. 4 for example) it will be seen that that of the front and back runs horizontally from side to side, whereas that of the ends is vertical. As wood always shrinks across the grain, it follows that the front and back are trying to reduce their width but are prevented from doing so by the upright grain
FIG. 18. PANELLED BACK CHAIR DECORATED WITH INLAY AND
CARVING.
About 1600.
A big advancement on the previous chair. The lower part Is open, and
the arms are unpanelled. The back has a definite incline, and, although
back legs are upright, they are made extra thick at the bottom to give
the good stability.
of the ends. As a consequence they have to split, and it is this that accounts for the bad condition in which the fronts of these chests are often found. If the reader turns to P. 21 he will find the point explained yet more fully.
Framed-up Construction.—It was to overcome this fundamental fault that the panelled system of construction was evolved, in which the strength was provided by a frame-work joined at the corners with mortise and tenon joints, the centre portion being filled in with a panel which rested in grooves worked in the inner edges of the framework. The panel was entirely free in the grooves, so that in the event of shrinkage no harm whatever would be done. Fig. 12 shows the idea. It was a system which has remained as a standard practice ever since.
The effect of this new form of construction on the chest is shown in Fig. 5. It is virtually four separate frames except that the legs are part of both front and sides. The
FIG. 19. LONG FORM WITH GOTHIC SHAPINGS.
Early 16th century.
This was the usual seating accommodation for the majority of people.
In a hall there might be one chair, the seat of honour for the principal
person (hence the term “chairman “), but forms or stools were good
enough for the others.
bad effects of shrinkage are eliminated, since the panels are free to shrink.
Whilst still on this subject of panelling, it is instructive to note that the width of the individual panels was seldom more than that of a single board, this saving the necessity of jointing. It is a useful point to remember because it accounts for the comparatively narrow panels found in early oak work.
TREATMENT OF PANELS
Linenfold Panels.—A favourite method of embellishing the panels of these chests was to carve them in the linenfold pattern as in Fig. 5, and many ingenious theories have been put forward to account for the origin of this device. That it was carved to represent a piece of folded linen is un-doubtedly true, but it probably owed its origin to a practical reason, especially as the earlier patterns were of simple form, just an ogee-shaped section, thin at the edges and rising to a point at the centre.
Most early oak was riven, that is, the log was cleft at the end with a wedge and so forced apart. The method was far less laborious than sawing, and it was stronger since it followed the natural line of cleavage. Fig. 9 shows the
FIG. 20. SIMPLE TUDOR GOTHIC STOOLS.
Early 16th century.
Note that the Gothic shaping of the uprights in the stool to the right is
similar to that in the long form in Fig. 19.
FIG. 21. ELIZABETHAN BOX
STOOL.
Late 16th century.
A small box space is formed beneath the seat, the latter acting as a lid.
process. At the same time the boards were not so straight and the surface was liable to have ridges in it. These ridges may have suggested the lines of the folded linen, and in any case the edges had to be reduced in thickness to enable them to fit in the grooves of the framing. Thus it seems to be a case of the craftsmen making the most of the peculiarities of the material, and adapting the design to suit the natural formation.
The enlarged illustration on p. IS shows a linenfold pattern in closer details in which the wood is cut thin at the sides to enable it to enter the grooves. This cutting-away forms a part of the design. Note also that the recessing of the groundwork at top and bottom to throw the folds into relief answers the same purpose.
Curved Rib Panels.—Another form of decoration was what is usually termed the curved rib design, an example of which is also given on p. 18. It probably owed its origin to the same causes as the linenfold. If the two illustrations C and D are compared it will be seen that the linenfold has the same downward curve in the ends of the folds at the top. The only fundamental difference is the introduction of the centre fold. The thinning of the edges occurs in both, and the riving of the timber would make it suitable for either one or the other in accordance with the amount of timber left by the cleavage. In fact it may be that the craftsman decided which treatment he would give after the timber had been riven. Or, alternatively, assuming that he had some timber already riven, he would select that which was the more suitable for the design he had in mind.
Tracery Designs.—This, however, is largely theory, and we may now turn to yet another kind of panel, the origin of which is more certain. This is the traceried panel of which two examples are given on p. 18. They were taken from the Gothic traceried windows which were a common feature of buildings of the period. Generally they were pierced right through, and this had the advantage of providing ventilation for such items as were used for storing food. When this was undesirable, for instance in the front of an ordinary chest, the ” window ” portions were just recessed, leaving the ribs standing up in high relief.
It is sometimes argued that the ecclesiastical appearance of these chests suggests that they were made originally for a church, but this is by no means necessarily the case. That the traceried designs were similar to the work found in churches is true, but it must be remembered the same thing applied to all secular work, because there was no other style than the Gothic. The Gothic style was evolved chiefly from the building of churches, but secular work followed on precisely the same lines.
Renaissance Designs.—The panel at E on p. 19 is of particular interest in that it shows the beginning of the new spirit the Renaissance brought with it. It is true that there are features about it that are reminiscent of the Gothic, but the main design is something outside what the latter pro-duced. It was probably a case of a man brought up in the Gothic tradition feeling his way rather cautiously in an unfamiliar element. It is somewhat meaningless in the treatment of the upper scrolls terminating in the horizontal band with the leafwork sprouting below, and one has the feeling that here was a man to whom new ideas were suggested but who was uncertain what to make with them.
Romayne Panels.—Another basic motif found in early Renaissance work was the Romayne panel, which consisted of a wreath of leafwork encircling the carved representation of a head, usually in profile. Such designs were often found on buildings, for instance, in the Gateway of Hampton Court Palace, and they provided a rich field for the carver’s fancy. Sometimes they were purely mythological head pieces, often of Roman origin, the head having the wreath of victory around the brow. On the other hand, these busts were often carved as a portrait of the person for whom the chest was made, and one can imagine the self-sufficiency of the owner as he would point out the likeness to his friends—though to judge from some of them the result could hardly have been flattering.
We have gone into the details found on these chests at some length because they form the basis upon which ornament of the time was built up. First the Gothic tracery or the linenfold, then the curious intermixture of the Renaissance with the Gothic, and finally the purer Renaissance, if such a term may be applied to a style which was handled in so free a way. Whatever its merits as a design, however, it had this about it, that it was extremely virile and spirited in its execution. A man came across this and that motif, and he worked on them with a complacent disregard for their true meaning and gave of his best in dealing with them. The result was the production of the style we know as Tudor Gothic.
At this point we may leave the chest for the time being. That made during the last phase of the period, that cf Elizabeth, was similar to that in Fig. 5, except that the linen-fold device was replaced by Renaissance details, and the framing was usually more or less elaborately carved. We shall pick up the thread again when we come to the next chapter dealing with the Jacobean times.

Mid 16th century.    About 1530•
FIG. 7. TUDOR GOTHIC PANELS WITH RENAISSANCE
INFLUENCE.

TRESTLE TABLE WITH GOTHIC LINES.
First half 16th century.
These tables were made specially so that they could be taken to pieces
and stacked away flat. The withdrawal of the wedges enabled the rails
to be pulled away clear of the trestle ends.
FIG. 23. DRAW TABLE OF ELIZABETH’S DAYS.
Second half 16th century.
This is the earliest form of extending table, and it is still the most reliable.
The extending leaves rest beneath the main top, and as they are pulled
out they are caused to rise by means of tapering bearers beneath.

USING THE RIVING IRON TO CONVERT TIMBER,
The iron was placed at the end of the timber and struck with the ” beetle to enter it. It was then levered over so that the timber was split.
FIG. 10. THE ADZE.
This was used to clean
the surface after cut-
ting out.
FIG. 11. SCRATCH TOOL.
The chief purpose of this was to work
mouldings. It was simply worked
back and forth.
FIG. 8. CUTTING OUT TIM-
BER WITH THE PIT SAW.
The man at the top was in
control, and it was his job to see
that the saw kept to the line.
He was called the top sawyer.
The man in the pit simply helped
to supply the power.

CARVING OF
FIGURES SEATED ON
A SETTLE.
Late i5th century.
Although the whole thing measures only some IS In. in height, it is of special Interest in that it shows the type of settle in use at the time it was carved. Note the linenfold panels, and the way in which the front framework reaches
right to the floor.

FIG. 16. PENITENT STOOL FROM
FORDWICH CHURCH, KENT.
Date uncertain, but probably earlier than i5th century.
The construction of this is crude in the
extreme. It is simply a solid piece of timber
with the upper part chopped out to form
the seat and back.
FIG. 17. EARLY FORM
OF PANELLED CHAIR
WITH LOWER BOX
PORTION.
First half 16th century.
The general form is
similar to that of the
settle shown in Fig. 15,
and the idea was prob-
ably prompted by the
chest. The back In this
case has a slight slope,
though in many similar
chairs it was quite
upright.

Settles and sofas before 1840
The box-settle was in existence in northern Europe by the 15th century. The earliest examples usually have planked seats and pierced trellis or linen-fold panelled backs, and are often richly carved. A plainer and sturdier form was the oak “monk’s table”, which had a bench-like seat, often set above an enclosed well used for storage, and a hinged back, which when brought forward served as a table. This basic form was adopted by furniture-makers in Britain (particularly in the provinces), and the Low Countries from the 16th century. Early box-settles were usually of oak, although elm, chestnut, and fruitwood were increasingly used during the 18th century; they continued to be made in the provincial tradition until well into the 19th century.

DOUBLE CHAIR-BACK SETTEES
The double chair-back settee dates from the mid-17th century, and its evolution reflects that of the chair back (splat). Invariably of walnut, this type of furniture is distinguished by caned seats, carved upright splats, and baluster-turned or strapwork legs joined by stretchers. By the late 17th and early 18th centuries the double chair-back settee was characterized by a drop-in, upholstered seat, slightly serpentine toprail with vase or baluster-shaped splats, and cabriole legs with pad feet. Usually made of walnut, it became increasingly bold and elaborate in form and decoration; by the reign of Queen Anne (1702-14) settees were frequently veneered with burr-walnut and enriched with seaweed marquetry on the splats and legs. George I examples (1714-27) were often inspired by the architect William Kent (c.16851748), and have carved shells, foliage, lion-masks and paws, and eagle’s-head arm terminals and claws. Mahogany settees were first made under George II (1727-60); those from the 1750s and 1760s frequently follow chair-patterns in the Chinese, Gothick, and French Rococo styles popularized by Thomas Chippendale (1718-79) in The Gentleman and Cabinet-Maker’s Director (1754-62). Continental examples were often gilded or painted with flowers and chinoiserie decoration, and are far more Rococo in form than their English counterparts, with exaggerated cabriole legs, serpentine toprails, and asymmetric splats. This latter feature is also characteristic of Dutch double-chair back settees, which parallel English Queen Anne and early Georgian examples, save for the enrichment of floral marquetry. However, Dutch chair-back settees with floral marquetry on a mahogany, as opposed to a walnut, ground are more usually 19th century. English settees of the late 18th and early 19th centuries are usually of carved mahogany or satinwood. Painted designs include peacock feathers and flowers in the manner of George Seddon & Sons (est. 1785), and Etruscan-black decoration, inspired by Classical vases. These painted examples are usually of beech and often display caned or rush seats with squab cushions.
CANAPES AND CHAISES-LONGUES
Canapes with padded backs and seats dating from the reign of Louis XIV (1643-1715) usually have walnut frames with simple channelled decoration to the legs and stretchers, scrolled arms, and cabriole legs. The most sophisticated canapes of the Regence period (1715-23) are masterpieces of the carver’s art; their giltwood or walnut frames were carved with foliage, shells, and chimerical dragons, and their backs strewn with flowers in the style of Juste-Aurele Meissonnier (1695-1750).
During the 1730s and 1740s, Rococo canapes became even more exaggerated in form and detail. They were usually gilded or of walnut, although Italian craftsmen also employed a mix of silver and gold leaf, a decoration known as mecca. Italian canapes are often less well constructed than French seat furniture.

The chaise-longue was characterized by its long seat, which enabled the sitter to recline horizontally, and was first recorded in France, Italy, and England in the late 17th century. Louis XIV chaises-longues were usually of carved walnut or beech, with caned seats and squab cushions. During the early 18th century the frames became richer and more florid, often being gilded or japanned in imitation of Oriental lacquer, while the caned seats were rejected in favour of fully stuffed and upholstered seats. Usually carved in lime or beech, and intended to be painted or gilded, inid-18th-century Continental chaises-longues were of a pegged construction. Although rarer, day-beds, usually without side-supports, were also made in England during the mid-Georgian period.
It was under the influence of the Prince of Wales (later George IV) and his circle that the chaise-longue reached its apogee in England. The form was the perfect vehicle for the reproduction of Greek, Roman, and Egyptian ornament. Simpler Regency chaises-longues were also widely manufactured, mainly in mahogany or rosewood, perhaps inlaid with brass in the “Buhl” manner. Painted examples with Etruscan-inspired ebonized and parcel-gilt decoration, or with a grained or stencilled finish, also abound. The earliest Regency chaises-longues are light and elegant, with simple, free-flowing lines, sabre legs, and brass caps and casters. Examples from the 1820s and 1830s are increasingly florid and heavy; they are supported on claw feet and arc often richly carved with exaggerated, stylized foliage.
DUNCAN PHYFE (1768-1854)
The best-known New York cabinet-maker of the early and mid-19th century, Duncan Phyfe also gave his name to the generic term for American furniture in the Neo-classical style, making use of the forms and ornament of Classical Greece and Rome. The work of Phyfe and his contemporaries incorporates “curule” (Grecian-cross design) legs or sabre legs, paw feet, harp and lyre backs, caned toprails, and decoration showing sheaves of wheat, thunderbolts, cornucopia, and swags. Unless documented by a bill or label, New York Federal and Classical furniture should be attributed to the Phyfe school. Phyfe-type furniture was made into the mid-19th century, with a revival in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

EARLY 19TH-CENTURY SOFAS
The development of the chaise-longue in the 19th century was mirrored by that of the sofa. From c. 805 to 1810 sofas became increasingly bold and luxurious. Frames of plain mahogany were initially fashionable, carved with Grecian ornament as promoted by George Smith (active c.1786-1828) in his book A Collection of Designs for Household Furniture and Interior Decoration (1808); these were superseded by more florid examples in rosewood and, later, walnut, upholstered with bolster cushions at each end. This extravagance was continued in the design and decoration of the frames, which often had tightly scrolled arm-terminals and were embellished with gilt-bronze mounts or inlaid in the “Buhl” manner with foliate arabesques, as on sofas by the firm of Gillow (est. c.1730). The sofas were supported by hairy-paw feet. As seen in the designs of Michel Angelo Nicolson (c.1796-1844) in The Practical Cabinet-Maker, Upholsterer, and Complete Decorator (1826), the basic Regency form persisted throughout the 19th century. However, sofa designs became heavier as the century progressed, with the introduction of shorter and fatter legs, often reeded, and tapering to brass caps and casters.

•    BOX-SETTLES the most lavishly decorated settles, particularly those with linen-fold panelled backs, are often examples of 19th-century antiquarianism, in which old panelling has been reused or plain types have been later carved or embellished
•    DOUBLE CHAIR-BACK SETTEES the majority of these are 19th-century copies, which may be identified by the quality of the timber and carving, and by the use of carved ornament borrowed from different periods
•    CHAISES-LONGUES mid-18th century Continental chaises-longues should be of pegged construction; 18th-century examples were widely copied in the 19th century – these later pieces are usually betrayed by the stiffness of the carving; chaises-longues have very often been regilded (this will not affect the value if the work is of a high quality); examples that were once brightly painted have often faded

Seat furniture
Until the 17th century most seating was provided by the stool; box-settles were also common in wealthier households. Side chairs and armchairs were introduced in the 16th century and the settee in the mid-17th century; this evolved over the next 200 years into the fully upholstered sofa. The demand for comfortable seating increased throughout this period, with upholstery gradually
eclipsing wood carving and decoration, especially after the introduction of the coiled spring in the 1820s. Over the centuries seating has been profoundly influenced by a succession of styles and forms, from the extravagant Baroque to the austere Neoclassical, all of which have been revived by later generations of craftsmen. The interest in historical design continues to this day.
Stools
The stool has been in use for thousands of years, and was and is common in one form or another to all civilizations. Its often simple construction and its portability have ensured its lasting popularity. Until the 17th century, seat furniture with backs and arms was scarce, and the chair was reserved for the head of the household; most seating was provided by the stool.
17TH-CENTURY JOINED STOOLS
Inventories from the 17th century show that stools existed in large numbers and were reserved for members of the household who had sufficient status to sit at formal occasions. This hierarchy persisted in court circles well into the 18th century. Most stools found today were made from the 17th century onwards. As with all types of furniture, examples of stools before 1600 are rare and those that come onto the market can be valuable. The simple, pegged, oak stool with carved decoration is probably the most common type. Called a joined or joint stool, it was made by a joiner, with mortise-and-tenon joints secured by pegs. Although regional variations exist, the design was basically the same throughout Europe. Generally only those pieces that were well made in good-quality wood have survived, and many stools intended for everyday use have long since disappeared.
Joined stools could be extended in length to become benches and were occasionally made with a small drawer underneath the seat. Even at this early date they were often made in sets, a practice that was to become widespread in later centuries. Originally the seat would probably have been softened with a squab cushion but during the 17th century padding became an integral part of the stool as the demand for comfort increased.

LATER STOOLS Because stools were perennially popular they tended to keep up with fashion trends. In the late 18th century British stools were made after designs in The Cabinet-Maker and Upholsterer’s Guide ( 1788-94) by George Hepplewhite (d.1786) and French stools after designs by Pierre Fontaine (c.1762-1853) and Charles Percier (1764-1838), as well as those in Receuil de decorations interieures (1801-12). Shapes diversified as the interest in historical styles and forms, whether real or imaginary, took hold. For example, the X-frame form, first made in ancient Egypt and common in Europe during the Renaissance, was revived in Europe and North America during the early 19th century.
The 19th century saw an increased use of mechanization, which enabled carving to become extremely elaborate, and stools were made in a variety of bizarre forms with carved and moulded decoration. From the third quarter of the 19th century a new type of upholstered seating, the pouffe, was introduced. The upholsterer played an increasingly prominent role in furniture-making as comfort became an ever more important criterion.

•   COPIES OF JOINED STOOLS during the 1920s and 1930s
many copies were made of the joined stool; signs of a genuine example include wear in the right places, such as the stretchers; irregular pegs that stand proud due to shrinkage and are visible on both the inside and outside of the frame; “dry” wood underneath the seat
•   GEORGIAN STOOLS look at the colour of the wood under the seat rail (the drop-in seat should lift out) – this should be “dry” and unstained; exercise caution with small stools, which are popular with collectors – fakers may have used the front pair of legs from two damaged chairs and fixed them into a seat rail; check for odd proportions and for tops of legs hidden by the seat rail