xx QUEEN ANNE’S GATE

London SW1

A Report on the Early Painted SchemesFollowing an Examination

of the Paint onVarious Surfaces

Patrick Baty

12th August 2010

1

xx QUEEN ANNE’S GATE

London SW1

A Report on the Early Painted SchemesFollowing an Examination

of the Paint onVarious Surfaces

A BRIEF SYNOPSIS

ExteriorThe external joinery appears to have been painted on seventy-one occasions since the house wasbuilt in 1705. This suggests that the exterior was repainted on average every 4.2 years. Off-white and pale stone colours have been used on each occasion.

Information provided by the paint suggests that the sashes were replaced soon after the SecondWorld War.

The overdoor of the doorcase was stripped at the end of the first half of the twentieth century orpossibly just before the War.

It seems that the narrow windows on the first and second floors of the front façade were brickedup towards the end of the third quarter of the eighteenth century (i.e. ca.1750-75). It is possiblethat the one on the ground floor was bricked up ca.1860-70.

InteriorThe 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 otherbuildings of the same period. For the most part, stone and grey colours in their various formswere employed in oil paint on all wooden surfaces. Dark browns and black were also found onskirtings 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 ashinier 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;

2

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 occasionthat the room was painted until the early nineteenth century when it was not repainted forabout sixty years; or

b) That a closet did not exist until the early nineteenth century and that it was removedabout sixty years later.

The grained scheme in the front room on the first floor had been applied in the first quarter of thetwentieth century. The panelling that had been exposed recently in the NE corner of that roomdisplays late eighteenth century decoration.

The paint stratigraphy appears to be sound on the surfaces that were sampled. However, it mustbe understood that many areas were wood grained at some stage and will have had several coatsof gloss varnish applied. As paint does not sit happily on varnish it is possible that overlyinglayers might shear off if the surface is knocked. Short of sanding down through the varnish littlecan be done about this.

3

xx QUEEN ANNE’S GATE

London SW1

A Report on the Early Painted SchemesFollowing an Examination

of the Paint onVarious Surfaces

Introduction

I was asked by Mr xxx xxx, of xxx Architects, to carry out an examination of the paint in variousareas of xx Queen Anne’s Gate, Westminster.

The purpose of the analysis was to establish what could be learnt of the earlier decorativeschemes 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 isone of the earliest houses to be occupied and built in the square, the first occupant being recordedin 1705.

The names of the occupiers of the house before 1840, according to the ratebooks, are as follows:

1705-18 Wm. Smith1719-21 Nic. Lowndes1722-23 Capt. Davenport1724-30 Mary Price1732-35 Lady Pickle1736-41 Ric. Wallace1744-59 Mrs. D’eath1760-61 Mrs. Treasure1763-72 James Random1773-76 Mary Clinker1777-79 William Fathom1780 Phoebe Greaves1782-88 Catherine Smollet1789-95 Rev. Dr. H. Grantly

1 (Survey of London 1926, 116). Information also taken from the Historic Buildings Report prepared by xxxArchitects 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).

4

1797-1803 Wm. Bold1806-22 Admiral Slope3

1825- Maria Harding4

In 1926 the house was occupied by the architect xx xxx. The freeholder at that time wasMountvernon Estates Ltd.

After the Second World War planning permission was granted for Nos. xx and xx to be used asoffices 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 Floora) Entrance Hallb) Front Roomc) Rear Room

2) First Floora) Stairs and Landingb) Front Roomc) Rear Room

3) Second Floora) Front Roomb) Rear Room

4) Exterior

Investigation of Samples

A total of 72 samples were taken by Patrick Baty during a number of visits made between Mayand 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 acounterpane stolen on 15th September of that year. Old Bailey Proceedings, 24th November 1834. ReferenceNumber: t18341124-115. http://www.oldbaileyonline.org/browse.jsp?path=sessionsPapers%2F18341124.xml

5

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; andi) Bibliography.

Limitations

Occasionally in this report an effort has been made to suggest possible dates for a number of theschemes found during analysis. It is believed that to provide some sort of context for thesequence of paint layers will be of more use than to offer no suggestion at all. Where dates havebeen 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 appliedfirst will be earlier than those at the top). Often, by dividing the age of a surface by the numberof 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 10-15 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

White A paint made up of a white pigment such as chalk, or lead white, with no visiblecolouring matter (pigment) added. The overall effect would often have been ofan off-white due to the inherent yellowness of the pigment and / or the medium.

Off-White A paint consisting of a white pigment such as chalk, or lead white, with smallamounts of visible colouring matter (pigment) added. Sometimes, however, avery 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 pigmentwas added to correct the inherent yellowness of some paints or to impart a slighttint. At the other end of the scale the difference between an off-white and a palestone colour is minimal and, as a result, inconsistencies in description are likelyto occur.

6

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 orPortland stone). The difference between a pale stone colour and an off-white isminimal 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 themicroscope. The large amount of light used to illuminate the sample combined with themagnified detail causes distortion. The only way of getting a closer idea of the depth of colour isto remove a small lump of the substrate, to carefully expose the relevant layer and to leave itexposed to UV light for a period of time. This is not always practical, especially when samplinga room in an inhabited building. For that reason a general description of the colour is given. Bydefinition this may sometimes be misleading. The rule of thumb is that colours are invariablydarker than they appear in a photomicrograph.5 If anything, the descriptions of the colours in thisreport are likely to err on the paler side.

Summary of Findings

GeneralThe evidence, in the form of the repainting cycle6 provided by a sample of paint from the externalcornice has enabled a reasonably precise date to be suggested for other elements and schemes onthe outside of the house. This information, where it can be linked with the interior, has led tofurther suggestions for possible dates for the introduction and alteration of a number of interiorelements.

However, whilst the repainting cycle is very helpful for dating exterior schemes, where theprotective function of paint is necessary, it is less so for the interior. Although one can obtain avery rough idea of the treatment of the interior at various stages any suggestion of a date must betreated 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 thisone might compare the photomicrograph of QAG/15 in Appendix Two with the photograph of the Ground Floorfront room – North wall, NE corner in Appendix One. What appears to be a dark green in the photograph seemsmuch 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 thebuilding by the number of schemes usually provides worthwhile information. This technique has been written aboutin American technical publications (e.g. Doonan 1982, 27-29) but has also been dismissed as being unscientific byother writers (Welsh 1986, 4-5).

7

Exterior

GeneralSamples were taken from these external surfaces:

1) Timber cornice;2) Sash windows, and3) The doorcase.

Timber CorniceA ‘scab’ of paint that had fallen from the timber cornice was provided by one of the workmen onsite. In view of the apparent completeness it was prepared as a cross section and examined underthe 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 redoxide7 primer was present at the bottom of the first scheme. A total of seventy-one schemes canbe seen. If one assumes that the exterior of the building was last painted in about 2005 and if onedivides its age by the number of schemes it can be seen that the repainting cycle wasapproximately 4.22 years.8

The first fifty-six schemes were carried out in a variety of stone colours (pale and darker) and off-whites in paints based on lead white.9 The upper face of each is clearly marked by a thin layer ofdirt, which helps with the interpretation enormously. Two schemes of zinc-based10 paint can beseen and these were followed by a sequence of paints based on a combination of zinc andtitanium dioxide11 initially and then on the latter pigment alone.

7 See Appendix Four for more information on this and other pigments.8 (300 years divided by 71 schemes equals 4.22 years). This kind of redecoration cycle is exceptional and isseldom encountered. The rear tripartite windows of Home House, in Portman Square, were found to have had arepainting cycle of about 4 to 4.2 years between 1773 and 1985, while the front façade had one of about 4.8years (Baty 1998:1, 5).

The railings of No 6 Fitzroy Square, London WC1, (built 1790-94) were found to have had a repainting cycle of4.7 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 foundthroughout 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 tosuggest that this was adhered to for very long.

9Until the second half of the 20th century the main constituent of most architectural paints was lead carbonate, awhite compound derived from metallic lead. Throughout this report it is referred to as "lead white". See AppendixFour.10 Although introduced towards the end of the nineteenth century paints based on zinc oxide tended to be seen inthe first half of the twentieth century and up to the 1960s. See Appendix Four for some information on thispigment. Marked as ZnO on photomicrographs.11 See Appendix Four for some information on this pigment. Marked as TiO2 on photomicrographs.

8

It is particularly interesting to see that the last fifteen schemes reflect what has been found whenexamining 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 whenmaintenance was not carried out (scheme 56); and

d) The lack of dirt on the upper face of those schemes applied after the introduction of theClean Air Act in 1956 (scheme 58+).

The paint layers applied to the external cornice are therefore a very accurate method of showingus 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 shownbelow.

Sash WindowsA photograph of the exterior of Nos. 17 and 19 taken in 1886 shows the windows of 19 withoutglazing bars but with sheets of plate glass.13 However, a watercolour of 1852 suggests thatglazing bars existed at that time.14 It is therefore thought that the plate glass must have beenintroduced between 1852-1886.

The external face of the top sash of the centre window on the first floor was sampled (seephotomicrograph of QAG/38 in Appendix Two).

The wood was first painted with a zinc-based paint in an off-white colour. The second schemewas identical. Three schemes of a cream colour in a paint based on a combination of zinc oxideand titanium dioxide were next employed and the last ten schemes were based on titaniumdioxide alone. It will be remembered that exactly the same sequence was found as the upperlayers 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 zinc-based 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 floorthat those window openings on the first and probably the second floors of the front façade werebricked up when the seventh scheme in that room was applied. It is possible that this took placetowards the end of the third quarter of the eighteenth century (i.e. ca.1750-75) (see

12 This is all very similar to what was found on the front façade of the Travellers’ Club (Baty 2008, passim).13 (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/d3Wlw014 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 inOctober 1954.16 It is highly likely that all sashes were replaced at the same time, but further samples would be necessary toestablish this.

9

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 islikely that the narrow window in that room was bricked up ca.1860-70.

The DoorcaseTwo samples were taken from the overdoor of the doorcase. Both were found to display analmost identical sequence to that on the sashes (see photomicrograph of QAG/53 in AppendixTwo). However, there is an extra zinc-based scheme at the bottom of the sequence and this has aclearly defined layer of dirt on it. Careful examination of the substrate shows that the wood hadbeen 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 inAppendix Two).

Interior

GeneralApproximately 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 Londonhouses of the same period are concerned it may be of interest to learn that the average repaintingcycle in the entrance hall of three other early eighteenth century interiors was as follows:

1) No 56 Artillery Lane, in Spitalfields, had a 7 year repainting cycle.18

2) Nos. 23 and 25 Brook Street (the houses occupied at one time by Jimi Hendrix andGeorge Frideric Handel) the average repainting cycle was 8 years.19

3) 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. Thisinformation is included to support the findings of the analysis and to show that the full sequencesurvives on many of the painted surfaces.

The painted surfaces in the house were found to have been painted on between twenty-six andthirty-three occasions. The Front Room on the ground floor seems to have been painted the mostoften.

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 leadto distortion as decoration was frequently based on fashion rather than necessity. Nonetheless, it can provide arough 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 by1807 some of the streets had been taken over by common lodging houses and much of the population wasclassed 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 havesome bearing on the frequency of decoration.

10

hierarchy becomes apparent. In common with the other houses of the same period, that are listedabove, the further up the building the fewer the number of decorative schemes:

Floor Area Approximate Number of SchemesGround Entrance Hall 31

Front Room 33Rear Room 27

First Stairs 31Front Room 20 (early 20th C scheme had been retained)

Second Front Room 26Rear Room 26

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 whenexamining other buildings of the same period. For the most part, stone and grey colours in theirvarious forms were employed in oil paint on all wooden surfaces. Dark browns and black werealso found on skirtings although this ceased by the early nineteenth century when such atreatment 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 thincoat of oil glaze in order to provide a semi-gloss finish. In spite of modern notions of eighteenthcentury practice, such a finish was considered highly desirable, as can be seen in the followingquote of 1723:

"Take notice also, That all simple Colours used in HousePainting, appear much more beautiful and lustrous, when theyappear as if glazed over with a Varnish to which both the dryingOyl before-mentioned contributes very much, and also the Oyl ofTurpentine, 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 theca.1820s,23 and once in the immediate post-War period. Clearly other works have taken place.

Entrance HallThe entrance hall has been painted on about thirty-one occasions.PanellingIt seems that the wood in the entrance hall was primed initially with a thin size-bound wash ofred 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 AppendixSeven.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 therebetween 1825 and at least 1834 and probably later.

11

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 ochreand charcoal black25 were applied. The overall effect was of a stone colour.26 A mid-sheenfinish 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 thesurface 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 beenslightly darker.

On the third time that the entrance hall was painted the colour was changed from a stone colourto a grey of a type that would have been known as “Lead Colour”. 28 The paint was based on leadwhite and tinted with charcoal black. A thin layer of oily glaze is visible on the upper face, onceagain.

The lead colour was repeated twice more – the first being slightly darker than the second. No oilglaze is apparent on either occasion although it has been found on equivalent schemes on thestaircase balustrade (see photomicrograph of QAG/72), where it was probably applied in order tomake 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 amongstthem. This darker layer is found throughout the house and is the scheme that is visible on therecently exposed panelling in the NE corner of the front room on the first floor (see below andphotograph 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 (seephotomicrograph of QAG/58 in Appendix Two and photograph in Appendix One). This hasbeen 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 whiteand 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 house-painter. See Appendix Six for a contemporary account of house-painting practices.27See the photomicrographs in Appendix Two that have been labelled with “Glaze layer” for a clear illustration ofthis. This finish was also found on the early layers in the Benjamin Franklin house, in Craven Street, where it hasbeen 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 colourthat 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 theca.1820s.

12

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 acoat of varnish that is quite clear in cross section.32 The wood being imitated was not that darkas the ground coat was a pale stone colour. This was obviously ‘carried over’ a couple of timesas it was given two further coats of varnish (see QAG/55).33 Its appearance at this time wouldhave 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 inpaint based on zinc oxide. From information obtained from the painting of the window sashes itis thought that this paint may have been applied in the 1950s. Two more zinc-based schemeswere employed before the first of the final sequence of five or six schemes of paint which werebased on titanium dioxide.

The lower wall appears to have been painted in the same manner as the upper wall except that itseems that rather than having been grained a second time a further coat of varnish was applied ontop of the previous (re-varnished) graining (see photomicrograph of QAG/62 in AppendixTwo).34

Chair RailThe chair rail has also been painted as the lower and upper wall (see photomicrograph ofQAG/56 in Appendix Two).

Front DoorIt seems, from the paint layers, that the front door dates from the time when the entrance hallunderwent modifications and the arch was inserted. This work probably took place in the firstquarter of the nineteenth century.

SkirtingThe skirting fascia, at least on the left hand side of the hall, is not original and appears to datefrom the early twentieth century (see photomicrograph of QAG/57 in Appendix Two). It seemsto have been applied when the graining was replaced by paint. However, information providedby the skirting on the first landing suggests that it might have been black originally and in verydark colours until the end of the eighteenth century (see below) (compare photomicrographs ofQAG/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 See Appendix Four for some information on this pigment.32 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 thegraining possibly repaired where necessary. In 1904, John Rea was quoting a price of 4d per square yard forcleaning and touching up a grained scheme, compared to 1s 3d for a new oak scheme (Rea 1904, 348). It is worthnoting that rather than being carried over a second occasion, the door architrave to the rear room on the first floorwas 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.

13

This was in the context of a black skirting fascia.

StaircaseThe 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 thetreatment of the entrance hall has been extended up the stairs as one might have expected. Onceagain, the wood was primed in the same manner as in the entrance hall, with a thin wash of redoxide having been applied to the timber (see photomicrograph of QAG/44 in Appendix Two).

PanellingThe first scheme of a glazed stone colour was employed on the panelling; the window shuttersthe 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 tothose found in the entrance hall, with a sequence of stone colours (pale and darker); salmonpinks; off-whites and wood graining. Throughout the building’s existence the panel beds andtheir surrounds have been painted in the same way.

The shutters on the first half landing have been painted as the wall panelling (seephotomicrograph of QAG/64 in Appendix Two).

SkirtingThe skirting fascia on the first floor landing (and probably on the ground floor, as well) waspainted black originally (see photomicrograph of QAG/48 in Appendix Two).36 A deepyellowish brown replaced this, which in turn was succeeded by a sequence of red-brown andblacks. It appears that it was first treated as the panelling (in a pale stone colour, in this case) atthe end of the eighteenth / beginning of the nineteenth centuries.

The skirting has been painted as the panelling on most subsequent occasions. Black has beenused recently and was also employed as part of the scheme that related to the insertion of thearched door at the base of the stairs.

Door ArchitraveThe architrave to the door of the rear room on the first floor was painted in the stone colour of thepanelling on the first two occasions that this area was painted (see photomicrographs of QAG/49in Appendix Two).

A dull dark green that was composed of yellow ochre and charcoal black was employed on thethird occasion – within the context of lead-coloured panelling. A deep reddish brown wasapplied 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 See Appendix Seven for some information on the use of dark colours on skirtings and doors.37 This has also been found in No. 25 Brook Street, the Handel House Museum (Baty 2000:1, passim).

14

noting that when the graining was carried over for the second time in the entrance hall thearchitrave was re-grained.

DoorThe door on the first floor landing that leads into the front room was thought to be an earlysurvival. The side facing the stairs was sampled but it appears that it was introduced as part ofthe early nineteenth century refurbishment (see photomicrograph of QAG/69 in Appendix Twoand photograph in Appendix One). Comparison of the cross section with that taken from thearch 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 beenused to prime the wood was found.

In recent years the stair-side of the door has been boarded over and comparison with a crosssection 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 paintbased on titanium dioxide, which suggests that the boarding-over took place at some point fromthe 1960s onwards.

It is understood that other doors to the stairs have been replaced.

Staircase BalustradeA 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 (seeQAG/72). Furthermore, comparison of the samples taken from the newel post with those fromthe panelling on the stairs shows that until relatively recent years the two surfaces were painted inthe same manner (see QAG/72 and /44 in Appendix Two). It was interesting to see that a thinlayer of oil glaze was applied to the early paints on the newel post and balustrade, presumably inorder to make them more wipeable.

The handrail was sampled beside the newel post on the first half landing. Only two coats oftinted varnish could be seen. These are thought to be of twentieth century type.

Ground Floor – Front RoomThe front room on the ground floor has been painted on about thirty-three occasions.

PanellingThe wood was primed in the same manner as the entrance hall and stairs – a thin coat of size-bound 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 bya thin layer of oil glaze, as described above.

The second scheme was slightly darker and displays a greater amount of yellow ochre and carbonblack pigment. This was also given a superficial layer of oil glaze as was the third scheme,

15

which was almost identical.

Two schemes of lead colour can next be seen and these appear to be very similar to the twoemployed on the staircase at the same time.38 It is thought that these two schemes may have beenvisible during the second half of the eighteenth century.39 There were a number of times thatschemes 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 employednext. This colour had been revealed by the rudimentary exposure on the panel bed of thechimneybreast.40 A very similar colour has already been found as the third scheme on a doorarchitrave on the first floor (see above), but it is unlikely that these are contemporary. The use ofthis colour is slightly curious at this time as it is generally understood that there was a tendency toadopt 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 wasapplied towards the end of the century and which can be seen on the newly-exposed panelling inthe front room on the first floor (see photograph in Appendix One). It can be seen that it wasreplaced quite quickly by a stone colour. It is known that the dark green was a short-livedscheme because of the number of ‘extra’ schemes that can be found in this room when comparedto those on the staircase (four compared to two).42

Pale colours, mainly stones and greys, were employed until probably the second quarter of thenineteenth century when the salmon pinks43 that have also been found on the staircase wereintroduced. 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 inAppendix Two). It is also clear that something has been fitted to the lower wall to the right of theR/H window as an area of a dark green can be seen – see photograph in Appendix One andphotomicrograph of QAG/15 in Appendix Two. This probably took place in the 1960s as thedark 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 theother from the NE alcove (QAG/14) suggests that the alcove had not been painted for manyyears. 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 thecorresponding paint on the staircase balustrade, where the more wipeable finish that it presented would havebeen 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 leadcolour 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 centuryhouses, 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 seasonsalmon colour, as it is called, reigns supreme; then sage green succeeds salmon; drab follows sage or slate; andthen all varieties of crimson put out the drabs.” (Hay 1847, 63-4). Small particles of vermilion can be seen in thestratigraphy (see Appendix Four for more details).

16

QAG/2 shows at what stage the alcove was not painted. There are two ways of interpreting thisinformation:

c) That a closet existed from the start and that the interior was painted on every occasionthat the room was painted until the early nineteenth century when it was not repainted forabout sixty years;44 or

d) That a closet did not exist until the early nineteenth century and that it was removedabout sixty years later.

A watercolour of part of the façade and dated 1852 exists (see Appendix One). In this the narrowwindow 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 anyevidence of applied decoration / a painting. There is no indication of either (see photomicrographof QAG/20 in Appendix Two).

The panelling on the partition between this room and the entrance hall dates from the twentiethcentury.

SkirtingIn common with that on the staircase very dark colours were employed on the skirting fascia onthe first ten or so occasions – probably until the end of the eighteenth century. The coloursranged from black through red-brown to yellow-browns (see photomicrographs of QAG/18 inAppendix Two).45 The pigments employed were largely black, yellow ochre, red ochre and redlead.46

Shutters and WindowsA sample taken from the L/H shutter of the R/H window suggests that it is not original (seephotomicrograph of QAG/26 in Appendix Two). Comparison with other elements shows when itwas introduced (see QAG/ 2; /3; /14 & /20) and it is thought that this might have been at the endof the eighteenth century. The first scheme on the shutters was the dark layer found throughoutthe building and on the newly-exposed panelling in the corner of the first floor front room (seephotograph in Appendix One).The sashes are certainly known to have been introduced after 1886.47 However, using theevidence provided by the paint on the external cornice it is now possible to conclude that at leasttwo of them were replaced in the 1950s. The first scheme was in a zinc-based paint that wasapplied 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 ofLondon 1926, 116).45 An example of the sort of colour employed can be seen in the photograph of the recently revealed panelling inthe 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).

17

It appears from evidence provided by the old shutters for the narrow window on the second floorthat those window openings on the first and second floors of the front façade were bricked upwhen the seventh scheme in that room was applied. It is possible that this took place towards theend of the third quarter of the eighteenth century (i.e. ca.1750-75) (see photomicrograph ofQAG/52 in Appendix Two). This bricking-up may relate to the introduction of the L/H shutter ofthe R/H window as the two events seem to have taken place at a similar time. As has beenmentioned, the narrow window on the ground floor was still open in 1852 (see watercolour inAppendix One) and may have existed until the closet in the front room was removed – ca.1860-70.

Ground Floor – Rear RoomAs it had been suggested that the chimneypiece in this room might be a later addition samples ofthe 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 frontroom on the ground floor although there are a number of schemes shared with other rooms (seephotomicrograph of QAG/51 in Appendix Two). Approximately twenty-seven schemes havebeen identified.

The first scheme was a dark lead colour that was applied over a very thin wash of red oxide in asize medium. Comparison with the sample taken from the chimneypiece (QAG/50) shows quiteclearly that it displays the same sequence of coatings and that the initial scheme was also a darklead colour. There is no doubt that the chimneypiece is an original feature and has always beenin this room.

The dark scheme that has been revealed in the front room of the first floor is also evident in thisroom, but here it is the seventh. On the stairs the dark scheme is the ninth and in the front roomof the ground floor it is the eleventh. The suggestion is that this rear room was not decorated asfrequently as the others. It was also noticed that ovolo mouldings were used in the front roomswhile 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 ofthe nineteenth century.

First Floor – Front RoomThis room had been “…transformed in the late 19th or early 20th century into a gentleman’slibrary and picture gallery.”49

Analysis has established that many of the decorative schemes relate to those found on the stairsand in the ground floor front room. A total of twenty schemes were revealed, but the last of theseseems to have been a grained one that survived from the first quarter of the twentieth century.

49 (xxx 2010, 10).

18

Having already taken the paint samples from this room it was discovered that earlier panellinghad been uncovered in the NE corner (see photograph in Appendix One). A return visit wasmade and samples taken of the panelling and skirting fascia in that area.

PanellingBy the time that the initial samples were taken the panelling had been well rubbed-down prior toredecoration (see photographs in Appendix One). However, sufficient evidence remained to beable to identify all the decorative schemes that had been applied (see photomicrograph ofQAG/28 in Appendix Two).

The panelling had originally been primed with red oxide, as was found to be the case in the otherrooms. 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 alsofound 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 beenfound on the panelling in the front room of the ground floor and on the door architrave on thefirst 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 palestone first coat on top of which was a thin dark brown layer.51 It is this ninth scheme that hasbeen revealed in the NE corner (see photograph in Appendix One and photomicrograph ofQAG/68 in Appendix Two). This scheme was much darker than most of the other ones and hasbeen 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 havebeen applied at the end of the eighteenth century.

Lighter stone colours were employed on the next four occasions and then the familiar salmonpink schemes can be seen in cross section.In the second half of the nineteenth century the panelling was grained in imitation of wood (seephotomicrograph of QAG/30 in Appendix Two). This has also been found at the same levelelsewhere 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 ofvarnish. However, the window seat was re-grained and subsequently painted brown (compareQAG/30 and QAG/36). Presumably this was necessary because it would have received more

50 This early sequence is well illustrated in the photomicrograph of QAG/36 in Appendix Two).51 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 becamefashionable from the late 1820s and continued throughout the nineteenth century. This was certainly earlier.

19

wear and tear.

The existing graining was the twentieth scheme to have been applied in the room and probablydates from the first quarter of the twentieth century. It seems likely that it relates to theoccupation of the house by xxxxxxx.

Both the panel beds and the panel surrounds had been painted in the same way whenever theroom was decorated.

SkirtingThe skirting fascia in the SE corner was sampled and only found to display the last fourdecorative schemes that were applied in the room (see photomicrograph of QAG/33). It isthought that this element dates from the last quarter of the nineteenth century. However, the areaof exposed panelling in the NE corner shows how the skirting was painted initially (seephotomicrograph of QAG/67).

A dark brown paint consisting of red ochre and black with a little lead white was applied whenthe skirting was first painted. Similar coloured paints were employed on the subsequent eightoccasions and the exposed scheme indicates the sort of depth of colour used.

DoorsThe stair side of the door leading to the landing was found to date from the early nineteenthcentury refurbishment and it seems likely that the double doors also date from that time.

WindowThe sashes were replaced at the same time as those on the ground floor, probably soon after theSecond World War (see photomicrograph of QAG/37 in Appendix Two). The narrow windowhad been bricked up by 1852 (see watercolour in Appendix One).

Second Floor – Front RoomFollowing a request to carry out an analysis of two of the chimneypieces on the second floor afurther 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 thepanelling 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 thenemployed on the next two occasions. It will be remembered that the same sequence wasencountered on the panelling of the entrance hall and stairs (see above).

Subsequent schemes have some similarities with those in other areas of the house – stonecolours; 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 stone-

52 (email Smyth – Baty 27th May 2010).

20

coloured (see photomicrograph of QAG/39 in Appendix Two). There appear to be about thirteenor fourteen separate schemes, the first of which relates to the scheme before the salmon pinkscheme. This suggests that the chimneypiece might date from the end of the first quarter of thenineteenth century – possibly when other alterations were taking place in the house.

Narrow WindowWhile in the room it was noticed that the panelling that had been used to cover the blocked-upnarrow window was constructed from the original shutters for that window (see photograph inAppendix One). This was thought to be important as it might shed light on the bricking-in of thewindows.

A sample was taken from the reverse of the original shutter and found to display six decorativeschemes (see photomicrograph of QAG/52). These schemes were identical to those found on thepanelling – two stone colours, two lead colours and then a further two stone colours. Thissuggests that the window in this room (and probably the one on the first floor) was bricked up inthe third quarter of the eighteenth century.

Second Floor – Rear RoomA sample was taken from the chimneypiece and also the panelling on the east wall in order tolearn something of the date of its insertion.

The panelling was painted in exactly the same manner as the front room initially. The first twoschemes were in stone colour and then two more in lead colour followed by two more in stonecolour (see photomicrograph of QAG/42 in Appendix Two).

The remaining schemes on the panelling were pale stones and off whites, although the salmonand 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/41in Appendix Two). The same colour was employed on the second occasion and then green wasused – 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 thesalmon scheme both in this room and elsewhere in the building (for example on the panelling ofthe stairs – see QAG/44) it seems that this chimneypiece might have been installed at the end ofthe first quarter of the nineteenth century – probably at the same time as the one in the frontroom. 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 thebuilding has undergone certain changes it may not be realistic to try to recreate one of theeighteenth century schemes. The elements introduced in the first quarter of the nineteenth

21

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 notableexception being the skirting fasciae. On many occasions the whole house has been painteduniformly – or all but. This was very much the pattern for panelled houses of the early eighteenthcentury.

In view of the preponderance of stone-coloured schemes my recommendation would be that sucha colour be adopted throughout the house. A black skirting fascia might be considered in theentrance hall and stairs.

The paint stratigraphy appears to be sound on the surfaces that were sampled. However, it mustbe understood that many areas were wood grained at some stage and will have had several coatsof gloss varnish applied. As paint does not sit happily on varnish it is possible that overlyinglayers might shear off if the surface is knocked. Short of sanding down through the varnish littlecan be done about this.

Patrick Baty BA (Hons) FSA Scot FRSA

12th August 2010Papers and Paints Ltd.4 Park WalkLondon SW10 0AD

APPENDIX ONE

LOCATION OF SAMPLING

Entrance Ha

55

63

56

62

57

58

22

ll: Arched Do

54

or to Base of Stairs

60

23

Panelling Architrave

Staircase

Shutter

64

48

47

46

45 49

44

43

Ground Floor: Front Room

Ground Floor: FrNorth Wall - Centr

2

1

4

24

NW Corner

ont Roome

3

1021

9

5

7

11

26

25

6

8

Ground Floor: Front RoomNorth Wall - Centre

7

11

9

10

5

GrouNorth

6

25

nd Floor: Front RoomWall - NE Corner

8

16

15

17

Exposed 1960s+ scheme

18

26

Ground Floor: Front RoomNE Corner

Ground Floor: Front RoomChimneybreast

20

19

24

14

12

13

Exposure

27

Ground Floor: Rear Room. Chimneybreast

51

34

31

28

First Floor: Front Room

32 29

33

. SE

28

27

30&

Corner

35

Fir

Sec

37

38

3952

29

st Floor: Front R

ond Floor: Front

36

oom. North Wall

Room. East Wall

40

Second Floor: Rear Room. Chimneypiece

41

42

65 & 66

38

30

Exterior: Doorcase

53

73

Exterior: Corni

53

ce

73

31

Second Floor: Front Room – Dark Green

40

32

Queen Anne’s GateT.H. Shepherd 1852

Ground floor:Narrowwindow priorto blocking up

Note alsoGlazing bars

1st & 2nd floors:Narrow windowshave beenblocked up

APPENDIX TWO

PHOTOMICROGRAPHS

Existing

3

2

2x re-varnish

TiO2

Zinc oxide

H

33

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

Graining

rd lead colour

nd stone

1st stone

1st lead colour

Salmon pink

Dark layer

Stone colours

all door here

34

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

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

1st lead colour

1st stone

R

Red oxide

Wood

Graining

Yellowish pink

1st off-white

Yellow ochre

NB No obvious red oxide

Glaze layer

ed lead

Glaze layer

rner

Salmon Pinks

Wood

Vermilion

35

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

Existing

Salmo

Graining

1st lea

Red lead

Glaze layer

Glaze layer

Red oxide Wood

2nd stone

1st stone

Re-varn

Dark

TiO2

Zinc

n pinks

d colour

ishing

layer

36

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

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

1st lead colour

on 1st stone

Zinc

Pale brown

NB No obvious red oxide

Glaze layer

on 2nd stone

Glaze layer

reduced)rail

Wood

TiO2

Existing

Wood

37

Photomicrographs of QAG/44 (x200 & x500 digitally altereStaircase: First Floor Landing. Upper wall panelling

Existing

Graining

3rd lead colour 1st lead colour

1st stone

Red oxide

2nd stone

Re-varnish

Red lead

Yellow ochre

Charcoal black

Split

NBlast layer on first

floor door (/69)

Dark layer

TiO2

Zinc

d)

Wo

od

38

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

GrainingB

Brown

layers

Brown

Wood1st black

Salmon pinks

Black

TiO2

Black

lack

Zinc

Existing

Graining

Salmon pink

Dark layer

Zinc oxide

TiO2

Re-grain

Dark green

Red brown

Split

39

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

1st stone

WoodRed oxide

2nd stone

40

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

Existing

Graining

1st lead colour

Dark layer

Split

1st stone Red oxide

TiO2

Zinc

Wood

Existing

Graining

1

Salmon pink

Existing sashes introduced here

post War

Green 2

Green 1

Zinc

PinkCloset removed here?

Closet formed here?

41

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

Dark layer

Dark green

st stone

2 x lead

Existing shutters introduced here

Split

colours

42

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

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

1st lead colour

2nd stone

3rd stone

1st stone

Wood

Red oxide

Dark green

Wood

2nd lead colour

Yellow ochre

Carbon black

Glaze layer

Glaze layer

3rd stone

indow

Lead colour

2 x lead colours

Red oxide

1st stone

Green 2

Existing

Dark g

1st lead

Dark

S

Green 1

Existing sashes introduced herepost War

Zinc

43

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

Black

reen

colour

Vermilion

layer

almon pink

Existing shutters introduced here

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

Gro

Existing

Wood

Green 2TiO2

& ZnO

Zinc

S

Green 2TiO2

44

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

& ZnO Zinc

Green 1 Graining

Dark layer

almon pink

45

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

B

Red br

Yellow brown

Salmon pink

Zinc

Green 1

GreTi

& Z

Existing sashes introduced herepost War

Existing

en 2O2

nO

lack

own

46

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

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

Yellow brown

1st brown

Red brown

Red oxideon wood

2nd stone

1st stone

Red oxide

Wood

3rd stone

Existing

G

D

1s

Ex

Green 2TiO2

47

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

& ZnO

reen 1

Zinc

ark green

t lead colour

Darklayer

Split

2nd lead colour

Existing sashes introduced here

post War

isting shutters introduced here

48

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

Dark green

2 x lead colours

Dark layer

2 stone colours

Existing shutters introduced here

49

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

Existing

Zinc

Graining

Dark layer

Sa

Existing sashes intro

post War

Green 2TiO2

& ZnO

lmon pinks

duced here

Split

Existing

Z

W

Green 2TiO2 &

50

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

ZnO

inc

Zinc

oodPink primer(lead-based)

51

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

Existing

Lead colour

Wood

Dark layer

Salmon pinks

Split

Red oxide

Lead colour

Existing

Salmon pinks

Grou

Dark layer

Split

Wood

Lead colour

52

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

Red oxide

Dark layer

Dark green

Lead colour

1st stone

2nd stone

Exposed scheme (see QAG/68)

Salmon pink

Graining(later layers

abraded)

53

Photomicrographs of QAG/28 (x200 & x500 digitally enlFirst Floor: Front Room. S wall. SE corner. Panel bed above

Split

Wood

1st stone

Red lead

arged)chair rail

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

Existing

graining

Graining

Dark green

Lead colour

1st stone

2nd stone

Dark layer

Salmon pinks

Re-varnish

Existing graining

Graining

Wood

54

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

Graining

Gr

Existing

55

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

Graining

aining

Lead colour

Dark green

2nd stone

Lead colour

Dark green

2nd stone

Red oxide

1st stone

Wood

Salmon pinks

Dark layerExposed scheme (see QAG/68)

56

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

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

Existing

TiO2

&ZnO

2nd stone

Red oxide

1st lead colour

Z

ail

2nd lead colour

1st stone

Wood

inc

TiO2

Existing

Zinc

Salmon pink

Green

installed here

57

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

1st lead colour

1st stone

Chimneypiece

Split

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

13th Existing

Wood

Existing

2nd lead colour

Glaze layer

1st lead colour

9th TiO2

6th -Zinc

1st

2nd

3rd4th

5th

8th zinc

10th

7 h

58

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

2nd stone1st stone

Red oxide

t

Wood

59

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

Existing

Zinc

1st lead colour

2nd stone

Red oxide

1st stone

TiO2

Salmon

Green

Stone colours

Wood

Existing

Graining

TiO2

Zinc

60

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

Graining

1st stone

Wood Red

Green

oxide

61

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

Existing

Woo

TiO2

Dirt

TiO2 &

Zinc

d

ZnO

62

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

Existing

Zinc

ZnO

TiO2

ace

Split

TiO2

&

Grained

Grained Split

over)

Zinc

layers

TiO2

1st off-white

Existing TiO2

(later boarded

63

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

Grained

1st off-white

Wood NB no obviou

Salmon pinks

Compare with /44to see missing

s red oxide

64

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

Grained

Salm

1st lead colour

3r

2nd lead c

1st lead colour

Glaze layer

2nd stone col

Wood

1st stone colo

Glaze layer

3rd lead co

12nd stone colour

Existing

TiO2

Grained

on pinks

d lead colour

lour

st stone colour

olour

our

ur

1st stone

Split

Yellow ochre

Olive green

Lead colour

scheme

stone

stone

stone

2nd stone

stone

65

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

Wood

Red

Existing(exposed)

oxi

de

66

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

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

1st pale stoneDirt layer

Wood

Red oxide

1st scheme

Upper layers

Photomicrographs of QAG/65 Exterior: Timber Cornice

TiO2

Zinc

TiO2 + ZnO

WWII

Poormaintenanceand dirt +WW2

Dirt

67

‘Scab’ of paint from timber cornice

1st scheme

Dark layer

Originalundercoat

Red oxide

68

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

Wood

Later paint

Red oxide

Originalundercoat

69

APPENDIX THREE

CROSS SECTIONS MADE

Cross sections in bold have been photographed and appear in Appendix Two.

Ground Floor – Front RoomQAG/1 Window wall. R/H stile of panel to LHS of L/H window 30cm above chair railQAG/2 Window wall. Panel bed to LHS of L/H window 30cm above chair railQAG/3 Window wall. R/H panel moulding to LHS of L/H window 30cm above chair railQAG/4 Window wall. Chair rail to LHS of L/H windowQAG/5 Window wall. Panel between windows. Chair rail 33cm from R/H sideQAG/6 Window wall. Panel between windows. Chair rail 14cm from L/H sideQAG/7 Window wall. Rail below chair rail. 53cm from LHSQAG/8 Window wall. Lower panel below chair rail. 53cm from LHSQAG/9 Window wall. Upper wall. Rail above chair rail. 53cm from LHSQAG/10 Window wall. Upper wall. Panel bed. 53cm from LHSQAG/11 Window wall. Upper wall. Panel bed. 17cm from LHSQAG/12 E wall. NE corner. Upper wall. Rail above chair rail 38cm from RHSQAG/13 E wall. NE corner. Chair rail 38cm from RHSQAG/14 E wall. NE corner. Upper wall. Panel bed 38cm from RHSQAG/15 Window wall. Lower wall to RHS of R/H window. Panel bed. Exposed green

previously covered overQAG/16 Window wall. Lower wall to RHS of R/H window. Rail below chair rail.

Exposed green previously covered overQAG/17 Window wall. Lower wall to RHS of R/H window. Panel bed to RHS of exposed

greenQAG/18 Window wall. Skirting fascia to RHS of RH windowQAG/19 Chimneybreast. Panel moulding lower LHSQAG/20 Chimneybreast. Panel bed lower LHSQAG/21 R/H window. L/H shutter. Inner face (aged paint)QAG/22 Blockboard panelling from wall adjacent to Entrance HallQAG/23 Door. Architrave. RHSQAG/24 Bead on LHS of chimneybreast. 68cm above chair railQAG/25 RH window. Lower sash – bottom railQAG/26 RH window. LH shutter – outer face

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

70

APPENDIX THREE (continued)

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

StaircaseQAG/43 1st Floor Landing. Upper wall panelling. 2nd stile from NW cornerQAG/44 1st Floor Landing. Upper wall panelling. 2nd panel bed from NW cornerQAG/45 1st Floor Landing. Chair railQAG/46 1st Floor Landing. Rail on lower wall below chair railQAG/47 1st Floor Landing. Lower wall. Panel bedQAG/48 1st Floor Landing. Skirting fasciaQAG/49 1st Floor Landing. Door architrave to rear room RHSQAG/64 1st half landing. R/H shutter. Outer face. Bottom R/H stileQAG/69 1st Floor Landing. Outer face of door to front room. Hinge styleQAG/70 Staircase balustrade. 4th baluster from 1st half landingQAG/71 Staircase handrail. By newel post on 1st half landingQAG/72 Staircase. Newel post on 1st half landing

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

71

APPENDIX THREE (continued)

Second Floor – Front RoomQAG/39 Neo-classical chimneypiece. Mantel LHSQAG/40 East wall. SE corner. Upper wall. Rail above chair railQAG/52 NE corner. Old narrow shutters nailed together to fill old window apertureQAG/74 East wall. NE corner. Exposed panelling – upper wall

Second Floor – Rear RoomQAG/41 Chimneypiece. Mantel RHSQAG/42 Wall to RHS of chimneypiece

ExteriorQAG/38 First Floor front. Centre window. Top sash. Outside faceQAG/53 Doorcase. LHS upper fasciaQAG/65 Wooden cornice at frontQAG/66 Wooden cornice at frontQAG/73 Doorcase. Swag: bottom L/H

72

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 usedwithout 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 anygreat quantity, but since then other whites have been introduced which have practicallysuperseded 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 whitesused in this country are zinc oxide, lithopone, antimony and titanium".53

Zinc OxideZinc oxide is a bright white pigment that is non-poisonous, and is not discoloured bysulphurous fumes. These properties led to its consideration as a replacement for white leadtowards the end of the nineteenth century. One of the earliest references to it appears in abook of specifications published in 1859.54 In this instance it was recommended in roomswith gaslights where the "clearness and brilliancy" of the white was to be preserved. Its chiefdisadvantage is the hardening effect it has on oil, which causes it to produce a hard non-elastic and brittle paint film. This may lead to premature breakdown of the paint on externalsurfaces by cracking or chalking unless corrected. In mixture with white lead it produces avery good paint. The zinc hardens the lead and helps it to maintain colour in a smokyatmosphere, while the lead moderates any hardening action of the zinc and so preventsbrittleness. Paints containing such a blend of lead white and zinc oxide were used in the firstquarter of the twentieth century.

The use of zinc oxide appears to have reached its peak in the second decade of the twentiethcentury. 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 fromFrance, Belgium, Holland, and the United States of America, but since that time severalfactories have been started in England, and the present produce has already reached an outputalmost sufficient to fill all home requirements.55

Its appearance in paint stratigraphy usually indicates the period ca.1890-1960.

Titanium DioxideA pigment known as titanium white, which was a combination of titanium oxide and bariumsulphate was introduced into Britain in 1921, and this rapidly became established as one ofthe staple pigments for paint manufacture. Towards the close of 1927, however, as a result oflong experience and research, the difficulties of preparing a satisfactory pigment from the

53 (Hurst 1949, 61).54 (Donaldson 1859, xxi).55 (Jennings 1921, 1:184-185).

73

APPENDIX FOUR (continued)

pure oxide were finally overcome, and a pigment of brilliant whiteness and intense opacitywas introduced containing approximately 98 per cent titanium oxide. The outstandingqualities of this were soon recognised, and by the late 1940s it had largely superseded theoriginal type of pigment for many purposes, although the composite pigment was stillmanufactured and used for a while. It has been the prime white pigment in house paints forthe last forty years.

Red LeadJohn 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 lithargebeing afterward ground to a powder in a mill is afterward conveyed into a hot furnace, forthat purpose, where 'tis continually kept stirring with an iron rake, till it has attained tothe colour of a fine, pale red.56

This pigment had a very mixed reputation, and was often used more for its drying properties, thanits orange-red colour, which was liable to turn black in oil. Whittock said, however, that it keptits 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 aground for mahogany graining.58

As well as being used in the manufacture of drying oils, this pigment came to replace Spanishbrown or red oxide as a priming colour. Its quick drying nature was of considerable use at a timewhen a coat of oil paint could take several days to dry, and the decoration of a room, perhaps, aweek. The addition of red lead to the undercoats would ensure that these would be ready toreceive the finish coat as soon as possible. One consequence of this characteristic was that it wassomewhat 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 andbring it into a working condition again.60

On internal surfaces the pigment was often mixed with size and used to kill knots, prior topainting.

Towards the end of the nineteenth century primers based on red lead dispersed in linseed oilbegan to be used on structural steelwork. Their use continued until the late twentieth centurywhen the toxic nature of red lead became a concern.

56 (Smith 1687, 21).57 (Whittock 1827, 10).58 (Vanherman 1829, 29).59 (Tingry 1830, 106).60 (Vanherman 1829, 29).

74

APPENDIX FOUR (continued)

Yellow Ochre / Yellow Iron OxideIn common with the umbers, the earth pigments designated ochres (or oxides) saw constant usein house-painting, not only were they readily obtainable, but they encompassed a large range ofhues, 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 sandand stones which they contain being heavier than themselves, subside. The water, turbidwith the ochre, is decanted, by making it pass into a trough lower than the vessel in whichit was washed; when the ochre has subsided the clear water is drawn off. The ochre isthen 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 frombeyond the Seas: the one is light Yellow, much like the colour of Wheat straw; the otheris somewhat of a deeper colour.62

The second edition clarified this, by referring to the first as "Plain-Oaker" most of which wasfound in the Shotover Hills near Oxford,63 and the other as "Spruce-Oaker".64 The formerdisplayed 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 forfilling imperfections in the body work of carriages, presumably a greater capacity for dryingrendered it useful for this purpose.66 This facility for drying could relate to the confusionmentioned earlier under Umber, where Tingry recorded the use of the name Brown ochre as asynonym 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 occasionallyused for more delicate processes.68

61 (Tingry 1830, 74).62 (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).

75

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, withoccasionally a little calcareous matter and magnesia, and are found between strata of rockand sand. Ochre varies in...price from 1d. to 1s. per lb.69

Red Ochres / Red Iron OxidesRed ochres came in many different forms, and provided a number of reds for the house-painterduring the period under review. Spanish brown, Venetian red, and Indian red, when in theirnatural state, were pigments used as they were found, while light red was made by calciningyellow ochre, and English red was one of a large number of artificial red oxides produced fromthe by-products of certain industrial processes. These latter appeared, largely, as a result of theIndustrial 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 sandand stones which they contain being heavier than themselves, subside. The water, turbidwith the ochre, is decanted, by making it pass into a trough lower than the vessel in whichit was washed; when the ochre has subsided the clear water is drawn off. The ochre isthen 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 deepbright colour, although inclined to be gritty.71 He went on to say that it was the only colour usedin priming woodwork, not least for its cheapness. Tingry mentioned the west of England72 asbeing the more likely source of this pigment,73 and Robert Dossie suggested that it was probablybrought from abroad originally, at a time when it would have been much finer than now "dug upin several parts of England". He confirmed that it was mainly used as a primer for coarse workby 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 ared ochre imported from England, which he called "rouge brun", or "brun-rouge

69 (Hay 1847, 108).70 (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).

76

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 ofthe 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 ironoxides, the Frenchman Jean Watin clearly states that Prussian red was "une terre calcinéedonnant 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 somethingelse.

In a similar fashion, Venetian red was brought from Venice; but it was also produced inFrance, Germany, and many other places, according to Tingry.80 Both Peter Nicholson, andWhittock, lifting the words from Dossie, described it as being a native pigment, inclining tothe scarlet, and being used in the imitation of mahogany.81 It was grouped with Spanishbrown 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 greenvitriol] 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 beenimported from the East Indies, but since the manufacture of the artificial variety from caputmortuum,84 was no longer imported.85 Field, writing over fifty years later, described it as apurple-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 tothe Persian ochre which Tingry presumed came from Persia, and called a "a dear colour" usedmainly 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 ofsulphate of iron or copperas, is another red used by the house-painter. It produces thechocolate paint so much in use for the woodwork of kitchens, servant's halls &c.. It is

APPENDIX FOUR (continued)

76 (Watin 1778, 23).77 (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).

77

cheap in price, and very durable.88

Charcoal BlackAccording 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 wascredited with a very similar tone, and bearing in mind the European origins of this work, it ismore 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, andeven fewer give an indication of its usage. Nicholson in his The Mechanic's Companion, of1825, mentioned it being used in small amounts to brighten up the last two coats of a surfacebeing 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 ofthe trade, the addition of a blue that held a key place on the house-painter's palette seems morelikely in everyday work, than a black reserved for this purpose alone.91 In finer work, one mayexpect a charcoal black to have been used in the way that Nicholson described, and the author hasencountered it in at least one late eighteenth century house.92

Carbon BlackLamp black was the soot collected after burning the resinous parts of fir-trees. It came mostlyfrom Sweden and Norway, although it was manufactured on a large scale in Germany at thebeginning of the nineteenth century.93 John Smith referred to its being "made up in small boxesand 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 finepigment, that would serve most needs, without grinding, if mixed up well with linseed-oil. Ifused in this manner, however, the greasiness would retard its drying time, unless a drying agentwere added.95

Blacks, of various forms, were often added to white paint in order to combat the inherentyellowness of a lead white and linseed oil paint.

APPENDIX FOUR (continued)

88 (Hay 1847, 113). For an account of its use on exteriors see: (Baty 1992, 44-47).89 (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 thewhite painted woodwork in many of the rooms.93 (Tingry 1804, 347).94 (Smith 1687, 16-17).95 (Pocket 1825, 89).

78

VermilionThe pigment known as Vermilion, is a bright scarlet pigment produced by combining sulphur andmercury, the result being red mercuric sulphide. Cinnabar is the natural form, which was lesscommon, but often preferred, because of the tendency of the early colour-shops to adulterate theartificial variety with red lead.

There were two methods of producing this pigment, the one known as Dry-Process, and the otheras Wet-Process. The Chinese are believed to have invented the dry-process, although Amsterdambecame the principal centre for its manufacture in Europe in the early seventeenth century. It isstill available in mainland China, and the author has recently obtained a quantity fromGuangdong province.

When viewed under the microscope, the particles of dry-process vermilion are irregular, andclearly made by pulverising lumps. The larger particles tend to be elongated, reflecting itscolumnar structure.

By the end of the seventeenth century, Gottfried Schulz, a German, had discovered an easier, andless expensive method of manufacturing the pigment. This was done by heating the blackmercuric sulphide in a solution of ammonium or potassium sulphide. It soon became thefavourite 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 achemically precipitated product.96

Its price in the late 1840s varied from three shillings to six shillings per pound.97 As abenchmark, the ubiquitous yellow ochre varied from 1d. to one shilling per pound.98

96 (Gettens et al 1993, 159-165).97 (Hay 1847, 110-12).98 (Ibid. 108).

79

APPENDIX FIVE

GRAINING

The imitation in paint of materials usually more expensive, or exotic, is thought to have beencarried 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 VIof Scotland, (1567-1603).99

The growing use of softwood for the building and internal cladding of houses in the lateseventeenth century, led to an increased demand for the painted imitation of woods in thiscountry. In his second edition, Smith referred to the imitation of "Olive Wood" and "WalnutTree", and described them being veined over with a darker pigment.100

Ian Bristow's commentary on the seventeenth century decoration at Dyrham Park, inGloucestershire, 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 firstsight, such names might be understood to imply merely the colour and tone of these woods, butin this early period, either the colour or the imitation of a wood could be indicated,102 and it isusually 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 thataccompanied three samples of graining prepared for a client:

B, ye properest for a Bedchamber, if well performed (withe the pencil), and not tou muchtwithe a brushe as is the common way, it will requier moor skill to paynes & will coste themoor, it represents a Light wall-nut tree color as I have seen some cabinets, and is properfor Antirooms & Bedchambers, the other A is a dark wallnut tree & will require a glosseyvarnishe 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 inspots ,) and generally speaking ye use at present is a flate color that of torteschall103

[italics mine].104

99 (Papworth 1857-58, 9).100 (Smith 1687, 52).101 (Bristow 1979, 141). Prince wood, or prince's wood, is a dark-coloured and light-veined timber produced by twoWest 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 inthe 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).

80

APPENDIX FIVE (continued)

Not only could wood be represented in light and dark forms, but the finish could also vary inlevels 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 bothof these woods was probably rather old-fashioned, being replaced by wainscot (or oak), andmahogany, 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 newideas. His use of graining to imitate light oak or satinwood on the dado and skirting of hisDining 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 doubta reflection of both the book's continental origins, and the fact that the process had not yetbecome fashionable again. In England, however, during the next ten years, a rekindled interest inthe 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 fromthe novelty of their being grained to imitate wainscot, done perhaps, about the year 1810when a new front was given to the building. From some letters in my possession I findthat 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 ImprovedBuilders' 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 woodsmentioned by Smith, deleting olive wood, and adding mahogany and wainscot110 to the walnutalready 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] inthe art of imitating the grain and colour of various fancy woods and marbles, and thefacility and consequent cheapness of this formerly expensive work, has brought it intogeneral use; and there are few respectable houses erected, where the talent of thedecorative painter is not called into action,

APPENDIX FIVE (continued)

105 (ibid., 5).106 (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).

81

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 fifteenyears.113

One of the features of this new trend was the extent to which some house-painters developed theart of imitating the natural product. Whereas the late seventeenth century representations ofwoodgrain are almost theatrical in their handling, in that they only read as wood from adistance,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 inhis The Decorative Painters' and Glaziers' Guide, gave an indication of where such woods mightbe used. Writing some twenty years later, Hay showed how this had changed by the end of theperiod:

[Of Oak, or Wainscot]1827Oak 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. Thedecorative painter, therefore, who considers propriety, will generally recommend theimitation of oak for street doors, shutters, &c..116

1847Imitation oak has been greatly used in halls, staircases, libraries, and dining-rooms, and itwill 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 givenfor this change being, the:

additional expense to the painter's bill, and the short-lived beauty they exhibit; for beinggenerally executed in water colours, and then varnished, should this covering crack andchip, the work will consequently look shabby, ragged, and mean.119

APPENDIX FIVE (continued)

112 (Whittock 1827, 20).113 (ibid., 46).114 See the walnut graining, carried out by Sergeant Painter Robert Streater, on the panelling of Apartment 7 atHampton 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.).

82

He added that:

Graining, like diamonds in portrait painting, should be sparingly employed for its scarcityconstitutes in a great measure its value.120

The process of graining was, inevitably, labour intensive. Papworth, relying heavily on Hay'sdescription,121 said that:

in the first instance [it is] the same as for ordinary painted work, but it requires more carein obliterating the marks of the brush. The last coat, instead of being flatted, is composedof equal portions of oil and spirits of turpentine, and is brought up to the colo[u]rcharacteristic of the wood to be imitated.122

When this ground-work was quite dry, a thick layer of a semi-transparent paint was prepared, inthe colour of the wood to be imitated. This was laid smoothly over the ground-work, after whicha graining comb,123 made of steel, ivory, horn, or wood, was:

drawn through this composition, by which it is separated upon the ground-work intominute 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 oilor water colour. Two or three coats of an oil varnish based on a resin such as copal would thenbe applied.

120 (ibid., 41).121 (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'sThe Decorative Painters', and Glaziers' Guide. Tingry tells us that they were obtained at the comb-makers inLondon (Tingry 1830, 282).124 (Hay 1847, 138).

83

APPENDIX SIX

A CONTEMPORARY ACCOUNT OF HOUSE PAINTING COLOURS AND PRICES

The following is taken from William Salmon's Palladio Londinensis, which was first publishedin London in 1734. For nearly forty years (until 1773 when it was superseded by William Pain'spublications) this remained a standard builders' manual, and in that time it saw more editionsthan 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 premiseswere half a mile away from 36 Craven Street.126 In 1741, Elizabeth Emerton advertised that shewas continuing the business of her late husband. By 1744, however, Alexander's brother Josephhad taken over the firm, which was still trading under the name Emerton and Manby a number ofyears later.127

p.55Sect. VII.

of PAINTERS Work

PAINTERS Work is measured in the same manner as the Joiners, only with this difference, thatinstead of accounting the Doors and Window-Shutters Work and half, they have double Work, asbeing painted on both sides; and they also measure all Edges, &c. where the Brush goes.

1 Sash-Frames, Sash-Lights, Window-lights, and casements, are done at per Piece.2 Modillion, and other Cornice, at per Foot running Measure.3 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.4 Inside Painting, old Work, of common Colours, at 4d per Yard; but of extraordinary

Colours, as5 Olive Colours, at 8d. per Yard.6 Prussian blue, at 8d. per Yard.7 Greens, at 12d. per Yard.8 Sash-Frames, at 12d. each.9 Sash-Lights, at 1d. each.10 Window-Lights and Casements, at 3d. each.11 Iron bars, at 1d. each, or more if very large.

125 (Harris 1990, 404).126 The business was well known at the time and evidence has been found for paint from Joseph Emerton havingbeen 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).

84

APPENDIX SIX (continued)

12 Modillion Cornice, from 6d. to 12d. per Foot running.13 Common outside Cornice 2d. per Foot running.

NB All carving in Rooms and out-side Frontispieces to Doors, &c. are so various, that theymust 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 forUse and Ornament, the doing of which well and often being the surest way of preserving all therest, instances of which may be seen in several Buildings, about London, where the Misfortunesof the Builders have prevented them from finishing their Works, it may be observed that theSash-Frames, Sashes, Window-Shutters, Doors and Door-Cases, for want of Painting, in a veryfew Years, are so much decayed, that were those Buildings to be made tenantable, most of theoutside 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 topenetrate thro' it as to the ornamental Part, there is no gentleman but must allow that there is agreat difference between a clean painted Room, and one that hath not been painted, or where thePainting is foul.

I shall be the more particular under this Head, Of Colours. Painters Work being veryexpensive, and this being the only part in Building wherein a Gentleman can be assistingeither by himself or Servants, it being almost impossible for any Gentleman to do eitherMasons, Bricklayers, Carpenters, or Smiths Works; whereas it is well known and dailyexperienced since the Advertisement of ALEXANDER EMERTON, that several Noblemenand Gentlemen have by themselves and Servants painted whole Houses without theAssistance or Direction of a Painter, which when examined by the best Judges could not bedistinguished from the Work of a professed Painter.

And that which conduces most to this Practice is the vast Disproportion between the Priceswhich Painters charge for their Work, and the Expence which Gentlemen are at in thisMethod of Painting, which at the utmost doth not amount to one fourth Part of the Painter'sPrice, to prove which I shall proceed to the Prices of Colours, and likewise shew whatNumber 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 willpaint 20 square Yards.

Second Primer ground in Oil, at 36s per 112lb or 4d per lb. One Pound of which will paint 12square Yards.

85

APPENDIX SIX (continued)

Best White Lead ground in Oil, at 36s per 112lb or 4d per lb. One Pound of which, with twoPennyworth of Oil, will paint 8 square Yards; which is three Farthings per Yard, for whichPainters 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 Paintersusually 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 whichPainters 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 Variants on this were used for most of the eighteenth century.129 A number of rooms in the house were painted with this colour in the early nineteenth century.

86

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 whichPainters 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 charge12d 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, andsold by ALEXANDER EMERTON, Colourman, at the Bell over against Arundel-street nearSt Clement's Church in the Strand, London. He likewise gives printed Directions for theusing 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 (Baty1998:3, 23).

87

APPENDIX SEVEN

SOME REFERENCES TO DARK BROWN DOORS AND SKIRTINGS

1) Dr. Steven Parissien. RICS Diploma in Building Conservation. Module 11. "The HistoricalDevelopment 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 forskirtings and for doors; it was not only cheap and practical - scuffing showed far less on a dark thanon a light background - but also aesthetically pleasing, terminating the light-coloured wall above ina 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 amahogany 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 ChristopherHussey 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 brownwainscots."

b) p.131It is especially interesting, therefore, that while Chambers may have employed white skirtingsthroughout the grand rooms in the Strand Block at Somerset House in 1780, technical investigationhas shown that in the humbler, more everyday apartments belonging to the Secretary of the Societyof Antiquaries and Housekeeper of the Royal Societya "chocolate" skirting was employed in roomswhich were otherwise simply painted stone colour (off-white) and hung with wallpaper. Thissuggests, perhaps, that in more ordinary homes the brown skirting persisted well towards the end ofthe eighteenth century.

c) p.132Thus at Erddig, DENBIGHSHIRE (now CLWYD), a door was to be painted chocolate colour in1772 [..The colour of the Paint a dead white as to the skirting board, and shutters, but the door of achocolate colour..]; while, probably two or three years earlier [1774-75], James Adam directed thatthe deal doors of the Dressing Room at Nostell Priory were to be painted mahogany colour.

----------------

88

APPENDIX SEVEN (continued)

4) Tasker, John. Bill for redecoration and building work carried out for John Tharp at 20 PortmanSquare, London (Home House). 1797. (Document lodged in the Cambridge Record Office).

p.16ANTE 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.

BlacksLampblack or bone black was used on skirting fascias, as was dark brown. Sometimes the areaaround door knobs was similarly painted for the same reason. This use declined after about 1800,and by 1815 was very old-fashioned.

--------------------

89

APPENDIX SEVEN (continued)

EXAMPLES OF BROWN PAINTED SKIRTING FASCIÆ AND DOORSca.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) werebrown.

-----------------

2) Patrick Baty. Greenbank House, Clarkston, Glasgow. A Brief Report Following anExamination of the Painted Surfaces in the Entrance Hall and Dining Room. 4th July 1999.

(Greenbank House was built between 1764 and 1765.)

Entrance HallThe skirting was originally a dark red brown.

--------------------

3) Catherine Hassall. Castletown Cox, [Co. Kilkenny, Ireland.] Initial Investigations on theDecorations. 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 inbrown. Ref. RP.D.71.1)

------------------

4) Patrick Baty. An Analysis of the First Scheme in the Rooms on the Ground, First, and SecondFloors of 50 North Great George's Street, Dublin. 25th August 1993.(House built ca.1785.)

Inner HallSkirting fascia: sample IH/4A Dark brown

Dining RoomSkirting: sample GD/5 Red-brown

90

APPENDIX SEVEN (continued)

Drawing RoomSkirting fascia: sample 1D/7A Red-brown

Rear BedroomSkirting: sample 2BR/1 Brown

91

APPENDIX SEVEN (continued)

ILLUSTRATIONS THAT INDICATE BROWN DOORS OR SKIRTINGSca.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.107on 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 RoyalResidences. 1819. Vol II, pl. facing p.33 (original watercolour by J. Stephanoff in Royal Librarydrawings, No. 22150)

11) Mary Ellen Best, Dining Room at Langton Hall. ca.1832-34.

92

APPENDIX EIGHT

SAMPLE ANALYSIS TECHNIQUES

Sample Preparation Procedures

PigmentsSamples 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 at500x and 1000x magnifications under both transmitted, and plane polarized light.

The pigments were identified using polarized light microscopy (PLM) techniques which allowsidentification of different pigment particles based on the characteristics of particle shape, colour,refractive index, and optical properties. In certain instances, where further confirmation wasrequired, energy-dispersive X-ray analysis (EDX), using the scanning electron microscope, wascarried out.

Cross SectionsSamples of finish coatings and substrates were removed from representative surfaces in therooms being examined with a scalpel, craft knife or dental drill. Depending on the material, thesamples varied in size from 5mm to 10mm. The samples were divided before casting, leaving aportion of the sample available for future testing. Samples were cast in small cubes in siliconrubber moulds using clear casting polyester resin (Alec Tiranti Ltd, Reading, Berks.). The resinwas allowed to cure for 24 hours at room temperature and under ambient light. The cubes werethen cut in half to expose the cross sections, and wet polished with 240, 400, 600 and 1200 gradewet-and-dry papers.

The cross section samples were examined under visible light using a Biolam metallurgicalmicroscope at 200x and 500x magnifications. Those that appeared to have the full sequence oflayers, i.e. that displayed an intact sequence from the substrate through to the final scheme, wereexamined particularly closely. These intact samples were compared with those samples that weredistorted or unclear, and with those that were incomplete. The combined information hasprovided the details in this report.

The cross sections were photographed digitally using a Nikon Coolpix 5000 camera. The bestphotomicrographs for each element have been included with this report. Photographs were takenat 200x and 500x. A number of the photomicrographs have been digitally enlarged or reduced tofit the page.

93

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 ArchitecturalConservation, March 1995:1.

________. "To Scrape or Not to Scrape ?" Traditional Paint News, Vol 1 No 2 October1996:2 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 UniversityPress, 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 PreservationTechnology (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, CambridgeUniversity Press, 1990.

Hay, D.R.. The Laws of Harmonious Colouring Adapted to Interior Decorations, withObservations on the Practice of House Painting. 6th edn. Edinburgh and London. WilliamBlackwood and Sons, 1847.

Holloway, J.G.E.. The Modern Painter and Decorator. 3 vols. Caxton Publishing Company Ltd.

94

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 publicationNo 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: QueenAnne’s Gate area. 1926. 'No. 19 Queen Anne's Gate', 116-117.

Nicholson, Peter. The New Practical Builder. Appended is The Practical Builder's PerpetualPrice Book. 1823.

Pain, William, & James. British Palladio. 1786.

Papworth, Wyatt. "An Attempt to Determine the Periods in England, when Fir, Deal & HousePainting 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 ofestimating 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.

95

Vanherman, T.H. Every Man his own House-Painter and Colourman. 1829. (Originallypublished 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 ofthe 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 anExamination of the Perimeter Railings and Two Windows from the King Charles and the QueenAnne 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 SchemeFollowing an Examination of the Paint on Various Surfaces." 28th February 1998 (1).

________. "The Benjamin Franklin House, 36 Craven Street, London WC2. A Report on theEarly Painted Schemes Following an Examination of the Paint on Various Surfaces." 12th July1998 (2).

________. "Newhailes House, East Lothian. A Report on the Decorative Schemes Following anExamination 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).

96

________. "Wx House, Wiltshire. A Report on the Decoration Following an Examination of thePainted Surfaces in Various Areas." 26th December 2000 (3).

________. "56 & 58 Artillery Lane, Spitalfields. A Report on the Decorative SchemesFollowing 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 ofthe External Surfaces on the Front Façade." 12th January 2008.

Winde, William to Lady Mary Bridgeman. Letter dated 3rd August 1700. (Staffs CRO, Earl ofBradford's Archives, 18/4). Quoted in Beard 1981.