Journal of early southern decorative arts [serial]

i\')i:sn'\

JOURNAL
of

EARLY SOUTHERN
DECORATIVE ARTS

May, 1986

Volume XII, Number 1

The Museum of Early Southern

Decorative Arts

MESDA ANNUAL MEMBERSHIPS

Benefactor *

Patron $500 and up

Sustaining $200 to $499

Contributing $100 to $199**

Corporate or Foundation $100 and up

Active $ 25 to $ 99

Joint $ 20

Individual $ 15***

*Persons who contribute valuable antiquities arc considered Benefactors of MESDA. Once
named a Benefactor, a person remains such for life and enjoys all the privileges of a
Member of MESDA.

* *A contribution of $100.00 or more entitles the member to bring guests to the museum

free of charge.

* * *Non-profit Institutions may subscribe to iht Journal on\y , receiving two issues per

annum at the rate of $8.00.

Overseas members please add $5.00 for airmail postage.

PRIVILEGES

Members of the Museum of Early Southern Decorative Arts receive the Journa/ twice
yearly in May and November, as well as the MESDA newsletter, the Luminary, which
is published in February and August. Other privileges include advance notification of
the classes and programs and lectures offered by the Museum, an Annual Member's
Weekend with reports from the MESDA Research staff, a 10% discount on bookstore
purchases, and free admission to the Museum.

The Museum of Early Southern Decorative Arts is owned and operated by Old Salem, Inc.,
the non-profit corporation that is responsible for the restoration and operation of Old SaJem, Moravian
Congregation Town founded in 1766. MESDA is an educational institution with the established
purpose of collecting, preserving, documenting and tesearching representative examples of southern
decorative arts and craftsmanship from the 1600s to 1820. The Museum exhibits its collection for
public intetest and study.

For further information, please write to MESDA, Box 10310, Salem Station, Winston-Salem,
North Carolina 27108. Telephone (919) 722-6148.

JOURNAL
of

EARLY SOUTHERN

DECORATIVE ARTS

May, 1986

Volume XII, Number 1

Published twice yearly in

May and November by

The Museum of Early Southern Decorative Arts

Copyright © 1986 Old Salem, Inc.
Winston-Salcm, North Carolina 27108

Printed by Hall Printing Company
High Point, North Carolina

Contents

Analysis of an Enigma 1

James R. and Marilyn S. Melchor

A Problem of Identification:

Philadelphia and Baltimore Furniture Styles
in the Eighteenth Century 21

Luke Beckerdite

111

Figure 1. Clothes press, walnut and yellow pine, eastern Virginia. 1690-1710.
HOA: 57'k". WOA: 6OV4". DOA: 20". MESDA accession 2024-1.

Editor's Note: The study of material culture, in whatever form it
may occur, calls for the application of research methodology which may
cross the boundaries of several disciplines, including historiography,
anthropology, and archaeology. The decorative arts historian may
fervently wish for supporting pnmary documentation and the existence
of parallel traditions in style and technology in order to establish the
origin of an object, but such obvious indices may be either fragmentary
or even non-existent. In such instances, the object itself becomes the
pnmary document. How well objects are used as documents depends
heavily upon the perception and intuition of those who attempt to
interpret the source and meaning of any unique object, using only the
physical attributes of the object itself as a guide. The article which
follows demonstrates the application of just this sort of intuitive study;
the authors considered every aspect of a very unusual press, and even
pursued their study in Britain in search of allied furniture forms.

IV

MESDA

Analysis of an Enigma

James R. and Marilyn S. Melchor

MESDA has in its collection an unusual walnut and yellow
pine clothes press (Fig. 1). This late seventeenth or early eighteenth
century press was found in eastern Virginia by the noted early
dealer in southern furniture, J. K. Beard of Richmond. Little else
is known about its history other than it was acquired from his
estate sale in 1940. > Quite possibly, this piece is the earliest
surviving American example of this general form, a form
frequently mentioned in eighteenth century wills and inventories,
and perhaps described by a variety of names such as "Dutch
cupboard," "old Cupboard," "greate Dutch Cash," and "large
wenscott Cupboard"^ in seventeenth century Virginia documents.
The primary purpose of this article is to establish the place of
this press in the study of early southern material culture. Another
important goal, however, is to fully document this piece through
an examination of physical details which lead to sound deduc-
tions or at least useful speculation. It is hoped that this approach
will stimulate other students to generate additional information
about the press.

Normally, a piece of furniture is characterized by grouping
it stylistically with a recognized regional form. More detailed study
generally consists of refining where such a piece fits within a
regional group. In this case, however, the item apparently is
unique, and stylistic grouping is not feasible. Consequently, the
decorative and construction details of the MESDA press must be
analyzed individually and carefully in an effort to learn as much
as possible about its design inspiration, the ethnological
background and training of its maker, and how its details relate,
if at all, to those of other pieces.

May, 1986 1

Beginning with its overall form and appearance, this piece
has two asymmetrical doors enclosing two separate compartments.
The right-hand compartment is fitted on three sides with a peg
rail (Fig. 2) for hanging clothes. The left compartment has two
shelves for flat storage (Fig. 3). Very generally, the form represents
what the English and southern colonists would have called a
clothes press, the term used in this article, or "hangar" press.
The Germans used the term schrank, the Dutch, kast (kas),^ and
the French, armoire, all terms known in the seventeenth century.
However, this piece does not comfortably fit the familiar vari-
ations of any of these national forms.

Figure 2. Detail of the peg rail in the right interior. The details which follow
are all taken from the MESDA press 2024-1.

The boldness of its proportions certainly gives the press a
continental European feel; however, its restrained cornice argues
strongly against pure German or Dutch influence. Instead, the
press appears to be a hybrid which incorporates features from
several countries as well as from other types of furniture. It is a
non-academic combination of familiar features. For example, the
canted corners appear to relate directly to the canted cupboard
sections on numerous English court cupboards and their American
counterparts. The same is true with regard to the applied split

MESDA

Figure 3- Detail of the left compartment shelves and the interior surface of
the door.

Spindles, a predominantly English feature. The diamond-shaped
lozenge, however, was a decorative feature widely used by the
Romans and is found archaeologically throughout their former
Empire, including France and England. This decorative feature
persisted, and frequently is found adorning continental and
English furniture late into the seventeenth century. The lozenge
is also familiar on American examples which show various national
influences well into the eighteenth century. It is interesting to
note that the lozenge is frequently encountered on British
furniture from the south of England and from the Yorkshire area,
regions heavily populated by the Romans.

Variations of the double moldings above and below the doors
(Fig. 1) of the MESDA press are occasionally incorporated in
seventeenth century French architecture and furniture, but occur
less frequently on English furniture of the same period. The raised

May, 1986

panel was widely used in France by the middle of the seventeenth
century, and came into favor in England during the last half of
the same century.^ In America, the raised panel made its appear-
ance by the end of the seventeenth century, and by the second
quarter of the eighteenth century was used extensively in both
architecture and furniture. The asymmetry of the doors, case stiles,
and canted corners apparently has no continental, English, or
American parallel.

Figure 4. View of the bottom.

%*?

Figure ). View of the top.

In assessing the visual impact of this piece of furniture, one
cannot help wonder if it currently stands at full height. Until
recently, it was sitting upon four unattached turned feet that were
supplied with the piece at Mr. Beard's sale.^ In examining the
underside of the press (Fig. 4), it is obvious that it was never fitted
with feet. The case construction — that is, front stiles of radically
different widths, and no rear stiles, does not lend itself to the
piece having rested on extended case stiles. Therefore, it either
sat directly upon the floor or was supported on a stand or base
of some fashion. Figure 4 also clearly shows a relatively clean
surface on the bottom without extensive wear or stains. The small

MESDA

amount of such attrition evident could have been acquired during
nineteenth and twentieth century use. In addition, the base
molding (Fig. 1) is largely original, and does not show the heavy
wear or damage that would be expected after sitting on the floor
for nearly three centuries, where the base would have been
subjected to sliding, brooms, liquids, shoes, chairs, and insects.
Therefore, it is unlikely that this press sat directly on the floor.
It is probable, though not conclusive, that it was supported on
a relatively low stand similar to the chests and cabinets on stands
so popular in France and England during the seventeenth century.
Another reasonable possibility would have been an enclosed base
fitted with one or more drawers and resting on low, turned feet
or even a heavy bed molding. If this indeed were the case, the
piece could have been considered a prototype of the common
clothes press of the eighteenth century. The press is now 5 TVs
inches in height. With that dimension as a given factor, a range
of base heights may be extrapolated through study of the various
proportional design moduli in use during the period. The five-
unit modulus that is incorporated in the Doric and Tuscan orders
might yield a case-to-base ratio of 3:2, although a ratio as high
as 4:1 is possible. The latter would have resulted in a base only

Figure 6. Detail of the left door, center stile, and upper rail molding.

May, 1986

about 15 inches in height, for a total height of 72 inches for the
press. Other common proportional units such as the root two
rectangle (1:42:1) and the IVa rectangle (1:25:1) would have
yielded 24-inch and 19-inch bases respectively, with total
respective heights of 81 and 76 inches. It is important to under-
stand that French, British, and American artisans did indeed
employ such classical systems in determining proportions of the

Figure 7. Opera// view of t/oe bac/i.

elements of both architecture and furniture; such things were
seldom haphazard. If the MESDA press originally was fitted with
a stand, it may have consisted of a simple, molded, upper frame
which accepted the press section, six turned legs similar in design
to and probably incorporating elements from the large turned
spindles. In this conjectural form, flat stretchers may have
connected the legs; the feet would have been turned.

MESDA

Construction details such as dovetails and case framing in
addition to the applied decorations indicate the general approach
of a cabinetmaker rather than a house joiner. However, the level
of skill in execution and attention to detail is below that of a
formally-trained master craftsman. The piece was sturdily built
with care but has an unsophisticated or rural rather than an urban
feel.

Figure 8. Detail of the left side, turned split spindle, base and cornice moldings.

The yellow pine bottom and top boards are dovetailed into
the walnut case sides with the large dovetails typical of late seven-
teenth century work. As Figure 4 illustrates, the canted corner
boards are nailed directly to the top and bottom boards, while
the top and bottom case rails and the ends of the outside case
stiles are pinned with slender diamond-shaped walnut trunnels

May, 1986

or pins. The press is fastened throughout with a combination of
wrought nails, the diamond-shaped trunnels, and round pins used
for securing mortise and tenon joints (Fig. 6). Slender diamond
pins do not split wood when driven. They are frequently found
in furniture from areas of the South heavily settled by Germans,
although such pins may be found in other southern coastal areas
as well.*' The canted corner boards are butt-jointed at an angle
to the case sides and outside stiles, while the case rails and outside
stiles are lap-jointed (Fig. 4). The center stile has blind lap joints.
The vertically-arranged pine backboards are splined together with
thin splines about Vs" thick by 1^4 " wide (Figs. 7 and 4) and
overlap the walnut ends, leaving an unfinished exterior appearance
(Fig. 8). These backboards were cut and fitted in a particular order
as the evidence of assembly marks inside indicates (Fig. 9 illustrates
one example). The splines are a feature occasionally seen on
Shenandoah Valley furniture.^ The fact that this press shares such
an unusual construction detail with the Germanic furniture of
the Valley simply indicates a common origin, namely continental
Europe. The use of splines in Tidewater Virginia is certainly an
atypical feature for the region.

Figure 9- Detail of scratched assembly marks on the interior of the backboards.

MESDA

Figure 10. Profile of the cornice molding. Profiles in Figures 10 through 13
were taken by the authors: these drawings have been slightly strengthened to
show the moldings in their original profiles, without wear. All of the drawings
are full scale.

The cornice molding is a composite of three separate pieces
(Figs. 1 and 10). The two upper elements are nailed in place while
the lower facing is pinned. The double upper and lower case rail
moldings (Figs. 1 and 11) are each four sections of a single molding
strip mitered together and nailed in place. Each lozenge, likewise,
is made from four pieces of a molding strip mitered together and
nailed in place (Figs. 1 and 12). The profile of the one-piece
molding is illustrated in Figure 13. The molding on the left door
(Fig. 14) is original, while the right door molding is a proper
replacement. Notice the rather awkward manner in which the
upper and lower rail moldings are notched to accept the rounded
ends of the door moldings (Fig. 1). On the center stile, the small

May, 1986

split spindles are single pieces. The large split spindles on the
corners, however, are each composed of two turnings.

Figure 11. Profile of the upper and lower case rail molding.

Figure 12. Profile of the lozenge molding.

The interior of the MESDA press is divided into two com-
partments by a yellow pine board partition positioned vertically
behind the center case stile. This divider is pinned in place, front
and back, through the stile and a backboard. Two pine shelves
(Fig. 3) in the left compartment are fixed in position by pins driven
through the case side and the vertical divider. This is an extremely
weak construction technique, since the pins could have led to
splitting of the shelf boards. Better methods would have been
to fit the shelves into grooves or dadoes cut into the case side
and partition, or to rest them on nailed shelf supports. The walnut
peg rail (Figs. 2 and 15) nailed to the sides and back of the right

10

MESDA

Figure 13- Profile of the base molding.

Figure 14. Profile of the vertical door stop t?7olding.

Figure 13. Profile of the peg rail molding.

compartment has 11 walnut pegs about three inches long, ar-
ranged with six across the back, two on the case side, and three
on the partition wall.

May, 1986

11

In addition to the assembly scratch marks on the finished
inside surface of the backboards, there is an illegible chalk mark
on the underside of the top shelf. Also inside this compartment,
there is chalk scribbling (Fig. 16) on the case side above the top
shelf. These are probably nothing more than construction layout
and cutting marks. There is one additional chalk mark in the left
compartment located above the shelf on the canted corner board,
an unusual script letter "M" (Fig. 17). This also could be a
construction notation, but seems more likely to be the cipher of
the maker.

Figure 16. Detail of the indistinguishable chalk marks on the interior.

The reason for the placement of this letter "M" is not as
important in this instance as is the area of origin of this unusual
letter. Figure 18 illustrates the two styles of script "M" most
frequently encountered in both European and American manu-
scripts and ciphers of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries.
Numerous early manuscripts, maps, tombstones, and books on
handwriting, calligraphy, and ciphers were reviewed in research-

12

MESDA

ing the "M" on the MESDA press. This style of script "M" is
illustrated in the sixteenth century writing books of noted Italian
scribes and calligraphers, Ludovico degli Arrighi, Giouanniantonio
Tagliente, and Giovanbattista Palatino. Palatino even identified
the form under the heading "French letters." It is interesting
to note further that the various writing styles of these three scribes
were derived directly from the eighth and ninth century
Carolingian minuscles of Charlemagne^ whose Prankish Empire
was centered in what is now France, Belgium, and parts of
Germany and Italy.

Figure 1 7. Detail of the scnpt "M" marked in chalk on the in tenor.

The doors are essentially typical raised-panel frame assemblies
(Figs. 1,3, and 19). The top and bottom rails are through-tenoned
into mortises cut in the door stiles, while the central rails are blind-
tenoned into the stiles. The stiles separating the raised panels
are blind-tenoned into the rails. All tenons are single-pinned
except those of the central rails which are double-pinned. The
chamfered edges of the raised panels are fitted into dadoes run

May, 1986

13

Figure 18. Two common scripts of the letter "Af", used in both France and
England. Drawn by the authors.

in the panel rails and stiles. The surrounding ovolo moldings at
these locations, though they appear to be separate units, are, in
fact, integral parts of the rails and stiles. This is a feature common
to the eighteenth century. Molding surrounds of this appearance
earlier in the seventeenth century were usually applied. However,
the framing moldings used here are the early Greek ovolo,
somewhat unlike the more common and later "thumbnail" or
quarter-round form. All of these details indicate a turn-of-the-
century date. Each door was fitted with an iron lock; both are
now missing. The brass keyhole escutcheons are original, and are
attached with brass and iron nails. All of the hinges are replaced.
Door stops are located at the bottom of each door opening and
are applied to the lower case rail.

In addition to the asymmetry of the doors, the raised panels
themselves are unusual features of the door frame assemblies.
Normally, the elevated flat portion or field of a raised panel is
separated from its chamfered edges by distinct shoulders or fillets
(Fig. 20). These provide shadow lines which visually divide the
two areas and give the illusion of greater depth. On the MESDA
press, however, the chamfered edges sweep smoothly to the field
without shoulders, having been cut with a plane with a slightly
radiused iron, possibly a hollow plane with a skewed iron, judging
from diagonal chatter marks visible on the bevels (Fig 1, left door).
This might simply represent a naive or early interpretation of the
raised-panel concept, but it could nevertheless provide an
important key in relating this piece to others.

14 MESDA

Figure 19. View of the w tenor of the right door.

Field

Chamfer

Shoulder

Figure 20. Draiving of sections of raised panels, showing the panel configuration
of the MESDA press (below) in contrast to the normal panel configuration run
with a panel plane which cuts the shoulder of the field, the bevel, and the
panel tenon simultaneously.

May, 1986

15

Having analyzed the MESDA press, what can now be said
about its origin and the background of its maker? It is American,
constructed of materials native to the South; early in this century,
it was found in eastern Virginia, where it was most likely made.
The press exhibits both English and continental, mainly French,
features, and bears an archaic cipher in the French style. How
could such a blend of English and French influence find its way
to eastern Virginia circa 1700? The answer is quite simple: the
Huguenots.

French Protestants, who, by the 1560's were known as
Huguenots, suffered decades of religious persecution in Catholic
France's religious wars. Henry IV, a Protestant king who converted
to Catholicism in an attempt to gain peace, proclaimed the Edict
of Nantes in 1598. This provided some measure of freedom of
worship for the beleagured Protestants by recognizing the rights
of religious minorities. The revocation of the Edict of Nantes in
1685, however, began over a century of renewed persecution.
Rather than accept forced Catholicism, some 250,000 French
Huguenots fled France, even though it was illegal for them to
do so. The agricultural workers tended to emigrate to continental
countries, while approximately 50,000, who were mainly urban
artisans and professionals of the middle and upper class, fled to
England, a haven for refugee Huguenots as early as the late
sixteenth century. Some 10,000 Huguenot refugees emigrated
to the New World. ^ It is thought that the first of these settlers
arrived in Virginia in 1610. From that time until the end of the
century. Huguenots arrived in Virginia either individually or in
small groups, settling in Nansemond and Norfolk Counties. In
1700, however, several vessels left England for Virginia bearing
substantial numbers of French refugees, representing the first
organized Huguenot migration to Virginia. These immigrants
settled in Manakin, about twenty miles west of the present city
of Richmond, as well as in Jamestown, and on the lower penin-
sula formed by the James and York rivers. '°

Tha Manakin settlement was exclusively composed of French
Huguenots. The fact that the town was situated twenty miles
above the fall line on the James forced the non-agrarian settlers
to abandon their hopes for commercial success for their trades,
and they adopted agriculture as a means of survival. Farming not
being their vocation, the venture quickly fell onto hard times,
and the settlement failed. The refugees dispersed and were

16 MESDA

assimilated into other areas of the colony; a number moved into
North Carolina. •'

Undoubtedly, these Huguenot artisans fashioned many objects
of continental form in early eighteenth century Virginia before
they became completely assimilated into the predominantly
English society of their surroundings. The MESDA press with its
bold blend of French and English characteristics most likely is
a prime example. Other early furniture, both case pieces and
chairs, from southeastern Virginia and the North Carolina
Albemarle, exhibits similar continental influence. ^^ It is logical
to assume that there are other surviving pieces with more subtle
features. It would be wise for all students of the early furniture
of the lower Chesapeake to take a closer look at work which has
long been considered evidence of material culture in the British
tradition. The MESDA press is certainly a key piece in bringing
forth the important consideration of stylistic influence from other
ethnic groups much earlier than might have been expected.

Mr. and Mrs. Melchor. residents of Norfolk, have a long-standing
interest in the decorative arts of eastern Virginia, and are well known
for their scholarly work on the furniture of the Eastern Shore of Virginia.

May, 1986 17

FOOTNOTES

1. MESDA accession files, 2024-1.

2. Northampton County, VA., Deeds, Wills, etc., Nos. 7 & 8, 1655-1668,
Edward Dowglas (Douglas), 12 November 1657, p. 77; York County, Va.,
Deeds, Orders, Wills, etc.. No. 3, 1657-1662, Gyles Mode, 1 February
1657/8, p. 22a; Norfolk County, Va., Wills SiDeeds, Book E, 1666-1675,
Wm. Moseley, 10 November 1671, p. 106; Norfolk County, Va., Deed
Book 4, 1675-1686, Robt. Hodge, 11 November 1681, p. 116.

3. James R. Melchor, N. Gordon Lohr, and Marilyn S. Melchor, Eastern Shore
of Virginia Raised-Panel Furniture 7 730- i^JO (Norfolk, Va.: The Chrysler
Museum, 1982). The term "hangar" (hanger) in connection with presses
was found repeatedly in Eastern Shore inventories. Editor's note: In regard
to the common usage of the term "kas" it is interesting to observe that
in modern Dutch this word describes a small glass case, particularly a
miniature greenhouse. The word "kast" is the accepted modern Dutch
word for wardrobe. It is now known by the MESDA staff whether these
terms were interchangeable in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries.

4. A representative example of the architectural use of raised panels in Britain
is illustrated in Herbert Cescinsky, The Gentle Art of Faking Furniture
(London: Eyre & Spottiswoode, 1931; reprint New York: Dover Publica-
tions, Inc., 1967), plate 88. The panels illustrated are from St. Botolph's,
Colchester, Essex, and show the earlier convention of bolection moldings
covering the stile and rail joints rather than the ovolo-molded framing typical
of eighteenth century work.

5. Personal communication by the authors with Frank L. Horton, Director,
MESDA.

6. Personal communication by the authors with Wallace B. Gusler, Director,
Conservation of Furniture and Decorative Arts, Colonial Williamsburg
Foundation.

7. Ibid.

8. Three Classics of Italian Calligraphy An Unabridged Reissue of the Writing
Books of Amghi, Tagliente, and Palatino With An Introduction by Oscar
Ogg (New York: Dover Publishing, Inc., 1953).

9. Robin D. Gwynn, Huguenot Heritage: The History and Contribution of
the Huguenots in Britain (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1985).

10. James L. Bugg, Manakin Town in Virginia: Its Story and Its People
(Charlottesville, Va.: MA Thesis, University of Virginia, 1950).

11. Ibid.

12. John Bivins, The Furniture of Coastal North Carolina 1700-1820
(Charlottesville, Va.: University Press of Virginia and MESDA, in press).

18 MESDA

May, 1986

19

i^Wj^^

Figure 1. Baltimore in 1752, From a sketch then made by John Moale, Esqr.
deceased, corrected by the late Daniel Bowley, Esqr., 1817, aquatint. 19'/2"
x29". MESDA ace. 2024-134.

20

MESDA

A Problem of Identification:

Philadelphia and Baltimore

Furniture Styles in the Eighteenth Century

LUKE BECKERDITE

A serious problem long encountered by American furniture
historians is the identification of eighteenth-century Baltimore
furniture made in the Philadelphia style. Furniture made in
Baltimore before the American Revolution was generally inspired
by either British or Philadelphia styles. The impact of British style
appears to have been primarily the result of furniture imports
and the immigration of British-trained artisans.^ In contrast, the
geographical proximity of Maryland and Pennsylvania, inter-
marriage between families, and the migration of cabinetmakers
from Philadelphia to Baltimore were probably more influential
in disseminating Philadelphia styles than furniture exported from
that city. Although there is little documentary evidence in
Maryland of the importation of Philadelphia furniture other than
Windsor chairs, prominent Marylanders were known to have
patronized Philadelphia cabinetmakers. This is particularly true
of residents of Maryland's Eastern Shore, such as Thomas Ring-
gold of Chestertown and William Hemsley of Queen Anne's
County, both of whom commissioned work from Benjamin
Randolph- and owned houses with elaborate architectural carving
from Philadelphia shops. ^

Economics and culture were important in the development
of furniture styles in Maryland. Located on the south bank of
the Severn River, Annapolis was designated the colonial capital
in 1694. Although the town experienced several periods of growth
and decline during the first half of the eighteenth century, the

May, 1986 21

consolidation of political power and rise of the merchant class
in the early 1760's promoted an era of sustained prosperity.^ In
October, 1769, the English traveler William Eddis speculated that
Annapolis would "in a few years ... be one of the best built
cities in America." Realizing that the city's inadequate harbor
would prevent it from becoming an important commercial center,
Eddis attributed Annapolis' recent period of prosperity to its role
as the political and cultural center of the colony. ' The fact that
Annapolis society was overwhelmingly British in its politics,
culture, and taste provides a partial explanation for that city's
preference for British furniture designs. Although Philadelphia
details are present in certain groups of Annapolis furniture, they
are more prevalent in Baltimore work.

Baltimore was described by Eddis as "the most wealthy and
populous town in the province . . . arising from a well conducted
and universal commercial connexion." This "commercial con-
nexion" not only referred to the city's ideal location at the junc-
tion of the Patapsco River and the Chesapeake Bay, but also to
the advantages arising from "the neighboring country being fer-
tile, well settled, and abounding in grain . . . ." According to
Eddis, trade with the Piedmont region was so lucrative that it
"became an object of universal attention" drawing people of a
"commercial and enterprising spirit . . . from all quarters to this
new and promising scene of industry. ' '^ The acquatint Baltimore
in 1732 provides and excellent benchmark for measuring the city's
growth during the third quarter of the eighteenth century (Fig.
1). When the artist, John Moale, sketched the town in 1752, it
had less than thirty houses; by 1776 there were 564 houses and
6,755 inhabitants.^ In comparison, Philadelphia had over 13,000
inhabitants in 1751, and 24,000 in 1775.^ The widespread
influence of Philadelphia style on furniture made in eastern
Maryland is understandable when one considers the phenomenal
scope of that city's maritime trade, the short portage from the
Delaware River across the Head of Elk to the Chesapeake Bay,
and the relative wealth of Philadelphia's artisan community. One
scholar has concluded that between 1700 and 1745, nearly one
out of every six Philadelphia tradesmen attained a personal wealth
in excess of £ 300 sterling compared with Boston's rate of one
in twenty. 9 All of these factors worked to insure Philadelphia's
dominance over the upper region of the Chesapeake until the
rise of Baltimore during the last quarter of the eighteenth century.

Philadelphia-trained cabinetmakers such as Gerrard Hopkins

22 MESDA

Figure 2. High chest with the label of Gerrard Hopkins, 1767-1775, Baltimore,
Maryland, mahogany with Atlantic coast white cedar, poplar, and white pine.
HO A: 89", WOA: 44^k", DOA: 24'>k" ■ Private collection, photograph Breger
& Associates, courtesy the Baltimore Museum of Art.

May, 1986

23

were among those of a "commercial and enterprising spirit" who
moved to Baltimore during this period. We are extremely for-
tunate in having documented examples made by such artisans
to serve as an index for understanding any possible developments
of "Baltimore" style. Hopkins, who was actually a native of
Maryland, was born in Anne Arundel County in 1742. His
parents, Samuel and Sarah Hopkins, were members of a pros-
perous Quaker family with ties to both eastern Maryland and
Pennsylvania. At the age of twelve, Hopkins moved to
Philadelphia, where he was apprenticed to the cabinetmaker
Jonathan Shoemaker in 1757.'^ Assuming that Hopkins was
bound until the age of twenty-one, he probably became a
journeyman in 1764. The receipt book of the Philadelphia mer-
chant Samuel Preston Moore documents business dealings with
Hopkins in September of that year.^^

:¥>

J 4

^ti

4*i^'^''> '"'^^

c*.

■J GL's.i;.A-^.r> 'no^hms-m

8 Cabinet ^.nJ Cl^.t>'\-BvJ<^. , -p!

^ y4' tl, F. r?i cfi'm Tjr-Tabk j-jOl-v.r^ '^]m^' ' '' • 'k-

i

■ '4

Figure 2a. Detail of the label on the high du >/ I m word "Philadelphia" has
been marked out and ' 'Baltimore ' ' has been added at the top.

Hopkins also maintained an account with a Philadelphia
Quaker merchant named Stephen Collins. On 24 April 1765,
twenty-five yards of linen was charged to Hopkins' account by
the Philadelphia carver, William Crisp. '^ This may have been

24 MESDA

payment for furniture carving commissioned by Hopkins. Like
most eighteenth century artisans, Hopkins traded work for goods
and staples of various sorts. His account with Collins shows a credit
for "Two Chamber Tables" in May, 1766. Although Hopkins
reputedly worked as a journeyman in the shop of the Philadelphia
cabinetmaker Robert Moore, his bartering with cabinetwork and
direct involvement with tradesmen like Crisp suggests that he was
working independently prior to moving to Maryland. The fact
that Hopkins' Philadelphia label is glued to the drawer of a high
chest made in Maryland (Fig. 2a) also supports this conclusion.
Only one other Maryland piece of the colonial period labeled by
a Philadelphia-trained cabinetmaker is known; a tall-case clock
bears the label of John Janvier, who at one point in his career
worked in Cecil County "at the head of Elk." '^

Hopkins evidently moved to Maryland early in 1767. On 9
April 1767, the Maryland Gazette reported:

GERRARD HOPKINS, Son of Samuel, Cabmet and
Chair-Maker, from Philadelphia, at the Sign of the Tea
Table and Chair, in Gay Street, Baltimore-Town, Makes
and sells the following Goods, in the best Manner, ;md
in the newest Fashions, in Mahogany, Walnut, Cherry-
Tree, and Maple, viz. Chests of Drawers . . . Desks, Book-
Cases, Scruitores, Cloth-Presses, Tables of various Sorts,
such as Bureaus, Card, Chamber, Parlour, and Tea-Tables;
Chairs of various Sorts, such as Easy, Arm, Parlour,
Chamber and Corner Chairs, Settees, Clock-Cases,
Couches, Candle-Stands, Decanter-Stands, Tea Kettle-
Stands, Dumb-Waiters, Tea-Boards, Bottle-Boards,
Bedsteads, &c., &c. N.B. Any of the above Articles to be
done with or without carved Work.

Subsequent advertisements indicate that Hopkins also operated
a sawmill where he sold logs and boards "sawed to suit every
branch of cabinet and chair work."^^ The considerable scope of
Hopkins' enterprise at the end of the eighteenth century is
revealed by one notice in 1798, offering 40,000 feet of "first
quality" Honduras mahogany and 10,000 feet of St. Domingo
mahogany.'^

Hopkins was associated with several Baltimore artisans during
his career. Although the precise nature of most of these business
relationships is not known, one such association was certainly

May, 1986 25

related to Hopkins' trade. From 1771 to 1776, Hopkins main-
tained an account with the clockmaker Thomas Morgan. Morgan's
ledger records charge Hopkins for clock repairs, hardware, and
movements. From June, 1773, to March, 1776, Hopkins pur-
chased four eight-day clocks and one "New Moon Clock" at prices
ranging from £ 14 to £ 16. ^^ Although these movements could
have been acquired for his customers, it is also possible that
Hopkins offered clock cases complete with movements.

One of the most informative documents regarding cabinet-
makers working in Hopkins' shop is a 1780 advertisement by
William Askew which informed the public and "his old
Customers in particular, that he [had] removed his shop from
Mr. Gerard Hopkins's over to his own house . . . ." Unfortu-
nately, it is not known whether Askew was a journeyman or a
partner. Hopkins may have moved his cabinet shop prior to the
advertisement, since Askew's new location was at the sign of the
"Tea Table and Chair"" and subsequent advertisements by
Hopkins described his shop as being at the sign of the "BUREAU
and COFFIN. ">«

Hopkins entered into a partnership with another cabinet-
maker, William Harris, sometime before 1793. On 29 April 1793
the Maryland Gazette reported:

HOPKINS AND HARRIS, CABINET and CHAIR-
MAKERS, A/ /^^zr Manufactory, in Gay-Street, near the
Upper Bridge, Respectfully inform the Public, that they
have, and intend at all Times to keep, a constant Supply
of GOOD MATERIALS, and WORMEN [workmen] to
make all Kinds of CABINET and CHAIR-FURNITURE,
in the neatest and newest Taste ....

The partnership evidently lasted only two years, since Harris adver-
tised independently in February, 1795.^^

Although there are no known examples of Neoclassical furni-
ture made by Hopkins, pieces listed in bills and later adver-
tisements document the fact that he worked in that style. In the
8 September 1797, Federal Gazette & Baltimore Daily Advertiser,
he offered "ready manufactured" cylinder desks, "circular and
straight front Bureaux," sideboards, pier tables, "North-
umberland dining and night Tables . . . oval, urn, heart, and
fan back Chairs. "^"^ Hopkins' ability to stock ready-made furni-
ture, as well as the extensive debts owed his estate, ^^ attests to

26 MESDA

the success of his business. He died "after a lingering illness"
on 18 April 1800."

A high chest with Hopkins' label (Fig. 2) provides a basis for
attributing other pieces to his shop. Considering his background,
it is no suprise that the form of the high chest and many of its
decorative details are derived from Philadelphia examples. Typical
of such pieces, it has a high, broken scroll pediment, cabriole
legs with claw-and-ball feet, shell and acanthus carving on the
central drawer of the lower case, and narrow fluted quarter-
columns. The quarter-columns of the upper case have unusual
base moldings (Fig. 2b) that differ from the classical turnings
normally encountered in Philadelphia case work (see Fig. 10b).

Figure 2b. Detail of the base turning of a quarter column on the high chest.

Hopkins' Philadelphia background is also reflected in the con-
struction of the high chest. The large drawers have rived white
cedar bottoms that are beveled on three edges, dadoed to the
front and sides, and reinforced with segmented glue blocks. Like
most Philadelphia examples, the grain direction of the bottom
boards is perpendicular to the drawer fronts. The small drawers
differ from the large ones in having continuous glue strips rather
than blocks. Similar methods of drawer construction are found
on other Baltimore pieces in the Philadelphia style.

The small drawers run on dustboards that are lapped and
nailed to the front rail and rest on blocks nailed to the back of
the case. Unlike many Philadelphia high chests which have
dustboards in the upper case, the Hopkins chest has drawer
supports that are tongue-and-grooved to the drawer blades and

May, 1986 27

dadoed to the case sides (Fig. 2c). A shallow rabbet cut on the
underside of the supports also forms a narrow shoulder that butts
against the sides.

Figure 2c. Detail of the case construction of the high chest.

The carved shells on the high chest (Fig. 2d) are virtually
identical to that on the chimneypiece in the large northwest room
of the James Brice House in Annapolis (Figs. 3, 3a). ^^ James Brice's
father, John, died in 1766, leaving his son land in Cecil and Kent
Counties and two town lots in Annapolis with building materials
' 'for the purpose of building a dwelling house and out houses.
According to James Brice's ledger, construction of the house began
in 1767, and continued through 1774. The only carver who was
identified in the ledger was William Bampton, who was credited
£ 40:0:1 for "finishing largest Room in my House the Carpenters
and Joiners work &. carving Chimney Piece" in March, 1770.
Additional expenditures under the undated heading "Carver"
include £ 9:15:0 for Chimney pieces and £ 8:1:0 for twenty- three
stair brackets. Bampton, who was described as a runaway, received
his last payment on 5 October 1772.^4

Although the chimneypiece in the northwest room could have
been purchased from Hopkins and shipped from Baltimore to
Annapolis, it is also possible that Bampton was employed by
Hopkins either before or after his work in the Brice House. This

28

MESDA

,1!

V

^^H

fA

1

^

W JM

""^^HLvjl

f^vW

\l

1

1

r^^^%

I^B

1^

^

-M

w

M

1^1

1

H

H

^^

^

Q

ffl

i^'^M

W

1

Figure 2d. Detail of a carved shell on the high chest.

Figure 2e. Detail of the knee on the high chest.

May, 1986

29

is suggested by Brice's ledger credits to Bampton and subsequent
entries regarding alterations made to the chimneypiece in the
northwest room. In 1771, Brice paid a joiner named George
Forster (or Foster) for altering the chimneypiece in the "parlor. "25

Figure 3- James Bnce House, 1767-1775, Annapolis, Maryland. MESDA research
file S- 11401.

Figure 3a. Detail of the carved shell on the chimneypiece in the northwest room
of the Brice House.

30

MESDA

Figure 5b. Detail of a carved console on the chimneypiece in the northwest
room of the Bnce House.

The chimneypiece in the northwest room, which appears to have
had its consoles shortened at an early date, is the only origmal
example in the Brice House that shows evidence of significant
alteration. In some respects, the acanthus car\'ing on the consoles
is related to work from Hopkins' shop (Fig. 3b). The leaves that
curl on either side of the crescent-shaped element at the bottom
have convex surfaces indented with a small punch and those
flowing from the crescent have wide lobes modeled with chip cuts
like the acanthus on the knees of the high chest and the chairs
illustrated in Figures 2e. 4, 5b, and 6. These parallels may reflect
Forster's attempt at copying Bampton's carving style.

Two arm chairs and a side chair (Figs. 4-6) are also attributed
to Hopkins on the basis of their carving. Like the high chest and
chimneypiece, they have carved shells with broad convex and

May, 1986

31

Figure 4. Armchair attributed to Gerrard Hopkins, 1767-1775, Baltimore,
Maryland, mahogany with yellow pine secondary. HOA: 39^4", width at knees:
23". Baltimore Museum of Art, ace. 77.39.2. MESDA research file S-9870.

concave segments (Fig. 5a). The concave segments are veined with
widely-spaced flutes made with a small gouge, and the convex

32

MESDA

areas are decorated with a single circular punch (or a circle made
with two vertical gouge cuts) and a series of lenticular cuts. The
latter were executed by making angled, converging cuts with a
small quarter-round gouge. Although carved shells are occasionally
encountered on the seat rails of Philadelphia chairs in the late
Baroque or "Queen Anne" style, they are generally glued to the
rail on Rococo examples.

Figure 4a. Detail of the molded arm support and arm of the armchair.

These chairs conform in both style and construction to
Philadelphia work of the period. This is particularly evident in
the shape of the crest rail, arms, arm supports, and rear legs (Figs.
4a, 4c, 5c). Like some Philadelphia examples, the seat rails are
not through-tenoned (Fig. 4c), and the mortise and tenon joints
at the front corners and sides were originally secured with glue.^*^
Large quarter-round blocks, cut to fit around the stiles, are used

May, 1986

33

to reinforce the rear leg and rail joint (Fig. 4b). The arm sup-
ports are lapped over the side rails and attached with screws from
the inside. Screws were also used to attach the arms to notches
cut in the stiles (Fig. 4c). All of these details, or variations of
them, can be associated with Philadelphia work.

Figure 4b. Detail of a glue block on the armchair.

Figure 4c. Detail of the back of the armchair.

The direct influence of Philadelphia on Baltimore is also
reflected in the career of Robert Moore. Moore was in partner-
ship with the reowned Philadelphia cabinetmaker William Wayne
until 1768. On 20 February 1769, the Pennsylvania Chronicle
carried a notice of the dissolution of their partnership, coupled
with an advertisement by Moore that he intended to continue
the business at his shop on Front Street.

Moore had moved to Baltimore before 30 April 1771, when
he posted a notice for a missing horse in the Maryland Gazette .^''
Unlike Gerrard Hopkins, who promoted his business in Maryland
newspapers, Moore's advertisements were primarily for runaway

34

MESDA

Figure y Armchair attributed to Gerrard Hopkins, 1767-1775, Baltimore,
Maryland, mahogany with yellow pine secondary. HOA: iPVs". WOA: 2P/4 ".
MESDA research file S-3924.

May, 1986

35

Figure 5a. Detail of the carved shell on the armchair.

Figure 5b. Detail of the knee carving on the armchair.

Figure 5c. Detail of the crest rail and back of the armchair.

36

MESDA

Figure 6. Side chair attributed to Gerrard Hopkins, 1767-1773, Baltimore,
Maryland, mahogany, secondary wood not examined. HO A: iPVs", WO A:
2}'/4", DO A: 2V/4". Photograph courtesy the U.S. Diplomatic Reception
Rooms, Department of State.

May, 1986

37

apprentices, indentured servants, and slaves. ^^ On 19 December
1774, the Pennsylvania Packet reported:

Went off from the subscriber yesterday, a servant man
named William Finley, about 26 years of age; came from
London . . . about 12 months ago; was bred in London
by trade a looking glass frame maker, but since his arrival
in Baltimore has been chiefly employed at cabinet work,
particularly in making desks and dining tables . . . Who-
ever apprehends said servant . . . shall receive ... [a]
reward, paid by Robert Moore, cabinet maker in
Baltimore. 29
The only other artisan who is known to have worked for Moore
was Isaac Johns. In his own advertisement, Johns stated that he
had apprenticed to Moore, whom he described as an artisan
"whose Abilities are well known in the Line of his Profession. "'^
Moore retired from the cabinetmaking trade in 1784. By 18 May

Figure 7. Dressing table, 1765-1773, possibly Baltimore, Maryland, walnut and
walnut veneer with Atlantic coast white cedar and poplar secondary. HO A:
SO^kc", WOA: 34V4 ", DOA: 21 Vs". Maryland Historical Society ace. 79.31.1.
MESDA research file S- 10047.

38

MESDA

Figure la. Detail of the shell drawer of the dressing table.

of that year, his shop was occupied by cabinetmakers John Bankson
and Wilham Gordon. ^^ Moore died at the age of sixty-four on
14 November 1787. His obituary stated that he was "an honest,
benevolent, and useful Citizen ... an ancient venerable
Brother . . . [and] a most honourable Master of several Lodges. "^^
Although no documented examples of his work are known,
the dressing tables shown in Figures 7-9 represent the type of
furniture a Philadelphia shop master like Moore might have
produced in Maryland. The dressing table illustrated in Figure
8 was originally owned by Henry Didier, a merchant who
emigrated from France to Baltimore in the eighteenth century. ^3
Although the precise history of the dressing table in Figure 7 is
unknown, it, too, has a possible Baltimore origin. ^"^ Because several
examples related to this group also have Philadelphia histories,
the dressing tables are tentatively attributed to Baltimore. ^^
Comparisons between these examples and a high chest (Fig. 10)
attributed to Moore's Philadelphia partner, William Wayne, and
the carving firm of Nicholas Bernard and Martin Jugiez^'^ illustrate
the acute problem of separating the work of the two cities.
Furniture historians such as William MacPherson Horner have
long considered the high chest to be the one mentioned in an
18 February 1770 bill of sale from Wayne to Samuel Wallis of
Philadelphia specifying "a case of mahogany drawers and table
[£] 25:0:0. "37

May, 1986

39

Figures. Dressing table. 1765-1775, possibly Baltimore, Maryland, walnut and
walnut veneer with Atlantic coast white cedar and poplar secondary. HO A:
30'/2", WOA: 55", DOA: 20 %". MESDA research file S-10971.

Figure 8a. Detail of the shell drawer of the dressing table. This example originally
had applied acanthus like the dressing tables illustrated in Figures 7 and 9-

40

MESDA

Figure 9- Dressing table. 1763-1773. possibly Baltimore. Maryland, walnut
primary, secondary woods not recorded. HO A: 29". WO A: 54". DOA: 21 '/? ".
Photograph courtesy Israel Sack. Inc. . N. Y. C.

The carved shells on the dressing tables are stylistically related
to the shell on the high chest. All have five stop-fluted hollow
lobes that are outlined with a small veiner (a U-shaped gouge),
convex surfaces indented with a four-point punch, and a central
five-petaled flower with two naturalistic leaves on either side (Figs.
7a, 8a, 9, and 10a). The central flower with flanking leafage was
once considered a hallmark of Maryland design; however, it is
frequently encountered on Philadelphia pieces in the Rococo
style. ^^ Although there are a number of intriguing parallels
between the canning on the high chest and dressing tables, the
shells and acanthus leaves were both drawn and executed in a
different manner. The outlining, deep fluting, and veining of
the shell and the adept modeling of the floral elements on the
drawer of the high chest contrast with the more abstract carving
on the dressing tables. Similar comparisons can be made between

Mav, 1986

41

Figure 10. High chest attnbuted to William Wayne with carving attributed
to Bernard and Jugiez, c. 1770, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, mahogany primary,
secondary woods not recorded. HOA: 97 'h", WOA: 44'/2", DOA: 21 Va".
Photograph courtesy Israel Sack, Inc.

42

MESDA

Figure 10a. Detail of the shell drawer of the high chest.

Figure 10b. Detail of the quarter-column turning of the high chest.

the acanthus leaves flanking the shell. On the dressing tables
which have these leaves, the appliques taper abruptly and end
where the flat scroll volutes on the shell meet the drawer front
(Fig. 7a). Philadelphia pieces generally have rounded volutes that
join the acanthus appliques inside the perimeter of the shell, a
technique which allows for a smoother design transition. Similarly,
Philadelphia work often has appliques with carved volutes that
are glued to the flat volutes on the shell. Although the carving
techniques differ, the design of the knee carving on the dressing
table illustrated in Figure 9 is closer to that of the high chest than
the other examples. Like the high chest, it features a half- flower
at the top of the knees and acanthus that flows from scroll volutes
on the knee blocks (Figs. 9, 10). This was one of the most common
designs employed by Philadelphia carvers during the eighteenth
century.

Two of these dressing tables are distinguished by having three
lower drawers of approximately equal size, and walnut drawer
fronts faced with walnut veneer (Figs. 7, 8). The veneers are glued
to the molded drawer fronts and form the fillets of the lipped
edges. Philadelphia pieces in the late Baroque style often have
veneers applied in this manner. The lower drawers are separated
by deep, vertical dividers that are attached to the upper drawer
blade with two large tenons. Most Philadelphia examples employ

May, 1986

43

a single tenon that is wedged on either side or through the middle.
In other respects, the construction is related to Philadelphia work.
The supports for the center drawer are nailed to partitions that
are tongue-and-grooved to the dividers and mortised into the back
of the case. The outer drawer supports are nailed to the legs and
supported by glueblocks at the corners and center of the case.
The top is also supported by blocks at the center of each side
and by two large braces that are mortised through the back of
the case.

The preceeding pieces serve well to illustrate the problem of
separating Philadelphia furniture from Baltimore work in the
Philadelphia style. For several decades, scholars have attempted
to overcome this obstacle by identifying regional characteristics
of Maryland case work. These details include closed ogee heads
(often referred to as "bonnet tops"), fluted chamfers that end
in a point or cusp, elaborately shaped skirts with applied shell
carving, deeply molded tops, and, on high chests and dressing
tables, lower drawers of equal width. However, an examination
of Philadelphia pieces in museum collections and in publications
like Horner's Blue Book of Vhiladelphia Furniture reveals that
all of the details which have been considered hallmarks of
Maryland work occur with equal frequency on Philadelphia pieces
in the late Baroque and Rococo styles.

A high chest (Fig. 11) with a probable history of ownership
by Joshua Skinner of Perquimans County, North Carolina,
illustrates this point particularly well.'^ The chest has a closed
ogee head, fluted chamfers ending in cusps and "lamb's
tongues," and lower drawers of approximately equal size — all
details associated with eighteenth-century Maryland furniture.
However, this piece is part of a large group of furniture made
m Philadelphia between 1730 and 1765 (see Figs. 12-19).'^° The
fact that most of these pieces pre-date Baltimore's age of affluence
makes it highly improbable that they were made in that city.

While the furniture in this Philadelphia group spans a period
of approximately thirty-five years and reflects the work of at least
two cabinetmakers and two carvers, stylistic relationships and con-
struction reveal a remarkable degree of continuity. The carving
on the knees of the Skinner high chest (Fig. 11a) is related to
that of the dressing table illustrated in Figure 12, as well as several
other examples in the group (Figs. 14-16). The V-shaped area
between the halves of the acanthus leaves is modeled with three
deep flutes, the center of which is terminated with a quarter-

44 MESDA

Figure 11. High chest. 1740-1735, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, walnut and
walnut veneer with Atlantic coast white cedar, poplar, and yellow pine. HO A:
83 Vs" (minus center finial). WVA: 43". DOA: 24". MESDA research file
S-2575.

May, 1986

45

round gouge cut (Figs. 11a, 12a, l4a, 15, 16). Other similarities
occcur in the outlining and veining of the lobes and the short
parallel gouge cuts used to shade the tips of the leaves.

Figure 11a. Detail of the knee carving on the high chest.

Figure lib. Detail of the shell drawer of the upper case of the high chest.

46

MESDA

Figure 12. Dressing table, 1730-1760, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, mahogany
primary, secondary woods not recorded. HO A: 31", WOA: 33'/?", DOA:
21'/2" . Photograph courtesy Israel Sack, Inc.

Figure 12a. Detail of the knee carving on the dressing table.

May, 1986

47

Figure 12b. Detail of the shell drawer of the dressing table.

Figure 13. Dressing table, 1745-1760, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, mahogany
primary, secondary woods not recorded. HOA: 29V4 " , WOA: 33^4 " , DOA:
21 '/a " . Photograph courtesy Israel Sack, Inc.

An exceptional dressing table (Figs. 13, 13a) that descended
in the Bush and Snader families of Wilmington, Delaware ^' has
shell and acanthus carving related to the preceding pieces (Figs.

48

MESDA

Figure ijj. Detail of the shell draiver of the dressing table.

Figure 14. Side chair. 17 i^- 11 55, Philadelphia. Pennsylvania, walnut
throughout. HO A: 42 V2 ". Photograph courtesy Israel Sack, Inc.

May, 1986

49

lib, 12b). The acanthus appliques flanking the shells have broad
lobes which were roughly modeled and veined with a small gouge
(Figs. 12b, 13a). In certain areas, the random application of the
veining flutes interrupts the flow of the leaves. Additional relation-
ships can be seen in the shading of the leaf ends and the design
and execution of the shells. The broad convex and concave
segments emanate from retracted scroll volutes like those of the
chairs illustrated in Figures 14 and 15.^^

Figure 14a. Detail of the knee and rail carving of the side chair.

The side chair illustrated in Figure 14 may represent the finest
expression of the late Baroque style in Philadelphia. Part of a
set of at least eighteen chairs, this example is distinguished by
having a solid, crotch walnut splat, claw-and-ball feet, and carving
on the crest rail, shoe, seat rail, and knees. In both design and
execution, the knee carving on the chairs (Figs. I4a, 15) is related
to that of the high chest (Fig. 1 la) and dressing table illustrated
in Figure 12a. This is most clearly seen in the deep fluting between
the raised central veins and outlining, veining, and shading of
the leaves. The knee blocks of Figures 12-15 are also similar in
having a relieved area just above the deeply modeled scroll volutes.

A dressing table (Fig. 16) that descended in the Saunders
family of Philadelphia and Alexandria, Virginia, '^^ has carved
details that were derived from the preceding examples. The shell

50 MESDA

Figure 15. Side chair. 1733-1755. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, walnut
throughout. HO A: 42 'A ". Photograph courtesy Israel Sack, Inc.

has broad convex and concave segments, sharply retracted volutes,
and flanking acanthus appliques. At first glance, the appliques
appear different; however they are based on the same general
formula as the acanthus on the shell drawer of the Bush-Snader
dressing table (Fig. 13a). Similarities are also evident in the fluting
and veining of the knee acanthus.

May, 1986

51

Figure 16. Dressing table, 1730-1760, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, walnut with
Atlantic coast white cedar and poplar secondary. HOA: ZS^" , IFOA: 34V4 " ,
DO A: 20 Vie". Courtesy the Henry Francis du Pont Winterthur Museum.

While the carving on the dressing table is stylistically related
to the preceding group, the execution is more closely associated
with the high chest and dressing tables illustrated in Figures 17-19-
The appliques flanking the shell of the dressing table are virtually
identical to those of the high chest (Fig. 17). "^^ The high chest
and dressing table illustrated in Figure 18 have oval shells with
a large convex element in the center (Fig. 18a). Although by a
different carver, the shells are stylistically related to those on a
group of early Philadelphia desks-and-bookcases.^^ Another
dressing table in the group (Fig. 19) has knee carving associated
with the high chest and dressing table. The leaves on all of these
examples have stippled backgrounds and broad surfaces that were
deeply veined with a small gouge (Figs. 18b, 19a).

52

MESDA

•^

^

^
•w -^

^ .^^

%v>?.

u^l
^■c.

Figure 17. High chest, 1730-1760. Philadelphia. Pennsylvania, walnut with
Atlantic coast white cedar and poplar secondary. HO A: 96 'A ", WO A: 45V4 " .
DOA: 24'/2 " . Courtesy the Henry Francis du Pont Winterthur Museum.

May, 1986

53

Figure 18. Dressing table, 1753-1765, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, walnut with
poplar, red cedar, and yellow pine secondary. HOA: 29", WOA: 34", DOA:
21 'A". MESDA research file S-5352.

Figure 18a. Detail of the shell drawer of the dressing table.

54

MESDA

Figure 18b. Detail of the knee carving of the dressing table.

There is also a remarkable degree of consistency in the case
construction of this Philadelphia group (Figs. 17-19). The vertical
dividers between the lower drawers are shiplapped and nailed to
partitions that are mortised into the back of the case (Fig. 19b).
The central drawers run on strips of wood that are nailed to the
bottom of the partitions and supported at each end by a small
glue block (Fig. 19c). Strips are also attached to the top of each
partition just below the upper drawer (Fig. 19d). The outer
supports for the upper and lower drawers are nailed to the stiles
and reinforced with glue blocks. On the dressing table illustrated
in Figure 19c, the blocks are shaped to the contour of the skirt.
The skirt shaping on several of these pieces is also related (Figs.
16-18). 46

May, 1986

55

Figure 19. Dressing tah/e, 1760-1770, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, mahogany
with Atlantic coast white cedar and poplar. HO A: 28''k" , WOA: SSVb", DOA:
21". Loaned by the Kaufman Americana Foundation. NiESDA ace. 3018-1.

56

MESDA

Figure 19^- Detail of the knee carving of the dressing table.

May, 1986

57

Figure 19b. Detail of the case construction of the dressing table.

Figure 1 9c. Detail of the case construction of the dressing table.

58

MESDA

Figure I9d. Detail of the case construction of the caressing table.

The case pieces and chairs illustrated in Figures 11-19 docu-
ment the stylistic and technological evolution of an important
group of Philadelphia furniture. The fact that several of these
examples have been attributed to Maryland accounts for much
of the confusion regarding regional characteristics. Documentary
research and more thorough studies of style and construction are
needed to separate the furniture of Philadelphia and Baltimore,
since it is apparent that virtually all of these "Maryland" details
are common to Philadelphia design.

Mr. Beckerdtte is Research Associate for MESDA.

May, 1986

59

FOOTNOTES

1. For example, the Annapolis cabinetmaking firm, Shaw & Chisholm supple-
mented their own wares with imported furniture and accessories. In the
11 December 1783, issue of the Maryland Gazette , they advertised a piano
forte, looking glasses with mahogany frames, backgammon tables, tea chests
and boxes, cribbage boards and boxes, decanter stands, knife boxes, and
"spare sets" of backgammon boxes and men, all of British manufacture.
British pieces with strong Maryland histories and Marylanders' accounts with
their factors also document the importation of British furniture. For an
excellent discussion of the importation of British furniture into Maryland
and the influence of British style on local furniture production see Gregory
R. Weidman, Furniture in Maryland, 1740-1940: The Collection of the
Maryland Historical Society (Baltimore: Maryland Historical Society, 1984),
pp. 42-47.

2. Benjamin Randolph Account Book, which is cataloged as Pennsylvania-
Philadelphia Account Book, 1768-1787, Rare Books and Manuscripts Divi-
sion, New York Public Library, New York, New York, pp. 77,144. This
ledger was identified as Randolph's by comparison with his receipt book
owned by the H. F. du Pont Winterthur Museum (Philadelphia Museum
of Art, Philadelphia: Three Centunes of American Art [Ph'ihddphh, 1976],
p. 111).

3. Luke Beckerdite, "William Buckland Reconsidered: Architectural Carving
in Chesapeake Maryland, 1771-1774," Journal of Early Southern Decorative
Arts, Vol. 8, No. 2 (November, 1982), pp. 71-88.

4. For a discussion of the growth of Annapolis see Edward C. Papenfuse, In
Pursuit of Profit: The Annapolis Merchant in the Era of the American
Revolution: 1763-1803 (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1975),
pp. 1-34.

5. William Eddis, Letters from America, Aubrey C. Land, ed., (Cambridge,
Massachusetts: Belknap Press, 1969), p. 13.

6. Eddis, Letters, pp. 49-50. Carville W. Fade and Ronald Hoffman's article
"Urban Development in the Eighteenth-Century South" examines the
influence of staple crops on urban development {Perspectives in American
History, Vol. 10 [1976], pp. 7-78).

7. Wilbur H. Hunter, "Baltimore in the Revolutionary Generation" in
Maryland Heritage: Five Baltimore Institutions Celebrate the American
Bicentennial, John B. Boles, ed., (Baltimore: Maryland Historical Society,
1976), p. 189.

8. Gary B. Nash, The Urban Crucible: Social Change, Political Consciousness,
and the Origins of the American Revolution (Cambridge, Massachusetts,
Harvard University Press, 1979), p. 408.

9. Ibid., p. 121.

10. Weidman, Furniture in Maryland, p. 46.

11. Receipt Book of Samuel Preston Moore, The Library Company of
Philadelphia, Mss/Yi2/74l8/Fl7. Cited in Nancy Anne Goyne, Furniture
Craftsmen in Philadelphia, 1 760-1780: Their Role in a Mercantile Society,
Master's Thesis, University of Delaware, 1963, pp. 22, 151.

60 MESDA

12. Stephen Collins Papers, Container #73, Accounts 1 January 1765-31
December 1765, Library of Congress. Cited in Goyne, Furniture Craftsmen,
pp. 22, 34, 151, 154-155. William Crisp was working in Philadelphia before
10 February 1763. On that date, the Pennsylvania Gazette reported that
he had moved his carving shop from Race Street to Vine Street.

13. Stephen Collins Papers, Accounts Container #74, 1 January 1766-31
December 1766; the Janvier label is illustrated on p. 113 of William Voss
Elder, III, Maryland Queen Anne and Chippendale Furniture of the
Eighteenth Century (Baltimore: The Baltimore Museum of Art, 1968).

14. For references to Hopkins' sawmill and lumber yard see the Maryland
Gazette, 19 January Ml ^, Maryland Journal Si Baltimore Advertiser, 28
December 1787, 26 March 1790, 29 April 1793, Federal Gazette &
Baltimore Daily Advertiser, 20 April 1796, 7 March 1798, and 19 May 1798.

15. Federal Gazette & Baltimore Daily Advertiser, 19 May 1798.

16. Ledgerof Thomas Morgan, 1771-1803- Historical Society of Pennsylvania,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

17. Maryland Journal & Baltimore Advertiser, 22 February 1780.

18. Maryland Journal Si Baltimore Advertiser, 28 December 1787.

19. Maryland Journal, 12 February 1795, in Alfred Coxe Prime, The Arts and
Crafts in Philadelphia, Maryland, and South Carolina, /7S6- 7S00(Walpole
Society, 1932), Vol. 2, p. 181.

20. From 24 August 1798, to 15 March 1800, the Baltimore merchant Hugh
Thompson purchased a variety of Neoclassical pieces from Hopkins. Among
the forms listed were a "Large Oval Breakfast Table . . . 2 Do. [large] oval
back Chairs ... 2 Do. [large] Side Bords . . ."and two "Circular Toilet
Tables" (Bill from Gerrard Hopkins to Hugh Thompson, Hugh Thompson
Papers, Maryland Historical Society, Baltimore Maryland).

21. Weidman, Maryland Furniture, p. 46.

22. Federal Gazette & Baltimore Daily Advertiser, 19 April 1800.

23. Although the central shell is original, the applied carving on the frieze
of the chimneypiece reflects the work of two other carvers, both twentieth
century. Judging from the context of the shell carving and that on the cen-
tral drawer of the labeled high chest, it is highly probable that the mantle
shell originally had stylized leafage in imitation of Philadelphia drawer
carving.

24. James Brice Account Book, reel M1207, Maryland Hall of Records,
Annapolis, Maryland, loose sheet and pp. 29, 32. For more on the Bnce
House and architectural carving in Maryland see Luke Beckerdite, "William
Buckland Reconsidered: Architectural Carving in Chesapeake Maryland,
111 \-\ll A," Journal of Early Southern Decorative Arts, Vol. 8, No. 2
(November, 1982), pp. 42-88 and Luke Beckerdite, "William Buckland
Reconsidered: Architectural Carving in Virgmia and Maryland, 1755-1774,"
Master's Thesis, Wake Forest University, 1985.

25. Brice Account Book, p. 28.

26. The pins on the chair illustrated in Figure 4 appear to have been added.
Two chairs, nearly identical to this example do not have pinned rails
(MESDA research files S-5924 and Israel Sack, Inc., Opportunities in
American Antiques. Vol. 21 (May, 1972), p. 12.

May, 1986 61

27. Maryland Gazette, 16 May 1771.

28. Maryland Gazette, 27 May 1773, and Maryland Journal 8c Baltimore Adver-
tiser, 16 September 1783. In the 3 July 1775, issue oi Dunlap' s Maryland
Gazette; or the Baltimore General Advertiser, Moore advertised paper hang-
ings and "MOCK INDIA PICTURES, all . . . the Manufacture of this
Country . . . ."

29. This reference is cited in Henry J. Berkley, "A Register of Cabinet Makers
and Allied Trades in Maryland, as Shown by the Newspapers and Direc-
tories, 1746 to 1820," Maryland Historical Magazine , Vol. 25 (March, 1930),
p. 12.

30. Maryland Journal & Baltimore Advertiser, 30 November 1790.

31. Maryland Journal & Baltimore Advertiser, 18 May 1784.

32. Maryland Journal &[. Baltimore Advertiser, 16 November 1787.

33. Elder, Maryland Queen Anne and Chippendale Furniture, p. 69-

34. The probable histories for the dressing table are outlined in Weidman,
Furniture in Maryland, p. 67:

The dressing table was owned in this century by Mrs. Lillian Stevenson
Meyers (b. 1886) of Hereford, Baltimore County, and probably before
that by her mother Mrs. Sallie Stevenson (b. 1845-d.?). Mrs. Meyers
and possibly her mother also worked in this century for Arnold Elezy
Waters (1860-1932) of Baltimore and Somerset County. If Mrs. Steven-
son received the dressing table from Mrs. Waters, it is possible that the
piece may have originally come from "Almodington," the Elzey fam-
ily estate in Somerset County. This is uncenain, however, and the table
may have come into the Stevenson family from any one of a number
of affluent neighbors in that area of northern Baltimore County. Mrs.
Meyer's paternal grandfather, Henry Stevenson (b. 1814), was a free
black laborer who lived near the estates of several old Maryland families.
It may be significant that Stevenson's nearest neighbor, George Austen,
was a retired Baltimore cabinetmaker who was a direct "descendant"
of Robert Moore. Austen was apprenticed to Thomas Lambert, who
apprenticed to Isaac Johns, who worked for Moore.

35. See William MacPherson Horner, Blue Book of Philadelphia Furniture
(Philadelphia, 1935), pi. 76, and The Magazine Antiques, Vol. 35, (May,
1939), p. 222 and Vol. 99 (January, 1981), p. 15. The author would like
to thank Mr. Albert Sack of Israel Sack, Inc. for the Antiques references.

36. The partnership of Moore and Wayne was dissolved by 16 February 1769
{Pennsylvania Gazette, 16 February 1769, in Prime, Arts and Crafts, p.
177). Luke Beckerdite, "Philadelphia Carving Shops, Part II: Bernard and

Jugiez," The Magazine Antiques, Vol. 128 (September, 1985), pp. 498-513.

37. Horner, Blue Book, pi. 121, p. 102.

38. For example see Joseph Downs, American Furniture (New York: Bonanza
Books, 1952), pp. 184-185; Oswaldo Rodriguez Roque, American Furniture
at Chipstone (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1984), pp. AlA}i\
and The Magazine Antiques, Vol. 35 (May, 1939), p. 222 and Vol. 99
(January, 1971), p. 15.

62 MESDA

39. MESDA research file S-2373. Skinner was a prominent Quaker planter who
moved from Isle of Wight County, Virginia, to Perquimans County, North
Carolina, sometime before 1729 (Ellen Goode Winslow, History of
Perquimans County [1931, reprinted Baltimore: Regional Publishing
Company, 1974], p. 23). The high chest probably belonged to Skinner
and his first wife, Sarah Cresey (Creecy). Their marriage was approved by
the Perquimans Monthly Meeting in 1745 (William Wade Hinshaw,
Encyclopedia of Quaker Genealogy [1936, reprinted Baltimore: Genealogical
Publishing Company, Inc., 1978], Vol. 1, p. 73). A nearly identical example
is in the collection of the Maryland Historical Society. It was purchased
at a 1978 auction of the estate of Mrs. H. Clifford Bangs of Smithfield,
Isle of Wight County, Virginia (Weidman, Furniture in Maryland, p. 56).
The Skinner high chest and the example in the Maryland Historical Society
have white cedar drawer bottoms that are beveled on all four edges, rabbeted
to the sides and front, and nailed to the back. The bevels are almost entirely
covered by thin glue strips that are mitered at the front corners and sawn
off at a 45-degree angle at the back. Unlike the MHS chest, which has solid
mahogany drawer fronts, the drawers of the Skinner example are walnut
veneered on walnut. The tympanum is also veneered, but on a core of yellow
pine. The construction of the back of the upper case of the Skinner chest
is also unusual. The horizontal back boards are set flush with the case sides,
nailed in place, and the joint covered at the sides by an astragal molding.
The upper sections of both chests have full dustboards with rabbeted edges
that engage the dadoes in a manner similar to the drawer supports on the
Hopkins high chest and the lower cases are fitted with linen slides. The
slides are unusual in having wide battens with cock- beaded edges that extend
above the work surface to form a rim.

The construction of the lower case of the MHS chest differs from the
dressing table illustrated in Figure 16. The supports for the shell drawer
are lapped onto the front rail and mortised into the back. The drawer
dividers are approximately 1 Vi " thick, and there are no partitions. The
drawer supports for the upper drawer of the high chest also differ in having
a central support dovetailed into the drawer blade.

40. Related examples are illustrated in Albert Sack, Fine Points of Furniture
(New York: Crown Publishers, Inc. 1950), p. 201; Israel Sack, Inc.,
Opportunities, Vol. 4, pp. 982-983, Vol. 5, pp. 1218-1221 and Brochure
No. 31, pp. 40-41; and Charles F. Hummel, A Wlnterthur Guide to
American Chippendale Furniture (New York: Rutledge Books, 1976), pp.
86, 117. Several pieces in this group were brought to the author's atten-
tion by Mr. Allen Miller, Furniture Conservator, Quakertown, Pennsylvania.
Mr. Miller's incisive observations on early Philadelphia construction and
carving were also of great assistance.

41. Sack, Opportunities, Brochure No. 31, pp. 40-41.

42. The author would like to thank Mr. Alan Miller for calling these chairs
to his attention. The chairs are illustrated in Sack, Opportunities, Vol. 6,
pp. 1218-1221.

43 Winterthur Ace. File G. 53.68.

May, 1986 63

44. A dressing table with a shell drawer and skirt shaping like that of Figure
16 is illustrated in Elder, Maryland Queen Anne and Chippendale Furniture,
pp. 70-71.

45. See Albert Sack, Fine Points, p. 165. Although by a different hand, the
carved shell on the desk-and-bookcase in the lower left corner has a large
convex element in the center. The shell and acanthus on this example is
attributed by the author to the Philadelphia carver Samuel Harding.

46. A dressing table in the collection of the Dietrich Americana Foundation
has a front skirt shaped like that of the dressing table in Figure 19. See
Alexandra W. Rollins, "Furniture in the Collection of the Dietrich
Americana Foundation," The Magazine Antiques, Vol. 125 (May, 1984),
p. 1116.

64 MESDA

For assistance with this article, the author would like to thank Mr.
William Voss Elder, III. Mr. Joe Kin dig, III, Mr. Allan Miller, Mr
Albert Sack, and Ms. Gregory R. Weidman. Special thanks are due
Mr. Elder and Ms. Weidman. Their research and observations on
eighteenth century furniture were essential to this study.

May, 1986 65

MESDA seeks manuscripts which treat virtually any facet of southern decorative
art for publication tn the JOURNAL. The MESDA staff would also like to
examine any privately-held primary research material (documents and manu-
scripts) from the South, and southern newspapers published in 1820 and earlier.

some Back issues of The Journal
are available.

The preparation of t\\e Journal ^■xs made possible (in part) by a grant from
the Research Tools and Reference Works Program of the National Endowment
for the Humanities, an independent Federal Agency.

Photographs in this issue by the staff of the Museum of Early Southern
Decorative Arts except where noted.

GG MESDA

MUSEUM OF EARLY SOUTHERN DECORATIVE ARTS

Frank L. Horton, Director
Bradford L. Rauschenberg, Research Fellow
Forsyth M. Alexander, Research Assistant
Luke Beckerdite, Research Associate
Sally Gant, Education Coordinator
Elizabeth Putney, Associate in Education
Paula Young, Education Assistant
Rosemary Estes, Research Archivist
John Bivins, Jr., Editor
Sara Lee Barnes, Editorial Associate
Carolyn Head, Secretary /Receptionist
Wesley Stewart, Photographer