Linon sarah five drawer padded chest cabinet

/rom (Â& tf&ut/rruw/ va/kction/

American Furniture

/. Michael Flanigan

INTRODUCTORY ESSAYS

WewJ}/ A. Cooper Morrison H. Heckscher Gregory R. Weidman

National Gallery of Art, Washington

^America/?/ &umt£ur& /ram/ tA& tf&iuAia/i/ (oo/kctlofi/

Selections from the Collection of George M. and Linda H. Kaufman

and the Kaufman Americana Foundation

Photographs by Dirk Bakker

Edited by Judith Rice Millón Typeset in Sabon and Snell Roundhand

by Composition Systems Incorporated, Falls Church, Virginia Printed by Princeton Polychrome Press, Princeton, New Jersey

on Potlach Quintessence paper Designed by Frances P. Smyth

Copyright © 1986, Board of Trustees, National Gallery of Art All rights reserved. This book may not be reproduced,

in whole or in part, in any form (beyond that copying permitted by Sections 107 and 108

of the U.S. Copyright Law and except by reviewers for the public press), without written permission from the publishers.

cover: catalogue number 3

Exhibition dates at the National Gallery: October iz, 1986-April 19, 1987

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Flanigan, J. Michael. American furniture from the Kaufman collection.

Bibliography: p. Includes index.

i. Furniture, Colonial—United States—Exhibitions. z. Furniture—United States—History—i8th century— Exhibitions. 3. Furniture—United States—History—

19th century—Exhibitions. 4. Kaufman, George M.— Art collections—Exhibitions. 5. Kaufman, Linda—

Art collections—Exhibitions. 6. Furniture—Private collections— United States—Exhibitions. I. National

Gallery of Art (U.S.) II. Title. NK2.4o6.F58 1986 749.2i4'o74'oi53 86-2.1844

ISBN 0-89468-099-4

Contents

Foreword J. CARTER BROWN

6

Acknowledgments 8

Note to the Reader 10

American Furniture Styles in the Colonial Period MORRISON H. HECKSCHER

12

Furniture from the Colonial Period 16

The Neoclassical Style in New England and New York, 1785—1840 WENDY A. COOPER

98

The Neoclassical Style in Philadelphia and the South, 1785—1840 GREGORY R. WEIDMAN

102

Furniture from the Federal and Empire Periods 106

Bibliography and Abbreviated Titles

244

Comparative Details 2-49

Glossary 256

Index 260

Foreword

One of America's first great art forms was furniture. Like our early great buildings in the Georgian manner, and later in the Federal and neoclassical styles, many of the decorative arts crafted for interior use blended aesthetics with practicality. It has been a particularly native and democratic impulse in American culture to seek both refinement of form and useful- ness of purpose.

Over the century from the period just before the American Revolution to the full flourishing of the Republic in the dec- ades before the Civil War, American architecture and furni- ture alike demonstrate the importation, adaptation, and transformation of inherited European forms.

Aside from being one of the largest and most refined collec- tions of early American furniture in private hands, the works in this exhibition lent by George and Linda Kaufman exem- plify American craftsmanship at its highest quality and offer vivid lessons in the evolution of national and regional tastes during this highly productive period of our nation's develop- ment. It begins with impressive examples of the Dutch style known as William and Mary, at the beginning of the eigh- teenth century. Among its later glories are elegant pieces in the American Queen Anne and rococo style. The collection is rounded off with the imposing presence of objects made in the Federal and Empire phases of neoclassicism during the first half of the nineteenth century. Their bold shapes and orna- mentation reflect the exuberant self-confidence of the estab- lished American nation.

In addition, the Kaufman collection offers a marvelous op- portunity for comparing the different tastes and achievements developed in the great regional centers of production, such as Boston, Newport, Philadelphia, and New York. Even more, we have the chance to savor the particular refinements of de- sign and execution attributable to the most celebrated individ- ual craftsmen of the colonies and early republic, including John Townsend, John and Thomas Seymour, and Duncan Phyfe.

Excepting the furniture assembled for the Diplomatic Re- ception Rooms of the State Department, there are no perma- nent collections or surveys of American furniture in Washing- ton's museums. As with other fields in which the National Gallery does not actively collect, we take the opportunity to show them through our exhibition program. Thus we are espe- cially pleased to be able to present to a wide audience exam- ples of American furniture at its best and seldom seen by our public.

This undertaking has been coordinated on behalf of the Gal- lery by J. Michael Flanigan, administrator of the Kaufman Collection. His kindness and hard work have been welcomed by all the members of our own staff, and he has served as an able intermediary with Wendy Cooper, Morrison Heckscher, Gregory Weidman and our collegues elsewhere.

This exhibition follows in the spirit of In Praise of America: American Decorative Arts, 1650-1830, which was seen at the Gallery in 1980 and included distinguished loans from the Kaufman collection. Indeed, the Kaufmans have been notably generous to many institutions, not just in lending objects but in helping to fund catalogues of museum collections and spon- sor scholarly research in the field. The Gallery is pleased to ac- knowledge their generous friendship, as donors to its Patrons Permanent Fund and members of our Collectors Committee. On this occasion we gratefully welcome their loans of Ameri- can furniture and the chance to share temporarily these trea- sures with our many visitors.

J. Carter Brown Director cat. no. 36, detail

6

Acknowledgments

I am first and foremost indebted to George and Linda Kauf- man for giving me the opportunity to publish their collection. This catalogue is only the latest in their continuing efforts to ensure that the finest examples of American furniture are available to the public through books. They have allowed me to crawl under, upend, and disassemble the furniture with which they live. They have also been taskmasters, demanding accuracy and honesty in the examination and publication of all that can be learned of the furniture in the time devoted to this project.

The essayists, who also functioned as advisors—Morrison Heckscher, Wendy Cooper, and Gregory Weidman—have helped guide a novice through the terrors of a first effort. Most notably I thank Morrie Heckscher, whose reassurance and counsel were much appreciated. Also, my wife, Gregory, who has shown great forbearance for the project through both our wedding and the birth of our first child.

The broadness of the collection has brought me in contact with scholars throughout the field. Their insights and exper- tise are, I hope, evident in the entries. Their quick and thor- ough responses to my inquiries were a great help, especially in the early stages of the project. Among them are Jayne Stokes, Baltimore Museum of Art; Ronald Hurst, Colonial Williams- burg; Dean Lahikainen, Essex Institute; Lynn Hastings, Hampton National Historic Site; Philip Zea, Historic Deer- field; Margaret Stearns, Museum of the City of New York; Luke Beckerdite and Bradford Rauschenberg, Museum of Early Southern Decorative Arts; Jonathan Fairbanks, Mu- seum of Fine Arts, Boston; Jean Burks and Beatrice Garvan, Philadelphia Museum of Art; Christopher Monkhouse, Rhode Island School of Design; Brock Jobe and Robert Mus- sey, Society for the Preservation of New England Antiquities; Donald Fennimore and Nancy Richards, Winterthur Mu- seum; Charles Venable, Winterthur Program in Early Ameri- can Culture; Jenine Sherry, Yale Art Gallery; Phillip Zimmer- man, York County Historical Society; and Page Talbott.

Other professionals have also helped provide information

on the history of various pieces in the collection and closely re- lated objects. Among these are Sue St. Amant, Robert Lee Gill, Sylvia Tearston, Joseph K. Ott, Jeanne Vibert, Arthur and Zeke Liverant, Bernard Levy, Nancy Skinner, Donald Webster, Thomas Schwenke, Robert T. Trump, Stuart Feld, Joe Lionetti, the late John Walton, Charles Dorman, Susan Detweiller,and Jan Herda. Harold and Albert Sack deserve a special note. Their knowledge, and willingness to share it, proved almost as valuable as the objects they discovered.

Special thanks go out to Georgeann Linthicum who sifted through the entire run of The Magazine Antiques, and to Brad Rauschenberg of MESDA who did the microanalysis of wood samples.

The excellent photographs are the work of Dirk Bakker of the Detroit Institute of Arts and his assistant, Steve Yungquist. The photo session that produced them required the coordi- nated efforts of a number of people including Jeff and Jim Aldrich, Jack Brown, Robert Brown, Daniel Hall, and espe- cially Walter Raynes.

The preparation of the manuscript, organization of the files, and my numerous inquiries were handled with aplomb by Jodi Mullins, Jean Frantz, and Rosalynne Dillon who also com- piled the indices.

The staff of the National Gallery of Art provided both ex- pert guidance and inspiration throughout the project. Design- ers Gill Ravenel and Mark Leithauser and editors Frances Smyth and Judith Millon gave form to the exhibition and focus to the catalogue.

The responsibility for any errors that may have survived the contributions of all these people is entirely my own. I wish to thank those whose support and encouragement predate this project: my family, especially Margaret R. Donahue and the late Raymond J. Donahue; also W Lee Beck, Harry D. Berry, Jr., Stiles T. Colwill, Frederick S. Koontz, and William Weaver.

/. Michael Flanigan August 1986

cat. no. 918

Note to the Reader

The heading for each entry follows these general rules: The name for an object is that, which when known, is the one most probably used at the time of manufacture. The dates give the widest time period possible. The regions are based on the idea of a style center and not geographic boundaries. The materials do not list inlays or veneers but are limited to primary and structural elements. Those woods identified by microanalysis are marked by an asterisk. All other identifications have been by eye or by a ten-power hand lens. Veneers are cited in the Construction and condition notes. The dimensions are taken at the widest point in each direction. They may be thought of as describing the smallest box into which the piece would fit. The dimensions are given for each object as seen in the photo- graph (i.e., table leaves are up).

The nomenclature of periods and styles has been vexing scholars for decades. It is a question far beyond the scope of this book. This collection is composed of pieces from the urban style centers and thus avoids entirely questions con- cerning Windsor, folk, and other styles. This catalogue follows the format based loosely on the English two part system of pe- riod by monarch, and style by the designer or idea most influ- ential in the production of a piece. For the purposes of this cat- alogue, periods are defined as: Colonial: up to 1785; Federal: 1785-1815; and Empire: 1815-1840. Styles are defined as William and Mary, Queen Anne, baroque, rococo, Federal, neoclassical, and Empire. Designers such as Chippendale, Hepplewhite, or Sheraton are cited when they are thought to have had a direct infuence on an object.

Most of the eighteenth- and nineteenth-century prove- nances cited are based on information supplied by the seller. Unsubstantiated histories are cited, in the hope that they may elicit more accurate information even if only by rebuttal. The dates of each owner have not been included except for the original owner when known.

The literature citations include all books and catalogues and all major periodicals, but no advertisements. For chairs and tables, publications related to mates and others from the same set are cited. Exhibitions and loans of the objects before they entered the collection are cited when known.

The information in the Construction and condition section is not intended to be inclusive; rather it is intended to give an overview of how a particular piece is constructed, noting ele-

ments not visible in the illustrations and techniques that differ from the common practice. These notes are also intended to aid in the examination of similar pieces to determine if the sim- ilarity extends beyond form and decoration. I have also at- tempted, when possible, to show how certain construction techniques affected design decisions, or vice versa.

A familiarity with the basic construction techniques em- ployed by eighteenth- and nineteenth-century cabinetmakers is helpful when using the notes. Certain techniques are so com- mon that their use is not always noted. For example, unless note is made to the contrary, drawers are always dovetailed to- gether; the mortise-and-tenon joint is standard for all frame constructions; all drop leaves rotate on rule joints except where noted.

All the woods in the original construction are noted; woods and fasteners used in repairs are not. The various types of hinges are not cited because the card tables, leaf tables, and doors use the standard type for their function. The antiquity of the hinges is accepted unless otherwise noted. Locks have not been cited either. Beyond differentiating between nails and screws, no attempt has been made to remove them to assure their age or originality. Brasses, unless otherwise noted, are original. While bits of original finish may remain on under- sides and in crevices, none of the pieces in the collection are known to retain the original finish. Since all the pieces are il- lustrated in color, there has been no attempt to describe patina.

None of the upholstery pictured is original nor are the brass nail patterns based on original evidence, except where noted. Evidence of original upholstery, upholstery substructure, and brass nail patterns are cited when known. Replacement parts, major repairs, and the addition of material to support repairs or weak joints have been noted, but veneer patches, breaks, and the wear and tear of two hundred years have not. I have avoided classifying certain techniques and decorations such as dovetails, carving, or inlay. Judgments on these are difficult to convey in a few words and are highly subjective.

A truly thorough and inclusive report on any piece in this catalogue would have taken more space than the entire entry and photograph. It is my hope that these notes will act as a guide and general overview to the pieces. J.M.F.

10 cat. no. 88

American Furniture Styles in the Colonial Era

Morrison H. Heckscher

Almost from the earliest years of settlement, furniture-making was an important industry in colonial America. The cost of importing English or European pieces was so great that only the very wealthy could do so, and frequently even they chose locally made pieces. There was a limitless supply of local raw materials, including many woods that had no exact parallel in England: northeastern white pine and cherry from New En- gland; tulip and American black walnut from New York and Pennsylvania; yellow pine and cypress from the south. There were also large numbers of furniture craftsmen. Joiners, turn- ers, and japanners, cabinetmakers, carvers, and upholsterers —all emigrated in large numbers to the land of opportunity. In New England alone some 150 first generation emigrant mak- ers are known. They came from widely diverse parts of En- gland, bringing with them regional styles they already knew. In other words they transplanted English regional styles to America, styles that tell more about the background of the joiner than of colonial tastes. But these transplanted styles rap- idly became local American preferences, and this is the over- riding feature of American colonial furniture: there are a num- ber of distinct regional style centers rather than any one American style.

The earliest American furniture was made in what, for want of a more descriptive title, is called the seventeenth-century style. It is heavy furniture, four-square or rectilinear, and often ponderous in form. The visual effect is produced by extensive surface ornamentation. Case furniture, that is chests and cup- boards, usually made of oak, was the work of joiners. Joiners were craftsmen who specialized in panel-and-frame construc- tion, heavy mortise-and-tenon frames into which thin panel boards are fitted. The surfaces of both frames and panels were often richly ornamented with low-relief carving, moldings,

and applied turnings or painted decoration. Seating furniture, as well as most tables, was the province of wood turners. The craftsmen turned the framing members on a lathe, in combina- tions of rings and urns, and then mortise-and-tenoned them together. This style predominated in the seventeenth-century settlements of Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Pennsylvania.

The decade of the 16908 witnessed a dramatic change in taste with the introduction of furniture in the William and Mary style, named after William of Orange, ruler of Holland, and Mary Stuart, who assumed the British throne in 1688. The luxurious and elegant new style, which had originated on the Continent, primarily in Holland, became fashionable in En- gland during the i66os, after the restoration of the monarchy. Its introduction into the colonies may have coincided with the installation of a Royal Governor during the mid-i68os, in which case the style may be seen as a visual symbol of the shift of power from the Bay Colony's old Puritan oligarchy to An- glicans and merchants with closer ties to England.

Furniture in this new style is lighter in scale, taller and more vertical in form, and exhibits more movement in design (greater contrasts of thick and thin, for example), than furni- ture in the seventeenth-century manner. A variety of new fur- niture forms were introduced—among them easy chairs, dressing tables, and fall-front desks—and regional styles be- gan to emerge.

Seating furniture still consisted primarily of turners' work, but was now characterized by vasiform posts and bold bul- bous stretchers. Fashionable chairs often have high narrow backs with richly carved crests, small seats, and splayed Span- ish feet; the seats and backs are caned or leather-covered. On cheaper examples the seats are rushed and the backs have split spindles. Couches, what we call daybeds, were introduced as

12.

were fully upholstered easy chairs, our wing chairs. There was an altogether new interest in comfort.

Case furniture was now the work of cabinetmakers rather than joiners. The boards forming the top, bottom, and sides of chests or desks are dovetailed together; so are the pieces form- ing the sides of drawers. Moldings, particularly those of cor- nices, adopt shapes found in classical architectural details.' Walnut and maple supplant oak as the favored furniture mate- rial. Many pieces have applied surface decoration—either burl walnut veneers framed with herringbone-pattern edges, or painted decoration in imitation of oriental lacquerwork. A high chest and a dressing table, both japanned (cat. nos. 17, 18), are two remarkably preserved examples of the latter type. The collection, however, really only begins with furniture in the Queen Anne style.

It was about 1730 that American furniture design changed course and embraced what is now called the Queen Anne style. The essence of the style in America is form—curvilinear, self- contained, and graceful. The preferred wood is native black walnut. Chairs provide the purest examples of the style. Their primary component is the S-curve—what Hogarth was to call "the Line of Beauty"—found in the rounded back and seat, the baluster splat, and, most of all, the gracefully curved cabriole leg with its projecting knee, narrow ankle, and pad foot. For the most part carving was of little importance. Shells, while often executed in low relief to accent crest rail and knees, do not affect the outline or shape.

Case furniture, particularly high chests and secretary desks, is now embellished with architectural features—bonnet tops or scroll pediments, molded cornices and fluted pilasters— details also found on the houses of a new generation of leaders, men like John Hancock in Boston and James Logan in Phila- delphia. In addition to modernizing case furniture and al- tering the form of chairs, craftsmen in the Queen Anne style in- troduced new types of tables to accommodate changing social patterns—marble-slab serving tables, folding-top card tables, and circular tilt-top tea tables.

The Chippendale style, the name now popularly given to American furniture showing rococo influence, made its ap- pearance in the mid-i75os and was dominant until just after the Revolution. Its primary features include: several architec- tural forms for case pieces; complex, even jagged forms for chairs and tables; elaborate naturalistic carving, and cabriole legs with claw-and-ball feet. It is, in good part, a carver's style: the carving often determines the shape or outline of various parts of a piece. Mahogany, ideally suited to the chisel, is the preferred wood. Although chairs, now with eared crest rails and square seats, are drastically different from the Queen Anne, the form of case furniture remained basically un- changed. Indeed, it is not always possible to distinguish be-

tween these two styles. On the other hand, during the late colonial period when the Queen Anne and Chippendale styles were dominant, regional styles became so pro- nounced that each furniture-making center must be looked at independently.

Boston was the leading urban center in New England during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, and the type of Queen Anne style furniture introduced there in the early 17308 influenced furniture design throughout the region. Stylistic- ally, the earliest example is a walnut-veneered, flat-top high chest (cat. no. 19) that differs little from William and Mary ex- amples except in its legs. Four cabriole legs supplant six turned ones; in the three-part skirt are pendant drops, vestigial re- mains of the two inside turned legs. A second walnut-veneered high chest (cat. no. 20) represents the fullest development of the Queen Anne form, with broken-arch bonnet top, carved and gilt shell drawers, and inlaid stars—all features in vogue by 1733. Chests and desks, on the other hand, very often had facades of solid wood shaped in block, bombe, or serpentine form. The block front, with sides projecting and center reced- ing, is a form known as early as 1738. However, veneered blocking is unusual, and a veneered blockfront dressing table (cat. no. 2.1) is a decided rarity.

As early as the 17405 Boston's economy and population had begun a gradual decline. Her craftsmen, mostly descended from long-established furniture-making families, refused to allow outsiders to infiltrate their domain. Inevitably this bred a conservative approach to design, which may explain why the straight-front high chest of drawers and blockfront pieces re- mained a staple of New England cabinetwork well into the 17708. It also helps explain why the style of Thomas Chippen- dale's The Gentleman and Cabinet-Maker's Director, pub- lished in 1754 and again in 1762, was not embraced by New Englanders with the same enthusiasm that had received the Queen Anne style. While a few copies of the Director were owned in New England, its designs had no influence on local furniture style. Most case furniture remained Queen Anne in form, but the best examples of the sixties and seventies often exhibit—through serpentine fronts and the delicate propor- tions and profiles of certain details—a lightness and playful- ness that is rococo in spirit (cat. no. 23). The same can be said of seating furniture. On a celebrated Masonic Master's chair (cat. no. 4), for example, the traditional form—smooth rounded arm supports and turned stretchers—is brought up to date with flat, leaf-carved knees and raked-back talon-claw feet.

Newport began its rise to commercial prominence in the 17408, just as Boston's growth had peaked. Newport had a close-knit group of Quaker craftsmen who took the Boston Queen Anne style and brilliantly transformed it. The result

13

was what is often considered the most uniquely American, as well as among the best crafted, of all American furniture. Among the leading practitioners were members of the Town- send and Goddard families, two intermarried dynasties of Quaker cabinetmakers. During the late forties and fifties Newport craftsmen produced an elegant, angular version of Massachusetts Queen Anne high chests and tea tables, with distinctively pointed pad feet. Then, about 1760, they adopted the blockfront form; by the addition of boldly lobed shells they transformed it into the famous block and shell pattern that continued in fashion, virtually unchanged, over a thirty-year period until the early nineties.

A number of important examples of the style include a chest-on-chest and a "kneehole" chest, or bureau table, each with four shells (cat. nos. 25, 2,6), and a three-shell, three- drawer chest bearing inscriptions by members of the Goddard family (cat. no. 24). We know that John Goddard (1723-1786) owned a copy of Chippendale's Director, but it had no impact on this piece, much less on Rhode Island taste in general. In addition to the block and shell, Newport cabinet- makers devised cabriole legs with intaglio-carved knee orna- ments and claw feet with open talons for use on tables and high chests (cat. no. 2.7). A square tea table (cat. no. 12), one that can safely be ascribed to John Townsend (1732-1809), the doyen of Newport makers, is in the collection. So also is a firescreen (cat. no. 33), part of a group of tripod-pedestal fur- niture with diminutive cat's-paw feet.

New York City had, during the late colonial period, a furniture-making industry that approximated that of New- port in size. The city's great growth came only after the Revo- lution. While some models of Queen Anne chairs made in the two cities were so alike as to be today indistinguishable, gener- ally speaking the furniture was totally different. Whereas Newport developed a unique and distinctive style, New York faithfully followed English practice. The city's population was heavy with Loyalists who wanted English furniture—whether made here or there was immaterial. Thus, not surprisingly, New York furniture appears in familiar English forms and has the broad and heavy proportions of the imported English ex- amples that it copies. It was good, middle-class furniture that New York makers copied, not the fanciful rococo imaginings of the Director. A chest, cat. no. 28, has these qualities, with characteristic New York fret pattern, chamfered corners, ga- drooned skirt, and square claw feet.

Philadelphia began a meteoric growth in the 17308; by 1740 she was second only to Boston in size; by 1765 she was half again as big. The 17405 was the golden age of Philadelphia chairmaking. To compete successfully against the flood of

cat. no. 2.0

14

seating furniture imported from Boston, the local makers pro- duced chairs that are a perfect manifestation of the Queen Anne style. The stiles and crest rail form an unbroken curve; the balloon seat is boldly rounded. Cat. nos. 2 and 3 are exam- ples from two different sets of such chairs in this collection. The other Philadelphia Queen Anne furniture form that sur- vives in particularly large numbers is the drop-leaf dining table, illustrated here by one that is notable for its twelve-sided top (cat. no. n).

The style associated with Chippendale in Philadelphia actu- ally had its beginnings just prior to the publication of the Di- rector in 1754. By this time Philadelphia cabinetwork had be- gun to assume a new importance. A mahogany bonnet-top high chest with shell drawers, acanthus-leaf knees, and claw feet, now at Colonial Williamsburg, is dated 1753. A high chest and its matching dressing table (cat. nos. 2.9, 30) also ex- emplify the early phase. The skirts, in the William and Mary manner, rise in a high central arch. Centered above the arch is an applied shell that is identical to one found on the seat rail of a chair (cat. no. 6) which, by virtue of the heaviness of its parts, may be assigned a similar date.

The most popular pierced splat pattern for Philadelphia Chippendale chairs is the strapwork splat type. In addition to cat. no. 6 there is one from the elaborate set once owned by the Lambert family (cat. no. 5), also of relatively early date, and two examples that must have been made in the mid-sixties or later. On these latter (cat. nos. 7, 8), the framing members are thinner, the carving is freer, and in places actually defines the chair outline. The ogival, Gothic-type splat, another popular local pattern, is also represented (cat. no. 9).

But the fullest development of the carved chair in Philadel- phia is found in the set made about 1770 as part of a suite of furniture for General John Cadwalader's opulent town house. In addition to a pair of chairs from this set (cat. no. 10) there is a richly carved firescreen (cat. no. 32) that can also be associ- ated with the Cadwalader suite. These pieces are in the late phase of Philadelphia Chippendale—after the publication in 1762 of the greatly enlarged third edition of the Director and after the nonimportation agreements of the sixties had ren- dered inadvisable the importation of English furniture. Thus the London-trained cabinetmaker, Thomas Affleck came to Philadelphia in 1763, Director in hand, and found a willing public. On a monumental desk and bookcase, whose upper case unit is in the Palladian style of the 17405, the lower case is taken directly from Chippendale's third edition (cat. no. 31). The Chippendale style in America followed a progression that can be clearly seen in cat. nos, 14, 15, and 16 from the rococo through Chinese and Gothic variations to the Marlborough style. This last offered an alternative to the cabriole leg and was a harbinger of the neoclassical style which was to eclipse the rococo by the end of the eighties.

15

1 Side Chair 1730-1760 Newport Walnut; maple slip seat 393/4 x n3/4 x 2.o3/4 in. ACC. NO. 83.2

The refinement of the Queen Anne chair in New England reached its apogee with this form. The gentle curves of the back, seat, and legs have a flowing naturalistic quality differ- ent from the robust, almost electric, quality of Philadelphia examples seen in cat. nos. 2, and 3. These chairs are often re- ferred to as compass chairs for the shaping of the seat. In the eighteenth century they were also called "Indian" chairs in ref- erence to their oriental derivation. The attenuation of the back is marked by a flawless transition of the fully molded stiles to the shallow, arched crest. The gentle curved vasiform splat with its high volutes supports this effect. The shell resting on a reverse C-scroll caps the design.

Conventional interpretation states that the turned stretch- ers of New England's Queen Anne and rococo chairs are a ves- tige of the William and Mary period that reflects Yankee con- servatism and detracts from the form. In fact they are a holdover, but the chairs have been designed around them. Without the stretchers the delicately wrought back would seem overwrought; high and narrow, with a rectangular sil- houette, the back would seem out of place with the broad com- pass seat and cabriole legs. The stretchers help bring the seat and legs into balance with the back.

A number of chairs are similar in form and decoration but differ slightly in dimensions and execution. They are all attrib- uted to Newport. A set of four chairs owned by Moses Brown and thought to have been made by John Goddard on the basis of correspondence between them are the best documented (Carpenter 1954, no. n). Another set of six (Jobe and Kay 1984, no. 91), of which four remain, are thought to have been owned, along with two other sets of Newport chairs, by Charles Barrett, Sr., a New Ipswich, New Hampshire, mer- chant. A pair, along with a matching slipper chair (I. Sack n.d.-i979, 3:745) and a single chair (Greenlaw 1974, no. 51), are part of this group, but have no eighteenth-century history.

Provenance: Dr. and Mrs. Joseph Kreiselman Collection, Washington; Bernard and S. Dean Levy, Inc., New York

Construction and condition: The chair frame is constructed entirely of walnut. The rails are tenoned and pinned to the legs and stiles. They are shaped on one side only. This makes the in- side of the seat trapezoidal in cross section. The returns in the rails are cut from the solid. The side and front rails are rab- beted to accept the slip seat. The front rail is marked mi in the rabbet. The rear rail is thinner than the stiles. Modern blocks support all the leg joints. The side stretchers are tenoned to the legs and the cross stretchers are doweled in place. The knee- blocks are glued and nailed. The slip seat is maple. It is mortise-and-tenoned together. Its members are shaped on one side only.

The shoe is separate from the rear rail. The splat is cham- fered along its edge and seats directly in the shoe. The stiles are tenoned and pinned to the crest rail. The stiles in cross section are more of a rectangle with rounded corners than an oval or ellipse. The crest-rail shell is carved from the solid.

16

2 Side Chair (one of a set of five) 1735-1760 Philadelphia Walnut; white cedar slip seat 41% x ioa/4 x ii in. ACC. NO. 78.6 a-e

All the elements that define Philadelphia's Queen Anne chair style can be found in this set. There is a strong vertical empha- sis delineated by a fully curvilinear design. The compass seat is deeply curved as well. The highly articulated baluster splat, stockinged trifid feet, delicate shells with deep scrolls, and fully rounded stiles are hallmarks of its fullest development.

Philadelphia chairs achieve this light vertical quality by eliminating stretchers and thinning the seat rails. The technical basis for this is that the seat rails are very deep and shaped on only one side to accommodate the deep curves. The rails are tenoned through the stiles. This reduces the rack and twist that stretchers and wider rails can eliminate.

The legs of these five chairs show the same styling as Heck- scher 1985, nos. 38-41 and Fitzgerald 1982, fig. 111-30. The distinguishing features of this style leg are widely spaced toes, a ridge along the outside edge, and the thick pad of the foot. None of these chairs share enough other quantifiable details to establish that they were produced in the same shop. The legs may be the work of an independent craftsman who supplied them to various shops.

The set of five chairs was purchased along with a similar sixth chair. The five are numbered n, in, mi, v, vn. The slip seats are numbered n, m, v, vi, vn. A chair illustrated in Rodriguez-Roque 1984, no. 48, appears to be from this set and is marked with the number vi. The sixth similar chair in the Kaufman Collection matches one in Kirk 1972,, no. 54.

Provenance: Florence Traemmer, Point Pleasant, Pennsyl- vania; Israel Sack, Inc., New York; John Schapiro Collection, Baltimore; Israel Sack, Inc., New York

Construction and condition: These chairs, like cat. no. 3, em- ploy the standard techniques of Philadelphia Queen Anne chair construction. The chair frame is made entirely of wal- nut. The front legs are doweled through the rails and sup- ported by knee-blocks which are glued and nailed in place. The side rails are horizontally tenoned to the front rails and vertically tenoned through the stiles. These joints are secured by modern pins. The returns are applied and are also tenoned through the stiles. The rear rail is thinner than the stiles and is

tenoned to them. These joints are secured by two pins in each stile. Returns in the rear rail are cut from the solid. The rounded lip enclosing the slip seat is cut from the solid in the front rail and applied on the side rails. The slip seats are made of white cedar. Although a few of the rear rails are replace- ments, the rails are shaped on one side only, mortise-and- tenoned together and pinned at the front.

The shoe is a separate piece and the splat is seated directly in it. The splat is solid crotch walnut, chamfered along its edges. Both the inner and outer curves of the stiles are finished by ap- plied pieces. All the carving of the crest rail is cut from the solid.

Literature: P-B 1955, no. 320; I. Sack n.d.-i979, 6:40-41, 1530-1531

Exhibitions: New York, P-B Galleries 1955 (Art Treasures Ex- hibition); Norfolk, Virginia, Chrysler Museum 1979-1980

18

3 Pair of Side Chairs 1735-1760 Philadelphia Walnut 4i5/8 x 2o3/4 x ii in. ACC. NO. 78.9 a, b

These chairs are the summit of American Queen Anne chair- making. They represent the height of curvilinear design. Like cat. no. 12, they are among the finest pieces of American eighteenth-century sculpture. The only right angles visible are at the joint of the rear rail to the stiles. There are other chairs that have more carving, ball-and-claw feet, or pierced strap- work splats, embellishments that shift the emphasis of the chair from line and form to decoration. Here, in cat. no. 3, the shells, leafwork, and scrolls enhance without dominating the form. The refinement of the rounded stiles and broken-front compass seat with molded edge stress the curvilinear design of the chairs. The production of chairs of this kind, also repre- sented by cat. no 2, required larger amounts of expensive woods than any other chairs of the Colonial or Federal peri- ods. Most significantly, the splats are made of solid crotch wal- nut. They are S-shaped in cross section, consuming even more wood. The deep curves of the compass seats are made from rails shaped on only one side, and the molded edge of the front rail is cut from the solid.

At least five of these chairs are known: this pair, a pair shown in Kirk 1971, no. 56, and a single chair shown in I. Sack n.d. —1979, 5:1218. Both pairs have histories of descent from the Coates family of Philadelphia.