Georgian & Regency Houses Explained Read online

  FIG 1.5: Mileposts were erected by turnpike trusts along the length of road for which they were responsible.

  FIG 1.6: CROMFORD WHARF, DERBYSHIRE: The terminus of the Cromford Canal, built for a consortium including Richard Arkwright whose earlier mill stands opposite, and opened in 1793 at the height of Canal Mania.

  Georgian Society

  After years of stagnation the population of the country began to grow in the second half of the 18th century, for reasons that are still not clear, although access to better food and housing – and soap – may have all played their part. Outbreaks of disease were still rife, particularly in the mid century, and the resilient population that emerged afterwards saw growth from around six million up to nine million by the turn of the 19th century. Much of this expansion came from London alone, which nearly tripled in numbers in this period to more than one and a half million by 1830. Other towns and cities were tiny in comparison but growth was even more dramatic in industrial centres and ports. For instance, Manchester, a modest town with under 10,000 people at the beginning of this period, had swelled to a potential city of 180,000 by the end of it.

  Despite these growing concentrations of population, the majority still lived in the country and worked on the land, even in the midst of the Industrial Revolution. The social mix also only changed slowly in this period, with the bulk of the nation’s wealth in the hands of aristocratic and gentry families, which probably made up just a few percent of the population, and under-pinned by a growing yet still small middle class. More than three-quarters of the people in England were craftsmen, labourers, or vagrants with no representation, few rights, and a life potentially full of violent fluctuations in fortune. Surprisingly, though, rich and poor lived side by side in many areas, and it was common for a large house of a wealthy family in town to have narrow courts of working class dwellings at the rear, although the exodus to peace and privacy in the suburbs for those with money had already begun.

  FIG 1.7: This magnificent room at Kedleston Hall, Derbyshire was designed by Robert Adam in the 1770s. It displays the aristocracy’s love for Ancient Greece and Rome, inspired by their Grand Tours and the work of Palladio, and turned into reality by leading architects of the day.

  UPPER CLASSES

  For the hereditary aristocratic families and the wealthiest gentlemen, the Georgian period was generally one where their incomes grew as land, the ownership of which was still the main status symbol in society, increased in value. This could happen due to suburban development, agricultural improvement or through the extraction of minerals and if it did not, as was often the case early on in the period, they could marry a rich heiress!

  There were, however, an increasing number of delights and opportunities on which they could spend their money, and some still managed to get into debt. For many a young gentleman the climax of his education would have been the Grand Tour, a journey primarily to Italy to soak up the architectural and cultural wonders of the Classical Age and invariably buy up and cart half of it back with him! Second sons were increasingly attracted to the church, which, as the land attached to each living gained value, became a lucrative position. However, as they mixed in a different social circle they often became rather remote in their smart new vicarage from their parishioners, weakening the Church’s influence on their minds and souls.

  The main expense for this class was building a country house. A need for increased space, often to store all the art work and sculpture shipped back from the Continent, and the demands of socialising were usually enough motivation. There was also the desire to impress guests with their refined taste for classical style but with the most modern of fittings behind the antique appearance. This resulted in large-scale rebuilding of thousands of country houses (most were refaced or extended; fewer were built completely from scratch due to the huge costs involved). The estate that it commanded came under the same scrutiny as landscapes were altered to mirror those of the classical world. They also provided a base for the new sports of foxhunting and shooting, in the process sweeping communities aside and breaking the traditional bond between manor house and manor.

  Much of the year was spent in London or in the major provincial town or city where the aristocratic and gentry families would either own or rent a large house, attracted by business or parliamentary commitments and the social circle and leisure opportunities on offer. For those who could afford it there were assembly rooms for concerts, dances and gatherings, theatres for plays, and coffee and chocolate houses for meetings (which developed into Gentlemen’s Clubs later in the period). There were many other distractions, mistresses were common and illegitimate children numerous, gambling was the downfall of many a gentleman and drinking a serious problem (this is the time when the phrase ‘drunk as a lord’ was coined). It was not until later in the period that those in power developed a more dignified and sober image under the threat of revolution from below.

  Crime and rioting were two other problems that faced the rich, especially as there was no police force, and both were accepted as part of life. Their houses were natural targets for burglars and rioters and they attempted to protect them with external shutters and elaborate door locks, which still survive on some properties today. Petty crime was rife in places and it was even known for wigs to be snatched off the heads of the unwary in the middle of the street! The only answer the authorities could come up with was to lower the offence by which you could be hung or transported – pickpocketing as little as 12 pence could send you to the gallows – although it appears that this action was no deterrent.

  FIG 1.8: Shutters were commonly fitted to ground floor windows of upper and middle class houses, not only to protect delicate interiors from excessive sunlight but also, when the property was unoccupied, to deter thieves and rioters. The bolt was fastened from inside when they were shut, with a rotating stay (between the two shutters) holding them in place when open (see also Fig 4.34).

  MIDDLE CLASSES

  Below the wealthiest band of society were increasing numbers of professionals, businessmen, merchants, financiers, shopkeepers and farmers whose rising income permitted them to imitate their superiors’ lifestyle. In the first half of the period they tended to be subservient to the gentry but by the turn of the 19th century they began to form the distinctive characteristics we associate with middle class life, becoming critical of upper class behaviour, establishing groups promoting the Church and Sunday schools and campaigning against vice and slavery. Many of them began the 18th century working in ‘trades’ but by the end were described as ‘professionals’. One example were architects who were formerly gentlemen amateurs (Vanbrugh who designed Blenheim Palace began his career in the army) but by the early 19th century were trained experts with their own practices. The middle classes were, however, at this time still only a small proportion of the population with the largest concentration, probably around one in five, being in the capital. This expanding social group was one of the main driving forces for the building of the new terraced houses that will be the main subject of this book.

  LOWER CLASSES

  The vast majority of the population came under this broad banner, which could include a skilled craftsman in a brick-built cottage or terrace down to a casual labourer in a mud hovel, and below this an underclass of homeless vagrants. Compared with today, life in the town or city could mean unbearably long hours of work, irregular incomes, limited freedom and short life expectancy. Disease was rife, sanitation virtually non-existent, food was poor with most income going on bread, and wages often kept low in the belief that this would make workers more industrious.

  This drudgery started at an early age, with many of the poorest or orphaned children put to work as young as five. Some of the worst conditions were inflicted upon chimney sweeps’ climbing boys who were starved to make them thin enough, although many still got stuck and if they did not die from this treatment they often developed cancer of the scrotum. In the country, things were little better and living co
nditions often worse, with daily life heavily affected by harvests, local disasters and changing weather. Those with the smallest holdings tended to lose out, especially if the village was subject to emparkment or parliamentary enclosure.

  Compared with previous generations, however, the under classes at this time may have looked more favourably upon their lot. The increased wealth of the nation filtered down to this level with better wages or cheaper goods for some, although pay was irregular, varied dramatically between regions and trades and there was little security if employment dried up. Those coming into industrial centres from the country often found the rigid hours and regular wages of factory work a shock compared with the casual routine of agriculture, and many preferred to work fewer hours rather than labour for more money if times were good.

  Most of the family would work, some in domestic service (the largest source of employment outside agriculture) or in mills, mines and factories or producing piecework at home. So, although many families would live in no more than a large single room, the whole family would only occupy it together for a short time each day. It was common for the man of the house to eat and drink out after work; the intake of beer increased and gin consumption boomed in the 1720s and 30s. Public houses were centres of the community, offering entertainment, bull baiting and cock fighting, and they were also places where business could be conducted. For those unable to work the poor law was provided but was only granted within the home parish, so many were reluctant to leave their town or village or had to return to it if work dried up elsewhere. This system, however, designed some two centuries before, could not cope with the new, rapidly expanding urban areas.

  The lot of the working classes depended very much on where they lived, especially if this was in one of the urban or rural areas where change occurred. Before looking at the houses built, it is important to examine the new types of town, village and suburb where much of the new housing was erected.

  FIG 1.9: STOWE LANDSCAPE GARDENS, BUCKINGHAMSHIRE: The aristocracy sought to recreate classical views from Ancient Rome in their sweeping landscape gardens and built follies in a variety of styles as eye-catching pieces within the composition. However, in the process, many villages were re-sited or removed completely. Stowe is probably the best example open to the public of this effect. It not only displays outstanding monumental buildings but also retains its original medieval church, hidden behind trees from the original community.

  CHAPTER 2

  Georgian and Regency Housing

  FIG 2.1: BRIGHTON, SUSSEX: This street, dating from the 1820s, was one of many built in this booming seaside resort to house the wealthy who had discovered the medicinal properties of sea water and the social delights of the Season. The houses have typical Regency features like the stucco-covered exterior, balconies with decorative iron railings and bay windows through which to glimpse the sea in the far distance.

  A Brief History of Housing

  Before the 18th century the vast majority of the population lived in villages and hamlets, working the land or in small-scale industrial activities, with the then small towns and cities serving primarily as markets and administration centres. London was the only major concentration of population and was split between twin centres – finance and trade in the City area and the court further west around Westminster. There were many settlements that grew up around specialist trades like ports, coal mining, and the wool industry, for instance, but these tended to be small in scale, scattered and not always permanent. In the Georgian period new developments in foreign trade, industry, agriculture and leisure resulted in the founding and growth of new towns and villages, forming the basis of the modern distribution of population with which we are familiar.

  Urban Development

  LONDON

  The capital already had ten times the population of the next largest city in England when George I came to the throne and it maintained this dominance, with more than one and a half million residents by the time George IV died. This tripling of numbers during the 115 years of this period came about through a massive influx of people from home and abroad.

  Some were escaping persecution in foreign countries and brought with them new skills and trades, others came for jobs in new industries and the docks. The annual sitting of Parliament and the development of the Season encouraged the rich to seek permanent residences in London and with them came a huge infrastructure of domestic servants, coachmen and shop workers to satisfy their every whim. The growth of government and law attracted civil servants and solicitors to the city and other skilled professionals like doctors and architects to this centre of activity.

  FIG 2.2: SPITALFIELDS, LONDON: French Protestants, nicknamed Huguenots, were one of the largest groups of immigrants in London as they fled persecution back home after Louis XIV revoked the edict that granted them protection in 1685. A large group of them were skilled silk weavers but they had to settle in the Spitalfields area outside the walls of the City of London, which was still controlled by the guilds and merchants. They built many fine early Georgian terraced houses with characteristic long attic windows to cast light on their detailed work.

  Although there were large developments in other parts of the city, the most notable of the new housing built to accommodate this influx took place to the north and west. Here on what were just fields owned by enterprising gentry were laid out streets and squares of refined terraced housing, speculations designed to attract those from the polluted, filthy and noisy old city and newcomers from the country into fashionable, elegant surroundings. Ribbons of new housing also spread out along the coaching routes radiating out of the city.

  FIG 2.3: SIR JOHN SOANE’S MUSEUM, 13 LINCOLN’S INN FIELDS, LONDON: As with most leading architects by the turn of the 19th century, Sir John Soane was a professional who had trained in an architectural practice and was based in the capital. His own house, pictured here, displays his stylised classical detailing, work that was well ahead of his time.

  PROVINCIAL TOWNS AND CITIES

  The amount of new housing in towns and cities reflected the growth or decline in the principal trade. Some saw rapid expansion, others stagnation and little building as they became bypassed by the new industries and business. One area where there was widespread rebuilding or re-facing of buildings was on the main roads in and out of town, along which the new coaches ran. The improvement in road surfaces and the coaches themselves saw a boom in the servicing of travellers, with inns and public houses built in new fashionable styles to attract business. As many could not afford such costs it was common for a new brick or rendered façade to be added to an existing building to keep up to date, with the arrangement of openings or exposed timber beams within usually betraying the earlier structure behind.

  FIG 2.4: HIGH STREET, ST MARTINS, STAMFORD, LINCOLNSHIRE: The Old Great North Road was an important and busy route in the 18th century and along this southern approach into town were established coaching inns and fine stone houses. Stamford is still today one of the most remarkable stone-built towns in the country and is dominated by medieval churches and Georgian houses.

  FIG 2.5: THE GEORGE INN, WEST WYCOMBE, BUCKINGHAMSHIRE: For those who could not afford to rebuild a house or inn, it was very common to have it re-fronted to remain fashionable. This example along the old London to Oxford road has a classical brick façade (above) but from behind its older timber-framed structure is revealed (below). Windows not lining up or sagging horizontally and a front that is not arranged symmetrically are often a clue to an older timber structure behind.

  FIG 2.6: THE CIRCUS, BATH: Bath was one of the most fashionable centres outside London, with a growing appreciation of the medicinal powers of its spa water. John Wood the Elder and his son John Wood the Younger designed some of the most notable buildings of the time, including The Circus with its pairs of stacked columns inspired by the Colosseum in Rome.

  SPA TOWNS AND SEASIDE RESORTS

  This improvement in passenger travel opened up new leisure opportu
nities in far-flung corners of the country that had previously only been appreciated by a limited local clientèle. Rheumatism and skin disorders were just two of the ailments for which the Georgians sought a cure. The drinking of certain mineral waters was one answer, which resulted in a massive expansion of spa towns, firstly and most notably at Bath and later, as they grew in popularity, at Cheltenham, Leamington and Buxton.

  FIG 2.7: CHELTENHAM, GLOUCESTERSHIRE: This spa town developed after a visit from King George III and retains much of its Regency housing, as with these large semi-detached houses with characteristic iron balconies.

  FIG 2.8: THE CRESCENT, BUXTON, DERBYSHIRE: Remote locations were not a restriction to Georgians as Buxton, high up in the Peak District, became a fashionable destination for those seeking its natural mineral waters. This building dating from the 1780s was designed by John Carr of York.