The Pre-Closet Era

Object: Corner Cupboard

Accession #: 1944.0002

1944.0002

This corner cupboard is an example of British and American furniture form of the 18th and 19th centuries and was intended for storage.  Constructed of walnut, it was probably produced in the Shenandoah Valley. It has a molded cornice above four shelves which are over a single paneled door. The whole cupboard rests on ogee bracket feet that have a vertical profile in the form of an S-curve, convex above and concave below. Cupboards first appeared in America in the 17th century and movable corner cupboards were in general use by the 18th century. The Randolphs may have used a piece of furniture like this one to keep their array of clothing folded and accessible. 
 

One historian explains that if a cupboard is 7.5 or 8 feet high it is probably a product of the South where rooms such as those at the Wilton House had high ceilings.  Cupboards with paneled doors were also a popular product of the South. The term cupboard began to be used in the Middle Ages and referred to the assembly of boards to be used as shelves to display cups, goblets, and similar items. Most were designed to use the upper part for display and the lower portion for storage. Featuring four shelves without enclosure and single door below them, this cupboard appears to be designed for these purposes as well. If the Randolphs kept their clothes in a cupboard such as this one they undoubtedly would have wanted to display the finery they owned. The Randolphs were a family of means who could afford to be fashionable, as anyone who saw what was put on those shelves would be reminded.

Corner Cupboard, 1750-1790, American: South, Virginia,

Walnut, Yellow Pine, Metropolitan Museum of Art

The elite spared no expense when it came to keeping up with the latest styles and best materials. As one historian describes the dress of a daughter of a typical Virginia planter in the 1770’s, she “could have worn at the same time a gown of silk from China, underclothing of linen from Holland, and footwear made in England – all shipped in a vast network of trade from their places of origin to a shop or warehouse in London, where they were selected by a merchant, [and] packed for a lengthy voyage across the ocean in a ship”. Much of what women wore could be purchased through import trade. Upper class men as well could afford to have their outfit custom-made in London to fit their exact measurements, specifications for expensive fabrics, and embellishments such as imported buttons. A cupboard like this one was a very useful piece of furniture used to store the many neatly folded and meticulously pressed articles of clothing owned by a wealthy family like the Randolphs.

Bibliography

Baumgarten, Linda. “Looking at Eighteenth Century Clothing”. Colonial Williamsburg. 7

October 2012.

Boyce, Charles. Dictionary of Furniture. Roundtable Press, Inc. New York: 1985.

Boger, Louise Ade. The Complete Guide to Furniture Styles. Charles Scribner’s Sons. New

York: 1969.

Comstock, Helen. American Furniture: Seveteenth, Eighteenth, and Nineteenth Century Styles.

The Viking Press. Inc. New York: 1962.

Ketchum Jr., William C. Chest, Cupboards, Desks and other pieces. Alfred A Knopf, Inc. New

York: 1982.

Obbard, John W. Early American Furniture: a guide to who, when, and where. Collector Books.

Paducah: 2006.

Image Credit

http://www.metmuseum.org/Collections/search-the-collections/10002329?rpp=20&pg=1&rndkey=20121015&ft=*&deptids=1&what=Softwood%7cCupboards&pos=16-http://csulb.edu/projects/elizabethmurray/EM/smcupboard.html

The Punishment and The Pardon

Item: Document

Object #: 1901.8

During the American Revolution, two soldiers John La Brun and Christopher Fofsill, of Captain Read’s Troop of Virginia Light Dragoons, were “charged with Desertion and Carrying Harnesses, Arms, and Accoutrements belonging to said Troop.” A court martial was held at Albemarle Barracks on March 24, 1780, and was presided over by Colonel Francis Taylor.  This record of the court martial proceedings describes the fleeing soldiers and their capture, based on the testimony of two other troops in Read's Dragoons. The document is also signed by Colonel James Wood and at the bottom “In Council July 14, 1780” Thomas Jefferson states the remission of the above sentence on La Brune and signed his name. 

A court martial is a trial in a military court for members of the armed forces. The two soldiers on trial were part of Captain Read’s Troop of Virginia Light Dragoons. According to one historian, the Light Dragoons “were first raised in the middle of the Eighteenth Century for reconnaissance and patrolling - in other words scouting - but soon acquired a reputation for courage and dash in the charge.” The court martial of these two soldiers was held at Albemarle Barracks.

Albemarle Barracks was located just outside of Charlottesville, Virginia, where the Convention Army was imprisoned from 1779-1781.  Some 4,000 British regulars and German mercenaries (also known as “Hessians”), collectively called the Convention Army, captured at the Battle of Saratoga, in New York, arrived at Albemarle Barracks in January 1779.  They were marched from outside New York City to Cambridge, Massachussetts in 1777 before boarding ships for Virginia.  It took them nearly three months to get to their new home just west of Charlottesville. One historian describes the living conditions of the Barracks as “primitive huts spread out over several hundred acres” where the prisoners “endured great hardships.” Supplying and guarding the Convention Army drained the resources of local community and militia.  As a result, by February 1781, the last of the prisoners had been relocated. 

The record states that, based on the evidence, both soldiers were found guilty and sentenced accordingly.  The court was of the opinion that La Brun “Ought to suffer Death by being shot” and Fofsill “Ought to receive Corporal Punishment and do sentence him to run the Gauntlet through the troop of the Garrison twice a day for three Days.”  Fofsill’s sentence, running the guantlet, “was a form of punishment in which the culprit was made to run stripped to the waist between two rows of men who whipped and beat him as he passed by. These beatings were extremely severe and the victims often died as a result.”  To “run the gauntlet” was originally “to run the gantelope.”  Gantlope, being the Anglicized form of the Swedish word 'gatlop', or 'gatu-lop', which refers to the gate of soldiers that the victim had to pass through.

This account of the court martial was signed by Colonel James Wood.  In 1776, James Wood of Frederick County was appointed colonel in the Virginia military and was named superintendent of the prisoners of war held by the Virginia militia.  At the time of the court martial Thomas Jefferson was governor of Virginia.  Among his duties as governor was signing official documents and granting clemency to those convicted of crimes.  On July 14, 1780, Jefferson wrote to Col. Wood declaring, “Sir, I inclose you a remission of the sentence against La Brun...”  Jefferson's pardon, rescued La Brun from his death sentence.  Jefferson also remits "The above sentence of La Brun" at the bottom of the court martial record, before signing the document.  It is not yet know if La Brun ever received a punishment less severe than what previously delivered.

Thomas Jefferson visited the Randolphs of Wilton on more than one occasion, including a visit in May 1781.  Jefferson was a relation to the Randolph family, through his mother, Jane Randolph. The Randolphs of Wilton were well involved with the American Revolution. Peyton Randolph, son of William III, was commissioned as a Major in the militia in 1777 and, according to the family, was also an aide-de-camp to General Lafayette.  Peyton's patriotism was so strong that in 1775 Archibald Cary recounts an altercation between him and brother-in-law Lewis Burwell, in which Peyton is stabbed with a dinner knife. 

Bibliography

Alexander, Arthur J. “Desertion and its Punishment in Revolutionary Virginia”. The William and

Mary Quarterly. Third Series, Vol. 3, No. 3 (Jul., 1946), pp. 383-397. Omohundro Institute of Early American History and Culture. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/1922874>

Martin, Gary. “Running the Gauntlet”. The Phrase Finder. 13 September 2012.

<http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/run-the-gauntlet.html>

Maurer, David. “New Marker commemorates Revolutionary POW march”. The Daily Progress

Online. May 6, 2012. 13 September 2012.

<http://www2.dailyprogress.com/lifestyles/2012/may/06/new-marker-commemorates-

revolutionary-pow-march-ar-1891200/>

“Court Martial”. Dictionary.com. 13 September 2012.

<http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/court-martial>

“Charlottsville, Va.”The Journey through Hallowed Ground: Monticello to Gettysburg. 13

September 2012. <http://www.hallowedground.org/Explore-the-Journey/Historic-Towns-

Villages/Charlottesville-VA>

“Albemarle Barracks Burial Site”. Hmdb.org: The Historical Marker Database. 13 September

2012. <http://www.hmdb.org/marker.asp?marker=37586>

“Convention Army The Barracks”. Hmdb.org: The Historical Marker Database. 13 September

2012. <http://www.hmdb.org/Marker.asp?Marker=55784>

“Watch Albemarle Barracks Video” OvGuide: Your Online Video Guide. 13 September 2012.

<http://www.ovguide.com/albemarle-barracks-9202a8c04000641f8000000000de5571#>

 “Colonel James Wood II”. Colonel James Wood II Chapter of the Virginia Society  Sons of the

American Revolution. 13 September 2012. <http://cjwsar.org/coljameswood.html>

 “Finding Aid for Thomas Jefferson Collection, 1780-1881”. William L Clements Library. 20

September 2012. <http://quod.lib.umich.edu/c/clementsmss/umich-wcl-M-230jef?view=text>

“Using Virginia Governors’ Records, 1776-1998”. Library of Virginia. 20 September 2012.

<http://www.lva.virginia.gov/public/guides/rn11_govrecords.htm>

The Papers of Thomas Jefferson Digital Edition, Main Series, Volume 3 (18 June 1779–30

September 1780) ed. Barbara B. Oberg and J. Jefferson Looney. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, Rotunda, 2008. <http://rotunda.upress.virginia.edu/founders/TSJN-01-03-02-0406 [accessed 20 Sep 2012]>

“History”. Light Dragoons Regimental Association. 21 September 2012.

<http://www.lightdragoons.org.uk/history.html>

Image Credit

http://www.hmdb.org/marker.asp?marker=37586

http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/run-the-gauntlet.html

A Print of the Washington Family

Object: Mezzotint
Accession #: 1984.0076

According to one historian, “a mezzotint is a distinctive tonal print made using a copper plate that is worked or ‘grounded’ using a semi-circular fine-toothed hand tool known as a ‘rocker’ so that the entire surface is roughened by tiny pits.”  The plate can then be covered with ink before being pressed against paper to produce a print.  According to the dictionary, a mezzotint is the method referred to as well as the print produced from such a plate. 

This mezzotint, one of two in Wilton's collection, was made from an engraving by John Sartain in 1840 which he based on a painting by Edward Savage completed in “Philadelphia in the year 1796."  Under the proper right corner of the print is: “Painted by Edward Savage," in the center “Published by Wm. Smith 3rd St. Philadelphia,” and under the proper left corner of the print: “Engraved by J. Sartain.” Underneath the print are the names of those depicted in painting, from the viewer’s left to right: George Washington Parke Custis, General George Washington, Eleanor Parke Custis, Martha Washington, and William Lee. The print depicts Washington as he sits at a table with his right arm resting on the shoulder of George Washington Parke Custis, who stands behind him. Across the table, on which is a map, sits Mrs. Washington pointing a folded fan to part of the map. Standing to her right is Eleanor Parke Custis. Standing behind Mrs. Washington is “Billy Lee, who was Washington’s body servant throughout the war” and “in the background is the noble aspect of the Potomac River as seen from Mt. Vernon.”   The mezzotint is lacking in a detailed view of the Potomac River, as is the case with the print from which it was produced.

Not much is known about the early career of Edward Savage. By 1785, he was painting in Boston and several years later worked in New York. He traveled to London in 1791 where he published copies of his engravings and portraits including one of George Washington. One historian explains that Savage, “was not a gifted artist, nor was he, so far as one may judge, an agreeable man” and that other artists “had nothing good to say of him or of his abilities.”  However, this same historian goes on to say that “he gave us an image that has been part of our national memory for two hundred years.” 

John Sartain was born in London in 1808 and began as an apprentice to John Swaine in 1823, from whom he learned heraldry and letter engraving.  In 1830, after marrying John Swaine’s daughter he moved to Philadelphia, Pennslvania.  From there, he produced engravings for Graham’s Magazine in 1841.  Eight years later, Sartain started publishing his own magazine, Sartain’s Union Magazine of Literature and Art.  Henry Wadsworth Longfellow and Edgar Alan Poe were among some of its notable contributors. 

Savage had been commissioned by Harvard College to paint a portrait of Washington from life while the president was in New York and in the winter of 1789-90 he painted George and Martha Washington.  Savage’s grandson, “supposes that he [Savage] used these portraits of George and Martha Washington for the family group [painting].”  The engraving of the Washington family was done by Sartain from a lithograph of the work by Savage and not from the actual painting.  Details in Savage’s work are not included in Sartain’s engraving, which a journalist for the New York Times, writing in 1892 about the works by the two, states, “prove that Sartain must have worked without the aid of painting or engraving.” 

Original painting by Edward Savage

George Washington had become a national icon following the American Revolution.  After he was elected president, Washington’s face became “a recognized symbol of victory and liberty.”  According to the last will and testament of William Randolph IV, of Wilton, a "print of the Washington family" is listed under the inventory.  The Randolphs may have purchased a print containing Washington to show their admiration for the then deceased president who had once visited their home. 

Bibliography

Frank, Robin Jaffee. Love and Loss: American Portrait and Mourning Miniatures. Yale

University Press. New Haven, 2000.

Richardson, Edgar P. American Paintings and Related Pictures in the Henry Francis Dupont

Museum. University Press of VA. Charlottsville, 1986.

“Washington and his Family”. New York Times Online Archives. December 30, 1892. 24

August 2012. <http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=F40910FB345515738DDDA90B94DA415B8285F0D3>

“Overview of Collection”. The Winterthur Library. 24 August 2012

<http://findingaid.winterthur.org/html/HTML_Finding_Aids/COL0398.htm>

“Mezzotint”. Dictionary.com. 24 August 2012.

<http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/mezzotint>

“The Mezzotint”. Warnock Fine Arts. 24 August 2012.

<http://warnockfinearts.com/MezzotintProcess.htm>

“The Early Mezzotint” The National Gallery. 24 August 2012.

<http://www.npg.org.uk/research/programmes/early-history-of-mezzotint/the-early-

mezzotint.php>

To The Greatest Perfection

Object:  Flute
Accession #: 2005.56

Thomas Stanesby Jr. learned the trade of making musical instruments at his father's workshop. This is where Stanesby Jr.’s career took off and led to him becoming an independent maker of all types of woodwinds: recorders, flutes, oboes, and bassoons. Contra-bassoons were made by him for use in the London performance of Handel’s Water Music. Stanesby inherited a seal ring and his father’s tools in 1734 and continued to be active in the industry until his death in 1754. His trade card boasted:

“Stanesby Jun. In the Temple Exchange Fleet Street, London. Makes to the greatest Perfection, all sorts of musical instruments. In Ivory or fine wood; Plain, after a very neat manner or curiously Adorn 'd with Gold, Silver, Ivory &c. Necessary to preserve them; approv'd and recommended by the best masters in Europe. Sold as above and no where else."

That his musical instruments were made “to the greatest perfection” is attested by this late eighteenth century Baroque flute done by Stanesby which can be found in the collection at Wilton. It is made of wood and has ivory rings along with metal keys. It is marked “Stanesby, Jr.” and was determined to be an authentic eighteenth-century flute by Weschler and Sons, Inc. of Washington, D.C. The Randolph family entertained guests in their parlor with music as well as in the lower passageway. The musicians might have played their instruments, one of which could have easily been a flute, on the landing of the stairs as the Randolph family and their guests danced the night away down below.

                                     La Barre and Other Musicians, c. 1710, André Bouys

The flute is the oldest woodwind instrument and dates back to the 9^th century B.C. Most historians agree that the instrument originated in Central Asia. Baroque flutes of the 1600s were originally built in 3 sections, had seven tone holes plus a key hole for the little finger.  Its shape has changed based on its air column’s shape.  One historian explains that the “bore [air column] of the baroque flute was modified to a slightly tapered conical shape with the large radius at the embouchure hole [mouth piece] and the smaller radius at the bell end.”  During the 18th century, the flute experienced even more modifications. One historian describes instruments during this time as being “often highly ornamental, sophisticated craftsmanship being applied to the thickenings left in wood or ivory to strengthen the sockets.”  Improvement of the flute was being strived for during the eighteenth century because it was not producing tones correctly.

However, the weaknesses of the flute did not affect its popularity during the eighteenth century. As one historian stresses, “some of the forked sounds were dull and out of tune seems to have been philosophically accepted as a natural weakness of the instrument which it was the player’s duty to conceal by skilful manipulation.” Perhaps the flautists, who the Randolph’s might have had the pleasure of listening to, were able to do just that as the piercing notes of their music wafted out through the open windows into the night air.

If you have a musical appreciation like the Randolph’s be sure to check out the flute on your next visit.  And look out for more information about our free summer concerts series, Jammin' on the James, where you and the family can enjoy music, games, crafts, face-painting, and tours of the historic house. See our website or follow us on Facebook for details on all of our upcoming events.

Bibliography

Bate, Philip. The Flute: A Study of its History, Development and Construction. W.W. Norton &

            Company, Inc. New York, 1969.

Toff, Nancy. The Development of the Modern Flute. Taplinger Publishing Company. New York,

            1979.

“Baroque Flutes: Thomas Stanesby, Jr”. Boaz Berney Historical Flutes.  18 July 2012.      

            <http://www.berneyflutes.com/pages/02flutes/models/baroque_stanesby.html> 

“Flute”. 18 July 2012. <http://www.gbmsband.org/html/flute.html >

“Stanesby Family. 18 July 2012. <www.buyrecorders.com/stanesbyfamily.htm>.

“History”. 18 July 2012. <http://community.middlebury.edu/~beyer/s/history.html>.

“Intonation”. Dictionary.com . 31 July 2012.

            <http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/intonation?s=t>.

Image Credit

http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/andre-bouys-la-barre-and-other-musicians

Vote For Spotswood!

Thank you to everyone who has been keeping up with WIlton's Found in the Collection blog.  One of the objects featured in a post last year is a portion of a waistcoat belonging to Lt. Governor Alexander Spotswood.  This waistcoat has been nomination for the Virginia Association of Museums' Virginia's Top 10 Endangered Artifacts program.

Virginia's Top 10 Endangered Artifacts program raises public awareness about care of collections throughout Virginia, D.C., and beyond. Virginia's Top 10 is not a grant-giving program. It is designed to give museums, libraries, and archives an opportunity to raise media and public awareness about the ongoing & expensive care of collections, and collections care needs.Virginia's Top 10 Endangered Artifacts' nominees have the opportunity to promote their nomination during the public voting portion of this project. Once the public votes are tallied, our independent peer review panel will select the Top 10 winners. While public voting doesn't determine the Top 10, it will be taken into consideration by the panel - and those impressive voting numbers are great for museums to use when courting donors or applying for conservation grants!

Please take a minute to vote for the Spotswood waistcoat at Wilton.  Go to www.vatop10artifacts.org and click "Vote Now for the 2012 Nominees."  And remember, you can vote as often as you like, between now and August 29th.  Vote now!  Vote often!