CARIBBEAN INFLUENCES ON THE HAMILTON GRANGE: ARCHITECTURAL IMPRINTS ON ALEXANDER HAMILTON RESULT IN SYNCRETISM
By
TIFFANY LANG
A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF INTERIOR DESIGN
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
2008
1
© Tiffany Lang
2
To all those interested in learning more about Caribbean architecture.
3
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
First, I thank the Almighty for life, the ultimate designer of only things good and true. I thank my parents for their support. I thank my community for providing a rich culture to
explore.
This study would not have been possible without the assistance of many persons and
organizations. I thank my chair, Professor Susan Tate, for advising me from inspiration to
fruition and suggesting that I speak to Richard Crisson. I thank Professor Roy Graham for
serving on my committee and for his helpful suggestions. I thank Richard Crisson of the
National Park Service, who is originally from the Caribbean island of Puerto Rico, for suggesting
possible topics, including mentioning that the Hamilton Grange might have Caribbean
influences. Richard Crisson was also helpful by meeting with me and providing me with
materials. Steve Laise and Albert Atchison of the National Park Service also provided their
assistance.
Nancy Rankin, Cory Trembath, Doug Bucher, and the other staff at John G. Waite
Associates assisted by providing information and allowing me to access the Hamilton Grange. I
thank the Nevis Historical and Conservation Society, Dave Robinson, and David Cox of Cox
Architects for information on the Hamilton House and John Guilbert for offering to take pictures of the other sides of this house. I thank local St. Croix historian, William F. Cissel, for meeting with me and sharing his knowledge, including information on local buildings reportedly connected to Hamilton. I thank the Mackenzies, current owners of The Grange on St. Croix, for providing information on the history of this house. I thank Dr. Margaret Portillo for mentioning an architect whose studies put a conceptual name to the idea in my mind concerning the effects of architectural memories. I thank the staff of the University of Florida libraries and interlibrary department, the Whim museum of St. Croix, and the New York Historical Society for their
4
librarian services. I thank those scholars who have paved the way for this study with their research on Caribbean architecture and the extensive coverage of the Hamilton Grange in the
Historic Structure Report.
5
TABLE OF CONTENTS
page
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...... 4
LIST OF TABLES...... 9
LIST OF FIGURES ...... 10
ABSTRACT...... 13
SYNCRETISM and ARCHITECTURAL IMPRINTS ...... 14
Introduction...... 14 Syncretism ...... 15 Architectural Imprints...... 15
LITERATURE REVIEW ...... 16
BACKGROUND OF ALEXANDER HAMILTON ...... 18
Early Years ...... 18 Exposure to Caribbean Architecture...... 19 Building a Home...... 21
HISTORY OF THE HAMILTON GRANGE AND ITS CURRENT APPEARANCE...... 26
History ...... 26 Floor Plan Layout ...... 27 Materials ...... 28 Exterior Colors...... 29
JOHN MCCOMB, JR...... 33
Family and Cultural Background...... 33 Emergence as a Builder-Architect...... 34 Professional Library...... 35 Interest in Culture ...... 37 Innovation and Creativity ...... 38 Syncretic Tendencies...... 39 New York City Hall...... 40
FEDERAL ARCHITECTURE ...... 62
Neoclassical Design during the Federal Period...... 62 Use of Shutters...... 63 Regional Differences ...... 64
6
ARCHITECTURE IN NEW YORK ...... 67
Regional Porches ...... 67 Long Island...... 67 English and Dutch Houses...... 67 New House Type ...... 68 Relation to the Grange...... 69 Harlem and the Manhattan Area...... 69 Morris-Jumel Mansion ...... 70 Gracie Mansion ...... 70
PHILIP SCHUYLER...... 76
Albany Mansion...... 76 Architectural Influences on the Albany Mansion...... 77 Schuyler’s Library...... 78 England Visit...... 79 Windows...... 79 Staircase...... 80 Roof ...... 80 Stairway...... 80 Fireplaces...... 80 Other Buildings ...... 81 Wings and Passageway...... 81 Hexagonal Vestibule ...... 82 Approach and Gardens ...... 82 Other Areas...... 83 Effects on the Hamilton Grange...... 84 Saratoga Mansion ...... 85 History ...... 85 Effects on the Hamilton Grange...... 86
CARIBBEAN ARCHITECTURE...... 96
Syncretic and Creole Characteristics...... 96 History of Caribbean Architecture...... 98 Caribbean Galleries ...... 99 Iberian Domestic Caribbean Architecture...... 100 Usage and Development by Other Countries ...... 100 Typical Characteristics ...... 101 Floor Plan ...... 102 Common Materials ...... 102 Environmental Factors...... 103
7
ARCHITECTURAL IMPRINTS FROM THE QUEEN OF THE CARIBEES AND THE GARDEN OF THE ANTILLES...... 112
Nevis: Queen of the Caribees ...... 112 St. Croix: Garden of the Antilles ...... 113 Historical Background...... 113 Layout of Christiansted ...... 114 Early Buildings...... 115 Development of Architecture ...... 115 Environmental Influences...... 116 Common Materials ...... 117 General Character...... 117 Building Code...... 118 Typical Buildings ...... 119 Historical Colors...... 119 St. Croix’s Architectural Imprint...... 120 Retracing Hamilton’s Steps...... 120
HAMILTON GRANGE ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS...... 129
Porches...... 129 Upper Balustrades...... 130 Columns...... 132 Lower Balustrades ...... 132 Porch Supports...... 134 Door Details...... 135 Shutters ...... 135 Early Photographs ...... 135 Hardware Evidence ...... 136 Wall Siding and Trim ...... 137 Foundation ...... 138 Historical Color Scheme...... 138 Summary...... 139
DISCUSSION...... 151
Syncretism and Architectural Imprints...... 151 Design Implications...... 153 Further Study ...... 154
BIBLIOGRAPHY...... 156
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ...... 161
8
LIST OF TABLES
Table page
12-1 Architectural Influences on the Hamilton Grange...... 155
9
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure page
3-1 Nevis, East Portico...... 23
3-2 Nevis West Porch on River Side...... 24
4-1 Location of the Grange...... 30
4-2 Present First Floor Plan...... 31
4-3 Present Second Floor Plan...... 32
5-1 North Dutch Church Elevation, John McComb, Sr...... 42
5-2 Left-Hand Terminal Pavilion of Kedleston Hall...... 43
5-3 1790 Government House Elevation, John McComb, Jr...... 43
5-4 Drawing #58a, 1790 Government House Plan, John McComb, Jr...... 44
5-5 Plates 52-53. Crunden...... 45
5-6 Plate 41. Crunden...... 46
5-7 Plate 49. Crunden...... 47
5-8 Plates 50-51. Crunden...... 48
5-9 Farmington...... 49
5-10 Hypothetical Original First Floor Plan ...... 50
5-11 Hypothetical Original Second Floor Plan...... 51
5-12 1799 Townhouse Design, John McComb, Jr...... 52
5-13 Country House Design, c. 1798-1800, John McComb, Jr...... 53
5-14 Townhouse Design...... 54
5-15. Grange Doorway...... 55
5-16 Drawing #55, 1790 Government House Plan, John McComb, Jr...... 56
5-17 Drawing #54, 1790 Government House Plan, John McComb, Jr...... 57
5-18 1793 Tontine City Tavern Second Floor Plan, c. 1793, John McComb, Jr...... 58
10
5-19 Circular House, John McComb, Jr...... 59
5-20 Doorway Detail. Plate XXXIX, William Pain...... 60
6-1 Federal Mantel Detail ...... 65
6-2 Hamilton Grange Mantel ...... 65
7-1 6-Post Frame House...... 71
7-2 House with Low Porch...... 71
7-3 House with Front Entrance Covered Stoop ...... 72
7-4 House with Low Porch...... 72
7-5 Morris-Jumel Mansion South Elevation ...... 73
7-6 Morris-Jumel Mansion First Floor Plan...... 74
8-1 Area North of the Grange ...... 87
8-2 Albany Mansion Shutters...... 88
8-3 Albany Mansion Stair Newel Post and Balustrades ...... 89
8-4 Albany Mansion Mantelpiece...... 89
8-5 Albany Mansion Piazza ...... 90
8-6 Albany Mansion First Floor Plan...... 91
8-7 Saratoga Mansion Piazza ...... 92
8-8 Saratoga Mansion Shutter Detail ...... 93
8-9 Schuyler Mansion View of Porch and Office...... 93
9-1 Two- and Three-Room Base Plan Types...... 105
9-2 Development of the Three-Room Base Plan Types...... 106
9-3 Variations and Expansion of the Base Creole Types...... 107
9-4 Casa del Almirante...... 108
9-5 Gabinete-Loggia Variations...... 109
9-6 Tripartite Plan with Galleries...... 110
11
10-1 Nisbet Plantation...... 121
10-2 Hamilton House-The Museum of Nevis History...... 122
10-3 Aerial View of Christiansted Buildings...... 123
10-4 Grid Layout of Christiansted, St. Croix...... 124
10-5 Christiansted Building with an Arcaded Masonry Ground Floor...... 125
10-6 The Grange in St. Croix...... 126
10-7 Hamilton Store...... 126
10-8 Cruger Building in St. Croix...... 127
11-1 Hamilton Grange National Memorial ...... 140
11-2 Hamilton Grange during Time as a School...... 141
11-3 Balustrades on the Piazza...... 142
11-4 Existing Newel Post with Lattice Panel Beyond ...... 143
11-5 Hamilton Grange before the First Move...... 144
11-6 Original Doorway...... 145
11-7 Partially Louvered Flush Panel Shutters and Clapboard Siding...... 146
11-8 Triple-Hung Windows ...... 147
11-9 Flush Siding Boards...... 148
11-10 Old Danish Customs House...... 149
11-11 Historical Color Scheme of the Hamilton Grange...... 149
12
Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Interior Design
CARIBBEAN INFLUENCES ON THE HAMILTON GRANGE: ARCHITECTURAL IMPRINTS ON ALEXANDER HAMILTON RESULT IN SYNCRETISM
By
Tiffany Lang
May 2008
Chair: Susan Tate Major: Interior Design
This is an exploration of the Hamilton Grange as the product of a syncretic process involving the mixture of the neoclassical elements in the American Federal period and features associated with the Caribbean. This noteworthy building has been recognized as a significant reminder of the architectural history of the American Federal era. The original design of this structure merged the ideal of the architect, John McComb, Jr. with the architectural imprints of the client, Alexander Hamilton. Considering its relation to Caribbean architecture may expand understanding of Hamilton, McComb, and Federal architecture. The design implications extend to the idea of some scholars that architectural imprints affect both designers and occupants of homes. This study documents diverse personal and architectural influences on the Hamilton
Grange and seeks to illustrate these as a case study of the syncretic process.
13
CHAPTER 1 SYNCRETISM AND ARCHITECTURAL IMPRINTS
Introduction
The Hamilton Grange is the product of a builder/architect open to exploring new architectural ideas and an owner eager to have a meaningful home. Because of the forces that involved its creation, it has both the architectural elements of the Federal era and the relatively more simplified language of Caribbean architecture. This building is a representation of the syncretism that was created in Colonial America by the use of architectural details brought from the Caribbean.
The Hamilton Grange will serve as a case study of a single building that has involved syncretism. This syncretic process led to the synthesis of the architectural elements of two distinct cultures. This synthesis was accomplished through the skill of an architect who employed this process. The syncretism and resulting synthesis that occurred at the Hamilton
Grange was reflective of the same process that was happening on a larger scale in the colonial south. This was due to the large influx of Caribbean migrants to these areas.
In this study, syncretism was used as a descriptive term to facilitate the understanding of the architectural influences, intentional or unintentional, that helped to create the Hamilton
Grange. This paper will consider the prevailing practices in the two regions related to this house.
It will trace the development of Caribbean architecture and subsequent exposure to mainland
American by referencing several studies on the subject. The elements of neoclassical architecture in the Federal period will also be summarized. This information will identify the characteristics of the Hamilton Grange derived from these separate influences.
14
Syncretism
Syncretism is the oldest model used to explore socio-cultural mixture. It is sometimes seen
as the precursor to multiculturalism.1 Syncretism refers to the “forging together of disparate,
often incompatible, elements from different systems; and to their intermingling and blending.”2
It involves the integration of two or more aspects from historically distinct traditions.
Participants in the syncretic process may or may not be aware of its occurrence and the history of their institutions.3
Syncretism comes from the Greek work, synkretizein, used to describe how quarreling
Cretans reconciled their differences.4 Syncretism can occur from contact between cultures, but
also within a culture. The concept of syncretism has, at times, been controversial, sparking
numerous debates. This may arise due to the application of the term to different cultural outcomes. This is often complicated by the fact that the term has a wide range of meanings and applications. In some fields, the term has taken a negative, positive, or neutral connotation.
Architectural Imprints
During the design of the Hamilton Grange, the process of syncretism was possible because of the architectural imprints impressed on Alexander Hamilton in his childhood and young adulthood. His idea of a home included these imprints that resulted in elements derived from the
Caribbean. Some scholars have done research on the effects of architectural imprints on the ways in which people may interpret their concept of home.5
1 Vassilis Lambropoulos, "Syncretism as Mixture and as Method," Journal of Modern Greek Studies 19, no. 2 (2001): 223. 2 Ibid.: 225. 3 Munro S. Edmonson, ed., Nativism, Syncretism and Anthropological Science, (Preprinted from Publication 19, Pages 181-204 - Middle American Research Institute, Tulane University) (New Orleans: Middle American Research Institute, Tulane University, 1960), 192. 4 Lambropoulos, "Syncretism as Mixture and as Method," 225. 5 Clare Cooper Marcus, House as a Mirror of Self: Exploring the Deeper Meaning of Home (Berwick, ME: Nicolas- Hays, 2006).
15
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW
Amos Rapoport in House, Form, and Culture (1969) looked at the effects of socio- cultural and climatic factors on vernacular house forms. He used secondary sources, along with drawings and diagrams, in order to relate house forms to influences of culture and climate.
Because the nature of this topic can cover a large area, Rapoport discusses the information only in general terms. Rapoport concludes that socio-cultural factors are the primary influence on house forms, while climate serves as a secondary influence.
Edward E. Crain’s Historic Architecture in the Caribbean Islands (1994) used both pictures and drawings of residential, commercial, military, and religious buildings of architectural value in the Caribbean and compiled this information in separate categories indicating the European influence as either English, Spanish, French, Dutch, or Danish. Crain’s work demonstrated the variations and also the similarities seen in Caribbean architecture. This information provided a substantial amount of data that can assist other researchers in making comparisons between building types and island locations.
In his article, The Origins of Creole Architecture (1994), Edwards compared and directly linked Caribbean Creole architecture to southern Creole architecture in North America. Edwards went beyond the external architectural characteristics of buildings and compared the interior spaces of selected residential buildings. He used floor plans from many of the selected houses, along with drawings of the exterior of buildings, as tools of analysis. His findings indicated that
Caribbean Creole architecture affected the development of certain areas of American southern vernacular architecture. Edwards also found that in most cases where the external characteristics or form of Creole architecture was adopted, the internal characteristics of room proportion, dimension, and arrangement were not adopted by a peoples of a culture. Although not using the
16
term architectural imprints, Edwards attributed this to ties to familiar internal geometries, as well as the relative ease of imitating external forms versus the more obscure internal layouts of the buildings of another culture.
In Early American Architecture, from the First Colonial Settlements to the National Period
(1952), Hugh Morrison covers development from Colonial America to the start of the National period. This book focuses on various types of colonial architecture from the seventeenth century. It also has considerable coverage of Georgian architecture. However, only the influences up until the National period are summarized at the end of the book.
Samuel Damie Stillman writes about the architecture of John McComb, Jr. in his thesis
Artistry and Skill in the Architecture of John Mccomb, Jr. (1956). He covers the career of
McComb, Jr., along with possible early and later influences on his work. Stillman includes pictures of the architect’s work that are discussed individually. This is an in-depth review of the work and career of this builder-architect. However, there is limited information on the Hamilton
Grange.
The Hamilton Grange has been extensively covered in Historic Structure Report:
Hamilton Grange National Memorial, Manhattan Sites, New York City (1980) by Alfred Mongin and Anne D. Whidden. This is a comprehensive historic structure report on the Hamilton
Grange. It covers the history, architecture, and restoration activities of this building. It examines each part of the Hamilton Grange, noting whether or not it is original and noting any restorations.
The information is extensive, but it does not introduce the notion that the Hamilton Grange had any other influences besides that of the Federal period.
17
CHAPTER 3 BACKGROUND OF ALEXANDER HAMILTON
After Alexander Hamilton moved from the Caribbean to North America in 1772, he attended King’s College in New York. He soon embarked on an impressive career, becoming an important figure in American history as one of the founding fathers of the U. S. Constitution, the first Secretary of the Treasury, developing the U. S. banking and financial system, and founding the U. S. Coast Guard; among other achievements. Near the end of his life, Hamilton became interested in building a country estate in New York. The relation to the Caribbean seen in the
Hamilton Grange can be explained by Alexander Hamilton’s background. Knowing the details of his early life is necessary to understand this connection.
Early Years
Alexander Hamilton was born on the island of Nevis in the West Indies. Hamilton and some of his descendants designate his year of birth as 1757. However, some biographers use the year 1755, based on his age as it appears on a probate document; although this was possibly an error made by the clerk.1 His parents were Rachel Faucett and James Hamilton. His mother was born on Nevis and traveled to St. Croix (at the time, part of the Danish Virgin Islands) as a 16- year-old with her divorced mother, Mary Faucett, in 1745. Hamilton’s mother was from a family of French Huguenots.
His mother married John Lavien in 1745 and gave birth to her first son, Peter Lavien in
1746. However, his mother returned to Nevis in 1750 after being imprisoned by her husband in the Christiansted fort. There she met James Hamilton, a merchant who was the fourth and youngest son of a Scottish aristocratic family. Hamilton’s mother had two more children, James,
Jr. in 1753 and Alexander in 1755 or 1757 (depending on the view of historians). Rachel Faucett
Lavien divorced her husband in 1759. Although it seems that she had a second marriage in
18
Nevis to Hamilton’s father, Danish law at the time only allowed John Lavien to remarry. The
family returned to St. Croix in 1765. However, James Hamilton went back to Nevis in 1766,
leaving the family behind. A few years later in 1769, Hamilton’s mother became ill with fever
and died.2
Alexander Hamilton spent his early childhood on the island of Nevis. With the move of
his family to St. Croix in 1765, he spent the rest of his growing years on this island. At her
passing, Hamilton’s mother had left modest resources for her two children, but her former
husband claimed these in probate court for their legitimate son. The two boys became separated
and Hamilton went to work for a merchant named Thomas Stevens and later for a merchant with
New York connections, Nicholas Cruger. Cruger owned ships, warehouses, a general store, and
a counting house. “Years later, Hamilton told one of his sons that clerking for Cruger had taught
him “method” and “facility” and that his years in the King Street counting house had been “the
most useful of his education.””3 Hamilton also was educated by Reverend Hugh Knox, who was
himself a graduate of the College of New Jersey in Princeton. Cruger and Knox were impressed
enough by Hamilton’s intellectual abilities to assist in sending him to North America in 1772 to
continue his education. Hamilton would have been around the age of 15 or 17.
Exposure to Caribbean Architecture
During this time period, the island of St. Croix was in a state of development. It had been
purchased by the Danish West India and Guinea Company from the French in 1733. This led to
the town of Christiansted being founded in 1735 with Frederiksted following in 1750. Before
residing on St. Croix, Hamilton had some exposure to the island of Nevis as a young child until around the age of eight or ten. He might not have remembered specific details of the buildings of this island at such a young age. However, during the next seven years, he would have reinforced this experience with exposure to another developing Caribbean island. He would
19
have seen the architectural details that adorned local buildings. He would have lived and worked
in these buildings. When his mother was alive, she rented a Christiansted house. As many two
story town buildings were used at the time, the family lived upstairs and had a small provisions
and dry goods store downstairs. Even after his mother’s death, Hamilton’s life on St. Croix
would be focused in the town area of Christiansted.
On the island of St. Croix, Hamilton’s relatives on his mother’s side were the Lyttons.
Ann Faucett, the sister of Hamilton’s mother, had married a planter named James Lytton from
Nevis. The couple and their four children lived on an estate in St. Croix. This 150-acre estate,
including a greathouse and an overseer’s house, was located about a mile from the town of
Christiansted at plot 9 of Company Quarter.
Lytton named the estate the “Grange” and is known today as “Estate Grange” or simply
“The Grange”. Interestingly, the “Grange” is also the name of the ancestral Hamilton home in
Scotland. Even more interesting is the fact that Hamilton named his country estate the Hamilton
Grange. A “grange” is defined as being a “farm; especially a farmhouse with outbuildings”4
Alexander Hamilton is likely to have organized his home area to fit his concept of a “grange”, including his associations with the term as used by his aunt and uncle on St. Croix and his concept of his ancestral family in Scotland.
The Lyttons lived on their plantation until financial difficulties resulted in its sale to another plantation owner in 1764. Since Hamilton arrived on St. Croix with his mother in 1765, it is hard to document whether or not he spent a substantial amount of time on this estate.
Nonetheless, his mother’s marriage ceremony in 1745 to John Lavien was at the Grange. In addition, Hamilton must have had at least some exposure to these estate buildings. His mother was buried in a cemetery plot retained by the Lyttons at the Grange. This gravestone was later
20
removed by the St. Croix Landmarks Society. Today, a stone stands as a memorial to Rachel
Faucett, placed near the greathouse in the 1930s by Gertrude Atherton, author of the fictional
biography of Hamilton named The Conqueror.
The Grange on St. Croix was an example of a typical greathouse during Danish times.
However, it has changed owners over the years and has endured various alterations. This makes
it difficult to determine the original configuration.
Building a Home
Hamilton’s grandson wrote a book that relied upon letters and his personal knowledge,
gained through family history, as the main sources of conclusions asserted in the book. This
grandson was the son of Hamilton’s youngest son, Philip Hamilton. In a highly related section
entitled “Building a Home” he mentions, “…or again, there may have been the influence of his
early life, spent in a clime full of beauty and restfulness, that prompted him to look about for a
retreat which was far enough removed from the bustle and affairs of men to enable him to find
relaxation in the happiness of seclusion.”5 He was of course referring to the Grange, which, at the time, was not located in as busy a city, as it is today. This leads to the question of whether
his memories became evident in forming the architectural expression of his home.
Hamilton had a strong interest in the project of building his home. His grandson
mentioned that most likely his grandfather had worked on the plans. He wrote “It is probable
that Hamilton himself worked on the plans…”6 Beyond this comment, it is difficult to ascertain
the exact modifications that Hamilton may have added to any of McComb’s plans. Unlike
McComb, Hamilton was not an architect by profession. Most likely, he may have indicated to
McComb his needs and desires as a client. Any architectural imprints in Hamilton’s memory would affect his desire for a certain layout or appearance. Hamilton’s grandson also mentioned correspondence between Hamilton’s family and his father-in-law, General Schuyler, that
21
demonstrated Hamilton’s interest in and some of his activities related to the building of his
home. In addition, Hamilton paid special attention to his surroundings in order to obtain ideas
for his home.7
Some historians may assert that Hamilton “. . . never wrote a fond word about the
Caribbean, and never made the slightest effort to return for a visit as an adult.”8 Hamilton did
have negative experiences in the Caribbean, but he also had positive ones. The fact that he never
visited may reflect negative feelings about his boyhood home or might also be a reflection of
responsibilities and economics.
Hamilton received assistance from family and friends in the Caribbean and maintained
contact with several persons through letters and even through personal contact.9 James
Alexander Hamilton, the third son of Alexander Hamilton and Elizabeth Schuyler, recalled his earliest memory of the journey of his family from Philadelphia to Albany by land in 1793. His parents were recovering from yellow fever. During their illness, Dr. Edwards Stevens of St.
Croix attended to them until recovery. Alexander Hamilton referred to him as “an acquaintance begun in early youth”.10
In 1835, James Alexander Hamilton, one of the people who knew Alexander Hamilton
best, built his own home in Irvington, New York. He affectionately coined this home “Nevis”
after the Caribbean island of his father’s birth.11 It appears that Alexander Hamilton impressed
upon his son mostly positive experiences about the Caribbean. It is interesting to note that Nevis is pictured with a grand portico with massive columns on the east (Figure 3-1). However, it also has a smaller piazza on the west (Figure 3-2). If these are original to this building, this may be another case for architectural imprints.
22
The country estate, the Hamilton Grange, was completed in 1802 in upper Manhattan in
an area now known as Harlem Heights. Since then it has been moved to 287 Convent Avenue by
the National Park Service. Alterations have been made to the exterior, such as moving the
entrance to the side of the building.
Alexander Hamilton had commissioned an architect by the name of John McComb, Jr.
He was one of the two designers for City Hall in New York. In 1803, the year after the Hamilton
Grange was completed; construction began on City Hall and lasted until 1811. Interestingly,
“the architectural style of City Hall is a combination of two famous historical movements. The
exterior façade reflects that of the French Renaissance, and the interior that of the American-
Georgian style.”12 This suggests that McComb, Jr. was an architect familiar with modifying a
building to allow the process that is known by the term syncretism.
Figure 3-1. Nevis, East Portico. Eberlein and Hubbard, Historic Houses of the Hudson Valley, 18.
23
Figure 3-2. Nevis West Porch on River Side. Eberlein and Hubbard, Historic Houses of the Hudson Valley, 17.
24
1 Richard Brookhiser, Alexander Hamilton, American, Special edition 2004. ed. (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2004), 16. 2 Ibid., 15-16. 3 Ibid., 20. 4 Merriam-Webster Incorporated, "Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, Springfield, M a, U. S.," http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/grange (accessed February 27, 2008). 5 Allan McLane Hamilton, The Intimate Life of Alexander Hamilton, Based Chiefly Upon Original Family Letters and Other Documents, Many of Which Have Never Been Published (New York: C. Scribner's sons, 1911), 336. 6 Ibid., 339. 7 Ron Chernow, Alexander Hamilton (New York: The Penguin Press, 2004), 642. 8 Brookhiser, Alexander Hamilton, American, 14. 9 Chernow, Alexander Hamilton, 38-39, 207-210. 10 James A. Hamilton, Reminiscences of James A. Hamilton; or, Men and Events, at Home and Abroad, During Three Quarters of a Century (New York: C. Scribner & Co., 1869), 1-2. 11 Harold Donaldson Eberlein and Cortlandt Van Dyke Hubbard, Historic Houses of the Hudson Valley (New York: Architectural Book Pub. Co., 1942), 16-18, 22. 12 City of New York: The Department of Citywide Administrative Services, "D. C. A. S. Managed Public Buildings, New York, N Y, U. S.," http://home2.nyc.gov/html/dcas/html/resources/man_cityhall.shtml (accessed February 27, 2008).
25
CHAPTER 4 HISTORY OF THE HAMILTON GRANGE AND ITS CURRENT APPEARANCE
History
Alexander Hamilton had been in the newly established American country for 26 years
before he decided to build a home in 1798. He chose the location of Harlem for several reasons.
At the time it was the location of prominent and affluent families, including some of Hamilton’s
friends. The country environment would also be good for his health. The area was centrally
located, convenient for professional and family travels. In addition, the area held memories of
Hamilton’s service in the Revolution.1
The area of interest was located on upper Manhattan Island, bordered by the current 145th
Street on the north, 141st Street on the south, St. Nicholas Avenue on the east, and the Hudson
River on the west (Figure 4-1). Hamilton was, originally, interested in purchasing the portion of this land along the Hudson River, but would have purchased the entire 30 to 32 acres if necessary. However, the owner Jacob Schieffelin, only sold Hamilton 15 to 16 acres in 1800, the portion east of Bloomingdale or Albany road. This area included a small plateau.2 Within two
months and again in 1803, Hamilton purchased additional land from Samuel and Mary
Bradhurst. After the last purchase, he had acquired a total of 32 to 34 acres. “This third parcel,
contiguous to the second, completed a triangle whose base was the original Grange property and
whose two sides were the Bloomingdale Road and the Kingsbridge Road.”3
After Hamilton’s death in the 1804 duel, Hamilton’s widow took control of the Hamilton
Grange in 1805. She later sold the Grange in 1833 to Theodore E. Davis, a real estate investor
and speculator. Davis, in turn, sold the Grange to Isaac G. Pearson in 1835. Pearson’s
bankruptcy in 1842 led to the property being transferred to Samuel Ward. The Ward family lost
the property by foreclosure to the Emigrant Industrial Savings Bank in 1876. In 1879, the bank
26
sold the property to William H. DeForest. DeForest divided it into building lots. Amos Cotting
invested in these lots. Cotting donated the Grange and a relocation site to St. Luke’s Chuch.
The Grange was then moved during 1888-1889. It was used by the church as a chapel until
becoming the church rectory with the construction of their new church in 1892. In 1924, the
American Scenic and Preservation Society bought the house. The Grange was accepted by the
U. S. Administration in 1962 for administration by the National Park Service.4 The National
Park is planning another move for the Hamilton Grange to St. Nicholas’ Park in 2008.
Floor Plan Layout
In the present floor configuration5, the first and second floors are the two areas that most
closely reflect the historical layout of the Grange (Figure 4-2). The basement houses the offices of the National Park Service. The original basement was left behind in the move to the current location. There are exterior steps on the west side of the building that lead to the front porch.
The current main entrance is located at right of the center of this porch. From the large window
in the center of the porch, one would enter into the octagonal-shaped space that is separated into
two smaller symmetrical spaces by columns in the center. At the opposite end of the room from
the large window is another window that leads to the back porch. On the left are secondary spaces. On the right a small hall area gives access to the stairway. This hall is also accessible from the main entrance on the porch, located to the right. There is also a small secondary space behind the stairs on the first floor.
The rectangular, L-shaped staircase leads straight up to the landing; it then turns left onto the second floor (Figure 4-3). Taking a left or right as one leaves the stairway will lead to a space on both sides. However, going straight ahead, veering slightly to the left, will lead one down a narrow interior hall that extends to the north end of the building. There are two spaces
27
on either side. The first two opposing spaces encountered down this hall are almost twice as
large as the last two spaces on the north end of the building.
The current alteration plan attempts to restore the Hamilton Grange to a layout more
representative of the original design. This includes moving the main entrance portico from the
current location ninety degrees to its original location on the current south side of the building.
This will help recreate the more classical symmetrical balance that was so prevalent during the
Federal period. The centered doorway would now open onto the stair hall. This hall leads
indirectly in a line towards the back of the building. This path is intercepted by one and then
another triangulated space, whose triangular bases fall on the long side of the octagon-shaped
central area. These triangulated spaces continue the symmetry by holding opposing positions.
The sides of these triangular spaces allow access to the octagonal space with the parlor to the left and the dining room on the right. Beyond these two rooms, are rooms one on either side of the back hall. These rooms mirror the overall size of the front space encompassing the stair hall with the stairs to the left and the library to the right.
With the new configuration, a U-shaped stairway leads to the second floor stair hall.
Walking straight ahead leads one to a small space. Making a left leads one down a hall past a room on either side to a large space at the back.
These spaces are also under plans to be modified to allow modern conveniences and building code. There are proposed accessible modifications such as an ADA public entry ramp and a wheelchair lift. There are also allowances made for an egress door and stair.
Materials
On the exterior, the building is largely composed of wood. The stairs to the main entrance, the roof, and the columns are wood. Also wood are the walls, doors, shutters, trim, and the porch
28
rail. The only brick is seen on top of the building on the chimneys. Glass appears in the window panes.
Exterior Colors
The first color seen on the exterior of the building is the light gray with just a slight hue of blue on the porch steps. The basement is covered in a deep brown hue. This contrasts with the stark white on the porch balusters and rail, columns, porch ceilings, windows, doors, and trim.
The exterior walls are painted a light to medium tint of yellow. The brick on the chimney is a medium red with white mortar. The white on the exterior carries into the interior of the building.
29
Figure 4-1. Location of the Grange. This is the general area of the Hamilton Grange as surveyed in 1888-1889. University of New Hampshire Library. "Historic U S G S Maps of New England and New York." http://docs.unh.edu/NY/harl91sw.jpg (accessed March 26, 2008).
30
Figure 4-2. Present First Floor Plan. Mongin and Whidden, Historic Structure Report : Hamilton Grange National Memorial, illustration 85.
31
Figure 4-3. Present Second Floor Plan. Mongin and Whidden, Historic Structure Report : Hamilton Grange National Memorial, illustration 95.
1 Alfred Mongin and Anne D. Whidden. "Historic Structure Report : Hamilton Grange National Memorial, Manhattan Sites, New York City." (Boston: North Atlantic Historic Preservation Center, North Atlantic Region, National Park Service, U.S. Dept. of the Interior, 1980), http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/park_histories/index.htm (Retrieved January 15, 2007 from National Park Service, Technical Information Center), 5-11. 2 Ibid. 3 Ibid., 42. 4 Ibid., 61-81. 5 Description based on floor plans received from S. Laise of the National Park Service, personal communication, November 10, 2004
32
CHAPTER 5 JOHN MCCOMB, JR.
“The house called “Grange” was designed by John McComb, Jr., at the height of his career
as the architect to important members of the New York Federalist hierarchy. The Grange is the
only surviving example of domestic architecture designed or built by McComb. For this reason
alone, it is worthy of preservation and interpretive display. Of course, it was also the most
significant residence of Alexander Hamilton. That the house was designed and built by
McComb for Hamilton—and that the house is so much identified with the culminating years of
Hamilton’s life—are circumstances that make this house one of the architectural and historical
treasures of our national heritage.”1
Family and Cultural Background
McComb belongs to a generation of craftsmen who were termed builder-architects. This
term implies that these men practiced first as master builders. The term “architect” was not used
in the modern sense, but suggests a slight departure from the then-prevalent builder tradition
towards a designer orientation.2 These master-builders were usually trained as carpenters,
masons, or bricklayers and supervised the work of these trades. Plans and elevations were usually limited adaptations of those found in builders’ handbooks. This master-builder tradition arose from eighteenth-century England and Colonial America.
John McCobmb, Jr. was born in 1763 and lived until 1853. He had a background in New
Jersey and family roots back to Scotland/Ireland. His grandparents had settled in Maryland in
1732 before moving to Princeton, New Jersey. His father, John McComb, Sr. was of Scotch-
Irish parentage. McComb Jr.’s parents married in 1761. His mother, Mary Davis, was from
Newark, New Jersey.
33
McComb, Sr. had originally moved to New York in 1758, left for Princeton, and returned after the Revolutionary War. He was in the trades as a mason and a builder. During his career, he won architectural commissions, served as City Surveyor, and in the office of election judge.
He was also a member of the General Society of Mechanics and Tradesmen. He retired in 1792 on a farm in Bottle Hill, New Jersey, later returning after his wife’s death in 1804 to live with his son, John McComb, Jr., until his death in 1811.
McComb, Sr. had an active private practice. His style has been described as being
“…traditional, a Colonial or post-Colonial adaptation of English Palladian architecture of the first half of the eighteenth century.”3 He seems to have been influenced by James Gibbs’ 1720
formula (Figure 5-1). He followed the tradition of the master builder closely by adapting
established patterns. Most of the existing buildings of this time were built by master builders.
Emergence as a Builder-Architect
John McComb, Sr. trained his son in the trades of mason and builder. John McComb, Jr. worked alongside his father until 1790. In this year, at 26 years of age, he was paid to draw elevations of Government House for the President of the United States; although it seems that he did not actually build it. He continued with moderate success as a builder for the remainder of
the decade. His fame arrived in 1802-1803 with his greatest commission for the New York City
Hall. Other works of McComb included houses, churches, and semi-public buildings. One such
house, the Hamilton Grange, was completed in 1801-1802.
McComb, Jr. also served as Street Commissioner, City Surveyor of New York, and a New
York agent for the United States Commissioner of Public Buildings. He was an officer in both
the General Society of Mechanics and Tradesmen and the American Academy of the Fine Arts.
He partially retired in 1826, but remained a businessman and investor until 1847.
34
McComb, Jr.’s process of working was representative of the architects of the Federal age.
His mode of work was also reflective of the development of the master-builder profession of that
time. “The master-builder system tended to follow a prevailing fashion, to champion it, and to
prolong it.”4 McComb operated largely in this fashion. However, he was also influenced by the
Colonial version of Burlington Palladianism and the later Adamesque or English Neoclassicism.
His main influences were his father, the builders’ handbooks in his library, and contemporary
architecture.
Professional Library
The library of McComb was extensive and reflected many of the popular architectural
handbooks of the time such as James Gibbs’, Book of Architecture, Robert and James Adam’s,
The Works in Architecture, John Crunden’s Convenient and Ornamental Architecture, and
William Pain’s Pains Architecture. It covered the gamut from the Palladian, the Adamesque, to
the newer Greco-Roman Revival. In addition, he had various books on other topics related to
architecture.
Gibbs (1739) has floor plans and elevations of buildings in the Georgian style. Common
details are porticos with pediments, quoins, urns and balustrades on roofs, and domed ceilings.5
Neither the floor plans nor the details are indicative of the Hamilton Grange.
Pain (1797) contains a few floor plans, sections, and elevations. Entrances with pediments, rusticated walls, and roof balustrades are details shown on the elevations.6 None of these have
similar plans to the Grange.
It is evident that Robert and John Adam were an influence on the design of the Hamilton
Grange. However, the exact floor plan is not found among the plans in The Works in
Architecture. The historic structure report mentions the possibility that the first and second floor
plan was adapted from a plan for the left-hand terminal pavilion of Kedleston Hall in James
35
Paine’s Plans, Sections, and Elevations of Noblemen and Gentlemen’s Houses. (Figure 5-2)
However, McComb may not have owned a copy of this publication; although it is possible that he had seen it in Adam’s The Works in Architecture.7
McComb was known to adapt plans for other buildings. His 1789 design for Government
House (Figures 5-3 and 5-4) was based on plates 52-53 of John Crunden’s Convenient and
Ornamental Architecture. (Figure 5-5).8 This establishes that McComb used adaptations of existing plans. It also shows that he used and was familiar with Crunden’s publications.
Crunden (1791) has floor plans and elevations of buildings. Details include porticos with
pediments, roofs with pediments and urns, quoins, and rusticated walls. These details are not
seen on the Grange. However, the current study revealed that there appears to be substantial
similarity between the original first floor plan of the Hamilton Grange and plate 41 (Figure 5-6), plate 49 (Figure 5-7), and plate 50-51 (Figure 5-8). McComb could have adjusted any of these plates for symmetry. Plate 49 even has a second floor option that excludes the octagonal shapes.
Plates 41 and 50-51 also have halls leading from the front door to the back entrance.
Hamilton had his own library with books on a wide variety of topics.9 He may or may not
have had Crunden’s book in his personal library. Despite this uncertainty, it is possible that
McComb could have shown him the plans from his own book or even loaned him the book in
order to allow him to select a range of plans. Hamilton would also be a major factor in any
adaptations made to the pattern book plan. Any of the floor plans from plates 41, 49, or 50-51
would have been representative of the work of the Brothers Adam. The details for the Hamilton
Grange are most likely taken directly out of their handbooks. Another plan with a similar layout is Farmington in Louisville, Kentucky; built from 1808-1810 (Figure 5-9). This house was designed by Thomas Jefferson in the Adam manner.10 Based on this information, the Hamilton
36
Grange is an adaptation of a Crunden floor plan based on Federal era plans. It features additional
Adamesque details directly from the Adam’s handbooks. A general idea of the result of this symmetrical adjustment incorporating Hamilton’s needs is shown in a hypothetical recreation of the first and second floor original plans (Figure 5-10 and 5-11).
Interest in Culture
It is interesting to note that among the books in McComb’s library are books titled New
Designs in Architecture; Travels in Upper and Lower Egypt (closest available title match),
Travels in Buenos Ayres, and the Adjacent Provinces of the Rio de la Plata; History of the Jews;
A History of the Puritans, or Protestant Non-Conformists; from the Reformation in 1517, to the
Revolution of 1688; The History of South Carolina; Antiquities of Asia; and A History of
Inventions and Discoveries.11
The book by George Richardson in New Designs in Architecture (1792) has plans and drawings of buildings. The Description of Plates includes suggestions for cottages with thatched roofs, rough cast and white washed walls, and an outer wall covered with shells or pebble stones.
The variety in the floor plans ranges from relatively simple designs to more elaborate ones using pediments, urns, and arches.12 However, none of the plans are similar to the Grange.
The titles of these books shows McComb’s penchant for new and diverse topics. This is in line with a career that shows a history of including new ideas and adaptations in his work. These titles also show an interest in different cultures throughout the world. These books may have been for purely leisure reading pursuits. However, even if this interest did not directly affect his resultant buildings, this shows that McComb was open to information about cultures different from his own. This may be a general indication of his attitude towards learning about other cultures.
37
Innovation and Creativity
“Among the attributes which McComb demonstrated in his first documented designs were
ingenuity, inventiveness, and imagination. To these he added a marked sensitivity, a finess[sic]
and refinement of style, and a skill of delineation. . . . But somehow the old builder-architect
tradition was able to force itself upon the building designer, and while he utilized the design
faculties in formulating his style and in almost all of his subsequent work, they were, in general,
merely auxiliary adjuncts to a competent builder-architect. He retained his sensitivity, his finess
[sic], and his skill of delineation, but only at intervals, primarily in studies and in unadopted
designs, did his imagination and creativity have full sway.” “Imagination and creativity, though, were the most exciting features of his early period, and the majority of the designs that can be
dated before 1803 show a fascination with his imaginative powers.” 13
McComb showed an interest in using and adapting innovative ideas in his buildings. His
1790 elevation for Government House featured a façade that was a break from the typical
Palladian style (Figure 5-3). It may be the earliest use of this type of design in America.14 In a
circa 1799 town house (Figure 5-12) and a circa 1798-1800 country house (Figure 5-13), he used
rectangular instead of arched windows in the arcades. This was an adaptation of a design seen in
J. Carter’s Builder’s Magazine in the 1770’s and 80’s (Figure 5-14). This magazine was
published in London and Mccomb’s façade might have been the first use of blank arcades in
America. Another likely first American introduction by McComb was the square-headed
doorway with side-lights and a rectangular transom (Figure 5-15) seen in the Hamilton Grange.
In fact, the Adamesque motif of the fan- and side-lighted doorway became a distinct
characteristic of McComb’s style.
The shapes used in McComb’s designs were varied and creative. He was known to use octagonal shapes. Before its use on the Hamilton Grange in the 1801 design, it could be seen in
38
his drawings for Government House (Figures 5-16 and 5-17). He also used curves as seen in his
designs for Government House (Figures 5-4, 5-16, and 5-17), Tontine City Tavern (Figure 5-18),
a circular house (Figure 5-19), and a country house (Figure 5-13).
McComb worked during a period of high Palladian influence. He was also able to
introduce elements of the late Colonial Adamesque into his designs. He is known for being a
sensitive designer, aware of proportion, scale, and detail. “…clear differentiation of elements is
one of the characteristics of his style . . . If his work suffers from any danger in this respect, it is
from over-refinement, not under-refinement. Like many of the architects of the Federal style,
McComb could be picayune in his detail, over-elongated in his proportions, but his best designs
are refined without being excessively so.”15
Syncretic Tendencies
McComb was influenced by the Brothers Adam, William Pain, and John Crunden. He
may also have been slightly, if at all, influenced by the New England architects, Samuel
McIntire, Charles Bulfinch, and Asher Benjamin, and perhaps the other Adamesque architects of
Philadelphia and the South. The New York style of Major Pierre Charles L’Enfant, using a combination of French and English elements, may have been another influence. “Federal Hall,
1789, the most conspicuous architectural monument for the novice McComb, was, at least to my way of thinking, as much, if not more, English than French, and it was certainly in the spirit of the Adam manner. It seems quite likely that specific details of L’Enfant’s work inspired later designs by McComb, especially for Washington Hall, but the direct influence of L’Enfant on the formation of the basic McComb style seems to have been minimal.”16
During McComb’s early professional career, he participated in the development of a basic
New York townhouse that featured a combination of Adamesque and Palladian styles. He may have been the first to establish this pattern and, at the very least, was one of the earliest to utilize
39
this pattern that was still being used about forty or more years later. McComb’s houses were built either as an individual unit or as a group.
McComb employed a variety of facades and floor plans, but they can be identified by some basic elements. They were three- or four-story attached or semi-attached dwellings that formed a row of private houses with common walls. Three bays were included in the width of the façade and the basement was high. Steps led to a small porch and entrance above the basement (Figure
5-12, atypical in decoration). McComb used either a Palladian type doorway (Figure 5-20) or one of two types of Adamesque doorways. The Adamesque type would be either the side- and fan-lighted portal or the side-light and flat transom doorway. The Palladian door “…consisted of a door with a fan-light above, framed by a miniature portico surmounted by a pediment with its bottom open and supported on either side by a free-standing column.”17
This town house was an alteration of the traditional narrow town houses of Holland and
England. McComb used a more simplified façade with plain walls, regular windows, and an accented door. Small columns might be found at the entrance with thin and delicate cornices, usually without frieze or architrave. The floor plan was usually rectilinear with rare use of curvilinear walls. “In these efforts is the epitome of a style which can aptly be called the Late-
Colonial Adamesque, a grafting on of the neo-classical elements to a basically Palladian (i.e.,
Colonial version of a Burlingtonian Palladian) core.”18
New York City Hall
McComb was the architect of record for New York City Hall. Although his name appears on the cornerstone, the original plan was created by Joseph F. Mangin and McComb. The exact contribution of either man remains in question because of the lack of appropriate documentation.
One factor that may have defined this relationship is the fact that the term “architect” in the nineteenth century did not necessarily signify the label of designer. Other factors that may give
40
some indication of the contributions of each man is the style of rendering and the style of the
building. The style of rendering seems to indicate that Mangin was the draftsman for the
presentation drawings. The exterior; details such as the portico, arch details, and roof
balustrades; and the great stairway of City Hall are either French in inspiration or similar to those
seen on French buildings (French style). Because of this, these elements have, by some
individuals, been attributed to Mangin. Some doubt that McComb’s body of work and experience would have given him the ability to produce this style.
On the other hand, Mangin is believed to have been an architect with a French background.
Joseph Francois Mangin was born and educated in France. He had an architectural and engineering practice with his brother in New York. Some sources consider him to be the designer of New York City Hall in 1802 and see McComb’s role as supervisor.19 Others believe
McComb had substantial responsibility for the design.20
Extant drawings by McComb show that he did, at least, modify the cupola and add English
style details on the exterior of City Hall. There is also some uncertainty concerning the person
responsible for the interior floor plan, though some persons also attribute this to Mangin with
McComb being the one who elaborated on Mangin’s design. However, as on the exterior, style
may give some indication of the designer. The Adamesque neoclassicism of the interior details
points to McComb as the designer in this area. Because of the prevalent style, generally the
exterior is considered French with the interior seen as English.
“The union of two creative forces explains why City Hall stands apart from the mass of
McComb’s work. It is an aberration, a biological sport.”21 Regardless of the appropriate
responsibilities of each man for the design of City Hall, it is important to note that McComb was
41
capable of, at the very least, combining his dominant Federal style with other styles or details in designing a building.
Figure 5-1. North Dutch Church Elevation, John McComb, Sr. Drawing #220, New York Historical Society in Stillman, Artistry and Skill in the Architecture of John Mccomb, Jr., fig. 2.
42
Figure 5-2. Left-Hand Terminal Pavilion of Kedleston Hall. Mongin and Whidden, Historic Structure Report: Hamilton Grange National Memorial, illustration 11.
Figure 5-3. 1790 Government House Elevation, John McComb, Jr. Drawing #56, New York Historical Society in Stillman, Artistry and Skill in the Architecture of John Mccomb, Jr., fig. 8.
43
Figure 5-4. Drawing #58a, 1790 Government House Plan, John McComb, Jr. Drawing #58a, New York Historical Society in Stillman, Artistry and Skill in the Architecture of John Mccomb, Jr., fig. 4.
44
Figure 5-5. Plates 52-53. Crunden, Convenient and Ornamental Architecture.
45
Figure 5-6. Plate 41. Crunden, Convenient and Ornamental Architecture.
46
Figure 5-7. Plate 49. Crunden, Convenient and Ornamental Architecture.
47
Figure 5-8. Plates 50-51. Crunden, Convenient and Ornamental Architecture.
48
Figure 5-9. Farmington. Williams, Great Houses of America, 114.
49
Figure 5-10. Hypothetical Original First Floor Plan. 1955 drawing by James G. VanDerpool in Mongin and Whidden, Historic Structure Report: Hamilton Grange National Memorial, illustration 13.
50
Figure 5-11. Hypothetical Original Second Floor Plan. 1955 drawing by James G. VanDerpool in Mongin and Whidden, Historic Structure Report: Hamilton Grange National Memorial, illustration 12.
51
Figure 5-12. 1799 Townhouse Design, John McComb, Jr. Drawing #104, New York Historical Society in Stillman, Artistry and Skill in the Architecture of John Mccomb, Jr., fig. 12.
52
Figure 5-13. Country House Design, c. 1798-1800, John McComb, Jr. Drawing #109, New York Historical Society in Stillman, Artistry and Skill in the Architecture of John Mccomb, Jr., fig. 13.
53
Figure 5-14. Townhouse Design, engraved by J. Carter. Plate XX, Andrew George Cook, New Builder’s Magazine, and H. F. duPont Winthertur in Stillman, Artistry and Skill in the Architecture of John Mccomb, Jr., fig. 11.
54
Figure 5-15. Grange Doorway. Drawing for Index of American Design. Avery Library in Stillman, Artistry and Skill in the Architecture of John Mccomb, Jr., fig. 15.
55
Figure 5-16. Drawing #55, 1790 Government House Plan, John McComb, Jr. Drawing #55, New York Historical Society in Stillman, Artistry and Skill in the Architecture of John Mccomb, Jr., fig. 5.
56
Figure 5-17. Drawing #54, 1790 Government House Plan, John McComb, Jr. Drawing #54, New York Historical Society in Stillman, Artistry and Skill in the Architecture of John Mccomb, Jr., fig. 6.
57
Figure 5-18. 1793 Tontine City Tavern Second Floor Plan, c. 1793, John McComb, Jr. New York Historical Society in Stillman, Artistry and Skill in the Architecture of John Mccomb, Jr., fig. 9.
58
Figure 5-19. Circular House, John McComb, Jr. Drawing #254, New York Historical Society in Stillman, Artistry and Skill in the Architecture of John Mccomb, Jr., fig. 10.
59
Figure 5-20. Doorway Detail. Plate XXXIX, William Pain, Practical House Carpenter; or Youth’s Instructor. (London: I. and J. Taylor, 1794) H. F. duPont Winthertur Museum. Drawing #58a, in Stillman, Artistry and Skill in the Architecture of John Mccomb, Jr., fig. 18.
1 Mongin and Whidden. "Historic Structure Report : Hamilton Grange National Memorial, Manhattan Sites, New York City." 3. 2 Samuel Damie Stillman, "Artistry and Skill in the Architecture of John Mccomb, Jr" (Thesis (M. A.), University of Delaware, 1956). 3 Ibid., 16. 4 Ibid., 11. 5 James Gibbs, A Book of Architecture Containing Designs of Buildings and Ornaments. By James Gibbs, The second ed. (London: printed for W. Innys and R. Manby; J. and P. Knapton; and C. Hitch, 1739). 6 William Pain and James Pain, Pains British Palladio: Or, the Builders General Assistant. Demonstrating, in the Most Easy and Practical Method, All the Principal Rules of Architecture, from the Ground Plan to the Ornamental Finish. Illustrated with Several New and Useful Designs of Houses, with Their Plans, Elevations, and Sections. Also, Clear and Ample Instructions Annexed to Each Subject, in Letter-Press; with a List of Prices for Materials and Labour and Labour Only . . . Uniform Title: British Palladio, A new, corr. ed. (London: I. and J. Taylor, 1797). 7 Mongin and Whidden. "Historic Structure Report : Hamilton Grange National Memorial, Manhattan Sites, New York City." 23, 23, 26 note no. 46.
60
8 Fiske Kimball, Domestic Architecture of the American Colonies and of the Early Republic (New York: Dover Publications, 1966), 164. 9 Hamilton, The Intimate Life of Alexander Hamilton, Based Chiefly Upon Original Family Letters and Other Documents, Many of Which Have Never Been Published, 74. 10 Henry Lionel Williams and Ottalie Kroeber Williams, Great Houses of America, 1st . ed. (New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1966), 113. 11 Information from annotated listing from McComb Papers at the New-York Historical Society in Stillman, "Artistry and Skill in the Architecture of John Mccomb, Jr", 102-115. 12 George Richardson, New Designs in Architecture Consisting of Plans, Elevations, and Sections for Various Buildings, Comprised in Xliv Folio Plates, Designed and Engraved by George Richardson, Architect. = Nouveaux Desseins D'architecture, Ou, Plans, Elevations, Et Coupes De Divers Bâtimens; . . . Dessinées Et Gravées Par George Richardson Architecte (London: printed for the author no. 105, Great Titchfield-Street, 1792). 13 Stillman, "Artistry and Skill in the Architecture of John Mccomb, Jr", 20-21. 14 Ibid., 21. 15 Ibid., 26. 16 Ibid., 30-31. 17 Ibid., 39. 18 Ibid., 42. 19 Roy Eugene Graham, "Joseph Jacques Ramée and the French Émigré Architects in America" (Thesis (M. Arch. Hist.), University of Virginia, 1968), 80. 20 Edward S. Wilde, "John Mccomb, Jr., Architect," The American Architect and Builiding News 94, no. 1703, 1704 (1908): 49-65. 21 Stillman, "Artistry and Skill in the Architecture of John Mccomb, Jr", 91.
61
CHAPTER 6 FEDERAL ARCHITECTURE
Neoclassical Design during the Federal Period
The Federal age had become established in America around 1776. It is considered to be the neoclassical counterpart and American version and of the architecture promoted in England by the Adam brothers as the Adamesque style. Robert Adam had visited Italy for two years; in
1764 he published architectural measured drawings of domestic Roman architecture. It was called Federal style in America because of the time period of its emergence and popularity.
Some of the designers in this manner were Charles Bulfinch, Samuel McIntyre, Alexander
Parris, and John McComb, Jr.
In 1775, George Washington’s dining room ceiling at Mount Vernon became an early example of the Federal. Relatively more elaboration is found on the interior of Federal buildings. “It is significant that this early manifestation of the Adamesque style in America is an interior feature, for it was in their decorative interiors that the Adam brothers excelled and departed most pronouncedly from Palladian architectural design.”1
The general characteristics of the Hamilton Grange fit the description of Federal houses.
Federal houses are in general square or rectangular, brick or frame, and three stories high. On the exterior, doors and window were marked by a sense of scale and articulation. The fan and the oval were frequent styles of articulation. In comparison to Georgian architecture, Federal buildings featured more narrow and delicate columns and moldings. Generally, exterior decoration appeared on a porch or entrance motif. The interiors became the area that revealed a major divergence from earlier periods.
Decorative details on the Hamilton Grange are also typical of the Federal period.
Explorations of Roman architecture had uncovered decorative patterns of urns, swags, sheaths of
62
wheat and garlands and interior spaces of hexagonal, oval, and circular forms. These discoveries
inspired oval, circular, and octagonal shapes in interior spaces. It also inspired decorative details
such as rosettes, urns, swags, oval patera, and reeded colonnettes or pilasters. These details
appeared on mantels, cornices, door and window frames, and ceilings.
“Parlor windows, which dropped to the floor, were especially common on the facades of
late Federal and Greek Revival row houses to maximize light and ventilation on the principal
floor.”2 Parlor windows fitting this description are located on both the east and west piazzas of the Hamilton Grange.
These large windows are triple-hung windows; one variation of this type of window. The double-hung window is a type of sliding sash window. In the United States, it is the most widely used traditional type of window. “In a double-hung window two sash slide by one another vertically in tracks formed by the stops. . . . Variations of this type include the single- hung sash, in which only one sash operates by sliding past a stationary sash, and triple-hung sash, which contain three operable sash [sic]. The latter type was frequently used in first-floor openings to provide access onto porches and verandas.”3
Use of Shutters
In the early seventeenth century, houses frequently oiled paper or sliding board shutters
instead of glazed windows.4 Around the time that the Grange was built, some types of shutters
were more common than others. “Blinds with the familiar slanted slats or louvers were rare until
late in the [eighteenth] century; the paneled shutter was almost peculiar to the middle colonies.
Windows also had paneled interior shutters which folded back into the reveals when open.”5
“As if to offset the severity of bare stone walls, wood trim was particularly heavy. Door
and window frames, paneled shutters, and richly molded cornices, all painted a gleaming white,
afforded a telling contrast to dark gray masonry. Paneled exterior shutters were particularly a
63
feature of the Georgian style in the middle colonies; usually they were employed only on first-
story windows, while louvered blinds were often used on the second story.”6
Any hardware used on these shutters would most likely have been supplied in the general
area. The use of wrought-iron hardware was extensive. It is mentioned that shortly after Penn’s
arrival, nails, hinges, beams anchors, shutter catches, etc. were manufactured using the iron-ore
in the region of Philadelphia and its vicinity.7
Regional Differences
“Interiors were, in general, less distinctively regional in character. The same types of
doorways, paneled walls, mantelpieces, and cornices may be seen in all the colonies.”8 The interior of the Grange features numerous neoclassical details. One of these details seen in the interior on one of the fireplace mantels is a common Federal pattern (Figures 6-1 and 6-2).
Despite the many similarities to typical Federal architecture, some of the architectural characteristics of the Grange suggest other influences. The most distinctive being the full-length east and west piazzas. These piazzas tend to be identified with Federal architecture in other regions.
Each region in America had its own form of Federal architecture. The commonality among all of them was the same system of proportion and ornament and a preference for complex shapes, both in structure and plan. In Charleston, South Carolina, a house type emerged that was indicative of this pattern. “This is the so-called “single house,” a house one room in depth, oriented with its short end toward the street and with a piazza along the entire long side.
These features seem to have been imported from the West Indies and were intended to afford space for outdoor living and to protect the house from the sun. The type is thus distinctly regional.”9
64
Figure 6-1. Federal Mantel Detail. Smith and Mudrick, Federal Style Patterns 1780-1820, 188.
Figure 6-2. Hamilton Grange Mantel. Author’s Photo.
1 John C. Poppeliers, S. Allen Chambers, and Nancy B. Schwartz, in What Style Is It?: A Guide to American Architecture (New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2003), 29. 2 New York Landmarks Society, "Repairing Old and Historic Windows: A Manual for Architects and Homeowners," (Washington, D.C.: The Preservation Press: National Trust for Historic Preservation, 1992), 27. 3 Ibid., 54-55. 4 Hugh Morrison, in Early American Architecture, from the First Colonial Settlements to the National Period (New York: Oxford University Press, 1952), 34.
65
5 Ibid., 304. 6 Ibid., 518. 7 Ibid., 518-519. 8 Ibid., 518. 9 William Harvey Pierson, American Buildings and Their Architects : The Colonial and Neoclassical Styles, vol. 1 (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1970), 232.
66
CHAPTER 7 ARCHITECTURE IN NEW YORK
Regional Porches
Syncretism of Dutch, English, and West Indian cultures in the United States in the late
eighteenth century led to the emergence of new building types. It is possible that the Grange
may have been influenced by Long Island porches or other house characteristics around this time
period. An examination of Long Island porches might also indicate the types of porches that
Alexander Hamilton and John McComb, Jr. would encounter on a daily basis in other areas of
New York.
Long Island
Long Island covers an area about 120 miles long that was originally colonized by the
Dutch and the English. The first Dutch settlements in the western area, now known as Long
Island, were in 1636. The first English settlements in the eastern area of Long Island were in
1644.1 Long Island became part of the Province of New York in 1664, except for a brief period of capture by the Dutch during 1673-1674. After the first crude shelters were built, the early houses in each settlement generally followed the building techniques and styles familiar to the colonists in Europe. Dutch and Flemish type houses were found on the western side and English
were found on the eastern. The typical type for both locations was the wood-frame one-room
and two-room end-chimney plan of one or two stories. This general type would expand in
various ways over the years and result in several variations, including several indigenous Long
Island versions that combined the two types of houses into an Anglo-Dutch house type.2
English and Dutch Houses
“The Colonial and Federal architecture of no two regions on Long Island is identical and, even though there are numerous points of similarity, many areas are distinguished by unique
67
indigenous characteristics which are local and personal variations.”3 The early homes in the
Dutch west were one or two room, plus auxiliary space with two front doors. Small rooms on
the back created a lean-to style. Additions were created as necessary.
In the 18th century, the gable and later gambrel roofs came into use. These flared,
projecting eaves are known as a sign of the Dutch-Colonial type. These homes were always long
and low, usually no more than a story-and-a-half high. The roof could extend to cover a piazza
at the front and extend at the rear close to the ground, often within six or eight feet of the ground.
Sometimes the roof would have dormer windows. Dutch-Colonial homes were framed on large
posts. The ceiling joists were uncovered. Porch columns were often octagonal in form.
The English houses started out in the 17th century as medieval forms. These developed into a shingled two-story lean-to house with a central chimney plan and a front entrance porch
(also called a covered stoop) and parlor. These also had a slope that extended to the back, sometimes within three or four feet of the ground. There was also another variation of a two-
and-a-half story with five bays that did not have a lean-to, but had a central hall or centered
chimney. Other characteristics are a gable roof and round porch columns. Variations of these
houses have been compared to Nantucket “salt-box” houses and others to “Cape Cod” houses.4
New House Type
The Dutch and English houses on Long Island, in combination with the climate, developed into a new syncretic house type. It started as a one-room-and-attic 6-post frame house (Figure 7-
1). The roof plate was high; additional rooms at the front were placed laterally with a continuous roofline. At the rear, small rooms resulted in a “salt-box” profile. The most typical Long Island farmhouse is a long, low structure of one-and-a-half stories with little ornamentation. The rear roof is closer to the ground than the front. Some of these houses are three rooms in width with both a centered chimney and an end chimney. The two room variations often have a center hall
68
and end chimneys. In some cases, they may also have cater-cornered fireplaces or a lateral one-
story wing.5
These houses were built facing south in front of a hill as a protection from the north winds.
Some of the less common variations included the addition of a bridge from a second floor rear
door to the bank, spanning the area between the free-standing building and the slope. Usually
there was also a retaining wall of local glacial stones.6 A characteristic that seems to be uniquely
Long Island is the location of the stairs and entrance hall on one end of the house and the end- chimney at the other.7
After the Revolutionary War, the variation called the “half-house”, “the side entrance
plan”, or the “house with a side hall” became popular. This was a two-and-a-half story house
with a gable, a lower roof plate and no front windows on the second floor or low floor level
windows under the eaves. A “three-quarters house” would have three full-sized windows across
the front on the second floor. On the other hand, the “full” two-story-and-a-half house had a
modified Dutch-Colonial gambrel roof, lateral one-story wing, and shed-roof extension.8
Relation to the Grange
It appears that although Dutch and English houses on Long Island would sometimes incorporate porches, these porches were not similar to the kind found on the Hamilton Grange.
These porches are described as being low to the ground as compared to the Grange’s raised porch (Figures 7-2 and 7-3). The other characteristics of this house types also do not seem to have affected the design of the Hamilton Grange. The syncretic Anglo-Dutch type also seems not to have been a significant influence on the Grange’s design (Figure 7-4).9
Harlem and the Manhattan Area
The Harlem area was not as populated as it is today. However, there were a few mansions in the area that may have had an impact on the Hamilton Grange. One of these is the Morris-
69
Jumel Mansion; the other is Gracie Mansion. The relatively close proximity of these buildings
and Hamilton’s familiarity with their architecture could point to these as influences on his home.
Morris-Jumel Mansion
Hamilton was familiar with the house now know as the Morris-Jumel mansion at 160th
street and Edgecombe Avenue. Not only was this home in the Harlem area,10 it was also
Washington’s headquarters at the beginning of the Revolution. The house is described as being an early Georgian frame building (Figure 7-5).11
The main features that could have been a possible impact on the Hamilton Grange is the
oblong octagonal room used as a “council chamber” (Figure 7-6). Some of the details of the
home, such as the arches, may also be influences on the Grange. However, the general layout
and use of the floor plan is different from the Grange.
Gracie Mansion
Another building in the Manhattan area familiar to Hamilton was Gracie Mansion, now
located on East End Ave at 88th St. Some sources have listed John McComb, Jr. as architect and
Ezra Weeks as the builder of the Gracie Mansion.12 If this is true, this builder and architect
would have been the same builder and architect for the Hamilton Grange.
However, the reason for this association appears to be based only on possible social
connections. There is currently no other evidence of the identities of the builder and architect
responsible for the mansion’s design. In addition, this building was built in 1799 with a portico
on two columns. Based on detailed physical examination, the porches seen on Gracie Mansion
today are 1810 additions.13 This would have precluded any influence on the Hamilton Grange.
70
Figure 7-1. 6-Post Frame House. Van Liew, Long Island Domestic Architecture of the Colonial and Federal Periods, cover.
Figure 7-2. House with Low Porch. Van Liew, Long Island Domestic Architecture of the Colonial and Federal Periods, 26.
71
Figure 7-3. House with Front Entrance Covered Stoop. Van Liew, Long Island Domestic Architecture of the Colonial and Federal Periods, 24.
Figure 7-4. House with Low Porch. Van Liew, Long Island Domestic Architecture of the Colonial and Federal Periods, 24.
72
Figure 7-5. Morris-Jumel Mansion South Elevation. Drawing by Joseph Palle. Haddon, The Roger Morris House (Jumel Mansion). New York City, 51.
73
Figure 7-6. Morris-Jumel Mansion First Floor Plan. Drawing by Joseph Palle. Haddon, The Roger Morris House (Jumel Mansion). New York City, 57.
1 Barbara Ferris Van Liew, Long Island Domestic Architecture of the Colonial and Federal Periods: An Introductory Study (Setauket, Long Island: Society for the Preservation of Long Island Antiquities (Reprinted from the Nassau County Historical Society Journal, Vol. XXXIII, Number 1 With Revisons), 1974).
74
2 Ibid., 2-3. 3 Ibid., 11. 4 Ibid., 12-14. 5 Ibid., 14-15. 6 Ibid., 17. 7 Ibid., 20. 8 Ibid., 20-21. 9 Ibid., 11-12. 10 Mongin and Whidden. "Historic Structure Report : Hamilton Grange National Memorial, Manhattan Sites, New York City." 21. 11 Rawson Woodman Haddon, "The Roger Morris House (Jumel Mansion). New York City. With Measured Drawings by Joseph Palle.," Architectural Record 42 (1917): 47, 49. 12 Mary Beth Betts, "The Mayor's Mansion," The New York Times, New York, NY, U. S., http://www.nytimes.com (accessed March 11, 2008). 13 Mary Beth Betts, phone interview, April 2008.
75
CHAPTER 8 PHILIP SCHUYLER
Alexander Hamilton’s father-in-law, Philip Schuyler had a significant influence in the building of the Hamilton Grange. As apparent from existing letters, General Schuyler gave
Hamilton advice and assistance during the building of the Grange in 1801 including giving him materials, such as timber and cedar posts.1 In addition, Hamilton was very familiar with at least one of Schuyler’s homes. Therefore, it is possible that these homes had an influence on the
Hamilton Grange. The Grange was, at the time, located in the country just north of New York
City.
Philip Schuyler had two homes. Both were in New York. One was in Albany; the other was in Schuylerville. (Figure 8-1) Since the Saratoga mansion was renovated for Schuyler’s son in 1787, it appears that the Albany mansion would have been considered the main residence of
Philip Schuyler’s immediate family. Therefore, the Albany mansion is likely to have had a greater impact on Alexander Hamilton, as compared to the Saratoga mansion.
Albany Mansion
Besides this documented evidence of Philip Schuyler’s involvement in the building of the
Grange is the possible influence of his daughter. Elizabeth Schuyler Hamilton, Hamilton’s wife ran the Grange in Hamilton’s absence. She is likely to have had some influence during the building of the Grange. The Albany mansion was very familiar to her since this is where she was born and she spent much of her childhood at this estate.2
Alexander Hamilton first visited the Schuyler’s home in October 1777. Hamilton may have meet Elizabeth, General Schuyler’s daughter, at this time or at a later date. By the winter of
1779-80 at Morristown, the two had met and were married at Albany in December 1780.3
76
Hamilton lived in the Schuyler’s home for ten months in 1781. He again lived there for some months in 1795 before settling in New York City. After this last stay, he visited this house on a constant basis. He and General Schuyler had a good father-in-law and son-in-law relationship and shared political views.4
Just as Hamilton shared Schuyler’s political ideals, it appears that he also shared his
preference for neoclassical architecture. Schuyler’s house was built in the Georgian style in the
immediate Albany area. “According to the Marquis de Chastellux, who visited Schuyler in
1780, Schuyler was ‘its owner as well as its architect,’ but the influences which prompted his
choice of a design so radical to local tradition can only be speculated upon.”5
Similar to the Long Island, Albany’s architecture was highly influenced by the Dutch at
this time. The Albany area had a large Dutch population and the predominant buildings were
Dutch Colonial at the time. This remained the case until the non-Dutch population in Albany
increased during the Federal period. Therefore, the Georgian style never became the prevalent
style in Albany.6
Architectural Influences on the Albany Mansion
One of the possible architectural influences for this building is attributed to Schuyler’s
familiarity with the other houses in the New York City area that had American adaptations in the
Georgian style. It might be assumed that “. . . communication among the colonists was more considerable than is generally credited, and the architecture of new buildings was no doubt of more than passing interest to correspondents and visitors.”7 John Bradstreet may also have been
an influence on the designs of Schuyler’s home. It is possible that Bradstreet may have had one
or more of the builder’s pattern books that were published in England.8
77
Schuyler’s Library
Some of the books in Schuyler’s library that might relate to the architecture of the
Hamilton Grange were listed by Schuyler as “Modern Builder”, “Morris’s designs in
Architecture”, and “Hawney’s Mensuration”. These books might refer to:9
1. Halfpenny, William et al, The Modern Builder’s Assistant or a Concise Epitome of the Whole System of Architecture. London, 1742, 1747, 1757. 2. Morris, Robert, Architecture Improved in a Collection of Modern Elegant and Useful Designs, London, 1755. Or Morris, Robert, Select Architecture, Being Regular Designs of Plans, and Elevations, Well Suited to Both Town and Country, London, 1755, 1757.
3. Hawney, William, The Compleat Measurer…, London, sixth ed., 1748.
Halfpenny (1757) has information on and drawings of the orders of architecture. There are
also floor plans and elevations. However, it does not have similar floor plans or architectural
elaboration as the Grange. Quoins, arches over windows, porticos, rusticated walls, main block
with wings, fireplaces, ceilings, and highly elaborated interior elevations are present.10
Morris (1755) also has a few floor plans and elevations. The buildings feature details such
as pediments and quoins. There are about one or two plans using pentagonal rooms on one side
of the building, but none show a hallway from front to back.11
Morris (1757) has drawings and elevations of a number of buildings. There are porticos
and galleries with massive columns, pediments, and plans showing main blocks with wings.
Plate 18 shows porticos on four sides and Plate 30 shows interlocking octagons, but these
elements are the only similarities to the Hamilton Grange floor plan.12
Hawney (1751) covers measuring techniques of different shapes and solids. It has information on decimal arithmetic. It also covers measurements relating to the building trades.
It does not have plans or elevations.13
78
The books in Schuyler’s library do not show a direct influence on the Hamilton Grange.
Although some plans have octagonal shapes, none are close enough to the basic Grange
configuration. The architectural details shown in these books also seem to fit more with the
Georgian period.
England Visit
Schuyler visited England from 1761-1762. During his visit, he purchased items for his
home, such as wallpaper, window glass, fabrics, hardware, and other household items.14
Construction of Schuyler’s Albany mansion started in 1761 supervised by Bradstreet; nine days after Schuyler sailed for England. After returning from England, the interior was supervised by
Schuyler.15 The interior carpentry work is believed to have been completed by the end of
1764.16
Windows
Bills show that outside shutters were an original detail of the home (Figure 8-2). Dormer
windows were also original as indicated by structural evidence.17 “The window glass was crown glass from London, sheet glass made by hand. “The twenty-six large windows of the main house each contained twenty-four panes of glass, each pane measuring ten inches by twelve inches in size. The six smaller windows contained eighteen panes of glass, each pane being seven inches by nine inches. The sash prepared by Banta and Gautier were probably hung so that each large window contained a double sash of twelve lights over twelve and each smaller window nine lights over nine. The dormer windows contained twelve panes of glass, each pane measuring seven inches by nine inches. These sash were probably hung as six lights over six.”18
The windows of the Albany mansion are similar enough to the Hamilton Grange to be
considered a direct influence. Especially applicable is the use of shutters and glass panes. The
only exception would be the dormer windows on the Albany mansion.
79
Staircase
The staircase in the Albany mansion is one of its most interesting architectural features. It
is comprised of balusters with spiral turnings (Figure 8-3). This type of balustrade detail was
highly fashionable in New England stairways before the Revolution. The existing newel post
may have also consisted of an outer spiral surrounding the current single spiral, resulting in a wider newel post.19 This staircase is not consistent with stairway detailing in the Federal period.
Roof
The double hip roof is original based on structural evidence. It is believed that shingles
was the original roof covering, possibly made of white pine. Neither the double-hip roof, nor the shingles are representative of the Hamilton Granges’ original roof construction or material.
Stairway
There is evidence that suggests that the interior stairway from the cellar to the first floor is not original. The extant stairway is of twentieth-century construction with no evidence of
another preexisting stairway. However, on the exterior, the west elevation shows the remains of
a stairway now covered by terrace paving blocks. Near the ground is an arch of brick next to the
central back door, marking the original connection to the cellar level.
This exterior stairway was protected by an enclosed passage extended across the rear of the
house, allowing easy accessibility in poor weather. In addition, there is no fireplace and bake
oven in the cellar that would indicate the location of the kitchen in the cellar. The kitchen was in
a separate building near the cellar.20 The original Grange layout would have included an interior
stairway to the cellar, as opposed to the original exterior stairway of the Albany mansion.
Fireplaces
The marble facings on the fireplaces in the drawing room, parlor, and southeast bedroom
are most likely the original Philadelphia marble (Figure 8-4). There was also marble facing in
80
the dining room, but this original marble is no longer on that fireplace. None of the marble
hearths are extant; the current hearths are tiles.21 These marble fireplaces may be an indirect
influence on the Grange. The marble fireplaces at the Grange were installed around 1805. The
original most likely had elaborate wooden mantels.22
Other Buildings
There were six windows in the cellar that from Schuyler’s 1798 description appears not to
have glass, only solid or louvered wooden shutters. There was also a brick office and a brick
nursery about 20’ x 24’ of one story that had similar window coverings on circular 28” diameter
windows. The nursery is believed to have been at the northwest corner for proximity to the
dining room, with the brick office at the southwest corner. The kitchen was 24’ x 26’ and one
story adjoined, but was not necessarily attached to, the nursery. The nursery, office, and kitchen
are described as not having a cellar.23
Schuyler described a yard in the rear, enclosed with a fence of posts and boards and a shed
roof. This fence enclosed separate small rooms that housed an ash pit, a wash room with a
window, a small smoak room for mashing meal, a small flour and harness room, a lumber loft, a
fowl yard, and part of a brick necessary (a privy or toilet).24 The structure seen in some pictures
at the south of the building is an arbor covered with vines.25
Wings and Passageway
Incisions in the brickwork at the point where the previously existing wings touched the house, along the rear wall, serve as visual evidence of the existence of the two wings. Traces of the foundation wall, angles of the incision, and the known dimensions of the wings allowed determination of the wings and their height.26
These two wings on either side of the house were connected by a passageway connecting
these wings to the house. The passageway was enclosed by a brick wall that had a height of
81
seven and one-half feet high. This brick wall was parallel to the west wall and had a shed roof
and six windows with panes of glass. It is believed that the point of the wing roofs’ incision
would also be the top of the shed roof. This location horizontally bisects the window at the main
staircase’s landing. This shed roof was reconstructed in the twentieth century. It is also believed
that a hatchway covered the cellar stairs because of its location under the passageway.27
This passageway was at the rear of the building. Later views of the building show a piazza at this location (Figure 8-5). However, this space was originally an enclosed area and; therefore, does not relate to the raised porches on the Hamilton Grange.
Hexagonal Vestibule
Another influence that is likely to be mistakenly attributed to the Hamilton Grange is the hexagonal vestibule (Figure 8-6). The hexagonal vestibule was not part of the original structure and not added by Schuyler. This allowed direct entrance into the large hall that is believed to have been used as a dining room, especially in hot summer weather. The original first and second floor plans were similar to the configuration seen today, except that the southwest room on the first floor that served as a library would have been larger encompassing the current closet and cellar stairway. Another effect on the building exterior is that back hall lighting would have been much less than is currently present. This would have been due to the enclosed passage and the shed roof blocking off some of the windows on the west wall.28
Approach and Gardens
The site of the Schuyler estate was about one-half mile south of Albany City. It was about
24 acres, located along the west side of Kings’ Road. This road, itself, was on the west side of
the Hudson River and a major route from Albany to New York City.29 There was a gentle slope
that began at the river with the mansion positioned about halfway up this slope. A tree-lined driveway led on a slightly curving path to the house. It is assumed that guests entered from the
82
front door, but there is no evidence of a formal path to the front door. Although there may not
have been a formal landscaped path to the front door, the Schuyler and Van Rensselaer (the
maiden name of the wife) families of Albany were renowned for their European style gardens
and Philip Schuyler’s was no exception. His gardens have been described as being done in the
“elaborate art of French landscape gardening”. Based on Simeon Dewitt’s map of 1794, these
gardens were composed of parterres, popular at the time in France. The particular style is
speculated to have been rectangular borders with some of these borders containing geometric
patterns of flowers, grass, etc.30 Schuyler was one of a number of late eighteenth century men
who were avid fruit growers. His success in this area is highlighted by the Schuyler Gage plum
of his namesake.
Schuyler’s home was also used as a large working farm.31 Other buildings on the site were
a barn of 80’ x 50’, a framed coach house, and a framed ice house of size 12’ x 12’ x 12’ deep.
Around 1810-1815, the coach house is noted as being yellow in color.32
Other Areas
The slope of part of the site was altered during the nineteenth century with the addition of
Catherine’s street to the northeast. This has significantly modified the original appearance of the
land. It has resulted in the addition of a retaining wall in 1916 as a protective measure against
erosion.33
Based on a description of the mansion in 1884, the house was about sixty feet square. It
has a double-hip roof with small dormers and square chimneys. It also mentions the balustrades on the roof and the relative large windows for that time period.34
The hexagonal vestibule on the east elevation is noted as being a later addition to the house
that covers the original front door. The main hall reached through the vestibule is 30’ long x
20’wide with a height of 12’. There is a door at the west end of the hall that is described with
83
aspects that have similarities to the Grange’s door. It is called an old Colonial door and has a fan and side-lights.
The staircase is located in the back hall. The balusters are carved by hand in three different designs that repeats on each step. This detail can be found in other homes of the period.
Hamilton and Elizabeth Schuyler married in the drawing room at the southeast corner. This room has deep cased windows with window seats and a large marble mantel. General Schuyler’s study is at the southwest; a room that can also be accessed from the back west entrance. There is another room at the northeast and the dining room is at the northwest corner with the entrance in the back hall. Comparisons between the first and second floor reveal that the second floor has longer halls, but a lower ceiling.35
The first floor has low wainscot in two panels, usual for houses of the time. All of the rooms have large windows. This allows significant light to enter the rooms. Every room also has windows that are deeply recessed and provides a window seat.36
Effects on the Hamilton Grange
The main areas of impact on the Hamilton Grange’s design are the windows. The existence of gardens and outbuildings also closely relate to the Hamilton estate in entirety. To the casual observer, two other major architectural elements, the piazza and hexagonal vestibule, may falsely be attributed as having an impact on the Grange. However, examination of the history of this building reveals that these elements are not original to the Albany Mansion. This leads to the conclusion that the piazza and hexagonal vestibule did not impact the design of the
Hamilton Grange.
The Albany mansion should be a reasonable indicator of the type of Georgian buildings in the area during the design and building of the Hamilton Grange. It was close enough to the
Hamilton estate for frequent travel and would number among the relatively few buildings in the
84
area. In 1777, “. . . the Province of New York ranked sixth in population with the other colonies
and that, with her wealthy seaport, the City of New York, in the hands of the British throughout
the entire war, there was little or no money to be had. A fringe of cultivated country bordered
the Hudson, the lower Mohawk, and the Delaware; there were no towns of any size save Albany,
Kingston, Schenectady, and a few others; the rest of the State was a wilderness”.37
Saratoga Mansion
The Schuylers also had another mansion in Schuylerville, New York. This house is now part of the Saratoga National Park. This house was built in 1777 by Philip Schuyler as a replacement for his home that was burned by the British after the Battles of Saratoga. The structure was a frame house described as having a cellar kitchen, small casement windows, and unpainted weatherboard siding. The interior had little embellishment and unfinished ceilings.38
History
Later changes included new windows with double-hung sashes, a new door and architrave,
more refined clapboards, new casings and cornices, and the addition of the porch, office, and
passageway on the east wall of the house. Interior changes included upgrades to walls, finishes,
doorways, windows, and trim.39 Philip Schuyler later renovated this home in 1787 for his oldest
son, John Bradstreet Schuyler. The house stayed in the family until 1937. In 1815, Philip
Schuyler II, John Bradstreet Schuyler’s son, is believed to have made some major alterations to
the house. These alterations included adding a large pillared piazza along the west façade
(Figure 8-7).40
The original shutters were determined to be solid batten blinds based on several surviving
first-story original blinds. Based on the existence of clenched wrought nails, it is likely that
these blinds were part of the 1787 renovation. However, because clenched wrought nails were
still being used for some purposes, the nails may also point to the early nineteenth century.41
85
These shutters are all solid and comprised of two or three vertical beaded boards each (Figure 8-
8).42 These may have also been part of the 1777 rebuilding. Eight pair of hinges mentioned in
Schuyler’s correspondence may have been used either for casement sashes or for exterior
blinds.43
The National Park Service acquired the house in 1950. Between 1955 to 1964, the house
and the northeast kitchen wing were restored to their 1804 appearance. However, additional
investigation has revealed that the porch now seen between the office and the kitchen wing may
have been an enclosed passageway (Figure 8-9). This would have been similar to the one in the
Albany mansion44
Effects on the Hamilton Grange
The floor plans of the Saratoga mansion reveal that the configurations are different than the
symmetrical arrangement of the original Hamilton Grange plan. (Figure 8-6) In addition, the
porches seen on this house are distinct from the Grange’s full-length piazzas. Based on the
historic structure report, there was only a porch located on one side of the building. In addition,
the structure of this porch is not the raised type and does not have the same visual attachment at the roofline as seen on the Grange. This porch seems to have more in common with the Dutch
Colonial porches in the New York region. The only possible strong influences may have been
from the exterior shutters and some of the interior and exterior detailing on the building.
86
Figure 8-1. Area North of the Grange. This is the area of the Albany and Saratoga mansions belonging to the Schuylers. Eberlein and Hubbard, Historic Houses of the Hudson Valley, inside front cover.
87
Figure 8-2. Albany Mansion Shutters. New York State Bureau of Historic Sites, Schuyler Mansion: A Historic Structure Report, 81.
88
Figure 8-3. Albany Mansion Stair Newel Post and Balustrades. New York State Bureau of Historic Sites, Schuyler Mansion: A Historic Structure Report, 21.
Figure 8-4. Albany Mansion Mantelpiece. New York State Bureau of Historic Sites, Schuyler Mansion: A Historic Structure Report, 113.
89
Figure 8-5. Albany Mansion Piazza. New York State Bureau of Historic Sites, Schuyler Mansion: A Historic Structure Report, 78.
90
Figure 8-6. Albany Mansion First Floor Plan. New York State Bureau of Historic Sites, Schuyler Mansion: A Historic Structure Report, 89.
91
Figure 8-7. Saratoga Mansion Piazza. Phillips, General Philip Schuyler House Historic Structure Report, 115.
92
Figure 8-8. Saratoga Mansion Shutter Detail. Phillips, General Philip Schuyler House Historic Structure Report, 221.
Figure 8-9. Schuyler Mansion View of Porch and Office. The kitchen wing is to the right. Phillips, General Philip Schuyler House Historic Structure Report, 175.
93
1 Georgina Schuyler, The Schuyler Mansion at Albany, Residence of Major-General Philip Schuyler, 1762-1804, by the Spirit of '76 (New York: The De Vinne press, 1911), 37. 2 Mongin and Whidden. "Historic Structure Report : Hamilton Grange National Memorial, Manhattan Sites, New York City." 18. 3 Schuyler, The Schuyler Mansion at Albany, Residence of Major-General Philip Schuyler, 1762-1804, by the Spirit of '76, 36. 4 Ibid., 36-37. 5 New York State Bureau of Historic Sites, Schuyler Mansion: A Historic Structure Report (Albany: New York State Parks and Recreation: distributed by the Schuyler Mansion State Historic Site, 1979), 12. 6 Ibid., 13, 14. 7 Ibid., 12. 8 Ibid. 9 Ibid., 13. 10 William Halfpenny et al., The Modern Builder's Assistant; or, a Concise Epitome of the Whole System of Architecture; in Which the Various Branches of That Excellent Study Are Establish'd on the Most Familiar Principles, and Rendered Adequate to Every Capacity; Being Useful to the Proficient, and Easy to the Learner (London: Printed for J. Rivington and J. Fletcher, and R. Sayer, 1757). 11 Robert Morris, Architecture Improved: In a Collection of Modern, Elegant and Useful Designs; from Slight and Graceful Recesses, Lodges and Other Decorations in Parks, Gardens, Woods or Forests, to the Portico, Bath, Observatory, and Interior Ornaments of Superb Buildings. With Great Variety of Rich Embellishments for Chimneys in the Taste of Inigo Jones, Mr. Kent, & (London: R. Sayer, 1755). 12 ———, Select Architecture: Being Regular Designs of Plans and Elevations Well Suited to Both Town and Country: In Which the Magnificence and Beauty, the Purity and Simplicity of Designing, for Every Species of That Noble Art, Is Accurately Treated . . . From the Plain Town-House to the Stately Hotel, and in the Country from the Genteel and Convenient Farm-House to the Parochial Church: With Suitable Embellishments: Also Bridges, Baths, Summer-Houses, &C. . . . : Illustrated with Fifty Copper Plates, Quarto, The second ed. (London: Robert Sayer, 1757). 13 William Hawney, The Complete Measurer or, the Whole Art of Measuring. In Two Parts. The First Part Teaching Decimal Arithmetic, . . . The Second Part Teaching to Measure All Sorts of Superficies and Solids, . . . The Eighth Edition. To Which Is Added, an Appendix, . . . By William Hawney (London: printed for R. Ware, J. and P. Knapton, S. Birt, T. Longman, C. Hitch, et. al., 1751). 14 New York State Bureau of Historic Sites, Schuyler Mansion: A Historic Structure Report, 14. 15 Ibid., 13, 18. 16 Ibid., 21. 17 Ibid., 19. 18 Ibid., 22. 19 Ibid., 21. 20 Ibid., 22. 21 Ibid., 24, 25. 22 Mongin and Whidden. "Historic Structure Report : Hamilton Grange National Memorial, Manhattan Sites, New York City." 137, 140. 23 New York State Bureau of Historic Sites, Schuyler Mansion: A Historic Structure Report, 27. 24 Ibid., 28. 25 Ibid., 8. 26 Ibid., 27-28. 27 Ibid., 28. 28 Ibid. 29 Ibid., 7. 30 Ibid., 34. 31 Ibid., 27. 32 Ibid., 35-36. 33 Ibid., 34, 36.
94
34 Schuyler, The Schuyler Mansion at Albany, Residence of Major-General Philip Schuyler, 1762-1804, by the Spirit of '76, 6. 35 Ibid., 7. 36 Ibid., 8. 37 Ibid., 26. 38 Maureen K. Phillips, General Philip Schuyler House Historic Structure Report : Saratoga National Historical Park, Schuylerville, New York, 2 vols. (Lowell, Mass.: Historic Architecture Program, Northeast Region, National Park Service, U.S. Dept. of the Interior, 2003), 19, 23, 37. 39 Ibid., 90, 95. 40 Ibid., 23. 41 Ibid., 94. 42 Ibid., 195-200. 43 Ibid., 68. 44 Ibid., 81, 110, 113.
95
CHAPTER 9 CARIBBEAN ARCHITECTURE
“The Caribbean Sea, covering an area approximately 750,000 square miles, is named for
the Carib Indians, who once inhabited this area.”1 In the Caribbean Sea are islands that start of
the tip of Florida and extend to the coastlines of Panama, Colombia, and Venezuela. These
islands were originally inhabited by the Amerindians until the arrival of Europeans and Africans.
These various groups of people, the local materials, and the environment contributed in varying
degrees to the development of a unique Caribbean architectural style. Despite the similarities,
this style has variations that developed based on the specific influences on particular islands.
“The Europeans primarily involved in the competition for Caribbean control were the Spanish,
French, English, Dutch, and Danes, and each contributed, in varying degrees, to the architectural
development of the islands.”2
Syncretic and Creole Characteristics
Caribbean architecture is sometimes described as being Creole because of the syncretic
characteristics present in this form. These Creole elements arise from the interaction of different
countries. Different cultures, such as the Amerindians and Africans, contributed to the earliest
dwellings in the Caribbean. The Arawaks, Tainos, Caribs, and other Amerindians had developed
their own dwelling types before the arrival of the Europeans.3 When enslaved Africans began to
arrive, there were still relatively large numbers of Indians on the islands. For example, a 1524
census reported 14,000 Indians on Santo Domingo.4
The first European nation to colonize the Caribbean area was Spain. The early Spanish colonists had to use locally available materials; their architectural imprints resulted in
adaptations to the designs of the Indians.5 As Africans were enslaved and brought to the region,
another culture was added to the syncretic mixture. Some escaped Africans even combined their
96
architectural imprints directly with the buildings of the Amerindians.6 On one island heavily
influenced by the Spanish, Puerto Rico, a significant portion of the houses were noted as being
bohios during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Bohios are a direct adaptation of the
native huts of the Taino Indians on this island.7
Edwards (1994) divided the first generation of prototypical Spanish Caribbean Creole
domestic architecture into four geometric features.8 These features were form class, base plan
type, plan expansion, and façade geometry. The form classes were a rectangular module with a
full-length front or encircling gallery and differing forms distinguished by flat, single, or double pitched roofs that were generally hipped, yet sometimes gable-ended. The base plan type was a symmetrical three-room base module with a central sala in the middle (Figures 9-1 and 9-2).
This sala was either a rectangle or an elongated salon. The rooms closest to the ends of the
building were usually smaller, aligning with the geometric principle of decrescendo. “In essence,
every Creole house consisted of a core (base module) plus a periphery of narrow spaces that
included galleries and optional loggias, gabinetes (corner rooms), and bedrooms.”9 Plan expansion must include a full-length front gallery to be considered Creole. A loggia between two gabinetes would be considered proto-Creole.10 The facades of these structures would be
either symmetrical or nearly symmetrical.
“Succeeding generations of Creole houses exhibit much variation around this prototype,
but the essence of Creole architecture can be found in the pattern of expansion that consists of
peripheral spaces wide enough to be used as secondary rooms but narrower than the principal
spaces of the interior. . . .No single geometric pattern is essential to Creole architecture; entirely
different base modules might form the core for the surrounding Creole periphery, and a diversity
97
of expansions might be added to the exterior of any base module as long as each conforms to the
overall limitations on Creole expansion spaces (Figure 9-3).”
History of Caribbean Architecture
Christopher Columbus sailed to these islands starting in 1492 on several voyages that
ended in 1504. The first permanent architecture in the New World was the European-derived
domestic architecture of the Spanish colony Santo Domingo (now called the Dominican
Republic). In 1510, Casa del Almirante or El Palacio was constructed on the banks of the Ozama
River in Santo Domingo (Figure 9-4). “Its architecture is distinct from that found in Spain in the first decades of the sixteenth century; Italian Renaissance villas in the style of Casa del
Almirante begin to be built in Spain about fifty years later.”11 This building had proto-Creole
features including four small gabinetes, the extended double-story open loggias that were
oriented toward the trade winds, a tripartite floor plan with a central sala, and the rooms followed
the principle of decrescendo.
This private house and other similar Italo-Spanish villas are not considered vernacular
architecture, but they had a substantial influence on architecture in the Caribbean at that time.
Between the sixteenth and nineteenth centuries, the features of symmetry or near symmetry,
tripartite floor plan, and gabinete-loggia additions was utilized for plantation and manorial
houses, urban houses, military structures, and vernacular homes. This colonial architecture
spread from the Spanish Greater Antilles throughout the Spanish Americas during this time
period. Since this was prior to the widespread availability of pattern books, most likely the
imprint of this architecture was transferred among Spanish builders and others, especially in the
case of migration to other regions.
As this architecture was embraced in the vernacular culture, variations of the front loggia
and corner gabinete pattern began to appear. A full-length, encircling gallery or a single
98
extended front gabinete-type room with a gallery was a typical replacement in the front of the
house. However, the original gabinete-loggia pattern in the back of the house remains unchanged, but could be expanded by increasing the size of the loggia. This area was used as an
open room for siesta meals (Figure 9-5).
Caribbean Galleries
This process of development is an example of syncretism. These syncretic occurrences in
the Spanish colonies “. . . moved domestic design from a static proto-Creole form to a full,
expansion-oriented Creole building philosophy.”12 The integration of a gallery space was part of
this expansion. Northern Spain and the Guinea coast of West Africa are two areas with vernacular architecture that includes galleries.
Africans were enslaved and brought to Hispanola starting in 1510. They were allowed to construct their own residences until late in the seventeenth century. At that time, plantations started to reflect more formal architecture and landscape designs. One of the reasons that galleries became a distinctive mark of Caribbean architecture is because the indigenous houses of Africans on the coast of the Gulf of Guinea utilized full-length front galleries as the principal daytime living spaces. In addition, Africans in tropical forest areas used galleries as a prominent feature of many African chiefs and kings, reflecting authority and prestige. Most of these
Africans were from these areas.
Because galleries existed in both cultures, one major requirement for syncretism was fulfilled. There are other reasons that Caribbean galleries, also called porches or piazzas, are also attributed to the Africans. One reason is that the open-front galleries used in the vernacular plantation architecture of Portuguese Pernambuco, Brazil and the Spanish Antilles are distinctly non-European. However, they were introduced early and simultaneously in both of these
99
colonies. These two colonies also had the greatest numbers of Africans in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.
The second factor focuses on the cultural use of the gallery. The cantilevered upper-story balconies and the ground-floor covered sidewalk passages used on the front of houses in these colonies were elements from the northern half of Spain. “In Spain and other European countries, however, the elevated open front gallery functioned principally as storage, decoration, and occasional socialization space. Only in Africa and later in the Caribbean was the open front gallery employed as a full-time everyday living space.”13
Iberian Domestic Caribbean Architecture
This Creole architecture spread to Veracruz, Mexico and St. Augustine, Florida. The prevalence and importance of this Creole prototype at the time is highlighted by the fact that
Spanish Creole plans are still found in contemporary vernacular houses of the Spanish Antilles.
The Creole vernacular modules date from the first decades of the sixteenth century to the late nineteenth century.
The best evidence of Spanish Caribbean hacienda vernacular architecture before 1750 is in the form of depictions, such as paintings. However, there are descriptions of colonial towns from the second half of the eighteenth century focused in Cuba and Hispanola. In 1637-41,
Dutch artists, including Franz Post, recorded sugar plantations that showed Creole houses with encircling galleries in Pernambuco, Brazil. Hans Sloane described around 800 Spanish houses with Creole characteristics from his visit to Jamaica in 1689. In fact, “Creole architecture was well developed in Jamaica, a sugar colony, prior to 1655. . .”14
Usage and Development by Other Countries
Spanish Creole domestic geometry survived despite the influence of other countries. Some locations that were originally Spanish colonies were later replaced by other western European
100
nations. Two such examples are Haiti and Jamaica with modern vernacular architecture that
reflects this Creole background. These new nations would utilize existing Creole vernacular
buildings and adapt them for their needs in their new colonies. In the case of French colonies,
Saint Domingue (Haiti) was taken over by the French in the seventeenth century. The resulting
Creole architecture was then carried to other French colonies, such as Cayenne (French Guyana),
and Louisiana. Some of the changes were that the central salle became smaller and nearly
square, while the roof received a steeper pitch.
Typical Characteristics
After 1660, houses in Saint Domingue were timber frame infilled with bousillades (mud and vegetal binding). A clissage (wooden latticework) served as a support. Aissantes (little boards) were used on the roof and was most likely shingles or wooden tiles. These homes started out as long, low single-story buildings with low-pitched roofs and, after 1705, better timber frame houses were built. Other features include landscaping of trees formed in straight lines from the road to the door and use of shutters with no glass at windows. Jalousies might be used in the open spaces of the galleries. Exterior stairways to the front and rear galleries were stone and brick. The buildings were elevated three to four feet above the ground. This was a reaction to the humid conditions.
Descriptions of French Colonial plantation houses include notes of houses with only a raised first floor. Only a few had a second story. It describes three rooms that are in a line. The room located in the middle of this tripartite was estimated to be sixteen to eighteen feet long, while the other two were sixteen feet long. This tripartite would then equal forty-eight to fifty feet long and have a width of sixteen feet. In addition to this width were the galleries that would be at least six to seven feet wide on each side (Figure 9-6). Wooden posts or square stone pillars were used to support the roof of the gallery.
101
Floor Plan
The floor plan was a rectangular three-part plan. The large and centrally located salle de compagnie was used as a dining room. This room was large with few pieces of furniture. The other two rooms were bedrooms. These bedrooms could be further subdivided into smaller spaces. There were often attached rear cabinets de toilette (dressing rooms). Extra bedrooms were used for storage. Small offices or bedrooms might be on the rear galleries.
The front and rear galleries were both used as living spaces. The front gallery was a meeting place for friends and family before dinner in the evening. The rear gallery was a dining room that was an antechamber to the main dining room. Furniture could be carried onto this rear gallery in good weather. Occupants constantly relocated to the most pleasant area of the home.
15 Common Materials
“Wood was the predominant building material in the early colonial Caribbean. Brick and tile were available for more formal buildings because they were popular ballast materials on sailing ships coming from Europe. Eventually, some brick was manufactured in the Caribbean, but its popularity declined when its poor resistance to earthquakes became apparent.”16
The most available material was wood. There are also many buildings made of another readily available material, stone. Some buildings used coral-stone as construction material.
Others used a process, similar to the more current process of pouring concrete, called “Spanish walling”. This involved filling timber framing with rough stones set in a composition of red earth and lime mortar and finishing with a surface rendering. Bricks were not plentiful because they were not locally made and ballast supplies were a limited resource.17
102
Environmental Factors
Acworth noted several environmental factors affecting Caribbean architecture in the 18th
and early 19th century. The location of the West Indies to the south of the Tropic of Cancer
creates an environment where houses need to be kept cool. In New England, the need for
colonial houses to be kept warm resulted in the chimney becoming the central element and plan
determinator. Without this central chimney, West Indian houses were a relatively simple design.
The threat of earthquakes and hurricanes lead to the prevalence of buildings with one and two
stories – “even churches tend to be squat”.18
“. . . This diversity of history and character has inevitably affected their [Caribbean islands] architecture.” Acworth quoted Charles Leslie as writing in 1739 that in Jamaica “‘. . . the gentlemen’s houses are generally built low of one storey’.”19 Acworth stated that although there were “certain common characteristics which are imposed upon them by the climate”, he asserted there was “no uniformity in the development” of a Caribbean architecture.20
In describing Halse Hall in Jamaica, Acworth mentioned that plantation houses in the late
17th and early 18th century included design elements that were partly built for reasons of defense.
In the case of Halse Hall, “the four corners of the building are strengthened by squat bastions of stonework”. He also stated that “the roof was covered with cedar shingles (which nowadays tend unfortunately to be replaced by corrugated iron).”21 On commenting on another estate house on
the island, he also observed, “that the upper floor should be reached by an outside stairway at the
back is characteristically West Indian”.22
Some features that are unique to Jamaica include projections at the end of roof ridges, the
use of coolers (fixed or movable jalousies set vertically about 18” from the window frame with
or without side pieces, and sanding paintwork (throwing sand on exterior paintwork while the
paint is still wet).23 Other islands also have particular variations. “Here [St. Kitts] and in Nevis
103
the practice was to have a full storey of stone construction on the street with inside stairway and an upper storey of wood.”24
104
Figure 9-1. Two- and Three-Room Base Plan Types. Edwards, The Origins of Creole Architecture, 161.
105
Figure 9-2. Development of the Three-Room Base Plan Types. Edwards, The Origins of Creole Architecture, 170.
106
Figure 9-3. Variations and Expansion of the Base Creole Types. Edwards, The Origins of Creole Architecture, 162.
107
Figure 9-4. Casa del Almirante. Edwards, The Origins of Creole Architecture, 172.
108
Figure 9-5. Gabinete-Loggia Variations. Edwards, The Origins of Creole Architecture, 175.
109
Figure 9-6. Tripartite Plan with Galleries. Edwards, The Origins of Creole Architecture, 179.
1 Edward E. Crain, Historic Architecture in the Caribbean Islands (Gainesville: University Press of Florida, 1994), 1. 2 Ibid., 4-5. 3 Isaac Dookhan, A History of the Virgin Islands of the United States (Kingston, Jamaica: Canoe Press, 1994), 22. 4 John Michael Vlach, "Sources of the Shotgun House: African and Caribbean Antecedents for Afro-American Architecture" (Dissertation, Indiana University, 1975), 111. 5 Andrew Gerald Gravette and Pamela Gosner, Architectural Heritage of the Caribbean : An a - Z of Historic Buildings (Kingston, Jamaica: Ian Randle Publishers; Oxford: Signal Books ; Princeton, NJ: Markus Wiener Publishers, 2000), 10, 11. 6 Ibid., 39. 7 Richard Charles Crisson, "Preserving and Restoring Buildings in the Historic Zone of San Juan, Puerto Rico" (Project in lieu of thesis (M.A. Arch.), University of Florida, 1973), 12, 15, 32. 8 Jay D. Edwards, "The Origins of Creole Architecture," Winterthur Portfolio 29, no. 2/3 (1994): 166, 167, 169. 9 Ibid.: 167. 10 Ibid.: 167, 168. 11 Ibid.: 172. 12 Ibid.: 176. 13 Ibid. 14 Ibid.: 170. 15 Ibid.: 177-180. 16 Crain, Historic Architecture in the Caribbean Islands, 5. 17 Angus Whiteford Acworth, Treasure in the Caribbean, a First Study of Georgian Buildings in the British West Indies, The Georgian Handbooks; (London: Pleiades Books, 1949), 3-4. 18 Ibid., 3. 19 Ibid., 2.
110
20 Ibid., 3. 21 Ibid., 8. 22 Ibid., 9. 23 Ibid., 11-12. 24 Ibid., 18.
111
CHAPTER 10 ARCHITECTURAL IMPRINTS FROM THE QUEEN OF THE CARIBEES AND THE GARDEN OF THE ANTILLES
Nevis: Queen of the Caribees
This island was visited by the Spaniards and the Dutch, as well as a documented account of a visit by the pilgrims on their way to Jamestown, Virginia in 1607.1 It was eventually settled by
the English in 1628. It became a sugar plantocracy supported by enslaved Africans in the 1640s.
During the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries, it became know as “Nevis-Queen of
the Caribees”.2
Hamilton was born on the island of Nevis. He moved with his family to St. Croix in 1765,
around the age of eight or ten. Because of hurricanes, wood buildings of one-and-a-half stories
were the most common types of buildings in Nevis.3 One of the plantation houses from the late
eighteenth century on this island is the Nisbet Plantation house. This house, built in 1778, may
give a general idea of the architecture of some of the homes around this time (Figure 10-1).4
The house considered as the birthplace of Hamilton currently houses The Museum of
Nevis History and is described as being Caribbean Georgian in style (Figure 10-2).5 There is some question concerning the original material of the upper story. Although it was most likely wood, the decision was made to use masonry material on the exterior as appropriate to the period for practical reasons such as fire separation.6
Hamilton’s family on his mother’s side owned another estate in Gingerland, in addition to
the home on the waterfront. This waterfront museum was reconstructed on the foundation of the
older structure in the 1980s.7 The site was initially located on a sandy beach. However, a road
was eventually built in front of the house. The original site would have been part of the
112
architectural imprints received by Hamilton in his earliest years. This may be one of the reasons
for his attempting to obtain land adjacent to the Hudson River.8
St. Croix: Garden of the Antilles
The Amerindians lived in St. Croix before the arrival of Columbus in the Virgin Islands in
1493-1496 on his second voyage to the region. Some of the indigenous architecture may have included structures that had a center post along with surrounding posts in a circle that supported a cone-shaped roof. Some of these structures were also in the shape of hexagons, rectangles, and ovals. The roof of other structures would emerge directly from the ground in the shape of a tent.
These structures may have been made of wild cane, rush, bamboo, or palm tree, small branches or vines, and grass and palm fronds. These indigenous buildings were called carbets and ajoupas and canayes. They were strong enough to resist strong winds and hurricanes.
These houses were formed around a central plaza that contained a fireplace. The chief’s house was usually larger than the other houses. Cooking is believed to have been done outdoors.
Furnishings were wooden stools and tables. The hammock, invented by the Amerindian, was also used in houses.9
Historical Background
Columbus made his first visit to St. Croix in 1493. However, the Virgin Islands did not
become a major port of Spain and were described as being mostly uninhabited in the 1590s. The
Dutch and English established settlements in the early 1600s. The Dutch settled on the east end,
while the English settled on the west. After many battles between the two countries, the Dutch abandoned the island. The English remained until it was taken over by Spain in 1650. However, the French replaced the Spanish later that year. In 1651, the lieutenant-general of the French
West Indies purchased the island as part of his private estate; he later deeded it to the Knights of
113
Malta. In 1665, the French West Indian company bought the island. However, from 1695 to
1733, the island was considered abandoned10.
The French sold the island to the Danish West Indian and Guinea Company in 1733. In
1734-35, the Denmark government took full control of the island. In 1735, Fort Christiansvaern
began to be built in the newly established town of Christiansted.11
Layout of Christiansted
The town organization is mostly composed of a grid of rectangular lines. These lines run
diagonally compared to the lines that follow the compass in the surrounding area. One possible
reason for this variation is to avoid the hilly terrain. The diagonal shape allows the majority of
streets in that section of town to fall outside of the nearby land mass.12 The first houses were
built near the front of the fort, usually by businessmen. However, plantation owners seemed to
prefer the country over the town (Figures 10-3 and 10-4).13
Descriptions of the buildings on St. Croix during the 1740s are available based on records
surviving from that time. By 1736, there was a 16x49 feet half-timbered warehouse, a 29x16 feet weighhouse built with buttresses and a thatched roof, a thatched storehouse, and a half- timbered, part masonry tiled smithy. By 1751, there was also a thatched house made partly of limestone.14 By 1753, a number of buildings existed that were small with masonry or half-
timber construction and thatched roofs. Imported boards and bricks from North America
(probably as a result of extensive trading with this region15) covered these houses as a protection
against heavy rain. Only one house was reported as being covered with tiles.16 Apparently, those buildings consisting of timber and half-timber construction were in constant need of repair because of the tropical climate.
Building regulations were introduced in 1747 that specified that “negro or bay houses” used as back buildings would be replaced with houses built of masonry or quality timber. Sugar-
114
cane or other forms of straw leaves for thatching was restricted from use in the urban district. In
addition, a three to four foot passage was required between two houses.17 Galleries and houses
were described as timber construction with shingles a generation later. However, the hurricane
in 1772 and the rising cost of timber helped masonry become more popular.18
Early Buildings
The first buildings in the U. S. Virgin Islands were simple, utilitarian buildings for the
purpose of defense, storage, and shelter. “Many of the warehouses and other buildings in the
islands today are simply functional, but their very simplicity, combined with a sturdy
construction meant to withstand fires and hurricanes, gives them a robust charm.”19 The
majority of buildings were established in Christiansted since it was the colonial capital for many years. The enslaved Africans were used in this construction. European craftsmen often trained these builders in European techniques.20
Development of Architecture
The colonial architects used brick as a building material; for details such as elaborate cornices and pediments, columns, pilaster strips and string courses, quoins, and plaster imitations
of rusticated masonry. However, brick was expensive since all brick was imported. Buildings
had a sense of symmetry and proportion. Some buildings followed European prototypes, but
most were adapted to suit the climate. One such adaptation was the elimination of chimneys.
Another was the relocation of the staircase leading to the upper floors to the outside of the building. “These exterior staircases became typically West Indian and lent themselves to elaborate architectural treatment. The most common type is a gently flaring shape known as the
“welcoming arms”.21
115
Environmental Influences
In Europe, galleries, loggias, arcades, and balconies were usually seen in buildings in the
southern parts of the continent. The tropical climate allowed a much greater use in the West
Indian colonies. The warmer climate also led to the use of wooden louvers instead of glazed
windows. Heavy storm shutters, sometimes with portholes, were utilized for protection in
hurricanes.22
Other cooling devices were employed in building construction that encouraged cross-
ventilation. The European symmetry was kept, but the central stair hall was replaced by a salon.
This salon stretched for either the length or width of the house. Interior partitions, usually of
wood, were built leaving either a space or lattice between the partition and the ceiling. Although
other ceiling shapes were utilized, a common ceiling shape was the coved or tray ceiling that
resembled an inverted tray. The layout of the floor plan placed the main living and sleeping
rooms on the upper floor, while the dining room and the pantries were located below. Cooking
hearths or cookhouses which might have arched chimneys were in a separate rear building.23
The early buildings were usually half timbered with rubble masonry in a timber framework and roofs that were thatched or shingled. Wood was a readily available material. Despite this fact, fires, hurricanes, and termites resulted in the greater use of masonry construction. Mostly less affluent individuals continued to build in wood. Brick was only available by the way of
ballast arriving on ships. Its use was primarily for precision around doors and windows, as belt
course and cornices, and at the corners. The other parts of the building would be constructed of
stone or rubble masonry. Because of its limited supply, it was rare to see buildings made entirely
of brick until the late 19th century. At this time, the older red brick was replaced with a more plentiful hard, yellow brick.24
116
Common Materials
Rubble masonry is composed of small pieces of stone, coral, broken bricks, etc. that is set
in a mixture of sand and lime. This mixture was plastered, sometimes to mimic stonework. It
could also be whitewashed. If water supplies were low, molasses might be used instead of water.
Different types of local stone were utilized in buildings. St. Croix often made use of limestone
or sandstone with a pale gold color, but fast erosion qualities. St. Thomas has buildings made of
a hard blue stone that was difficult to cut and was often combined with yellow brick. St. John often used coral block that was soft and easy to shape when freshly cut, yet hardens with
exposure to air.25
Trim, of brick or wood, is another element in West Indian houses. It is usually seen on
later houses and on Frederiksted buildings built after the 1878 fire. Other trim could be made of,
likely local, wrought iron or the later replacement of imported cast iron. Interior woodwork
could also be found in the classical or Victorian style.
General Character
St. Croix was purchased by the Danish West India Company in 1733. Christiansted was
the capital of the Danish West Indies from 1755 to 1871. During this time, the town was planned
and a large number of public buildings were constructed as part of this town. The town emerged
with Fort Christiansvaern being built on the ruins of a French fort. Governor Frederick Moth
was for the most part the planner of the town. The town was built as a rectangular grid of streets
on a former French village. The direction of the streets was based on the low hills that extended
into the town. The focal point was the fort and the buildings of the Danish West India and
Guinea Company.26
St. Croix was Denmark’s most prosperous colony. At one time it was known as “the
Garden of the Antilles”.27 This was conducive to the building of plantation houses and other
117
buildings. “St. Croix is the island richest in architecture of the colonial period, with its two fine
towns and its rolling countryside dotted with the ruins of mill towers and estate houses, many of
which have been carefully restored.”28
“Christiansted was for many years the capital of the Danish West Indies, and with its pastel
buildings and shady arcades it remains one of the loveliest towns in the Caribbean.”29 Gosner
quoted the authors of Three Towns who were involved in the Royal Danish Academy study of
this town as stating in their book, “The buildings of Kongensgade [King Street in Christiansted]
in the area nearest the harbour and in a few of the other streets in the immediate vicinity of
Government House, form a distinguished whole, marked by ambitious colonial affluence.”30
Building Code
The building code introduced in 1747 which, among other things, stipulated that houses built of wood in the town limits had to be built on footings or foundations, with buildings near the shore allowed to be built on pilings. Thatched roofs were also not allowed and had to be shingled, except homes of less affluent persons on the western outskirts and waterfront of the town. It also required that houses of masonry or wood with shingled roofs had to be built facing the street within three months. Besides these rules, a common practice was to create galleries by building structures that extended the upper level over the sidewalk below.31 Besides creating
pedestrian spaces, these lower galleries served another purpose. The difficult harbor entrance
limited the use of the Christiansted port. Because warehouses were not generally built in the town, goods would often be stored under the shop arcades temporarily.
The town grew steadily during the 1750s. By 1758, there were 2,175 inhabitants with a peak of 5,000 people and 664 houses and buildings of various kinds around 1800 and into the next century. The main residential and business district was north of present day Queen Street.
There was also a residential district in the hilltop at the eastern end of Christiansvaern.32
118
Typical Buildings
The common characteristics of Christiansted include houses that are built of either
masonry or a masonry ground floor coupled with upper stories of wood. Although full masonry
buildings were built, these combination buildings were more common.33 Arcades could be built of brick with slightly flattened arches. They could also be supported with square brick pillars or wooden posts. The bottom story was often a shop with living quarters located on the upper levels. There was usually an exterior staircase to the living quarters. Access to the staircase could be directly from the street or from inside of a walled courtyard with a separate gate that opened onto the street. Often, both the staircases and the gates had elaborate architectural details.34
Some buildings do not have arcades. These tend to have galleries fitted with wooden
louvers. This gallery can extend the full width of the building and be supported on posts or
could be indented in the façade of the upper story (Figure 10-5).
The floor plan of these buildings consisted of a central salon running the length or width of
the building. This salon is flanked by smaller rooms. Another feature more common in
Christiansted was a high hipped roof with gables that had a third story for bedrooms. More
affluent individuals might have a ground floor for storage or use it as a shallow basement. Public
buildings would tend to be located around the Government House area in town.35
Historical Colors
Traditional exterior paint colors in the Virgin Islands included a lime wash or paint of
white, sometimes with tints of a yellow gold or a pinkish to terra-cotta red. Shutters and interior
jalousies were red, green, or white. Roofs were a dark iron-oxide red. Recommended paint
schemes by the local historical organiztions include white trim.36 In 1823, building surveyors
119
indicated a yellowish-grey color on the church, barracks, and government building and a
whitewashed yellow on the fort in Christiansted.37
St. Croix’s Architectural Imprint
Economic and other factors have been forces in retaining most of the character of the town of Christiansted into the twentieth century.38 This allows us to better understand and compare
the type of architectural imprints that Alexander Hamilton may have encountered during his
impressionable years on this island. Especially, in the area of Christiansted near the harbor and in the streets near Government House, “There are not many townscapes of this kind to be found in the world. The architectural quality bears comparison to the European Court towns of the 18th century.”39
Retracing Hamilton’s Steps
The building known as “the Grange” on St. Croix was so named by Hamilton’s uncle-in-
law, James Lytton. This building has undergone drastic changes over the years (Figure 10-6).
This estate was sold by the Lyttons in 1764. According to the present owners, the original
greathouse was entirely surrounded by the present building after sustaining damage. When
viewing the exterior of the building, this is evident by the protruding of a brick wall above the
existing wall.
This greathouse is positioned on a knoll that affords an extensive view of the surrounding
area. This house was once part of a larger estate. The overseer’s house is situated nearby and
the general layout of the original plantation is barely discernible amid newer construction.
However, there are some ruins of other buildings that show evidence of an earlier time.
Another two-story masonry building in the town of Christiansted, St. Croix that is believed to be connected with Hamilton is King Street No. 56-57. There was even a sign in 1961 with the name “Alexander Hamilton” (Figure 10-7). However, there is not substantial evidence for this
120
connection.40 According to William F. Cissel, a local historian, the story of this building known
as the “Hamilton House” and its connection to Hamilton is a local legend that is not true.41
One building that does have some connection to Alexander Hamilton is King Street 7-8
(Figure 10-8). This building was leased by the company Beckman and Cruger in 1766 as noted in the poll-tax list. Nicholas Cruger bought the house in 1770; the 1777 land register showed him as the sole owner. Alexander Hamilton was an apprentice for Beckman and Cruger.42
Figure 10-1. Nisbet Plantation. Gosner, Plantation and Town, Historic Architecture of the United States Virgin Islands, a Guide, 261.
121
Figure 10-2. Hamilton House-The Museum of Nevis History. Nevis Historical and Conservation Society.
122
Figure 10-3. Aerial View of Christiansted Buildings. Dahl, Surveys in 1961 on St. Thomas & St. Croix, 92.
123
Figure 10-4. Grid Layout of Christiansted, St. Croix. Dahl, Surveys in 1961 on St. Thomas & St. Croix, 93.
124
Figure 10-5. Christiansted Building with an Arcaded Masonry Ground Floor. The upper floor is made of wood and has an indented gallery. Also note that the upper floor displays the center loggia/corner gabinete configuration of Casa Del Almirante (see Figure 9- 4). Photo taken by author, August 2006.
125
Figure 10-6. The Grange in St. Croix. Notice the masonry of the original building still showing above the roofline. Perhaps the high pointed section might indicate the location of an original entrance. Photo taken by author, August 2006.
Figure 10-7. Hamilton Store. Dahl, Surveys in 1961 on St. Thomas & St. Croix, 120.
126
Figure 10-8. Cruger Building in St. Croix. Surveys in 1961 on St. Thomas & St. Croix, 97.
1 Vincent K. Hubbard, Swords, Ships & Sugar : History of Nevis to 1900, 4th ed. (Corvallis, OR: Premiere Editions, 1996), 5-6. 2 Nevis Historical and Conservation Society, "The Museum of Nevis History, Charlestown, Nevis, West Indies," http://www.nevis-nhcs.org/nevishistory.html (accessed March 11, 2008). 3 Hubbard, Swords, Ships & Sugar : History of Nevis to 1900, 14. 4 Nisbet Plantation, "Nisbet Plantation Beach Club, Nevis, West Indies," http://www.nisbetplantation.com/ (accessed March 11, 2008). 5 Nevis Historical and Conservation Society, "The Museum of Nevis History, Charlestown, Nevis, West Indies." 6 David Cox, Cox Architects, phone interview, April 2008. 7 John Guilbert, Executive Director and Dave Robinson, former Executive Director, Nevis Historical and Conservation Society, separate phone interviews, March 2008. 8 9 Crain, Historic Architecture in the Caribbean Islands, 6-11. 10 Harold W. L. Willocks, The Umbilical Cord: The History of the United States Virgin Islands from Pre-Columbian Era to the Present (St. Croix, V.I.: The author, 1995), 51-59. 11 Ibid., 68-70. 12 Thorkel Dahl and Kjeld De Fine Licht, Surveys in 1961 on St. Thomas & St. Croix, trans. Avanti Gruppen and Nicholas Wrigley (Copenhagen: Royal Danish Academy of Fine Arts, School of Architecture, 2004), 87. 13 Ibid., 87-88. 14 Ibid., 84. 15 Willocks, The Umbilical Cord: The History of the United States Virgin Islands from Pre-Columbian Era to the Present, 95-96. 16 Dahl and De Fine Licht, Surveys in 1961 on St. Thomas & St. Croix, 87-88. 17 Ibid., 86. 18 Ibid., 88. 19 Pamela W. Gosner, Plantation and Town, Historic Architecture of the United States Virgin Islands, a Guide (Durham: N.C., Moore Pub. Co., 1971), 12. 20 Ibid. 21 Ibid., 13.
127
22 Ibid., 13-14. 23 Ibid., 14. 24 Ibid., 15. 25 Ibid. 26 Ibid., 58. 27 Ibid., 10. 28 Ibid., 57. 29 Ibid. 30 Ibid., 57-58. 31 Ibid., 58-59, Peter Bredsdorff et al., Three Towns : Conservation and Renewal of Charlotte Amalia, Christiansted, and Frederiksted of the U.S. Virgin Islands, ed. Ole Svensson, trans. Hanne Ringsted (Copenhagen: Danish West Indian Society, 1980), 7. 32 Gosner, Plantation and Town, Historic Architecture of the United States Virgin Islands, a Guide, 59-60. 33 Peter Bredsdorff et al., Three Towns : Conservation and Renewal of Charlotte Amalia, Christiansted, and Frederiksted of the U.S. Virgin Islands, ed. Ole Svensson, trans. Hanne Ringsted (Copenhagen: Danish West Indian Society, 1980), 7. 34 Gosner, Plantation and Town, Historic Architecture of the United States Virgin Islands, a Guide, 60. 35 Ibid., 61. 36 William Chapman, "Preservation Guideline 2," (St. Croix, U. S. Virgin Islands: Virgin Islands Department of Planning and Natural Resources, Division for Archaeology and Historic Preservation). 37 Dahl and De Fine Licht, Surveys in 1961 on St. Thomas & St. Croix, 160. 38 Bredsdorff et al., Three Towns : Conservation and Renewal of Charlotte Amalia, Christiansted, and Frederiksted of the U.S. Virgin Islands, 11, 55, 57. 39 Ibid., 71. 40 Dahl and De Fine Licht, Surveys in 1961 on St. Thomas & St. Croix, 119. 41 William F. Cissel, personal interview with author, August 2006. 42 Dahl and De Fine Licht, Surveys in 1961 on St. Thomas & St. Croix, 96.
128
CHAPTER 11 HAMILTON GRANGE ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS
Porches
In 1886, George A. Townsend, a Civil War reporter with the pen name “GATH” gave a description of the Grange. “On the east and west sides of the house are piazzas of uniform length with balusters above them, each piazza perhaps thirty feet long by eight feet wide. The
entrances to the house, which occupy the other two sides north and south are porches, probably
twelve feet square, and surmounted with balusters like the two piazzas; and so the entire house is
balustered at the square top all around. The house stands nearly square and is perhaps forty to
forty-five feet long and wide.”1
The current pitch of the porch roofs on the east and west side are believed to be a
replication of the original roof pitches (Figure 11-1). The pitch of the porch roofs had been
previously altered from the original. It appears the pitch was increased around 1830-1850 in
order to minimize water damage to the building interior. This also resulted in the widening of
the entablature from 16 to 24 inches and the shortening of the columns at the outer edge of the
porch to lower this edge while raising the opposite edge.
The National Park Service acquired the Hamilton Grange in 1962 and made restoration
attempts in 1978-1979 that included adjustment of the roof pitch to match the original slope and
replication of the historic beaded-board ceilings of the piazzas and porticos. The original slope
was only slight, about ½:12 and was described as being “shed-type roofs”.2 The south portico
was moved in front of the west piazza in 1889. Although both the north and south portico are
believed to have had the same minimal slope as the other two sides, the roof of the south portico
was not adjusted to the original slope. The main consideration was its junction with the west-
piazza roof and, perhaps, preventing the formation of ice dams. In addition, the southwest
129
portion of the west piazza was shortened in 1890 in order to create enough space for the newly
built St. Luke’s Church. The north portico is no longer extant.
Both the flashing and covering of the piazza and portico roofs are terne-coated stainless
steel. These steel pans are 14” x 20” and protected with red Tin-o-lin paint. The covering replaced a 1929 addition of sheet copper plate. Because of the flat deck on the main roof and the low pitch of the piazza and portico roofs, a sheet-metal covering would have been essential. The original covering material is suggested to have been tinplate pans coated with red paint. It is
likely that these pans would have been about 10” x 13” with flat seams joined with white-lead
caulk.3
Upper Balustrades
Although early photographs dating back to the late nineteenth century show Hamilton
Grange with balustrades on the eaves of the main, porch, and portico roofs (Figure 11-2),
physical evidence does not point to them as original ornamentation. Balustrades would seem
likely because they were not uncommon during the building of the Grange. In addition, in one of
the few instances where McComb used this stylistic ornamentation, he used a form similar to
those seen in the Hamilton Grange photographs. As part of the 1978-1979 restoration, balustrade
marks were found on both the west piazza’s and south portico’s sheathing in connection with the
hipped roof. However, there was no indication of balustrade attachment to the original shed
roofs in either location. This was also absent on the outer edge of the main roof and the
chimneys where the original wood-shingle roof would have especially necessitated a secure
attachment. Furthermore, the shed-type roof is not conducive to the attachment of a balustrade.
The likely scenario is that the balustrades were part of the 1830-1850 hipped-roof
transformation.4
130
The entablatures are in the Doric order on the main building block of the Hamilton Grange.
The frieze has triglyphs, plain metopes, taenia, and guttae. Guttae are not found on the mutule blocks. These are located under the soffit and are more simplified. Perhaps because of the visual weight of the Doric order, the full Doric order was not common among the leading
Federal-period architects of that time such as Bulfinch and McIntire. In McComb’s drawings, he most often had a combination of mutule blocks and simple, unornamented or denticulated friezes.5
In 1977-1978, pieces of the original fascia boards and cornice were found in situ. These
were used during the 1978-1979 restoration in order to reproduce the original fascia and
entablature. Although they had been widened to 24”, the original fascia boards were 16” wide,
unornamented fascia board. The current entablature of the main block, piazzas, and porticos are
historically correct reproductions. It consists of a variety of original and reproduction material.6
The gutters on the main roof are a mixture of original and reproduction gutters, except for the copper lining on some of the troughs. Although the original gutters found on the main roof is larger than the usual size of gutters at the time, they are considered to be built-in original gutters.
However, there is no evidence for the originality of the previous wooden gutters that were on the edge of the piazzas and porticos. Any evidence was lost during previous modifications to the west piazza and there was no evidence found on the original shed roof of the south portico.
Nevertheless, because of the steps on the portico, there would have been a greater need for gutters on the portico. As a temporary solution, the current terne-coated stainless steel gutters were installed in 1978-1979 on both the piazzas and the portico using a box shape to avoid them being considered as originals.7
131
Columns
The columns on the porches are in the Roman Doric order. Each piazza has eight of such
columns under the roof with some of the columns resting against the main portion of the
building. The necks of the columns are 30” in diameter. There are several annulets or rings
above this neck. The bases follow correct Doric form. These columns have terne-coated
stainless steel caps. In 1977-1978, ten original columns were found with different alterations.
This included alterations to the capitals and bases, along with the reduction of the column heights. The study of all extant columns determined the original form of the columns. As part of the 1978-1979 restoration, repairs were made to the engaged columns under the piazzas. On the
other hand, the freestanding columns are hollow reproductions consisting of California redwood.
At this time, turned columns believed to have been installed in 1888-1889 were in place on the
lower gallery at the east elevation. These were also replaced by the Idaho white pine that had the
same dimensions as the columns on the upper gallery for compatibility reasons.8
This east elevation is actually four stories high as opposed to the two stories on the west
elevation. The reason for this difference is the fact that the land below slopes steeply from west to east. A rubblestone wall the height of the subbasement supports the outer wall of a lower
piazza or gallery at the basement level. This lower piazza is underneath the east piazza. At the
original site which was more level, the east piazza was supported by the same wooden posts that
are underneath the west piazza. Therefore, both the lower east piazza and the rubblestone wall
are not original to the Hamilton Grange.9
Lower Balustrades
The balustrades around the piazzas and east gallery floor are thought to be representative of the original (Figure 11-3). Two sections of a balustrade of mortised construction found on the west piazza were in harmony with the Federal era buildings. These matched the unpainted
132
impression of the believed to be original handrail on the southeast engaged column of the west
piazza. The paint layers on these sections also matched the paint sequence that is assumed to be
original. Their “restrained handrail shape” and square balusters were copied in the same
redwood as the columns in 1978-1979; the originals were placed in the subbasement.10
The tongue and grooved floorboards of the west piazza’s floor are most likely original.
The upper and lower east piazza’s floorboards were modeled upon the floorboards on the west in
1978-1979 in Douglas fir. Most of the framing of both floors was replaced in 1929.11
Two pairs of attenuated Roman Doric columns assumed to be original are on the outer
corners of the west portico. All of these columns were found to be replaced, except for one that was used as a replacement column on the west piazza. This column was found during the 1977-
1978 study and used in 1978-1979 as a reproduction model of the portico columns. These
columns are made of hollow redwood and capped with terne-coated stainless steel. The original
column model is stored in the subbasement.
The original main entrance consisted of these two pairs of columns now seen on the
portico that matched and lined up with two more pairs of pilasters. These columns framed the
front door at the south portico entrance. It appears that the original rear north entry portico also
had similar columns in terms of size, but not in number. Each corner held a single column without pilasters. In 1888-1889, the innermost pair of the aforementioned pilasters that were on the south portico was moved to the south portion of the west elevation, along with the front door.
However, they are no longer in line with the portico’s columns.12
Although the porticos’ balustrades were replaced in 1888-1889 and, perhaps, again in
1941; it is likely that the balustrades on the piazzas and porticos were the same in 1802. This is based on the fact that, in 1978, two pieces of balustrade that fit only on the porticos were found
133
in the subbasement. These two pieces were similar to the two balustrade sections found on the west piazza that were thought to be original. The same redwood reproduction balustrades found on the piazzas can be found on the porticos. The framing of the portico is most likely from 1941.
The floor consists of a 1978-1979 Douglas-fir replicas of the west piazza floorboards.13
The balustrades on the piazzas and porticos are also found on the stairs. Most of the material, including the Douglas-fir framing, southern pine thread and risers, and redwood balustrades on the stairs; are replicas dating from 1978-1979. However, the history of the newels at the foot of the stairs (Figure 11-4) did not allow reproductions of originals. “. . . The earliest photograph of the Grange shows apparently plain newels, but magnification reveals dark areas at their necks and bases. These areas could represent shallow turnings, which would be consonant with Federal detailing.”14 However, there were quite a few changes made to these newels over
the years. Victorian newels with prominent turnings were in place by 1876, square posts by
1888, and “column-like” newels during the 1888 move were all used before the present newels.
Porch Supports
Based on old photographs, the piazza and portico originally rested on wooden posts that
were on top of sandstone (brownstone) blocks (Figure 11-5). There is currently a post under
each of the piazza columns. Each of the four columns of the portico also had a post and block
before the move. Now there is only a post under the outermost of each pair of the portico’s
columns. It is believed that the porch supports were replaced in 1929. The current arrangement
of the east piazza resting on the posts of the east gallery with these posts resting on a rubblestone wall at the subbasement level is not original. The lattices seen around the basement level is also not original (Figure 11-4). Based on early photographs, this area was left open.15
134
Door Details
The door details are representative of Federal details (Figure 11-6). The actual doorway design appeared to be a new design introduction in America. “For the transoms over the front and entrance doors, McComb borrowed and refined the fanlight of the entranceway pictured in
Plate 39 of William Pain’s Practical House Carpenter…He then made a historic modification: he fitted the arched design into a rectangular frame….Thus, it seems that the square-headed doorway with sidelights and rectangular transom—so popular a motif during the Greek Revival period—made its first appearance in America at the Grange.”16
Shutters
Currently there are two types of windows seen on the exterior of the Grange. These two
types consist of double-hung and triple-hung windows. The double-hung windows have flush
panel shutters. There are three panels per leaf. The highest panel is about a third of the size of
the other two leaves below. The shutters on the lower east of the building are solid. On the
upper east and west elevations are shutters of a similar design, except that the highest panel is
louvered instead of solid (Figure 11-7). They are also slightly shorter on the upper elevations to
match the shorter size of windows at this level. The triple-hung windows have recessed-panel
shutters (Figure11-8). Both the north and south elevations currently have no shutters.
Early Photographs
Although the east and west elevations seem to follow the pattern of partially louvered
shutters on the upper with solid shutters on the lower levels, early photographs show that the
north elevation exhibited both types of shutters on both levels. Also shown in early photographs
of the south elevation are fully louvered shutters on the upper level with solid, recessed panel on
the lower level. Although all elevations are thought to originally have some form of shutters, the
photographic evidence does not reveal the original shutter pattern.
135
All early photographs show the flush-panel shutters. Therefore, except for replacement shutters, they are thought to be either original or to have been installed in the early years of the
Grange with approximate dates of 1802-1820. The fully louvered shutters are believed to have been installed around 1835 which also corresponds to 1830, the time that these shutters came into common use. The recessed-panel shutters are believed to have been installed prior to 1864 with the date 1845 being the most likely.
Hardware Evidence
The hardware evidence gives more detailed information on the changes made to shutters on the various elevations. The existing hardware is a mixture of original, 1933 restoration work, and 1978-1979 restoration work. The original hardware is identified as thinner, all hand- wrought, and finely detailed in appearance. The federal-style flush-panel shutters have pintles and hinges of halved construction. Many of the pintles’ back plates have handmade, wrought screws and the hinges also have handmade bolts. In addition, there appears to be no evidence of earlier hinge marks. Other machine-made screws used on these pintles and hinges are attributed to repair work. Because of this evidence, both types of flush-panel shutters are believed to be the earliest type of shutters.
On the south elevation, there is evidence of two separate shutter changes. One of these shutter changes is for the fully louvered shutters seen in early photographs. However, below this
shutter change, is evidence of pintles that suggest that the earliest shutters were partially
louvered and/or solid, flush-panel.
The triple-hung bay windows show evidence of two earlier shutter changes. The pintle and hinge marks and screws seem to indicate that the previous shutters were installed at the same time as the fully louvered shutters that were on the south elevations and may have been the same type of shutters. This shutter system had two leaves per jamb. There was a leaf for the upper
136
sash and another longer leaf for the middle and bottom sash. Evidence of the earliest shutters
seem to indicate either partially louvered or solid, flush panel shutters with solid shutters being
considered the most likely to coordinate with the other shutters that would have hung nearby.17
Wall Siding and Trim
Flush siding boards are located on the south, and lower east and west elevations (Figure
11-9). These are splined boards ¾” thick. The 12” wide boards on the lower east and west elevations have been protected by the piazzas and are all original. Of the about 4 ½” to 5 ½’ wide boards on the south elevation, most of the boards in the area of the former front entrance are 1978-1979 reproductions of Alaskan yellow cedar. The other boards on this elevation are mostly original. Both the original and the newer boards are held in place by wrought nails.
However, only the undisturbed original boards have nails with handmade flattened T-shaped heads, while the other original and reproduction boards have nails with a rose head.18
Clapboard siding is located on the north and upper east and west elevations (Figure11-7).
These boards are 4 ½” to 5 ½” wide. The weather portion is 3 ½” to 3 ¾” wide. The lengths vary from about 4’ to 11’. These butt-jointed sewn boards are “not tapered in the usual manner”.
From a side view of the installed boards, the wider portion of the boards measures 5/8” and widens to 7/8” until the start of the rabbet edge that fits over another clapboard underneath.
There is a 2/8” rabbet starting about 1 ½” from the bottom edge of the clapboard. Most of the
clapboards on the north elevation are original. The boards in the former rear door opening and at
the upper east and west elevations were installed in 1978-1979 as reproductions. The nails in
these locations are the same as those found on the flush-board siding.19
Some of the trim boards are unornamented corner boards that measure about ½” thick by
8” wide. Most of these are considered to be original. Other boards on the north and south
137
elevations only are sill boards. Many of these sill boards were installed in 1978-1979 and
flashed with terne-coated stainless steel.20
Foundation
The original foundation is believed to have been a reddish-brown, dressed sandstone
known as brownstone. It would have resembled coursed ashlar masonry blocks because of being parqueted and penciled with a light color. The size was 8” to 9” high and 12” to 18” long.
Pieces of dressed sandstone have been found in the present foundation walls. In addition, sandstone blocks resembling those seen under the square wooden posts of the west piazza are seen in photographs taken before the move of the Hamilton Grange (Figure 11-5).21
Sandstone was commonly used for contemporary houses in the area. Parquet is understood
to be the “rough casting” of the foundation referred to in McComb’s final accounting in 1803.
Parquet was also consistent with Federal architectural practices. Penciling is believed to be
portrayed in photographs, since scribing would have produced shadows resulting in a dark
instead of the apparent light color.22
In the move of 1888-1889, the old foundation walls were demolished. In 1978-1979, the
east and west foundation walls at the basement level were coated with an ashlar-scribed concrete
parquet. The north and south basement walls are in disrepair and are not parqueted.23
Historical Color Scheme
Paint analysis was conducted by the National Park during the 1978-1979 restoration.
Approximately 115 samples were analyzed from the exterior of the building. Result showed that
the earliest existing paint colors were both a “mustard yellow” and an “ochre yellow”. Results
also showed that the trim would have been painted white along with these yellow colors (Figure
11-1).24 These trim areas would have included columns, windows, shutters, railings, and doors.
138
The earliest paint on the porch floors are thought to be a gray-green color, while the porch roofs and chimneys were most likely a red color.25
From 1977 to 1981, about 300 paint samples were also taken from the interior of the
Hamilton Grange. Based on analysis of these samples, the original interior walls, cornices, and ceilings were most likely unfinished white plaster. The trim would have been white paint.
Floors may have been unfinished wood.26
Summary
Based on the available evidence, much of the appearance of the Hamilton Grange is representative of Alexander Hamilton’s time. However, the configurations of the porticos and piazzas exhibit major modifications. Another major modification is the later addition of a gallery at subbasement level. Other factors that would moderately affect the appearance are the hardware evidence favoring partially louvered or solid shutters as original and the later addition of lattice at the basement level.
The original configurations of the porticos and the piazzas highlight the importance of the symmetrical arrangement in the original Grange plan. Additionally, the changes in the exterior details help with interpretation. These details can be disregarded as part of later additions.
The colors are indicative of light neoclassical colors. The light color with white trim is especially representative of the traditional color scheme of the town of Christiansted, St. Croix.
This may be an indication that the paint color was influenced by both Federal and Caribbean architecture (Figures 11-10 and 11-11).
139
Figure 11-1. Hamilton Grange National Memorial. Photo taken by author in August 2006.
140
Figure 11-2. Hamilton Grange during Time as a School. This photo clearly shows the upper balustrades. A closer look at the area of balustrade attachment to the roofline will appear to corroborate that these elements are not an original part of the design. Photo from New York Historical Society archive.
141
Figure 11-3. Balustrades on the Piazza. Photo taken by author, August 2006.
142
Figure 11-4. Existing Newel Post with Lattice Panel Beyond. This is the view of the new basement looking from the side of the current west location of the entrance stairs. Photo taken by author, August 2006.
143
Figure 11-5. Hamilton Grange before the First Move. The thirteen trees representing the original states are part of the original site and are partially seen off on to the viewer’s right. Photo from New York Historical Society archive.
144
Figure 11-6. Original Doorway. This doorway is now located under the west piazza on the previous side of the building. Photo taken by author, August 2006.
145
Figure 11-7. Partially Louvered Flush Panel Shutters and Clapboard Siding. Photo taken by author, August 2006.
146
Figure 11-8. Triple-Hung Windows. These windows allowed access onto the piazzas. Photo taken by author, August 2006.
147
Figure 11-9 Flush Siding Boards. This wall is next to an engaged column on the west piazza. The brick is from the building next door. Photo taken by author, August 2006.
148
Figure 11-10. Old Danish Customs House. The design of this building would have undergone various changes after Hamilton left St. Croix.27 However, the color scheme is an appropriate and common traditional Christiansted color scheme. White shutters would also have been an appropriate color choice instead of green. Compare with Figure 11-11.
Figure 11-11. Historical Color Scheme of the Hamilton Grange. The use of the yellow and white colors on the exterior are the same as their use on building exteriors in Christiansted, St. Croix. Compare with Figure 11-10.
149
1 Mongin and Whidden. "Historic Structure Report : Hamilton Grange National Memorial, Manhattan Sites, New York City." 65. 2 Ibid., 89, 96-98. 3 Ibid., 96, 98. 4 Ibid., 98-99. 5 Ibid., 101. 6 Ibid. 7 Ibid., 102. 8 Ibid., 107. 9 Ibid. 10 Ibid. 11 Ibid., 107-108. 12 Ibid., 108. 13 Ibid. 14 Ibid., 109. 15 Ibid. 16 Ibid., 31. 17 Ibid., 112-115. 18 Ibid., 104. 19 Ibid., 104-105. 20 Ibid., 105. 21 Ibid., 106. 22 Ibid. 23 Ibid. 24 Ibid., 163-166. 25 Ibid., 166-168. 26 Ibid., 169-183. 27 Pamela W. Gosner, Caribbean Georgian, the Great and Small Houses of the West Indies, 1st ed. (Washington, D.C.: Three Continents Press, 1982), 246.
150
CHAPTER 12 DISCUSSION
Syncretism and Architectural Imprints
The Hamilton Grange is the result of the process of syncretism. Elements in the Hamilton
Grange may be attributed to the influences of either Caribbean architecture, Federal architecture, or both (Table 12-1). Ultimately, Hamilton Grange reflects these architectural influences and the personal interpretations of a significant owner and a prominent architect.
This structure has readily apparent neoclassical elements, spaces, and details that reflect the Federal period. The inclusion of a full-length porch in the design of this building, during this time and in this specific region, hints at Hamilton’s architectural imprints received in his early years in the Caribbean. This conclusion becomes more certain when considering the use of shutters and the raised position of the porch.
Because Christiansted was built in the neoclassical style, some buildings also have porticos found on Federal buildings. However, in combination with the exterior details and the main
Palladian window at the entrance, the portico at the Hamilton Grange relates more closely with the Federal period. The interior folding shutters are also more in line with the New York region during this time and McComb’s background is a direct connection to the Federal period.
A less visible indicator would be the floor plan that fits the exact description of typical floor plans in the town of Christiansted, St. Croix. Hamilton spent the most time on St. Croix in the town of Christiansted. It is likely that Hamilton directed McComb, Jr. to layout spaces that related to ways in which he was familiar in using these spaces. The original Grange first floor plan features the central salon running the full length or width of the building, flanked with secondary spaces (Figures 5-10 and 5-11). The drawing and dining room had doors that could be opened to create one large space.
151
The original second floor plan also conformed to the typical Christiansted plan. The four
North rooms, furthest from the current stairs, were originally one large room. This would have
created the cental salon space that was the full length or width of the building. Any other rooms
on this floor would have been smaller secondary space.1
Even less obvious at first glance, is how Hamilton’s use of spaces relates to his Caribbean
background. Not only is the original layout similar to typical floor plans in Christiansted, St.
Croix, but Hamilton’s family used the spaces in a similar fashion. He used the main salon as a salon/dining room combination and used a floor-length window to access the piazzas. The flush board siding on the exterior of these piazzas indicates that these porches were an extension of the main living area. This usage elevates the importance of this space and corresponds to the use of galleries as everyday living spaces in the Caribbean. McComb, as an architect, desired to assist
Hamilton with feeling comfortable in his home. He modified a plan, most likely from Crunden’s handbook, Convenient and Ornamental Architecture, and met his client needs while conforming to the stylistic demands of the time. He stamped the floor plan with his characteristic use of an octagonal shape and incorporated Federal details.
The process of syncretism was facilitated because both Federal era and Christiansted buildings are built in the neoclassical manner. Exterior neoclassical details, shutters, and floor- length windows would have been familiar to Hamilton in the two traditions. McComb was an architect that could snyncretize Hamilton’s experience and architectural imprints from both the
Caribbean and New York in order to give him a meaningful home.
This study has analyzed the process of syncretism that may have influenced the architecture of the Hamilton Grange. Recognized as a significant reminder of the architectural and political history of the American Federal era, Hamilton Grange also exhibits features
152
associated with the Caribbean heritage of its prominent owner. This study has documented the
roots of the diverse influences and the relation of the syncretic process with the personalities
associated with the resulting piece of architecture known as the Hamilton Grange.
Design Implications
Vlach (1986) noted that “a house is both a personal and a cultural expression, at once home
and habitat. . . While houses have been accepted as important cultural achievements by many,
very few have realized that architectural values are deeply rooted in human nature.”2 Some
architects and designers are aware of the powerful effects of architectural imprints and the
possibility of syncretism affecting their clients. Marcus (2006) noted that “having listened to
many, many accounts of people’s feelings about their homes---positive, negative, and ambivalent---there is no doubt in my mind that we all, to some degree, display in the physical environment messages from the unconscious about who we are, who we were, and who we might become . . . The house is indeed a mirror of the self if we can learn to interpret what we see, comprehend what it means, and act on what it seeks to communicate.”3
Designers should also be cognizant of their own architectural imprints. As an architect
teaching design students, Marcus (2006) discovered that students “. . . frequently recognize in
their design work significant echoes imprinted in childhood.”4 This designer concluded that
people might not consciously recreate the environment of their childhood. However, memories
can still be brought into concrete form as part of their physical environment and can emerge from
childhood imprints dealing with aspects of privacy, enclosure, view, form, materials, sounds,
textures, etc.5
Besides design professionals, other researchers have noted the prevalence of syncretism in
the built environment. Rapoport (1969) sees the house as the interaction of social, cultural,
ritual, economic, and physical factors. He also recognizes that cultural determinants are strong
153
forces that can limit the choices for the form of a house. “The house is an institution, not just a structure, created for a complex set of purposes. Because building a house is a cultural phenomenon, its form and organization are greatly influenced by the cultural milieu to which it belongs.”6
Further Study
This study has used the Hamilton Grange as a case study for the process of syncretism caused by architectural imprints. Further development of related topics is possible using this and other sources of information. The historic structure report includes extensive information on the
Hamilton Grange. This information can be used to launch further in-depth investigations of specific areas in this study which may lead to further insights. The Hamilton Grange may also be studied for a better understanding of both Alexander Hamilton and John Mcomb, Jr. In addition, studies on other buildings with Caribbean influences will help add to the relatively limited available research in this area.
1 Mongin and Whidden. "Historic Structure Report : Hamilton Grange National Memorial, Manhattan Sites, New York City." 181. 2 Vlach, "Sources of the Shotgun House: African and Caribbean Antecedents for Afro-American Architecture", 7. 3 Marcus, House as a Mirror of Self: Exploring the Deeper Meaning of Home, 15. 4 Ibid., 40. 5 Ibid., 41. 6 Amos Rapoport, House Form and Culture, Foundations of Cultural Geography Series (New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1969), 46.
154
Table 12-1. Architectural Influences on the Hamilton Grange Caribbean Federal Both
Exterior wood material ●
Sandstone foundation ●
Raised first floor under porch ●
Neoclassical exterior details ●
Porticos ●
Full-length porches ●
Shutters ●
Shutter-porch combination ●
Floor-length windows ●
Floor plan ●
Interior folding shutters ●
Hamilton’s background ●
McComb’s background ●
Color scheme ●
155
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Acworth, Angus Whiteford. Treasure in the Caribbean, a First Study of Georgian Buildings in the British West Indies, The Georgian Handbooks;. London: Pleiades Books, 1949.
Betts, Mary Beth. "The Mayor's Mansion." The New York Times, New York, NY, U. S., http://www.nytimes.com (accessed March 11, 2008).
Bredsdorff, Peter, Hans Henrik Engqvist, Viggo Moller-Jensen, Herbert Olsen, Eric Pettersson, and Ole Svensson. Three Towns : Conservation and Renewal of Charlotte Amalia, Christiansted, and Frederiksted of the U.S. Virgin Islands. Translated by Hanne Ringsted. Edited by Ole Svensson. Copenhagen: Danish West Indian Society, 1980.
Brookhiser, Richard. Alexander Hamilton, American. Special edition 2004. ed. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2004.
Chapman, William. "Preservation Guideline 2." St. Croix, U. S. Virgin Islands: Virgin Islands Department of Planning and Natural Resources, Division for Archaeology and Historic Preservation.
Chernow, Ron. Alexander Hamilton. New York: The Penguin Press, 2004.
City of New York: The Department of Citywide Administrative Services. "D. C. A. S. Managed Public Buildings, New York, N Y, U. S." http://home2.nyc.gov/html/dcas/html/resources/man_cityhall.shtml (accessed February 27, 2008).
Crain, Edward E. Historic Architecture in the Caribbean Islands. Gainesville: University Press of Florida, 1994.
Crisson, Richard Charles. "Preserving and Restoring Buildings in the Historic Zone of San Juan, Puerto Rico." Project in lieu of thesis (M.A. Arch.), University of Florida, 1973.
Dahl, Thorkel, and Kjeld De Fine Licht. Surveys in 1961 on St. Thomas & St. Croix. Translated by Avanti Gruppen and Nicholas Wrigley. Copenhagen: Royal Danish Academy of Fine Arts, School of Architecture, 2004.
Dookhan, Isaac. A History of the Virgin Islands of the United States. Kingston, Jamaica: Canoe Press, 1994.
Eberlein, Harold Donaldson, and Cortlandt Van Dyke Hubbard. Historic Houses of the Hudson Valley. New York: Architectural Book Pub. Co., 1942.
Edmonson, Munro S., ed. Nativism, Syncretism and Anthropological Science. Edited by Margaret A. L. Harrison and Robert Wauchope, (Preprinted from Publication 19, Pages 181-204 - Middle American Research Institute, Tulane University). New Orleans: Middle American Research Institute, Tulane University, 1960.
156
Edwards, Jay D. "The Origins of Creole Architecture." Winterthur Portfolio 29, no. 2/3 (1994): 155-189.
Gibbs, James. A Book of Architecture Containing Designs of Buildings and Ornaments. By James Gibbs. The second ed. London: printed for W. Innys and R. Manby; J. and P. Knapton; and C. Hitch, 1739.
Gosner, Pamela W. Caribbean Georgian, the Great and Small Houses of the West Indies. 1st ed. Washington, D.C.: Three Continents Press, 1982.
———. Plantation and Town, Historic Architecture of the United States Virgin Islands, a Guide. Durham: N.C., Moore Pub. Co., 1971.
Graham, Roy Eugene. "Joseph Jacques Ramée and the French Émigré Architects in America." Thesis (M. Arch. Hist.), University of Virginia, 1968.
Gravette, Andrew Gerald, and Pamela Gosner. Architectural Heritage of the Caribbean : An a - Z of Historic Buildings: Kingston, Jamaica: Ian Randle Publishers; Oxford: Signal Books ; Princeton, NJ: Markus Wiener Publishers, 2000.
Haddon, Rawson Woodman. "The Roger Morris House (Jumel Mansion). New York City. With Measured Drawings by Joseph Palle." Architectural Record 42 (1917): 47-62, 127-139.
Halfpenny, William, John Halfpenny, Robert Morris, and T. Lightoler. The Modern Builder's Assistant; or, a Concise Epitome of the Whole System of Architecture; in Which the Various Branches of That Excellent Study Are Establish'd on the Most Familiar Principles, and Rendered Adequate to Every Capacity; Being Useful to the Proficient, and Easy to the Learner. London: Printed for J. Rivington and J. Fletcher, and R. Sayer, 1757.
Hamilton, Allan McLane. The Intimate Life of Alexander Hamilton, Based Chiefly Upon Original Family Letters and Other Documents, Many of Which Have Never Been Published. New York: C. Scribner's sons, 1911.
Hamilton, James A. Reminiscences of James A. Hamilton; or, Men and Events, at Home and Abroad, During Three Quarters of a Century. New York: C. Scribner & Co., 1869.
Hawney, William. The Complete Measurer or, the Whole Art of Measuring. In Two Parts. The First Part Teaching Decimal Arithmetic, . . . The Second Part Teaching to Measure All Sorts of Superficies and Solids, . . . The Eighth Edition. To Which Is Added, an Appendix, . . . By William Hawney. London: printed for R. Ware, J. and P. Knapton, S. Birt, T. Longman, C. Hitch, et. al., 1751.
Hubbard, Vincent K. Swords, Ships & Sugar : History of Nevis to 1900. 4th ed. Corvallis, OR: Premiere Editions, 1996.
Kimball, Fiske. Domestic Architecture of the American Colonies and of the Early Republic. New York: Dover Publications, 1966.
157
Lambropoulos, Vassilis. "Syncretism as Mixture and as Method." Journal of Modern Greek Studies 19, no. 2 (2001): 221-235.
Marcus, Clare Cooper. House as a Mirror of Self: Exploring the Deeper Meaning of Home. Berwick, ME: Nicolas-Hays, 2006.
Merriam-Webster Incorporated. "Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, Springfield, M a, U. S." http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/grange (accessed February 27, 2008).
Mongin, Alfred, and Anne D. Whidden. "Historic Structure Report : Hamilton Grange National Memorial, Manhattan Sites, New York City." Boston: North Atlantic Historic Preservation Center, North Atlantic Region, National Park Service, U.S. Dept. of the Interior, 1980. http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/park_histories/index.htm (Retrieved January 15, 2007 from National Park Service, Technical Information Center).
Morris, Robert. Architecture Improved: In a Collection of Modern, Elegant and Useful Designs; from Slight and Graceful Recesses, Lodges and Other Decorations in Parks, Gardens, Woods or Forests, to the Portico, Bath, Observatory, and Interior Ornaments of Superb Buildings. With Great Variety of Rich Embellishments for Chimneys in the Taste of Inigo Jones, Mr. Kent, &. London: R. Sayer, 1755.
———. Select Architecture: Being Regular Designs of Plans and Elevations Well Suited to Both Town and Country: In Which the Magnificence and Beauty, the Purity and Simplicity of Designing, for Every Species of That Noble Art, Is Accurately Treated . . . From the Plain Town-House to the Stately Hotel, and in the Country from the Genteel and Convenient Farm-House to the Parochial Church: With Suitable Embellishments: Also Bridges, Baths, Summer-Houses, &C. . . . : Illustrated with Fifty Copper Plates, Quarto. The second ed. London: Robert Sayer, 1757.
Morrison, Hugh. In Early American Architecture, from the First Colonial Settlements to the National Period, 34. New York: Oxford University Press, 1952.
Nevis Historical and Conservation Society. "The Museum of Nevis History, Charlestown, Nevis, West Indies." http://www.nevis-nhcs.org/nevishistory.html (accessed March 11, 2008).
New York Landmarks Society. "Repairing Old and Historic Windows: A Manual for Architects and Homeowners." 27. Washington, D.C.: The Preservation Press: National Trust for Historic Preservation, 1992.
New York State Bureau of Historic Sites. Schuyler Mansion: A Historic Structure Report. Albany: New York State Parks and Recreation: distributed by the Schuyler Mansion State Historic Site, 1979.
Pain, William, and James Pain. Pains British Palladio: Or, the Builders General Assistant. Demonstrating, in the Most Easy and Practical Method, All the Principal Rules of Architecture, from the Ground Plan to the Ornamental Finish. Illustrated with Several New and Useful Designs of Houses, with Their Plans, Elevations, and Sections. Also, Clear and Ample Instructions Annexed to Each Subject, in Letter-Press; with a List of
158
Prices for Materials and Labour and Labour Only . . . Uniform Title: British Palladio. A new, corr. ed. London: I. and J. Taylor, 1797.
Phillips, Maureen K. General Philip Schuyler House Historic Structure Report : Saratoga National Historical Park, Schuylerville, New York. 2 vols. Lowell, Mass.: Historic Architecture Program, Northeast Region, National Park Service, U.S. Dept. of the Interior, 2003.
Pierson, William Harvey. American Buildings and Their Architects: The Colonial and Neoclassical Styles. Vol. 1. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1970.
Plantation, Nisbet. "Nisbet Plantation Beach Club, Nevis, West Indies." http://www.nisbetplantation.com/ (accessed March 11, 2008).
Poppeliers, John C., S. Allen Chambers, and Nancy B. Schwartz. In What Style Is It?: A Guide to American Architecture, 29. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2003.
Rapoport, Amos. House Form and Culture, Foundations of Cultural Geography Series. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1969.
Richardson, George. New Designs in Architecture Consisting of Plans, Elevations, and Sections for Various Buildings, Comprised in Xliv Folio Plates, Designed and Engraved by George Richardson, Architect. = Nouveaux Desseins D'architecture, Ou, Plans, Elevations, Et Coupes De Divers Bâtimens; . . . Dessinées Et Gravées Par George Richardson Architecte. London: printed for the author no. 105, Great Titchfield-Street, 1792.
Schuyler, Georgina. The Schuyler Mansion at Albany, Residence of Major-General Philip Schuyler, 1762-1804, by the Spirit of '76. New York: The De Vinne press, 1911.
Stillman, Samuel Damie. "Artistry and Skill in the Architecture of John Mccomb, Jr." Thesis (M. A.), University of Delaware, 1956.
Van Liew, Barbara Ferris. Long Island Domestic Architecture of the Colonial and Federal Periods: An Introductory Study. Setauket, Long Island: Society for the Preservation of Long Island Antiquities (Reprinted from the Nassau County Historical Society Journal, Vol. XXXIII, Number 1 With Revisons), 1974.
Vlach, John Michael. "Sources of the Shotgun House: African and Caribbean Antecedents for Afro-American Architecture." Dissertation, Indiana University, 1975.
Wilde, Edward S. "John Mccomb, Jr., Architect." The American Architect and Builiding News 94, no. 1703, 1704 (1908): 49-65.
Williams, Henry Lionel, and Ottalie Kroeber Williams. Great Houses of America. 1st . ed. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1966.
159
Willocks, Harold W. L. The Umbilical Cord: The History of the United States Virgin Islands from Pre-Columbian Era to the Present. St. Croix, V.I.: The author, 1995.
160
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH
Tiffany Lang is originally from the island of St. Croix, U. S. Virgin Islands in the
Caribbean. Under the Bruce D. Henderson Scholarship, she attended the University of the
Virgin Islands, St. Croix campus where she received her Bachelor of Business Administration.
She later moved to Florida to study for a Master of Interior Design at the University of Florida.
Her course of studies has been focused on receiving a first professional degree in the field of interior design with a concentration in historic preservation. She is one of the 2006-2007 recipients of the Mildred Colodny Scholarship for Graduate Study in Historic Preservation from the National Trust for Historic Preservation.
161