Alexander Echlin & William Kelley, ‘Nicholas Hamond’s School, Swaffham: A new attribution to Sir Andrew Fountaine of Narford Hall’, The Georgian Group Journal, Vol. XXIV, 2016, pp. 35–52

text © the authors 2016 Nicholas Hamond’s School, Swaffham: a new attribution to Sir Andrew Fountaine of Narford Hall

a l e x a n d e r e c h l i n a n d w i l l i a m k e l l e y

Sir Andrew Fountaine (1676–1753), a close friend of ir Andrew Fountaine (1676–1753) of Narford Lord Burlington and key member of his circle, was SHall, Norfolk, enjoyed a remarkable life. Born celebrated by his contemporaries for his erudition and into a gentry family, he was educated at Eton as a his skills as an architect. Despite this, his activities as King’s Scholar and then at Christ Church, Oxford, an amateur architect remain elusive to architectural under Dean Henry Aldrich, amateur architect and historians. In this article we summarise briefly admirer of Palladio and Vitruvius.1 At Oxford he Fountaine’s career as an architect before presenting was selected by Aldrich in 1698 to perform the a new attribution to him. Based on a document Latin oration to William III as the king entered the in the Norfolk Record Office we believe Fountaine city. He was knighted for this the next year. In 1701, to have been the architect of Nicholas Hamond’s shortly after leaving Christ Church, he was part of School in Swaffham, Norfolk (demolished 1930). a diplomatic mission that travelled to Hanover to The schoolhouse is typical of the austere, Rome- present the Electress Sophia with a copy of the Act inspired Palladian buildings of the 1730s. of Succession. Sir Andrew was a precocious intellect,

Fig. 1: Narford Hall, Norfolk, engraving by E. Roberts, from T. Cromwell, Excursions through Norfolk, volume II, (London, 1819). The Palladian wing built by Sir Andrew Fountaine is visible to the rear of the main house. (© Alec Barr)

t h e g e o r g i a n g r o u p j o u r n a l v o l u m e x x i v   n i c h o l a s h a m o n d ’ s s c h o o l , s wa f f h a m gaining the favour of Aldrich and contributing a is wholly due to yourself, you will pardon, Sir, my chapter on Dark Age coins to George Hickes’s Presumption, in thus publickly addressing you’.9 monumental treatise on the early Middle Ages, George Vertue was in no doubt as to the book’s true Linguarum veterum septentrionalium thesaurus author, noting that ‘Tho the name of a man that grammatico-criticus et archæologicus (1705). has the care of the house & pictures &c & shews Fountaine went on two Grand Tours, acquiring a them is put to it. But by all the circumstances of large collection of antiquities, paintings and other criticism learned observations, is evidently by Sr curiosities that he kept at Narford Hall, the house his Andrews conduct…’.10 Kent, in one of his letters father had relocated to, and bequeathed to him in from Rome, described Fountaine as his ‘friend’.11 1707 (Fig. 1).2 William Kent remarked on Fountaine’s It is unsurprising that with these connections and purchases on several occasions in his letters from his erudition Fountaine was a prominent courtier in Rome to England.3 George Vertue was charmed by the 1720s, acting as Vice-Chamberlain to Caroline, the collection’s paintings.4 Contemporaries trusted Princess of Wales and tutor to her third son, Prince Fountaine’s eye unfailingly: Jonathan Richardson William Augustus. He became Warden of the Mint in the younger described him as ‘one of the keenest 1727, before retiring from political life to Narford in virtuosi in Europe’ who ‘out Italianed the Italians the early 1730s. themselves’.5 Joseph Spence recalled that when Fountaine’s contemporaries considered him he visited the Uffizi in 1732 he was shown a bronze an expert on architectural matters as well as on which he was told ‘used to lay despisd under a heap paintings, coins and antiquities. William Halfpenny of rubbish till Sr Andrew Fountaine discovered its dedicated The Art of Sound Building (1725) to worth’.6 This Virtù was reflected in the friendships him, mentioning his ‘uncommon Penetration… Fountaine formed on his travels – amongst his close exquisite Judgment… delicate Taste, and… friends he counted Gottfried Leibniz, Jonathan thorough acquaintance with the Subject’.12 In 1728 Swift and Cosimo III, penultimate Grand Duke Robert Morris described Sir Andrew, Burlington of Tuscany. and Pembroke as ‘the principal practicioners and In England Fountaine moved amongst preservers’ of ancient architecture.13 John Harris the leading lights of the Palladian Revival. He has, on several occasions, singled Fountaine out became friends with Lord Burlington in the years as Burlington’s ‘mentor’.14 He has written of immediately before the young earl’s journey to Burlington’s nascent Palladianism, that ‘not enough the Veneto in 1719. The two were clearly fond of has been made of the influence of Sir Andrew each other: Burlington gave Fountaine a series of Fountaine and…Narford…and it was as much paintings by Giovanni Antonio Pellegrini, and Sir here, as in memories of Italy, that Chiswick was Andrew hung Kneller’s portrait of Burlington over conceived’.15 If this is true then Sir Andrew must the chimneypiece of the Salon at Narford.7 Lord be considered a person of supreme importance in Herbert, from 1733 the ninth – ‘architect’ – Earl eighteenth-century architectural history.16 of Pembroke, was another friend of Fountaine’s.8 In spite of attracting the praise of his Although not named as its author, it was widely contemporaries, Fountaine’s activities as an reported that Sir Andrew wrote the catalogue of amateur architect remain shrouded in mystery. The the Pembroke collection published in 1751. The academic literature reflects this: most discussions work was dedicated to Fountaine: the author of Sir Andrew focus overwhelmingly on his life Richard Cowdry wrote, somewhat sheepishly, that and collections, and make little or no mention of ‘As… the Merit of this small Work (such as it is) his career as an architect.17 In general histories of

t h e g e o r g i a n g r o u p j o u r n a l v o l u m e x x i v   n i c h o l a s h a m o n d ’ s s c h o o l , s wa f f h a m eighteenth-century English architecture or of the Palladian taste’.23 The authors stress, however, that it Palladian Revival he receives a passing mention, at is simply impossible to be certain of any attribution. best. His entry in the most recent edition of Howard Susie West, writing about the Narford library in Colvin’s Biographical Dictionary is very brief, 2013, was also cautious, stating that Sir Andrew with Colvin writing that Fountaine was primarily ‘a was ‘probably’ the architect.24 During Sir Andrew’s well-known virtuoso and to some extent an amateur lifetime there was a further phase of rebuilding at architect’.18 In this article we briefly survey the Narford in the 1730s. Again, it is impossible to reach known facts of Sir Andrew’s architectural career, a certain attribution, but Fountaine is the most likely before presenting a new attribution to him, based on candidate. newly discovered documentary evidence. The main evidence for Sir Andrew’s authorship is literary. Alongside the accounts of Halfpenny and Morris, several writers from the eighteenth century state that he was responsible for Narford sir andrew fountaine as an Hall, though they usually imply that he designed the amateur architect whole house, which is incorrect. Francis Blomefield, In this Journal’s predecessor in 1987 Steven writing in the 1740s having met Sir Andrew, Parissien, John Harris and Howard Colvin wrote described him as a ‘learned and worthy knight, a report on Narford Hall.19 This remains the most having his residence in a seat of his own erecting, extensive scholarly analysis of Sir Andrew as an at this place, called Narford Hall’.25 George Vertue architect. They describe the design of the house reported that Narford was ‘a pleasant well situated and Sir Andrew’s participation therein as the most dwelling…answerable to the Genius and Taste of mysterious part of ‘Narford’s tantalisingly enigmatic the best manner wholly I believe by his [Fountaine’s] history’.20 The original part of the house had been own direction’.26 Mostyn John Armstrong, in 1781, built by an unknown architect at the behest of noted that ‘Sir Andrew built the mansion-house, Fountaine’s father in the years between 1701 and called Narford Hall, and resided there to his death’.27 1704, when Sir Andrew was on his first Grand Tour. Like many amateur architects of the early eighteenth Sir Andrew succeeded to Narford on the death century, Fountaine had spent considerable time in of his father in 1707 but only turned his attention Rome, taking in the remains of antiquity. He had to building works shortly after returning from his been to the Veneto on his first Grand Tour where, second Grand Tour in 1716. Work on the gardens as a student of Dean Aldrich, he must have visited and construction of a new Palladian wing began Palladio’s villas.28 Burlington wrote to Fountaine in c.1718; work on the house itself may have been from Vicenza in 1719 to tell him about the Palladio ongoing throughout the 1720s but was certainly drawings he had purchased in Venice.29 The tone complete by the time of Sir Matthew Decker’s visit to of the letter suggests that Fountaine was familiar Narford in 1728.21 Parissien, Harris and Colvin state with the area and its sights. We know from the that ‘it is these Palladian additions which continue surviving catalogue that Sir Andrew had an enviable to present the most vexing problems of date and architectural library at Narford, which included authorship’.22 Ultimately they attribute them to Sir Perrault’s French translation of Vitruvius, multiple Andrew himself. The library was the most notable versions of Palladio’s Quattro Libri and the books feature of the extensions. Parissien, Harris and associated with Lord Burlington’s circle.30 The Colvin describe it as ‘a surprisingly sophisticated three volumes of Colen Campbell’s Vitruvius piece of work’, testifying to Fountaine’s ‘advanced Britannicus were amongst these. Parissien, Harris

t h e g e o r g i a n g r o u p j o u r n a l v o l u m e x x i v   n i c h o l a s h a m o n d ’ s s c h o o l , s wa f f h a m

Fig. 2: Narford Hall, Norfolk, plan of the house and grounds from Vitruvius Britannicus, volume III, (1725). (© Alec Barr) and Colvin suggest that Campbell’s designs for elevations’.32 Narford’s gardens and grounds were Wanstead, published in the first volume ofVitruvius illustrated in volume three of Vitruvius Britannicus Britannicus, were an influence on the designs for the (1725) (Fig. 2)33. Campbell described Fountaine as a library at Narford.31 ‘learned and ingenious gentleman…distinguished The possibility of Campbell’s involvement at by his universal knowledge in all the polite arts… a closer level, however, cannot be eliminated. As [who] has given marks of his good taste and affection John Harris has written: ‘Fountaine, as an amateur for architecture in several pieces lately erected…[at architect may have had some assistance from Narford]’.34 Given his association with Burlington, Campbell, whose style is implicit in the library a connection between Campbell and Fountaine

t h e g e o r g i a n g r o u p j o u r n a l v o l u m e x x i v   n i c h o l a s h a m o n d ’ s s c h o o l , s wa f f h a m is unsurprising. Yet Campbell does not claim the Campbell and Morris, the architects in their circle – design for Narford as his own, which is significant. would not have been consulted. The extent to which Roger Morris, who acted as Campbell’s assistant for they guided Sir Andrew can only be guessed at, but much of the 1720s and was also a close collaborator their involvement in no way militates against him of Pembroke, is another who may have had a hand having been his own architect, accepting or rejecting in the extensions at Narford.35 Fountaine certainly their counsel as he saw fit. knew Morris by the 1730s – he appointed Morris Eighteenth-century evidence links Fountaine Surveyor to the Mint when he was the Warden.36 to just three further architectural projects. These Morris may also have been ‘Mr Roger Harrison are even more mysterious than the documentary an ingenious bricklayer’, who is mentioned in material relating to Narford. Horace Walpole, in Benjamin Ibbots’s account of the 1718 work at 1761, described how in Lord Fitzwilliam’s house Narford, written later in the eighteenth century and on Richmond Green – which had belonged to still preserved at Narford.37 Morris began his career Fountaine’s friend Sir Matthew Decker – there was as a bricklayer (although he is first documented as ‘a large ugly room which cost £2000 designed by such in 1724, six years after building work at Narford Sir Andrew Fountain: it is 36 long, 24 high, & 24 commenced) and the names Morris and Harrison wide’.42 This is corroborated by Decker’s account of might have been confused in the passage of time. Narford, where he noted that the decorative scheme Pembroke and Burlington may also have played a ‘is as our room’.43 This dates the room to before part at Narford. A letter from c.1735 confirms that June 1728, when Decker’s visit took place. The house Pembroke corresponded with Sir Andrew about has since been demolished and the room lost. the ongoing building work.38 Fountaine employed The second mention of Fountaine’s participation the French painter Andien de Clermont at Narford in other building schemes comes from much the in the 1730s.39 The artist was engaged on projects same date. The Norwich Gazette from 10 June 1728 for Morris and Pembroke at much the same time. ends with the declaration that ‘Sir Andrew Fountain De Clermont may well have come to Narford Hall is to direct, as ‘tis said, the building of a Palace at on Pembroke’s recommendation. It is probable that Richmond’.44 There was significant architectural Burlington would have been involved in a similar activity at Richmond in the early eighteenth century, fashion, supplying advice by correspondence. particularly after the accession of George II in 1727. None of this, however, amounts to hard evidence The ‘Palace’ in question might be the large royal against Sir Andrew’s authorship of the extensions residence that was planned but never built.45 at Narford. Ongoing debate as to the identity of the Edward Lovett Pearce and William Kent also architect of Holkham Hall in Norfolk has served to submitted designs.46 It could equally refer to the emphasise the extent to which architectural design construction of the New Lodge (also known as was often, for the Burlington circle, a collaborative White Lodge) at Richmond, which was ongoing in exercise.40 Given that his friendship with Burlington 1728.47 A connection between Fountaine and the and Pembroke derived from a common love of New Lodge need hardly occasion surprise given his architecture, it would have been entirely natural for close ties to the court and the involvement of Morris them to have corresponded on architectural matters in the scheme. and to have shared ideas.41 Fountaine, one imagines, The final contemporary reference to Fountaine would have done the same for Burlington and acting as an architect comes from 1742. A letter Pembroke’s architectural projects. Indeed, it seems from Sir Andrew testifies that he supplied designs implausible that Burlington and Pembroke – and for two gate lodges for Temple Newsam, Viscount

t h e g e o r g i a n g r o u p j o u r n a l v o l u m e x x i v   n i c h o l a s h a m o n d ’ s s c h o o l , s wa f f h a m

Irvine’s house near Leeds.48 Fountaine’s lodges they had lived at Brookmans Park, Hertfordshire, were to be built of stone, ‘the rougher the stone… and in Salle, also in Norfolk, but a considerable the better’.49 Ultimately the lodges were erected distance from Swaffham. It seems much more likely in brick, suggesting that Fountaine’s designs were that a document relating to and located in Swaffham discarded. The letter does, however, cast light on Sir would have originated from when the Fountaines Andrew’s working methods. He wrote that ‘I have resided at Narford, rather than Brookmans or Salle. made each side of the gate different that his Lordship Secondly, although Andrew was a common Christian may choose which he likes best’.50 Fountaine seems name within the Fountaine family, Sir Andrew to have accorded builders a degree of flexibility was the only Andrew Fountaine to have received a when working from his plans, for he adds that knighthood. The title was never hereditary. He was, ‘this building may be made higher or longer as moreover, the only member of the family known the Builder pleases’.51 That he was still producing to have practised as an amateur architect. Finally, designs in the 1740s shows that retirement from life the ‘Charity School’ can be identified as the school in London had not put an end to his practising as that opened in Swaffham in the 1730s: Nicholas an architect. Hamond’s School. In short, whilst it is likely that Sir Andrew was Hamond’s School was one of a series of charity involved in some capacity in the design of Narford, schools established in the eighteenth century, it is impossible to know how far he acted unassisted. whereby a rich individual would pay for the Further eighteenth-century evidence for his status education of local children out of his own pocket. as a practising architect is even more ambiguous In the words of the historian of this phenomenon: and cannot be linked with certainty to any surviving ‘thousands of schools were set up and hundreds of buildings or even drawings. For somebody so thousands of children, for whom no other means celebrated by his contemporaries, Sir Andrew’s of education existed, were instructed by its means career as an amateur architect remains enigmatic. during the eighteenth century’.55 The history of the school – which can trace a continuous line to the present Nicholas Hamond Academy in Swaffham – has been well chronicled by John Gretton, in a nicholas hamond’s school, swaffham short book published in 1986 to mark the school’s A document in the Norfolk Record Office sheds light 250th anniversary.56 The idea of a school was first on a building hitherto unrecorded by architectural formulated in October 1724 when local magnate historians. The document, entitled ‘Proposalls for Nicholas Hamond was forced to amend his will Building the Charity School at Swaffham by Richard after the death of his oldest son Richard. Hamond’s Chapman and John Reeve according to Sr Andrew will, two copies of which are in the Norfolk Record Fountaines plan’ (Appendix 1), came to the Office as Office, stated that: part of the Swaffham Parish Records in 1971.52 On ‘my will is that my trustees upon receipt of Five arrival it was catalogued tentatively as dating from Hundred pounds… do immediately imploy the the seventeenth century.53 There are, however, three same in erecting a Building convenient for the strong grounds to believe that the document dates Dwelling of a Master and his Family and for a School from Sir Andrew’s lifetime, specifically from the early Room for instructing and teaching Twenty youths to 1730s. In the first place, the Fountaines had only read the English tongue’.57 moved to Narford (which is just over five miles north The building was to act as the master’s of Swaffham) at the turn of the century.54 Previously house as well as the schoolroom, and was also to

t h e g e o r g i a n g r o u p j o u r n a l v o l u m e x x i v   n i c h o l a s h a m o n d ’ s s c h o o l , s wa f f h a m accommodate a workhouse ‘for the convenient employing [of] twenty poor persons’.58 Hamond desired that the school and workhouse ‘may be erected at the South End of the Close commonly called the Campingland in Swaffham’.59 Hamond died aged 70 in October 1725. An inventory of his possessions, compiled on his death, survives in Swaffham Museum.60 It took some years – up until the death of Hamond’s second son in 1733 – for any action to be taken with regard to building the school and appointing a schoolmaster. The school finally opened in 1736, on the Campingland (an open space just outside the centre of Swaffham, which had previously been used as a football pitch) as Hamond had wanted. Blomefield, writing shortly thereafter, noted that in Swaffham: ‘There is a Free- School lately built in the Camping-Land, founded by Nicholas Hammond, Gent. Late of this parish, with a dwelling for the master, and the interest of £500 (until a purchase can be made) for teaching Fig. 3: The eighteenth-century plaque placed above 20 boys.’61 He added that ‘over the School-House the door of the schoolhouse that was built in the 1730s. Door, are the Crest and Arms of Hammond’, with It can now be seen on the building in Market Place, the inscription: ‘1736 Nicholas Hammond, Esq. gave Swaffham, to which the school moved in the by Will in 1724 a Thousand Pounds, Five Hundred nineteenth century. (© Alec Barr) for Erecting a School-House, Five Hundred for Endowing the same, for Instructing XX Boys in Reading, Writing and Arithmetic’.62 This was accompanied by a further inscription: ‘Benefactors in London to concentrate on life in Norfolk. The who promote Knowledge, Virtue, and Industry, Earl of Oxford, visiting Narford in September 1732, Deserve to be Recorded on Earth, and Rewarded reported that Fountaine ‘seldom comes to London’.65 in Heaven’.63 The original plaque (Fig. 3) can still Richard Chapman and John Reeve were a be seen on the building in Market Place, Swaffham, mason and a carpenter.66 The document is a list of to which the school relocated in the late nineteenth their proposals for materials to be used in various century.64 The date of the school’s founding is also aspects of the design. The ‘plan’ that it alludes to commemorated in a document signed by the original presumably refers to a drawing, or drawings, supplied trustees, including Lord Nelson’s grandfather. This by Fountaine to the two craftsmen. The proposals is currently on display in the foyer of the Nicholas are divided into two sections: the first relates to the Hamond Academy. The school building would, building’s walls, floors, tiling and the digging of a well; therefore, have been built between 1733 and 1736, in the second to materials used in structural supports time for its opening. This correlates perfectly with (girders, lintels and spars), the glass to be used in the what we know of Sir Andrew’s movements. In the windows and the panels for the door. A second hand very early 1730s he appears to have given up his duties is visible on the document – this second hand has

t h e g e o r g i a n g r o u p j o u r n a l v o l u m e x x i v   n i c h o l a s h a m o n d ’ s s c h o o l , s wa f f h a m added article numbers and a series of remarks (some tradesmen’s work ‘for Building the Almshouse and of which have subsequently been crossed out) onto Charity School at 7 Oaks…according to a Design the proposals. These two hands might be those of made by the Right Honble. Henry Lord Herbert’ Chapman and Reeve, though this cannot be proved. totalled almost £4,205.67 Sir Matthew Decker, as we A third hand is also present on the verso of the have seen, spent £2000 commissioning a single room document, endorsing the plans. This can be ascribed from Sir Andrew in the 1720s.68 Clearly the funds to Sir Andrew with certainty: his endorsement reads: afforded to Sir Andrew did not permit a large or ‘I think these proposals very reasonable, if they especially ornate building. keep strictly to the Plan, uprightly scantlings And: Regrettably the plan itself did not come to the Fountaine’. The signature matches exactly to other Norfolk Record Office with the builders’ proposals examples from Sir Andrew’s correspondence. We and, as with all architectural drawings associated have noted that the letter Fountaine wrote in 1742 with Sir Andrew, is lost. There does, however, implies that he allowed builders a degree of flexibility survive a photograph of the old school building in interpreting his plans or drawings. His endorsing taken before it was demolished in 1930 (Fig. 4).69 the builders’ proposals, as we see here, suggests that Can this be identified as Fountaine’s schoolhouse? he operated a process whereby he would re-examine The building depicted in the photograph largely the ideas that the workmen developed on seeing matches to the details we can glean from the his plans, and then give his approval or suggest proposals. The ‘Leantoo’ must refer to the two side modifications as appropriate. bays with pitched roofs. The floors of the building The nature of the document, which contains are arranged as speculated and the windows are proposals for materials to be used and details such casement windows. Given that the photograph as the thickness of the walls, affords few clues as to was taken 200 years after the school’s construction how the building would have appeared when built. It it seems likely that certain aspects of the original is clear that the building was to be made from brick. building would have been modified – the proposals No form or location is specified for the ‘Leantoo’ make no mention of chimneystacks, for instance. mentioned in the first section. The reference to The photograph, however, conforms to the ‘lower floors’ and ‘upper story’ suggests that the particulars of the proposals. building was somehow divided, with two or more lower floors being separated from an upper floor (perhaps an attic). The document also states that the windows were to be casement windows. Beyond english architecture in the 1730s that the plan does not supply many hints as to the and the case for fountaine’s authorship building’s external appearance. The only indication We have already noted that the opening date and of any ornament comes in the final article of section the location of the school both fit in perfectly 2. A ‘Cornish’ is mentioned, that is to be painted ‘of a with the timing of Sir Andrew’s retirement from Stone colour’ instead of being made from stone. The life in London to Narford in the 1730s. The fact use of relatively basic building materials no doubt that the building sits comfortably in the broader derived from the wish to make maximum use of the context of eighteenth-century English Palladianism limited funds available. The extent to which £500 lends further weight to the view that Sir Andrew was a miserable budget can be seen when compared designed the schoolhouse in the photograph. Brick to the cost of the building work that took place at buildings embellished with classical features were Sevenoaks School in the 1720s. An estimate of all the commonplace in Georgian Norfolk towns, but very

t h e g e o r g i a n g r o u p j o u r n a l v o l u m e x x i v   n i c h o l a s h a m o n d ’ s s c h o o l , s wa f f h a m

Fig. 4: Nicholas Hamond’s School, Swaffham. The eighteenth-century schoolhouse, photographed before its demolition in 1930. (© Swaffham Museum) few have such a distinctive Palladian form. This stable block at Houghton Hall.72 The form is further form – a central bay with a pitched roof and two side reproduced in the two side wings of the elevation of bays, also with pitched roofs, slightly recessed – is one version of Burlington and Kent’s proposed new reminiscent of other eighteenth-century English Houses of Parliament from 1733 (Fig. 5).73 That the Palladian buildings. One of Lord Burlington’s Campingland school is so similar to buildings by designs for the Council House in Chichester in Burlington and his circle, suggests that its architect the 1720s has a similar form, as does the Council must have been familiar with recent developments building that was finally executed by Roger Morris in English Palladianism. James Gibbs later used in the early 1730s.70 Colen Campbell’s design for ‘A the form in one of his designs in the 1740s for St new Garden Room at Hall Barn near Beacons Field Nicholas West Church, Aberdeen.74 in the County of Bucks, the Seat of Edmond Waller, English architects throughout the seventeenth Esq’ from the third volume of Vitruvius Britannicus century had also used this form. The schoolhouse is comparable.71 So too are Kent’s design for a recalls a drawing by Inigo Jones of an unidentified garden building for Sir Charles Hotham in Isaac stable block (Fig. 6). In the early eighteenth century Ware’s Designs of Inigo Jones and Others, and the this was in the collection of Dr George Clarke, a central gatehouses on the east and west fronts of his Fellow of All Souls College, Oxford.75 Clarke had

t h e g e o r g i a n g r o u p j o u r n a l v o l u m e x x i v   n i c h o l a s h a m o n d ’ s s c h o o l , s wa f f h a m

Fig. 5: Lord Burlington and William Kent, a scheme for rebuilding the Houses of Parliament, c.1733, The National Archives, London, WORK 29/3358 (21). (© The National Archives)

Fig. 6: Inigo Jones, design for an unidentified stable. (© The Fellows and Provost of Worcester College, Oxford) been a colleague and friend of Henry Aldrich, the Vitruvius Britannicus.78 Given these connections it Dean of Christ Church to whom Fountaine had seems highly likely that Clarke and Fountaine were been so close.76 He had also been a friend of Sir acquained with each other. Sir Christopher Wren Matthew Decker, whose journal contains a colourful employed this form, most notably in the south façade account of a dinner the two men shared at Christ of the Sheldonian Theatre, but also in a design for Church in August 1726.77 Colen Campbell also knew the Chapel Screen at All Souls College, Oxford.79 Clarke, dedicating to him the plate of Inigo Jones’s The Swaffham school’s lack of ornament and Queen’s House, Greenwich from the first volume of its astylar, austere façade reflect Burlington and

t h e g e o r g i a n g r o u p j o u r n a l v o l u m e x x i v   n i c h o l a s h a m o n d ’ s s c h o o l , s wa f f h a m other Palladian architects’ efforts from the 1730s to mentioned above ultimately derives from Palladio’s adopt a more reductive classicism, based on their reconstruction of the façade of the Temple of Peace understanding of ancient Rome. The 1730s saw (Basilica of Maxentius) in Rome, as illustrated in the the construction of Burlington’s York Assembly fourth book of the Quattro Libri (Fig. 7).81 Palladio Rooms, the most severely classical of all his used this form in his own buildings, most notably buildings. Of Burlington’s plans for the Council in the Venetian churches of San Giorgio Maggiore House at Chichester, the appearance of which and Il Redentore.82 Several of the villas illustrated resembles the Swaffham school, John Harris has in the second book of the Quattro Libri are also written: ‘here is an architecture of the severest sort, similar.83 Burlington’s Fabbriche antiche disegnate the ultimate in minimalism… We have here what da Andrea Palladio e date in luce da Riccardo can only be described as a modern rendition of the conte di Burlington, a series of Palladio’s drawings Roman antique’.80 Indeed the form common to reconstructing ancient Roman buildings, had come Sir Andrew’s schoolhouse and the other buildings out in 1730. Sir Andrew owned a copy. Holkham Hall,

Fig. 7: Andrea Palladio’s reconstruction of the Temple of Peace (Basilica of Maxentius) in Rome; from Book Four of the Quattro Libri. (© Alec Barr)

t h e g e o r g i a n g r o u p j o u r n a l v o l u m e x x i v   n i c h o l a s h a m o n d ’ s s c h o o l , s wa f f h a m

Fig. 8: Ambrose Phillipps, The Temple of Vesta at Garendon Park. (© Alec Barr) described by Frank Salmon in last year’s Georgian a Temple’.85 This must be the temple folly in antis Group Journal as ‘perhaps the greatest Neo-Roman illustrated in Vitruvius Britannicus.86 Sir Andrew house of early eighteenth-century Europe’, was being may have built more garden buildings after the built at exactly the same time as Nicholas Hamond’s publication of Vitruvius Britannicus: Decker also School, a mere 25 miles away from Narford.84 Like mentioned that Fountaine was ‘now building a round the schoolhouse, it was constructed from brick and temple which will have its prospect upon a very fine largely devoid of ornament. Canal’.87 This, if realised, might have been based on Sir Andrew would certainly have been familiar one of the Roman Temples of Vesta (at Rome and with developments at Holkham Hall and in the Tivoli), and may have been similar to the temple Palladian Revival more generally. Indeed, the built by Ambrose Phillipps at Garendon Park in the building work at Narford in the 1720s and 30s early 1730s, following his own drawings of Roman reflects this growing interest in ancient Rome. buildings made on the Grand Tour (Fig. 8). 88 Decker reported that in the gardens at Narford there There was one further folly designed after the was ‘a little summer house, built in the manner as ancients, for the Earl of Oxford in 1732 described

t h e g e o r g i a n g r o u p j o u r n a l v o l u m e x x i v   n i c h o l a s h a m o n d ’ s s c h o o l , s wa f f h a m

Fig. 9: Louis-François Roubiliac, Sir Andrew Fountaine, terracotta, c.1740s. (Norfolk Museums Service, Norwich Castle Museum & Art Gallery) how the ‘great walk is terminated by a building made had been illustrated by Antoine Desgodetz in Les of rough stone in the form something like the Arch of Edifices antiques de Rome dessinés et mesurés tres Severus’.89 A triumphal arch (with three archways, exactement (Paris, 1682), which was in the library as has the Arch of Septimus Severus) appears at the at Narford. De Clermont’s painted ceiling for the end of the Long Walk in one of Edmund Prideaux’s library closet at Narford is, in Ingrid Roscoe’s topographical drawings of Narford.90 These date words, an expression of Fountaine’s ‘passion for from some time between 1725 and 1745.91 This was the Antique... The subject is a celebration of the one of several Roman Triumphal Arches to be built Emperor Titus’.92 A portrait of Titus, taken from a in England in the 1720s and 30s: Triumphal Arches sculptural relief inside the Arch of Titus, formed the after Roman examples were also built at Mereworth, central medallion of the ceiling. De Clermont used either by Roger Morris or Colen Campbell, at Bernard de Montfaucon’s L’antiquité expliquée et Blenheim by Nicholas Hawksmoor and, once again, représentée en figures (Paris, 1719–1724) as a source at Garendon Park by Phillipps. Fountaine had seen for the depictions of Roman architecture.93 the buildings in Rome on his Grand Tours and they Sir Andrew’s collection also betrays a fascination

t h e g e o r g i a n g r o u p j o u r n a l v o l u m e x x i v   n i c h o l a s h a m o n d ’ s s c h o o l , s wa f f h a m with Roman antiquity. Roubiliac’s portrait busts of conclusion Fountaine are, along with his depiction of Pembroke, The documentary evidence proves that Fountaine amongst his most classical sculptures. The inventory was involved in the design of Hamond’s School of the collection at Narford, compiled on Sir Andrew’s at some stage. That the school as executed bears death, records that ‘the high finished Busto in marble striking resemblances to contemporaneous of Sir Andrew Fountaine, done after the life and very buildings by Sir Andrew’s close friends, that like him – by Roubiliac’ stood on ‘a Derbyshire marble it conforms largely to the details that can be table on a rich carved and gilt frame’.94 A terracotta gleaned from Chapman and Reeve’s proposals, version of the bust (described in the inventory as and that its construction fits in with Sir Andrew’s ‘Sr Andrew Fountaine’s bust in clay’) is in Norwich movements, suggests to us, that he was the architect Castle Museum (Fig. 9). Roubiliac depicted Fountaine of the building in the photograph. The margin in classical dress, which is exceptionally rare in his of uncertainty in this attribution is far less than portrait busts and must have been at the request of the in any other architectural project with which Sir sitter.95 The Roman associations of Roubiliac’s bust Andrew has been associated. Chapman and Reeve’s are even clearer on the version that remains at Wilton proposals alone supply the most solid evidence House: here there is an inscription on the socle of Fountaine practising unassisted as an architect. copied from Republican Roman coins (a reference to Sir Andrew Fountaine, a key member of Lord Fountaine’s employment at the Mint, as well as making Burlington’s circle, was an important figure whose manifest his Roman credentials).96 Sir Andrew even career as an architect remains mysterious. His seems to have conducted archaeological excavations producing plans for the school means, surely, that we at Narford. Francis Blomefield reported from Narford can give more credence to contemporary accounts that ‘the Romans appear to have had a station at of his authorship of other architectural projects, not this place, many Roman bricks, being found by the least work on the house and gardens at Narford Hall workmen about the hall, and Sir Andrew Fountaine in the 1720s and 30s. It is to be hoped that more such shew me a Roman vase of brass dug up in the hall documents are discovered that cast further light on yard’.97 Modern archaeological research has revealed Fountaine as an amateur architect. that the Nar Valley (much of which belonged to Sir Andrew) was ‘the centre of significant Roman industry which provided goods and services for a wide area’.98 Pottery production was particularly prevalent. It may be a simple building, built on a small budget, but Nicholas Hamond’s school reflects the growing interest in ancient Rome that characterised the architecture of Burlington and his circle in the 1730s. As such, it was at the forefront of architectural fashion in England and must have been designed by somebody with more than a passing interest in architecture. For a place of scholarship and learning, a purposeful effort at recreating a Roman building would have been fitting.

t h e g e o r g i a n g r o u p j o u r n a l v o l u m e x x i v   n i c h o l a s h a m o n d ’ s s c h o o l , s wa f f h a m

acknowledgements The Skanthlings ^Scantlings^ of the Timber [hand 2:] & We are most grateful to John Harris, J. Mordaunt the Inwd parts of the House [hand 1:] as Foll[ows] Crook, Edward McParland and Jeremy Musson for Art[icle] 1 The Outward Door Case to be 7 Inches by 5 their invaluable thoughts on drafts of this article, and 2 The Middle Door Cases of the Lower to Richard Hewlings for his helpful review comments. Floors 4 Inches by 5 Further, we are indebted to Peter Foden for his 3 The upper Story to be 3 Inches by 4 all assistance in transcribing Chapman and Reeve’s Oake Timber [added by hand 1:] Clear of Sap proposals. 4 The Windows to be 4 Light Girts of Oake 3 Inches by 4 ^[hand 2:] to small^ Glazed in the Front with Crown Glass the other Common Glass [hand 2:] No Casemts ^[hand 1:] and appendix 1 proper Casemts^ Recto: Proposalls for Building the Charity School 2 1/2 thick 5 The Front Door a Six pannelld one ^2 at Swaffham by Richard Chapman and John Inches & 1/2 thick^ all the rest 4 Pannells Reeve according to Sr Andrew Fountaines plan ^Inch & 1/2 thick^ [hand 2:] no Thickness Art[icle] 1 The Foundation walls to be 3 Foot Deep 2 6 All the Girders in the Building to be Oake 11 Foot & 1/2 thick, from the Ground 2 Brick & Inches by 10 1/2 to the Water Table & from thence to Levell walls 2 Brick thick 7 The Joyce oake 3 Inches & 1/2 by 4 1/2 [hand 2:] __ 6 by 3 to make the floors strong 2 The partition walls a Bricks Length in __ Thickness 8 The Ceiling Floors D[itt]o 3 D[itt]o by 4 3 The walls of the Leantoo a Brick & 1/2 thick [hand 2:] __ too Small 5 by 3, or 2 1/2 __ from the water Table 9 The Partitions D[itt]o 3 D[itt]o by 4 4 The House to be Covered with Flatt Tile good Oake hea\r/t Larth & Tileing hooks 10 The wall Plates D[itt]o 5 D[itt]o by 4 Instead of Nails 11 Six pair of principall Sparrs D[itt]o 6 D[itt] 5 The Leantoo to be Tiled with holland pantile o by 7 in the Middle 6 To Sink a well to the Fountaine Spring & to 12 The Small Sparrs D[itt]o 3 D[itt]o by 4 in work it up from the Chalk with Brick & Mortar the Middle __ To Sett on a good Oake Curble to find 13 The Collar Beams D[itt]o 2 1/2 or 3 thick Bucketts Ropes & finish it in all respects fitt to Draw water ^[hand 2:] but no well cover^ 14 The Lintells & Mantells & all other Timber of Oake at a ___ [NB article 6 has probably been cancelled; it has a large ‘X’ and ‘\’ drawn through it] 15 proportionable Scantling According to the Building ___ all the Doors and Window 7 To Ceil the Floors & render the walls with 2 Frames to be ^twice^ painted with Lead & Coates of good hair mortar oyle And we propose to find all Materialls for 8 The Lower Floors to be Laid with the Building & finishing the House According pavements or white Brick to the plan Except the Cornish which we propose [2:] is [1:] to be ^[2:] of the best^ 9 The upper Floors with Deale ^Deal^ [hand [1:] Oake Timber ^with out Sapp^ painte ^3 2:] no mention here of wt kind _ but should Times^ of a Stone Colour Instead of Stone be red well sea--soned & wth out Sap [hand 1 again:] & Clear of Sap

t h e g e o r g i a n g r o u p j o u r n a l v o l u m e x x i v   n i c h o l a s h a m o n d ’ s s c h o o l , s wa f f h a m

Wee propose to Undertake this Building & finish it 4 G. Vertue, ‘Note Books,’ Walpole Society, XXVI, according to these Proposalls in a Workmanlike Manner. (Oxford, 1938), pp. 120–21. 5 J. Richardson, Richardsoniana, (London, 1776), Verso: pp. 331–32. Endorsements: 6 J. Spence, Letters from the Grand Tour, ed. S. Jno Reeves and Rd Klima, (Montreal, 1975), p. 126. Chapmans proposalls 7 G. Knox, ‘Antonio Pellegrini and Marco Ricci for Building a Charity at Burlington House and Narford Hall’, The School at Swaffham Burlington Magazine, 130 (November, 1998); National Art Library, London, 86.ZZ.160. [hand 3 (Sir Andrew Fountaine):] 8 G. Vertue, ‘Note Books,’ Walpole Society, XXII, I think these proposalls (Oxford, 1934), pp. 156–7; Pagan, ‘Andreas very reasonable, if they Fountaine’, p. 120; For the Pembroke collection keep strictly to the Plan, of antiquities see A. Michaelis, Ancient Marbles uprightly scantlings in Great Britain, (Cambridge, 1882), pp. 42–7; M Baker, The Marble Index: Roubiliac and And: Fountaine Sculptural Portraiture in Eighteenth-Century [hand 2:] Britain, (New Haven and London, 2014), No Proposal for Stair-cases, the Dimension for the Stairs, pp. 278–90. or whether Rail’d & Ballustred or not & with what wood. 9 r. Cowdry, A Description of the Curiosities in No Cellar or Vault the [illegible in copy] of which should Wilton House, (London, 1751). be expressed as its length & Bredth 10 Vertue, ‘Note Books’, 22, pp. 156–7. 11 A Dictionary of British and Irish Travellers in Italy, 1701–1800: compiled from the Brinsley Ford Archive by John Ingamells, ed. J. Ingamells, (New Haven and London, 1997), p. 377. 12 W. Halfpenny, The art of sound building, endnotes demonstrated in geometrical problems, (London, 1 For Fountaine’s biography see B. Ford, ‘Sir 1725), ‘Dedication’. Andrew Fountaine: One of the Keenest Virtuosi of 13 r. Morris, An Essay in defence of Ancient His Age’, Apollo, 122 (November, 1985); A. Moore, Architecture, (London, 1728), pp. xii-xiii. ‘Fountaine, Sir Andrew (1676–1753)’, Oxford 14 J. Harris, The Palladian Revival: Lord Dictionary of National Biography, (Oxford, 2004). Burlington, his Villa and Garden at Chiswick, 2 Sir Andrew’s father’s will is kept in the National (London, 1994), p. 62; J. Harris, ‘Is Chiswick a Archives, London, PROB 11/493/134; The Palladian Garden?’, Garden History, 32 (2004), collection is well documented in: A. Moore, p. 132; J. Harris, ‘Garden Buildings’, in William Norfolk & the Grand Tour: Eighteenth-Century Kent: designing Georgian Britain, ed. S. Weber, Travellers Abroad and their Souvenirs, (Norwich, (New Haven and London, 2013), p. 394. 1985); A. Moore, ‘The Fountaine Collection of 15 Harris, Palladian Revival, p. 210. Maiolica, The Burlington Magazine, 130 (June, 16 For Sir Andrew’s importance in forming 1988); H.E. Pagan, ‘Andreas Fountaine eques Burlington’s interest in architecture see A. Echlin auratus A.A.A.F III Vir’, British Numismatic and W. Kelley, ‘A “Shaftesburian Agenda”? Lord Journal, 63 (1993); S. West, ‘Life in the library’, Burlington, Lord Shaftesbury and the Intellectual in Placing Faces: The Portrait and the English Origins of the Eighteenth-Century Palladian Country House in the Long Eighteenth Century, ed. Revival in England’, Architectural History, 59, G. Perry etc., (Manchester, 2013). (2016; forthcoming). 3 W. Kent, ‘Letters from William Kent to Burrell 17 Moore, Norfolk; Ford, ‘Sir Andrew Fountaine’; Massingberd from the Continent (1712–19)’, Walpole Pagan, ‘Andreas Fountaine’; Moore, ‘Fountaine, Society, 63, (2001), ed. C. Blackett-Ord, pp. 92; 93. Sir Andrew’; West ‘Life in the Library’.

t h e g e o r g i a n g r o u p j o u r n a l v o l u m e x x i v   n i c h o l a s h a m o n d ’ s s c h o o l , s wa f f h a m

18 H. Colvin, A Biographical Dictionary of British 40 For this debate see: F. Salmon, ‘“Our Great Architects, 1600–1840, (New Haven and London, Master Kent” and the Design of Holkham Hall: 2008), pp. 392–3. A Reassessment’, Architectural History, 56 (2013); 19 S. Parissien, J. Harris and H. Colvin, ‘Narford F. Salmon, ‘Thomas Coke and Holkham from Hall, Norfolk’, The Georgian Group Report and 1718 to 1734: The Early History’, The Georgian Journal, (1987). Group Journal, 23 (2015); L. Schmidt, ‘Holkham 20 Ibid. p. 49. Hall: An Architectural Whodunnit’, Architectural 21 Wiltshire and Swindon History Centre, History, 58 (2015). Chippenham, 2057/F5/2 . 41 Burlington frequently corresponded on topics of 22 Ibid. pp. 51–3. architectural interest. See, for example, British 23 Ibid. p. 53. Library, London, Add MS 75358, ‘Letter from 24 West, ‘Life in the Library’, p. 64. Lord Lovell, later 1st Earl of Leicester, Dec 20, 25 F. Blomefield and C. Parkin, An essay towards 1736’. a topographical history of the county of Norfolk, 42 H. Walpole, ‘Journal of Visits to Country Seats (Fersfield, 1739–1775), vol. III, p. 521. &c’, Walpole Society, XVI (Oxford, 1928), p. 40. 26 Vertue, ‘Note Books,’ 26, pp. 120–21. 43 Wiltshire and Swindon History Centre, 27 m.J. Armstrong, History and Antiquities of the Chippenham, 2057/F5/2. County of Norfolk, (Norwich, 1781), p. 60. 44 The Norwich Gazette, 22, 1132, (Norwich, 28 June 28 H. Brown, Inglesi e Scozzesi all’Università di Padova 1728), p. 2 . dall’anno 1618 sino al 1765, (Venice, 1921), p. 184. 45 J. Cloake, Palaces and Parks of Richmond and 29 J. Clark, ‘The Mysterious Mr Buck: Patronage and Kew: Richmond Lodge and the Kew Palaces, Politics 1688–1745’, Apollo, 327, (May, 1989). (Chichester, 1996), pp. 68–70. 30 National Art Library, London, 86.ZZ.160. 46 J. Bryant, ‘Queen Caroline’s Richmond Lodge by 31 Parissien et al, ‘Narford’, p. 53. William Kent: an architectural model unlocked’, 32 J. Harris, ‘The Grey Wash Style of the Palladian The Burlington Magazine, 1346 (May, 2015). Office of Works’,The Georgian Group Journal, 12 47 Cloake, Palaces, pp. 104–5; R. Hewlings, ‘White (2002), p. 54. Lodge, Richmond New Park’, The Georgian 33 C. Campbell, Vitruvius Britannicus, (London, Group Journal, 17 (2009). 1715–1725), vol III, pl. 95; T.P. Connor suggested 48 West Yorkshire Archives, Leeds, TN/C 15/253. that Fountaine may even have provided the 49 Ibid. illustration to Campbell himself: T.P. Connor, 50 Ibid. ‘The Making of Vitruvius Britannicus’, 51 Ibid. Architectural History, 20 (1977), p. 29. 52 Norfolk Record Office, Norwich, PD 52/347. 34 Campbell, Vitruvius Britannicus, III, p. 11. 53 this was outlined by Frank Meeres of the Norfolk 35 For Morris’s activities in the 1720s see Colvin, Record Office. Biographical Dictionary, pp. 705–7. 54 For the history of the Fountaine family see 36 r. Mitchell, ‘Morris, Roger: 1695–1749’, Oxford Blomefield and Parkin,An essay, pp. 518–24. Dictionary of National Biography; Pagan has 55 m.G. Jones, The Charity School Movement, mooted the possibility that Sir Andrew was (London, 1964), p. 3. godfather to Morris’s son, though this cannot be 56 J. Gretton, History of Hamond’s High School, proved, Pagan, ‘Andreas Fountaine’, p. 118, n. 41. Swaffham, 1736–1986, (Swaffham, 1986). 37 Parissien et al, ‘Narford’, p. 51. 57 Norfolk Record Office, Norwich, DN/MSC3/24; 38 Ibid. p. 53. BIR/61/4. 39 I. Roscoe, ‘Andien de Clermont, Decorative 58 Ibid. Painter to the Leicester House Set’, Apollo, 123 59 Ibid. (February, 1986); G. Jackson-Stops, ‘A Duke’s 60 Swaffham Museum, Swaffham, 800/D/2/(1). Palladian Pleasure-Houses: Roger Morris and the 61 Blomefield and Parkin,An essay, p. 517. 3rd Duke of Marlborough’, The Georgian Group 62 Ibid. Journal, 4 (1994). 63 Ibid.

t h e g e o r g i a n g r o u p j o u r n a l v o l u m e x x i v   n i c h o l a s h a m o n d ’ s s c h o o l , s wa f f h a m

64 Gretton, History, p. 25. 1702–1718, ed. Clyve Jones and Geoffrey Holmes, 65 royal Commission on Historical (Oxford, 1985), p. 219; Fountaine hung a portrait of Manuscripts, The manuscripts of Aldrich in the library at Narford: West, ‘Life in the His Grace the Duke of Portland preserved at Library’. Welbeck, (London, 1891–1931), vol. VI, p. 164. 77 Wiltshire and Swindon History Centre, 66 Gretton, History, p. 14; Chapman worked as a Chippenham, 2057/F5/1. ‘stone-cutter’ on the Earl of Sunderland’s library 78 Campbell, Vitruvius Britannicus, vol I, p. 15. in Piccadilly in 1719: The Parish of St James, 79 A. Geraghty, The Architectural Drawings of Sir Westminster: Survey of London, ed. F.H.W Christopher Wren at All Souls College, Oxford: Sheppard, (London, 1963), vol. 32, part 2, p. 368. A Complete Catalogue, (Aldershot, 2007), p. 22. 67 r. Hewlings, ‘The School and Almshouses at 80 Harris, Palladian Revival, p. 26. Sevenoaks’, The Georgian Group Journal, 11 (2001). 81 Palladio, ‘Libro Quarto’, I Quattro Libri 68 Walpole, ‘Journal of Visits’, p. 40. Dell’Architettura, (Venice, 1601), p. 13. 69 Gretton, History, p. 25; The photograph is at 82 t.E. Cooper, Palladio’s Venice, (New Haven and Swaffham Museum, Photograph Album 1, no. 51. London, 2005), pp. 109–45; 229–57. 70 P. Kingsbury, Lord Burlington’s Town Architecture, 83 A. Palladio, ‘Libro Secondo’, I Quattro Libri. (London, 1995), p. 37; another design is held at 84 F. Salmon, ‘Thomas Coke’, p. 30. the West Sussex Record Office, Chichester, Add 85 Wiltshire and Swindon History Centre, Mss 48,396; B. Fletcher, Chichester Council House, Chippenham, 2057/F5/2. (Chichester, 2002), pp. 3–4. 86 Campbell, Vitruvius Britannicus, III, p. 49. 71 Campbell, Vitruvius Britannicus, III, p. 49. 87 Wiltshire and Swindon History Centre, 72 I. Ware, Designs of Inigo Jones and Others, Chippenham, 2057/F5/2. (London, 1733), pl. 43; Kent’s design was used 88 m. Girouard, ‘Ambrose Phillipps of Garendon’, for the temple at Holkham (1734): F. Salmon, Architectural History, 8 (1965). ‘Thomas Coke’, pp. 36–7; G. Worsley, ‘Riding on 89 royal Commission on Historical Manuscripts, Status: The Stables at Houghton’, Country Life, 27 The Manuscripts, p. 164. September (1990). 90 J. Harris, ‘The Prideaux Collection of 73 National Archives, London, WORK 29/3358 (21). Topographical Drawings’, Architectural History, 7 74 t. Friedman, James Gibbs, (New Haven and (1964), pp. 32; 79–80; pl. 65. London, 1984), pp. 81–82. 91 Ibid. 75 J. Harris and A.A. Tait, Catalogue of the Drawings 92 roscoe, ‘Andien de Clermont’. by Inigo Jones, John Webb and Isaac de Caus 93 Ibid. at Worcester College Oxford, (Oxford, 1979), 94 National Art Library, London, 86.ZZ.160. pp. 24–25; pl. 38–39. 95 Baker, Marble Index, p. 282. 76 J. Weeks, ‘The Architects of Christ Church 96 Ibid. p. 284. Library’, Architectural History, 48 (2005); In 1704 97 Blomefield and Parkin,An essay, p. 523. the Bishop of Norwich called Fountaine ‘a bigoted 98 J. Davies, The Land of Boudica: Prehistoric and creature of the Dean of Christ Church’: The London Roman Norfolk, (Oxford, 2008), p. 202. diaries of William Nicolson Bishop of Carlisle

t h e g e o r g i a n g r o u p j o u r n a l v o l u m e x x i v  