Whitehall : $b historical and architectural notesLoftie, W. J. (William John)
History
Whitehall : $b historical and architectural notes
Loftie, W. J. (William John)
Architecture -- England -- London; Whitehall (London, England) -- History
to go to the Holy Land and fight the infidel, being himself, as Roger
of Wendover says, _Miles strenuus_; but not being able to fulfil his
vow, he gave his land at Whitehall, which he describes as being in the
parish of St. Margaret’s, into the hands of trustees to be sold in aid
of an expedition to the Holy Land. The trustees promptly sold it to
Walter Grey, archbishop of York, who annexed it to his See. Walter died
in 1255, and was succeeded by Sewall Bovill, who had been Dean of York.
Thirty archbishops in all held this house, beginning with Walter Grey
and ending with Thomas Wolsey. It is curious to remark that no trace
now exists of their occasional residence. It was uniformly called York
House, and we may be sure that Wolsey improved it, and built a hall
and a chapel similar to those at Hampton Court. One or two old views
show us stately and lofty buildings in the half-Gothic, half-Italian
style, which is so familiar at Christ Church at Oxford, and at King’s
College at Cambridge. A large hall was in King Street; that is, outside
Holbein’s Gate. We see it beyond the gate in Silvestre’s view; and
it stands up dark and heavy, with its strong buttresses on the left
hand, in T. Sandby’s view. In the last century, when it had been part
of the Treasury buildings for generations, it was newly fronted in
stone, and the buttresses turned into pilasters. Since then it has been
refronted twice—by Soane in 1824, and by Barry in 1846. Barry greatly
increased the length. It would be interesting, but almost impossible,
to ascertain if any of the masonry of Wolsey’s building still remains
within the new walls.
This is, of course, a digression. No part of the Treasury is in
Whitehall; but the reason for mentioning it is that its inclusion in
the two engravings I have named shows us what, in all probability,
Wolsey’s other buildings were like. Paul Hentzner, writing in the
reign of Queen Elizabeth, says that they were “truly royal.” Very
little building of any importance went on under Henry VIII. or his
three immediate successors, so that Hentzner’s allusion must be to
what Wolsey left. It is true, as we shall see, that Henry proposed to
improve and extend it; but we may rest certain that he added nothing
to its magnificence, if we except the gates; as the anonymous author
of _Dodsley_ remarks, he had a greater taste for pleasure than for
elegance of building, and immediately on entering upon possession he
ordered a tennis court, a cockpit, and a series of bowling-greens.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account