CHAPTER 2

Georgian and Regency Housing

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

A Brief History of Housing

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

Urban Development

LONDON

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

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

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

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

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

PROVINCIAL TOWNS AND CITIES

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

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

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

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

SPA TOWNS AND SEASIDE RESORTS

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

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

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

FIG 2.9: REGENCY SQUARE, BRIGHTON: It was the belief that sea water could cure or relieve ailments, either by bathing in it or drinking it, which drew crowds to the south coast and encouraged the building of streets and squares along the sea front, as with this example from the 1820s.

The benefits of bathing in sea water were also appreciated in the Regency period and small seaside resorts developed around the country, but no more so than at Brighton where elegant rendered terraces were built along streets and around squares fronting the sea.

PORTS, NAVY DOCKS AND ARMY BARRACKS

The increase in trade with Europe and especially the new colonies resulted in the development and expansion of ports. Liverpool, Whitehaven and Bristol all grew, with new docks and fashionable housing for those who had made their fortune from shipping. The Port of London also expanded, although only after the Thames had become so clogged with traffic that merchants threatened to move elsewhere. Smaller ports developed along rivers where improvements to navigation brought larger craft further inland to dock. The building of new ships for the merchant fleet led to development in towns like Sunderland and Scarborough and for the navy, which had to protect their routes, in centres at Portsmouth, Chatham and Plymouth.

FIG 2.10: LIVERPOOL: This important port grew in the 18th century as a result of trade from the American colonies, Asia and Ireland. Merchants and those involved with shipping built themselves classically styled terraces on the hill overlooking the docks.

A permanent standing army took shape in the 18th century, although it was much smaller than the navy. It was principally employed overseas until, with the threat of revolution in the air in the 1790s, new barracks were built to house a force to quell public dissent – this role was, however, largely taken over by the police force in the following century. Army buildings, accommodation and officers’ houses were built in many towns and cities, and factories and metal foundries that supplied weapons for both army and navy also resulted in urban expansion, especially in the Birmingham area.

FIG 2.11: STOURPORT BASIN, WORCESTERSHIRE: Towns also developed further inland around wharfs and docks as with this example on the River Severn, which became a busy canal junction. A new town was laid out with the houses on the far side of the basin built along a rigid grid pattern of straight roads, as is still evident today.

FIG 2.12: WEEDON BARRACKS, NORTHAMPTONSHIRE: Permanent barracks only began to be established with the threat from Napoleon and from radicals. This site was principally a depot for light arms but as it was at the geographic centre of England, pavilions were built to house the king in case of invasion. The lodge in the picture incorporated a portcullis (in the arch at the bottom) to cut off the canal, which ran into the site.

INDUSTRIAL TOWNS

The most notable urban growth, however, occurred in the new industrial centres in the Midlands and North as towns and cities were established or expanded many times over. The cotton industry in the Manchester area, clothing in Leeds and Halifax and metal working in Sheffield and the West Midlands were some of the more important examples. Smaller settlements also developed in rural areas around mining, iron production and quarrying, many expanding in scattered, unplanned forms where there was little control over the landlord, and only later, with infilling, becoming a more defined town or city.

FIG 2.13: CROMFORD, DERBYSHIRE: This row of terraced houses was built by Richard Arkwright in the 1780s and had living accommodation on the ground and first floors, and an open attic above for weaving with distinctive wide windows.

Rural Development

Despite the expansion of urban areas in this period, the complete transformation of rural communities at the same time could be far more dramatic and thorough. Many remote hamlets remained untouched in this age before railways and mass tourism and others that had been enclosed by agreement in previous centuries may have changed very little. But for vast swathes of the country, especially in the Midlands, the reform of agriculture, the reshaping of country houses, the spread of industry and the expanding transport network caused, in the worst examples, the complete removal of ancient communities.

TURNPIKE AND CANAL SETTLEMENTS

Many smaller settlements also benefited from the increased traffic on the main roads upon which they stood. Others may have been bypassed by new lengths of road constructed by the Turnpike Trust to shorten routes or avoid notorious obstacles or hills but, to avoid missing out on the lucrative trade, inns and buildings were established on the new stretch and a general drift of building away from the old centre to the new source of business often occurred.

With the arrival of canals in the late 18th century, workshops, wharfs, pubs and inns were built to maintain the structure and service the route and its workers. Houses were sited around these new centres, either in existing settlements or a short distance away, with building spreading down towards the activity around the canal.

PARLIAMENTARY ENCLOSURES

In this age of agricultural improvement the medieval arrangement of small-scale farms with scattered holdings in different fields was restrictive to new ideas and practices. Some areas had already been enclosed (the process of hedging or fencing off the land of individuals) by agreement. However, landlords of estates where this had not been possible now looked to friends in Parliament to pass acts forcing it upon their tenants. This reached a peak of activity in the late 18th and early 19th century, with previously large open fields and common land being divided up into regular sized compartments and new straight roads with wide verges (often mistaken for Roman roads) constructed between them.

FIG 2.14: Maps of a simplified imaginary estate and its village around the green before (left) and after (right) Parliamentary enclosure. In the left-hand example the five farmers (A–E) have their houses in the centre of the settlement as their land is dispersed in the large fields around. In the right-hand map, however, new farmhouses have been built out in their newly rearranged holdings, but farmer E has lost his land to his larger neighbours.

FIG 2.15: EDENSOR, DERBYSHIRE: This village was re-sited in the 1830s to keep it out of view of Chatsworth House. The new buildings were designed in an eclectic mix of styles more for the pleasure of the lord than his tenants.

This created more manageable and efficient farms that could meet the new urban demand for food. The tenants with the greatest amount of land could build new brick and stone farmhouses located in the centre of their holdings (their old houses back in the village were often subdivided up for cottages), which could be held on simplified leases of 7 to 21 years. Smallholders, however, often lost out, not only losing their land but also the common rights to graze livestock on village greens and wasteland, which were swallowed up in the reorganisation. A large part of the rural population became seasonal labourers or moved to the new industrial centres.

EMPARKMENT AND ESTATE VILLAGES

The relationship between the lord of the manor and his tenants had gradually changed over the centuries. The old manor house with its open door to villagers and visitors alike had become more remote, with firstly tall walls around it and then removal to a more private corner. In the 18th century many landowners sought to transform their piece of rural England into a romantic classical scene and the scattered hovels they could view from the house did not fit in. Rather than resite gtheir home, many preferred to remove the entire village to a completely new position out of sight. The process of emparkment often started with the enclosure of the estate, then new houses for the villagers were built, before the old buildings (many of which may have been simple timber framed cottages of limited life) were flattened. The old church was often the only building left standing close to the country house, perhaps with a fashionable classical makeover, so it was only a short walk for the lord of the manor on a Sunday. On paper this may seem to have benefited both parties, but as part of the reorganisation many landlords took the opportunity to remove unwanted villagers by only offering the new houses to the best tenants, and then on strict terms.

FIG 2.16: NUNEHAM COURTENAY, OXFORDSHIRE: These cottages date from the 1760s when the village was re-sited along the new turnpike road, a mile from its old position next to the grand country house. Only the church remained and it was given a classical makeover to fit in with the new building.

Other estate villages that remained in place or had a partial removal were often rebuilt by wealthy landlords, less out of benevolence to their tenants and more to improve the approach to their own house to impress guests! (At Old Warden in Bedfordshire the tenants themselves had to dress up in period costume to complete the landlord’s picturesque view of the world.)

Types of Development

LANDLORDS AND BUILDERS

In the past, houses were generally erected for the tenant or landowner by a builder or by the owner himself. There were planned developments at least as far back as the 12th century and most towns and even villages have elements that may have originated thus, but nothing on the scale or with the permanency that emerged in London in the mid 17th century. These first speculative projects were laid out upon what were then open fields, with straight rows of new brick terraced housing.

Some of these new permanent structures were built by an emerging breed of small-scale speculators, often but not always builders. They would take the risk of building the house and having to find a purchaser or tenant for it afterwards in return for a low ground rent and a long-term lease, around 30–40 years. When the lease ran out, the buildings would revert back to the original landlord who could then increase the rent. These original terms meant that there was little incentive to build houses that would last longer than the length of the lease and poor quality construction was often the result. In response, the terms were increased so that by the mid 18th century 99 years was becoming the norm.

FIG 2.17: THE CRESCENT, BATH: This most famous of buildings in Bath was designed by John Wood the Younger in the 1770s. However, he commissioned a series of different builders to construct it and although they had to stick rigidly to his plan of the façade there are slight differences, as in the close up where the windows are not the same height.

The landlord would usually retain some control over the appearance of the street or estate and larger builders would often design the buildings and then subcontract the work out. What -ever the arrangement, it was common for only a small number of houses to be built at once by one builder; there were few firms large enough to take on the whole project until the 19th century. As a result most seemingly unified rows and crescents have slight differences to show where one builder finished and another started, or the same one at a later date.

STREETS AND ESTATES

Most new housing was erected upon geometrically designed layouts – squares, crescents, circles and in straight rows – the only meandering features usually coming from old roads or lanes that had been retained. There were few large-scale developments at first, the grandest projects being limited to one square or street at a time. The width of the roads in London and later in other cities was a reflection of the buildings along it, the taller and more expensive they were the wider the road (these proportions were enforced in London by Building Acts).

Most streets were poorly surfaced with no drainage and only in the best examples were there pavements to save pedestrians from the worst of the filth (foot-scrapers were an essential feature beside the door of most houses: see Fig 4.35). Later, larger terraces often had the road built up with the spoil from digging out the house foundations, leaving a basement below the street at the front but level with the garden on the original ground level at the rear. This also enabled the builder to provide storage under the pavement with coal chutes above for deliveries to be dropped down (see Fig 3.23).

By the early 19th century more ambitious schemes were undertaken, the most notable being Regents Street and Park by John Nash, which involved rebuilding a whole section of London’s West End with a new main thorough -fare terminating in a grand park surrounded by classical terraces and pavilions. Some of the first large building firms also emerged, like that of Thomas Cubitt, which grew to employ a thousand men and whose clients would include Queen Victoria.

FIG 2.18 BEDFORD SQUARE, LONDON: Many of the new streets or squares were named after the aristocratic owner of the land, whether or not he was directly involved in the development. Bedford Square was built in the 1770s for the Duke of Bedford.

FIG 2.19: REGENTS PARK, LONDON: One of the most ambitious schemes of the period was the rebuilding of part of the West End of London by John Nash for the Prince Regent (later George IV) with the construction of Regents Street and the Park. Grand, stucco-covered brick terraces were built along the main thoroughfare and around the new park.

By the early 19th century more ambitious schemes were undertaken, the most notable being Regents Street and Park by John Nash, which involved rebuilding a whole section of London’s West End with a new main thoroughfare terminating in a grand park surrounded by classical terraces and pavilions. Some of the first large building firms also emerged, like that of Thomas Cubitt, which grew to employ a thousand men and whose clients would include Queen Victoria.