I’ve hit a wall with my research concerning the architecture of the Victorian era with particular reference to any Tudor-inspired work they created.  At first I thought it was because Mock-Tudor or Tudorbethan houses were often classed as ‘Gothic Revival’ or ‘Queen Anne’ even though both classifications are technically incorrect. 

 Having no luck with the multitude of journal sources, websites and the university library, I emailed my supervisor Geoff who is currently in London on a paid research trip.  His reply?  Because Mock-Tudor or Tudorbethan architecture was considered ‘populist’ and somewhat tacky, the highbrow architects (and therefore the scholars of the period) barely acknowledged the style.  This is why I’m finding passing references to architects such as Edward Blore, W. E. Nesfield, William Burn, George Devey, and Henry Clutton, but nothing significant on their work specifically.  The only reference Geoff could think of that might deal with the Tudor-style housing in the Victorian period in any detail was Sir Banister Fletcher’s  ’History of Architecture.’  The problem is the university library only has one copy on St Lucia campus, and from what I can tell the book is so huge that I would be silly to try and lug it home.  I can also tell that it’s going to be one of those books that I may as well own anyway because I’ll be continually wanting to refer to it at a later date.  So I bit the bullet and ordered a second hand copy online from Amazon.com - the new edition is ridiculously expensive.  I just hope it turns up before the expected delivery date of 6th September!!

I’m in the process of researching my honours thesis, which is a summation of Tudor influences in the Victorian era, and the attitudes the Victorians had to the Tudors. I’m focusing on the historiography of Victorian Tudor historians (such as James Anthony Froude, one of my favourite historians), the physical presence of the Tudor era in the Victorian age (such as architecture and archaeological discoveries), and the notion of empire (comparisons between Queen Elizabeth I and Queen Victoria, comparisons between the Elizabethan navy and explorers and the Victorian navy and colonizers, etc). I’ve done the majority of my research on the first part (the historiography), and am now moving on to the architecture and archaeological discoveries section. The problem is, while there certainly was a Tudor-style revival in the nineteenth century in England, no one seems to want to write about it.

My theory is that because there were more significant architectural varieties in the Victorian era, such as the Gothic and Classical revivals, the Tudor and Elizabethan styles get lost in the mix. A further complication is that one of the most prominent architectural fads of the nineteenth century, the Queen Anne Style, borrowed elements of Tudor design but didn’t wholeheartedly embrace the older style. What this adds up to is either complete denial of a Tudor-style revival in the Victorian era, or a passing mention of the Tudor-inspired wood detailing in the Queen Anne style. Only after a bit of digging is it possible to come across some useful information.

The Tudorbethan or Mock Tudor style was a favourite of the mid- to late-nineteenth century landed gentry in England, as the ’simple, sobre’ cottage-style houses reflected the homely respectable atmosphere that Queen Victoria’s reign instigated. Ascott House in Buckinghamshire is a beautiful example of one of the more prominent Tudorbethan architects work, that of George Devey. Another great example is Cragside in Northumberland by Norman Shaw, more famous for coming up with the design for the now Grade I listed New Scotland Yard. George Devey and Norman Shaw are acknowledged as being two of the more famous Tudorbethan architects, however both are more widely known for works that fell into the Queen Anne style of architecture.

It seems to me that when Tudorbethan designs were requested and built, they were idealized in a similar way to custom-made period pieces today - that is, they weren’t necessarily what was in vogue, but the patron or architect desired a Tudor-style work for personal or aesthetic reasons. From what I understand, this also happened in garden design in the nineteenth century - there was certainly a niche for Tudor or Elizabethan style gardens, the idea being that the patron was seeking a quaint, old-fashioned, almost kitschy centre-piece that would draw comment from his acquaintances.

So what does this say about the Victorians? That they plundered the past for the stylish bits and pieces least offensive to their sombre tastes, and every now and then sought slightly off-beat niche designs for their ‘humble’ abodes?

………I guess we’re not too different to the Victorians after all.