ANOTHER VENERATED ARMCHAIR

Armchair. Made in Philadelphia c. 1755. Black walnut, hard pine.

As mentioned in my post about January’s Americana Week, another armchair from the only known set of Philadelphia compassed armchairs was in Christie’s sale as lot 563. The loose seat is a modern reproduction. The front seat rim and one knee return are replaced. There are other repaired breaks throughout. The losses and repairs and refinished surface is not surprising knowing it had not been recognized as an important or valuable historic chair for some time. It was found last year in an Antique Mall in Pennsylvania and was later recognized for what it was based on the track record of the other chairs from the set that have sold recently. The chair then went to a restorers shop where the missing elements were recreated and the breaks repaired. A new loose seat frame was made and upholstered and the chair was sent to Christie’s for the January preview.

This armchair was marked II on the top of the front seat rail. Other extant chairs in the set included an unmarked chair previously in the collection of the Philadelphia Museum of Art; a chair marked III at Winterthur Museum; a chair marked IIII sold at Christie’s January 2022; a chair marked V that sold at Sotheby’s in 2006; a chair marked VIII at Winterthur Museum (the loose seat is marked I) and a chair only known from its illustration in John Walker, Experts Choice: 1000 Years of the Art Trade, New York 1983.
I had not seen the chair illustrated in John Walker, Experts Choice: 1000 Years of the Art Trade until a recent online search turned up a copy advertised for sale that included the page with the chair. It can now be compared to the other chairs to confirm if it is, or is not, one of one of the other chairs.
Top surface of the front seat rail with II stamped with a chisel. The front seat rim at the bottom of the image is replaced.
There are double tenons at the top and bottom of the splat. The left tenon seen in this image suffered damage and only about a third of it remains.
Anyone generally familiar with 18th century Philadelphia seating furniture knows many chairs made in the city have a through mortise and tenon joint between the side seat rails and rear stiles as seen here. The very short tenons on the back rail are typically pegged for structurally support even when the other mortise and tenon joints on a chair are not pegged.
Side chair. Made in Philadelphia c. 1735. Black walnut, black walnut veneer, hard pine. Stenton collection.
A group of early Philadelphia compassed chairs in the British manner, perhaps all from the same or closely related shops, have legs that are attached to the front seat rails with dovetails. The seat rails are covered with veneer concealing the joint at the front edge of the seat rail. A turned rear stretcher contributes structural support. These chairs do not have through tenons at the side seat rail to rear stile joint.

Pegs very close the front surface of the front rail of the seat frame suggests the possibility that the the side seat rail to front seat rail mortise and tenon joint is a through and wedged joint, the end grain of the through tenon of the side seat rail being concealed by the veneer. This could be confirmed by X-radiography. Joiners and house carpenters long knew that wedged through tenons were inherently stronger than simple mortise and tenon joints. When compassed chairs in Philadelphia began to be made out of solid walnut without rear stretchers, through tenons were not possible at the front of the seat frame. Fashioning round tenons on the top of the legs that fit into bored holes in the seat rails solved the problem of visual joinery at the front seat rail. Transferring through tenons to the back of the set rail joint helped overcome of the loss of the structural integrity earlier supplied by wedged through tenons at the front of the seat frame and rear stretchers.
I’ve discussed the metal braces at the back of crest rail to rear stile joint of these ceremonial armchairs in other posts. It is a fact that all the armchairs in the set have them. They are present on the most recent chair to come to light, shown here.
Another armchair from the set. Auction photograph.
Back of the previous armchair.
Back of one of the two armchairs form the set in the Winterthur Museum collection.
A side chair made in the same shop as the suite of armchairs.
The back of the chair in the previous image.

The known chairs from this set of side chairs all have iron braces that are indistinguishable to those on the armchairs. I will have more to say on this topic in another post, but note that all of the iron braces on the large ceremonial armchairs and the related side chairs are identical is size and placement and furthermore, none of these chairs has suffered damage at the joints the braces are intended to protect. These braces have been described as “repairs” and “misinterpreted” as original. While there are many instances of historical furniture having later repairs done with iron strapping of one kind or another, it seems unlikely this number of chairs, thought to have been separated at an early time in their history, should have exactly corresponding braces where no damage has occurred making the work of installing them at a later date superfluous.

Kitchen Interior. Thomas Hicks (1823-1890). 1865. Dietrich American Foundation.

The Philadelphia compassed armchair depicted in Thomas Hicks’ painting above certainly has had its share of damage – probably a replaced crest rail, a large wood lose to the splat, one arm is being held on to the stile with bailing wire, and the seat rim is missing. Yet Hicks lovingly paints it bathed in light serving a function, propping open an exterior door. It has been written that the painting represents “romance and nostalgia for the past” in the early days of the Colonial Revival. That “Once a treasured heirloom but now an old-fashioned relic with a broken splat, the chair is a lingering reminder of a proud past.” But look again at the date of the painting. The long history of empty chairs depicted in paintings, needlework, and eventually photographs representing loss and remembrance suggests to me the painting is not necessarily nostalgic or lingering reminder of a romantic past but may be instead an act of honoring a missing family member, perhaps one of the hundreds of thousands of Union soldiers who died in the United States Civil War (1861-1865). It too, then, is a venerated armchair.

Leave a comment