A Project of the Center for Advanced Study in the Visual Arts, National Gallery of Art
History of Early American Landscape Design

Difference between revisions of "Bower"

[http://www.nga.gov/content/ngaweb/research/casva/research-projects.html A Project of the National Gallery of Art, Center for Advanced Study in the Visual Arts ]
Line 1: Line 1:
 
==History==
 
==History==
  
In eighteenth- and nineteenth-century  
+
In eighteenth- and nineteenth-century landscape-design vocabulary, the term bower was closely related to arbor. The two features held several common characteristics:  
landscape-design vocabulary, the term  
+
the use of intertwined trees and other vegetation, the creation of shaded areas, and their siting at the end of walks. Further refinement of this definition is complicated by the lack of explicit descriptive language in related accounts. William Faux’s 1819 description of Nathaniel Russell’s garden in Charleston, in which he simply notes bowers of flowering and fruit trees, or C. M. Hovey’s brief reference, in 1840, to a shady bower at James Arnold’s estate in New Bedford, Mass., each represents this problem. In addition, a bower had similar functions to an arbor, such as serving as an outdoor living or dining space.  
bower was closely related to arbor. The two  
 
features held several common characteristics:  
 
the use of intertwined trees and other  
 
vegetation, the creation of shaded areas,  
 
and their siting at the end of walks. Further  
 
refinement of this definition is complicated  
 
by the lack of explicit descriptive language  
 
in related accounts. William Faux’s 1819  
 
description of Nathaniel Russell’s garden in  
 
Charleston, in which he simply notes bowers  
 
of flowering and fruit trees, or C. M. Hovey’s  
 
brief reference, in 1840, to a shady bower at  
 
James Arnold’s estate in New Bedford,  
 
Mass., each represents this problem. In addition,  
 
a bower had similar functions to an  
 
arbor, such as serving as an outdoor living or  
 
dining space.  
 
  
Nonetheless, some writers made distinctions  
+
Nonetheless, some writers made distinctions between bowers and arbors (see Arbor). Noah Webster, for example, in 1828 specified that a bower had a centralized plan—round or square—whereas an arbor was long in plan and arched in cross-section. Rev. Manasseh Cutler’s mention in 1787 of encircled bowers preceded this distinction. It should be noted, however, that this rule was not always followed. For example, A. J. Downing labeled many structures as arbors that were either round or square in form, and Fortescue Cuming, in 1810, described a “long frame bowery.” James E. Teschemacher’s 1835 definition of an arbor as an “artificial bower” indicated that for him the distinction was to be made between the man-made arbor and the natural bower.  
between bowers and arbors (see  
 
Arbor). Noah Webster, for example, in 1828  
 
specified that a bower had a centralized  
 
plan—round or square—whereas an arbor  
 
was long in plan and arched in cross-section.  
 
Rev. Manasseh Cutler’s mention in 1787 of  
 
encircled bowers preceded this distinction.  
 
It should be noted, however, that this rule  
 
was not always followed. For example, A. J.  
 
Downing labeled many structures as arbors  
 
that were either round or square in form,  
 
and Fortescue Cuming, in 1810, described a  
 
“long frame bowery.” James E. Teschemacher’s  
 
1835 definition of an arbor as an “artificial  
 
bower” indicated that for him the distinction  
 
was to be made between the man-made  
 
arbor and the natural bower.  
 
  
In general, three different types of bowers  
+
In general, three different types of bowers can be identified. The first was composed of planted vegetation manipulated into a covered shelter, as described in 1755 by Samuel Johnson. An example of this type is a Shaker illustration of 1854 of a bower constructed of intertwined trees and used as a dining setting [Fig. 1].1 A bower described in the Virginia Argus (1799) as suitable “for the accommodation of company” may have been similar in form and size to this Shaker bower.  
can be identified. The first was composed of  
 
planted vegetation manipulated into a covered  
 
shelter, as described in 1755 by Samuel  
 
Johnson. An example of this type is a Shaker  
 
illustration of 1854 of a bower constructed of  
 
intertwined trees and used as a dining setting  
 
[Fig. 1].1 A bower described in the Virginia  
 
Argus (1799) as suitable “for the accommodation  
 
of company” may have been similar in  
 
form and size to this Shaker bower.  
 
  
The second type was a built structure over  
+
The second type was a built structure over which vegetation was trained. William Byrd II’s 1728 description of a habitation of a“Marooner” is an early instance of a bower being defined as a constructed shelter. Teschemacher gives a detailed account (1835) of the construction of a nineteenth-century bower, one in which iron arches were covered with climbing vines. In 1806, Bernard M’Mahon specified that bowers were “light ornamental buildings” suitable for terminating garden walks [Fig. 2] or complementing open grassy areas in the garden. William Dickinson Martin, in 1809, referred to a “neatly built” bower and William Bailey Lang in 1845 noted a rustic bower that had a shingle roof, with a corner post of rough cedar, “to which that hardy-plant, the Virginia creeper, has been trained.” A. J. Downing also advised in 1848 that such bowers could be “easily and economically constructed,” an idea for rustic buildings that was shared by M’Mahon (1806).
which vegetation was trained. William Byrd  
 
II’s 1728 description of a habitation of a
 
  
“Marooner” is an early instance of a bower
+
An important difference, however, marks M’Mahon’s and Downing’s references to constructed bowers. M’Mahon argued that such features were appropriate for “spacious pleasure grounds,” while Downing limited their use to more “humble and simple cottage grounds, the rural walks of the ferme ornée, and the modest garden of the suburban amateur.” Downing’s sentiments reflect the increasing attention paid to style and decorum by nineteenth-century treatise writers and suggest that bowers were associated with the rustic-style gardens that doubled as both aesthetic and utilitarian spaces. Such distinctions were not without precedent: In 1804 Thomas Jefferson commented that bowers were more suitable for a kitchen garden than for pleasure grounds.  
being defined as a constructed shelter.  
 
Teschemacher gives a detailed account
 
(1835) of the construction of a nineteenth-
 
century bower, one in which iron arches were  
 
covered with climbing vines. In 1806,
 
Bernard M’Mahon specified that bowers  
 
were “light ornamental buildings” suitable  
 
for terminating garden walks [Fig. 2] or complementing
 
open grassy areas in the garden.
 
William Dickinson Martin, in 1809, referred
 
to a “neatly built” bower and William Bailey
 
Lang in 1845 noted a rustic bower that had a
 
shingle roof, with a corner post of rough
 
cedar, “to which that hardy-plant, the Virginia
 
creeper, has been trained.” A. J. Downing
 
also advised in 1848 that such bowers
 
could be “easily and economically constructed,”
 
an idea for rustic buildings that
 
was shared by M’Mahon (1806).  
 
  
An important difference, however, marks
+
The third type of bower, a naturally occurring and seemingly unmanipulated collection of trees and shrubs creating a shady enclave or space, is well documented in both descriptions and images of American gardens. For example, Lewis Miller’s mid-nineteenth century poem about “bowery shade” is illustrated with an image of two girls nestled underneath the curving branches of a small tree, which constitutes such a bower [Fig. 3]. The “Elysian Bower” at Springland, near Bristol, Pa., illustrated in an 1808 view, exemplifies the application of this term to a secluded gathering of shade trees [Fig. 4].  
M’Mahon’s and Downing’s references to
 
constructed bowers. M’Mahon argued that
 
such features were appropriate for “spacious
 
pleasure grounds,” while Downing limited
 
their use to more “humble and simple
 
cottage grounds, the rural walks of the ferme
 
ornée, and the modest garden of the suburban
 
amateur.” Downing’s sentiments reflect
 
the increasing attention paid to style and
 
decorum by nineteenth-century treatise
 
writers and suggest that bowers were associated
 
with the rustic-style gardens that
 
doubled as both aesthetic and utilitarian
 
spaces. Such distinctions were not without
 
precedent: In 1804 Thomas Jefferson com
 
  
 +
As a final note, one of Noah Webster’s definitions for bower was for “a country seat; a cottage.” To date, no example of this use of bower has been found. This absence confirms the observation that although treatise writers and lexicographers set forth specific definitions of bower, observers of the American landscape tended to use the term to mean simply a specific natural or artificially constructed shady space occurring either in a garden or landscape.
  
mented that bowers were more suitable for
+
-- ''Anne L. Helmreich''
a kitchen garden than for pleasure grounds.
 
 
 
The third type of bower, a naturally occurring
 
and seemingly unmanipulated collection
 
of trees and shrubs creating a shady enclave
 
or space, is well documented in both descriptions
 
and images of American gardens. For
 
example, Lewis Miller’s mid-nineteenthcentury
 
poem about “bowery shade” is illustrated
 
with an image of two girls nestled
 
underneath the curving branches of a small
 
tree, which constitutes such a bower [Fig. 3].
 
The “Elysian Bower” at Springland, near Bristol,
 
Pa., illustrated in an 1808 view, exemplifies
 
the application of this term to a secluded
 
gathering of shade trees [Fig. 4].
 
 
 
As a final note, one of Noah Webster’s
 
definitions for bower was for “a country
 
seat; a cottage.” To date, no example of this
 
use of bower has been found. This absence
 
confirms the observation that although treatise
 
writers and lexicographers set forth
 
specific definitions of bower, observers of
 
the American landscape tended to use the
 
term to mean simply a specific natural or
 
artificially constructed shady space occurring
 
either in a garden or landscape.  
 
 
 
ALH
 
  
 
==Texts==
 
==Texts==

Revision as of 21:16, January 5, 2016

History

In eighteenth- and nineteenth-century landscape-design vocabulary, the term bower was closely related to arbor. The two features held several common characteristics: the use of intertwined trees and other vegetation, the creation of shaded areas, and their siting at the end of walks. Further refinement of this definition is complicated by the lack of explicit descriptive language in related accounts. William Faux’s 1819 description of Nathaniel Russell’s garden in Charleston, in which he simply notes bowers of flowering and fruit trees, or C. M. Hovey’s brief reference, in 1840, to a shady bower at James Arnold’s estate in New Bedford, Mass., each represents this problem. In addition, a bower had similar functions to an arbor, such as serving as an outdoor living or dining space.

Nonetheless, some writers made distinctions between bowers and arbors (see Arbor). Noah Webster, for example, in 1828 specified that a bower had a centralized plan—round or square—whereas an arbor was long in plan and arched in cross-section. Rev. Manasseh Cutler’s mention in 1787 of encircled bowers preceded this distinction. It should be noted, however, that this rule was not always followed. For example, A. J. Downing labeled many structures as arbors that were either round or square in form, and Fortescue Cuming, in 1810, described a “long frame bowery.” James E. Teschemacher’s 1835 definition of an arbor as an “artificial bower” indicated that for him the distinction was to be made between the man-made arbor and the natural bower.

In general, three different types of bowers can be identified. The first was composed of planted vegetation manipulated into a covered shelter, as described in 1755 by Samuel Johnson. An example of this type is a Shaker illustration of 1854 of a bower constructed of intertwined trees and used as a dining setting [Fig. 1].1 A bower described in the Virginia Argus (1799) as suitable “for the accommodation of company” may have been similar in form and size to this Shaker bower.

The second type was a built structure over which vegetation was trained. William Byrd II’s 1728 description of a habitation of a“Marooner” is an early instance of a bower being defined as a constructed shelter. Teschemacher gives a detailed account (1835) of the construction of a nineteenth-century bower, one in which iron arches were covered with climbing vines. In 1806, Bernard M’Mahon specified that bowers were “light ornamental buildings” suitable for terminating garden walks [Fig. 2] or complementing open grassy areas in the garden. William Dickinson Martin, in 1809, referred to a “neatly built” bower and William Bailey Lang in 1845 noted a rustic bower that had a shingle roof, with a corner post of rough cedar, “to which that hardy-plant, the Virginia creeper, has been trained.” A. J. Downing also advised in 1848 that such bowers could be “easily and economically constructed,” an idea for rustic buildings that was shared by M’Mahon (1806).

An important difference, however, marks M’Mahon’s and Downing’s references to constructed bowers. M’Mahon argued that such features were appropriate for “spacious pleasure grounds,” while Downing limited their use to more “humble and simple cottage grounds, the rural walks of the ferme ornée, and the modest garden of the suburban amateur.” Downing’s sentiments reflect the increasing attention paid to style and decorum by nineteenth-century treatise writers and suggest that bowers were associated with the rustic-style gardens that doubled as both aesthetic and utilitarian spaces. Such distinctions were not without precedent: In 1804 Thomas Jefferson commented that bowers were more suitable for a kitchen garden than for pleasure grounds.

The third type of bower, a naturally occurring and seemingly unmanipulated collection of trees and shrubs creating a shady enclave or space, is well documented in both descriptions and images of American gardens. For example, Lewis Miller’s mid-nineteenth century poem about “bowery shade” is illustrated with an image of two girls nestled underneath the curving branches of a small tree, which constitutes such a bower [Fig. 3]. The “Elysian Bower” at Springland, near Bristol, Pa., illustrated in an 1808 view, exemplifies the application of this term to a secluded gathering of shade trees [Fig. 4].

As a final note, one of Noah Webster’s definitions for bower was for “a country seat; a cottage.” To date, no example of this use of bower has been found. This absence confirms the observation that although treatise writers and lexicographers set forth specific definitions of bower, observers of the American landscape tended to use the term to mean simply a specific natural or artificially constructed shady space occurring either in a garden or landscape.

-- Anne L. Helmreich

Texts

Usage

Citations

Images


Notes

Retrieved from "https://heald.nga.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=Bower&oldid=16509"

History of Early American Landscape Design contributors, "Bower," History of Early American Landscape Design, , https://heald.nga.gov/mediawiki/index.php?title=Bower&oldid=16509 (accessed March 29, 2024).

A Project of the Center for Advanced Study in the Visual Arts

National Gallery of Art, Washington