Trewithen

Trewithen House: Architectural Drawings

Essay by Rodolfo Acevedo Rodriguez

In the Cornwall Record Office (CRO) in Truro are several sets of architectural drawings, which have been particularly significant in the current research of the history of the house at Trewithen (see Appendix). The majority of these drawings correspond with the thirty-year period of construction in the eighteenth century. A smaller selection of drawings represent continued development in the gardens and surrounding estate, particularly during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. In the context of this project and the discussion on Trewithen’s interior, this study will explore the various contributions of individual architects employed by the Hawkins family in the eighteenth century, whose visualisations have revealed new insights about the history of the house.

The earliest set of drawings, which bear a watermark that has enabled us to date them to c.1728, correspond with the time that Philip Hawkins II purchased the Trewithen estate. Collectively, these eight drawings (figs. 1–8) form a proposal to replace the late seventeenth-century H-shaped building with a more up to date house in the neo-Palladian style. This scheme has been attributed to James Gibbs (1682–1754), based partly on the fact that Gibbs was working in Cornwall in the 1720s and partly on its similarities to the design for the remodelling of the house at Tehidy, the home of Philip’s niece Anne Prideaux.¹ The principal drawing of the set is a general plan (fig. 1), which illustrates the internal arrangement of the main house, as well as its relationship to a set of curved colonnades that lead onto a pair of flanking office blocks. These architectural features appear again in each of the three elevation drawings of the house, although the actual floor plans of the two blocks were laid next to one another on a separate sheet. What is particularly valuable about the elevations is the fact they reveal Gibbs’s intention to build a four-storey-high house, including a basement and attic level. Considering that the extent of the site was originally defined by a building with only two floors, it could be argued that the design of a four-storey-high house would have been perceived as an ambitious proposition at the time it was put forward, and that this perception might have influenced Philip Hawkins II’s decision to add a smaller extension instead of rebuilding a house from scratch. However, the fact that Gibbs’s drawings remained in the hands of the Hawkins family throughout the rest of the eighteenth century, also suggests that his designs were retained as a way of informing future developments on the existing house.

Figure 1.

James Gibbs, 'The General plan of the house, court and offices' (proposal for the general plan of the house at Trewithen), circa 1728. Pen and wash on paper, 56.4 × 43.2 cm. Trewithen (CRO J/2/1).

Digital image courtesy of Rodolfo Acevedo Rodriguez. (All rights reserved)
Figure 2.

James Gibbs, 'Plan of the Offices under Ground' (proposal for the basement floor plan of the house at Trewithen), circa 1728. Pen and wash on paper, 43.7 × 28.1 cm. Trewithen (CRO J/2/2).

Digital image courtesy of Rodolfo Acevedo Rodriguez. (All rights reserved)
Figure 3.

James Gibbs, 'Plan of the Ground floor' (proposal for the ground floor plan of the house at Trewithen), circa 1728. Pen and wash on paper, 43.5 × 28.3 cm. Trewithen (CRO J/2/3).

Digital image courtesy of Rodolfo Acevedo Rodriguez. (All rights reserved)
Figure 4.

James Gibbs, 'Plan of the Rooms and pair of Stairs' (proposal for the first-floor plan of the house at Trewithen), circa 1728. Pen and wash on paper, 44 × 28 cm. Trewithen (CRO J/2/4).

Digital image courtesy of Rodolfo Acevedo Rodriguez. (All rights reserved)
Figure 5.

James Gibbs, 'Proposals for the kitchen and stable blocks at Trewithen, circa 1728. Pen and wash on paper, 32.3 × 43 cm. Trewithen (CRO J/2/5).

Digital image courtesy of Rodolfo Acevedo Rodriguez. (All rights reserved)
Figure 6.

James Gibbs, 'The end or front towards the Terrace' (proposal for the west elevation of the house at Trewithen), circa 1728. Pen and wash on paper, 43 × 41 cm. Trewithen.

Digital image courtesy of Rodolfo Acevedo Rodriguez. (All rights reserved)
Figure 7.

James Gibbs, 'The Back Front' (proposal for the south elevation of the house at Trewithen), circa 1728. Pen and wash on paper, 43.5 × 32 cm. Trewithen (CRO J/2/7).

Digital image courtesy of Rodolfo Acevedo Rodriguez. (All rights reserved)
Figure 8.

James Gibbs, 'Principal Front towards the Court' (proposal for the north elevation of the house at Trewithen), circa 1728. Pen and wash on paper, 43.3 × 28.1 cm. Trewithen (CRO J/2/8).

Digital image courtesy of Rodolfo Acevedo Rodriguez. (All rights reserved)

Indeed, it appears that when Philip Hawkins II commissioned the architect Thomas Edwards (d. 1775) to develop the design of Trewithen, Edwards referred directly to Gibbs’s c.1728 design as a way of devising a more modern residential scheme. Such an approach to design becomes clear by comparing Gibbs’s drawings with Edwards’s master plan (fig. 9) of the house produced around 1738, which depicts the ground floor of the house together with an elevation of the north front. With this drawing, Edwards made clear his intention to fill in the south courtyard of the house with a two-storey block protruding from the rear front, in a similar arrangement to that which Gibbs had proposed.² The moderate elongation of the two flanking office blocks enclosing the courtyard was another of Edwards’s propositions that aimed to reinstate the proportional system of the Palladian-villa design.

Figure 9.
Thomas Edwards, Proposed plan and elevation for the remodelling of the house at Trewithen, circa 1738. Pen and wash with later pencil additions on paper, 36.3 × 41.7 cm. Trewithen (CRO J/2/13).

Edwards also appears to have followed Gibbs’s steps by introducing a series of regular window openings, which meant the north and south elevations could be split into five-bay centres and two-bay sides. In fact, this new arrangement differed slightly from Gibbs’s scheme, which incorporated three-bay centres and two-bay sides on each of the main elevations. Nevertheless, the same level of symmetry that Gibbs had intended was achieved in the end and, to put this into effect, Edwards added an additional layer of brickwork with symmetrical openings on both sides of the north elevation. This alteration, which is highlighted in Edwards’s master plan, sought to integrate visually both sections of the late seventeenth-century house, as well as the later addition, with new architectural elements designed in a more regimented fashion. To go with the new aspect of the north elevation, Edwards designed a new office block that flanked the house on the west side of the courtyard. The design of this office block, as depicted in a composite drawing bearing Edward’s hand (fig. 10), reflected some of the principles Gibbs had devised in c.1728. The scheme incorporated two five-bay elevations, as well as a central passage dividing the dairy and kitchen. Yet the overall form of the building adopted a rectangular rather than a square plan form, as Gibbs had originally proposed. Edwards also took the opportunity to introduce a cupola with a clock at the top of the building. The construction of this office block was probably completed in c.1755. That on the east side of the courtyard, however, was left unbuilt temporarily. Presumably, by the late 1750s, greater attention was being focused on the alterations to the house itself.

Figure 10.
Thomas Edwards, Proposal for an office block at Trewithen, circa 1750. Pen and wash with later pencil additions on paper, 49 × 34.8 cm. Trewithen (CRO J/2/50/5).

The third set of illustrations that are part of the Trewithen collection in the CRO are three elevation drawings that correspond to three variations on a design for a new east range. These three drawings, all of which were drafted around 1755–7, have been attributed to Edwards on the basis of the graphic style. The first two elevations (fig. 11), which share the same page, were almost certainly composed first, while consultation was still in progress with Edwards, Hawkins and William Borlase. It is understood that Hawkins, having commissioned Edwards to produce the design for the east range, had shown the first two drawings to Borlase and that Hawkins later received Borlase’s review of the proposals by correspondence. This is confirmed by a letter sent from Borlase to Hawkins on 27 October 1756, in which Borlase expressed his views on the width of the openings and the rustication around the main door.³ Borlase’s preference for sunlight and square window openings, which he also mentioned in his letter, are other key pieces of information that help us understand why Edwards developed a third iteration of the east-range scheme. This particular drawing (fig. 12) incorporated Borlase’s suggestions and was presented in conjunction with a detailed plan of the bow projection, presumably in anticipation of its construction.

Figure 11.
Thomas Edwards, Two proposals for the east range of the house at Trewithen, circa 1757. Pen and pencil on paper, 39.2 × 25.2 cm. Trewithen (CRO J/2/41/2).

Figure 12.
Thomas Edwards, 'East Front' (proposal for the east range of the house at Trewithen), circa 1757. Pen and wash on paper, 49 × 37 cm. Trewithen (CRO J/2/34).

Around the same time as the new east range was being built, Hawkins initiated plans to erect a second office block on the east side of the courtyard. This event is understood from James Heywood’s journal of his travels around Cornwall. Written in 1757, Heywood’s journal contains detailed records and commentary that offer valuable insights into the development of the house during the 1750s. From one of Heywood’s diary entries, dated 1757, we learn that the soon-to-be-built office block on the east of the courtyard was intended to replace a temporary stable block, and that the design would mirror that of the west block.⁴ At this particular moment neither Hawkins nor Heywood had mentioned Edwards in their correspondence, which would in part explain the absence of a separate drawing for the new block. Given the extent of the available historical evidence, it can only be assumed that a drawing of the east block was not produced because all necessary dimensions to build it could be sourced directly from the drawing of the west block. It could also be argued that the scheme was never drawn because Edwards’s services had not been requested on this particular project. A letter from Heywood dated 30 January 1758 informs us that by the time the east range was being built, Hawkins had begun to feel some disenchantment towards the work of Edwards, mainly because sufficient progress in the construction had not been made.⁵ This suggests that Hawkins may have chosen to proceed with the construction of the east block without an appointed architect in charge.

The last, and arguably one of the most significant, set of drawings pertaining to the archives from Trewithen consists of ten different studies produced at the time Thomas Hawkins reconsidered the design of his country home, apparently around 1760, shortly after the new east range was complete.⁶ This set of drawings is made up of two parts; the larger part consists of seven drawings by Matthew Brettingham the Elder (1699–1769; see figs. 13–19), possibly produced in conjunction with his son Matthew Brettingham the Younger; the second part consists of three drawings produced by Robert Taylor (1714–1788; see figs. 20–22).⁷ The Brettingham designs, which include three preliminary sketches for the north and south elevations, as well as seven rendered elevations for the house and one of the pavilion blocks, were probably commissioned first. These drawings are by far the most extensive and ambitious designs produced for Trewithen. Each elevation is worked up to a level of detail that is consistent with the others. At the same time, every scheme conveys Brettingham’s desire to employ a wide range of neo-classical features, such as Ionic columns, cornices and balustrades at roof level. In one of his most elaborate propositions, an elevation drawing titled ‘No. 4’ (fig. 15), Brettingham even suggested introducing a hexastyle portico with Corinthian columns, a dentilled pediment and parapet and a decorated frieze on top. The proposal for one of the two flanking pavilions (fig. 17), which combined heavy features such as rows of double Tuscan pilasters and a pediment below, with a lightly decorated attic storey above, further demonstrates Brettingham’s intention at the time to implement a more dramatic style of architecture at Trewithen. Despite their quality and ambition, none of Brettingham’s designs were executed in the end, as Thomas probably reconsidered the practical implications involved in rebuilding a large part of the house. None the less, Brettingham’s drawings have survived intact and the information they contain has been particularly valuable in terms of understanding the extent of the eighteenth-century building campaign.

Figure 13.

Matthew Brettingham the Elder, 'No. 2 Trewithin Hall, North Front' (two proposals for the alteration of the north front of the house at Trewithen), circa 1760. Pen and wash on paper, 72 × 51.1 cm. Trewithen (CRO J/2/9).

Digital image courtesy of Rodolfo Acevedo Rodriguez. (All rights reserved)
Figure 14.

Matthew Brettingham the Elder, 'No. 3' (two proposals for the alteration of the north front of the house at Trewithen), circa 1760. Pen and wash with later pencil additions on paper, 71.5 × 53 cm. Trewithen (CRO J/2/11).

Digital image courtesy of Rodolfo Acevedo Rodriguez. (All rights reserved)
Figure 15.

Matthew Brettingham the Elder, 'No. 4' (two proposals for the alteration of the north and south fronts of the house at Trewithen), circa 1760. Pen and wash with later pencil additions on paper, 72.7 × 51.6 cm. Trewithen (CRO J/2/12).

Digital image courtesy of Rodolfo Acevedo Rodriguez. (All rights reserved)
Figure 16.

Matthew Brettingham the Elder, Sketch proposal for the alteration of the north front of the house at Trewithen, circa 1760. Pencil on paper, 33 × 21 cm. Trewithen (CRO J/2/39/1).

Digital image courtesy of Rodolfo Acevedo Rodriguez. (All rights reserved)
Figure 17.

Matthew Brettingham the Elder, Proposal for an office block at Trewithen, circa 1760. Pencil and wash on paper, 39 × 22.5 cm. Trewithen (CRO J/2/39/2).

Digital image courtesy of Rodolfo Acevedo Rodriguez. (All rights reserved)
Figure 18.

Matthew Brettingham the Elder, Sketch proposal for the alteration of the south front of the house at Trewithen, circa 1760. Pencil on paper, 32.7 × 21 cm. Trewithen (CRO J/2/39/3).

Digital image courtesy of Rodolfo Acevedo Rodriguez. (All rights reserved)
Figure 19.

Matthew Brettingham the Elder, Sketch proposal for the alteration of the north front of the house at Trewithen, circa 1760. Pencil on paper, 38.9 × 24.5 cm. Trewithen (CRO J/2/39/4).

Digital image courtesy of Rodolfo Acevedo Rodriguez. (All rights reserved)

While Brettingham’s designs have long been considered some of the most developed architectural proposals for Trewithen, Taylor’s work has somewhat been seen as one of the less ambitious schemes. Yet in fact Taylor’s designs demonstrate that architects and patrons were able to come up with intelligent solutions for modernising living spaces without altering the building shell. Taylor’s illustration of the Drawing Room (fig. 20), for example, shows how a set of decorative wood panels, carefully fitted round the openings, were able to increase the sensation of depth around the space. From this drawing it is also clear that some of the most prominent architectural details, which were not included in the drawing from the start, were built eventually in an effort to embellish every facet of the room. This is true of the insertion of a chimneypiece overmantel, whose position was not anticipated from the outset, but was nevertheless introduced in order to host a landscape picture depicting a picturesque scene.

Figure 20.
Sir Robert Taylor, Proposal for the remodelling of the drawing room at Trewithen, circa 1760. Pen and wash on paper, 48 × 36.4 cm. Trewithen (CRO J/2/37).

A similar approach was taken for the remodelling of the Dining Room, although in this instance, most of the neo-classical details were included in the drawing from the start. In this design (fig. 21), Taylor appears to have prioritised the arrangement of the arcaded screen and the position of the fireplace in relation to the room. His treatment of the ceiling, cornices and chimney mantelpiece also helps to reveal the enthusiasm felt towards the transformation of the space. In fact, if one compares the drawing with the design as built, one can see that only a few modifications were made during the construction. For instance, the two plaster arabesques on the south-facing wall are the only ornaments that were spared in order to allow enough space for pictures to be hung (see Emily Burns, ‘The Dining Room at Trewithen: Collection and Display’, fig. 9 and TN31 and TN33). Likewise, the two recessed panels flanking the fireplace, which are shown as blank in the drawing, were altered only slightly in order to accommodate two portrait paintings of members of the Hawkins family. This way of forming a display differed slightly from the remodelling of the stairs hall, including the service and best staircases, which Taylor represented in a single orthographic drawing (fig. 22). Here it is clear that Taylor paid more attention to the articulation of masses and voids than to intricate details. The chosen method of projection would have enabled him to understand the viability of the construction and the usability of the stairs. For Hawkins, however, these illustrations would have proved that having two separate sets of stairs, connected by a doorway at mezzanine level, was an adequate solution to the problem of having an additional set of service stairs in the way of a ground-floor passage.

Figure 21.
Sir Robert Taylor, Proposal for the remodelling of the dining room at Trewithen, circa 1760. Pen and wash on paperp, 52.5 × 37.3 cm. Trewithen (CRO J/2/29).

Figure 22.
Sir Robert Taylor, Proposal for the remodelling of the staircase at Trewithen, circa 1760. Pen and wash on paper, 65.7 × 50 cm. Trewithen (CRO J/2/33).

Collectively, the drawings discussed here reveal how the architecture of the house at Trewithen developed in a somewhat unpredictable fashion throughout the eighteenth century. Each set of drawings demonstrates individual ways of addressing a constantly changing design brief. Gibbs’s scheme of c.1728 has proved one the most significant proposals of the thirty-year building campaign. Edwards’s designs, viewed in relation to the correspondence of Thomas Hawkins, James Heywood and William Borlase, also provide valuable insights into the personal relationships and priorities that shaped a building project of this scale, and the relative roles of patron, architect and other interested parties. The work of Taylor exemplifies a similar scenario, since it was Thomas Hawkins who, as patron, decided not to execute Brettingham’s design, allowing Taylor to take on the commission. Altogether, these drawings reveal that, despite the apparent symmetry and architectural coherence of the building, the construction of the house was far more complex than previously thought.

Trewithen House: Architectural Drawings Appendix

The following checklist represents a complete record of the architectural drawings that form part of the Trewithen archives at the Cornwall Record Office (CRO) in Truro. The largest portion of drawings, which includes multiple plans and elevations, illustrates the design of the two-storey house and the proposed alterations commissioned by members of the Hawkins family during the eighteenth century. A smaller selection of drawings, primarily in the form of sketches, documents smaller-scale developments around the estate during the nineteenth century. In addition, there are a number of detailed studies that record further improvements in the Hawkins family property at Argyll Street in London. The attribution and dates for these drawings has been based on recent scholarship and stylistic comparisons.

J/2/1

James Gibbs, ‘The General plan of the house, court and offices’. Proposal for the general plan of the house at Trewithen, c.1728

Pen and wash on paper

56.4 x 43.2 cm

J/2/2

James Gibbs, ‘Plan of the Offices under Ground’. Proposal for the basement plan of the house at Trewithen, c.1728

Pen and wash on paper

43.7 x 28.1 cm

J/2/3

James Gibbs, ‘Plan of the Ground floor’. Proposal for the ground-floor plan of the house at Trewithen, c.1728

Pen and wash on paper

43.5 x 28.3 cm

J/2/4

James Gibbs, ‘Plan of the Rooms and pair of Stairs’. Proposal for the first-floor plan of the house at Trewithen, c.1728

Pen and wash on paper

44 x 28 cm

J/2/5

James Gibbs, Proposals for the kitchen and stable blocks at Trewithen, c.1728

Pen and wash on paper

32.3 x 43 cm

J/2/6

James Gibbs, ‘The end or front towards the Terrace’. Proposal for the west elevation of the house at Trewithen, c.1728

Pen and wash on paper

43 x 41 cm

J/2/7

James Gibbs, ‘The Back Front’. Proposal for the south elevation of the house at Trewithen, c.1728

Pen and wash on paper

43.5 x 32 cm

J/2/8

James Gibbs, ‘Principal Front towards the Court’. Proposal for the north elevation of the house at Trewithen, c.1728

Pen and wash on paper

43.3 x 28.1 cm

J/2/9

Matthew Brettingham the Elder, ‘No. 2 Trewithin Hall, North Front’. Two proposals for the alteration of the north front of the house at Trewithen, c.1760

Pen and wash on paper

72 x 51.1 cm

J/2/10

Proposal for the alteration of the south front of the house at Trewithen, c.1738

Pen and wash on paper

48.5 x 32 cm

J/2/11

Matthew Brettingham the Elder, ‘No. 3’. Two proposals for the alteration of the north front of the house at Trewithen, c.1760

Pen and wash with later pencil additions on paper

71.5 x 53 cm

J/2/12

Matthew Brettingham the Elder, ‘No. 4’. Two proposals for the alteration of the north and south fronts of the house at Trewithen, c.1760

Pen and wash with later pencil additions on paper

72.7 x 51.6 cm

J/2/13

Thomas Edwards, Proposed plan and elevation for the remodelling of the house at Trewithen, c.1738

Pen and wash with later pencil additions on paper

36.3 x 41.7 cm

J/2/14

Joseph Gandy, ‘Plan and Elevation of a Design for Cottage Lodges and Gate for Labourers and their Families’. Proposal for two gate lodges and a gate at Trewithen, 1807

Pen and wash on paper

31 x 43.8 cm

J/2/15

Proposal for the plan and elevation of a coach house at Trewithen, c.1750–60

Pen and wash on paper

63.5 x 42.3 cm

J/2/16

Proposal for the elevation of an office building at Trewithen, c.1750–60

Pen and pencil on paper

90.3 x 43.8 cm

J/2/17

Proposed detail for the elevation of an office building at Trewithen, c.1750–60

Pen on paper

60.6 x 46.2 cm

J/2/18

Proposal for the elevation of an office building at Trewithen, c.1750–60

Pen and pencil on paper

52 x 46 cm

J/2/19

Proposal for the north elevation of the house at Trewithen, c.1750–60

Pen with later pencil additions on paper

100 x 47.2 cm

J/2/20

Detail studies of fleur-de-lys designs for the house at Trewithen, c.1750–60

Pencil on paper

63 x 51.7 cm

J/2/21

Detail study of a baluster for the house at Trewithen, c.1750–60

Pen and pencil on paper

65 x 52.5 cm

J/2/22

Detail study of a pilaster and capital for the house at Trewithen, c.1750–60

Pen on paper

52 x 64 cm

J/2/23

Detail study of a doorway for the house at Trewithen, c.1750–60

Pen on paper

64 x 52.5 cm

J/2/24

‘Profile of capital of pilaster’. Detail study of a capital for the house at Trewithen, c.1750–60

Pen on paper

52 x 63.5 cm

J/2/25

Detail study of entablature for the north front of the house at Trewithen, c.1750–60

Pen and pencil on paper

46.8 x 52.3 cm

J/2/26

Detail study of door and fittings, and water closet for the house at Trewithen, c.1750–60

Pen on paper

54 x 33.7 cm

J/2/27

‘Window upon hall floor’. Detail study of window for the house at Trewithen, c.1750–60

Pen on paper

33 x 52.5 cm

J/2/28

Detail study of capital for the house at Trewithen, c.1750–60

Pen on paper

33.5 x 16.5 cm

J/2/29

Sir Robert Taylor, Proposal for the remodelling of the dining room of the house at Trewithen, c.1760

Pen and wash on paper

52.5 x 37.3 cm

J/2/30

Proposal for the remodelling of the dining room of the house at Trewithen, c.1760

Pen and wash on paper

53.5 x 38 cm

J/2/31

Detail studies of decorations, doorways and friezes for the house at Trewithen, c.1750–60

Pen and wash on paper

52 x 32.5 cm

J/2/32

Detail studies of frieze and doors for the house at Trewithen, c.1750–60

Pen and wash on paper

36 x 52.3 cm

J/2/33

Sir Robert Taylor, Proposal for the remodelling of the staircase of the house at Trewithen, c.1760

Pen and wash on paper

65.7 x 50 cm

J/2/34

‘East Front’. Proposal for the east range of the house at Trewithen, c.1757

Pen and wash on paper

49 x 37 cm

J/2/35

Matthew Brettingham the Elder, Proposal for the alterations to the south front of the house at Trewithen, c.1760

Pen and wash on paper

51.5 x 34.7 cm

J/2/36

Proposal for the dining room of the house at Trewithen, c.1738

Pen and pencil on paper

46.4 x 37.3 cm

J/2/37

Sir Robert Taylor, Proposal for the remodelling of the drawing room of the house at Trewithen, c.1760

Pen and wash on paper

48 x 36.4 cm

J/2/38

Proposal for the north elevation of the house at Trewithen, c.1750–60

Pen and wash with later pencil additions on paper

33 x 25.6 cm

J/2/39/1

Matthew Brettingham the Elder, Sketch proposal for the alteration of the north front of the house at Trewithen, c.1760

Pencil on paper

33 x 21 cm

J/2/39/2

Matthew Brettingham the Elder, Sketch proposal for an office block at Trewithen, c.1760

Pencil and wash on paper

39 x 22.5 cm

J/2/39/3

Matthew Brettingham the Elder, Sketch proposal for the alteration of the south front of the house at Trewithen, c.1760

Pencil on paper

32.7 x 21 cm

J/2/39/4

Matthew Brettingham the Elder, Sketch proposal for the alteration of the north front of the house at Trewithen, c.1760

Pencil on paper

38.9 x 24.5 cm

J/2/40

Proposed plan and elevation for a barn and granary at Trewithen, mid–late 18th century

Pen and wash on paper

50 x 34.8 cm

J/2/41/1

Proposal for the east range of the house at Trewithen, mid–late 18th century

Pen and wash on paper

13 x 14.5 cm

J/2/41/2

Thomas Edwards, Two proposals for the east range of the house at Trewithen, c.1757

Pen and pencil on paper

39.2 x 25.2 .cm

J/2/41/3

Proposal for an office block adjacent to the house at Trewithen, mid–late 18th century

Pen and pencil on paper

165 x 20 cm

J/2/42

Plan of the ground floor of the house at Trewithen, late 18th century

Pen and wash on paper

39.2 x 25.2 cm

J/2/43/2

Proposal for the plan of the kitchen and servant’s hall of the house at Trewithen, late 18th–early 19th century

Pen on paper

48.5 x 30 cm

J/2/43/3

Proposal for the plan of the kitchen of the house at Trewithen, late 18th–early 19th century

Pen on paper

37 x 23.5 cm

J/2/43/4

Proposal for the plan of the kitchen and servant’s hall of the house at Trewithen, late 18th–early 19th century

Pen and wash on paper

37 x 23 cm

J/2/43/6

Sketch plan of the house at Trewithen, c.1730

Pen on paper

38 x 31.2 cm

J/2/43/8

Sketch plan of an office block at Trewithen, late 18th–early 19th century

Pencil on paper

20.5 x 16 cm

J/2/43/9

Proposal for the plan of the kitchen and servant’s hall of the house at Trewithen, late 18th–early 19th century

Pen on paper

37 x 23.2 cm

J/2/44/1

Sketch proposals for two cottage buildings at Trewithen, late 18th–early 19th century

Pen on paper

25.7 x 40 cm

J/2/44/2

Proposed plan and elevation for a cottage building at Trewithen, late 18th–early 19th century

Pen and pencil on paper

21 x 32.5 cm

J/2/44/3

Proposal for the interior of the dining room of the house at Trewithen, mid-18th century

Pen and pencil on paper

32.5 x 20.3 cm

J/2/44/4

Sketch plan for the east range of the house at Trewithen, mid-18th century

Pencil on paper

20.3 x 16 cm

J/2/45

‘Trewithen’. Sketch plan of the ground floor of the house at Trewithen, 1868

Coloured pencil on paper

44 x 28.3 cm

J/2/46

‘The plan of Mr Basset’s intended house’. Plan of the ground floor, early 19th century

Pencil on paper

23.3 x 22 cm

J/2/47

‘Tredenham House and Offices’. Sketch plan of the ground floor, 19th century

Pen and pencil on paper

52 x 40 cm

J/2/48/1

Sketch plan of the south courtyard at Trewithen, late 18th–early 19th century

Pen on paper

37.7 x 27.3 cm

J/2/48/2

Sketches for a gate at Trewithen, late 18th–early 19th century

Pen on paper

31.8 x 19 cm

J/2/48/3

Plan of the house and estate of Trewithen, late 18th century

Pen on paper

28.4 x 17 cm

J/2/48/4

Sketch study of a pump, late 18th–early 19th century

Pencil on paper

32.8 x 21 cm

J/2/48/5

Sketch proposals for cottage buildings at Trewithen, late 18th–early 19th century

Pen with later pencil additions on paper

33 x 20.3 cm

J/2/48/6

Sketch proposal for a cottage building at Trewithen, late 18th–early 19th century

Pen on paper

17 x 15.3 cm

J/2/48/7

Sketch plan of the house and gardens at Trewithen, late 18th–early 19th century

Pen with later pencil additions on paper

38.4 x 23.8 cm

J/2/48/8

Sketch plan of the house and east office building at Trewithen, late 18th–early 19th century

Pen with later pencil additions on paper

37.2 x 23.6 cm

J/2/48/9

‘Double Cottage’. Sketch plan and elevation for a cottage building at Trewithen, 1784

Pen on paper

40 x 25.8 cm

J/2/49/1–17

Studies of details and fittings for the houses at Trewithen and Argyll Street, London, early–mid-19th century

Pen with later pencil additions on paper

Various dimensions

J/2/49/18

Proposal for an office building at Trewithen, late 18th century

Pen on paper

53.5 x 45.8 cm

J/2/49/19

Proposal for a colonnade structure at Trewithen, late 18th century

Pen with later pencil additions on paper

52.5 x 45.5 cm

J/2/50/1

Detail study of a bench, late 18th century

Pen on paper

41 x 32.5 cm

J/2/50/2

‘Plan for pleasure house’. Proposal for a two-storey building at Trewithen, late 18th century

Pen on paper

48.5 x 30 cm

J/2/50/3

Proposal for a greenhouse, late 18th century

Pen and wash on paper

42.5 x 23.5 cm

J/2/50/4

Proposal for a garden building at Trewithen, late 18th–early 19th century

Pen and wash on paper

23.1 x 33.7 cm

J/2/50/5

Thomas Edwards, Proposal for an office block at Trewithen, c.1750

Pen with later pencil additions on paper

49 x 34.8 cm

J/2/50/6

‘Plan of steps to summer house in kitchen-garden, Trewithen Hall’. Detail study of a set of steps at Trewithen, late 18th–early 19th century

Pen on paper

48.1 x 27.9 cm

J/2/50/7

Proposal for a courtyard fence at Trewithen, late 18th–early 19th century

Pen and wash on paper

36.4 x 30.2 cm

J/2/50/8

‘Plan of new wall to kitchen-garden’. Proposal for a wall at Trewithen, late 18th–early 19th century

Pen on paper with pencil additions

36.4 x 30.2 cm

J/2/50/9

Proposal for a gate at Trewithen, late 18th–early 19th century

Pen and wash on paper

20.5 x 12 cm

J/2/51/1–6

Detail studies for an office building and miscellaneous equipment at Trewithen, late 18th century

Pen with later pencil additions on paper

Various dimensions

Author

Rodolfo Acevedo Rodríguez is an artist, architect and architectural historian with an interest in the recording and interpretation of historic buildings. He is a practicing member of The Royal Institute of British Architects, an affiliate member of The Royal Society of Painter-Printmakers and a fellow of The Society of Antiquaries. Between 2016 and 2020, he carried out research on Boughton House, Doddington Hall, Petworth House, Thornton Abbey Gatehouse, Trewithen House, Wentworth Woodhouse and West Wycombe House. A contributor of ‘Art & The Country House’, Rodolfo has written a number of essays and transcriptions of architectural records.

Footnotes

Pamela Dodds, ‘The Hawkins of Trewithen and Thomas Edwards of Greenwich’, Journal of the Royal Institution of Cornwall, n.s. 2, vol. 3, part 2, 1999, p. 47.
1
The design of the new south block is also represented in an elevation drawing that bears Edwards’s hand: CRO J/2/10.
2
Borlase to Thomas Hawkins, 27 October 1756, CRO J/T/14/169: As I am old therefore & great admirer of the Sun I should chuse to put two windows on each side of the Bow, contracting the under windows in the Elevation No 2 to 3 ft wide placing a pediment on the top of them and making the Chamber windows square. As to the Doorcase in No 2, tis in my opinion too large and should be contracted to the width of the windows . . . The rustick on the top of the door may stand with this little alteration [sketch] but the Rustick at the sides has in my opinion a clumsy effect, and should be entirely omitted’.
3
John Heywood, ‘A Diary of my Journey to the West of England 1757’, Trewithen, MS, ff. 19–20.
4
Thomas Hawkins to William Borlase, 30 January 1758, Morrab Library, Penzance: Letters to William Borlase, vol. 5, f. 228: ‘The architect as you call him is I know in good health . . . but you certainly jest when you talk about fine sherry to a person who has scarcely begun to build’.
5
The date of Brettingham’s work has been assigned according to the paper’s watermarks: Paul Holden, ‘Trewithen and the Brettingham Plans’, The Georgian Group Journal, vol. 21, 2011, p. 61.
6
For more extensive interpretations of the Brettingham plans, see ibid., pp. 58–72.
7

Imprint

Author: by Rodolfo Acevedo Rodriguez

Date: 20 November 2020

Category: House Essay

Licence: CC BY-NC International 4.0

Cite as: Rodolfo Acevedo Rodriguez, "Trewithen House: Architectural Drawings", Art and the Country House, https://doi.org/10.17658/ACH/TNE512

art & the Country House

Home

Trewithen

Trewithen House: Architectural Drawings

Essay by Rodolfo Acevedo Rodriguez

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

Figure 5.

Figure 6.

Figure 7.

Figure 8.

Figure 13.

Figure 14.

Figure 15.

Figure 16.

Figure 17.

Figure 18.

Figure 19.

Trewithen House: Architectural Drawings Appendix

Author

Footnotes

Imprint