Story Category: Legacy

This is a legacy story from an earlier version of our website. It may contain some formatting issues and broken links.

A rare view of the Pavilion by one of Britain’s greatest artists

This exquisite watercolour by JMW Turner entered the collection of Brighton Museum & Art Gallery only a few years ago. It had been in private collections since it was bought in the 1830s, and came up at an auction in New York in 2012. We were able to purchase it with generous help from the Art Fund, the Heritage Lottery Fund and private patrons.

Joseph Mallord William Turner, R.A., Brighthelmston, Sussex, c1824 © The Royal Pavilion & Museums. Pencil, pen and black ink and watercolour with scratching out on Whatman paper. 14.6 x 22.2 cm

It was of utmost importance to secure this gem, as it is one of the few paintings by Turner that shows the Royal Pavilion. The palace is only faintly visible in the oil painting Brighton from the Sea (1829), which was commissioned by one of Turner’s patrons, George Wyndham, 3rd Earl of Egremont, at Petworth House, and in a few other rough sketches in pencil and watercolour, for example in this sketchbook from 1830. In our watercolour Turner took a few compositional liberties for the sake of the ‘picturesque’ appeal of the image, for example turning the Pavilion by about 90 degrees to ensure the whole of its east front can be seen.

Compared to other paintings of Brighton by Turner our watercolour provides a surprising amount of detail. Many buildings of Brighton can be identified, among them St Nicholas’s Church, the Duke of York’s hotel, and Marine Parade under construction. The most prominent building is the recently finished Chain Pier, a bold cast-iron structure that seems to be withstanding strong waves and stormy conditions and is gleaming in the sunlight. It pushes its way into the composition with all the pride and confidence we see a few years later in other great cast iron structures, such as railway bridges and stations.

The reason for this detailed rendering and the painting’s relatively small size is that it was meant to be engraved. The printed version was used as an illustration in Picturesque Views of the Southern Coast of England, an important topographical publication by George and William Cooke. It was published in 16 parts between 1814 and 1826, with Turner contributing a total of 39 images. George Cooke engraved the watercolour and entitled it Brighthelmstone, Sussex, using the old name for Brighton.

A coloured print after Turner’s watercolour, engraved by George Cooke and published in 1825

While the apparent subject of the painting are bustling Brighton and the Chain Pier, something else shapes this image and demands attention: the sea, the sky, and the stormy and quickly changing weather conditions of the scene. Water in many shapes and forms plays an important role in Turner’s work. A large proportion of his paintings depict the sea, rainstorms, cloud formations, waterfalls, rivers, mist, snow and floods. Like many artists and scientists of his time Turner was an observer of nature, atmospheric conditions and meteorological studies, frequently sketches outdoors, ‘en plein air’, attempting to capture fleeting moments with great immediacy. Our watercolour is a prime example of aesthetic ideas of the ‘picturesque’ which had its roots in the 18th century but prevailed in the early 19th century. The concept of the picturesque was to combine two earlier and seemingly jarring aesthetic concepts, that of ideal ‘beauty’ and of the ‘sublime’. In the 1750s writers, artist and thinkers such as Edmund Burke and William Hogarth had argued that beauty was to be associated with purity, symmetry, order and pleasing lines, while the sublime was the unknowable, dangerous, chaotic and awe-inspiring. In the visual arts you see manifestations of the sublime in depictions of, for example, vast mountain ranges, natural disasters such as floods and storms, while ideal beauty may be associated with classical aesthetics, especially in architecture. By the 1770s writers began to combine these two concepts, resulting in aesthetic ideas about ‘the picturesque’, which could be applied to many areas of life and the arts, but were largely associated with travel, illustration, fine art, poetry, and garden design.

One of the great advocates of picturesque landscape gardening and architecture was Humphry Repton, who proposed new designs for the entire Royal Pavilion estate in 1806, which were, sadly, never executed. In his last publication before his death in 1818, Fragments on the Theory and Practice of Landscape Gardening (published in 1816) Repton elaborated on some of his ideas concerning the picturesque and colour, and used the rainbow spectrum and ever-changing light conditions to explain his theories. We have one of the plates from this publication in our collection. It merges Newton’s early 18th century findings concerning optics with early 19th century colour theory and picturesque aesthetics. (There is a chance to see Repton’s discarded designs for the Royal Pavilion at this talk at The Keep on 11 May: http://www.thekeep.info/events/early-illustrated-books-of-the-royal-pavilion-and-other-royal-palaces-a-talk-by-dr-alexandra-loske-3-00-admission/ )

Humprhy Repton: ‘Colour’, 1816.

A wealth of publications in the late 18th century advised readers on how to travel and appreciate your surrounding in a picturesque manner, for example William Gilpin’s Three Essays: On Picturesque Beauty; On Picturesque Travel; and on Sketching Landscape: to which is Added a Poem, On Landscape Painting, published in London in 1792 but based on his travels in the 1760s and 1770s. Images, gardens and buildings in a picturesque manner would embrace irregularity, ruggedness and imperfections, but still aimed to be pleasing compositions, while sublime aspects could still be included, in the form of dramatic landscapes, vast scenery or wild weather conditions. Crucially, picturesque ideology encouraged considering the British countryside as valuable and worthy of study as going on a ‘Grand Tour’ with Rome as a destination. A perfect picturesque image would be well observed and carefully composed, but contain elements of surprise and tantalising details that would trigger curiosity, such as ruins, old trees or interesting rock formations. This is one of the reasons why Turner depicted Brighton not just with all its exciting new buildings and structures,but also in dramatic and quickly changing atmospheric conditions. The insertion of a rainbow on the left side of the painting highlights the contrast between dark and clear skies, gives it a fleeting feeling and an immediacy that he perhaps associated with Brighton. While severe storms are recorded in Brighton in 1824, it is unlikely that Turner wanted to document an actual storm. It is much more likely that he included high waves, large cloud formations and indeed a rainbow to give the image a picturesque quality, with more than a slight hint of the sublime. Depicting Brighton in 1824 in a book entitled Picturesque Views of the Southern Coast of England had to be more than simply showing a pretty beach and some exciting architectural structures, and Turner delivered.

Coloured aquatint by J. Bruce, depicting the storm of 23 November 1824.

The prints based on the watercolour were also published individually and it is still relatively easy to find a later print of the engraving, as it remained popular and was reprinted and copied throughout the 19^th century. The watercolour however disappeared from public view until it was first shown at Brighton Museum shortly after it had been purchased by us. In 2013/14 it was the star of an exhibition in the Royal Pavilion on Turner and his relationship with Brighton, curated by Turner expert Ian Warrell. Because it is a watercolour the painting cannot be exposed to light for very long and is therefore not permanently on display, but we occasionally offer gallery talks during which it can be viewed. The shimmering painting is in demand: in 2017 it will be lent to an exhibition at the Frick Collection in New York, thus briefly returning to where it appeared at auction in 2012.

Gallery talk at Brighton Museum & Art Gallery

A shorter version of this article was published in the May 2016 issue of Viva Brighton magazine

Dr Alexandra Loske, Art Historian and Curator at the Royal Pavilion

This is a legacy story from an earlier version of our website. It may contain some formatting issues and broken links.

Last year, 3D modeller Colin Jones volunteered to work with the Royal Pavilion to produce some 3D models of the Royal Pavilion Estate. In this blog post, Colin discusses his work to date, and the challenges posed in trying to recreate the past through polygons.

The project to produce accurate computer models of the Royal Pavilion estate,  at several stages in its history, started in November 2015 with a single model of the 2015 Royal Pavilion itself. Since that time, the initial model has been extended and improved while other estate buildings have been modelled and landscapes created to provide context.

Modelling buildings that no longer exist presents many challenges. However, even when modelling buildings that do currently exist, inaccessible areas such as roofs can be difficult because accurate plans are not always available and photos cannot always be taken from ground level. In the case of the Royal Pavilion, the modelling team was lucky to find a YouTube video, produced by a local drone pilot, who had recently flown over the roof of the Pavilion revealing every detail. The Pavilion modelling project couldn’t have asked for a better insight into the shape of the roof and the less accessible parts of the present day Royal Pavilion building.

[iframe id=”https://www.youtube.com/embed/5Ubdd9hCFlI” align=”center” maxwidth=”800″]

The older the building, the harder it is to find images that give you an accurate view of the detail of that building. However, if you want to model a building as it appeared before photography was available, you must rely on the work of artists in the form of paintings and engravings. It is even more challenging if there are several views by different artists which disagree with each other, which was the case with the Royal Pavilion. Additionally, there were several different architect’s plans with commissioned artist’s visualisations of how the estate could look if a particular architect was chosen. These plans were quite often different to actual realised detail. It was possible, however, to match some paintings exactly with an image from a model which is very satisfying.

The Royal Pavilion curators enlisted the cooperation of a group of academics who were willing to comment on every stage of this project. In practice, these selfless people were invaluable and a major factor in the quality of the end result. It is important that the modelling team, despite their efforts to produce accurate detail in the first instance, is receptive to criticism from these experienced people. Many aspects of the models were tested by this group, who in addition to their knowedge of contemporary images of the Pavilion, can also draw on knowledge of legal documents and written witness accounts. In this project, all comments were accepted without question, resulting in many changes being made to produce the final versions. The modelling team is grateful to them for their time and effort which was unfailingly constructive and freely given.

Research was carried out by the modelling team to find out how computer modelling has been used effectively on other historic buildings in other countries. Impressive work was highlighted to the Royal Pavilion curators including Buckingham Palace, the US White House and the French Palace of Versailles. The Palace of Versailles web site (http://www.versailles3d.com/en/discover-the-3d-scale-models/) is particularly impressive for it’s use of computer models to show the estate at different times in it’s history. The modelling team were inspired by this and intends eventually to produce comparable functionality for the Royal Pavilion.

The modelling team uses Lightwave 3D software to produce the models. Lightwave 3D is robust, tested software which is used by professional teams in many countries to create live action film special effects and computer animated films. The functionality is split between two tools, Modeller and Layout. Modeller is used to create and assemble polygons which is the technique used to construct the models. Layout is then used to apply textures to polygons and to produce high quality rendered images of scenes containing the models. Modeller and Layout communicate with each other so it’s possible to make changes to a model and re-render a scene quickly and efficiently. Modeller has been designed to work for architectural visualisations and so appropriate modelling tools are available to aid accuracy and to construct complex shapes such as domes. For repetitive tasks, there is an Application Programmers Interface (API) which allows Python program code to interact with model polygons.

The most complex model of all the buildings on the Royal Pavilion Estate, is the 2015 Royal Pavilion building which contains over 260,000 polygons and has several hundred man hours invested in it. This complexity is however dwarfed by requirements of modelling landscapes which are important to give context to the buildings. A realistic model of a single tree has 32,000 polygons and, unlike rigid architecture, is shown differently in every artist’s representation of a scene. If you multiply this number by the number of trees on the Royal Pavilion Estate it is easy to understand why this issue is so challenging to the designers of modelling software. To address this issue, the designers of Lightwave 3D provide a cloning function which allows the modeller to place a marker of a tree in a scene that does not require any resources until the system is producing a rendered image.

2015 Royal Pavilion in 3D

If the model below does not display in your browser, please try viewing it direct at http://cjbrighton.co.uk/BrightonPavilion11.html

Colin Jones

More information

• Royal Pavilion Time Machine
• 3D models from our collections
• History of the Royal Pavilion

This is a legacy story from an earlier version of our website. It may contain some formatting issues and broken links.

I’ve had a keen interest in photography from a very young age, probably inspired by my Grandad and Uncle who both loved it.

Particularly my uncle, who would keep all of his photography equipment in the back of his car and would often talk to me about competitions he had entered, photographs he had taken and the goings-on in his photography club. I had my first camera before I was 10 and I was always using it, especially on family holidays abroad in summer. I still have quite a few packs of developed photographs from this time and even though the photos are not quite of professional standard, I enjoy looking through them occasionally. Photography has changed so much since then with people using pocket-sized digital cameras, digital SLRs and phones being able to take, look at and download images instantly. Changes in photography methods and equipment as well as photography as an art-form are both things that interest me and so I was really excited to start working on the Film Pioneers project with the Film and Media collection at Hove Museum, which focuses on the documentation of the collection as well as assisting with the preparation for the Experimental Motion exhibition opening in Brighton Museum later this year.

I began my work on the project by being introduced to the collection both in the galleries and stores  at Hove Museum by exhibition leads Suzie Plumb and Alexia Lazou. I also had the opportunity to watch some films by 19^th and 20^th century film-makers like James Williamson, the inventor of the close-up and George Albert-Smith, the creator of the first colour filming process ‘Kinemacolor’. Seeing some of their original works was fascinating. I particularly liked ‘Fire!’ by Williamson and would recommend anyone look this film up to see some of the earliest examples of film editing and the use of film as a way to tell a story, something which was very experimental at that time when films were ordinarily used to show scenes from everyday life. In preparation for the Experimental Motion exhibition I have also been looking at the influential work of more contemporary Brighton filmmakers like Ben Rivers, Jeff Keen and Ben Wheatley whose work pushes the boundaries of film into innovative and exciting new domains.

Researching the history of film and cinema in Brighton & Hove has been a highlight of mine during this project and a real eye-opener. Although I already knew a little about the rise of cinema around the mid-20^th century I had no idea exactly how popular it was or how many cinemas there had been in Brighton. I felt a hint of sadness too, seeing photos of these cinemas in their grand heyday and knowing that most are now derelict if they haven’t been completely destroyed. I’m sure residents of Brighton will recognise the wonderful Art-Deco façade of the Astoria which was once one of Brighton’s largest cinemas.

Brighton’s Astoria c1932

A professional photographer visited Hove Museum to take new images of the objects we are planning to show to publicise the exhibition and display in the gallery space. I arrived at the museum that morning unaware that I would also be photographed holding various cameras (including a Bolex, one of my personal favourites) with the possibility of them being used in publicity! I tried to channel my inner model but holding those old cameras up was quite tough, some of them are pretty heavy! The final photos look great, especially the ones of the early 20^th century wooden box cameras, I’m really looking forward to seeing them used in the exhibition.

The last couple of weeks have involved me really getting to grips with some of the finer details on our collections management system MIMSY. I’ve been working through donations held in Hove Museum’s film and photography stores, handling the objects, reading the donation documentation and then adding the details onto the database. I used MIMSY previously when I produced the LGBTQ trail for Brighton Museum and also on a short project for the Learning team but Film Pioneers has given me the chance to develop what I already knew and learn how to use some of the other functions that MIMSY has. I feel much more confident using the software and I’m sure that this will be invaluable in the future, especially when applying for new jobs. It has also been great to get out all manner of film and photography related objects (including, but definitely not limited to, old projectors, Super 8 films of 60’s Hanna Barbera cartoons and some tricky-to-identify objects that have required some research online) which have been a lot of fun to discover. The sense of nostalgia when I find something I recognise from my family attic or see an animation I watched as a child is also quite wonderful.

As I write this I still have a few weeks left on the project during which I’m sure I’ll get to work with some more great objects from the collection. I’m really looking forward to seeing the work of Suzie, Alexia and myself come together in Experimental Motion later this year and hope you enjoy discovering the stories yourselves that I have found so inspiring.

Robert White, Collections Assistant

This is a legacy story from an earlier version of our website. It may contain some formatting issues and broken links.

In January 1934 a homeowner in Woodingdean discovered a skull whilst digging the foundations of a sun terrace at the side of his house.

As reported in the Brighton & Hove Herald of 3^rd February 1934, experts were then called in to excavate the rest of the skeleton and Herbert Toms, curator of Brighton Museum, declared it to be the remains of a young woman of around 25 years and approximately five to five foot six inches tall. It was noted that her teeth were ‘white and perfect’.

The body had been buried in an extended position and is reported to have been enclosed in a flint coffin – completely surrounded by flint pieces, many of which were burned. Although it’s stated in the newspaper report that Sir Arthur Keith (of Piltdown Skull fame) was due to make a detailed analysis of the skeleton, we have no further information as to whether this was actually undertaken. However, because of the extended position of the skeleton, it was assumed to date to the late Bronze Age or Iron Age.

Osteo Notes:

Based on the features of the skull and pelvis, we agree that this is the skeleton of a female but we think, on balance, she was a little older than originally thought, probably somewhere between 30 and 45 years. The skeletal evidence is a little contradictory, though, which makes it difficult to be sure. On the one hand she has some probable indicators of youth, for example the ends of her collar bones and the edge of her pelvis haven’t completely fused. However, she also has bone formation (‘ossification’) of the thyroid gland in her neck, which is more usually seen in older people. There is spondylolysis, a defect or fracture usually of the lowest (5^th) vertebra of the spine, and this woman would no doubt have suffered back pain as a result of this.

Interestingly, she has what is known as a persistent metopic or frontal suture of the skull. The frontal bones of the skull usually totally fuse together by seven years of age but in some people this doesn’t happen and the ‘junction’ between the bones remains into adulthood. A recent visitor to one of our open days, coincidentally also from Woodingdean, had one of these herself and kindly let us have a feel of it!

Her teeth are indeed white although not perfect as, on closer inspection, there is wear to the teeth, which could be age or occupation related, and there is also a nasty-looking abscess below the bottom front incisors.

As with the Moulsecombe skeleton we blogged about last time, the Woodingdean skeleton has been assigned to the Bronze Age or Iron Age on the basis of her burial position. It would be good to use scientific techniques to find out more precisely when this Brighton ancestor lived and to tell a bit more of her story.

Andrew Maxted, Curator (Collections Projects) and Dawn Cansfield 

This is a legacy story from an earlier version of our website. It may contain some formatting issues and broken links.

Funded by an award from the Prehistoric Society, Royal Pavilion & Museums is presently working with Dawn Cansfield (PhD student at Winchester University) and Dr Paola Ponce (human osteologist from the Institute of Archaeology, UCL) to catalogue and research our collection of prehistoric human remains.

Over the next few months we will be publishing extracts from that research which will hopefully give a better insight into some of the earliest residents of Brighton & Hove.

The Moulsecombe Skeleton

On 19 July 1928 workers carrying out road excavations in Wild Park, Brighton, found a human skeleton. The find was reported in the Sussex Daily News as being that of an elderly prehistoric person, probably female, found lying on their left side, facing north-east with their knees slightly drawn up, about 4 feet (1.2 metres) below the ground surface. No grave goods or other artefacts were found with the skeleton. The burial was located next to a saucer-shaped pit, thought to perhaps have been the hearth from the floor of a prehistoric hut.

The human remains were taken to Brighton Museum for preservation and further examination. As was often the case at that time, a report on the human remains was carried out by Sir Arthur Keith of the Royal College of Surgeons.

Contrary to the original newspaper report and based upon tooth wear and the appearance of the skull and long bones, he assessed the skeleton to be that of a man, 5 feet 4 inches tall and approximately 60 years of age. He noted that his teeth were almost ground to stumps and that as well as having an extra incisor, he suffered from dental abscesses.

In the absence of any dating evidence and relying solely on the ‘crouched’ burial position and particular features of the skull (a method no longer used) he came to the conclusion that the individual had lived in the Early Bronze Age ‘Beaker’ period roughly 4,500 years ago.

Moulsecombe skull (dental abscess arrowed)

OSTEO Notes: The Moulsecombe skeleton, although damaged, is fairly complete. We would agree that the individual was a mature male (45+ years), a good age for prehistoric times. The skull was reconstructed at some point and the wires holding the pieces together are clearly visible. His teeth are indeed very worn due to his age and perhaps diet, and there are clear signs of dental abscesses (see photo above) which would, no doubt, have been very painful.

Worn upper teeth

In some joints there is evidence of osteoarthritis, a bone disease of age that can also result from earlier injury, which would probably have caused him pain and stiffness and affected his mobility. There is an interesting lump on his right lower leg (tibia, pictured below) which is probably bone growth within damaged muscle called myositis ossificans traumatica, perhaps caused by excessive or repetitive physical activity. Alternatively, it could be a benign bone tumour known as an osteochondroma. Investigation by x-ray could clarify this further.

Tibia with probable myositis ossificans traumatica

Radiocarbon dating would enable an accurate date to be arrived at for when this man lived in Brighton & Hove. Further scientific analysis could also tell us about his diet and where he grew up.

Andrew Maxted, Curator (Collections Projects) and Dawn Cansfield 

This is a legacy story from an earlier version of our website. It may contain some formatting issues and broken links.

Perusing the Royal Pavilion shop recently, I discovered some material that had been produced for an exhibition held here a few years ago; ‘Princess Charlotte: George’s Forgotten Daughter’. I knew almost nothing about ‘the Original People’s Princess’, so I decided to investigate further and what resulted was the Pavilion Tales talk of the same name.

Charlotte’s is a heart-breaking yet fascinating story and I challenge anyone who hears it not to fall in love with her, just a little bit. She was George IV and Caroline of Brunswick’s only legitimate child and despite at one time being the most popular member of the Royal Family and ‘Britain’s Hope’ for the future she has now been largely forgotten. In her lifetime though, she was vivacious, stubborn, eccentric and a hopeless romantic, comparing herself to Marianne of Sense and Sensibility.

The Princess Charlotte by Thomas Lawrence 1822

To truly understand Charlotte one must first understand her parents and their disastrous relationship. Once George made up his mind to find an appropriate, legal wife, Caroline of Brunswick, was chosen seemingly without thought or consideration and she proved to be a wholly unsuitable bride. Caroline was vulgar, poorly educated, careless in her appearance and hygiene and catastrophically immature. In 1795, George was introduced for the first time to his wife-to-be and, without uttering a word to her, said to a servant “Harris, I am not well, pray please get me a glass of brandy.” He abruptly left and Caroline was left with no better impression of her future husband than he had of her, remarking that he was extremely fat and nowhere near as handsome as the portrait she had seen. The marriage had an unhappy a start as possible, with George weeping through the wedding ceremony. Within weeks, Caroline and George were separated, never to be reconciled.

Infant Princess Charlotte, Laurence; Bourlier, M.A.

Against all odds, in the few nights the couple did spend together, they managed to conceive their only child, and Charlotte was born on 7^th January, 1796. The day after, George was overcome with panic and drafted a will in which he left everything he had to his ‘true’ wife Maria Fitzherbert and to his legal, despised spouse Caroline, just one shilling. The will also left instruction to the effect that his new-born daughter Charlotte should be raised by her paternal grandparents, and under no circumstances should her mother have any influence whatsoever on her upbringing. It was only by the grace of George III’s good will, and his fondness for Caroline, that she was able to maintain any semblance of a relationship with her daughter at all. Charlotte grew up lonely and neglected in a dreary annex of Carlton House, with only the company of elderly governesses and tutors for comfort.

Although Charlotte undoubtedly lived a very unhappy for life for the entirety of her formative years, she continued to display the energy and mischievous nature that had so repelled her father from her mother. She was besotted with her maternal uncle, the Duke of Brunswick, and at times would draw on a moustache and march around the house making sounds as close an imitation to swearing as she could, to mimic his mannerisms. Her natural charm meant that Charlotte was far more popular than her father and he was childishly jealous of her. As a result, she was kept from public view as much as possible, trapped in a ‘protracted childhood’. She was not introduced to society and was not given her own establishment and income at the age of eighteen, as a future monarch normally would have been.

In 1813, the idea was conceived for Charlotte to marry William, the Hereditary Prince of Orange, ‘Slender Billy’. Charlotte had heard a great deal of unflattering talk of William and was not well-disposed toward the match. Although Charlotte’s opinion of William did change somewhat on meeting him at her father’s palace at Brighton, her heart was never in the engagement. The marriage contract was signed in 1814 but Charlotte was already infatuated with another man, the dashing womaniser, Frederick of Prussia. Charlotte remained blissfully unaware of Frederick’s entirely dishonourable intentions and, increasingly distraught at the idea of a loveless marriage to William, took flight from her home on foot, declaring the engagement at an end. It was clear no happy relationship could be salvaged and the marriage was abandoned.Once she had rid herself of the dread Orange match in 1815, Charlotte hoped to hear from her erstwhile love interest, Frederick of Prussia. Much to her distress it became more and more obvious that no such communication was forthcoming and she was forced to reconcile herself with her second choice of husband.

Charlotte and Leopold of Saxe-Coburg-Saalfield (later Leopold of the Belgians) had met during the fetes, celebrations and conferences in London that had followed the temporary defeat of Napoleon’s sometime prior. He was charming, handsome, in fact, Napoleon claimed him to be the most handsome man to ever set foot in the Tuileries, and penniless. Still smarting over the snub of his preferred beau however, it took George some time to acquiesce to Charlotte’s request to bless the marriage. It wasn’t until January of 1816, in the Music Room of the Pavilion, that George finally agreed to allow the wedding to go ahead. On the 2^nd of May 1816, Charlotte and Leopold were married in the Crimson Drawing Room at Carlton House in a modest but joyous ceremony in which Charlotte wore a dress woven with real silver that was said to cost some £10,000. During their short-lived, but loving and happy marriage Leopold and Charlotte were frequently seen out driving in carriages and at the opera, but also enjoyed spending time at their new home, Claremont, renovating and decorating.

The Death and Apotheosis of Princess Charlotte

Charlotte suffered two miscarriages in this time but her third pregnancy showed every sign of being carried to term and the country prepared to welcome the new future king or queen. On the 3^rd of November, 1817, Charlotte’s labour began and lasted for over fifty hours. On the 5^th of November, she finally gave birth to a stillborn son. Remaining stoical in the face of tragedy Charlotte appeared to recover and be doing well. In the small hours of the next morning however, Charlotte’s condition had worsened and it became clear that she was bleeding internally. She died that morning aged only 21 years, and was buried with her child. Having lost beloved wife and child in one fell swoop, Leopold was devastated and never truly recovered. The nation mourned with him and a huge number of memorial souvenirs were produced to commemorate the passing of Britain’s hope. The shops were shut for two weeks, haberdashers ran out of black cloth and it was said that even the lowest of paupers had ragged black armbands. Charlotte endured in public memory for many years but her predecessor as heir to the throne, Princess Victoria of Kent, made such a lasting impression throughout her iconic 63 year reign that Charlotte was overshadowed. The Pavilion seems a fit place to remember her as the site where her marriage to Leopold was agreed and her only brief period of true happiness began.

Meg Hogg, Visitor Services Officer

This is a legacy story from an earlier version of our website. It may contain some formatting issues and broken links.

When visiting museums (especially if you get the privilege to go behind the scenes) you may well have seen little insect traps in corners or storage cabinets.

These traps make up an integrated pest management (IPM) programme, monitoring the levels of pest insects present in the museum, by looking at those that have stumbled upon the traps. Sometimes lures are used to attract a sex of a target species (e.g. pheromone lures for clothes moths) and sometimes the traps are simply blunder traps.

Our conservation team monitors the traps present in each of our museums, and seasonal reports are generated by our preventative conservation team. The latest report looking at pest activity over the summer months showed a marked increase in pest species trapped in the taxidermy store area at the Booth Museum. Having worked on audits in this section earlier in the summer, we knew this could only have happened in the last couple of months, so set about looking in cupboards. All seemed fine until we reached the large mammal taxidermy cupboards at the far end of the stores.

On opening the storage cupboard, it was immediately evident that this was the source of the increased activity. While most of the smaller items had been bagged up during the audit, the larger items were too large for the sheets of plastic we had had available. Unfortunately, this meant that the large specimens were the ones that had been found by some intrepid moth and beetle explorers and their offspring had set about devouring their fur. The bases of two specimens (roe deer and reindeer) were both covered with cut strands of fur, and our unfortunate goat now has bald fore legs up to the ankles.

Thankfully, due to the close monitoring of pests and the collections team at the Booth following up on the advice, we found the damage before it became too pronounced. The large items were wrapped in newly acquired large sheets of plastic, and the entire cupboards contents were shifted to our large walk in freezer at Preston Manor, purchased for just such an infestation. The cupboards were sprayed down with an insecticide, and plans are in progress to create tyvek tents in these stores to further reduce the chances of infestation, and keep these objects available for many more generations of visitors and researchers.

This work is only possible with donations from the public, especially in the face of falling funding levels. Please do consider donating either during your visit or online here.

Lee Ismail, Curator of Natural Sciences

This is a legacy story from an earlier version of our website. It may contain some formatting issues and broken links.

From the end of July 2016 until early 2017 there will be a display on bears in history, art and popular culture on the North Balcony of Brighton Museum. It is curated by Lee Ismail, Curator of Natural Science at the Booth Museum, assisted by colleagues from a variety of teams.

Lee asked me to contribute to a ‘Bear Discovery Day’ on 3 August and this was a good opportunity for me to look back at any bear-related material and objects I used for the Exotic Creatures exhibition at the Royal Pavilion earlier this year.

A bear from Thomas Bewick’s History of Quadrupeds, 1804 edition

In the Georgian and for much of the Victorian era bears were not considered cute or cuddly (the teddy bear as toy was “invented” much later) but mostly known to the public as performing animals in urban areas, often paraded by exotically dressed owners, and in the very cruel context of bear-baiting. Many depictions of bears from that period present them as fierce and dangerous creatures, sometimes tamed, but always shackled, muzzled or collared. A number of ceramic figures in the Willett Collection of Popular Pottery in Brighton Museum depict this then popular form of entertainment. Until around 1830 you would also have been able to see bears (mostly black and brown bears) in public menageries, for example at the Tower in London, and at Exeter ‘Change in The Strand. Bears were also bred commercially for the production of bear fat, which was used for greasing wigs and moustaches.

Attitudes to how animals should be kept and treated changed towards the end of the Georgian era, coinciding with the founding of the Zoological Society London in 1826 and the opening of the Society’s gardens in Regent’s Park in 1828, which George IV greatly supported. The Society was dedicated to scientific study and research and was also concerned about better conditions for the animals. However, some early pictures of the bear enclosure still show visitors and keepers poking the animals with sticks to provoke fierce reactions. Although bear-baiting and other extremely cruel performances became less common, animals were still being paraded around fairs and in pageants and shown off at inns and public houses.

A lithograph by George Scharf from 1836, showing the bear enclosure at the Zoological Gardens in Regent’s Park, London

Bears about to be poked, from Robert Huish’s ‘The Wonders of the Animal Kingdom, London’, 1830

Several attempts were made to establish a zoo in Brighton, but none lasted long. In 1822 Ireland’s Gardens opened just north of St Peter’s Church, on land owned by Thomas Read Kemp. The pleasure gardens were never quite finished and James Ireland sold them after a few years. In the early 1830s they were under new ownership and advertised as ‘Zoological Gardens’, but these, too, were short-lived and the grounds closed  in 1833.  In a book published just before the closure the author J.D. Parry writes, ‘The collection of animals is at present small, and kept in a temporary place, but it is very well managed. It consists of two young tigers, two fine leopards, a panther, hyaena, a lynx, two Russian bears, foreign goats, deer, lamas, monkeys, &c. &c. The lion and the elephant are still wanting.’ Parry also mentions that there were plans to ‘orientalise’ a number of buildings in the grounds.

Design for Royal Zoological Gardens, Brighton, early 1830s

The Royal Zoological Gardens on the site of Ireland’s Gardens seen in this print were never built as envisaged here, but the assembly of vaguely Chinese structures is typical of both 18th century pleasure gardens and 19th century zoo architecture. Look closely and you can see the bear enclosure in the bottom left of the image. Of this grand design, probably proposed in the early 1830s, only the south gate, topped by figures of lions, remains today. The site is now occupied by Park Crescent (built in 1849) and its gardens.

Detail of Design for Royal Zoological Gardens

In or around 1936 a small zoo was opened at the newly built Withdean Stadium in Brighton. It closed during the war but re-opened in 1948 as Withdean Zoological Gardens. In 1949 Brighton papers reported that the zoo boasted ‘he largest collection of animals on the south coast ‘, including ‘Russian and Himalayan bears.’ Like its predecessor it was not a financial success and closed in June 1952.

Alexandra Loske, Curator at the Royal Pavilion

The Bears Discovery Day will take place on 3rd of August, 10am-1pm & 2-4pm. Curators and researchers will be talking about objects related to bears from Brighton Museum’s collections. Free with admission. For more information go to http://brightonmuseums.org.uk/brighton/whats-on-2/#!bears-discovery-day

This is a legacy story from an earlier version of our website. It may contain some formatting issues and broken links.

Some of the human remains in the collection have less for us to go on than those we have blogged about previously.

One such example is the human remains contained in a box marked ‘Eldred Avenue’ in Brighton. The only paperwork accompanying them were handwritten notes recording that they were ‘presented by Sgt James (of Brighton Police ?) and ‘Found [in] 1956’ in ‘Eldred Avenue, off Dyke Road, B’ton’. Interestingly, the notes show that the human remains were originally thought to be of ‘Anglo Saxon’ date but this had subsequently been crossed-out and changed to ‘Neolithic?’, however, it is not known at this point what either of these dates was based upon.

The Eldred Road box contained the remains of two individuals who we assessed as a probable male aged 30-45 years and a probable female aged at least 18 years.

Also found with the human remains was a cow’s metatarsal (foot) bone. These do feature in Neolithic burial practice but we don’t know if this bone was actually buried with the human remains from Eldred Road and, as there were no other finds with the human remains, radiocarbon dating would be needed to find out when these two people lived.

Osteo Notes:

We didn’t find any evidence of illness in the fragmentary remains of the female skeleton but we did find that the male skeleton had suffered from some health issues. The only teeth remaining for us to examine were a loose upper molar and premolar. Pictured below is the view of the roof of his mouth from below.  Most of the teeth were lost from the skeleton after he died, however, all but one of his lower molars and all three upper molars on the right (his left) in the photograph were lost while he was still alive. Here you can see that the bone has grown over the sockets afterwards, as happens to us today when dentists remove our teeth. The roof of his mouth itself is pitted with little holes which is evidence that he suffered an infection in that area, probably following on from a dental infection, all of which was probably rather unpleasant for him.

We also found that this man had osteoarthritis in his right elbow and and both shoulders, which would have caused him pain and discomfort as it does for people today who commonly develop this condition as they grow older. We can also tell from his arm and leg bones that an infection had prompted a new outer layer of bone to grow on them.

These two individuals are not the only ancient human remains in the collection to have been passed on to the museum by the Police. It would be interesting to find out a bit more about them but this will take a bit more detective work.

Andrew Maxted, Curator (Collections Projects) and Dawn Cansfield 

This is a legacy story from an earlier version of our website. It may contain some formatting issues and broken links.

For many of us, January is a time to cut down on food and drink following the excesses of Christmas. This was clearly not the case for the Prince Regent.

Dinner menu served at the Royal Pavilion, 18 January 1817

200 years ago, Prince George hosted Grand Duke Nicolas of Russia in an extraordinary banquet at the Royal Pavilion. The meal consisted of over 100 dishes prepared by celebrity chef Antonin Careme. Some of the more exotic dishes included:

• The head of a great sturgeon in Champagne
• Jellied partridge with mayonnaise
• Pigeons in crayfish butter
• Terrine of larks
• Rose ice cream
• The Royal Pavilion rendered in pastry

A Voluptuary Under the Horrors of Digestion by James Gillray, 1792

The Prince Regent was famed for his excessive eating, and frequently mocked for his obesity. But this banquet was as much of a performance as an eating pleasure; the sheer scale and extravagance of the feast suggests that it was designed to impress.

A copy of the menu for this banquet can be seen by visitors in the Great Kitchen of the Royal Pavilion. The menu is also available to buy in the form of a tea towel or a chopping board, two of the most popular items in our online shop.

You can learn more about how George dined at the Royal Pavilion in this extract from our audio tour with David Beevers, Keeper of the Royal Pavilion.

[accordion]
[pane title=”Read the Transcript”]

Dinner started at six o’clock, and went on for several hours. It usually consisted of dozens of courses, with several dishes served at once, as David Beevers explains:

‘It was called ‘service à la française’; there was ‘service à la française’ and ‘service à la russe’. ‘Service à la russe’ is what we use more or less today at formal dinners with each course brought to you by a waiter. ‘Service à la française’ was the courses were laid out on the table and you helped yourself to them and helped your neighbour to them and you might have three or four, what we would call courses, all laid out on the table at the same time. The table was very overloaded with plates and food and all kinds of things going on.’

At the end of the 18th century, it was customary for gentlemen to sit at one side of the table and ladies to sit at the other, with the order dictated by rank. George preferred a different arrangement, which, like his chefs, was a French import: placing men and women next to each other. It also meant greater contact between men and women, with all the possibilities for discreet dalliance that this entailed. For George, it meant he could sit beside whoever was his current favourite. And rather than being stuck at the end of the table, he sat in the middle, where he could be at the centre of things: the life and soul of the party.

Please remember you can ask staff if you have any other questions about this room.
[/pane]
[/accordion]

You can also view both the Great Kitchen and the Banqueting Room online on one of our virtual tours of the Royal Pavilion.