George III’s Visit to Kenwood House in 1794

By Peter Barber, member of the Georgian Papers Programme Steering Committee.


Kenwood House is one of the most popular tourist sites in London. This is largely because of its beautiful grounds, the outstanding collection of paintings bequeathed by the first Earl of Iveagh in 1927 and because of the Robert Adam rooms in the house itself commissioned by Lord Chief Justice William Murray, first Earl of Mansfield (1705-93) between 1764 and 1779. The extensions made by his nephew and successor, the diplomat David Murray, 6th Viscount Stormont and 2nd Earl of Mansfield (1717-96) have until recently been less well known. The diary of Queen Charlotte shows, however, that at the time they were of interest to the King himself, and presumably to others like him who had architectural inclinations and expertise.

Kenwood House had originally been built as a home for the King’s Printer, John Bill, shortly after 1616. Its healthy, elevated position and views over woods toward London undoubtedly explain the choice. The house was a substantial but by no means palatial suburban villa. In the early eighteenth century it passed through the hands of interrelated Scottish aristocrats, including George III’s later mentor, John Stuart, 3rd Earl of Bute who acquired it in 1746 and sold it to Murray in 1754, a year before Bute became George’s tutor and Groom of the Stole. Only an orangery stretching along the terrace to the west of the main house had been added to the house in the intervening years. Bute had been fond of the house and had doubtless talked to his impressionable pupil about it.

The house that Bute occupied was still just a villa. William Murray, who was created earl of Mansfield in 1776, had ambitions to turn it into a proper, aristocratic country seat, maintained through the rents from surrounding lands. These eventually extended from Kentish Town to Highgate Village, Crouch End and East Finchley (the link to the Mansfields is perpetuated through street names). The money also paid for the extensive parkland stretching south from the house to what is now Parliament Hill Fields on Hampstead Heath.

Despite employing Adam, however, Mansfield only added the – admittedly magnificent – library wing, which balanced the orangery, to the east of the house itself. The rest of the house had been re-faced, raised by a storey and its garden façade had been decorated with stucco, while a grand processional route was created from the front hall/dining room to the library. The rest of the house was left as it was, with the private rooms – which constituted the bulk of the space – retaining their original, domestic proportions.

The second earl had grander ambitions and, long before his uncle’s death, but with his full approval, he had determined to embellish Kenwood ‘upon a handsome plan’. He clearly intended to transform the house from a villa into a proper country seat, an English counterpart to his Scottish ancestral home, Scone Palace. Hampstead Lane was diverted so that it no longer passed Kenwood’s front door. The landscape designer, Humphrey Repton, was consulted about modifying the grounds in the latest, more picturesque taste. For the house itself, the new earl employed two architects who are now little-known, Robert Nasmith and, after his death in 1793, George Saunders (1762-1839). Saunders, however, was a well-read architectural innovator who enjoyed a good reputation in his time.

Between 1793 and 1796, Saunders transformed the house, adding large dining room and music room/drawing room wings, a vast set of service buildings and handsome stables. Under the influence of his wife, Louisa, née Cathcart, in 1794-5 he also added, a fashionable and well-placed dairy, tea-room and scullery, supposedly resembling a Swiss chalet, on a nearby hillock that could be seen from the house, while her favourite artist, Julius Caesar Ibbotson, decorated the music/drawing room with allegorical paintings.

For Friday 28 March 1794, Queen Charlotte recorded in her diary [RA GEO/ADD/43/3e] that ‘This Morning the King went to see in His Airing the improvements of Lord Mansfield (sic) villa at Caenwood. Lady Mansfield & Her Daughter were there’. That the King should go towards Kenwood for his ‘Airing’ is not surprising: the healthy air of Hampstead and Highgate had long attracted city dwellers of all sorts. The daughter of Lord Mansfield in Kenwood was probably Lady Caroline, then a five-year old infant.

But what particularly attracted the King to the improvements at Kenwood? It is unlikely to have been the dairy, of which by March 1794 very little would have been visible. However he might well have been interested in the features that that the artist and diarist Joseph Farington had noted in the previous November as being ‘in respect of architectural effect, strange’. This would have included the decision to leave the yellow brickwork of the two new wings to the main house exposed despite plaster concealing the bricks elsewhere.

Perhaps, however, it was the new kitchen that particularly appealed to the King. George III had since the 1780s become particularly interested in gothic architecture (and was indeed designing a gothic palace in Richmond). The new kitchen at Kenwood – which is still to be seen – was loosely modelled by Saunders on the medieval kitchen at Glastonbury Abbey.

This was well known in antiquarian circles and had, indeed, been the subject of an early watercolour by Turner. However, Saunders had enhanced it by increasing the amount of daylight streaming down from the cupola and windows – a feature that would surely have been of particular interest to the man whom Professor David Watkin has recently described as our ‘Architect King’.

“What, here? Really?” Finding Native Americans in the Royal Archives

Harrison Cutler, a third-year undergraduate student in History at King’s College London, reports on his project “Marginalised Indians: Native Americans in British Archives, 1763 to 1795” (supervisor: Dr Angel-Luke O’Donnell), as part of the King’s Undergraduate Research Fellowship scheme.


“What, here? Really?” – the potential difficulty of finding Georgian sources on Native Americans was encapsulated succinctly by a fellow researcher upon a visit to the Royal Archives at Windsor. Nevertheless, over the course of July and August 2016 I was able to accumulate two vast bibliographies of both pamphlets and books regarding Native American peoples from the library catalogues of George III located in the British Library.

Portrait of Thayendanegea (Joseph Brant) by Gilbert Stuart, 1786.

Before embarking on upon the Library reading rooms, Dr. O’Donnell and I discussed potentially illuminating themes and terms via which Native American sources might be found within the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century context. That George himself was such a keen naturalist suggested environmental texts might be fruitful. The French and Indian War, which culminated in the Royal Proclamation of 1763 (restricting colonial settlement to east of the Appalachians), as well as the American War of Independence highlighted that texts pertaining to warfare might be useful considering the significance of Native Americans in these military engagements. I was also wary of significant figures in colonial relations with Native Americans, including Indian Agent Sir William Johnson, whose regular relations with Native Americans would inform any authored works. These themes, amongst others, provided the starting point for beginning the databases.

The crucial source for these bibliographies were the unpublished Catalogue of King’s Pamphlets (9 vol., 1850s, L.R.419.b.3) and F. A. Barnard’s Bibliotechae Regiae Catalogus (10 vol., 1820, RAC Rare Books and Music Reading Room), which exhaustively detailed the contents of the King’s Library. Whilst systematically poring through each volume, I produced two longlists, each containing c. 500 potential sources by applying the selection criteria pre-established, which was continually broadened as I grew better accustomed to the nature of the respective collections.

From the catalogues, I noted the shelf reference, the author or reference name, the title, size, location and date of publishing, as well as the edition of the print. Taking down all of this information enabled me to further reduce the longlists I had created using the Eighteenth Century Collections Online (ECCO), a fully digitised database of over 180,000 books, pamphlets and much beyond. Since these documents are fully text-searchable, having found each of the documents from my longlists I used a series of key terms to identify whether Native Americans appeared therein.

Using the terms ‘Indian*’, ‘Tribe*’, ‘Native*’, ‘Savage*’, ‘Iroquois*’, ‘Mohawk*’, and ‘Cherokee*’, with the asterisk serving to broaden the search to similar terms or derivations, I was able to roughly quantify the preponderance, or absence, of Native Americans in each of the sources. Consequently, I reduced the longlist to a shortlist, ordered by the number of my key terms that appeared within each, taking the assumption that the greatest number of references would provide the best starting point for further investigation

This process was completed in full for the pamphlet database, taken from the Catalogue of King’s Pamphlets, which was the first task I undertook on my project. From a Catalogue of around 19,000 titles, I noted 673 titles, which produced 234 titles which struck at least one of my keywords. As Dr. O’ Donnell and I had predicted, the books database longlist was smaller, at only 310 titles. The mentioned process of reducing this to a shortlist is ongoing.

Overall, this was an extremely valuable experience for me to engage in broader academic investigation beyond my degree at King’s. I am very grateful for the support of Dr. O’Donnell, as well as manifold others including the staff at the Royal Archives for their invaluable tips into making the best of any archival visit. It has been fantastic to bear witness to the display of the Georgian Papers Programme at King’s, and I look forward to maintaining an eye on the progress of the project.

Coffee Mornings: Powering the Exploration of an Unfamiliar Archive

By Dr Angel Luke O’Donnell, Academic Liaison for the Georgian Papers Programme, and Teaching Fellow in North American History, King’s College London.

On the 20th October and 15th December 2016, King’s College London hosted coffee mornings for the fellows of the Georgian Papers Programme. These coffee mornings were opportunities for King’s academics to get to know the research undertaken in the Royal Archives. Most importantly, they were an opportunity for the fellows to share their research, their plans, and their ideas. As academic liaison, my hope, and the hope of my colleagues on the programme, is to encourage the development of a cohort of scholars sharing their knowledge of the archives.

While the Georgian Papers Programme will digitise the collections in the Royal Archives associated with the long eighteenth century, part of this process involves understanding the papers George and his family left to posterity. This is one of the most exciting parts of the process because so little is known about the contents. For a long time these papers were housed by the Duke of Wellington before he graciously donated them to the Royal Archives.

However, the full extent of the collections is still unknown and a lot of activity on the programme is about learning what is in the archives. There are index cards that record the addressee and receiver for correspondence, and our colleagues at the archives have initially surveyed the collections, giving us researchers an overview of the material, then alongside the digitisation there is a team cataloguing the items. Moreover, after the material goes up on the website another team enrich the catalogue by adding metadata information that provides keywords to help navigate. Finally, there is an exciting computer programme being written that can read the handwriting of George and some of his family, so there will also be the ability to search the collections through a keyword search. However, until all this is complete, researchers working in the archives still rely heavily on the expertise of the archivists and the experience of fellow scholars. And this is why these coffee mornings are so useful.

During the first meeting, we were joined by Bruce Ragsdale, Suzanne Schwarz, Felicity Myrone and Adam Crymble. There was also a good collection of King’s academics, including a welcome from Paul Readman, Vice Dean for Research in the Faculty of Arts & Humanities, giving a sense of the institutional context of the Georgian Papers Programme and the work of King’s. We also were joined by Katie Sambrook, who provided an overview of the possible connections with the College’s special collections, such as the Foreign and Commonwealth Office collection. Likewise, Geoff Browell described the King’s College archives.

Each of the fellows gave a brief sense of their research plans. Bruce presented a short overview of his work on George Washington and the possible connections between Washington’s interest in agriculture and George III’s interest. Adam gave us a fascinating oversight of his project to create a digital archive of a single meal of George III. Suzanne shared images of the sources about Sierra Leone that were fundamental to her research. Finally, Felicity Myrone described her current project cataloguing George’s maps and its intersections with her work on the provenance of material in the Royal Archive. We discussed issues related to agriculture, digital humanities, the history of collections and the Royal Navy. Taken together, I was struck by the breadth of projects associated with the Georgian material.

For the second meeting, Arthur Burns welcomed the fellows to the College and described his interest in the programme and his vision for the future as he takes the leadership of developing the academic programme at King’s and further afield. Afterwards, Cindy Kierner presented an overview of the ideas in her project, focusing especially on the natural disasters she is interested in examining further. Meanwhile, Daniel Reed told us about the work that he has undertaken so far connecting ecclesiastical material from a wide variety of archives. He explained his aim was to make further connections with the Royal Archives. There then followed an interesting discussion about the various intellectual and practical linkages between both Cindy and Daniel’s work. Ultimately, the session was a fantastic opportunity to exchange ideas about incorporating the Royal Archives material into broader strands of eighteenth-century research.

In each case, it has been a pleasure to see the connections that have developed and our aspiration is that over the next five years there will be a growing scholarly community discovering and writing about the Georgian Papers.

In fact to develop this aspiration, King’s College London have announced a new fellowship scheme for Summer 2017. The deadline is 31 March 2017. Please go here for more information and to apply.