Category: Uncategorized

Back in 2014, Number One London Tours organized a Duke of Wellington Tour which, I’m pleased to recall, was a resounding success. Our first stop was, fittingly, Number One London, the town house of the 1st Duke of Wellington, also known as Apsley House.  We arrived before public hours in order to take a private tour given by Christopher Small, who kindly agreed to let us photograph the interior of the house, which is otherwise prohibited.

For the Apsley House wsebite at English Heritage, click here. The website has an excellent timeline on the history of the house from its original construction by architect Robert Adam (1728-92) in 1771 for Henry Bathurst, Lord Apsley, to its present day status as The Wellington Museum.

First Christopher took us to see the many gifts and awards the Duke received from grateful governments and monarchs. Here are just a few from the several rooms full of treasure.

Arriving at the gigantic statue of Napoleon by Canova, one is amazed first by its size, then by its placement in Apsley House (home of Napoleon’s conqueror), then by the complete lack of resemblance to what we know of Napoleon’s physique: short and stout — and with no waistcoat into which he could insert his hand.

Canova sculpted this image of Napoleon as Mars the Peacemaker between 1802 and 1806. It is said that Napoleon disliked this statue and had it placed in the basement of the Louvre. He found it disrespectful. The British government purchased the statue for 66,000 Francs in 1816; the Prince Regent gave it to Wellington, who then had to find a place for it.  The floor beneath the statue had to be reinforced in order to hold the heavy marble work, over eleven feet in height.

The graceful curving staircase is part of the original Adam design. Personally, this is one of my favourite features of the house and each time I visit, I contemplate all of the great and good of bygone eras whose hands touched the banisters. On the principal floor (up one flight) there are four drawing rooms, the State dining room, and the Waterloo Gallery.

Designed in 1774 by Robert Adam, his fireplace, frieze and ceiling ornament remain.

On a recent visit to Portugal, I visited 18th century Queluz Palace, located just outside Lisbon, as it’s on the itinerary of Number One London’s upcoming Peninsular War Tour – it’s the site of Junot’s signing the Convention of Sintra. The Palace was built as the summer retreat of Pedro of Braganza, brother of the king, who would go on to become king himself after marrying his niece, Queen Maria I. Queluz served as the official royal residence from 1794 to 1826.

To escape the forces of Napoleon I in 1807, the Portuguese royal family abandoned Queluz and fled to Brazil. The French occupational forces took control of the palace and their commander, General Junot, made several alterations to the building. On the royal family’s return from exile in 1821, King João VI preferred to live at the Palace of Mafra.

Restoration of the Palace after years of neglect and a fire in 1934 has brought the building back to life, it’s Rococo rooms now decorated with murals, ornate ceilings and period furniture that demonstrate how tastes developed in this period marked by the baroque, rococo and neoclassic influences.

The Queluz Palace and its gardens are one of the most remarkable examples of the harmonious link between landscape and palatial architecture in Portugal. From the Visit Sintra website: The different green spaces meld with the building, and its façades face the upper “French style” gardens (Pênsil and Malta), extending through the delicate broderie of parterres woven by box hedges. The statues, inspired by classical mythology, adorn and dot the main axes, adding a touch of splendour to these gardens. The remarkable collection of stone and lead sculptures originate from Italy and England, the latter by London artist John Cheere. These gardens are separated from the adjacent gardens, as well as the surrounding forested areas, and agricultural areas, by stone balustrades with vases and statues. The portico radiates out onto a set of connecting avenues which, in turn, are connected to others, forming a complex geometric lattice, with lakes and water features at each vertex. We highlight the lake designed by Frenchman Jean-Baptiste Robillion in 1764, shaped as a starred octagon (Lake of the Medals), among others.

If you’d like to visit Queluz Palace, please consider joining guides Gareth Glover and Kristine Hughes on Number One London’s Peninsular War Tour, May 2024. You’ll find the complete itinerary and further details here.

Victoria and I visited Fashioning Masculinities: The Art of Menswear exhibition at the V&A last year. Below, I’ve selected three of the most memorable portraits to share with you. In each, the sitters’ clothing and pose were chosen to impart a very definite statement and served to define how they would be perceived by the viewer.

             Once owned by Horace Walpole, the wooden cravat above was carved to imitate gros point de Venise, a heavily textured lace fashionable for both men and women during the middle of the 17th century.

Charles Coote, 1st Earl of Bellamont, in Robes of the Order of the Bath by Sir Joshua Reynolds. While this portrait is today derided as an example of camp excess, at the time it was painted, the plumed headdress, tassels and beribboned shoes were meant to imply patriarchal power. Originally, the Earl’s robes were a rich scarlet red, the pigment now having faded to a feminine pink. Reynolds considered fashion to be fleeting, so rarely painted dress in such detail as above.

This elaborate robe de chambre of brocaded silk was made from a woman’s skirt.

Fleetwood Hesketh by Joseph Wright of Derby 1769. Here, Hesketh is dressed as a country squire in hunting pink. The powder horn visible in his pocket and his relaxed pose signal that he is a man of leisure, with time to devote to his chosen pursuits. The skirted coat, perfect when riding, evolved into the frock coat.

Captain Gilbert Heathcote by William Owen, circa 1801-1805. Heathcote, a Navy captain, adhered to official guidelines in the tailoring of his uniform, embellishing it with gold braid, buttons and epaulettes to signal to the observer that he was both wealthy and fashionable.

Do you have a favourite amongst the masculine portraits of the period? Please leave a comment and share your thoughts with us.

Louisa Cornell

The relationship between herding dogs and their masters is one of longest standing and in many ways the closest when it comes to dogs and humans during the Regency. Herding dogs were some of the hardest working dogs of the era, but they spent a great deal of time with their masters. It was not unusual for herding dogs to sleep with their masters, especially when they were out with their herds or flocks. The level of communication between herding dog and master was on a completely different level than that of a pet and master. This sort of relationship would certainly engender a level of mutual respect and affection between dog and master. There were, of course, exceptions. The life of a shepherd, a keeper of sheep and cattle, was a hard one. There were those who trained and used their dogs with tactics of fear and abuse. However, this did not always make for a willing and obedient dog. A master who appealed to a herding dog’s innate desire to please and instinct to herd was far more successful, and part of this sort of relationship had to involve love, loyalty, and affection between man and dog.

The artist Edwin Landseer (1802-1873) understood this relationship very well when he painted his famous work The Old Shepherd’s Chief Mourner.

Old English Sheepdogs

It is generally agreed that this breed, fairly closely to the way we know it, had its origins in the southwestern counties of England in the early 19^th century. They were referred to as “drovers’ dogs” as they were used primarily to drive cattle and large breeds of sheep to market. Their tails were docked to show that they were working dogs. Companion dogs were taxed, working dogs were not.

Border Collies

Remember that the appearance of these dogs during the Regency would not match our vision of this breed today. Not to mention, a number of different sorts of dog fell under the label of sheep dog. The dog most like the sheep dogs of the Regency is the border collie.

Perhaps the earliest training manual for sheepdogs was written by William Ellis (ca. 1690-1759). Ellis was a farmer from Little Gaddesden in Hertfordshire, about 30 miles northwest of London. In 1732 he wrote The Practical Farmer or The Hertfordshire Husbandman. His book enjoyed popularity immediately upon publication. In this book, Ellis writes a description of the ideal sheepdog.

A Shepherd generally keeps a rough-coated Dog, partly, I suppose, for their being, as I said, better enabled by their fluffy warm Coat, to withstand the Violence of Frosts and cold Winds, or to become the more frightful to their Sheep, and for his closer Attendance on his Master, as he is somewhat slower than a smooth-coated one, therefore not so subject to hare and run the Sheep too fast; and is commonly the most sensible one of all others…One Thomas…has a has a brindle-colour’d, very shaggy-hair’d Dog, of the biggest Sort, so much at Command, as to lie down by a Fold all Night to guard the Sheep till next Morning; and for making haste on an emergent Occasion, when Sheep are pent in a narrow Place, will run over their Backs; and in several other Respects, makes himself an excellent Shepherd’s Dog…

Sheepdogs generally began their training at the age of 6 months. They were taught a number of basic and important commands, the first of which was “lie down.” This was an important command when dealing with sheep as a dog on its feet tended to intimidate and sometimes frighten sheep. Every shepherd had his own system of commands and signals that could be a series of whistles, short word commands or even hand signals.

Shepherd’s dogs were divided into three categories or types during this era: the Shepherd’s Dog or Colley; the English Sheep-Dog or Southern Sheep-Dog; and the Cur or Drover’s Dog, As you can see the “breed” names were a little ambiguous. These dogs tended to be bred by shepherds and sheep farmers. Their bloodlines were managed and tracked in hand-written records by each farmer. Dogs from one farmer might be loaned out to another for stud purposes. These dogs were bred for very distinct qualities.

Keen sight.

A keen sense of smell.

Courage.

Intelligence.

Loyalty.

Vigilance.

Athletically active.

Constant watchfulness.

Agility.

Hardiness in all kinds of weather.

Devotion to duty.

Louisa Cornell

By the late 18^th century, a new species of rat had invaded England. The brown or “Norway” rats were much larger and quite frankly more frightening than the common black rat indigenous to England. Catching and eliminating rats was considered the perfect job for the poorer citizens of England, especially those people born and bred in the poorer areas of larger cities like London, Manchester, and Edinburgh. After all, these were the people who spent their childhoods playing with rats in the floorboards of their meager homes.

The more successful rat-catchers used ferrets and dogs to catch rats. They were paid per rat and sending a dog into the sewers and less clean and accessible parts of homes and businesses was less work, for the rat-catcher at least. The dogs used for this task were mostly terrier-type dogs. Their prey drive, ferocity, small size and quickness made them perfectly suited for the task.

Some of the breeds used as ratters were:

Bull Terriers

Bedlington Terriers

Fox Terriers

Jack Russell Terriers

Rat Terriers

Black and Tan Terriers

Manchester Terriers

Yorkshire Terriers

Staffordshire Bull Terriers

Those who used and bred dogs for this purpose kept close track of their dogs’ pedigrees. They sought to bred in those traits best suited to ratters and the breed out unwanted qualities. Surprisingly, even those poorest and least educated breeders of rat-catching dogs took great pride in the breeding and pedigrees of their dogs. Having a dog related to some of the better-known ratters was a source of pride, not to mention a great selling point when seeking employment, especially in the more successful businesses and in the more exclusive homes in London.

How did dogs gain reputations as champion ratters? From the late 18^th into the early 19^th centuries word-of-mouth was a big part of spreading a dog’s fame. However, rat-catchers didn’t only breed dogs, they also bred rats. They bred rats for three purposes.

1. Frankly, they bred them to encourage repeat customers or to persuade customers to avail themselves of the rat-catcher’s services. Yes, they bred rats to turn loose in businesses and houses to drum up business.
2. They bred them to demonstrate their dogs’ prowess as rat catchers. They gave demonstrations and eventually, once other baiting sports were banned in 1835 by Parliament’s passing of the Cruelty to Animals Act, rat baiting contests took place in the facilities formerly used for cock-fighting, dog fighting and bear baiting. Thousands of rats were needed for these contests and ratters provided them.
3. They bred rats for unique colors to sell them to the gentry and aristocrats as pets. Yes, even young Queen Victoria had pet rats, but people were keeping rats as pets long before she did. One of the most famous breeders of pet rats was also one of England’s most famous rat catchers. Jack Black styled himself as rat catcher to Queen Victoria. He was also written up in Henry Mayhew’s 1815 book London Labor and the London Poor. He dressed rather elegantly for a rat catcher in order to drum up business. He was the first recorded breeder of fancy rats and also provided rats for rat baiting contests.

Rat catching dogs made money for their owners both in catching and eliminating rats for customers and in participating in rat baiting contests which involved cash prizes for the winning dogs and, of course, wagering on the outcome of the contests.

These dogs were highly prized by their owners both for their ability to kill rats for customers and by 1835 for their ability in the rat baiting ring. I daresay their lot in life was better than that of turnspit dogs in spite of the very real danger of possible injury and even death when catching rats. These dogs were doing what they were born and bred to do.

One of the most celebrated ratters of his day was the 26-pound bull terrier, Billy, owned by Charles Dew.

The October 1822, edition of The Sporting Magazine provide us with descriptions of two rat pit matches with Billy.

Thursday night, Oct. 24, at a quarter before eight o’clock, the lovers of rat killing enjoyed a feast of delight in a prodigious raticide at the Cockpit, Westminster. The place was crowded. The famous dog Billy, of rat-killing notoriety, 26 lb. weight, was wagered, for 20 sovereigns, to kill 100 rats in 12 minutes. The rats were turned out loose at once in a 12-foot square, and the floor whitened, so that the rats might be visible to all. The set-to began, and Billy exerted himself to the utmost. At four minutes and three-quarters, as the hero’s head was covered with gore, he was removed from the pit, and his chaps being washed, he lapped some water to cool his throat. Again, he entered the arena, and in vain did the unfortunate victims labor to obtain security by climbing against the sides of the pit, or by crouching beneath the hero. By twos and threes, they were caught, and soon their mangled corpses proved the valor of the victor. Some of the flying enemy, more valiant than the rest, endeavored by seizing this Quinhus Flestrum of heroic dogs by the ears, to procure a respite, or to sell their life as dearly as possible; but his grand paw soon swept off the buzzers, and consigned them to their fate. At seven minutes and a quarter, or according to another watch, for there were two umpires and two watches, at seven minutes and seventeen seconds, the victor relinquished the glorious pursuit, for all his foes lay slaughtered on the ensanguined plain. Billy was then caressed and fondled by many; the dog is estimated by amateurs as a most dextrous animal; he is, unfortunately, what the French Monsieurs call borg-ne, that is, blind of an eye. This precious organ was lost to him some time since by the intrepidity of an inimical rat, which as he had not seized it in a proper place, turned round on its murderer, and deprived him by one bite of the privilege of seeing with two eyes in future. The dog BILLY, of rat-killing notoriety, on the evening of the 13th instant, again exhibited his surprising dexterity; he was wagered to kill one hundred rats within twelve minutes; but six minutes and 25 seconds only elapsed, when every rat lay stretched on the gory plain, without the least symptom of life appearing.’ Billy was decorated with a silver collar, and a number of ribband bows, and was led off amidst the applauses of the persons assembled.

Billy’s best competition results are: (Yes, they kept meticulous records of this.)

Date              Rats killed         Time                                   Time per rat
1820–??-??        20               1 minute, 11 seconds                3.6 seconds
1822-09-03      100              8 minutes, 45 seconds             5.2 seconds
1822-10-24       100              7 minutes, 17 seconds             4.4 seconds
1822-11-13        100               6 minutes, 25 seconds            3.8 seconds
1823-04-22      100               5 minutes, 30 seconds            3.3 seconds
1823-08-05      120               8 minutes, 20 seconds            4.1 seconds

Billy’s career was crowned on 22 April 1823, when a world record was set with 100 rats killed in five and a half minutes. This record stood until 1862, when it was claimed by another ratter named “Jacko”. Billy continued in the rat pit until old age, reportedly with only one eye and two teeth remaining.