Settee

Object/Artifact

Historic Charleston Foundation

Settee

Origformat: digital; Resolution: 200

Name/Title

Settee

Entry/Object ID

1999.1.17

Description

Mahogany with mahogany veneer, yellow pine, ash and tulip poplar. Settee made in Charleston, 1795-1810. From John Bivins, September 20, 1999: Including this example, there are five known neo-classical Charleston settees (no sofas or settees are known to survive from the colonial period). The origin of this one was quite clear even without removal of the upholstery, due both to the style of the inlays and most particularly to the form of the crest. The crest rail drops below the arm returns, which is very unusual, and the back is centered with an inlaid tablet. Two other settees from the same shop have much the same crest, (see file for photocopies). The first is privately owned in Charleston and the other is in the MESDA collection. The back of the MESDA example is identical to this one except for the fact that it has a diamond inlay in the tablet and horizontal husks at teach side of the tablet. The elliptical rosewood inlay inside the lunetted-corner satinwood background on the tablet of ours has been seen on the stiles of several Charleston sideboards which also happen to share the same small leg husks of this and the MESDA settee. All of this group of furniture appears to... be the work of one of the Scottish shops of the city. Like the MESDA example, the triple-string inlay on this settee returns on the inside faces of the arms. The seat frame is of birch -- probably river birch -- which is encountered frequently in Charleston work, particularly the fly frames of neoclassical tables. The rest of the frame is yellow pine (all verified by microanalysis). The mahogany portions of the frame have an old and possibly original surface. The front legs retain their original casters; those on the back legs are missing.The open corner braces of the seat frame are original, but have triangles of wood nailed below the front braces (there is damage from this). The only alteration of the frame (as of Sept. 1999) is the addition of a middle leg at the back; unlike the MESDA settee, this one did not have a center rear leg originally. Evident in the photographs, the back rail was cut to receive the new leg, and an oak brace screwed to the front face of the back rail to re-unite the severed rail. Like the MESDA settee, this one had a front-to-rear brace dovetailed to the front and rear rails just to the side of center. This has been removed, and the front-to-rear center brace -- as in the photos -- added. Were the settee to be used, ... likely recommend that it be left with the added back leg and attendant structure, but in a museum situation ... believe that the leg should be removed, the rear rail pieced in, the new bracing removed, and a new brace returned to the existing dovetails in the front and rear rails. Since the back rail wasn't removed, the value of the piece fortunately isn't hurt. The MESDA settee has a new front seat rail, evidently due to a great number of upholsterings, but the medial brace fortunately remains. The only other Charleston example exhibited to the public is the MESDA settee. There are very minor edge repairs needed to the upholstery rabbets of the crest and arms, and castors are needed for the rear legs. With the back rail repaired, (Bivins) estimate that conservation will fall in the $1800 range or less, not counting the upholstery, which clearly should be done by someone experienced in historic pieces.

Collection

Historic Charleston Foundation Collection

Acquisition

Accession

1999.1.

Source or Donor

Purchase

Acquisition Method

Purchased

Made/Created

Manufacturer

Charleston, South Carolina

Date made

1795 - 1810

Place

Location

Charleston, South Carolina

Lexicon

Nomenclature 4.0

Nomenclature Secondary Object Term

Settee

Nomenclature Primary Object Term

Sofa

Nomenclature Sub-Class

Seating Furniture

Nomenclature Class

Furniture

Nomenclature Category

Category 02: Furnishings

Other Name

Sofa

Dimensions

Height

32 in

Depth

24 in

Length

53-7/8 in

Material

Mahogany, maple, yellow pine

Good

Overall Condition

Good

Notes

Conserved by David Beckford in Charleston before being sent to conservator Elizabeth Lahikainen in Salem, Massachussetts for upholstery.

Conservation

Notes

Scope of work: Treatment: This treatment was a modified Ethafoam treatment. Upholstery: The frame arrived with no textiles. The frame was examined for upholstery evidence and initially none was discovered. Only by raking light during treatment did fabric impressions appear p.r.outside ear. A dep impression of a stain weave structure is most likely haircloth. The satin was orientated side ways. There also were four faint puddle impressions fo the nailing pattern along the outside arem. some other nailing was discovered along the outside of the back posts. See photos. Ethafoam was cut to fit the seat back and arms units and then shaped to resemble the historic profile. Nomex was fitted into the edges of the foam and a line of Beva was appled tothe outside edge as the attachment systemfor the damask. THe seat was fitted with a custon Baltic birch plywood base to hold a cushion. The ply wood was constructed in three parts to avoid lock out and supported with struts a the breaks tocomplete the support system. Bolts were used to attach them together. A fade line at the end of the arm post however revealed the seat height of a stationary seat so the treatment was changed to include this detail. The Ethafoam was padded to give the upholstery a textile finish.The seat was built up with paddig to the fae line and tapered to the rails. The fabric edge was trimmed with coated brass nail heads that were glued on. Frame and Finish Conservation-see report by John Bivens Materials :Nomex, 1.w.linen, Baltic birch plywood, no-resin polyester batting, custon silk damask from Classic Revivals, Boston, Beva adhesive, bolts/screws cotton threads, SS staples, Ethafoam Sunnary: This was a very successful conservation treatment. The standards of conservation were well served by using low interventive methods to install the upholstery an the presentation in the room interior is exemplary. THe documented silk damask is in a yellow/gold color that integrates well with the gilding in the room and other furnishings with a splendid period flair. The presentation issue of the nailing pattern came up during treatment. The holes along the back posts required some study to disern if any of them were brass nails. Initially it was thought that the nails had been placed ina curl at the join of the seat. In the end some evidences of the holes were too questionable as to being from a bras shank so ot thought to be conclusive. the nails, therefore, were place in the traditional line along the outside edge.

Treatment

Conservator

David Beckford

Notes

Scope of work: Retenon and reset center rear leg Otherwise minor repairs and fill to tack holes reglue frame completely and add center brace Clean and wax. Cost: 1200 Expected completion date: 1999-12-03

Relationships

Related Publications

Notes

"The Furniture of Charleston, 1680-1820" Volume II: Neoclassical Furniture Bradford L. Rauschenberg John Bivins, Jr. "The Frank L. Horton Series" Old Salem, Inc./Museum of Early Southern Decorative Arts, Winston-Salem, NC, 2003 Nch-25c. Sofa, (Photograph only) Volume IIp. 786 MRF 29,252. (MESDA Research File)

Provenance

Notes

Found: Maryland Found in Mayland by some Pennsylvania antique dealers who thought it to be from New England. Jon and Ann Bivins acquired it in 1999 and offered it to HCF.

Exhibition

General Notes

Note

Notes: Included in the book "Charleston Furniture" by John Bivins and Bradford Rauschenberg, published 2002-2003. no worksheet,

Created By

admin@catalogit.app

Create Date

July 8, 2002

Updated By

sferguson@historiccharleston.org

Update Date

April 26, 2023