Source 4, an extract from a booklet about Wimpole describes work on the Chapel and Church which shows change within a period. The source also states that three small villages were moved away to improve the views from Wimpole. This shows that rich landowners could do anything they liked to improve their properties. Source 6 tells of how the Chapel was built, possibly just to balance the West Wing and because there was a feeling of rivalry with the Chapel at Cannons. This shows that building owners were competitive, pretentious and that buildings were often changed just to show off. Source 8, a plan of Wimpole Hall and grounds in both 1730 and 1790, is quite useful in telling us about the developments of Wimpole. It shows many different changes, for example the folly has been added as has the Chinese bridge, pleasure grounds and the walled garden. The map also shows that extra wings have been added to the house and that Home Farm has moved slightly. However, in some ways the source is limited because it doesn’t show when the changes were made or who made them. For example, the source shows that the folly was added between 1730 and 1790 but it doesn’t tell us exactly when in that period it was added.
Although Wimpole is a good example of a Neo-Classical house it tells us nothing about the two previous styles of architecture and as source 5 states, ‘The two most important styles of architecture used in country houses are Tudor-Jacobean and Classical.’ Tattershall Castle in Lincolnshire tells us about castles and the Tudor-Jacobean style and shows that the two styles are similar, for example both styles often have crenellations. The castle was crenellated and an extra moat was added by Ralph, 3rd Lord Cromwell. This shows that, like Wimpole Hall many changes take place in houses to keep up with fashions. So, although Wimpole tells us nothing about the two previous styles of architecture it does show change within a period.
Osterly Park also shows this, it was bought in 1763 as an Elizabethan Mansion and was then quickly modernized by the architect Robert Adam who added a classical façade and an entrance façade. The house was now viewed by important people as a fashionable place to visit.
In conclusion I can say that although Wimpole tells us plenty about the Neo-Classical style of building and shows that houses were often changed within a period to keep up with fashions and tastes it tells us nothing about the previous styles of architecture used and taken alone Wimpole tells us very little.
Eliana Tacconi 10c2
Q2- How helpful is Wimpole Hall as a source in helping us understand the religious and social attitudes of the rich and poor in the 18th and 19th centuries?
Wimpole Hall shows us a reasonable amount about the religious and social attitudes but it does have limits as the house has undergone many changes and things were designed to make the owners look a certain way because that is how they wished to appear even if they were nothing like that. The Hall also shows us mainly about the rich and very little about the poor.
In the 18th century there was a very strict hierarchy between the rich and poor and religion was very important or people at least wanted to appear religious. Before the industrial revolution religion was like a social cement but as this occurred so many people had moved to the cities, the 1851 census showing that the majority no longer lived in the country, that there were not enough churches for everybody. This meant that a lot of people stopped going to church and religion became less important.
Wimpole is very useful in showing religious attitudes and I think that at the time religion was definitely becoming less important. I think this because the Chapel at Wimpole was beautifully decorated yet it was never consecrated so it couldn’t be used for proper services. This shows that they wanted to be seen as religious for social reasons but were not so, it is a good example of conspicuous consumption, they wanted to be seen to be spending money on religion. This is also true in the church in the grounds of Wimpole Hall. Although the church could be used for proper services this was only because of previous religious generations. Even so, the owners were buried in the church with huge extravagant statues of them holding bibles and swords as they wanted to be seen as religious and from the military even though it was not so.
Wimpole is useful in showing social attitudes in some ways because all of the changes show that fashion was very important and if you had the right kind of house you were respected. However, this cannot be taken at face value as the National Trust has made key changes to the house as the purpose isn’t a historical source, the National Trust have changed things to show their view of the past, e.g., they rebuilt some of the formal gardens at the back of the house and therefore this cannot be used as a historical source. Mrs. Bambridge, the owner of Wimpole in the early 20th century had the servant’s wing knocked down therefore the servant’s rooms were added after this and so a misleading view of what conditions were like is given. Wimpole shows that servants weren’t treated with much respect as the owners didn’t want to see them and this is shown by the hidden doors in the walls especially for the servants so that they would be less noticeable. However, Wimpole doesn’t tell us much about the social attitudes of the poor, just that they always did as they were told.
Source B shows just how important being a landowner was; it says that Disraeli had to be a landowner before he could become a County member, this shows the social attitudes of the rich to be very materialistic and by this time it was very easy to move into the upper class if you had the right kind of house and enough money.
Source 1 shows a very strict hierarchy within the servants. There were three chief servants and they had power over the other servants. We can also see this distinction in how much they were paid, e.g, we can see that the chef was more highly regarded than the footman because he gets 55 pounds a year whilst the footman gets just 10. The hierarchy is also demonstrated by the housekeeper getting her very own steel bell pull whilst all the other servants would have to share bells.
Source 2 shows social and religious attitudes. Servants were ordered to attend daily prayers and go to church at least once a week and this shows that the owners were hypocrites as they didn’t do this. It also shows that religion was used as a social control, the owners of the house wanted to keep their servants in their place and they did this by forcing religion onto them.
Source 3 shows that Lord and Lady Hardwicke wanted to appear religious even thought they didn’t wish to put in the effort and actually attend church. Lady Hardwicke was horrified that the Queen would believe that she wasn’t religious even though she wasn’t. The Chapel at Wimpole was never consecrated but was beautifully decorated so this again backs up source 3 and shows that they wanted to be seen as religious for social reasons.
Ham House was built in 1610 in the Tudor-Jacobean style and was not extended after this but the house is very useful in showing social attitudes of the rich, all the servants lived on the top floor in tiny rooms and were being used as late as 1947, there were 4 servants per room and there was no fireplace so it would be boiling in summer and freezing in winter. The wardrobe servants lived in a tiny cupboard in the wardrobe room on hard surfaces. This shows that the rich cared very little for their servants and let them live in awful conditions whilst they were living in luxury.
Erdigg is similar to Wimpole because both houses have the servants quarters on display as the public often show more of an interest in the poor than they do in the rich. The owners at Erdigg had all the family servants painted which was very unusual and shows a measure of respect from rich to poor that is not seen elsewhere. The servants at Erdigg had purpose built out buildings which were perhaps there to keep them out of the way which doesn’t show the respect that having them painted did. Erdigg used steel wire bell pulls just like the ones used at Wimpole.
The BBC adaptation of Mansfield Park provides a useful insight into both social and religious attitudes. As guests arrive servants are shown to be waiting to welcome them and this is similar to Wimpole where the Housekeeper can look out of her window to see guests approaching and then go outside to welcome them. This shows that servants were at constant beck and call. Religion is not considered very important by the characters and this is shown by the chapel, the family never used it was simply there to look good. This is an example of conspicuous consumption, they wanted to be seen to be spending money on religion so that people thought they were religious but really they didn’t particularly care about it. This is also true at Wimpole because the Chapel there was never consecrated so couldn’t be used for proper services; although it was decorated beautifully therefore it must have been there just for show.
At this time Religion was declining in importance and this is shown in a quote taken from Mansfield Park, ‘A clergyman is nothing.’
I think that Wimpole is very helpful in helping us understand the religious and social attitudes of the rich in the 18th and 19th centuries as it has given much evidence for both although there was very little evidence to show anything of the servants attitudes so in this respect it is not as helpful.