Dutch alders from Rotterdam for Audley End – part 3

Het derde en laatste deel van mijn serie over een levering van 3000 elzen vanuit Rotterdam naar Audley End in Essex in 1775. Op basis van rekeningen gevonden in het archief van Huys ten Donck probeer ik te bepalen of deze specifieke levering economisch zinvol was.

Continue reading

Summary

Het derde en laatste deel van mijn serie over een levering van 3000 elzen vanuit Rotterdam naar Audley End in Essex in 1775. Op basis van rekeningen gevonden in het archief van Huys ten Donck probeer ik te bepalen of deze specifieke levering economisch zinvol was.

Continue reading

De ‘Rouina’ van Huys ten Donck revisited

Over five years ago I posted a piece about the ruin in the park of Huys ten Donck, near Ridderkerk. The estate accounts mention the ruin had been stuccoed in 1777. Based on that, and on the only available photo of a contemporary painting, I concluded that the glass painting made by Zeuner shows this stuccoed front. The original, however, shows a brick wall. It appears this old photo is very bad (unfortunately I have no better photo). I still stand by my conclusion, although this new information raises several other questions.

Continue reading

Summary

Over five years ago I posted a piece about the ruin in the park of Huys ten Donck, near Ridderkerk. The estate accounts mention the ruin had been stuccoed in 1777. Based on that, and on the only available photo of a contemporary painting, I concluded that the glass painting made by Zeuner shows this stuccoed front. The original, however, shows a brick wall. It appears this old photo is very bad (unfortunately I have no better photo). I still stand by my conclusion, although this new information raises several other questions.

Continue reading

Finding that match

Afgelopen november kon ik vaststellen dat de Kapel van Willem Tell in de tuin van Huys ten Donck werd gebouwd in 1792. Afgezien van de vraag waarom, restte de vraag: wat was de bron? Die is nu waarschijnlijk wel gevonden.

Continue reading

Summary

Afgelopen november kon ik vaststellen dat de Kapel van Willem Tell in de tuin van Huys ten Donck werd gebouwd in 1792. Afgezien van de vraag waarom, restte de vraag: wat was de bron? Die is nu waarschijnlijk wel gevonden.

Continue reading

Sporen van een tuinpiramide

Laser altimetry technology reveals the location of what is most probably the footprint of a lost garden pyramid in The Netherlands. It seems to be several meters north from the location indicated on maps from the 1780’s, but it may have been moved towards the bank of the pond after that was created in 1792.
Until further on-site research is done, the idea that this shape is merely the result of an anomaly in the picture, can not be completely ruled out, though.

Continue reading

Summary

Laser altimetry technology reveals the location of what is most probably the footprint of a lost garden pyramid in The Netherlands. It seems to be several meters north from the location indicated on maps from the 1780’s, but it may have been moved towards the bank of the pond after that was created in 1792.
Until further on-site research is done, the idea that this shape is merely the result of an anomaly in the picture, can not be completely ruled out, though.

Continue reading

Huys ten Donck’s huisje van Wilhelm Tell gedateerd

At Huys ten Donck, the building date of a now lost garden pavilion resembling Wilhelm Tell’s ‘kapelle’ on the rocky shores of the Vierwaldstättersee in Switzerland, was unknown. The estimate was that it was built circa 1800, although the layout of the garden it sat in, is known to have taken place in 1792.
One document in the house archive -a hand written version of the legend of Wilhelm Tell- mentions that this pavilion had just been built. This document is dated 29 September 1792. Earlier that year, a carpenter was paid ƒ219,- for his work on the ‘Capelleke Buyten’.
Both documents confirm that the pavilion was built simultaneously with the creation of this new layout of the garden (the ‘nieuwe werk’).

Continue reading

Summary

At Huys ten Donck, the building date of a now lost garden pavilion resembling Wilhelm Tell’s ‘kapelle’ on the rocky shores of the Vierwaldstättersee in Switzerland, was unknown. The estimate was that it was built circa 1800, although the layout of the garden it sat in, is known to have taken place in 1792.
One document in the house archive -a hand written version of the legend of Wilhelm Tell- mentions that this pavilion had just been built. This document is dated 29 September 1792. Earlier that year, a carpenter was paid ƒ219,- for his work on the ‘Capelleke Buyten’.
Both documents confirm that the pavilion was built simultaneously with the creation of this new layout of the garden (the ‘nieuwe werk’).

Continue reading

Harde en Evergreene Heester Trees, Shrobbs

Published: my piece about the 18th century nurseryman Jacobus Gans, whose bold move from Haarlem to Hillegom (and his purchase of an estate there in 1771), is now explained. His formerly unknown partnership with Rotterdam merchant Bastiaan Molewater (1734-1780) played a deciding role in the rise and fall of his nursery.
The move itself makes it possible to put a date on Gans’ undated catalogues, especially because an unknown version has come to light, on which his sole address is still in Haarlem only.

Gans had ‘English’ and ‘American’ plants for sale, and mentioned that he had gone to England himself to collect them there. His use of ‘English’ terms when advertising the sales catalogue of these plants (see the advert and the title of this post), shows that no proper Dutch vocabulary was available (yet) for this type of planting material.

Continue reading

Summary

Published: my piece about the 18th century nurseryman Jacobus Gans, whose bold move from Haarlem to Hillegom (and his purchase of an estate there in 1771), is now explained. His formerly unknown partnership with Rotterdam merchant Bastiaan Molewater (1734-1780) played a deciding role in the rise and fall of his nursery.
The move itself makes it possible to put a date on Gans’ undated catalogues, especially because an unknown version has come to light, on which his sole address is still in Haarlem only.

Gans had ‘English’ and ‘American’ plants for sale, and mentioned that he had gone to England himself to collect them there. His use of ‘English’ terms when advertising the sales catalogue of these plants (see the advert and the title of this post), shows that no proper Dutch vocabulary was available (yet) for this type of planting material.

Continue reading

Published: Giudici’s 1777 ruin for Huys ten Donck

Ter gelegenheid van het verschijnen van mijn laatste publicatie: Van der Eijk, H.; ‘Jan Giudici, ontwerper van de ruïne in het park van Huys ten Donck’, in: PorteFolly nr.41 (winter 2014), p17-20.

Continue reading

Summary

Ter gelegenheid van het verschijnen van mijn laatste publicatie: Van der Eijk, H.; ‘Jan Giudici, ontwerper van de ruïne in het park van Huys ten Donck’, in: PorteFolly nr.41 (winter 2014), p17-20.

Continue reading

Methode voor het planten van een magnolia (1771)

A bill concerning the delivery of two trees in 1771 for Huys ten Donck reveals a specific method for the planting of magnolias. They had to be planted in the pot they were delivered in. After one or two years this pot should then be broken, while in the ground.

Philip Miller originally suggested to keep the plant in pots for the first two years (after sowing), so the tender young plants could be brought in when necessary during those first years. After that, they went into the ground, pot-less.

Apparently the succes rate of newly planted magnolias had been below expectation. Magnolias ranked under the most expensive garden plants of the time, so losing one of those was a costly and frustrating affair. Twenty-five years after the Dutch translation of Miller’s work was published, their planting method in the Netherlands had changed -probably as a result of that.

Continue reading

Summary

A bill concerning the delivery of two trees in 1771 for Huys ten Donck reveals a specific method for the planting of magnolias. They had to be planted in the pot they were delivered in. After one or two years this pot should then be broken, while in the ground.

Philip Miller originally suggested to keep the plant in pots for the first two years (after sowing), so the tender young plants could be brought in when necessary during those first years. After that, they went into the ground, pot-less.

Apparently the succes rate of newly planted magnolias had been below expectation. Magnolias ranked under the most expensive garden plants of the time, so losing one of those was a costly and frustrating affair. Twenty-five years after the Dutch translation of Miller’s work was published, their planting method in the Netherlands had changed -probably as a result of that.

Continue reading