The Historic
Dimension Series
A student publication series by the UNCG Department of Interior Architecture
Castles & Cottages:
Tudor Revival Architecture in America
by Sarah Gross Spring 2005
For a period of about
sixty years, Americans
were completely
enamored by old architecture. During the
revival movement of the late nineteenth and
early twentieth centuries, Americans built
and resided in mass numbers of houses
purposely designed to appear to be from
another time and place. One of the most
popular of these revival styles was the
Tudor revival, which promised to transport
a person to the cozy cottages and stately
manor houses of English history, eschewing
modern designs for a dated, historical
architectural style. That Tudor revivals
played such a large role in American
architecture should not be overlooked
or minimized, for their significance and
popularity enable a glimpse into the
mindset of those who designed, built and
resided in them. Tudor revivals implicitly
reveal a nation of individuals unsure
about the changes of their industrialized
present, about their status in a nation of
altering composition, and about their future.
Tudor revival houses were more than
representations of a popular architectural
style, they were a reassurance of status
and a form of comfort for individuals in a
changing world.
Origins of Tudor Revivals
Tudor revivals began to become popular in
the late nineteenth century in America (even
earlier in Great Britain), with their main
period of significance dating from 1880 to
1940. Interestingly, Tudor revival structures
went by a variety of names in America,
and were not always based on English
houses built during the reign of the Tudor
monarchs. Architects actually based Tudor
revivals on a variety of English prototypes,
and referred to them by several names
during the revival movement, including
Tudor, English, Jacobean, Elizabethan, and
Jacobethan. Sometimes, these classifications
were arbitrary and inaccurate, with
designers choosing them to invoke an
idea, while sometimes architects attempted
to classify them under these categories
based on the presence or absence of certain
features. Regardless, builders, publications,
and the general public generally used the
various labels interchangeably during the
revival movement.
Obviously, architects drew their inspiration
from a long chronological span of English
architecture. Their creations similarly
also ran the gamut of size and ornateness,
with architects basing American Tudor
revivals on dwellings that encompassed the
entire scale of English architecture, from
the largest manor houses to the humblest
cottages. Architects modeled the majority of
Tudor revival houses, mostly those designed
for suburban single families, after smaller
English cottages; most of these shared a set
of common characteristics. There are six
main categories of façade construction, with
stucco and brick wall cladding being the
most prevalent. Architects also designed
wooden cladding, stone cladding, false
thatched roof, and parapeted gabled houses.
Wealthier Americans tended to construct
houses based on English manor houses,
with architects sometimes patterning
these after original structures. Diplomat
Tudor revival
architecture
was one of the
most popu-lar
residential
styles in the
United States
during the
early twenti-eth
century.
Tudor revival
houses can
still be seen in
communities
across the na-tion,
and they
stand as a tes-timony
to so-cial
processes
during the
early twentieth
century and to
the fascination
that Ameri-cans
have with
the past.
UNCG The Historic Dimension Series: 2
Fig. 2: An example of a stone-veneered Tudor style cottage.
Fig. 3: A very simple brick-veneered Tudor style cottage.
Alexander Weddell went to the extreme of purchasing an English manor house, which was originally built in 1119 as a priory in Warwick. Weddell dismantled the house, shipped it to Virginia and reconstructed it on his property to serve as his residence and later as a museum of the Virginia Historical Society. Builders often constructed high style examples such as this out of masonry, and thus they were much more expensive than the more common and smaller suburban Tudor.
Characteristics of Tudor Revivals
A defining characteristic of a Tudor revival was a steeply pitched roof, commonly side gabled, with cross gables also frequently located on the front of the house. Windows were usually tall and narrow, with multiple panes shaped as diamonds or rectangles. Oriel or bay windows could be found on the front façade, often along with dormer or casement windows. Multiple large chimneys were common amongst Tudor revivals, and often were embellished with decorative pots or elaborate designs. The design of roofs was one area where architects had to deviate from original Tudors, since traditional thatched roofs pose a major fire hazard and are highly impractical for modern structures. A few individuals still used thatching for their roofs, but architects and builders generally addressed the problem by employing composition roofs constructed of slate or tile to resemble thatching; shingles or concrete were also used if slate or tile proved too costly. Tudor revivals nearly always lacked front porches, yet after 1920 they frequently began to feature garages, reflecting the growing importance of the automobile in American society.
Probably the most distinctive and recognizable feature of Tudor revival houses is half-timbering. A large number of Tudor revivals had decorative, false half-timbering, with the timbers attached to the façade of the structure. True half-timbering, found on original English examples, occurred when builders positioned heavy wooden frames and filled in the spaces between them with nogging, the composition of which could range from stone or brick to mud and sticks. True half-timbering developed in heavily wooded areas of England where masonry materials were scarce but wood was abundant and, unlike in Tudor revivals, it was a structural necessity to the homes. The decorative half-timbering on Tudor revivals ranged from simple horizontal beams to elaborately constructed patterns and designs.
Designers sometimes patterned the interiors of Tudor revivals after original examples, but this was not always the case. Paneling and ceiling beams added the appearance of age and promoted a cozier atmosphere. In the living room, window seats for the oriels and decorative fireplaces were sometimes found. Architects purposely designed many Tudors to have a rambling floor plan, and because these houses lacked symmetry, architects could be more flexible in both the original design and in the design of later additions. Living rooms, drawing on the tradition of English manor halls, were large, open, and served as a focal point of the house with entrances to multiple adjoining rooms.
The Rise of American Tudor Revivals
Traditional Tudor styles gained exposure in the United States in the late nineteenth century for a variety of reasons, contributing to their subsequent popularity. In the late nineteenth century, Americans were more likely to travel overseas than ever before, and as a result many saw older, traditional European buildings in person for the first time. Architectural picture books featuring Tudor buildings were common, and exposed many Americans to the style. It was the 1876 centennial exhibition, however, that truly ignited interest in UNCG The Historic Dimension Series: 3
Fig. 4: Multiple diamond-shaped panes make up this Tudor window.
Fig. 5: This house features the tall and narrow windows commonly found on Tudors.
both American Colonial architecture and in Tudor architecture, prompting a proliferation of both revival styles in the years that followed. American Builder magazine gave rave reviews to two half-timbered styles featured at the exhibition, giving its professional endorsement to this “new” style. Architects contributed heavily to the rise of Tudor revivals as well. More American architects received professional training during this period, with large numbers training for the first time in overseas schools. Many of these architects returned to the United States with a heightened interest in the traditional and historic European styles they studied.
The initial American owners were amongst the affluent upper class. Mail order catalogs had made the Queen Anne and Victorian styles widespread and ubiquitous among the middle class, and the wealthy were looking for a building style to set them apart. Tudor revivals, based on structures that were centuries old, automatically had connotations of a rich and storied past, and Americans associated Tudor revival architecture with an Anglo-American pedigreed heritage. Through their imposing Tudor manor houses, wealthy Americans sought to establish a connection with the English aristocracy who lived in such houses, enabling them to establish themselves as a kind of American aristocracy whose right to rule was based on not only the wealth they had accumulated, but also on purity of heritage and demonstrable pedigree.
Massive manor houses began cropping up around large cities like New York, Philadelphia, and Chicago, and the construction of Tudor style country clubs around the country only further enhanced their connotation of wealth and prestige. In fact, in the late nineteenth century, Tudor revival houses were commonly known as “stockbroker Tudors” because the public so strongly associated them with men of industry, such as financiers, bankers, and stockbrokers. Tudor revival houses became linked in the public perception not only with English history and pedigree, but also with American wealth.
Because of their association with affluence and elite status, both past and present, it is hardly surprising that demand for Tudor style houses from the general public increased rapidly in the following years. As the rich built Tudor revivals to associate themselves with English aristocracy, the middle class flocked to Tudor revivals to associate themselves with upper class Americans and with the idea of privilege of class, wealth, and upward mobility. Middle class Americans aspiring to raise their social and economic status could further their quest by at least residing in a Tudor.
As more middle class Americans desired to live in Tudor revivals, the architects adjusted the style to fit their lifestyle and, more importantly, their income. Print culture played a large role in disseminating Tudor revival styles to the general public and into suburban America. Architectural design books and pre-cut housing catalogs featured Tudor designs prominently, though the styles they championed were more akin to English cottages than to the manor houses built by the wealthy. Between the years 1880 and 1940, Tudor revivals comprised thirty to forty percent of the houses featured in such journals. Popular serials such as Ladies Home Journal, House Beautiful, Country Life in America, and Home and Garden also gave ample attention to Tudor designs, again attesting to the influence of popular media in promoting the style. Ironically, the cottage style Tudors that were so popular with the suburban middle class would have been built by the poorer English in their original context, while the manor houses prevailing amongst wealthier Americans would have been originally built by affluent English nobility. Mass UNCG The Historic Dimension Series: 4
Fig. 6: An example of decorative false half-timbering.
Fig. 7: An interesting Tudor roof featuring an elaborate chimney and a composition roof that mimics thatching.
Spanish, and Neoclassical, by far the two most popular were Colonial and Tudor revivals. All these styles were based on past architectural precedents, but only Tudor and Colonial revivals were highly associated with Anglo-American roots. The nineteenth century had witnessed the arrival of untold number of immigrants to the United States. Constructing and residing in Tudor and Colonial revivals was for some Americans an ethnocentric statement asserting their English, “purer” heritage as opposed to recent immigrants and their descendents. In a time of social disorder, for those unsure about their social positions it in effect was an attempt to establish an American hierarchy, and to reinforce longevity and substantiate position. In his 1912 study The Half-Timbered House, Allen W. Jackson summarized this position, noting, “In the half-timber houses of England were born, lived and died our great-grandfathers; these houses were conceived and wrought by our own progenitors; they are our architectural heritage…”. This attempt by individuals to distinguish themselves by their English heritage is also demonstrated by the fact that Spanish and Mission revival houses were rare on the eastern coast while prevalent on the western coast, where there was less of an English heritage and thus less of an idea of Anglo-American superiority.
While an ethnocentric explanation accounts for some of the popularity of Tudor and Colonial revivals and of the greater revival movement, it was only a small reason for their widespread demand and adoption. All of the revival styles were easy for architects to design and manipulate. Each style had basic elements and a basic form that identified them, but beyond this architects could adapt revivals by employing many stylistic variations. This enabled architects to play around with
construction of cottage style Tudors by the middle class, thus, only served to reinforce class boundaries, not to transcend them.
The growth in popularity of Tudor revivals, as well as other revival styles, coincided with the rise of American suburbs, following mass growth and industrialization in most urban areas. Individual family housing, largely designed for suburban areas, became one of the major focuses of domestic architecture. The coziness, informality, and adaptability of Tudor revival styles fit in well with this trend. For many, Tudor revivals were a welcome alternative to their rival in popularity, the Colonial revival style house. Colonial revivals had a strong emphasis on symmetry, while the Tudor revivals’ floor plans and form were infinitely more adaptable, relaxed, and flexible. The interiors of Tudor revivals usually were welcoming, with a large family room for gathering. These cottage style Tudors were also generally one-story, and the interiors were not too large or drastic a departure from those of bungalow style houses, which had been prevalent in the early twentieth century. Thus, the interiors of Tudor revivals were “safe” and comfortable, and their floor plans and form were not radical or dramatically different from the established popular house forms. The solid and durable construction of most Tudor revivals also appealed to individuals, and Tudors held up very well in market value, something that is true of the style even today.
Causes of the Revival Movement in the U.S.
The emergence and popularity of Tudor revivals did not occur in isolation; rather, they were part of a larger revival movement that swept the United States in the early part of the twentieth century. However, while many revival styles existed, including Beaux Arts, UNCG The Historic Dimension Series: 5
Fig. 8: A typical oriel window nestled between half-timbering.
Fig. 9: An arched doorway, such as the one shown here, was also common on Tudor revivals.
various elements and stylistic choices and thus to put some amount of originality into their designs, while still ensuring a safe, easily recognizable and marketable product. An unfortunate by-product of revival architecture however was the lack of creativity found in most of the revival designs.
A large part of the popularity of revival houses during the early twentieth century is also attributable to a general nostalgia for the past, strongly contributed to by the centennial celebration in 1876, which flourished during this period. Living in a revival style house was a way of connecting oneself with a greater past, and the romantic associations of revival styles cannot be discounted; indeed, they were one of the primary reasons for the existence of revivals style houses. Americans were living in a time of industrialization and change, when many abandoned urban areas for a new, cleaner and safer suburban setting. These individuals could distinguish themselves by choosing a dwelling that was almost whimsical in its proclamation of its association with the past: a past that had been idealized by those wishing to escape the present. Individuals associated the Tudor cottage specifically with a bucolic, simple life that contrasted strongly in their minds with the industrialized, more frantic urban lifestyle in which many were participating.
While Tudor revivals were still highly popular with the general public up until the late 1930s, they had fallen from popularity in architectural circles as early as the 1920s. Modernists especially dismissed Tudor revivals as being dishonest, and called for original styles that were applicable to and based on modern life and ideas. Over time, architects turned away from mimicking Tudors, and turned to other styles. Higher building costs, especially for the more expensive masonry, also explained the gradual decline of Tudor revivals during the Great Depression. Tudor revivals simply became unaffordable for a large proportion of the public. Predicting the wane of the Tudors, architect H.V. Walsh aptly noted in 1928: “We are going through a very strange period in our domestic architecture. It is a make believe era. We seem to want to live in dream houses, in quaint, old-fashioned houses, in fantastic castles. Whatever….the cause of this feeling, the evidence is growing on every hand that people are demanding houses that reflect, not our own age, but some other past age.” Individuals gradually abandoned these “dream houses,” and looked to more modern, creative designs that better fit with their own lives.
In a recent poll on a popular architectural website, the majority of respondents listed a Tudor revival as their “dream house,” attesting to the extraordinary popularity of the style even today. In retrospect, it is hardly surprising that the American public had, and indeed still has, such an affinity for Tudor revival architecture. As the current American society continues to romanticize the past and yearn for bygone ages, there is little doubt that Tudors will retain their popularity, and their reputation as idealized “dream houses.” Americans originally constructed Tudors for a myriad of reasons, yet they never would have attained such popularity if there had not been such a heavy emphasis in society on the importance and value of history and heritage. The existence and popularity of Tudor revivals both in the past and today thus not only reveal a wealth of information about the motivations of the society which constructed and lived in them, but also speak to the greater truth of the fascination and love that Americans have with the past and with their history and heritage.UNCG The Historic Dimension Series: 6
Fig. 10: This Typical Tudor has steeply pitched gables; a large, prominent chimney; and an arched doorway.
Fig. 11: A combination of brick and stone veneer is employed on this simple Tudor.
The Historic Dimension Series is a collection of briefs prepared by UNCG students under the direction of Professor Jo Ramsay Leimenstoll. For information on other topics in the series please visit the website at go.uncg.edu/hds
Bibliography
Brown, M.A. (1995). Greensboro: an architectural record.
Greensboro, NC: Preservation Greensboro, Inc.
Dana, R.H., Jr. (1913, October). Edgerton, a study in the
Tudor Style. The Architectural Record 34,4.
Foster, G. (2004). American houses: a field guide to the
architecture of the home. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.
Goff, L. (2002). Tudor revival houses in America from 1890
to the present. New York: Universe Publishing.
Hewitt, M.A. (1998, Jan/Feb). To build a Tudor: the
design and construction of English Revival Houses. Old House Journal 26(1), 50-55.
Hewitt, M.A. (1997, Mar/Apr). The other proper style.
Old House Journal 29(2), 30-37.
Kidney, W.C. (1974). The architecture of choice: eclecticism
in America 1880-1930. New York: George Braziller Inc.
Loeb, C.S. (2001). Entrepreneurial vernacular: developer’s
subdivisions in the 1920s. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University. Press.
Massey, J.C., & Maxwell, S. (1991, Sept/Oct). American
houses in Old English styles. Old House Journal 19(5), 45-49.
McAlester, V., & Lee. (2004). A field guide to American
houses. New York: Alfred A.Knopf Inc.
