Colonial Williamsburg Digital Library

SOUTH ELEVATION
View Facing Duke of Gloucester St.

GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE CHURCH

Bruton Church is most readily recognized by its south facade as it is seen from Duke of Gloucester Street. Its gabled transept at center as seen through the entrance gate is flanked on either side by the main body of the church, namely, the nave at left and the chancel at right. There is a series of three arch-headed windows that admit light to both the nave and the chancel. A circular "rose" window is centered above the arched doorway.

At the far left, forming a termination to the church, there is a tower with a brick base, surmounted by a slender wooden steeple. The height of the tower, including the spire, is approximately [ed.-one] hundred feet -- the same dimension as the length of the church.

The architectural design has clearly articulated parts that 15 form a complete and satisfying whole. Its appearance is "Virginia colonial," resembling Ware Church in Gloucester County in its nave, also recalling the shape of Christ Church, Lancaster County. Both of these are contemporary. The native character of Virginia churches is emphasized by the resemblance that exists between a selected group of a dozen or so Virginia churches. Bruton, as an example, is quite unlike the Stuart and Georgian churches of rural England.

As originally built, under supervision of Governor Spotswood, Bruton was given the plan form of a Latin Cross. To that (1715) church as a nucleus, the nave end was lengthened to its present size, and in 1752 a twenty-five foot addition was made to the chancel end. That symmetry was of importance at that time we repeat the squib from a contemporary? writing in the Virginia Gazette: "an addition…made to the East End of the church…to make that End of equal length from the Wings as the West End." Two years later its brick enclosing wall was built by Samuel Spurr. The steeple was its final architectural feature, known, by Virginia Gazette advertisement, to have been added in 1769.

BRICKWORK of BRUTON CHURCH TOWER AND THE OLD COURT HOUSE, COMPARED.
[no image]

Bricks in church yard wall are varied in size, laid generally with Flemish bond. Sizes, near to 8 ½" to 8 7/8" x 4 ¼" to 4 ½" x 2 7/8" to 3 ¼". This wall has been, repaired many times, but appears substantially of period when built by Samuel Spurr in 1752-54.

The pavement within the tower is three bricks (9 7/8") below the top of water table.

The church floor level at doorway of the south narthex is 9" below the top of water table.

Brickwork of Church Described. All sides of the church brickwork were examined. The condition of the brickwork of this date, (September 9, 1953), was found to be excellent. There is some evidence of repairs made to the exterior wall, with repointing where cracks had occurred before restoration. In general, repairs and repointing are not readily detected. There is an apparent difference in the color of brick (mostly with the glazed headers) on the exterior face of the easterly twenty-five feet of the chancel end of the church. It trill be recalled that the chancel was lengthened during the eighteenth century as advertised in the Virginia Gazette, May 15, 1752. The addition is confirmed both by the external brickwork and by a surviving foundation wall that was revealed during excavations made beneath the basement floor.

The wall of the church, above the water table, is laid with Flemish bond. The brick bond of the church foundation is also of Flemish bond. In this respect it differs from the tower, which has English bond for the foundation below the water table and 20 Flemish bond above.

COLOR

The general color effect of the church brickwork is a pale red to tan. A fawn shade predominates in the overall color. The rubbed bricks at window and door jambs, arches and outer angles of the body of the church, above the water table are deeper in color, sometimes approaching a distinct red. He re again we may perceive a variation from the church tower. The latter is darker and definitely a deep red in color tone.

GLAZED HEADERS

Glazed Headers are used throughout the wall facing. In some places, all of the headers are glazed, as at the eastern end of the church, Toward the west the headers are less in evidence, partly due to the effect of weathering. There is no developed pattern produced by the glazed headers, although the overall texture of brick surface alternating with the glazed headers can be seen. In the east gable the headers are placed over one another from the foundation to the base of the gable. Within the gable the headers are more irregular and without a uniform placing of header above header.

SPECIAL TREATMENT

The arched windows were given special design attention. The arch is surrounded by gauged brick, rubbed to the diverging lines of the arch, laid alternately with stretchers and headers. The headers are glazed and produce an enrichment that tends to give importance to the windows.

MORTAR JOINTS

The jointing of brickwork is irregular, varying in width from 5/8" to ¾". The mortar is composed of oyster shell lime and sand and has been tooled at center by a 3/16" wide half round tooling. There is some irregularity in the pointing so that it would 21 probably be possible to determine some facts concerning the history of the wall by the changes in the mortar joints.

There are very few, so called "salmon brick," notwithstanding the generally light color of the church wall. Where pitting of brick occurs it appears to be found on the water table alone. The water table has sloped face and had been rubbed to a smooth surface when the church was first built. Glazed headers vary in tone from a medium gray to a dark shade.

COMMENT OF RESTORERS ON BRICKWORK

When the outer brick walls were examined from scaffold levels by the architects, the observation was made that brickwork was "old and original but with some patching and repairs." Putlock holes^* on upper walls (used as support for scaffolding) were considered as of the eighteenth century. It is probable that these were used during the building of the 1752 addition. They do not occur elsewhere.

"The exterior brickwork of the church was examined with the aid of engineering advice and all weakened parts were rebuilt with cement mortar. The surface brick is all old and original. This was patched in a few places and kept as far as possible with its original appearance. All joints were then repainted by use of oyster-shell lime mortar, colored so as to continue the shade of old mortar color." (A. E. Kendrew, in correspondence files).

Shingles

There is a brief statement in the Bruton Vestry Records of 1717 which says: "The new Church is shingled." The shingles referred to as roof covering were doubtless of split cypress or cedar. It is probable that wood shingles continued as roofing until the last quarter of the nineteenth century when shingles of tin were applied as a protection against the possibility of fire from neighboring conflagrations.^* Early in the twentieth century (1905) a green glazed tile roof was installed. This continued in place until the tile was replaced by asbestos-cement shingles in 1938-39.

Asbestos-cement shingles were developed by Colonial Williamsburg as a fire-safe substitute for wood shingles. They resemble old weathered wood shingles in appearance and also conform to the building regulations of Williamsburg.

An occasional exception is made permitting the use of wood shingles for small outbuildings in isolated locations. Shingles of cypress were permitted as a roof covering for the steeple, because of the impracticability for using the fragile asbestos-cement ones. Supplementary information on the church and steeple roof is found elsewhere in this report under the subject of "roofing."^**

Dormers. Because of the nature of the building there was no necessity for dormers.

Cornice. The church and tower, each, have a crowning cornice, designed in scale to fit the height and nature of the supporting wall. It is probable that the main cornice had been repaired from time to time during the two hundred and twenty years of its existence.

^{Drawing of Cornice and Cornice End board (awaiting photostat)}

Early in 1929, after Colonial Williamsburg had assumed responsibility for carrying the restoration through to a final conclusion, scaffolding was raised against the outer wall of the church with the express purpose of examining the condition of the cornice and the brickwork of the entire wall.^* The cornice was 24 found to be in need of some repairs. The design of the cornice was found to be of such a character that it was considered desirable that it be retained. All repairs and added parts were made to match existing profiles.

That the cornice was of modillion type from the time of first construction is shown by a vestry entry for expenditures made in 1715, namely, to Lewis Delony " ... to 32 foot modillion cornice."^*

THE MAIN CORNICE DESCRIBED

The uppermost member of the cornice is a crown molding with a fascia below it. Square modillion brackets support the overhang while a bed molding joins the cornice to the brick wall. The cornice overhang is 16 ½". This is approximately the same as the vertical cornice height and is in conformity with an established rule in architecture, "that the cornice surmounting a wall have its projecture nearly equal to its height." (See accompanying drawing shown at ¼ full size.) Since the architect and student who views the church as restored will raise the question, "Is the cornice original"; we therefore quote the draftsman on the job, Finlay Ferguson, who from firsthand examination on the scaffolding reports that "The cornice is largely original. During its restoration it was patched and extensively repaired." It is essentially original. Paint samples were gotten from crevices at edge of modillion brackets.^** These color specimens were used in determining the paint used for woodwork on the church exterior.

MAIN CORNICE END BOARDS

The cornice end boards had beer. removed in the 1905 restoration. They were then replaced by an unauthentic "cornice return" at the lower roof angle of all gables. Two early photographs, taken before 1900 were of assistance in reconstructing the end boards. Their profile could be identified and reconstructed with the aid of end boards found elsewhere in Virginia, which constituted common practice.

TOWER CORNICE SUITED TO ITS PURPOSE AS ABSE EDGE TO THE STEEPLE

The tower cornice profile differs from main cornice in minor details. Its overhang is the same as the main church cornice overhang. The fascia beneath the "crown" is greater, apparently because its profile is a base to the rise of steeple above it. Its purpose called for a special treatment. It is also ornamented with block modillions, spaced approximately 12 1/8 inches on center. A profile of this cornice is shown in comparison with the eaves profile of the main church.

The cornice was determined to be (in parts) a survival of the old and original cornice. No precedent was rewired for its re-conditioning although local cornices were in the mind of the designer as profiles were developed. Repairs were made to most of the upper corona and new blocking was installed "as a support for the present lookout," Heavy lead-coated copper flashing was applied to the slog above the cornice overhang, (See accompanying drawing for the complete profile of cornice.)

GUTTERS AND LEADER

Gutters for conducting rain water from the roof to the ground existed in place when the restoration of the church was undertaken. It was recalled that eaves gutters were rarely used during the eighteenth century and that "base of the wall" brick gutters, as at the Palace, were more satisfactory and desirable. For these 26 reasons, the existing gutters were discarded and sold as old iron.

There has long existed the question, "were cornice-edge gutters of eighteenth century usage?" That they did exist is shown by a Virginia Gazette advertisement:^*

"At the Lead Manufactory, behind the Church, may be had all sorts of sheet lead, pipes for conveying water from the tops of houses, cisterns ... etc.
Kidd & Kendall.

PRECEDENT FOR THE INSTALLATION OF BRICK "BASE OF WALL" GUTTERS

Ever since brick (base of wall) drains, or gutters were discovered as a part of the old brick construction of the Palace and at the Wren Building of the College of William and Mary, it has become customary to adopt similar gutters for buildings of the restored area.^** In exceptional instances eaves gutters are employed unauthentically, as when gutters discharge water against an existing building, as in the case of the Pasteur-Galt rear roof, adjoining the Scrivener house, and with roofs over doorways.

Exterior walls of the church and tower are of brick, not all constructed at the sane time. The oldest part of the church has brickwork.

Windows.

Early records testify to the Latin cross shape of the church as it was built by the vestry in 1715.^* A record, recently found, enumerates building materials purchased for a church under construction, and specifically refers "To 8 sash window frames and sashes to them." This number of windows would have been required for a church in the form of a cross with each of its four arms fitted with one of the windows at the two sides of each projection. The arch headed windows were doubled in number when the church was finally completed. The nave of the church, we will recall, was lengthened by 22'-0" by Governor Spotswood. The chancel was again lengthened by 25'-0" in 1752. The triple arched treatment given to the nave and chancel walls followed the two changes made to the nave and chancel. The arched window width as measured today is: 4'-11".^** The over-all height of the window opening is slightly less than 10'-0". This ratio of width to height (2 to 1) is of interest since the "rule of thumb" of mason-builders of the eighteenth century was "to make the height of windows twice the over-all width." This same ratio was applied at the 1769 courthouse on Market Square.

CONDITION OF WINDOW FRAMES AND SASH

An inspection of window frames of the church by the architects during September, 1938 led to the following notes:

• Window frames of the church were all considered old but in need of varying repairs.
• Most of the sash was found to be new, other sash needed repairs or renewal of parts.
• The brick moulding surround the window frames was of a late character; it was therefore removed and a mold of appropriate profile was put in place of the one that was scrapped.

New window sills were required for all of the large arch-headed windows. When the restoration was carried out, cast iron sills were found in place. New wood sills, with a molded face, were substituted. Those, in form, were a modification of the window sills of the Ludwell Paradise House on Duke of Gloucester Street.

The great round windows of the South, East and North gables were found on inspection to have old frames. The sash was repaired in parts or largely renewed. New sash were made for the three round (Roses windows. The details of muntin bars and sash for the round windows followed original parts, salvaged from a window discovered in a Williamsburg basement, also from fragments of sash found in place.

The East window, it will be recalled had been removed and filled with stained glass around 1900, as a memorial to John Page who in the seventeenth century donated the land on which Bruton churchyard is located.^*

The small bulls-eye window in the upper part of the North, East and South gables had old frames, in need of repair. New sash was added with the same wide muntin bar as for the large rondels.

In the tower, old window frames were revealed beneath the 1903 restoration. The profile of these old molded frames were followed in the renewal of parts required to receive glazed sash.

MISCELLANEOUS NOTES CONCERNING WINDOWS

The replacement of louvered window openings by sash to match other windows of the church was based upon the discovery of parts of old sash where the late louvers were placed.^* Louvered openings in the upper part of the steeple were retained since they are thought to have existed continually in the belfry from the evidence of early drawings. The tower appears to have had louvered opening below the cornice for a century or more. They are shown in the Millington drawing of the 1830s, and in several drawings and photographs of the following hundred years.

ROUND WINDOWS OF GABLE ENDS

The large windows of Bruton are 4 lights wide and 8 lights high up to the springing level of the arch. Within the arch there are 6 lights. No borrowed precedent was necessary for restoring these windows since old and original profiles were from the church itself. A detail of window iambs, with double face molded casing on the outside and single molded trim within, accompanies this account.

Windows installed in the tower are slightly smaller in scale and are three lights wide and six lights high to the impost. There are four lights in the arch of tower.

The great circular windows were restored with their original triple division of the circle produced by the two vertical mullions and the areas subdivided into rectangles of approximately the size of the window glass within the arched windows.

Since some of the windows were new, it was thought desirable to salvage all of the old glass and to reuse it. New glass was mixed with old panes so as to retain the appearance of age that had been acquired by the windows.

In October (21) 1938 William Perry recommended the removal of all shutters then in place "as historically incorrect,"^* It was further urged that Venetian blinds replace the shutters as a means for controlling the intense sunlight. After discussion it was decided not to make use of Venetian blinds because of the thought that they would conceal from view, the window sash and muntin bars. It was later on decided to make use of fabric curtains that could be drawn across the window when necessary.

SHUTTERS USED IN VIRGINIA EARLY IN EIGHTEENTH CENTURY

A word should be added concerning the use of shutters in Bruton Church. Our earliest record of their appearance on the church is in the decade between 1870 and 1880. There is, however, a reference to shutters having been installed for windows of Straton Major Church in 1733,^** It has been observed that outside shutters are less frequently used with brick buildings of the colonial era, 31 than with buildings of wood frame.^* Shutters on the inside the windows of such buildings are of fairly common occurrence as for example, at the Capitol and the Palace. In both instances there were record of evidences for such use of shutters.

BASEMENT WALL

Brickwork of foundation wall of Bruton was laid in Flemish bond, differing from the basement wall bond of the church tower. The reader is referred to an analysis of brickwork of the church included elsewhere in this report.

The church wall, below the water table measured 2'-7 ½" from outer face to inner plastered surface. The nature of the of the footings can be gleaned from the illustration of excavations made in the basement of Colonial Williamsburg when the enlargement of basement space was in progress, (1938, 1939). A detail of this board is shown as a part of the detail of the Main Cornice.

Photo N5887

CORNER BOARDS

The end board that received the main cornice moldings is illustrated and described under that subject.

END BOARDS

There are no corner boards on the church, due to its brick. The corner boards on the steeple base are discussed under "Tower."

The basement wall was patched and strengthened where weaknesses were discovered. The condition of wall footings was reported as sound in general.^*

The basement space was considered to be a gradual addition to the church, resulting from needs for various uses. The provision of rooms for the choir, storage of robes and furniture and space consuming needs of a furnace room were mostly of late date. No detailed discussion of the basement changes will be included, excepting as they concern the structure of the church.

BULKHEAD

There is no bulkhead on this elevation. The modern bulkhead added as a convenient entrance to the basement is covered by our notes on North Elevation.

CHIMNEY

There is no chimney on this elevation. Since heating of the church was an innovation of the nineteenth century, chimneys were recognized as unauthentic. See North Elevation, also the account of heating. During the period when stoves were used, terra cotta chimneys were visible at the roof ridge above the chancel, transepts and nave of the church.

BARGE BOARDS

The barge boards that border the roof edge of the gable is new, its width was determined by the size of the cornice crown mold. It consists of a board 6 ½" in width at the lower level and 5 ¼" at the peak of gable. It has a ¾" beaded edge at side toward the brickwork and a 1 ½" molding at the juncture between the barge board and the shingled edge.

PORCH

There is no porch on this elevation. In England some churches were entered by way of a projecting side porch, a feature that is generally absent in Virginia. However, side entrances were common.

SOUTH DOORWAY

Photographs of the 1870s show a square headed doorway beneath the large rose window of the south gable.^* This was changed to a round arched doorway on the basis of brick evidence found on the inner side of the north transept entrance. The door frames of both the north and south side are new. They follow in their profiles, the old doorway with trim at the west end of the church. This doorway continued in sound condition because of its protected location within the church tower. Because of the original and unaltered character of this door, a detail showing its frame and moldings is included with this report. It became the model for the other double doors of the north and south transepts and for the new outer west doorway to the tower.

MAIN DOORWAYS DESCRIBED

The exterior door casing is "double faced" and is of generous width, appropriate to a wide doorway of public character. Its exterior dimension is 7" wide. The interior trim has a single face between the outer molding and the inner quarter round. Its width is 6 ¼". The solid pine door jamb of the original door frame measures 6 ½" x 7". The paneled double doors are 1 ¾" in thickness. Each door has on its separate leaves -- four raised panels, facing in both outwardly and in the direction of the church 34 interior. The tympanum above the doors is paneled as shown. A scaled drawing of the original doorway between tower end church is shown on the accompanying rage. This doorway was precedent for all of the main "bivalve" doorways of transepts and tower.

EAST END DOORWAY

There was a doorway at the east end of the church, as shown on the Millington drawing c. 1834. This doorway appears to have existed there for approximately two hundred years. It served as an entry to the robing room at the rear of the reredos. There was some question as to whether the door should be retained because of its long existence, and as an entry to the crypt. In November 7, 1938 the Vestry requested a decision of Perry, Shaw and Hepburn concerning the fate off this doorway. It was finally decided that the door must go. It was therefore obliterated in the course of carrying out the extensive restoration of the facing of the church, early in 1939.^*

ENTRANCE STEPS AT SOUTH ELEVATION

Excavation in front of the south transept, carried out by Colonial Williamsburg during 1938-39 revealed an early grade level that once existed in front of the south entrance. There was indication of steps placed within the present doorway, leading upward to the church floor level. The disappearance of this level and of the inner step was probably found desirable when the present sidewalk grade was established.

BRICKWORK

DIMENSION INFORMATION

Tooled Joint/Water Table

Seven courses measured 1'-10 ¼" center to center of tooled joint. There was some evidence of repointing. The brick of Tower does not continue brick pointing of church. Churchyard wall bricks average, approximately, 8 7/7" x 4 ¼" x 3 ¼".

WEST ELEVATION

VIEW OF CHURCH FROM THE NORTH, SHOWING THE TOWER AS RESTORED IN 1938, 1939.

The church tower dominates the west elevation, rising to a height of approximately 100 feet. It must, at one time have been the dominating landmark of Williamsburg. Discussion of the tower, with its steeple is given under the subject of "tower," elsewhere in this report.

The parts of the church seen from the west, such a s end boards, transept cornice, barge boards, brickwork, etc., are found under North Elevation, with the exception of brickwork of tower. For this subject see the brickwork chart included as an illustration.

There is no documentary statement among the church records to indicate that the base of the toner was contemporary with the church as built in 1715. There is rather substantial evidence to show that the tower was built from the round upwards in 1769 as advertised 37 in the Gazette of that time. Had the tower been built as a part of the church then the separate walls of church and tower would not have been necessary. As mentioned in our account of the tower, the term steeple (in the eighteenth century) meant the base and its superstructure.

NORTH ELEVATION

^{Photo to follow}

BRUTON PARISH CHURCH AS SEEN FROM THE CHURCHYARD SHOWING THE APPEARANCE OF THE BUILDING BEFORE ITS SECOND RESTORATION IN 1938, 1939. THE NORTH ELEVATION. AT LEFT IS ENCUMBERED WITH ITS "UNHISTORIC" SHUTTERS AND LOUVERED WINDOWS OF THE TOWER.

The north facade of Bruton Church is an exact duplicate of the south side, excepting for the late chimney and bulkhead that appear on the north side. An examination of the building on the site reveals slightly darker brickwork at the base of the building and (seemingly) better preserved brickwork along the entire north wall. The location of the church, at the corner of the yard and adjoining Duke of Gloucester Street on the South and Palace Green on the East, gave it prominence as a secondary entry through the north transept. It was also the door most closely related to the graveyard.

The notes immediately following, for the north side are a direct transcription from notes made by Finlay Ferguson as a preliminary summary of what was done to the church in the way of restoring and preserving its structure.

WINDOWS

Frames old, repaired, some sash new and made to match some old repaired parts.

Brick moldings surrounding the window frame is new, restored to colonial detail. The sills of all windows are new, patterned after eighteenth century examples. [See North Elevation for precedent.]

RONDEL NORTH TRANSEPT

The frame is largely old; antique sash members were duplicated in patched parts.

CORNICE

This was largely original in character if not in reality. The cornice seemed correct in design excepting that the wide spacing of modillions was questioned by the architects. Paint sample for exterior paint was derived from crevices under the cornice overhang.^*

END BOARDS

The end boards are new, based on Virginia colonial design.

SMALL BULL'S EYE WINDOW

The round windows in upper part of gable are new, but they duplicate existing sash and frames found in place. The openings, surrounded by rubbed bricks were repaired.

NORTH TRANSEPT DOORWAY

This doorway gave evidence in its brickwork for the restored round arched head, as opposed to the flat door head shown on early photographs and drawings.

The door frame is new, to detail of the antique doorway at the nave entrance. The door with four panels in each leaf is precedented by the door in tower to nave.

BRICKWORK

Brickwork of the north elevation is all original; however, patched and strengthened.

TOWER WINDOWS

The tower windows, below the cornice level are new, to detail of church windows but at a smaller scale. The tower cornice resembles the cornice of church but at a reduced scale.

EAST ELEVATION

BRUTON CHURCH AT EAST END SHOWING AN OUTSIDE (UNAUTHENTIC) ENTRANCE TO THE EAST "GALLERY." NOTE PUTLOCK HOLD USED TO SUPPORT SCAFFOLDING DURING CONSTRUCTION. THIS ILLUSTRATION WAS MADE BY THOMAS MILLINGTON, 1834.

VIEW OF BRUTON PARISH CHURCH FROM THE NORTH-EAST, AS IT WAS RESTORED. THE CHIMNEY AT CENTER IS AN UNAUTHENTIC ADDITION MADE DURING THE LATE NINETEENTH CENTURY WHEN A FURNACE FOR HEATING THE CHURCH WAS INSTALLED.

Evidence that this stairway was replaced by an interior stair was found under the plaster at the east end of the church.

CORNICE

The cornice of the north and south wings are a continuation of the main cornice discussed under South Elevation.

GUTTER AND LEADERS

There are no gutters or leaders on the East Elevation at chancel gable. There are "base of the wall" brick gutters at the sides of the transepts. The nature of these gutters is discussed and illustrated under "brickwork" of the South Elevation.

WALL SURFACE

The wall surface of the east end of church is of brick laid in Flemish bond. The glazed headers of this elevation are well preserved and produce a pronounced pattern. The headers are laid over one another with regularity up to the base of the upper gable, within the gable end the header arrangement is without regularity. An account of brickwork for the church is given under the heading, "South Elevation." Discussion of the tower facing appears under the subject "Tower."

DOOR

The east doorway of 1848 is discussed under "General Remarks." The removal of the door and frame was debated by the architects during 1938 and finally revved in 1939 by Colonial Williamsburg. The opening was bricked up with use of old brick of similar color and texture.

WINDOWS

The circular window of this ^(East) elevation is an authentic replica of an old and existing window, removed when the John Page Memorial window was added to the church early in the nineteenth ^20th century. The outer dimension of the wheel sash is 7'-1". A new window replaced the old one removed. However, the heavy bars and the window pattern were duplicated in the reproduction.

It should be noted that the east circular window differs from 43 the two rose windows of the north and south transepts. The East one has a 2 3/16" mullion at the center, extending vertically and horizontally. The North and South examples have two heavy vertical mullions that divide the window into three areas of glass. The center part has sash that operates.

The two arch headed windows of the north and south transepts as seen on this elevation are discussed under the heading "South Elevation" -- windows.

SHUTTERS

There are no shutters on this restored elevation. See an account of the "unhistoric" shutters under South Elevation

BASEMENT WALL

The basement wall of the East Elevation is a continuation of the wall of the south elevation, to which the reader of this report is referred.

BULKHEAD AND CHIMNEY

Both the bulkhead and chimney are viewed from the northeast angle. They are both additions made for convenience. A discussion of their history is given under North Elevation.

BARGE BOARDS

The barge boards of the east gable are new, following in their design typical barge boards of the eighteenth century. Precedent for similar barge boards are found on contemporary gabled ended brick buildings such as the Warburton House. The width of the boards vary from 6 ½" at the cornice level to 5 ¼" at the peak. The molded treatment of the barge boards is discussed under South Elevation.

END BOARDS

There are no corner boards. End boards, as terminals to the main cornice are treated under the heading of "Cornice," South Elevation.

GENERAL REMARKS

The facade of the church, facing Palace Green has been returned to its precise appearance of the eighteenth century. Its brickwork 44 was least disturbed by repairs. Its ^{(The East facade)} window based on a measured drawing is the same that was installed when the East addition was made in 1752.

Circular Window said to be from Bruton Church

THE STEEPLE CLOCK

THE CLOCK IS NOT KNOWN TO HAVE BEEN IN THE ORIGINAL CHURCH STEEPEL

The long existence of a clock in the church steeple, naturally suggested to some members of the Vestry that the clock should be 57 retained as an external feature of the belfry.^* The architects on the other hand expressed the attitude that the clock face should be eliminated since it was historically not a feature of the old church. As was pointed out by Mr. Kendrew, at a meeting of the Vestry (April 24, 1939, that the greater number of churches of Virginia do not have clocks in either gable or tower. He suggested that the clock face be eliminated so that the steeple would be outwardly authentic and that the eighteenth century clock works be retained and made to operate so as to strike the hour and half hours. This proposal was prompted by an attitude of sympathy for the point of view of the Vestry and by the desire of not sacrificing the eighteenth century appearance of the steeple and at the same time acceding to the desire of some to perpetuate the association of the clock with the church of the nineteenth century. In a series of letters exchanged by the representatives of the church and the reluctant and historically careful architects, the vestry made the point, that the clock face had been on the tower almost one hundred years (from the year 140.) which was a long time, and that it be retained for its associations and for sentiment.

In the end, the architects were supported in their insistence on authenticity and the external clock face was eliminated. The clock itself has been retained in the tower but was not made to 58 operate, and to strike the hours beyond a few months. The clock works remain in the steeple in a chamber below the topmost louvered part of the spire, where the bell is hung. It has been cased and protected from dust and dampness.^{* It has NOT 1/11/58 OMB}

RESTORATION OF THE STEEPLE
CASING AND STRUCTURE

STRUCTURE OF CHURCH STEEPLE REPAIRED

The church steeple was thoroughly inspected by the architects of Colonial Williamsburg in January 1939 with assistance from Mr. Herbert Cleverdon, Consulting Engineer. The steeple was found to be in sound structural condition excepting the center pole that supported the finial and weather vane. This had deteriorated and so was replaced. The steeple roof was resheathed and surfaced with hand split cypress shingles, permission to use wood shingles on the steeple roof having been obtained from the local authorities.

New cornices, paneling, window frames and numerous other parts were added or renewed at this time. What was done to the tower by way of renovation was almost entirely replacement of old or fragmentary casing by new woodwork, new sash, etc.

It was in the winter of 1938-39 that the church tower was measured, with further study made of evidences that pointed to its original architectural treatment. The steeple structure was found to have been undisturbed by any attached members or structural alteration, so that the general contour of the tower and steeple was recognized as old and authentic. Many photographs and drawings of the tower and steeple bear witness to its unchanged silhouette.

There was a period of almost three quarters of a century during 59 which the steeple way encased in sheet metal, as protection against fire. This was a fortunate circumstance since, beneath the tin, it preserved the traces of moldings and other trim. This tin surface was finally removed during the first restoration of Dr. Goodwin in 1945. On that occasion the steeple was given a casing consisting of two tiers of arches, (eight wood arches at each level), supported by doric pilasters.

MAIN TOWER CORNICE

The cornice at the top of the masonry tower is modillion type, copied in part from the main cornice of the church. The crown molding was abbreviated in its height and the vertical fascia, above the modillions, is somewhat wider than the same detail on Bruton Church. This greater width, and the general design formula appear to have been influenced by the cornice location at the base of a rising spire. Precedent for the cornice as restored can be seen in James Gibbs' A Book of Architecture, published in London, 1728, pl. 24.

There is a repetition of this same cornice, in each case in diminished scale, and without modillions, at the shingled edge of the intermediate and topmost roof. The profiles are correct, according to colonial practice and it appears certain that the architect, J. Stewart Barney (1905) repeated old moldings that he found in place on the tower.

It was this same Barney who was responsible for the applied elaboration of flat arches which have no similar example in any of the Virginia churches of any period. The treatment may be characterized as American carpenter colonial of the decade following 1900. This wood facing remained in place until 1939, when it was removed during the, so called, "second restoration" by Colonial Williamsburg.

LOUVERS

The tower, when stripped of excrescences, offered a basis for the recovery of most of its details. Evidence for the location of the original louvered openings was observed in the old framing, and the existence of pieces of solid iambs with sloped grooves to receive the louvers. Corner boards were found in place; therefore, their renewal or replacement was a natural step. The random width, beaded edge, flush sheathing survived the surface changes. Vertical walls were restored with boarding of the same kind.

BOLECTION MOLDINGS

Bolection moldings surrounded the louvered openings of the bell chamber and windows of the lower part of the steeple. These repeat "a piece of molding found nailed to the studs at the edge of a window."^* The wood sills of these openings were also an authentic repetition of what the tower offered in the way of evidence.

The panels above the window and louvered openings could be reconstructed by traces of applied trim on the existing sheathing.

There is other Virginia precedent for the use of bolection molds, for exterior door casing, namely at Tuckahoe, in Goochland County, where bolection moldings surround the outside doors as trim.

Mr. Ferguson reported on the design origin of the vertical boarding at the base of the spire and its molded cap. It was his impression that the two details were "true replacement" of what had originally existed here and were not designed without fragments found on the tower.

The cavetto molding at the transition point of intermediate roof and the top bell tower is based on handbook details and also is in conformity with what was considered the natural overhanging molding for this location.

THE TOWER OF BRUTON FROM THE CHURCHYARD. THE ORIGINAL TOWER ^was ERECTED WITHIN THE SAME YEAR AS THE 1769 COURTHOUSE. THE COLOR OF ITS BRICKWORK AND THE ALTERNATE GLAZED HEADERS THAT SURROUND THE ARCHES TO RESEMBLE THESE DETAILS ON THE COURTHOUSE.

DOORWAY OF TOWER
INTERIOR VIEW OF THE DOUBLE DOORS INTO THE TOWER FROM THE OUTSIDE. THE DOORS AND FRAME FOLLOW THE DETAILS OF THE ORIGINAL DOORWAY INTO THE CHURCH. NOTE THE LEVEL OF TOWER FLOOR IN RELATION TO THE WATER TABLE POSITION.

INTERIOR VIEW OF BIVALVE DOORS BETWEEN TOWER AND CHURCH. HINGES AND BAR FASTENERS ARE OLD AND ORIGINAL. THE DOOR IS A REPLACEMENT OF THE ORIGINAL ONE.

DETAILS OF WEST BALCONY

Stairway to West Balcony showing slope of gallery, also columns that were considered late and unauthentic.

Photo - N5823

The old and original west balcony. Note the benches with sloped backs. These benches served as the model for intermediate seating within the pew enclosures of the nave of church. The bracket shown at right is a detail of old iron braces that strengthened the long railing at front of gallery.

THE REREDOS OF BRUTON CHURCH

REREDOS AS RESTORED, AS A SCREEN, BEHIND THE ALTAR

THE REREDOS IS AN ACCURATE RESTORATION

The reredos of Bruton is considered to be accurately restored. Some of its moldings are old and original, and two carved oak Ionic capitals and a part of a pilaster shaft showing the fluting served as a pattern for the making of new parts.

There are two versions of the reredos revealed by early photographs, both of which may have been subjected to some modification.

Scheme No. 1 is from the church before its 1905 restoration. It had six ionic pilasters that support an entablature and curved 75 INTERIOR. OF BRUTON (BEFORE 1900) SHOWING REREDOS PLACED AGAINST WALL, WEST OF TRANSEPT. A SUNDAY SCHOOL ROOM WAS IN SPACE PREVIOUSLY OCCUPIED BY NAVE. INTERIOR OF CHURCH AFTER ITS RESTORATION 1938, 1939. THE REREDOS IS RETURNED TO ITS TRADITIONAL LOCATION. 76 pediment over the two pilasters that flank the paneling at center. The design formula is essentially the same as for the restored reredos. In other words, the screen above the altar as, shown in the pre-1905 photograph was considered a relic of the old Bruton Church of the eighteenth century and its duplication by the architects, 193, 1939 was a logical decision.

Scheme No, 2 shows a modification of the earlier design that includes the addition of a curved fronton above four pilasters and a widening of the overall length of the reredos, and an apparent lowering of the base beneath the pilasters. The 1905 reredos was completely remade by a mill which modified many of its details, such as widening the space between the two center pilasters and making the Ionic caps smaller than for the earlier reredos.

REREDOS

It was observed as an interesting discovery of the architects that the original reredos, if standing today on a level of the nave floor, would partially eclipse the east wheel window. As the east gallery is rebuilt (somewhat forward) it hides the window to an even greater degree. This is because of the elevation of the reredos above the general level of the church.

Because of this, and because the window faces the congregation and creates a glare today, an antique organ which was purchased to represent the original organ was placed against the easterly wall, covering the wheel window.^{* also footnote}

Today three Bruton pilaster caps are in existence. (1) Located in the Architectural Research Department in two pieces. Broken into five pieces & reglued - September, 1980. (2) Another in better condition is stored in a crate -- along with the other Bruton woodwork fragments -- in crates of Arch'l Artifact Storage, Piland Warehouse #3 (B1. 33-1, #58). (3) The best example, also stored there, remains in the display case in which it was exhibited at the Court House of 1770 Archaeological Museum from 1933-1973.
CSS (12/16/80)

In restoring the reredos so as to conform with the original character of the design, it was first thought possible that two original Ionic capitals and fragments of pilaster could be incorporated in the restored screen. This intention is confirmed by a letter of the construction supervisor, Elton Holland, who on December 1, 1938 wrote: "Our estimate for the interior restoration of Bruton Parish Church was based upon the supposition that we would reuse two original pilaster caps in the reredos and as noted in the specifications of William Perry. It now seems necessary to fabricate new ones."

It was decided to retain for preservation, an original cap in the Colonial Museum after using it as the model for the carving of six new ones.^* Other details of the reredos were subjected to the most exacting scrutiny. A comparison was made of the original carved pilaster caps and the fluted parts with the milled reproductions delivered at the church. By this comparison, wide discrepancies both in carving and in surface execution were revealed. A meeting with a representative of the mill led to corrections and improvements in finish.

Another glazing discrepancy was found in the design of the entablature. This architectural feature as delivered from the mill was compared with early photographs and was found, as built, to have a different panel molding surrounding the commandment tablets. It was then decided to study the detail further. It was then noted that the profile of the reredos cornice as shown on early prints varied from that shown on drawings by the architects. By scaling the photograph and making use of proportional dividers, it was established by comparison with the existing pilasters that the "overall" of the entablature as detailed on the drawings is correct (from the top of 78 the cornice to the bottom of the architrave). The entablature in question turned out to be a true ionic order of the denticulated sort, and, since the pilasters are Ionic, it was felt that the order should be correctly used. The form of the parts and their moldings were carefully checked with details from early eighteenth century handbooks, to be certain of the correctness of the restored parts.^* Approval of the changes and refinements was given by all concerned with the reredos, February 14, 1939.^**

The reredos, with advice from Mrs. Nash, was given a painted finish with putty-gray color. The places where tablets were located were painted black.

As with Falls Church, Fairfax County, the Ten Commandments, the Creed and the Lord's Prayer were painted in gold upon portrait canvas in the old manner and placed in panels of the reredos. The wording of these inscriptions accords with the Book of Common Prayer.^***

The location of the reredos, approximately 6'-0" from the end wall, permits the placement of a passage and stairs at the rear.

The lettering of the tablets was done in Boston by Ed Silva, under direction of Mr. Perry.

THE PULPIT OF BRUTON CHURCH, located at the southeast angle of the "Crossing." Restoration by Colonial Williamsburg.

THE PULPIT AS RESTORED

PULPIT OF EARLY DOCUMENTS

The first mention of a pulpit in Bruton Church is found in an account of work done on the new church during 1715. The item gives the cost of the "Pulpit and Canopy, £ 1.10."^*

The McCabe vestry notes of 1744 determined the location of the pulpit "placed in the South-East corner.^** The location is again defined by vestry notes of 1753 when it was "Ordered that half the South Gallery, near the pulpit, in the church in Williamsburg, be appropriated to the use of the College of William and Mary."^***

It was believed by the architects that the original pulpit of 1715, continued in use within the church until the drastic interior alterations of 1837-40.

"In 1837 the high pews and the stone-paved aisles, the pulpit and the chancel remained unchanged. Before 1838 the whole had passed away."

This original pulpit was previously recalled and described by Miss Gabriella Galt who wrote in a letter of the 1880s, "The pulpit was at the southeast angle of the church, opposite the Governor's pew. The organ gallery was at the west end of the church, dust over the .entrance to the church a t that end. . .the Pulpit was of mahogany, . . .elevated; a flight of steps led to it. It looked like a bird's nest to my childish fancy."^*

In March 2, 1886. . .the pulpit of that date is reported as "taken down and a new reading desk and pulpit supplied." The later disposition of this "new pulpit" caused a mild dissension in the church.

On the 17th day of March, 1891 a well-meaning resolution of the vestry placed the pulpit described as "costly and handsome," in the hands of a "Society of Ladies" who in turn moved it to the "Powder Horn" where it served their meetings. The church in the meantime, found itself without a pulpit, and in 1895 the Reverend W. T. Roberts, rector of Bruton, after a long wait, made up his mind to test the legality of the Vestry gift, acting with legal advice of Mr. R. T. Armistead, a member of the vestry. A struggle ensued between a part of the vestry and the rector "without a pulpit."^** The dispute was amicably settled by the pulpits return.

In 1905 the pulpit with its overhanging sounding board was moved to its correct location against the southeast wall. There it remained until the time of the church's second restoration in 1938-39.

It was hardly to be expected that the pulpit of this date would have had the characteristics of the original eighteenth century one. As a matter of fact it was ponderous and "Victorian" in its proportions. It was therefore found necessary to redesign a replica of what was deemed to be an early eighteenth century pulpit. We quote Mr. William Perry who described the problem as follows: "The new pulpit was a redesign, following the known precedent at Christ Church, Lancaster County, embodying other characteristics taken from designs in contemporary architectural books and existing pulpits in England.^* Mr. Singleton P. Moorehead, head designer of the Architectural Department was put in charge of the design.

It was he who supervised the collection of pulpit precedent from colonial Virginia churches and who adapted the design elements thus assembled, to the pulpit at Bruton. Mr. Moorehead also checked and determined the location, the stairs, and the character of its moldings, panelling, fluting of pilasters, with the historical data supplied by the Division of Research and Records, and with the handbook details of the early part of the eighteenth century. It was a time when Queen Anne details were applied as, for example, the heavy round headed panelling of the pulpit exterior. The use that was made of handbook precedent is discussed at length, later on as a part of this report.^**

The pulpit, with its walnut finish, its inlaid ceiling, overhanging canopy, sweeping stairway and its refined moldings represents, as restoration, the most ambitious and attractive example of interior 82 furnishing in all of Colonial Williamsburg. It is also a most used subdivision of architecture.^*

The pulpit is square in plan, measuring 3'-9" on each side at its greatest dimension. The outer face of the pulpit proper, is 3'-4" in each side.

The pulpit design includes (a) the pedestal base, (b) the pulpit enclosure, (c) the canopy top with a sounding board ceiling. The structure consist of a 5" x 5" center post of wood, which forms the core of the pedestal and carries the weight of the pulpit above. This post is encased with a casing of American Walnut. The hidden support of the hanging canopy was reinforced with steel channels. These form a cantilever bracket, securely hung from the wall.^** The canopy (or hood) has a cornice of walnut, and has its cornice moldings broken at the four corners in classical fashion.

Before listing the precedent for the parts of the pulpit, we call the readers attention to the handbook precedent available to the designer.

Betty Langley's City and Country Builder's and Workman's Treasury of Designs contains on Plate CX 11 a square pulpit plan with adjoining stairway. See print of handbook plate opposite page. ^{-Design for sounding board inlay}

See also pages 69, 70 of W. Pain's Builder's Companion with illustration of a hood supported by a pilaster, inlaid sounding board, paneled pulpit face and vase shaped pedestal.

83

Precedent: Vase shaped pedestal from the two foregoing handbooks.

Panel on facing of pulpit, with arch head is similar to China Dresser panel at Brooke's Bank, Virginia; also doorway panel of Mile Tree, Surry County. The panel moldings repeat the moldings of wall paneling of Bruton; also similar to paneling in the Tayloe House on Nicholson Street.

Pilaster caps (fluted, with birds beak cup) front the Great Room of Wilton on the James.

Cornice profile is a variation of cornice in Weyanoke, Charles City County.

The general scheme of pulpit and stairway is a recall of what was typical for pulpits of the eighteenth century in Virginia, specifically of Christ Church, Lancaster County. Moldings of handrail, top of pew railing, stair nosing, are from that church.

In having the flame-like termination carved, the mill failed to follow closely the drawing that was supplied by Mr. Moorehead, so that a second attempt was made. The termination was described to the mill contractor in the following terms: "Its form: several spiral coils, each of which is well rounded, similar to the individual strands in a hemp cable. Each such coil, or large strand, is divided into smaller round coils, the whole effect being a tapering, flame-like form."^*

The reading desk at the minister's pew was made from designs by Perry, Shaw and Hepburn. It was completed and delivered to the church, May, 1939.

Mrs. Nash, Mr. Moorehead and Mr. Thrall, painter of Boston (in charge of interior painting of the church) directed and prepared 84 samples of finish for the walnut pulpit. The pulpit woodwork first received a mild brown stain, followed by a bleach and then waxing coats. This finish was used for the pulpit throughout and its background of walnut paneling, excepting that the floor of the pulpit was given the usual pew floor stain and finish; while the ceiling inlay of varied woods, beneath the hood, were untouched, excepting for the coating of clear shellac, followed by a thorough rubbing.^* Stair treads are stained with oil, and waxed as for new floors of pews.

See under Precedent for further data on the design origin of the pulpit.

THE ORGAN OF BRUTON

The historic nature of the original organ of Bruton Parish Church is emphasized by the early and repeated mention of a need for it. On June 29, 1729, Governor Gooch wrote to an unidentified English Lord: ". . .I am prevailed upon by Gentlemen of the Country to Beg the favor of your Lordship to intercede with His Majesty for an organ for our church at Williamsburg. . . .As such gifts my Lord have sometimes been made by royal Bounty to other places in America; the subjects here most humbly presume to hope, that they may have as just a claim,. . .as any people in any part of his Majesty's Dominions."^*

In 1741 the interest of Bruton Church in the acquisition of an organ found a place in the Journals of the Virginia Legislature, with the query: "whether an organ, to be bought by the Public, and appropriated to the Use of Divine Service, at the Church where the Seat of Government shall be, will not add greatly to the Harmony of Praise to the Supreme Being?"^**

The organ did not follow immediately upon the need, but in the year 1752, an Act was passed by the Assembly authorizing the "purchase of a musical organ, for the use of, and to be placed and kept in the said church. . . ."^***

Re: Location of Organ see Marcus Whiffen, Public Buildings of Williamsburg page 146 and note #70 on page 218

LOFT FOR THE ORGAN ORDERED

In November (18) 1755 the organ was finally ordered from London and a distinguished group of Virginians, the Honorable John Blair, Esq., Peyton Randolph, Esq., Benjamin Waller, Esq. and the Honorable Commissary, Thomas Dawson …do agree with a person to build a Loft for an organ in the church in the city of Williamsburg and to set up the same… ."^*

In the same year, payment to the renowned Peter Pelham, late of Boston, was authorized for his services as organist.

MENTION OF THE ORGAN BY A TRAVELER

The organ, by virtue of the organist as much as by the quality of the instrument, was to achieve a lasting popularity. There is a journal entry of Alexander Macaulay, February 26, 1783, while visiting Williamsburg. ". . .Theres the Church fam'd for its noble Organ of one hundred tones, touch'd by the modern Orpheus--the inimitable Pelham . . . ."^**

It has been deplored by the architects of the Restoration that the records are neither specific nor detailed concerning the location of the "noble organ." It has been supposed, by some, that the loft, referred to in the 1758 document could hardly have been at the east end of the church interior, since, as we have observed elsewhere in this report, it would have obscured the wheel window above the chancel. It is also apparent that the reported ponderous size of the organ would seem to have been out of proportion in a provincial church, such as Bruton was.

The final fate of the organ purchased by authorization of the Assembly in 1752 is not definitely known. It was probably the organ disposed of by sale in April 23, 1835 when it was "Resolved" by the 87 Vestry that "the remains of the old organ be given to Mrs. Galt, to be disposed of in such a manner as she deems proper; the proceeds to be applied to the ornament or improvement of the organ gallery. . ."^*

The architects who were responsible for the restoration of the church expressed the desire for the installation of an antique instrument within the church; one that would be as close as possible, a duplication of the 1758 organ, "Such an organ," it was specified, "must be equipped with supplementary modern pipes so as to be adapted to the special use of the twentieth century choir and group singing. Mr. William Perry discovered such an antique organ in England and had it rebuilt and installed in a balcony at the east end of the chancel, above the reredos. In so doing he aroused some opposition since no agreement had been reached among architects and by the Vestry, with respect to the location of the first organ. There was doubt, or rather an absence of proof that the east gallery was proper setting for it.^{** (copy note)}

The so called "Green organ" purchased by Mr. Perry and installed it the East Gallery is an extremely interesting one and probably 88 VIEW OF ANTIQUE ORGAN, LOCATED AT CENTER OF THE EAST GALLERY. The organ was designed and built by Samuel Green, London, 1785. Curtains hang at each side, to shield from view, the circular window above the chancel. The ceiling grille above the organ balcony was intended for release of sound from the organ chamber in the attic. 89 resembles the organ type that was brought to the colony after 1755. It was examined by the author of this report to discover its practical usefulness in the church today. This antique organ by Green was cross connected with a second organ, of 1840, placed in the attic above the organ loft. The two are operated by the organist from the organ console which stands near the pulpit, on the south side of the church chancel.

The antique organ bears the name of its maker above the key board, namely:

SAMUEL GREEN
LONDON, 1785.

Its width is 6'-8"; its height, 8'-6".

On each side of the organ, partly to obscure the light from the circular window, and also to form a finish at the edge of the organ, as it joins the wall, there are hung antique damask curtains.

The extension of the balcony above the reredos and the partial enclosure of the organ space by a parapet and curtain wall, made it necessary to provide grille openings in the ceiling and into the sound chamber in the attic. These have been subject to some alteration since the sounds from the 1840 organ are considered to be muffled because of location.^*

The PEWS OF BRUTON, as they were finally restored in 1941. All seating in nave of church faces toward the Altar. Box pews with round about seats are installed in transepts.

EIGHTEENTH AND TWENTIETH CENTURY PEWS COMPARED

Pews of today differ in their purpose and design from what they were during the eighteenth century. Pews then were reserved for designated families or individuals. Class distinction among Virginians and family ownership of pews have now vanished, making the high backed and exclusive box pew, something of an anachronism.^*

Even so practical a matter as heating by use of foot warmers and the elimination of drafts had an influence on the adoption of enclosed pews during colonial times.

None of the pews of Bruton Church are original but are a restoration of old Virginia pews.

The question whether to restore the pews to their authentic eighteenth century appearance or to meet modern congregation practice was debated by the architects and the Vestry over a period of many months. It should be recorded that the architects sought to retain the box pew character throughout the church interior. It was their desire to reconstruct pews that would give the impression of the design of typical old church pews of colonial Virginia. What was finally done, as we shall see, was in fact a compromise in the direction of comfort and increased seating accommodation.

BASIS FOR THE PEW DESING OF BRUTON

The pew design was based upon three sources of information:

• 1.

  There were markings within the church of original pew locations. These consisted of wood blocks and markings on the wall as well as traces of partitions and pews 91 found on the floor. The discovery of these artifacts were made, partly during 1905 but chiefly while the 1938, '39 re-restoration was under way.

  From these traces it was possible to determine the location and the parts of the old square box pews of pre-Revolutionary days.

• 2.

  The recollection of old residents of Williamsburg was taken into account in formulating pew design. Mrs. Letitia Tyler Semple for instance, was said-to recall the old church of 1839, before drastic alterations of 1840 were made. "They were box pews," she said, "and the seat went around the three sides. A door opened from the pew into the aisle, one step higher than the stone flagging of the aisle."

  Miss Gabriella Galt has preserved for us glimpses of the church interior of the mid-nineteenth century. "My recollection of the Governor's Pew, as a child, is that it was square with seats extending around three sides. I had to stand on a seat to see what was passing. The sides of pews were high. The chair of state, or throne, had been done away with before my day. I am told it was an elevated seat with a handsome gilded canopy. I do not recollect the inscription on it."^* The pulpit location was recalled as on the right hand side of the aisle, entering at the south door.

• 3.A third and most important basis for the pew restoration was Virginia precedent. There were a number of Episcopal Virginia churches of early foundation that had (1938, 1939) original dado paneling, elevated pulpits, altar railing and box pews. Among these are Ware and Abingdon Churches in Gloucester County; Christ Church, Lancaster County; Aquia Church, Stafford County; Christ Church, Alexandria; and St. Mary's White Chapel, Lancaster County.

The architects of Colonial Williamsburg sent two of their staff, Finlay Ferguson and John Henderson, on a tour of the churches listed, with the purpose of their studying them, making sketches, in the architectural drafting room for use in the design of the church interior.

Among these examples visited, Christ Church, "Lancaster," built by Robert Carter c. 1732, was considered as having the best unaltered pews in Eastern Virginia. It was here that the large corner box pews and smaller aisle pews existed and were used in designing the ones in Bruton. Mr. Singleton Moorehead, at this same time, was making drawings of Bruton's new pulpit which repeated some of the details of the pulpit of Christ Church.

Some investigation was also roads of churches in South Carolina, including Pompion Hill Chapel, St. James Church, Santee, and St. James Church, Goose Creek.

HIGH BACKED PEWS NOT UNIVERSALLY POPULAR

Even in the eighteenth century the high backed pews were not considered universally as necessary and desirable. There were some of the clergy and others who objected to them because they obstructed the view of the architecture and of the service. Pews in the more formal churches tended to hide the base of column as well as the altar and the lower part of the pulpit; the elevation of the latter made it "an eagles nest, reached only by a flight of winding steps.".

"It were to be wished" wrote Christopher Wren, c. 1714, "There were to be no Pews, but Benches."^** To the Victorian churchman of the nineteenth century the enclosed pew came to be generally despised and avoided. That attitude seems to account for the drastic alterations made to Bruton, in the name of modernization, during the 1840-1842 renovation.

In our discussion of the eighteenth and nineteenth century attitude of the church and congregation toward pews, we do not wish to lose sight of the final decision of Bruton Church, to adopt a design of box pews with intermediate benches so that a majority of the congregation could face forward toward the pulpit.^*

After information on the restoration of pews for the church had been assembled the actual work on the design of the interior was hastened. Many of the drawings were made during 1938 and 1939 although a restudy of the pews was continued into 1941 which ended in modifications made to pew backs and paneling. In July, 1941, Mr. A. E. Kendrew prepared an outline of the "history" of the pews of Bruton including pertinent facts and decisions that followed discussions of architects and Vestry over a period of about three years. The highlights of this "history" are included here because they show the care that was taken by both the Vestry and the architects in exploring every possible proposal for preserving an eighteenth century church character but not without keeping in mind a suitability for present day church usage.

During the start made toward the restoration of Bruton Church under the direction of Perry, Shaw and Hepburn,, in 1936-1938, some small scale sketches for the interior work were made and submitted to the Vestry. A pew arrangement proposed by them was approved by the Vestry and later constructed during that year. The seating arrangement proposed by them gave a general effect of colonial box 94 pews but with the introduction of low backed intermediate pews that provided a maximum seating which the Vestry was anxious to have.

During the course of construction and after some of the pews had been installed, members of the Vestry pointed out that the intermediate pews were found to be uncomfortable with their almost straight backs and because of a projecting cap, below shoulder height. It was also pointed out that there was cramped leg room.^*

The objections of the Vestry, as recorded here brought up the question again, should the church be restored so as to be, as far as possible, a replica of the eighteenth century Virginia church with box pews in the nave and also in the transepts? To do this would require alterations. It would likewise mean a reduced seating accommodation and many in the congregation would be compelled to sit facing away from the pulpit and chancel.

1939

After the dedication of the church in the summer of 1939, Thomas Mott Shaw of Perry, Shaw and Hepburn visited Williamsburg in order to discuss the pew designs and arrangement with member of the Vestry building Committee. This conference led to a tentative agreement on three modifications:

• 1.Rework the present pew back cap to a new profile on all of the intermediate pews.
• 2.Remove panels under the seats of intermediate pews in order to provide foot space and storage for kneelers.
• 3.Install bevelled cleats on top of all pew seats so that the outer edge of seat cushions would be raised slightly.

The making of these changes was delayed by long discussion between the architects and Vestry, complicated by the idea, sponsored 95 by the church building committee, that the box pews throughout the church would now be a desired objective.

1941

The subject was debated, for many more months, not on practical merits but on principle. Little thought was given by the building Committee on how its proposals might be financed.

It finally became, (rather than was) the consensus of opinion that nothing would be gained by exploring the question further since, even though money could be found somehow to carry out the work, that it would be impracticable in a living church which is being used continuously, to have the complete arrangement of seats around the high backed box pews.^*

The question was now reduced to two alternatives:

• #1.Remove the present intermediate seats, numbered on the plans as 18-21 24-27 and extend seats around three sides of these pews in colonial manner.^**
• #2.". . .that the present pew arrangement in the nave be retained, that the cap on top of the intermediate pews be changed and that the bottom panels of the main partitions, where they are in front of the intermediate pews, be removed or made removable, in order to make pews more comfortable."^***

The alternate schemes were fairly considered. It was then decided by a majority vote that alternate #2 be followed out; even though scheme #2 had been considered because of possible authenticity. Yet this commendable striving for authenticity would result in the loss of 21 seats, while 65 persons in the 96 pews would sit with backs to the chancel and pulpit.^* The intermediate seats that were adopted were patterned after old benches in the west balcony. These benches, that survived a century of use, have low sloping backs, wider seats, and are open underneath. Their chief advantage was that they were comfortable. They are not of the eighteenth century vintage but are supposed to have been constructed about 1840.^**

As a test of the validity of this proposal one of the balcony pews was moved down from the west balcony and into Pew #5 of the nave and given an experimental trial "by use" by members of the vestry. They were declared comfortable and had additional leg room since they were not enclosed below the seat.

1941

While the substitution of 1840 seats within the existing pews in the nave was finally settled, it was also recommended that enclosed, "roundabout" pews be placed in the transepts. The Restoration agreed to pay for a part of the cost of this work and the church agreed to pay for the balance.

There remained some feeling on the part of the Vestry committee chairman who "wondered if it would not be possible to consider, once more, the installation of a more authentic pew system in the nave." Mr. Kendrew circulated the proposal with Mr. Perry and others. In doing so and in considering costs, it was found that it would be necessary to make a major alteration in the design 97 of the pew seats and paneling because the present main partitions of pews are too narrow to accommodate roundabout seats. Diagrams showing the new arrangement were presented to the Vestry, along with the problems involved in attempting a return to the box pews.

Mr. Craighill then called a meeting of the Vestry and invited members of the Building Committee to be present, for presentation of the new idea. The gathering studied the diagram proposals and, after discussion, voted in favor of seating in the nave with intermediate benches.

Thus ended the lengthy battle of contrary views. The outcome has grown increasingly clear that the right decision was reached. The consideration that was given to all aspects of the question is a demonstration of the patient endeavor of Colonial Williamsburg architects to reach a solution in which the Vestry, the congregation and the architects would find themselves in full and friendly accord.

1942

In January 23, 1942 the removal of intermediate seats [in the transept] was practically completed and their painting was underway. Pew cushions were ready at this date.

On February 26, 1942 the nave pews were declared completed and ready for use.

The remaining transept pews were finished, April 2, 1942.

The church and its building Committee were commended by Colonial Williamsburg for their stand with respect to the pews in the nave of the church. It was a triumph for the principle that Bruton Parish Church is an historically continuing church body, dedicated to service in the twentieth century as well as an extension of its past.

After completion of the church, Mr. Kenneth Chorley, in correspondence with Mr. Frank Craighill, Rector of Bruton Church, urged that a statement be made to the public, including the congregation, that the much discussed pews in the church are not intended as authentic replicas of eighteenth century ones, and the reasons should be given why they are not authentic.

PEWS IN THE GALLERIES

Turning back for a moment to the mid-eighteenth century we note that there was pews in the galleries as well as on the first floor of the church is indicated by a letter of Benjamin Waller to Thomas Jones, June 2, 1750.

"Sirs: My wife being often at a loss for seats in the Pews allotted her, I trouble you with this letter, to know whether you would be willing, at leaving the town, to sell yours in the Gallery?"

INTERIOR LIGHTING

LIGHTING FIXTURES PROPOSED BY MR. PERRY

The interior lighting of Bruton was a result of ^{the adoption of} different lighting methods. Its principal lighting ^fixtures (selected by Mr. W. Perry) included: (1) a large polished brass chandelier, hung from the 22'-0" high ceiling. ^{8x8 Eng Brass 16 ft wax Candles - Georgian Brass Co.} Its design is a modification of antique church ceiling fixtures.

• 2 chandeliers of moderate size were selected and placed beneath north and south additions to the east balcony (chancel), ceiling 9'6". ^{Georgian Brass Co 6 ft wax candles}
• 3 antique sconces (double) selected to be placed adjacent to the crossing wall.
• 2 antique sconces (double) for the reredos.
• 8 Reproduced single sconces, at piers.
• 3 Reproduced single sconces under galleries.
• 12 reproductions of antique sconces, at three galleries.
• 3 lanterns ^{pendent, onion globe, brass, electrified} under the north, south and west balconies, where ceiling height is 9'-6". ^{furnished by Georgian Bronze Co 212 Newbury St Boston}
• 1 lantern west, first floor vestibule (16 feet under first floor faints).

A modification was made in the above order, following a later request by Mr. Perry for several additional fixtures having electrical outlets and additional antique sconces and electrified chandeliers, besides those already contemplated.^*

In reply to this request the view was expressed that two additional (electrified chandeliers) would not be in keeping with the 100 church, and that, if they were necessary, they should be of candle type, and not electrified. It was also recommended that the antique wall sconces were comparatively expensive, and therefore the reproduction type should be used.

REPRODUCTIONS OF ANTIQUE LIGHTING FIXTURES RECOMMENDED

In May 1939 shortly before the dedication of the restored church, Mr. Chorley suggested that the two intended antique sconces on either side of the reredos be made single reproduction sconces. Mr. Perry had already ordered the choir chandelier (unelectrified) for use under the east balcony and the three lanterns under other galleries. The list of other fixtures suggested by Mr. Perry, were approved.

Following the installation of the sconces, chandeliers and lanterns, a need was felt for increasing the light intensity in certain places. . . .

STEREOPTICON LIGHTING INSTALLED

During the course of the restoration an attempt was made to improve the lighting by introducing what was termed "modern methods of illumination." Lighting Experts (under direction of Mr. Wendel) from New York were consulted. Under his supervision light was introduced in conical form through lenses which projected the light through small, scarcely visible openings in the ceiling. These openings did not exceed ¾ of an inch in diameter. The apparatus for creating the light was placed about three feet above the ceiling level and resembles in its operation a stereopticon projector. This method was designed to give a supplementary light throughout the church, after dark, sufficient for reading purposes. "In this way," said Mr. Perry, "the necessity for chandeliers and other fixtures which would have destroyed the eighteenth century appearance of the inside of the church would be avoided."

Two attic lights, with this hidden source, flood light the altar and reredos. It was at this time that the huge brass candle chandelier of colonial design was placed in the chancel.

Candle sconces with hurricane shades were placed at the wall between the arched windows.

In August (5) 1941, after trial of over two years, the lighting system recommended by Mr. Wendel was considered to have failed to meet the need of the church and the further advice of lighting experts was sought.

In December (30) 1941 the office of Colonial Williamsburg wrote to Reverend Francis Craighill, "We have finally worked out what we believe to be a satisfactory answer to the lighting problem."

This resulted in the installation (February (13) 1942) of 13 additional lighting fixtures as follows:

• 3 Custom built double reflector units, recessed into the balcony cornice construction of the north, south and west balconies.
• 2 Additional sconces added to the reredos.
• 8 Outlets with wall sconces (2 at rear wall of each of the four galleries).

YARD LIGHTING

During the time when the church was being restored (1939) the vestry waged^urged that improved lighting of the church yard be considered by the architects. The request was answered by the installation of newly designed lamp posts at the north and west doors. A south door lamp post was omitted, due to the existence of a nearby street lamp.^*

INTERIOR

All interior woodwork of doors and windows were ^was painted a 106 putty-gray color, including all^the hardware but not locks. All window frames, stools, trim, also metal grilles, were painted the same gray color excepting the cap mold, which was given a dark red color^pigment to match the cap molding of pews.

Interior plastered walls were painted white to give the appearance of whitewash which was -^the traditional surface treatment given to plastering throughout the eighteenth century. The Bruton vestry records, as repeated in the notes of McCabe, refer frequently to the whitewashing of walls. It was the customary method for refreshing the internal appearance of churches and other buildings.

PEWS

Woodwork of pews in both the gallery and on the main floor of the church was given a surface coating of the same color as approved sample.^* The seats of pews on which cushions were placed were also finished with the putty-gray, contrasting agreeably with the narrow ^maroon red seat cushions.

Pew floors were stained, then oiled and waxed. Mere as elsewhere -- samples of finish were followed. The cap of pew backs and new knobs were painted to match the color of the top of pew backs.

REREDOS

The reredos was also painted a putty-gray shade throughout (#1048), excepting the three decorative panels. These panels, with their lettering of the Creed and the Commandments were painted in 107 Boston, by the artist Ed De Silva, under direction Mr. William Perry,

The rail under balusters at the top or reredos was painted the same as the pew caps, on top, sides and on the bottom between the balusters.

The balusters and gallery woodwork were painted a gray-putty color #1048, Floors of reredos as also the treads of the reredos stair were treated so as to match the pew floors mentioned above. The iron railing of this stair, after priming, was also painted gray. Other woodwork, including the woodwork in the passage below the reredos gallery was painted putty-gray. An appearance of contrast was given by the finish accorded the walnut rail of the sanctuary. This was finished "natural" in walnut color to match the treatment of the pulpit.

PULPIT

Mrs. Nosh, Mr. Moorehead and Mr. Thrall^* directed and prepared samples of finish for the walnut pulpit. The pulpit woodwork first received a mild brown stain, followed by a bleach and then waxing coats. This finish was used for the pulpit throughout and its background of walnut panelling, excepting that the floor of pulpit was given the usual pew-floor finish, while the ceiling inlay, underneath the hood, was untouched, excepting for its coating of clear shellac, followed by a thorough rubbing. Stair treads of 108 pulpit were stained with oil and waxed as for new floors of pews.

Other walnut in the church, including the arms of the intermediate pews, were given the same treatment as the pulpit.

NORTH AND SOUTH GALLERIES

Woodwork of these galleries, were, in general, painted gray. Stair treads and floor repeat the same stain and waxing as for the pew floors. Handrails and newel posts of the stair to these galleries are painted dark red. Pews in galleries are of putty-gray, including seats, except cap mold which was painted dark red. Top moldings of gallery balustrade are also painted a dark red. The balusters are painted ray.

GALLERY

The newel posts and hand rails of the gallery are painted dark red. The antique stair treads were cleaned, oiled and waxed. Pews of the west gallery were given the same finish as elsewhere within the church, namely, they were given a putty-gray color with caps painted a dark red.

PLASTER WALLS

The cornice and ceiling were painted white, with two coats of Dri-Wall paint.

ORGAN GRILLES IN CEILING

The grilles in the ceiling installed for the organ requirements were painted with two coats of flat white oil paint. After this was thoroughly dry they received the same coating as the ceiling, namely, two coats of Dri-Wall paint. All joists above these grilles were given a through brushing over of flat dark brown paint.

VESTIBULE

All exposed brickwork of the tower vestibule was cleaned to receive two coats of whitewash containing a heavy glue binder. The underside of the second floor, including joists, received the same treatment. All woodwork of windows and doors in this 109 room was painted putty-gray, including the backboards of coat hook strips.^*

BULKHEAD COLOR

The bulkhead was painted three coats of oil paint. The final coat to be dark brown in color. This dark color was chosen as least conspicuous. The bulkhead as observed elsewhere in this report was not an authentic colonial feature. It was added as a convenient access to the basement from the north side. Additional color notes:

The varied color decisions for the church were not matters of snap judgment, but followed the examination of many actual specimens found in the church and the study of every available record that related to the painting of the church. Following research, various experimental panels were set up to note the appearance of paint for walls, trim, pew caps, handrails, balusters, etc. These samples were placed just south of the southeast corner of the crossing of nave and transept aisle pews. They preceded a final decision on color.^**

PERMANENT PAINT RECORDS

After the colors were finally selected, it was recommended by the architects that a permanent record be made of paint formulae for pews, reredos, rails and other woodwork, so that in the future the colors and finish can be readily duplicated.^***

After the Purbeck floor was laid there was some discussion of methods of allaying dust from the new stone. A clear Dri-Wall 110 the engineers, could be gotten by the subsequent addition of refrigerating equipment. At that date (1938) they recommended a method that was to have made use of ice for air cooling. The use of antifreeze ice for chilling air was then considered both practical and economical.

BRUTON CHURCH AS IT APPEARED AROUND 1912; with an unauthentic chimney, required for heating. Lightning rods, shutters, tile roof and the colonnaded facing of the steeple were among the acquired details of the church that were destined to be removed during 193, 1939.

finish was recommended as a dust preventive.

The top of organ console was given the same dark red finish as the molded cap of pew backs.

^GLASS

It was intended that English crown glass would be used as replacement for all needed glass in exterior windows.^*

Because of difficulty in obtaining English glass at that time, one of two alternates ^was permitted:

• 1.It would be satisfactory to use "C" quality glass in all tower windows and in circular windows where crown or old glass is not available. Crown glass received its name from the practice of granting "an exclusive right to manufacture glass within the Kingdom by the Crown, during the seventeenth century."
• 2.

  In large circular headed windows in the main part of the church, use "C" quality glass where window lights are broken or missing.

  If all new glass is needed for a single new sash, then include about six old window panes taken from some other window of the church in order not to have a completely new appearance in one window.^**

While the paint colors in Bruton were, in general, subdued for woodwork and walls, there are records of internal colors 112 having been used for altar cloth, for cushions and for the curtain rail of the Governor's Pew. Some of the accepted colors for fabric accessories are as follows:

"Pulpit cloth and cushions of ye best velvet..." not of a gold cloth.

Red damask curtains, 15" high, surrounded the pew of the Governor -- as restored.

Red wool challis curtains were adopted (in restoration) as curtain for the organ gallery.

The same red color occurs for cushions.

CHURCH DECORATION LIMITED BY BISHOP

The vestry records indicate the custom of decorating the church interior at Christmas and Easter. The decorative treatment of Bruton Church was the subject of a communication from a Bishop of the Protestant Episcopal Churches in Virginia in 1879. He approved of the custom for Christmas, declaring it "as old a practice as the church itself.

He declared, however, that "the introduction of evergreens and flowers, fruits or vegetables on Thanksgiving Day, or on any other occasion is a novelty and an innovation in Virginia and ought not to be done or allowed.

"The decoration of the Lord's Table, pulpit and desk with cloths of one color for some occasions and of another color for other occasions, the different colors [red, purple, gold, etc.] being changed according to the times and seasons, is a new and strange thing in the Church in Virginia, and ought not to be done or allowed."^*

Dimension Information

All measurements are external, taken above the brick water table.