Travels of a Scenic Artist and Scholar. The Georgian Theatre Royal, Richmond, England.

Copyright © 2024 by Wendy Waszut-Barrett

On Saturday afternoon Mike Hume, Grit Eckert, and I had an afternoon appointment at the Georgian Theatre Royal in Richmond, England.

Prior to our visit, I watched The Georgia Theatre Experience to familiarize myself with the venue.

Built by actor-manger Samuel Butler in 1788, the building is nestled near the center of Richmond. A small alleyway leads from the town square to the stage door.

Like many historic playhouses, time took its toll on the building with areas becoming derelict over the years. Fortunately, the theatre was restored, reopening in 1963. A museum was later added in 1979.

Here are a few photographs of the building from our visit. That being said, when Mike finishes his write-up about this building, and posts it to Mike Hume’s Historic Theatre Photography there will be a link HERE.

After exploring the stage, we went below to see remnants of old stage machinery on display and the dressing room area.

Anna Bridgeman, Heritage and Administration Manager at the theater, gave us a private tour of the building, museum, and archives. She was an absolute delight to have as a tour guide!

The main purpose of our visit was to see the woodland scene. It purported to be “Britain’s oldest surviving stage scenery” by George Rivers Higgins, c. 1836.

Recently, The British Museum and BBC published the following in an online article:

The Georgian Theatre (the UK’s oldest working theatre in its original form, built 1788) holds, in its display area, the oldest known theatrical scenery still in existence: the Woodland Scene. The scenery comprises 8 wooden wing flats 9ft 6ins by 3ft 6ins, 5 canvas borders and a Forest back-drop scene 13ft 1in by 10ft 2ins. All trees in the scene can be identified as specific types. On the back is painted a Blue Drawing Room, with Fire, showing a period fireplace, skirting board and paneling and a picture frame over the fireplace. The Woodland scenery was only part of a stock of 5 different scenery pieces which had been in the Hinkins family as far back as 1820. It was painted at a scene painting shop in Royston, Hertfordshire, (previously Cambridgeshire) which was set up in 1811 by a former travelling actor – George Rivers Higgins. How and why the Woodland Scene became detached from the other pieces of Hinkins scenery is not known but it was Richard Southern (a theatre architecture historian instrumental in uncovering the history of the Georgian Theatre in Richmond, North Yorks) who arranged its transfer into the care of the Theatre trustees in 1961.

Today’s post solely focuses on a portion of the three scenic pieces currently on display. Here is a link to see the scenery in its entirety before it was removed from the stage area, preserved, and stored.

Only the woodland backdrop and two double-painted wings remain on display in the basement of the Georgian Theatre Royal. They are all well-lit and encased in glass cabinets. This makes it easy for visitors to examine without threat of harm, but difficult to photograph as a scene.

I am not going to address the conservation team’s historical analysis of the scenery or the preservation. All of the reports were shared with us during our visit and I have spent hours contemplating the final conservation process.

I am going to share my own thoughts on the manufacture and the artist who is credited with the work. By the way, my next post will solely look at the life and career of George Rivers Higgins. Higgins is credited with the woodland scene.

The backside of woodland wings is painted with two different interior settings, This was a common practice throughout the 19^th century. The interior subjects would have been labeled a plain chamber (SL) and a parlor interior (SR).

These themes were two standard stock scenes for nineteenth-century stages in English and American theaters. Whether for small halls or large opera houses, stock scenery was purchased when a stage was constructed or renovated. Stock scenes offered standard settings used in many productions.

This practice continued throughout the 19^th century and well into the 20^th century. Here is an example of stock scenery offerings from 1889:

Double-painted wings are not an anomaly. I have documented dozens in North American. Here is an example from the Tabor Opera House in Leadville, Colorado, c. 1879.

Double-painted wings makes complete sense, especially from a financial perspective. It was a practical way to conserve stage space while offering more options for productions.

The back side of a wing wasn’t always covered with cloth before painting the second composition. In some cases, the frame remained entirely visible under a coat of paint. Here is another example from the Tabor Opera House in, Leadville, Colorado.

This remained a standard practice into the early-twentieth century, especially for interior sets.

We were fortunate to have Anna open the display case opened at the Georgian Theatre Royal, and provide me with a stepladder. This meant that I could examine scenic art details. 

Without this type of access, I could have never identified a hidden composition. Upon close inspection (and without the glare of the glass) remnants from an earlier interior painting (on the backside of the woodland wings) was clearly visible.

As in many cases, the actual wing fabric and frame predate the current painted composition. Again, this could be work of two entirely different artists.

The build-up of paint on the fabric suggests also suggests multiple layers, not just two compositions.

The underpainting suggests that the previous painted composition included an onstage column, perched atop a base; the column and base emulating a type of granite.

I have identified underpainting on extant scenery before; no special machinery required, just a keen eye and photoshop.

When examining a grayscale image of the painted details and playing with contrast, numerous details suddenly become visible. Here is a quick example with white lines (in the right image) to show an underlying composition.

Here is an 19th century example of what the underlying composition could have looked like.

Keep in mind, that it was a common practice to touch-up, re-paint, and physically alter stock scenes (both framed pieces and soft goods).

In many cases used/old scenery was taken back on as credit for the purchase of new scenery. The used scenery was then enlarged and/or refurbished for another venue.

I noticed that the woodland backdrop has fabric extensions on both the top and the sides, suggesting that it was enlarged before a the artist painted the woodland scene.

Even when historic records suggest that an original piece of scenery was painted by a specific individual, the entire scene may have been refurbished/repainted by another artist (local, or visiting) at a later date. Stage managers frequently directed artists to refresh the painting when scenes began to show some wear (about every 5-10 years). 

So the woodland scene may have been originally painted delivered as a landscape, but the top painting concealed much of the original artist’s work. This makes it extremely difficult to date and/or determine the actual creator without a signature – UNLESS there is a paper trail that clearly notes who refurbished the scenery during a specific period.

Only ONCE, have I been able to track down a newspaper article that mentioned a specific artist painting new scenes on existing stock flats (ones that still existed). This was at the Tabor Opera House in 1888 when Frank Cox painted new scenes on the original shutter frames, dating from 1879.

While examining the shutters by Cox and the wings by Higgins, I was struck by their similarity. The two sets of Cox shutters are very similar in compositional layout to the woodland scene at the Georgian Theatre Royal. Here is a detail of from Higgins’ painting with a similar trunk to compare with that by Cox above.

There is something about the 1836 date for the woodland scene that doesn’t sit right with me, making me wonder when the last coat of paint was actually applied.

There is no doubt that the framework and fabric were manufactured in the early 19th century, but I wonder about the final painting. It is now very difficult to judge, as the sealer used during conservation work (for paint consolidation) adds a slight sheen to the entire composition. Therefore, we cannot tell if the underlying interior composition (the one with red and green spatter) is a different type of paint.

Yet the underpainting remains very exciting. Upon close inspection, one can clearly see the earlier scene; one with spattered pink stone columns and brown wood moulding. What I find remarkable is the use of spatter – red, green and ivory dots. This is the first time that I have encountered this type of spatter (warm and cool) on a nineteenth-century scene. I could write SO much more about this, but am going to stop here.

Below are a few more painted details from my visited to the Georgian Theatre Royal.

To be continued…