A Baker garden with a touch of Jekyll: Early history (1903–1905) of the garden at Westminster Estate near Tweespruit, Free State, with special reference to the role played by the Duke of Westminster, Sir Herbert Baker and Gertrude Jekyll
Department of History, National Museum, Bloemfontein, P.O. Box 266, Bloemfontein, 9300, and Research Fellow, Department of History, University of the Free State, Bloemfontein
E-mail: Derek@nasmus.co.za
Abstract
The house and garden of Westminster Estate near the town of Tweespruit are one of the few examples of an original sandstone house and matching garden that have survived in the Free State for more than a century. The history of Westminster’s garden, the focus of this study, is multi-faceted, especially because the key personalities in the story, namely the Duke of Westminster, well-known architect Sir Herbert Baker, and the famous British garden designer Gertrude Jekyll, were no ordinary people. This study aims to tell the story of the early years of Westminster’s garden, viewed against the background of the profound changes that had taken place in South Africa’s history, and in particular in the Free State during the early 1900s. The historical processes that led to the establishment of the estate and the subsequent laying out of the garden, as well as the role the above-mentioned personalities played in the design and creation of the garden, are discussed. Westminster’s garden, a good example of the Jekyllian philosophy that a house and garden should form a visual unity, is one of few Free State gardens designed by Baker that survived the ravages of time.
(Key words: Westminster, Free State, South Africa, Duke of Westminster, Sir Herbert Baker, Gertrude Jekyll, English-style garden)
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
The Anglo-Boer War and its aftermath…………………………………………………………………………………………….
The Duke of Westminster and Westminster Estate…………………………………………………………………………..
Sir Herbert Baker and Westminster Estate……………………………………………………………………………………….
Gertrude Jekyll’s garden philosophy and influence………………………………………………………………………….
Learning from a master gardener…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. A Baker garden with a touch of Jekyll………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
“More English than South African”…………………………………………………………………………………………………..
“A wall and terrace garden”………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
CONSLUSION………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
SOURCES………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
INTRODUCTION
It seldom happens that a garden survives intact for more than a century. If it survives for that long it typically outgrows its original layout and appearance. Gardens are ephemeral and vulnerable and therefore much more difficult to preserve than buildings. One season’s neglect could ruin a garden considerably, if not permanently. Because a garden is a “living materiality”,[1] it is subject to constant change. It evolves over time as plants and trees take root, mature, contract diseases, grow old, and eventually die. Needless to say, all gardens are subject to these “processes of time and nature”.[2] In addition to these natural processes of change, there are other changes that are brought about by human intervention. Various factors determine the lifespan of a garden and it is self-evident that the odds are stacked more heavily against some gardens. This is especially true in South Africa where climatic conditions and topography vary greatly from one region to another.
The likelihood of a Free State garden surviving a century’s droughts, unreliable rainfall, frosts, hail, dust storms, and other kinds of adversity is small. Changes brought about by successive owners to reshape the garden according to their tastes and preferences further compromise its original layout. For these reasons the province does not boast a significant number of historical gardens. The Florence Charter on historical gardens, registered by the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) in 1982, defines a historical garden as “an architectural and horticultural composition of interest to the public from the historical or artistic point of view”.[3] This definition also applies to historical gardens in South Africa, although only a few are protected and preserved in terms of the Florence Charter. High levels of care and maintenance are required to preserve a garden for more than a century, and even more so in regions with severe climates such as the Free State. The few noteworthy examples of relatively well-preserved historical gardens in Bloemfontein include the garden of the Oliewenhuis Art Museum[4] and that of the Appeal Court.[5] In other Free State towns it is mostly private gardens that qualify as ‘historical’ or ‘historic’. Very few of these gardens, however, are more than a hundred years old; and in cases where they are that old, only remnants still exist.
The academic study of gardens and designed landscapes is an internationally recognised discipline, most notably in Britain, the USA and Europe. In other countries, including South Africa, garden history is still a relatively new study discipline. Regrettably, the study of historical gardens is a rather neglected subject in South African academic circles. In fact, the study of garden history in South Africa has been far more popular outside academic circles, and more the concern of amateurs. Traditionally, most garden history research conducted locally has focused on well-known historical Cape gardens, including the Dutch East India Company’s gardens, Groote Schuur, Vergelegen, Boschendal, and Stellenberg. As far as the state of garden history in the rest of the country is concerned, the situation is even worse. It has been mostly the work of prominent architects and landscape designers, such as Sir Herbert Baker and Joane Pim,[6] that have received attention. In Baker’s case the focus has been mainly on his architecture and much less on the gardens he designed to complement the buildings. In the case of the Free State one can safely argue that garden history research is almost non-existant. Apart from references to Bloemfontein’s gardens in Karel Schoeman’s historical works and novels on Bloemfontein,[7] as well as in a small number of architecture dissertations and theses,[8] detailed information on the history of gardens and gardening in the Free State is scant.
After the founding of Bloemfontein in 1846 and the subsequent establishment of the Orange River Sovereignty (1848), and later the Orange Free State republic (1854), numerous private gardens were laid out in all Free State towns. Most white and European settlers and immigrants, including the Afrikaners,[9] Dutch, English, Scottish, Irish and Germans, brought with them a strong gardening tradition. This was especially the case in towns that had relatively large and influential English-speaking communities, including Bloemfontein, Bethlehem, Ficksburg, Harrismith, Fauresmith and Smithfield. After the Anglo-Boer War (1899–1902; hereafter referred to as the War), the existing English-speaking communities were further augmented when a new wave of English-speakers settled in many Free State towns. This new wave of immigrants also strengthened the existing gardening culture. Hailing from countries that had been international leaders in the field of gardening and horticulture for most of the 19th century, they settled in an area that had already been strongly influenced by British culture. At the turn of the 19th century Victorian ideas and tastes concerning architecture and garden design were still dominant. Therefore, the existing gardening culture at the time in the Free State in general, and the eastern Free State in particular, could be described as Victorian.[10] For reasons that will be explained later, certain parts of the eastern Free State received substantial numbers of English-speaking immigrants.[11] Many were able farmers and gardeners who had settled in an area that happened to be “as rich a pastoral and agricultural country as can be found in South Africa”.[12] Crops and other plants seemed to thrive in the moderate climate and fertile loamy soil of the eastern Free State.[13]
Most of these immigrants managed to successfully establish themselves either in towns or on farms. Over time, some farms were turned into well-developed estates. Handsome sandstone houses were built and lush gardens laid out around or in front of them. One of the few examples of an original sandstone house and garden that has survived for more than a century is the Westminster Estate (hereafter referred to as Westminster) near the town of Tweespruit. The manor house and garden at Westminster may be regarded as exemplary cases of historical preservation. While the garden has not survived in its entirety, the structure and masonry have remained mostly intact, and some of the original trees and plants can still be seen. The focus of this study is not, however, the current condition of Westminster’s English-style garden, but rather its early history. Because the house and garden complement each other, the architecture of the house will also be briefly discussed in order to shed light on the garden’s context. This is necessary because all gardens are ultimately defined by, and should be understood within, their contexts. A garden should not only be viewed and understood within the context of the architect’s and/or garden designer’s design and aesthetic vision for the house and garden, but also within the context of its immediate environment. Furthermore, a garden should also be viewed within its broader historical context, i.e. the historical period when it was designed and laid out. Only within its rightful context can a garden be appropriately discussed and described.[14]
Designed by Baker (Fig. 1), the house—also known as the ‘Big House’—and the other buildings at Westminster represent some of the finest examples of sandstone architecture in South Africa. Baker, who was awarded honorary doctorates by the University of the Witwatersrand (1934) and the University of Oxford (1937), is considered by the majority of architecture scholars to be one of South Africa’s most original, versatile and influential architects. Despite criticism that some of his work is overrated and out of context in terms of the period, most of his domestic and public buildings rank among the country’s finest and are considered to be classical and timeless.[15] Westminster’s main house, which will be discussed in more detail elsewhere, is no exception. Descriptions of the house’s architecture vary from praise for its “excellent proportions”[16] and “generous scale”[17] to being one of Baker’s “finest stylistic inventions”.[18] Baker’s client was Hugh Richard Arthur Grosvenor (Fig. 2), otherwise known as the Duke of Westminster. The Duke and Baker were close friends, and Baker was the obvious choice for the Duke’s envisaged purposes. Commissioning Baker served the Duke well because Baker was a talented architect, an able organiser, and – as an added bonus for his clients – he also had a flair for garden design. At Westminster the confluence of Baker’s many talents resulted in a house and garden that not only complemented each other but which, to some extent, also became a benchmark for house and garden design in a region that still struggled to overcome the devastating effects of the War.
The history of Westminster’s garden is multi-faceted, chiefly because the key personalities in the story were no ordinary people: a wealthy aristocrat (the Duke), an influential architect (Baker), and the famous British garden designer, Gertrude Jekyll (Fig. 3). Although Jekyll was involved only indirectly, her role is by no means unimportant. Because her contribution to the garden’s design is not widely known or appreciated, her career, philosophy and influence will receive considerable attention. In order to fully appreciate the Westminster garden’s early history, it will be placed in the context of a particular period of South Africa’s, and the Free State’s, history. The War had just ended and the process of rebuilding and rehabilitating the two erstwhile Boer republics of the Transvaal and Orange Free State had begun. However, this did not merely entail rebuilding for the sake of rebuilding, because the rebuilding effort had to achieve certain objectives. This process was driven solely by the conqueror, namely Great Britain, and her representatives in South Africa, according to their own specific requirements and visions.
This study aims to tell the story of the early years of Westminster’s garden, viewed against the background of the profound changes that had taken place in South Africa’s history and that of the Free State during the early 1900s. The history of the garden must be seen within the context of the history of Westminster, which is an important aspect of the eastern Free State’s post-War history. A further objective of the study is to explain the historical processes that led to the establishment of the estate, subsequent building of the manor house, and laying out of the garden. Politics and ideology—in this case Britain’s imperialistic aspirations—played an important role in the early history of Westminster. The main focus, however, will be on the role played by the key personalities mentioned above, namely the Duke, Baker and Jekyll. All three knew each other well and also happened to be close friends.
Although Westminster’s architecture has received attention in a number of books, including Graham Viney’s Colonial houses of South Africa (1987) and Michael Keath’s Herbert Baker: architecture and idealism 1892-1913: the South African years (1992), the same cannot be said of the garden. Nancy Gardiner included the garden in her book Beautiful gardens of South Africa (1991), but the role played by Jekyll is not mentioned. Doreen Greig briefly discusses Jekyll’s influence on Baker in her book Herbert Baker in South Africa (1970), but not specifically in the context of Westminster’s garden. Other sources include C.J.S. Coetzee’s dissertation Herbert Baker in die Oranje-Vrystaat en Noord-Kaap (1975) and a number of articles on Westminster in popular magazines and newspapers, including South African Panorama, Family Radio & TV, The Friend and Volksblad. These sources also only briefly discuss the garden. In terms of historical research, Westminster’s garden is a neglected aspect of the Westminster Estate. There is therefore a need for a study focused solely on the history of the garden.
One of the reasons why the history of Westminster’s garden is of such particular interest is the role played by Jekyll. The influence that she had on garden design beyond the borders of Great Britain is not always acknowledged, or adequately explained. Jekyll was a staunch advocate of the idea that a house and its garden should form a visual unity, and that the garden must be designed in such a way that it unites the house with the surrounding landscape.[19] Westminster’s garden, which is currently (2016) still being maintained according to Baker’s original plan, is a good example of this philosophy. It will be argued that the garden was designed to enhance and complement the house in all respects. The garden cannot, therefore, be adequately discussed without reference to the house.
The Anglo-Boer War and its aftermath
After more than two years of hostilities between Britain and the Boer republics, the War ended on 31 May 1902 with the signing of the Peace Treaty of Vereeniging. Although the declaration of peace brought an end to the fighting, the War—and specifically Lord Kitchener’s[20] scorched-earth policy—had turned the Free State landscape into a wasteland. Farmsteads and entire towns, 26 in total, were burnt to the ground to prevent civilians from aiding Boer combatants with food and ammunition. Not only were houses destroyed, but most often also their gardens. Flower and vegetable gardens were trampled, orchards were stripped of all available fruit and then burnt, and big trees chopped down for firewood.[21] After a visit to General Christiaan de Wet’s farm in the Heilbron district in 1903 the British humanitarian Emily Hobhouse reported that she had found “houses, outhouses, kraals, wiped out – fruit trees cut down, not any tree left – a desert all around…”.[22] The British journalist E.F. Knight, who had visited many Boer farms shortly after the War, also wrote about the devastation and reported how he had come across a ruined eastern Free State farmhouse “surrounded by the wreck of a once delightful garden…”.[23] A similar situation prevailed on most Free State farms. According to H.E.V. Pickstone, the well-known Cape nurseryman who had been supplying Free State gardeners with fruit trees and seed since the late 1890s, the situation was desperate. He concluded that “it can safely be said that at the declaration of peace there were few healthy orchards and gardens throughout the [Orange Free] State.”[24]
Because of the magnitude of the devastation in the Orange Free State, which had been renamed Orange River Colony [hereafter ORC], a gargantuan effort was required to rebuild it. Sir Alfred (later Lord) Milner (1854-1925), who was appointed Governor[25] of the Transvaal and ORC in June 1902, had taken on the task of co-ordinating the reconstruction of the two former republics. This ‘reconstruction’ was also underpinned by an ideological objective, since a key aspect of the rebuilding process entailed the Anglicisation of the country districts of the Transvaal and ORC, in order to “settle the political question”.[26] To achieve this objective, a Land Settlement Scheme[27] was implemented, in terms of which British farmers were to be settled on farms[28] in the two colonies. Milner, who partly sponsored the scheme, reasoned that this influx of English-speakers would tip the demographic scale in favour of the British. In the case of the ORC, the “Conquered Territory”,[29] an area “about 30 miles broad and 100 miles long”[30] and roughly stretching from Thaba Nchu to Wepener, was earmarked for resettlement. Most of the farmers who had settled on these farms were ex-servicemen who had found themselves out of work after the War.[31] These farmers became known as the ‘Milner Settlers’.[32] From the outset, Milner’s scheme was hampered by a lack of funds; and he urgently needed wealthy entrepreneurs, so-called “patriotic men of standing”[33], who could co-sponsor similar schemes. Milner did not need to search far for a suitable candidate, because he found one at his side, namely his friend and former aide-de-camp (ADC), the Duke of Westminster.[34]
The Duke of Westminster and Westminster Estate
Hugh Richard Arthur Grosvenor (1879–1953), the second Duke of Westminster, was also known as Bendor, a nickname derived from the name of his grandfather’s horse, Bend Or. The Duke’s grandfather, Hugh Lupus, was the first Duke of Westminster. Because of the Grosvenor family’s vast riches, the Duke’s early years in England were characterised by a lifestyle of privilege and pleasure. In February 1899, when the Duke was 18 years old, he passed the British army’s entrance examination and became a 2nd Lieutenant in the Royal Horse Guards. Soon after this he was appointed as ADC to Milner, who at that stage was British High Commissioner in South Africa. The Duke became an eyewitness to the high politics of the day when in May he attended the Bloemfontein conference between Milner and President Kruger of the Transvaal. According to biographer Leslie Field, “Milner had a great admirer in Bendor”,[35] and the Duke supported Milner’s tough stance towards Kruger. As in Milner’s case, the cause that lay closest to the Duke’s heart was “…that of the British Empire…”.[36] After the War broke out on 11 October the Duke became ADC to Lord Roberts,[37] Commander-in-Chief of the British Forces in South Africa. The Duke was at Lord Roberts’ side when the latter occupied Bloemfontein with his men on 13 March 1900,[38] and later that year he (the Duke) hoisted the Union Jack in Pretoria during the occupation of the Boer capital. During the War the Duke received news of his grandfather’s death and inherited the Grosvenor family fortune. In an instant he became one of the richest men in the world.[39]
After the War ended in May 1902 the Duke went to England for a short time. During October of that year he returned to South Africa with his wife, Shelagh Cornwallis-West. It was then that Milner approached him with his settlement scheme and proposed that the Duke should purchase a tract of land between Tweespruit and Ladybrand. This was not a bad choice as that area had long been considered the “garden of the colony”,[40] and it was believed that “all fruits and vegetables of Europe thrive on this fertile soil”.[41] Richard Bentham Weedon[42] was also convinced that “the Eastern portion of the [Free] State, bordering upon Basutoland…” was “…second to no soil in the world.”[43] The Duke bought 10 000 morgen of fertile grassland at a cost of ₤8 per morgen. He regarded the expansion and consolidation of the British Empire as a priority and saw this piece of land, which he divided into 18 farms of about 500 morgen each, as a means to that end. A house and stable were built on each farm. The farms were named after the various Westminster estates in Britain. Most of the farmers who settled on these farms also originally hailed from those estates, namely Aldford, Beauchamp, Belgrave, Broxton, Chesam, Crichton, Eaton, Eccleston, Grosvenor, Halkyn, Lumley, Madersfield, Malpas, Newlands, Ormonde, Shaftsbury, and Wyndham. After the farmers had settled the Duke turned to his own portion of land, which he named Westminster. He saw Westminster as the ideal property to turn into a country estate. The scene had been set for the creation of one of South Africa’s model estates, with a manor house and garden designed by a famous architect.[44]
Sir Herbert Baker and Westminster Estate
Sir Herbert Baker (1862-1946) grew up in Kent, England. He began to display an interest in all things architectural at a young age. After completing his education at Tonbridge School he attended lectures on architecture at the Architectural Association and Royal Academy Schools in London. In 1886, Baker started his career at the prestigious London architectural firm of Ernest George & Peto. The following year, the 18 year old Edwin Landseer Lutyens (1869–1944) also joined the firm. According to Michael Keath, “his [Lutyens’] meeting with Herbert Baker was to prove one of the most fateful events of both men’s lives”.[45] Baker and Lutyens became friends, despite their differences in temperament and background. The two men shared the same interests and had similar tastes. In his autobiography, Architecture & personalities, Baker confesses that “I greatly enjoyed his [Lutyens’] company, his insight into some of the arcana of our art, and his wit and good stories…”.[46] Even after the two had left Ernest George & Peto during the early 1890s and started their own architectural practices, their friendship continued. Lutyens managed to build a rather successful practice, and often took Baker, whose practice was struggling, to building sites to show off his designs. Baker’s first time in South Africa was in 1893 when he visited his brother in the Cape Colony. He decided to stay on after the British imperialist Cecil John Rhodes (1853–1902) commissioned him to remodel his Groote Schuur residence in Cape Town. Impressed with Baker’s work, Rhodes took him under his wing, and within a relatively short time Baker became a sought-after architect.[47] According to Joanna Walker, Rhodes found in Baker a sympathetic architect who could “give form to Rhodes’ aspirations and Imperial ambitions”.[48]
After the War the rebuilding of the two former Boer republics created new opportunities for Baker in the Transvaal Colony, when Milner invited him to assist with the reconstruction process. Baker decided to move to Johannesburg where he and his two associates, F.K. Masey and E.W. Sloper, opened an office under the name of Baker, Masey & Sloper. In Parktown, Baker built himself the well-known ‘Stone House,’ [49] and soon became the favourite architect among Johannesburg’s ‘movers and shakers’. A Baker house came to be regarded as a status symbol. Baker also designed numerous public and commercial buildings in Johannesburg, including St John’s College and the Rhodes Building for De Beers. During this time Baker’s initial Arts and Crafts[50] approach, also known as the Crafts Revival[51] style, had developed into what became known as the Cape Revival[52] style, a re-interpretation of the Cape Dutch vernacular.[53] Baker, however, did not limit himself to one style. Rather, he strove to achieve timelessness in his eclectic[54] designs. With his Johannesburg practice firmly established he decided to exploit opportunities in the ORC and opened an office in Bloemfontein. Baker’s first commission came in October 1902 when he was asked to design additions to the government buildings in President Brand Street. He was also tasked with the design of the gardens of the government buildings. Other commissions followed, including one from the new Colonial Secretary of the ORC, Sir H.F. Wilson,[55] to design alterations to his house and garden in Bloemfontein. Then, in 1903, Baker landed himself a “prestigious commission”[56] when he was asked by the Duke of Westminster to design his house and garden at Westminster.[57]
Westminster’s garden should be understood within the context of the house itself, because Baker, Lutyens, and Jekyll all regarded a garden as an extension or continuation of a house. Westminster’s ‘Big House’ is considered one of Baker’s finest country houses. It is built entirely of sandstone. Keath describes its architecture as being of a style that combines “Jacobean English with Dutch Colonial in a peculiarly South African blend of Queen Anne”.[58] Viney describes the style as “Baker’s Edwardian free style”.[59] According to Baker himself, the house displayed “characteristics of an English Elizabethan country house, rather than altogether a Dutch house.”[60] Whatever the style may be, Baker’s ‘experiment’ can be considered aesthetically pleasing. Apart from the house’s excellent proportions, its prominent features include the elegant elongated gables, red Marseilles-tile roof, charming leaded windows, and tall, sleek chimneys (Fig. 4). The architectural integrity is further enhanced by the overall quality of the craftsmanship, which is also visible in the finishes. Of particular interest is the garden front of the house as it features an impressive colonnaded verandah (Fig. 4). The verandah, with its six Doric sandstone columns, does not only “command a vista of the Basutoland Mountains”,[61] in the words of Baker, it also creates a pleasing transitional space between the house and Baker’s other masterpiece, the garden.[62]
Although Westminster’s garden was designed by Baker, its design and layout can only be fully understood within the context of Gertrude Jekyll’s design philosophy. Therefore, it is important to consider the influence that Jekyll exerted on Baker. Historian Graham Viney argues that “so much has been made of the Lutyens-Jekyll relationship that it is generally overlooked that Baker and Miss Jekyll also established a warm friendship…”.[63] This friendship also involved the exchange of ideas, and as far as garden design is concerned, it was Jekyll who influenced Baker. This aspect of the Baker-Jekyll friendship should be considered when Baker’s gardens are discussed, and Westminster’s garden is certainly no exception. As a matter of fact, Viney is convinced that nowhere is the evidence of Jekyll’s influence on Baker more evident than in Westminster’s garden.[64]
Gertrude Jekyll’s garden philosophy and influence
In order to fully understand the role that Jekyll played in the design of Westminster’s garden, it is necessary to firstly focus on Jekyll herself. Gertrude Jekyll (1843-1932) spent her childhood years in picturesque Surrey, south of London. She was an inquisitive child and her father stimulated her interest in science, botany and art. In 1861, when Jekyll was 18, she enrolled at the South Kensington School of Art in London. Because of her interest in horticulture and painting, she studied art, botany, anatomy, optics and colour science. These subjects happened to be the right choices, because Jekyll’s studies further fed her curiosity regarding her fields of interest. Because of her inherent artistic nature and spontaneous personality she was one of several women who were able to rise above the mindsets and conventions of the Victorian age.[65] Author Madden C. Cole argues that for her time Jekyll may be described as “iconoclastic”.[66]
After Jekyll’s father passed away in 1876, her mother had a new house built for herself at Munstead Heath, near Godalming in Surrey. Jekyll was asked to design the garden. She did this so well that word spread and the garden became a ‘must-see’ for other horticulturalists and garden designers. The success of her mother’s garden encouraged Jekyll to refine her design philosophy. Jekyll’s way of thinking strongly resonated with the principles of the Arts and Crafts movement, led by John Ruskin (1819–1900) and William Morris (1834–1896). This movement was a reaction against the brutality and inhumanity of the 19th-century Industrial Revolution. Its main objective was to beautify man’s living environment by emphasising the beauty of natural materials and craftsmanship. This philosophy had a notable influence on architecture and garden design. Jekyll herself, as well as Lutyens (her future collaborator), featured amongst its best-known proponents. In terms of this new thinking it was of paramount importance to create a sympathetic relationship between the house and its surroundings. In practice this meant that the architect had to design a house in sympathy with its setting, while the garden designer had to blend the garden with the house and surrounding landscape.[67]
Owing to poor eyesight Jekyll was constrained to abandon her original plans to become a professional painter. Her focus then shifted to gardens and garden design. Fortunately, her talent for drawing and painting was not wasted, since she could use it when drawing up garden plans, and in the process she created works of art in their own right. Because of her painterly approach, Jekyll’s gardens were reminiscent of paintings in the Impressionistic style.[68] This approach came to fruition in the garden she designed for herself at Munstead Wood, located near her mother’s garden.[69] A combination of talent, dedication and hard work made Jekyll one of the most successful and influential garden designers of 20th-century Britain.[70]
Apart from the more than 400 gardens that Jekyll designed professionally for clients, she also became a prolific author on the subject of gardens. She wrote numerous articles for periodicals such as The Garden and Country Life, as well as 13 books including Wood and garden (1899) and Home and garden (1900). Most of Jekyll’s writing was based on practical experience that she had gained at Munstead Wood. In her “prose style”[71] she managed to communicate her design philosophies with eloquence and skill.[72] In Wood and garden, in her characteristic style, she explains her main concern, namely the importance of creating a garden that blends in seamlessly with the surrounding landscape: “…where the wood joins the garden some bold groups of flowering plants are allowed, as of Mullein in one part and Foxglove in another; for when standing in the free part of the garden, it is pleasant to project the sight far into the wood, and to let the garden influences penetrate here and there, the better to join the one to the other.”[73]
Jekyll is also remembered for her famous friendships and collaborations with prominent people, most notably William Robinson (1838–1935) and Lutyens and Baker. William Robinson was an iconoclastic garden designer who had advocated a radical move away from the unnatural and contrived Victorian style to a more naturalistic approach. Robinson, who crossed swords with the well-known champion of the formal garden, Sir Reginald Blomfield (1856–1942),[74] explained his design philosophy in his book The wild garden (1870). He found a friend in Jekyll, who supported his enthusiasm for a more naturalistic approach to garden design. Because of Jekyll’s desire to design gardens that complemented the houses around which they were laid out, she also became a good friend of Lutyens. After they met in 1889 their friendship deepened and they became collaborators. He taught her about architecture and she taught him garden design skills, an asset which stimulated his architectural creativity. Jekyll and Lutyens went on to form one of the most influential partnerships of the Arts and Crafts movement, and “a Lutyens house with a Jekyll garden”[75] became a sought-after asset among affluent members of the English upper class.[76]
Learning from a master gardener
Baker was first introduced to Jekyll by Lutyens, his former colleague at Ernest George & Peto. Soon after Lutyens left the firm and started his own practice, a significant opportunity arose for him when Jekyll asked him to design her house at Munstead Wood.[77] At that time, Baker, who had also left the firm to start his own practice, was struggling to find his feet. He was in need of some inspiration. Lutyens already had an “intimate friendship”[78] with Jekyll, and one day in 1890 he invited Baker to join him in paying her a visit. Jekyll, whom Lutyens called his “fairy godmother”,[79] made a great impression on Baker. Baker writes that Jekyll “had a great personality”,[80] but what impressed him most were her talents. According to him, she had “…rare gifts; she was a skilled craftswoman and not only an expert gardener, a planter of flowers, but she had the painter’s sense for their arrangement in colour harmonies.”[81]
Baker was not only enthralled by Jekyll’s personality and talents, but during his visit to Munstead Wood his eyes were opened to the potential role that a well-designed garden could play in enhancing architecture. He admired Jekyll’s talent for designing gardens that united houses with the surrounding natural elements. Referring to her work in general, Baker wrote that “all” – meaning house and garden – was “in harmony and breathing the spirit of its creator.”[82] He found a mentor in Jekyll. Although she was primarily a garden designer, she had a keen interest in domestic architecture and was well acquainted with the principles of that discipline. Baker’s friendship with Jekyll not only broadened his vision, but impressed on him the potential and possibilities inherent in a holistic approach to architecture and design.[83]
When Baker left England in 1892 to start a new career in the Cape Colony it was one of the promising outposts of the vast British Empire. Despite their separation and the long distance between them, Baker’s friendship with Jekyll continued. The two stayed in touch primarily by means of letter-writing.[84] In South Africa, Baker soon established himself as an architect, and before long he was asked to design gardens as well owing to the scarcity of professional garden designers at the time. These garden commissions, including Cecil John Rhodes’ garden at Groote Schuur, were often challenging, but this was the way that Baker preferred it, knowing that the architecture of a house would benefit from a well-designed garden. He subsequently developed a keen interest in garden design, remarking that “this is a matter I am particularly interested in and have given a good deal of attention to.”[85] Baker’s clients had full confidence in his taste, and gave him the opportunity to design gardens that reinforced his overall design vision for each project.[86]
However, despite Baker’s interest in, and enthusiasm for, garden design, he was still in some respects a novice. Fortunately for him he had a very able advisor in England in the person of Jekyll, and whenever he needed her advice on matters concerning gardens and plants he would write to her. For example, this happened in the case of Groote Schuur. Considering the scale of the project, Baker felt unsure about some aspects of his initial design for the garden, and so he wrote to Jekyll requesting her advice. She always responded to his letters in detail and often mailed him complete plans and reports along with her suggestions. Over a period of time Jekyll’s inputs contributed greatly to the development of Baker’s own garden style and expertise. Like Jekyll, Baker became a firm proponent of the idea that in the area nearest to the house, a garden should be more formal, smaller in scale, and intimate, but that the style should progressively become more informal and natural in the distant parts of the garden approaching the wilder surrounding landscape. This philosophy became the mainstay of Baker’s approach to garden design.[87]
A Baker garden with a touch of Jekyll
Although Jekyll had a strong preference for a natural garden, she did not eschew formality. In fact, in her view, formality had its place in a well-designed garden.[88] A typical Jekyllian garden often comprised a marriage of formality and informality: a formal arrangement of beds combined with an informal arrangement of plants.[89] According to Graham Thomas, Jekyll’s “lines were always decisive”[90] and she knew “when it was best to have a straight line”.[91] She often utilised box[92] or yew hedges to create a “distinct division”[93] from the rest of the garden, or to define a specific area in it. Jekyll’s formal rose gardens[94] or croquet lawns were typically surrounded by clipped hedges. Tall hedges were also employed as ‘garden walls’ to form “a quiet background for the brightness of the flowers”.[95] In order to balance the formality, Jekyll devised the concept of the ‘herbaceous border’[96] or ‘mixed border’. By planting flowering plants in “cloud-like harmonies”[97] and “graduated harmonies”[98] of cool and warm colours, a painterly effect was achieved.[99] (She also recommended that flowers be planted in so-called “drifts”,[100] i.e. by means of narrow, long plantings, in order to avoid leaving unattractive empty spaces when the flowers had died.) These mixed borders with their artistic qualities, as well as Jekyll’s effective use of stonework to seamlessly unite house and garden, impressed Baker immensely. He utilised these elements to great effect in his own garden designs. Although not devoid of originality, Baker’s gardens had an unmistakable Jekyllian touch. They were typically a combination of formality and freedom, à la Jekyll.[101]
Baker’s adherence to Jekyllian principles is especially evident in the gardens he designed for Johannesburg’s wealthy mining magnates and businessmen in the suburbs of Parktown, Westcliff and the surrounding areas. Parktown was also one of South Africa’s first so-called ‘garden suburbs’, modelled in accordance with the Englishman Ebenezer Howard’s Garden City philosophy.[102] Baker’s clients included Drummond Chaplin, George Farrar, Howard Pim[103] and Sir Lionel Phillips;[104] and their properties—some of them huge estates—had names such as Marienhof,[105] Hohenheim, Northwards, Ednam and Villa Arcadia.[106] According to Shirley Zar, Jekyll was the “guiding spirit”[107] behind the gardens of these Baker houses. In Baker’s descriptions of the gardens, the terms “herbaceous borders”[108] and “cypress hedges”[109] clearly reveal Jekyll’s influence. As Baker gained more experience, however, he became more independent of Jekyll’s advice and began to refine his own design ideas. Most importantly, he was increasingly influenced by South Africa’s climate and the idea that the climate and uniqueness of each site dictated a different approach.[110] Baker’s use of phrases such as “distant veld”[111] and “natural rock-garden”[112] indicates his growing awareness of the South African context and the potential of indigenous flora during a time when the “ornaments of veld and bush”[113] were not widely appreciated by local gardeners. He did not shy away from experimenting with indigenous specimens, including agapanthus, aloes, euphorbias, gazanias, geraniums, mesembryanthemums, pelargoniums, and various other succulents. As will be discussed later, the indigenous plants were carefully selected and had to be ‘suitable’, and also ‘compatible’ with the exotic plants. This approach was illustrated at Villa Arcadia where the above-mentioned plants intermingled with exotics in the herbaceous borders.[114] Baker’s attempts at ‘indigenising’ Jekyll’s borders were, however, not appreciated by all. There were those, including Lutyens, who criticised this approach.[115] During his visit to South Africa in 1910,[116] Lutyens visited Villa Arcadia and commented (as quoted in Hussey) that it was “…odd to see great ugly cactus[117] growing up in a Munstead border”.[118]
Despite Baker’s attempts to include indigenous specimens in his herbaceous borders, his gardens never lost the essential ‘Jekyll touch’, and remained characteristically English. This is also true of the garden he designed at Westminster.[119] Therefore, the garden of the ‘Big House’ may best be described as ‘a Baker garden with a touch of Jekyll’: essentially a Baker garden, with Jekyll’s influence evident.
“More English than South African”
The landscape that surrounds Westminster is characterised by typical Free State grassland. In 1900, the Englishman A.H. Keane described the vegetation as “herbaceous or scrubby”[120] and “yielding extremely succulent pasturage during the wet summer months”.[121] Although Baker took the local landscape and Westminster’s topography into consideration in his design for the garden, the style and character of the garden is essentially English. Not only did the garden have to match the English-style house, but Baker also found the estate’s surroundings “more English than South African”.[122] According to him, “the fine grass-land and the keen air are more like the chalk downs or Yorkshire fells…”.[123] This comparison of the Free State landscape with that of England is hardly surprising, since Baker’s first frame of reference was the English landscape. For Baker and most of his contemporaries, England—the mother country—remained ‘home’. The natural desire of these English immigrants was to transplant an atmosphere of ‘Englishness’, as something they could identify with, to their adopted country. This meant that, although the indigenous landscape with its vegetation (‘the veld’) was appreciated as an ‘exotic’ and ‘curious’ borrowed landscape, it was not considered suitable for inclusion in the realm of the domestic garden.[124] The domestic garden, in this case the English-style domestic garden, was considered too sophisticated to accommodate any indigenous plant. Shirley Zar refers in this regard to the “then prevailing derisive attitude towards the so-called ‘common’ plant material.”[125] If indigenous species were included at all they were selected on the basis of suitability and compatibility with imported plants. Mostly, so-called ‘proper’ garden plants typically included in gardens in England, were regarded as preferable.[126] Indigenous species with their brightly-coloured red and orange flowers were often considered too ‘wild’ for sophisticated herbaceous borders.[127]
“A wall and terrace garden”
Baker was strongly guided by Jekyll’s design principles when he designed Westminster’s garden. She was fond of varying the levels of a garden, and one way of doing this—if the site’s topography allowed for it—was to create sunken gardens and terraces. It was decided that the ‘Big House’ should be built on “a stoney kopje”[128] – a natural sandstone outcrop which allowed for an unobstructed view of the Korannaberg and the Maluti mountains beyond. Apart from the beautiful view, the site was, according to Baker, also chosen in order “to take advantage of the good garden ground both on the top and bottom of the kopje”.[129] Baker drew up a fairly detailed plan (Fig. 5) of Westminster, showing not only the ‘Big House’ and other buildings, but also the terrace garden and surrounding landscape. The plan, which is in actual fact a delicate water-colour painting,[130] clearly depicts the formal garden, demonstrating how it connects the house with the surrounding landscape and the dam below. In this regard Baker was strongly influenced by Jekyll’s design dictum, which stipulated that it is crucial “to join the one [house] to the other [landscape].”[131] In order to make the most of the view, Baker conceptualised the garden as essentially “a wall and terrace garden”[132] consisting of a series of four terraces and their retaining walls.[133] In a letter to Colonel I.I. Byron, the Duke’s agent who had managed the estate, Baker distinguished between “the main grass terrace”,[134] which became the croquet lawn, and “the intermediate terraces”.[135] Two of the latter terraces were envisaged as formal gardens, while the third (which adjoined the verandah) was meant to be covered with gravel.
Work on the garden began in earnest at the beginning of 1904 when the house was nearly completed. Creating the terraces required extensive earth-moving, which was carried out mainly by local farm labourers under the supervision of Colonel Byron and E.W. Sloper, one of Baker’s associates. During the period 1903 to 1905, Baker corresponded intensively with Byron and Colonel Lloyd,[136] the Duke’s secretary at Eaton Estate in Cheshire, England, regarding every conceivable detail involving the house and garden. In a letter to Byron dated 22 September 1905, Baker described his intended planting scheme for the garden in detail, explaining why he preferred certain plants above others. He pointed out that a terrace garden “requires rather special and unusual treatment in planting”.[137] By this time Baker had seemingly developed a strong preference for certain plants, both exotic and indigenous, which was based on experience he had gained from the garden he designed at Groote Schuur. Baker’s planting scheme for Westminster showed similarities with those he devised for Marienhof (ca. 1905) in Johannesburg, and Government House (ca. 1902-1906) in Pretoria. Both gardens showed strong Jekyllian influences, not only in terms of design, but also in terms of plant selection. Baker was very much in favour of ‘proper’ plants such as roses, specifically climbing roses and rambling roses, and also recommended a variety of old-fashioned roses for both the formal rose garden and the pergola garden below it. He argued that not only did roses lie dormant in winter and require less water at such times, but in the long run they were also cheaper than “annuals or bedding out plants”[138] which needed to be replaced each year.
It is also evident that Baker considered the region’s hot and dry summers when he selected plants, and therefore recommended hardy and “deep rooted plants”.[139] Plants specifically mentioned by Baker include cannas, creeping geraniums (often confused with pelargonium species), agapanthus, hydrangeas and azaleas. He stipulated that the agapanthus, hydrangeas and azaleas “should be planted in tubs or pots as they will do best and look best upon the stone work.”[140] For the two ornamental ponds, Baker suggested water lilies and water irises.[141] Although most of the plants that Baker chose for the garden were non-indigenous, he also included some South African species such as agapanthus and geraniums. He was, however, quite selective when choosing local species. One could argue that the soft white and purple hues of the agapanthus blended in better with the pale English colour palette than the typically bright colours of many indigenous flowers.
The garden’s rectangular terraces and the geometrical and rectangular flower beds that were laid out on them created a formal framework for the garden. In true Jekyllian style this formality was balanced with informal planting in the flower beds. Baker made sure that the terraces did not compete with the house in any way, but rather created a kind of elevation or pedestal to show off the house to its best advantage. While each terrace was designed to have its own unique character, the four terraces still complemented each other and formed a unified whole. The terraces were characteristic of so-called ‘garden rooms’ and provided a sense of enclosure (Fig. 6).[142] While the garden’s prime location afforded breathtaking views of the surrounding landscape, the strict formality of its design created the impression that the vast landscape had to be kept at a distance. The formal framework created a sense of order and control, and in effect established a subtle boundary between the garden and the landscape. The first terrace could be accessed by sandstone steps (Fig. 7), which linked it with the house’s imposing colonnaded verandah. Originally this terrace was covered with gravel, as stipulated by Baker, but the gravel was later replaced with lawn.[143] The terrace was characterised by tall cypresses that were planted alongside the second terrace’s retaining wall (Figs 4 & 6). The second terrace could be reached by means of two flights of sandstone steps which curved around an ornamental pond (Figs 4 & 6), also built of sandstone. This terrace was wider than the other terraces and was intended to be a croquet lawn. Deep rectangular flower beds, which provided plenty of room for herbaceous border-type planting in the Jekyllian fashion (Fig. 4), ran parallel to the first terrace’s retaining wall.[144]
The third terrace, narrower than the second one, was conceived as a formal rose and flower garden, with clipped hedges and edges (Figs 8 & 9). Rose beds were laid out in the form of geometrically-shaped quincunxes.[145] This terrace was strongly reminiscent of Jekyll’s formal rose gardens, which were typically enclosed by clipped hedges and edges. In the middle of the rose garden was a square ornamental pond, edged with sandstone kerbing (Fig. 9). This pond, however, was not constructed exactly as Baker wished, and in a letter to Byron he complained that he “was a little distressed with the appearance of the pool which was meant to be a beautiful feature of the garden and not only a dipping tank”.[146] According to Baker, the pond was “spoilt by the levels”,[147] and he would have preferred its kerbing to be flush with the lawn and not raised above it. Directly opposite the pond ran another deep herbaceous border, in the centre of which was a garden bench, strategically placed, providing a comfortable spot for repose (Fig. 8). Some of the roses in this garden, including Polyantha roses, were imported from England.[148] The fourth terrace, situated on the lowest level, was dominated by two sandstone and wood pergolas (Figs 6 & 10) which served as supports for Paul’s Scarlet, an old-style climbing rose. In the centre of this garden was a sundial (Figs 6 & 11), also designed by Baker. The year in which the house was officially completed, namely 1905, was carved into the sundial’s slate slab.[149]
Westminster’s terrace garden successfully complemented the house, because the same cream-coloured eastern Free State sandstone used for the walls and other brickwork was also used for all garden structures and ornaments. The major sandstone garden structures were the steps that connected the different levels and the walls that retained the four terraces (Fig. 12). The walls and steps were built of dressed sandstone, which lent an aura of age to the garden. Baker followed Jekyll’s example by effectively using stonework to unite house and garden. Other sandstone structures included the two ponds, the pillars of the pergolas, the sundial’s pedestal, and a garden bench (Fig. 13). All of these structures and ornaments were designed by Baker. Another reason why the garden complemented the house is that all garden elements were carefully proportioned and perfectly balanced in order not to compete with the house. As a trained architect, Baker respected the classical design principles and dictums, particularly in the case of formal gardens. When formal gardens were designed it was customary to first establish the main or central axis, usually the north-south axis, and then designed the garden accordingly. Often the east-west axis was also taken into consideration. The main axis visually divided the garden in two halves of exactly the same size and the one half was typically a mirror image of the other. In Westminster’s garden the sundial and the two ponds were positioned on the same axis, namely the main or central axis, and thus emphasised the garden’s formal design aesthetic and conceptual connection to the whole.[150]
Apart from the above-mentioned terraces, Westminster’s garden also included a quadrant garden (Fig. 14), situated on the southern side of the house. A distinctive feature of this garden was its formal quadrant layout, with paved footpaths which divided the square into four segments. This garden could be reached by means of the steps that connected the colonnaded verandah with the gravel terrace. Adjacent to the kitchen was a walled kitchen garden, also laid out in formal style, with square vegetable beds divided by footpaths. Over the years some of the original features of the garden were removed or disappeared. One such feature was the clipped hedge with topiary animals (Fig. 15) near the walled courtyard in front of the house. Although the disciples of the natural school of gardening, including Robinson, eschewed topiary as unnatural and artificial, Baker seemingly included examples of this traditional English garden craft in Westminster’s garden to add a touch of whimsy. Westminster’s topiary featured clipped hedges topped by neatly-trimmed beagles, hares and horses. These figures were a tongue-in-cheek reference to the English-style hunting expeditions that took place at Westminster during the time when the Duke hosted friends and family at the estate. Famous visitors included Lord Milner, Lord Selborne, Lord and Lady Roberts, and the Prince of Wales (Edward VIII).[151]
Apart from the garden, the surrounding grounds of Westminster were also attended to, once again in true English style. Baker’s plan of the estate shows driveways that link the main house with the other buildings on the property. On the plan most driveways are depicted as being lined with rows of trees to create formal avenues. The plan also shows rows of cypresses that were meant to serve as windbreaks to protect the house and garden. The rest of the plan shows belts and clumps of trees, as well as a formal park strongly reminiscent of the parks that surround most of England’s country estates. It was clearly Baker’s intention to recreate a similar atmosphere at Westminster.[152] In order to achieve this objective, thousands of cedar and cypress trees were planted on the estate (Fig. 16). “With regard to the question of trees,” Baker wrote, “it is a choice between Walnut trees and Cedar and Cypress.”[153] Regarding the trees that were planted close to the house, Baker preferred trees that did not grow too tall so that “the fine view from the stoep would not be obscured.”[154] The Duke was an enthusiastic tree-lover himself, and owing to his efforts, more than two million trees had been planted on and around Westminster by the mid-1920s.[155] According to historian Doreen Greig, the tree-planting efforts had paid off, since it is hard not to believe that Westminster is a “simple but grand park belonging to an ancient English manor house”.[156] Miss Jekyll would have approved heartily.
CONCLUSION
Westminster Estate and its garden represent a unique aspect of the eastern Free State’s tangible heritage. It is not often that one comes across a garden that came into being as a result of collaboration between well-known and influential people such as the Duke of Westminster, Sir Herbert Baker and Gertrude Jekyll. Although Jekyll’s role was mostly of an advisory nature, the influence that she had exerted on Baker was strongly visible in Westminster’s garden. The main objective of the Arts and Crafts movement, namely to emphasise the beauty of natural materials and craftsmanship, was not only achieved in the design of the ‘Big House’, but also in that of the garden. In keeping with the Arts and Crafts philosophy, and in true Jekyllian style, the garden was designed to complement the house. In the case of Westminster, it was an English-style garden that complemented an English-style house. However, despite the English influence that was evident in his work, Baker was not indifferent to the local environment and context, and responded to it by creating a sympathetic relationship between the house, the garden, and the surrounding landscape. Although Baker’s first frame of reference was the English landscape and English plants, he also appreciated the beauty of indigenous plants, and included some local species in his planting scheme at Westminster.
The history of Westminster’s garden is multi-faceted and can only be adequately understood in the context of the specific historical period during which the garden was laid out, as well as the particular context as defined by the ‘Big House’ and the surrounding landscape. Ultimately, a garden is defined by its context and by the historical forces that shaped that context. For this reason it is important to place Westminster and its garden in the context of the post-Anglo-Boer-War period of the Free State’s history. Milner’s Land Resettlement Scheme and the subsequent Anglicisation of the Free State’s country districts are factors that shaped Westminster’s history. On the one hand, the first few years that followed the end of the War represented a period of unashamed imperialism and political interference by Britain. On the other hand, this period also represents a time of rebuilding, when the ravaged and war-torn Free State landscape was revitalised by tree-planting and gardening on a scale that had never been seen before. Most of these efforts may be attributed to the influence not only of the British colonial government, but also of British immigrants who had settled in the towns and on the farms.
Westminster’s garden is one of very few Free State gardens designed by Baker that has survived the ravages of time. The mere fact that the garden has survived and retained its original layout for more than a century makes it remarkable and worthy of historical study. Sadly though, the academic study of period gardens such as Westminster is a neglected genre in South African historiography. In the USA and Britain garden history has developed into a mature and independent historical genre since it contributes to a better understanding of the social and cultural importance and meaning of gardens, as well as the relationship between human beings and their surrounding landscape. The history of Westminster’s garden illustrates the importance of garden design as an expression of this relationship, and also underscores the important role of a garden in the history of an estate or farm. A garden is a man-made construction. Its design, layout, maintenance, neglect and death are ultimately the result of human interference or the lack thereof. This process needs to be studied and documented for posterity.
OPSOMMING
Du Bruyn, D. 2016. A Baker garden with a touch of Jekyll: Early history
(1903–1905) of the garden at Westminster Estate near Tweespruit, Free State, with special reference to the role played by the Duke of Westminster, Sir Herbert Baker and Gertrude Jekyll. Een van die min voorbeelde van ʼn oorspronklike sandsteenhuis en bypassende tuin in die Vrystaat wat reeds vir meer as ʼn eeu bestaan, is dié van die Westminster-landgoed naby Tweespruit. Die geskiedenis van Westminster se tuin, wat die fokus van hierdie studie is, is veelkantig, hoofsaaklik weens die feit dat die sleutelpersoonlikhede in die verhaal geen gewone mense was nie, naamlik die Hertog van Westminster, die bekende argitek Sir Herbert Baker en die befaamde Britse tuinontwerper Gertrude Jekyll. Hierdie studie het ten doel om die verhaal van die Westminster-tuin se beginjare te vertel teen die agtergrond van die ingrypende veranderinge wat gedurende die vroeë 1900s in Suid-Afrika en die Vrystaat se geskiedenis plaasgevind het. Die historiese prosesse wat tot die totstandkoming van die landgoed en die gevolglike uitleg van die tuin gelei het, sowel as die rol wat die genoemde persoonlikhede in die ontwerp en skep van die tuin gespeel het, word bespreek. Westminster se tuin, wat ʼn goeie voorbeeld is van die Jekylliaanse filosofie dat ʼn huis en tuin ʼn visuele eenheid moet vorm, is een van die min oorblywende Vrystaatse tuine wat deur Baker ontwerp is.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to extend my sincere thanks to the Director and Council of the National Museum for the opportunity afforded to us to publish this study, as well as to the two reviewers for their critical comments. A special word of thanks to Mr and Mrs Fitzmaurice, the owners of Westminster Estate, for making their private archival and photographic collection available to the author.
SOURCES
I Archival Sources
Free State Provincial Archives (FSPA)
Unpublished material
Accessions:
A156/3/11, Concept autobiography of Emily Hobhouse, vol. XII, 1925.
A566/153,156, 455, 459, The Friend, clippings and photographs.
A574, R. Bentham Weedon, Description of O.F.S., 1893 (manuscript).
Colonial Office of the Orange River Colony (ORC):
CO 164/2920/03, 1903.
CO 236/8340/03, 1903–1904.
University of the Witwatersrand: Wits Institutional Repository (WIR)
Unpublished material
Digital archive of the Baker Collection, Department of Architecture, University of the Witwatersrand:
Baker, H. House for H. Pim Esq., Johannesburg, 1905: site and garden plan.
Baker, H. Villa Arcadia for Sir L. Phillips, Johannesburg, 1905: cloister garden plan.
Westminster Private Collection (WPC)
Unpublished material
The Baker Documents:
Correspondence, 1903–1905.
The Grosvenor Documents:
Scrap book, visitors’ book, photographic albums and newspaper and magazine clippings.
Water-colour drawing of Westminster Estate by Sir Herbert Baker, showing the ‘Big House’, the terrace garden, the dam, other buildings, and surrounding landscape, ca. 1904.
Webster, G. Story of a Westminster farm, ca. 1939 (manuscript).
II Newspapers
The Friend, 9.1.1967, 29.4.1967, 1.12.1983.
Volksblad (Naweek+), 14.2.2015.
III Articles in newspapers
Baker, A.F. Beauty of Bloemfontein’s public parks and gardens, The Friend, 1.12.1936, p. 29.
Taljaard, P.C. Duke had strong ties with OFS, The Friend, 27.9.1982, p. 7.
IV Books
Anon. Twentieth century impressions of Orange River Colony and Natal: their history, people, commerce, industries, and resources. Natal, 1906.
Aron, H. (Ed.). Parktown 1892 –1972: a social and pictorial history. Johannesburg, 1972.
Baker, H. Architecture & personalities. London, 1944.
Beyers, C.J. (Ed.). Suid-Afrikaanse biografiese woordeboek (part III). Cape Town, 1977.
Blomfield, R. & F.I. Thomas. The formal garden in England. London, 1985.
Brown, J. Gardens of a golden afternoon: the story of a partnership: Edwin Lutyens & Gertrude Jekyll. Harmondsworth, 1985.
Clarke, V. (Ed.). The gardener’s garden. London, 2014.
Crosby, A.W. Ecological imperialism: the biological expansion of Europe, 900–1900. Cambridge, 1993.
Davenport, T.R.H. South Africa: a modern history. London, 1991.
De Kock, W.J. (Ed.). Suid-Afrikaanse biografiese woordeboek (part I). Cape Town, 1968.
Duchess of Westminster, L. Grace and favour: memoirs of Loelia Duchess of Westminster. New York, 1961.
Eloff, C.C. The so-called conquered territory: disputed border area between the Orange Free State (Republic of South Africa) and Lesotho (Basutoland). Pretoria, 1979.
Field, L. Bendor: the golden Duke of Westminster. London, 1983.
Gardiner, N. Beautiful gardens of South Africa. Cape Town, 1991.
Greig, D.E. Herbert Baker in South Africa. Cape Town, 1970.
Gutsche, T. No ordinary woman: the life and times of Florence Phillips. Cape Town, 1966.
Hadfield, M. Gardening in Britain. London, 1960.
Hallé, G. Mayfair to Maritzburg: reminiscences of eighty years. London, 1933.
Headlam, C. The Milner papers: South Africa 1899–1905 (vol. II). London, 1933.
Helmreich, A. The English garden and national identity: the competing styles of garden design, 1870–1914. Cambridge, 2002.
Hussey, C. The life of Sir Edwin Lutyens. London, 1950.
Jekyll, G. The gardener’s essential Gertrude Jekyll. London, 1983.
Jekyll, G. Wood and garden: notes and thoughts, practical and critical, of a working amateur. London, 1926.
Keane, A.H. The Boer states: land and people. London, 1900.
Keath, M. Herbert Baker: architecture and idealism 1892–1913: the South African years. Gibraltar, 1992.
Knight, E.F. South Africa after the war: a narrative of recent travel. London, 1903.
Le Roux, C.J.P. Sir Hamilton John Goold-Adams se rol in die Oranjerivierkolonie, 1901–1910. Archives Year Book 1984. Pretoria, 1984.
McRae, J.F. (Ed.). The Orange Free State: its pastoral, agricultural, and industrial resources. London, 1912.
Miller, N.F. & K.L. Gleason (Eds). The archaeology of garden and field. Philadelphia, 1994.
Pakenham, T. The Boer War. New York, 1979.
Picton-Seymour, D. Historical buildings in South Africa. Cape Town, 1989.
Picton-Seymour, D. Victorian buildings in South Africa: including Edwardian & Transvaal Republican styles 1850–1910. Cape Town, 1977.
Pim, J. Beauty is necessary: creation or preservation of the landscape. Cape Town, 1971.
Pretorius, F. (Ed.). Geskiedenis van Suid-Afrika: van voortye tot vandag. Cape Town, 2012.
Schoeman, K. ‘n Ander land. Cape Town, 1984.
Schoeman, K. Bloemfontein: die ontstaan van ’n stad 1846–1946. Cape Town, 1980.
Schoeman, K. Portrait of Bloemfontein 1860–1910. Cape Town, 1987.
Schoeman, K. Vrystaatse erfenis: bouwerk en geboue in die 19de eeu. Cape Town, 1982.
Spies, S.B. Methods of barbarism?: Roberts and Kitchener and civilians in the Boer Republics: January 1900–May 1902. Cape Town, 1978.
Trollope, A. South Africa. Cape Town, 1973.
Tunnard, C. Gardens in the modern landscape. London, 1950.
Van Zuylen, G. The garden: visions of paradise. London, 1995.
Viney, G. Colonial houses of South Africa. Cape Town, 1987.
Wessels, A. (Ed.). Lord Kitchener and the war in South Africa 1899–1902. Stroud, 2006.
Wessels, A. (Ed.). Lord Roberts and the war in South Africa 1899–1902. Stroud, 2000.
V Chapters in books
Blake, F. The flora of the Orange Free State: history and characteristics. In: J.F. McRae (Ed.), The Orange Free State: its pastoral, agricultural, and industrial resources (London, 1912), pp. 277–278.
Carlson, K.A. Forestry in the Orange Free State. In: J.F. McRae (Ed.), The Orange Free State: its pastoral, agricultural, and industrial resources (London, 1912), pp. 247–250.
Gleason, K.L. To bound and to cultivate: an introduction to the archaeology of gardens and fields, In: N.F. Miller & K.L. Gleason (Eds), The archaeology of garden and field (Philadelphia, 1994), pp. 1–24.
Meiring, H. Sir Herbert Baker 1862–1946. In: Anon., They shaped our century: the most influential South Africans of the twentieth century (Cape Town, 1999), pp. 191–195.
Pickstone, H.E.V. The fruit industry in the Orange Free State. In: J.F. McRae (Ed.), The Orange Free State: its pastoral, agricultural, and industrial resources (London, 1912), pp. 361–362.
Pretorius, F. Almal se oorlog: die Anglo-Boereoorlog (1899–1902) In F. Pretorius (Ed.), Geskiedenis van Suid-Afrika: van voortye tot vandag (Cape Town, 2012), pp. 235–254.
Zar, S. The garden suburb. In: H. Aron (Ed.), Parktown 1892–1972: a social and pictorial history (Johannesburg, 1972), pp. 79–96.
VI Articles
Anon. Frederick Nicholson of Heathfield. Africana Notes and News, 22(5), March 1977, pp. 201–211.
Bhatti, M., Church, A., Claremont, A. & Stenner, P. ‘I love being in the garden’: enchanting encounters in everyday life. Social & Cultural Geography 10(1), 2009, pp. 61–76.
Cole, M.C. Parktown 1892–1972. Lantern, 22(3), March 1973, pp. 18–23.
Dellatola, L. Westminster Estate. South African Panorama 18(2), February 1973, pp. 28–31.
Dreija, K. Historic gardens and parks: challenges of development in the context of relevant regulations, definitions and terminology. Science – future of Lithuania/Mokslas – Lietuvos ateitis 4(2), 2012, pp. 167–175.
Du Bruyn, D. ‘Township Topiary’: the history of the English-style gardens of Batho, Mangaung (1846–1948). Navorsinge van die Nasionale Museum, Bloemfontein 27(3), December 2011, pp. 37–82.
Du Bruyn, D. & A. Wessels. The British soldiers’ Bloemfontein: impressions and experiences during the time of the British occupation and Lord Roberts’ halt, 13 March – 3 May 1900. Navorsinge van die Nasionale Museum, Bloemfontein 29(3), December 2013, pp. 29–68.
Esterhuyse, M. ’n Tuin met ’n ou, ou storie. Tuis, July 2014, pp. 90–95.
Greig, D. A domestic heritage. Lantern 22(3), March 1973, pp. 52–61.
Kerrigan, P. Resisting Darwin: the natural theological design philosophy of Gertrude Jekyll. Studies in the History of Gardens & Designed Landscapes: An International Quarterly 29(4), 2009, pp. 314–329.
Mitchell, C. A bit of olde England in the Free State. Family Radio & TV, 15–21 May 1978, pp. 38–41.
Murray, S.-A. The idea of gardening: plants, bewilderment, and indigenous identity in South Africa. English in Africa 33(2), October 2006, pp. 45–65.
Seaton, B. The garden autobiography. Garden History 7(1), Spring 1979, pp. 101–120.
Thomas, G. The influence of Gertrude Jekyll on the use of roses in gardens and garden design. Garden History 5(1), Spring 1977, pp. 53–65.
Van der Waal, G.M. Aantekeninge oor party voorstede van Johannesburg. Africana Notes and News 21(2), June 1974, pp. 62–65.
Van Sittert, L. Making the Cape Floral Kingdom: the discovery and defence of indigenous flora at the Cape ca. 1890–1939. Landscape Research 28(1), 2003, pp. 113–129.
VII Dissertations
Botha, S. Die verandering en ontwikkeling van die woonhuisargitektuur in Bloemfontein gedurende die tydperk 1846–1946 met bydraende faktore. Unpublished M. Arch. dissertation, University of the Orange Free State, 1991.
Coetzee, C.J.S. Herbert Baker in die Oranje-Vrystaat en Noord-Kaap. Unpublished B. Arch. dissertation, University of the Orange Free State, 1975.
Roodt, L. The architecture of the Orange Free State Republic 1854–1902. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Natal, 1984.
VIII Brochures and Reports
Anon. Land settlement in South Africa: settlers and farms. Cape Town, 1916.
Anon. Park Town 1892–1972. s.l., s.a.
IX Interviews
Fitzmaurice, H. Bloemfontein, 25.3.2015.
X Electronic Sources
Anon. Gertrude Jekyll: the official website of the Jekyll Estate, http://www.gertrudejekyll.co.uk, 17.3.2015.
Anon. Historic Gardens (The Florence Charter – 1982), http://www.international.icomos.org/charters/gardens_e.html, 11.6.2011.
Arnander, C. Gertrude Jekyll, 1843–1932 – pioneer garden designer, http://www.victorianweb.org/art/parks/jekyll/biography.html, 12.3.2015.
Walker, J. Sir Herbert Baker, http://www.artefacts.co.za/main/Buildings/archframes.php, 13.3.2015.
Walker, J. Westminster estate buildings: the big house, http://www.artefacts.co.za/main/Buildings/bldgframes.php, 16.2.2015.
Photographs
Figure 1. Portrait of Sir Herbert Baker by C.H. Thompson. (Photo: Wikipedia)
Figure 2. Portrait of the Duke of Westminster by G. Philpot. (Photo: Wikipedia)
Figure 3. Portrait of Gertrude Jekyll by W. Nicholson. (Photo: Wikipedia)
Figure 4. Westminster Estate’s ‘Big House’ and young garden, early 1900s. Note the colonnaded verandah. (Photo: Westminster Private Collection)
Figure 5. Sir Herbert Baker’s water-colour drawing of Westminster Estate showing the ‘Big House’, the terrace garden, the dam, other buildings, and surrounding landscape, ca. 1904. (Photo: Free State Provincial Archives)
Figure 6. An aerial view of Westminster Estate showing the ‘Big House’ and the terrace garden, undated. Note the tall cypresses, pond, croquet lawn, pergolas, formal rose garden and sundial. (Photo: Westminster Private Collection)
Figure 7. The sandstone steps which link the first terrace with the colonnaded verandah, ca. 2015. (Photo: National Museum, Bloemfontein)
Figure 8. The formal rose and flower garden on the third terrace, early 1900s. Note the quincunxes, garden bench and the deep herbaceous border. (Photo: Westminster Private Collection)
Figure 9. The formal rose and flower garden on the third terrace, early 1910s. Note the clipped cypress edges and the square ornamental pond below the pergola. (Photo: Westminster Private Collection)
Figure 10. A sandstone and wood pergola on the fourth terrace, ca. 2015. (Photo: National Museum, Bloemfontein)
Figure 11. The sundial on the fourth terrace. Note the date carved into the slate slab, ca. 2015. (Photo: National Museum, Bloemfontein)
Figure 12. The terrace garden with its sandstone retaining walls and steps, early 1900s. (Photo: Westminster Private Collection).
Figure 13. A sandstone garden bench designed by Sir Herbert Baker, ca. 2015. (Photo: National Museum, Bloemfontein)
Figure 14. The quadrant garden, early 1900s. Note the formal layout. (Photo: Westminster Private Collection)
Figure 15. A farm worker in front of the clipped hedge with topiary shaped to resemble beagles, undated. (Photo: Westminster Private Collection)
Figure 16. Rows of cypress trees planted to serve as windbreaks to protect the house and the garden, undated. (Photo: Westminster Private Collection)
[1] M. Bhatti et al., ‘I love being in the garden’: enchanting encounters in everyday life, Social & Cultural Geography, 10(1), 2009, p. 64. According to Bhatti et al., a garden is “a material place with a specific past”; yet, at the same time, “they [gardens] live on into the future.”
[2] K.L. Gleason, To bound and to cultivate: an introduction to the archaeology of gardens and fields, in N.F. Miller & K.L. Gleason (eds.), The archaeology of garden and field, p. 5.
[3] Anon., Historic Gardens (The Florence Charter – 1982), http://www.international.icomos.org/charters/gardens_e.html, 11.6.2011.
[4] Previously the official Bloemfontein residence of the Governor-General of South Africa. The formal terrace garden was laid out during the early 1940s.
[5] For more information on Bloemfontein’s historical gardens and parks, see A.F. Baker, Beauty of Bloemfontein’s public parks and gardens, The Friend, 1.12.1936, p. 29.
[6] J. Pim, Beauty is necessary: creation or preservation of the landscape, passim.
[7] K. Schoeman, Bloemfontein: die ontstaan van ‘n stad 1846-1946, passim; K. Schoeman, Portrait of Bloemfontein 1860-1910, passim; K. Schoeman, ‘n Ander land, passim.
[8] C.J.S. Coetzee, Herbert Baker in die Oranje-Vrystaat en Noord-Kaap, unpublished B. Arch. dissertation, passim; S. Botha, Die verandering en ontwikkeling van die woonhuisargitektuur in Bloemfontein gedurende die tydperk 1846-1946 met bydraende faktore, unpublished M. Arch. dissertation, passim.
[9] Also known as so-called Boers. They were the descendents of European immigrants who settled in the Cape during the 17th and 18th centuries and spoke a simplified version of Dutch. The Afrikaners or Boers must be distinguished from Bloemfontein’s Dutch-speaking community who immigrated from the Netherlands during the 19th century.
[10] L. Roodt, The architecture of the Orange Free State Republic 1854-1902, unpublished Ph.D. thesis, pp. 105, 106, 210, 280, 281; E.F. Knight, South Africa after the war: a narrative of recent travel, pp. 141, 158, 163; D. du Bruyn, ‘Township Topiary’: the history of the English-style gardens of Batho, Mangaung (1846-1948), Navorsinge van die Nasionale Museum, Bloemfontein, 27(3), December 2011, pp. 46-49.
[11] G. Hallé, Mayfair to Maritzburg: reminiscences of eighty years, p. 128; A. Trollope, South Africa, p. 399; H.E.V. Pickstone, The fruit industry of the Orange Free State, in J.F. McRae (ed.), The Orange Free State: its pastoral, agricultural, and industrial resources, p. 361; Schoeman, Bloemfontein: die ontstaan…, p. 183.
[12] F. Blake, The flora of the Orange Free State: history and characteristics, in J.F. McRae (ed.), The Orange Free State: its pastoral, agricultural, and industrial resources, p. 277.
[13] K.A. Carlson, Forestry in the Orange Free State, in J.F. McRae (ed.), The Orange Free State: its pastoral, agricultural, and industrial resources, p. 247.
[14] K. Dreija, Historic gardens and parks: challenges of development in the context of relevant regulations, definitions and terminology, Science – future of Lithuania/Mokslas – Lietuvos ateitis, 4(2), 2012, pp. 167-174; Anon., Historic Gardens (The Florence Charter…).
[15] H. Meiring, Sir Herbert Baker 1862-1946, in Anon., They shaped our century: the most influential South Africans of the twentieth century, pp. 191-195; W.J. de Kock (ed.), Suid-Afrikaanse biografiese woordeboek (part I), pp. 47-48; G. Viney, Colonial houses of South Africa, p. 17; D. Greig, A domestic heritage, Lantern, XXII(3), March 1973, pp. 52-61.
[16] Viney, p. 214.
[17] D.E. Greig, Herbert Baker in South Africa, p. 144.
[18] M. Keath, Herbert Baker: architecture and idealism 1892-1913: the South African years, p. 105.
[19] P. Kerrigan, Resisting Darwin: the natural theological design philosophy of Gertrude Jekyll, Studies in the History of Gardens & Designed Landscapes: An International Quarterly, 29(4), 2009, p. 321.
[20] Lord Horatio Herbert Kitchener (1850–1916) served as Lord Roberts’ Chief of Staff (1900–1902) during the War and played a key role in the British war effort and the eventual conquest of the Boer republics. For biographical notes on Kitchener, see A. Wessels (ed.), Lord Kitchener and the war in South Africa 1899-1902, p. 337.
[21] K. Schoeman, Vrystaatse erfenis: bouwerk en geboue in die 19de eeu, pp. 124-126; T. Pakenham, The Boer War, pp. 500-501; S.B. Spies, Methods of barbarism?: Roberts and Kitchener and civilians in the Boer Republics: January 1900 – May 1902, pp. 42-46, 108-121; F. Pretorius, Almal se oorlog: die Anglo-Boereoorlog (1899-1902), in F. Pretorius (ed.), Geskiedenis van Suid-Afrika: van voortye tot vandag, p. 243; T.R.H. Davenport, South Africa: a modern history, pp. 201-202; Anon., Twentieth century impressions of Orange River Colony and Natal: their history, people, commerce, industries, and resources, p. 52.
[22] Free State Provincial Archives (hereafter FSPA): A156/3/11, Concept autobiography of Emily Hobhouse, vol. XII, p. 11.
[23] Knight, p. 190.
[24] Pickstone, p. 361.
[25] To assist Milner, Sir Hamilton John Goold-Adams was appointed Lieutenant-Governor of the ORC.
[26] C. Headlam, The Milner papers: South Africa 1899–1905 (vol. II), p. 492.
[27] For more information on the Land Settlement Scheme, see Anon., Land settlement in South Africa: settlers and farms (brochure), pp. 1, 27-28.
[28] Because of the disruption caused by the War and Kitchener’s scorched-earth policy, most of the Boer farmers who had farmed on these farms had left; and they and their families were widely dispersed in the ORC and Transvaal.
[29] FSPA: A574, R. Bentham Weedon, Description of O.F.S., 1893 (manuscript). For more information on the ‘conquered territory’, see C.C. Eloff, The so-called conquered territory: disputed border area between the Orange Free State (Republic of South Africa) and Lesotho (Basutoland), passim.
[30] FSPA: A574, R. Bentham Weedon, Description of O.F.S., 1893 (manuscript).
[31] Westminster Private Collection (hereafter WPC): G. Webster, Story of a Westminster farm, ca. 1939, p. 170; P.C. Taljaard, Duke had strong ties with OFS, The Friend, 27.9.1982, p. 7.
[32] For more information on the Milner Settlers, see Anon., Frederick Nicholson of Heathfield, Africana Notes and News, 22(5), March 1977, pp. 205-211; The Friend, 9.1.1967; The Friend, 29.4.1967.
[33] Headlam, p. 491.
[34] C.J. Beyers (ed.), Suid-Afrikaanse biografiese woordeboek (part III), p. 631; C.J.P. le Roux, Sir Hamilton John Goold-Adams se rol in die Oranjerivierkolonie, 1901–1910. Archives Year Book 1984, pp. 33-39; Davenport, pp. 203-206; Viney, p. 208; Greig, Herbert Baker…, p. 142.
[35] L. Field, Bendor: the golden Duke of Westminster, p. 54.
[36] L. Duchess of Westminster, Grace and favour: memoirs of Loelia Duchess of Westminster, p. 179.
[37] For biographical notes on Frederick Sleigh Roberts (1832-1914), see A. Wessels (ed.), Lord Roberts and the war in South Africa 1899-1902, pp. 336-337.
[38] For more information on the occupation of Bloemfontein, see D. du Bruyn & A. Wessels, The British soldiers’ Bloemfontein: impressions and experiences during the time of the British occupation and Lord Roberts’ halt, 13 March – 3 May 1900, Navorsinge van die Nasionale Museum, Bloemfontein, 29(3), December 2013, passim.
[39] Field, pp. 54-56; Viney, p. 208.
[40] Knight, p. 141.
[41] Ibid., p. 149.
[42] No biographical information on Richard Bentham Weedon could be found.
[43] FSPA: A574, R. Bentham Weedon, Description of O.F.S., 1893 (manuscript).
[44] WPC: Webster, p. 171; Field, p. 85; Duchess of Westminster, pp. 179-180; Viney, p. 210; Greig, Herbert Baker…, p. 142; D. Picton-Seymour, Historical buildings in South Africa, pp. 128-129.
[45] Keath, p. 14.
[46] H. Baker, Architecture & personalities, p. 15.
[47] De Kock, pp. 45-46; Keath, pp. 11, 14-17; Baker, p. 15.
[48] J. Walker, Sir Herbert Baker, http://www.artefacts.co.za/main/Buildings/archframes.php, 13.3.2015.
[49] For more details, see Keath, pp. 87-89; Viney, pp. 198-205.
[50] See discussion of the Arts and Crafts movement later in this article.
[51] De Kock, p. 47; Meiring, p. 192.
[52] Walker.
[53] Walker; De Kock, p. 47.
[54] De Kock, p. 47; Meiring, pp. 192, 194. Baker’s designs may be described as eclectic because they accommodate various styles and influences.
[55] For more information on H.F. Wilson’s appointment as Colonial Secretary, see FSPA: CO 164/2920/03 & CO 236/8340/03.
[56] Viney, p. 210.
[57] De Kock, p. 47; Keath, pp. 101, 105; Coetzee, pp. 4, 10-69; Schoeman, Bloemfontein: die ontstaan …, pp. 188, 191-193.
[58] Keath, pp. 105, 107.
[59] Viney, p. 210.
[60] WPC: H. Baker – Col. Lloyd, 16.11.1903, p. 3.
[61] Ibid., p. 1.
[62] Viney, pp. 210, 214; Keath, p. 107; Greig, Herbert Baker…, pp. 144-145, 149; D. Picton-Seymour, Victorian buildings in South Africa: including Edwardian & Transvaal Republican styles 1850-1910, p. 377; Picton-Seymour, Historical buildings…, p. 129; J. Walker, Westminster estate buildings: the big house, http://www.artefacts.co.za/main/Buildings/bldgframes.php, 16.2.2015.
[63] Viney, p. 208.
[64] Ibid.
[65] C. Arnander, Gertrude Jekyll, 1843-1932 – pioneer garden designer, http://www.victorianweb.org/art/parks/jekyll/biography.html, 12.3.2015; Bhatti et al., p. 72.
[66] M.C. Cole, Parktown 1892-1972, Lantern, XXII(3), March 1973, p. 22.
[67] Arnander; M. Hadfield, Gardening in Britain, pp. 363-364, 367-368; Anon., Gertrude Jekyll: the official website of the Jekyll Estate, http://www.gertrudejekyll.co.uk, 17.3.2015.
[68] C. Tunnard, Gardens in the modern landscape, pp. 56-58.
[69] For more information on Munstead Wood, see A. Helmreich, The English garden and national identity: the competing styles of garden design, 1870-1914, pp. 178-188.
[70] V. Clarke (ed.), The gardener’s garden, p. 170.
[71] B. Seaton, The garden autobiography, Garden History, 7(1), Spring 1979, p. 108.
[72] Seaton, p. 108; Arnander; Greig, Herbert Baker…, p. 25; Helmreich, pp. 172-174.
[73] G. Jekyll, Wood and garden: notes and thoughts, practical and critical, of a working amateur, p. 270.
[74] Baker, p. 16. For a detailed discussion of the quarrel between Robinson and Blomfield, see Helmreich, pp. 135-154. For more information on the formal garden style in England, see R. Blomfield & F.I. Thomas, The formal garden in England, passim.
[75] G. van Zuylen, The garden: visions of paradise, p. 118.
[76] Arnander; Tunnard, p. 58; Helmreich, pp. 189-192. For more details on the relationship between Jekyll and Lutyens, see J. Brown, Gardens of a golden afternoon: the story of a partnership: Edwin Lutyens & Gertrude Jekyll, passim.
[77] Helmreich, pp. 176-178; Viney, p. 208.
[78] Baker, p. 15.
[79] Keath, p. 16.
[80] Baker, p. 15.
[81] Ibid.
[82] Baker, p. 16.
[83] Greig, Herbert Baker…, p. 25.
[84] Baker, p. 16; Viney, p. 183. Gertrude Jekyll’s correspondence concerning the gardens she designed, and other matters, are housed in the Environmental Design Archives at the University of California, Berkeley, and in the Godalming Museum, Surrey.
[85] WPC: H. Baker – Col. Lloyd, 19.11.1903, p. 2.
[86] Baker, p. 16; Viney, p. 183.
[87] Baker, p. 16; Cole, pp. 18-23; Helmreich, p. 170.
[88] For more information on Jekyll’s approach to formal gardens, see G. Jekyll, The gardener’s essential Gertrude Jekyll, pp. 89-96.
[89] Kerrigan, p. 321; G. Thomas, The influence of Gertrude Jekyll on the use of roses in gardens and garden design, Garden History, 5(1), Spring 1977, p. 65.
[90] Thomas, p. 64.
[91] Ibid.
[92] Also known as boxwood (Buxus).
[93] Jekyll, Wood and …, pp. 178-179.
[94] For more information on Jekyll’s rose gardens, see Thomas, pp. 53-65.
[95] Jekyll, Wood and …, p. 202. See also Thomas, p. 64.
[96] The term ‘herbaceous’ refers to plants with stems that are not woody.
[97] Jekyll, Wood and …, p. 207.
[98] Ibid.
[99] Tunnard, p. 58. For more details on Jekyll’s herbaceous borders and mixed borders, see Jekyll, Wood and …, pp. 206-212 and Helmreich, pp. 179-184.
[100] Jekyll, The gardener’s essential …, p. 64.
[101] Thomas, p. 64.
[102] Anon., Park Town 1892-1972 (brochure), p. 1; G.M. van der Waal, Aantekeninge oor party voorstede van Johannesburg, Africana Notes and News, 21(2), June 1974, p. 65.
[103] University of the Witwatersrand: Wits Institutional Repository (hereafter WIR): H. Baker, House for H. Pim Esq., Johannesburg, 1905: site and garden plan.
[104] WIR: H. Baker, Villa Arcadia for Sir L. Phillips, Johannesburg 1905: cloister garden plan. For a description of Sir Lionel and Lady Florence Phillips’ garden at Villa Arcadia, see T. Gutsche, No ordinary woman: the life and times of Florence Phillips, p. 240.
[105] Later renamed Brenthurst.
[106] Baker, p. 53; S. Zar, The garden suburb, in H. Aron (ed.), Parktown 1892-1972: a social and pictorial history, p. 81. See also M. Esterhuyse, ’n Tuin met ’n ou, ou storie, Tuis, July 2014, pp. 90-95.
[107] Zar, p. 81.
[108] Baker, p. 53.
[109] Ibid.
[110] Baker, pp. 54-55; De Kock, p. 47; Meiring, p. 192.
[111] Baker, p. 53.
[112] Ibid.
[113] Gutsche, p. 240.
[114] Gutsche, p. 240.
[115] Zar, p. 86.
[116] Gutsche, p. 240. When Lutyens visited Villa Arcadia in 1910, the garden had long been established.
[117] In Baker’s time the term ‘cactus’ was apparently incorrectly used to refer to indigenous aloe species.
[118] C. Hussey, The life of Sir Edwin Lutyens, p. 206. Gertrude Jekyll’s herbaceous borders were known among her admirers as ‘Munstead borders’, after the exemplary borders she planted in her garden at Munstead Wood.
[119] Baker, p. 53; Greig, Herbert Baker…, pp. 25-26.
[120] A.H. Keane, The Boer states: land and people, p. 52.
[121] Ibid., p. 54.
[122] Baker, p. 55.
[123] Ibid.
[124] L. van Sittert, Making the Cape Floral Kingdom: the discovery and defence of indigenous flora at the Cape ca. 1890-1939, Landscape Research, 28(1), 2003, p. 114; A.W. Crosby, Ecological imperialism: the biological expansion of Europe, 900-1900, pp. 6-7; C. Mitchell, A bit of olde England in the Free State, Family Radio & TV, 15-21 May 1978, p. 40.
[125] Zar, p. 86.
[126] S.-A. Murray, The idea of gardening: plants, bewilderment, and indigenous identity in South Africa, English in Africa, 33(2), October 2006, p. 47; Baker, p. 55.
[127] Although Jekyll liked strong colours, she abhorred so-called “garish” colours, and preferred “pale” and “medium” coloured flowers for her mixed borders. See Jekyll, Wood and …, pp. 89-90, 109, 207 and Helmreich, p. 180.
[128] WPC: H. Baker – Col. Lloyd, 16.11.1903, p. 2.
[129] Ibid., p. 1.
[130] WPC: Sir Herbert Baker’s water-colour drawing of Westminster Estate showing the ‘Big House’, the terrace garden, the dam, other buildings, and surrounding landscape, ca. 1904.
[131] Jekyll, Wood and …, p. 270.
[132] WPC: H. Baker – Col. Byron, 22.9.1905, p. 1.
[133] Coetzee, p. 81.
[134] WPC: H. Baker – Col. Byron, 22.9.1905, p. 2.
[135] Ibid.
[136] Col. Lloyd’s first name(s) or initial(s) could not be determined.
[137] WPC: H. Baker – Col. Byron, 22.9.1905, p. 1.
[138] Ibid.
[139] Ibid.
[140] WPC: H. Baker – Col. Byron, 22.9.1905, p. 2.
[141] Ibid., p. 1.
[142] N. Gardiner, Beautiful gardens of South Africa, p. 66; Picton-Seymour, Historical buildings …, p. 129; Volksblad (Naweek +), 14.2.2015, p. 16.
[143] Interview: Mrs H. Fitzmaurice, Westminster, 25.3.2015.
[144] Gardiner, p. 66.
[145] In this context, a quincunx refers to the arrangement of five flower beds so that four are at the corners of a rectangle or square and the fifth at its centre.
[146] WPC: H. Baker – Col. Byron, 22.9.1905, p. 1.
[147] Ibid.
[148] Interview: Mrs H. Fitzmaurice, Westminster, 25.3.2015.
[149] WPC: H. Baker – Col. Byron, 10.7.1905, p. 1; Col. Byron – H. Baker, 22.8.1905, p. 1; Gardiner, p. 66.
[150] L. Dellatola, Westminster Estate, South African Panorama 18(2), February 1973, p. 31; Thomas, p. 64; The Friend, 1.12.1983, p. 10; Greig, Herbert Baker…, p. 144.
[151] WPC: visitors’ book; WPC: Webster, p. 174; Volksblad (Naweek +), 14.2.2015, p. 16; Gardiner, p. 66.
[152] Gardiner, p. 66; Greig, Herbert Baker…, p. 144.
[153] WPC: H. Baker – Col. Byron, 8.6.1905, p. 1.
[154] WPC: Col. Byron – H. Baker, 5.6.1905, p. 1.
[155] Viney, p. 219; WPC: Webster, p. 173.
[156] Greig, Herbert Baker…, p. 144.
Comments are closed.