The Francis C. Sessions House, Columbus, OH

The Francis C. Session House, Columbus, OH. 1840, alt. 1862

From: Columbus Illustrated

From: Illustrated History of Columbus

The Sessions house, built for a banker on E Town Street, certainly started life as a Greek Revival house, given its 1840 construction date. But it appears that it was transformed into a fine Italianate residence in an 1862 remodel. The house was torn down in 1924 to make room for the current Beaux Arts Columbus museum. The house was a symmetrical plan villa, with a projecting central bay with a shallow gable. While the central bay was decidedly flat, the side bays were articulated with elaborate brick work which formed a thick set of quoins at the corners and recessed frames for the central sections of each bay. Whether these were part of the original house is unknown, although it would be very atypical for a Greek Revival house to have such fripperies. On the first floor, the sides featured rectangular windows framed by delicate fringed porches (with almost invisible balustrades atop), perhaps of iron (that wisteria really makes it unclear), while above, the windows had small wooden awnings with a fringe. The central bay had a recessed entrance with, again, a porch with triple arches and a rather weird set of three arches in the central span. Above was an iron balcony with fancy urns at the corners in front of a wide arched window with a bracketed wooden awning forming a Palladian form. Above, the cornice has a strong resemblance to the Baldwin house which survives up the street, with elongated brackets the break into strong s curves. These enclosed a pair of windows with concave corners, another reminiscence of the Baldwin house. The whole was topped with an octagonal cupola, with pierced s curve brackets, paired windows (also seeming to have concave corners), and a lacy iron cresting. All the bells and whistles abounded, with a conservatory and a whole other cube built on back. A shame it didn't survive, but it was replaced by an exceptionally fine museum building.

'Evergreen on the Falls' the Albert H. Carroll House, Baltimore, MD

The Albert H. Caroll House, Baltimore, MD. 1860 Photo: Wikimedia

'Evergreen' was built by the owner of a cotton mill, Albert H. Carroll, in 1860, following an irregular plan, but an idiosyncratic design. The house does not have a tower, nor, like many tower-less irregular plans, does it suggest a tower with a cupola, fenestration, or the placement of the entrance in the center. Rather, this house places the entrance on the projecting pavilion. While the façade is painted brick, the windows have no surrounds, but the emphasis is placed on a series of elaborate wooden awnings that project further than any typical wooden awning. The entablature is nonexistent, with the s scroll brackets projecting right from the façade without any framing. The projecting pavilion has the main entrance, a triple arched palladian design; above, the window is a normal palladian design, but oddly the central window is especially long with the sides placed high up, a very unclassical formula. This is topped by a wooden awning with an engaged rounded pediment in the center and very elongated c and s scroll brackets. On the recessed façade, a double window on the first floor with a wooden awning with a tent roof design sits underneath a single window. The simple side façade has a spare bay window with a round window in the gable. A unique house, unfortunately much of it was destroyed by a fire in 1970, but it was well restored by the Maryland SPCA.

The Eli Slifer House, Lewisburg, PA

The Eli Slifer House, Lewisburg, PA. 1861. Source: otandka

Source: Bill Badzo

Source: Wikimedia

Eli Slifer commissioned Samuel Sloan to design his country house in Lewisburg, completed in 1861, just as the Civil War was breaking out in which Slifer played a major role as a bigwig in state government. In this house, we can see Sloan moving somewhat away from all of his precedents and into more creative territory in design. While the plan and first two floors look like most of Sloan's five bay symmetrical plan houses, such as the Packer house, to which this bears some similarity, above the roof, Sloan has raised the roof pitch dramatically to accommodate tall central gables. An additional oddity is the placement of the tower in the rear, invisible from the front unless one stands at just the right angle to see its steeply pitched tent roof poking out. So emphatic is the right side of the house, that it almost becomes a principal façade in competition with the main façade. The design of the house is rather spare, with no window surrounds, though this would appear much less cheerless if the shutters were restored. The façade as well seems to have been faced in fine stone, now obscured by a rather rough plaster job. The front of the house features a simple porch that extends around the design, very much a Sloan standby which softens the mass of the main body and expands the profile. The central window is paired with a curved wooden awning over it, uniting the two. The dramatic gable, with paired tombstone windows, has bargeboards, decorative wooden boards attached to the cornice, with a few whimsies thrown in for drama. The simple beam brackets are mostly obscured by the angled eave overhang. The right side features a large fringed second floor balcony, perhaps the frilliest thing on this mostly somber design. The tower's curved roof is a feature that hearkens back to an earlier stage of Italianate, with balconies and triple arched windows. In a sense, one might consider the placement of this tower along side the rear towers found in Woodland Terrace.

Sloan published his design for this house in Homestead Architecture, as Design 33.

After serving as a religious institution for many years, the house is now a museum. On their website is a gallery of interior images, which indicate the house seems appropriately furnished for its period.

The William Ebert House, Hannibal, MO

The William Ebert House, Hannibal, MO. 1865 Photo: Brandon Bartoszek

The William Ebert house at 1000 Center St. in Hannibal, MO was built in 1865 for a newspaper owner. Having gone through many owners, by the late 20th century, most of the house's exterior features, its porches, balconies, and metalwork had disappeared, but it was recently restored through older images authentically. The house follow the irregular plan, but lacks a central tower as well as a strong central projection where the tower would be. Like many of the houses in Hannibal and especially in the midwest, the house has a steeper pitch to the hip roof than is often found. This makes the house look like a series of retreating steps. The plain brick facade has arched windows with stone insets that have a shouldered arch shape and incised Eastlake carving. The cornice has small brackets with large c scroll brackets at the corner; these actually take the form of distorted Doric trigylphs complete with guttae (small circular drops). Interiors can be seen here.

'Fieldwood' the Richard Stockton Field House, Princeton, NJ

'Fieldwood', Princeton, NJ. 1853-5 All Photos: HABS

Perhaps John Notman's largest home (now) in Princeton is the house built for Richard Stockton Field, a descendant of a major colonial family in the town. After use and adaptation by Princeton University (as Guernsey Hall), it is currently condos. A unique feature of the plan for this Italinate house is its squarishness. When seen from above, it forms a massive cube (partly because of extensions when it was given to the university). Yet, although it was originally more rectangular, unlike the cube form of the symmetrical plan, Notman freely plays with each of the facades, forming a unique profile on each side. Each façade is distinctive enough, it's difficult to identify the house's main façade, which is more traditional in appearance than the others. As contrasted with the drawing above, the house has gone through some changes, especially the replacement of spindly iron porches by massive stone versions. The principal façade, as seen in the top two pictures, has the form of a typical irregular plan house in an L-shape, although, in line with other Notman plans, the tower is placed to the side rather than highlighted in the center of the design as we expect with the irregular plan. The ornamentation is spare and the walls are typical local stone in a variety of mottled colors with sandstone and plaster trim. The fine classical details, flared wooden awnings, and grand arched entry porch, and Renaissance balustrade are in harmony with his other designs. It seems that the iron porch, seen in the watercolor, was replaced in the early 20th century by a stone portico based on the entrance portico. The presence of a two story bay pavilion on the left hand façade gives the front a chamfered look, an appearance emphasized by the original iron porch.

Going clockwise, the façade to the left of the main façade has been drastically altered. As seen in the upper image, it originally had one projecting bay with a wrapping iron porch. Later, the house was extended to by a matching bay (though note the architects did not continue the brackets on the chimney cornices). The porch was removed and the central bay of each bay window was destroyed by chimneys. A new turn of the century sun porch was added.

The back façade of the house has likewise been altered. Originally, it was designed as  pavilion plan façade with calculated asymmetry in the presence of a be-awned bay window on the right side. The porch is a particularly interesting example of a rustic post and beam Italian design; I like it much more than the pompous stone porch that currently is on the façade.

The final side, lying to the right of the main entrance is the pedestrian service façade. It is cleverly hidden by Notman by the presence of the frontal tower. It's not particularly common to have a house so picturesquely finished in the round, but Fieldwood is a fine example of an architect playing with multiple façade formations. Each façade is asymmetrical; the front has its tower and right hand pavilion. The lefthand façade had a projecting bay on the right side. The back façade, despite its symmetrical composition again emphasizes the right with its bay window. The right hand façade from the front is weighted to the left with the tower. In each section, Notman creates a series of focal points that interlock and diminish the staid symmetrical possibilities of the design.

The house's most amazing feature (at this point I really wish it were not a private residence), is the octagonal stair hall with a wrapping staircase worthy of Mannerist Italy topped by a dome and decorated with neo-Classical plaster roundels. The walls are beautifully stuccoed that is scored like stone and the landing is supported by the odd fans seen in Prospect House. Clearly, this was a Notman thing. For its period, this staircase is one of the most beautiful and sophisticated interior designs. You can see it below in more HABS images.

'Fern Hill' the Henry Pratt McKean House, Germantown, PA

'Fern Hill' Germantown, PA. 1852 Photo: Philadelphia Suburban Homes

Photo: The Homes of America: Some Pennsylvania Homes

The Henry McKean house shows Notman working in someone else's plan for once. This house was built in 1852 for a wealthy Philadelphian who had a typical Victorian love of rare plants. His house was noted for showcasing his collection of uncommon flowers and shrubs. The Victorians had so much time on their hands! Here, Notman decided to use Richard Upjohn's double tower plan which we just finished looking at. Unlike many of the examples we saw, Notman decided to alter Upjohn's detailing to a greater degree than many of those who followed his design so closely they used the same ornament. Notman has raised the tower by an extra story and added pairs of tombstone windows which are authentically Romanseque in their distribution, though he has kept the arched first floor windows and second floor balcony and wooden awning. In the central bay, he has switched out the triple arched second floor windows with tombstone windows again, providing an as yet unseen variant. The tower to the left, squatter than Upjohn's departs the most in its first floor bay window, second floor arched windows, and third floor attic windows (oddly rectangular, they look like some weird Greek Revival invasion). Notman seems to have returned here to single brackets with no strong entablature. The side porch, a bit hard to make out, looks huge and seems to feature large shallow arches, something we have not seen. Unfortunately, this house as well was torn down in the 1950s. 

'Prospect House' the Thomas F. Potter House, Princeton, NJ

'Prospect House', Princeton, NJ. 1851

Prospect House is probably Notman's greatest surviving masterpiece of residential design, and fortunately Princeton University has preserved it inside and out beautifully (if you happen to be in Princeton, just walk in and take a look, it's open). It was built in 1851 for Thomas F. Potter, a South Carolina merchant who relocated to Princeton. The university, which grew up around the house, acquired it in 1878 as the president's house; it is currently a faculty dining club, which occasioned a large modernist addition on the back. Designed the same year as Alverthorpe, one can see many of the same influences here, though Prospect House is far less elaborate. It follows the pavilion plan with a tower to the side (the opposite side from Alverthorpe) with a side wing to the left fronted by an iron porch with tent roof. The same materials, local stone with brownstone quoins and trim, feature on this house.

In Prospect House, Notman opted for a lower two story plan and banished the tall gables, removing much of the verticality and giving the house a strong horizontal focus. In many ways Notman inverts his decisions for Alverthorpe here. The front of the house is all about triple windows in both the side and central bays, rectangular on the first floor and arched on the second. The front entrance is surrounded by a weighty English-looking port cochere with rusticated stone, panels, double s scroll brackets, and a Renaissance balustrade. The original shutters have been unfortunately painted over, but were recessed in the deep window casings. Note the appropriate way the painted wooden details match the stone! In the primary cornice, Notman again used a double row of brackets, giving the house a top heavy weighting. The tower, deeply integrated into the plan without a strong projection, has interestingly only one rather than triple windows (inversion!) with balconies and a stronger entablature than the rest of the house. Note that the wooden awning on the bay window is supported by iron brackets. The porches on Prospect House follow what we have come to expect from Notman with lacy designs (gothic on the left and wing) and tent roofs. The left hand service wing is connected by a hyphen dramatized by the iron porch, making it look like a separate building only incidentally connected to the house.

The interiors are well worth a look for the fine preservation. Of note is the central hall with a circular oculus that reveals a (later) stained glass skylight. It was probably clear. The entrance hall has niches and etched glass windows. The finishes inside are very impressive, with delicate plaster moldings, fine gilded light fixtures, and strange plaster fans. The small room at the base of the tower has a full circular ceiling. Another room has a concave ceiling. The stairs have a barrel vault. Notman clearly was having fun. The finest treasure to the house is the restored faux graining on the dado, which simulates inlaid wood. Take a look at the plans below of the first floor.

'Hollybush' the Thomas Whitney House, Glassboro, NJ

'Hollybush', Glassboro, NJ. 1849 Photo: JasonW72

Photo: Wikimedia

The Thomas Whitney house, built in 1849 for Thomas Whitney, the owner of one of the most profitable glass companies in South Jersey (Glassboro!), cannot be perfectly identified with John Notman, but its early date coupled with its Notman-esque stylistic features means that if he didn't design it, he surely influenced it very heavily. I'm minded to say it is a Notman product. Whitney commissioned the house after a Grand Trip tour that included Italy; what better souvenir than a rustic Italian farmhouse? Unlike Notman's other houses, this follows a more straightforward, irregular plan. Perhaps the publication of Downing's Cottage Residences in 1842 with a similar plan encouraged Notman to use it. The use of local stone, probably at one point plastered, is a big Notman feature as well as gives the house the desired rustic Italian effect. The spare use of decoration is a typical characteristic of Notman and early Italianates. Here decoration is confined to the use of spindly ironwork for the porches with particularly oversized concave tent roofs and wooden awnings on iron brackets. Additionally, laciness is seen on the balconies. The overhang over the front door is a particularly beautiful and Notman feature. A highly elongated shallow gable is supported on three beams with interlacing arches; the whole rests on, you guessed it, spindly iron brackets, a rarity. The strangest feature of the house is the eave, which is far wider than any in a typical Italianate, and the eave inclines upward, as can be seen on the tower. This construction has the effect of reducing the visual impact of the beam brackets, making them almost invisible underneath the huge overhang.

The house was sold by the Whitneys in 1915 and promptly bought by what would become Rowan University as the president's house. It's well-known primarily because it hosted a Soviet-American summit in 1967 over the Six Day War. Interiors can be seen here.

Photo: Wikimedia

'Homewood Villa' the William Wyman House, Baltimore, MD

Homewood Villa, Baltimore, MD. 1853
Photo: Courtesy of Maryland Historical Society, [B330]

The house was built for William Wyman in 1853 and was probably designed by Upjohn himself. Wyman was a very wealthy Baltimore merchant who first lived in the Federal style house on the property until he constructed his own Italianate mansion, Homewood Villa (named after the Federal house). The house stayed in the family until 1949, when it was given to Johns Hopkins University which allowed the house to fall into disrepair. Despite a passionate grassroots response and attempted fundraising, the house was demolished in 1955 a little more than 100 years after it was built.

The house is a perfect example of the double tower plan and matches the King house in Newport very closely, even in the details. Not only does the house have almost the same fenestration pattern and variation, but even the wooden awnings, balconies, and open pediments were reproduced. It's the differences between the two houses that are most significant. First, the most noticeable difference (besides the reversal of the plan) is the taller tower is a full stage taller than in the King house, giving Homewood Villa a far more vertical thrust as well as creating even more drama in the profile. The added stage has been treated with a small round window with Gothic tracery on the front and tombstone windows on the sides. Another feature is the porches. The King house lacks porches, but here both the central bay is extended with a simple arched porch that repeats the triple arched Palladian design. Both sides as well are furnished with long porches that harmonize in design with simple arches, square Tuscan pillars, and rosettes. In this house, the shorter tower instead of paired rectangular windows has a bay window, although I am unsure if this is an addition from later remodeling. Finally, unlike the King house, the villa has the brickwork in the cornice extend to form an architrave to define the entablature, a subtle detail that adds an extra shadow that brings it closer in line with Renaissance formality. The fate of this house is quite a shame, as it would be a stunning addition to the country's examples of Upjohn's plan.

Below is an image of the Federal 'Homewood' built in 1808 that does survive.

Photo: Wikimedia