I have to write a newsletter article for the local historic landmarks board (which I am a member of) and have very little time to churn it out – has to be submitted on Sunday. I’m a finisher/painter by trade but my expertise is really limited to the last several decades and current technology – none of which is relevant to houses built between about 1870 and the 1940s.
I am familiar with shellac and know a bit about the old-school varnishes, but what I don’t know is when they were commonly used.
Can anyone give me a rough timeline when these earlier varnishes were most commonly used? And if possible, how they were most commonly used (example: floor finishes, stair rail finishes, etc)?
I also want to touch on the kinds of paints used for interiors but know practically nothing about them. Would Milk Paint have been widely used?
BTW, this is for a historic district in Oregon. So that’s why it doesn’t cover anything prior to the 1870s.
Thanks in advance!
Replies
This isn't a lot of info, but maybe someone else can add to it -
Shellac was a very common (maybe even exclusive) finish on fine furniture until about the 1920s- 1930s, when laquer came into vogue. I've been asked to repair a number of Victorian antiques. Every one to date was originally finished with shellac.
House paint up until the 1970's - 1980's was almost exclusively linseed-oil based, and all colors generally contained white lead, sometimes with zinc oxide mixed in. The tinting colors, of course, varied in chemical composition - some of which were (by today's standards) shockingly toxic. After the 1970's, white lead was phased out in favor of titanium dioxide.
Can't really help with how often milk paint was used. It's been around a long time, but from what I've read in books and academic papers, most of the paints since the early 1800's were primarily oil based.
Thanks! That's essentially what I suspected but was leary of going out on a limb and asserting it in a newsletter.
So... do you figure that Copal, Amber and other resin/oil varnishes were seldom used on interior furnishings? Or perhaps they were more favored for interior fixtures than for furniture?
Those types of formulations were in widespread use in the 18th century as customers demanded more durable ans shinier surfaces than the old standby of linseed oil and beeswax would provide. Jeffrey Greene's got quite a bit of this information in his book "American Furniture of the 18th Century".
The summary is that because it's necessary to boil linseed oil and liquify the copal and amber resins at high heat to get them into solution, the resulting finish on the object deteriorated quickly. That may well be why "spirit varnishes" in the form of shellac/sandarac mixtures came into vogue in the early 18th century as the application method of "French Polishing" became widely known.
My impressions of historic houses in the late 18th and early 19th century from walking through restorations in musuems is that almost all of the interior wood work was painted, and no finish was applied to the floors. People with less money but still more than average had wallpaper in some rooms - some of which was apinted to resemble wooden paneling. Lathe and Plaster, was, of course, the utilitarian wall covering in a less-well-to-do house in a major city.
Outside the major cities, of course, rude log cabins were more the rule.
My bet is that shellac came to dominate finishes as the 19th century progressed, probably on a price basis. But, I certainly can't make any quantitative statements about the percentages of particular resins. Amber is gnerally incorporated into oil varnishes, which would be much superior to the "common brown varnish' based largely on rosin, but also more expensive. It would require major scientific efforts to break out the other spirit resins--sandarac, some copals, benzoin, etc. from shellac since all would redissolve in alcohol. (Though the benzoin might announce itself by its aroma after a century.)
I believe there is a literature among convervationists about the determination of historic colors. A lot of the rather staid colors that have appeared on color charts have come from matching colors with those of paints found in under layers of historic buildings. But the more modern approach is to take materials of the underlayers and determine the chemical content, and from that reconstruct what the paint would have looked like when new. Apparently some pretty shocking colors were used. Colonial Williamsburg has been revising colors in that way, and some of the same work has been done in continuing maintenance and restoration of Mt. Vernon. One intresting example is the dark, dark green so often found on windsor chairs. Originally it was an oil paint with pigment that generated colors about the shade of spring grass--only darkening over time.
I do have a question about the time period. The peak movements along the Oregon Trail were in the 1840's and 50s, into the 60s. Was the architecture before the 1870's virtually all "pioneer dwellings" rather than carpenter constructed houses?
I do have a question about the time period. The peak movements along the Oregon Trail were in the 1840's and 50s, into the 60s. Was the architecture before the 1870's virtually all "pioneer dwellings" rather than carpenter constructed houses?
Good question. The answer is yes and no. Some were temporary pioneer dwellings. But mostly the houses and dwellings from the pre-statehood period (1859) simply haven't survived. Many didn't survive the pioneer period because they were replaced with finer, larger homes built in organized plots as towns grew and became organized.
Forest Grove where I live was incorporated in 1872 and while a few older houses do still exist - the A.T. Smith house was built in 1854 - the large majority of historic houses here date to the incorporation and later. A.T. Smith, for example, built and lived in two log cabins between 1841 and when he built the house in 1852. Interestingly enough, Smith was a trained carpenter.
You can check out a PDF file that has everything on the A.T. Smith house - history and all the wonky details of construction here: http://www.historicforestgrove.com/pdfs/ATSmithHSR.pdf
The history begins on page 5 of the .pdf file and given that the surrounding area was one of the first settlements in the entire Oregon Territory, it's about as good of a look into those early years as can be found.
<<The peak movements along the Oregon Trail were in the 1840's and 50s, into the 60s. Was the architecture before the 1870's virtually all "pioneer dwellings" rather than carpenter constructed houses? >>I contributed to a book in the early 1970s on historic architecture in the west which changed my perception of "How the west was won". The odds are better than even that most were carpenter built from the mid 50's on. Only the poorest of the settlers stayed in rude housing (cabins, sod and shed/barn) after the first winter of settlement. House construction (basements, multiple story, dormers etc) would start the first full spring after arrival. Among others, Saltbox with basement was common. In the cities, stick built houses, churches and jails and street site layouts were almost mandatory as for most communities, the desire being to maintain and promote symbols of the familiar or traditions of eastern cities and towns gave the settlers a sense of comfort and continuity. By the 60s Mansard roofs and cut stone block buildings were common. Building against perceived hostiles not withstanding (very little after the Nez Perce and far west indian wars ending in the late 50s). There are many examples of multiple storied houses, even some with multiple gingerbread facades, ala Martha's Vineyard - all built in the 50s and 60s. Farms - different story - also relatively few of the O-trail migration actually ended up settling on farms. Painting was common and manufactured locally from traditional recipes brought from the east. Linseed,lead,pigment.BB
Kevin,
I don't have much to add but I know many of the towns out here have historic commissions that require compliance when painting. I'm sure they could put you in touch with experts in the area to answer your questions. http://www.hingham-ma.com/about_history.html
I noticed that these commissions are hooked in the Nat'l Parks Department.
Our historic district doesn't require compliance. But from what I've seen - mostly on This Old House and Googling - compliance usually revolves around getting the color choices historically accurate rather than getting the paint materials historically accurate. Which proved to be a problem when I tried Googling "historic paint." Scads of hits on historic colors but precious little on the types of paints used.
Interestingly enough, the British appear to be all over this sort of thing. In fact, one company actually makes historic paints (lead included) which you can apparently get an official waiver allowing you to use it on a historic building. But I'm skeptical how much of the Brit stuff is relevant to this side of the pond.
could you post that article here when you finish it, I would be interested in reading it.
Thanks
Um... sure. Although, the fact that I'm asking questions here ought to indicate the level of scholarship that goes into it. Peter Gedrys is vastly more qualified to write it than I am...
Here it is in rough draft form. I'm expecting it to be cleaned up a bit by the guy who does the newsletter:
When most of us think about the paints and varnishes in and on historic buildings we think in terms of colors. Different periods and styles have their own "appropriate" color schemes and that's about as far as we usually go. To the extent that we think about materials it's most often about the lead content and how to cope with the known health hazards associated with it. But there is some fascinating history surrounding the types of paints and varnishes used when these great old buildings and homes were constructed.
Varnishes have been around since at least the ancient Egyptians. And today, as it was back then, varnish forms the core ingredient of many paints too. Add some sort of coloring agent - usually a minerals such as the lead oxide or black soot more commonly known as "lamp black" - and the transparent varnish becomes an opaque paint.
All of the historic varnishes are based on some sort of natural resin. That remains largely the case today, although the wonders of modern chemistry have produced synthetic resins that are far superior to natural resins in many respects. An alcoholic spirit was used to dissolve the earliest and most widely used resins into an easily usable form. When the spirits dried what was left was a solid protective or decorative film. Mastic, sandarac and shellac - which is still widely used today, albeit more by hobbyist woodworkers and craftsmen - all readily dissolve in alcohol into a usable varnish which could then be brushed onto whatever surface one wanted to beautify or protect. However, shellac wasn't widely used until the early 19th century. With the notable exception of shellac, spirit varnishes fell out of favor and were replaced with oil varnishes. Shellac is also a notable exception in that it is derived from the excretions of an asian beetle which feeds on the sap of a specific type of tree rather than directly derived from the sap resins as is the case with the other spirit varnishes.
In the Middle Ages, a German monk, Theophilus Presbyter, found he could dissolve amber (a fossil resin) in heated linseed oil. The result was a drying-oil varnish that produced a tough resilient finish that was deemed superior to spirit-based varnishes in several key ways, most notably in toughness and moisture resistance. Later it was discovered that less ancient resin deposits known as copal could also be processed in similar fashion into a similar but somewhat inferior (and less expensive) varnish.
Even today amber and the less ancient copal, are used to make varnish. The plentiful amber deposits of the Baltics and Eastern Russia are a primary source of amber varnish. Only about 10 percent of the mined amber there is suitable for jewelery and the rest is turned into varnish using essentially the same technology that Theophilus Presbyter discovered.
A word of caution to those who fancy amber jewelry is in order here. Copal is commonly passed off as amber to unsuspecting victims. If your tastes run that way, be careful and ask lots of questions before buying "amber" as it may not be what you think it is. Given sufficient time copal will eventually turn into amber. But it won't be in your lifetime or even your grandchildren's lifetime!
Linseed oil is used by itself as a sort of varnish, as is tung oil and some other similar vegetable oils. But they offer almost no durability and are most commonly used today underneath some sort of more durable varnish or lacquer. And even there the commercial market mixes them with alkyd or something similar to speed up drying times and dry film properties.
Water-based paints were also widely used. But they were used more as a means to add color than as a protective coating. Distemper and other whitewashes were and still are used for decorations and to color plaster
So-called Milk Paint was a blend of lime, pigment and milk and was used for exterior applications. It has staged something of a revival over the last few years and can easily be purchased online. Indeed many of the historic varnishes and paints appear to be increasingly popular with hobbyists, craftsmen and artists and can be found for sale online.
As the industrialization of the American economy progressed it produced a seemingly insignificant product which vastly altered the paint and varnish choices of Americans - the paint can in the 1860s. The paint can allowed paints and varnishes to be mass produced in factories and it quickly became easier and cheaper to purchase canned paint or varnish at a store than to make it locally. Both oil-based and water-based paints were mass produced and by 1875 factory-made paint became the norm. Along with factory-made paints came factory ground pigments which were finer and made for a better looking paint job. Ingredients and recipes for making paints and varnishes were also standardized, producing a more consistent product at cheaper prices. And that democratized interior decorating as more and more of the less affluent could afford to have their own homes decorated not just with mere paint and varnish but also with faux painting such as the simulated oak treatment given to the pine floors of the A. T. Smith house here in Forest Grove. The attraction of such treatments were obvious. Far cheaper to paint a cheaper wood to look like a more expensive wood than to buy the expensive wood in the first place.
A couple of points:Shellac is a secretion, not an excretion. Excretions are what come out of the anus.Also, the bug is not a beetle, but a scale insect.
Edited 9/28/2008 10:07 pm ET by Disputantum
Thanks. I read that lac bug is a beetle and that's why I described it that way. Originally I just referred to it as a bug, which in hindsight is probably what I should have stuck with. It's doubtful that any of the homeowners who read it will know the difference but on the whole it's better to be accurate.
There's also distemper and other forms of whitewash. Distemper is usually thought of as a paint for artwork, but it was used for interior and exterior house painting too. Distemper is a paint that contains glue, usually animal hide. In old novels, one sometimes comes across the description "distempered walls" which sounds rather like the walls have a veterinary disease. I can't provide any more info than that.
Edited 9/27/2008 2:22 am ET by Disputantum
Aha! I do believe I've found the mother-lode:
http://www.nps.gov/history/hps/tps/briefs/brief28.htm
This forum post is now archived. Commenting has been disabled