Edwardian vs Victorian

[RHorn]

I'm confused. I thought the house I bought last year was Edwardian as suggested in the survey and estate agent literature. But my terraced neighbour has just put their 'late Victorian' property on the market.

Can someone shine a light please! Thank you

 

[Nemesis]

Well - a date would help!

 

[biffvernon]

Perhaps it was built in 1901.

 

[NT]

Perhaps its late Victorian in the sense of 'the late Queen Victoria.' Slightly more seriously, people often dont know when their house was built.

NT

 

[sarahj]

I have the same problem - mine was built in 1837 - not yet victorian, but not quite within the georgian bracket either - so what is it?

 

[thiambal]

I have the same problem - mine was built in 1837 - not yet victorian, but not quite within the georgian bracket either - so what is it?

Unless my history teacher credentials fail me QV came to the throne in June 1837. So depending on when the property was started and completed it is either one, the other or both,

I always take the 'Victorian' 'Edwardian' description to be indicative of a style rather than an exact date. No doubt houses built in 1839 were still in a style common during the reign of George IV, likewise my 1903 property is common in every detail to the other houses on the street built from 1899 onwards.

The only example I can think of where a change of monarch exactly marks a change in architecture is with our own dear Queen Elizabeth - when in 1952 they started building sh*ite out of concrete on a massive scale.

 

[RHorn]

Nemesis - I think you need more than a date!

Everyone else, thanks for the info. Definitely a nice shade of grey then! Agree with the comment about our current Queen. I defnitely won't be putting in a concrete fire place and if I go with early 19th C, that should be about right

 

[Nemesis]

No, a date would have been useful, for various reasons.

http://www.victorian-society.org.uk

and if you think it's early 19th c quote

Nemesis - I think you need more than a date!

Everyone else, thanks for the info. Definitely a nice shade of grey then! Agree with the comment about our current Queen. I defnitely won't be putting in a concrete fire place and if I go with early 19th C, that should be about right



you have certainly a Georgian house

http://www.georgiangroup.org.uk !!!


A house built before the demise of good Queen Vic cannot be described as Edwardian. It may be described by an architectural school or style though.

 

[biffvernon]

Agree with the comment about our current Queen.

It's not her direct responsibility but I wonder what name will be given to the Poundbury style of architecture?[/url]

 

[Nemesis]

Pastichean?

 

[Gareth Hughes]

Agree with the comment about our current Queen.

It's not her direct responsibility but I wonder what name will be given to the Poundbury style of architecture?[/url]

Future Carolean / Charles III

 

[Nemesis]

Ah but within that period too I am sure we will have all manner of subsets...

'Vernacular' revival?

 

[EmmaT]

Future Carolean / Charles III

To complicate matters futher I've heard a rumour that he's not planning on being King Charles (what with the unfortunate end of one of the previous holders of that title) and may be using one of his middle names - so Arthurian or Georgian #2? That'll be confusing...

 

[thiambal]

Ah, my history teacher credentials coming back into play - I think Charles would be inadvisable - you can imagine pictures of him being beheaded everytime he made a cock-up.

King Arthur is not much better though is it!

My money is on George VII - but he is also called Phillip and he does not have to choose one of his given names so perhaps Louis after Mountbatten.

The most interesting thing about Charles I is that he was 5 foot 6 inches tall at the beginning of his reign but only 4 foot 8 inches tall at the end!

 

[Gareth Hughes]

The most interesting thing about Charles I is that he was 5 foot 6 inches tall at the beginning of his reign but only 4 foot 8 inches tall at the end!

Because of....

(cue Chopin)

apologies to the large number of you who may be puzzled by this :lol:

 

[Nemesis]

Oh groan. Chopin indeed.

Have you no mills to save Hughes?
(Scaffolding up at Warwick Bridge...)

 

[Pford75]

I heard from an estate agent friend that agents are often encouraged by unscrupulous vendors (not that they need much encouragement) to list properties as Queen Anne or Georgian, when strictly they are not. There is certainly a belief (whether true or not) that these properties have a cachet and consequently acheive higher prices (although one wonders why buyers don't check when the property was built)

 

[Gareth Hughes]

Oh groan. Chopin indeed.

Have you no mills to save Hughes?
(Scaffolding up at Warwick Bridge...)

Did that yesterday, (SPAB Committee, dealing with, among other things, this:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/coventry_warwickshire/5333686.stm ), today I'm in need of a large gin and running about like a blue-4rsed fly trying to sort out an awards presentation tonight in the absence of anyone who has a clue about it!

 

[Nemesis]

Does the not having a clue include you?

Well I'll have a glass of my own damson gin on your behalf - best I can do.

Nasty about that accident - oh dear. The video is depressing - lucky no-one was really badly injured.

Muncaster Mill now closed to the public which is sad. Eskdale closed up Sat pm - no idea why and still looks a bit frayed around the edges. Hope the Trust which now owns it will get round to some more sorting.

Nice two seater privy outside I discovered though...

It's updating the BaRR time, so any candidates you think let me know!

 

[Nemesis]

'I heard from an estate agent friend that agents are often encouraged by unscrupulous vendors (not that they need much encouragement) to list properties as Queen Anne or Georgian, when strictly they are not'


I suspect a sense of history is beyond many buyers - look at all those 'Georgian' uPVC windows!