THE INDUSTRY OF ALL NATIONS.

ORNAMENTAL FURNITURE.

URNITURE is made to be used; or, perhaps it were better to say that itshould be made for use. A couch upon which you cannot lie, a table fromwhich you cannot eat, a chair upon which you cannot sit, might better not bemade at all. No matter what their richness of material, their beauty of form, orexquisiteness of workmanship, such articles cumber instead of furnishing theplace in which they are. The most comfortable chair or bed is the best; and sothe most convenient table, or wardrobe, or writing desk is the best, and, in thehighest sense, the most beautiful; for it will have a beauty of fitness, the lack ofwhich is utterly fatal to the enjoyment of any other beauty. Let the form of acouch be essentially inconsistent with the idea of repose, and if it were coveredwith carving by Buhl or Grinlin Gibbons, it would, as a couoh , not be beautiful;because the mind of the thoughtful observer, he who can justly appreciate beauty,would be filled with dissatisfaction and annoyance at the incongruity of the de-sign of the object with the purpose for which it was intended; to say nothing ofhis ever present consciousness of the individual discomfort which would certainlyensue if he were himself compelled to prove, in his own proper person, the fitness ofthe thing. Usefulness, therefore, fitness, or, in other words, the combination ofconvenience, ease, and propriety, is the first and highest qualification of furniture,as well as of every other object, the chief function of which is not to give pleasureto the mind through the eye. Beauty of form is of secondary importance; but sofar is it from being inconsistent with the first, that it will invariably be found thatthose designs which are most beautiful in furniture, are those which are bestadapted to the uses to which the various articles included in that term are to beput. Elaborate workmanship and sumptuous materials are severally of thirdand fourth rate consequence. The former, indeed, may degrade a beautiful de-sign by belittling it with painfully wrought trivialities; and the latter, by itsunsuitableness, may fail to awaken that feeling of content and freedom from carewhich is the first office of every article of household use. Added to theserequirements, there is a certain harmony of place, if we may so call it, which hasmuch to do with the power of furniture to awaken ideas of comfort and pleasure.An intrinsically beautiful article may be a pleasant object in one place, and in an-other, unpleasant and ridiculous. A chair, for instance, which, standing in West-minster Abbey for the use of the Archbishop of Canterbury, would be impos-ing, and from its harmony with the place, would awaken a feeling of admirationtinged with solemnity, if transferred to the boudoir of his Grace’s daughter, wouldexcite only our ridicule, mingled perhaps with a little of the terror which would befelt in a nursery upon the entrance of a very magnificent giant. So a buffet, wellsuited to the hall of a Norman Castle, or English Manor-house, would only over-whelm and crush all its surroundings if transferred to a 1 third room ’ on the FifthAvenue. These, then, in their order of importance, are the considerations whichshould influence the selection of furniture, and which will guide us in a brief exam-ination of such ancient and modern examples as will afford a comprehensive viewof the subject from the earliest ages to the present day:—fitness of form, beautyof outline, design and finish of ornament, richness of material, and, as kindredwith the first, and of equal importance with beauty of outline, though not havingto do with intrinsic fitness or beauty,—adaptation to place.

It would be a difficult, and by no means a profitable task to inquire when fur-niture first was used. Chairs probably came into vogue about the time whenpeople first began to sit down. Indeed, it is safe to assume that Adam chose carefullytwo of the softest stones in Paradise for the use of himself and Eve, and that inthem we are to acknowledge the primitive type of the chair. We name the chairfirst, because its accommodation is that which nature first demands; and, indeed,according to the Monboddian theory, this article of furniture has greatly modifiedthe external appearance and even the destinies of mankind. For if man be onlya monkey whose tail has been worn off by constant sitting, the chair may cer-tainly be regarded as the proximate cause of the existence of the human species—as such. Tables, without a doubt, soon followed chairs as a support for food.Milton is the source of much of the orthodox theology of the day: why may henot be admitted as authority upon all the subjects of which he sang ? He assuresus that both tables and chairs formed a part of Eve’s establishment in Eden.When she entertained Raphael in her “ sylvan lodge with flowerets deck’d andfragrant smells,” Milton, with praiseworthy particularity, tells us,

“ Raised of grassie terf,

Thir Table was, and mossie seats had round.”

The form, it seems, was quadrilateral; for the poet continues:

“ And on her ample Square from side to sideAll Autumn pil’d; though Spring and Autumn hereDanc’d hand in hand.”

A square is not the best shape for a table, neither is grassy turf a suitable ma-terial for the support of hot soup or beefsteak fresh from the coals. Of this un-fitness of Eve’s furniture for modern uses, Milton seems to have been fully con-scious ; for, with his usual keen eye to creature comforts, he adds,

“ A while discourse they hold;

No fear lest Dinner coole; when thus began

Our Authour. Heav’nly stranger, please to taste,” &c.

182

The forms of household furniture have not changed so much as most persons,perhaps, suppose; in fact, in their principal outlines and essential parts, articles ofdaily household use could not, and need not vary in different ages of the world.Whether men live in tents or houses, in castles or cottages, whether they be peace-ful or warlike, savage or civilised, their chairs, tables, beds, and such like articles,if they have them at all, will be alike in all essential points. The laws of mechan-ics, the structure of the body, and the ingenuity of the species ensure this. Wedo not know what were the forms of the bed, the table, the stool and the candle-stick, which the good Shunamite woman placed in the little chamber which shepersuaded her husband to build on the wall for Elisha; but we do know that theearliest chairs with the designs of which ancient monuments have made us ac-quainted, had a seat, a back, and four legs; and ours have neither more nor less.The tables of the same period had tops and legs; the former of various shapes,the latter of various number and position, just as is the case with tables of to-day;and so with beds, couches, and other articles. The difference between the furni-ture of one age and country, and that of another, is merely a difference in com-fort and style of ornament.

We go to the Egyptians for the origin of every art and science, and are rarelydisappointed; and from the dearth of works upon furniture, being driven to originalinvestigation upon this subject, we find that at an early day in their history, theirartisans had arrived at a high pitch of excellence in the manufacture of orna-mental furniture. Their merit is not comparative, but positive; and there wasfor thousands of years very little real improvement upon their models and work-manship, and as might be expected, no more lavish expenditure for costly ma-terials than was common among the upper classes of that strange people.. Cham-pollion Figeac, in his work on Ancient Egypt, furnishes us with some direct infor-mation with regard to Egyptian furniture; and from the illustrations which ac-company it, in which kings and nobles frequently appear in various public and do-mestic acts and ceremonies, and which are taken from the ancient monumentsof the Egyptians themselves, we are able to learn much more that is interestingand instructive upon the subject.

The furniture of the Egyptians exhibits a higher appreciation of the beautifulthan we find in any of their works of pure art. The sombre, formal, ponderoustaste of the people appears, it is true, even in their tables, chairs, and bed-steads ; but it is more modified by graceful motives than it seems to have beenin any other of their articles of luxury. It is true, they had not the English no-tion of comfort, and had not quite attained to tete-d-tetes or reclining chairs; butthey studied a sort of rectangular ease, and added to their richness of materialand elaborate workmanship, a solemn elegance which was at least a substitute forgrace. The forms which they affected were grotesque enough. Their coucheswere frequently in the shape of a sphinx, a lion, a jackal, or a bull,—standing, ofcourse, on all fours. The upward curve of the head of the animal served for thesupport of the pillow, and a mattress was laid upon the back. The imitation ofthe beast was carried so far in these singular pieces of furniture, that, in additionto color, gold and enamel were freely used in their adornment. The same laborand rich materials were expended upon their bedsteads, footstools, divans, cano-pied seats, armories, buffets, chests and coffers; for all these articles were includedamong their household furniture. Their arm-chairs were supported by legs in theshape of those of beasts, the fore legs and hind legs of the chair corresponding inshape and position to the corresponding members of the animal; which hasthe effect of making the piece seem as if it were about to walk off by itself. Thebacks were quite straight upon the outside, and very little inclined upon the inside:at the top they turned outward in a scroll. They were richly adorned with seulp-res of religious or historical subjects; and the seats were generally supported, inappearance, on the heads of figures of the shepherd kings, which were placed inthis position as a symbol of the servitude of the race; and which, in all the speci-mens which we have examined, are bound by the wrists and tied together by theneck. The chairs were upholstered with the richest stuffs. Some of their chairsand stools were constructed in the curule form; that is, with the legs crossing eachother, and confined in the middle by a pivot upon which they revolved, enablingthe chair to be folded up. These legs were sometimes in the form of swan’s necks,which were placed with their heads down. Cedar was the favorite wood with theEgyptians for cabinet purposes; it was generally inlaid with ivory and ebony.The seats of even the finest chairs were sometimes made of rushes; but theluxurious covered them with cushions, or soft, rich stuffs. Egyptian bedsteadswere not always in the menagerie style; and when they were not, their form isthat of an elegant modern couch, without a footboard. The legs, however, havealways the shape and position of the fore and hind legs of beasts; and as the footof the bed is supported by the fore legs of the animal, we know that three thou-sand years ago it was the custom to place the head of the bed against the wall,just as it is now. The preposterous fashion of high bedsteads, those huge plat-forms upon which it is necessary to clamber at pef il of one’s neck, and whichwent out about five and twenty years ago, existed among the Egyptians; for we findamong the pictures which the care of Champollion has preserved, representationsof bedsteads which are ascended by four steps; about the number up which ourfathers and mothers toiled to their repose—repose which they must surely have