ACP 1552 4

Historical Background: Dummy Boards4— Dummy Boards have a long and continually evolving social history, but little is truly understood about their original purpose and manufacture.5 Current thinking links their origin to Dutch cultures in the early 17th century (Graham 1988, 3). Essentially a dummy board was an extension of the Dutch tradition of oogenbedrieger or trompe l’oeil realistic rendering (Janson 2014).6 One of the earliest documented makers of dummy boards was the Dutch artist, Cornelis Bisschop (1630-1674). (Graham 1988, 3). It is interesting that a significant number of makers of dummy boards are known and have signed their work. Their claim to ownership of the design elements pushes these dummy boards more towards the category of fine art. Bisschop’s most known dummy board depicts a child asleep in a high chair (see below).

4 The term “dummy board” was likely applied to these objects in the 19th century as a reference to the unexpected muteness of such a lifelike figure (Edwards 2003, 74). Other terms include silent companions, room companions, picture board dummies, door porters, and fireside figures (Hinchman 2013, 70, 81, 146; Macquoid and Edwards 1924, 233; Scott and Scott 1966, 9). Simply “trompe l’oeil painted figures” or “painted room companions” may have been used historically to reference these objects. “Dummy board” will be used throughout this report regardless of relative dates. 5 Dr. Joyce Hill Stoner presented a pair of Dummy Boards as a case for acquisition to the Metropolitan Museum of Art in 1970. See this pair on the Metropolitan website: http://www.metmuseum.org/Collections/search-the-collections/205194?rpp=20&pg=1&ao=on&ft=dummy+board+figures&pos=1 The sources that Dr. Stoner compiled for her research in 1970 have not been supplemented with newer scholarly sources. The only significant addition to the discourse on dummy boards is Clare Graham’s Dummy Boards and Chimney Boards (1988). One goal of this project is to contribute to the discourse through a material understanding of the construction and production of these figures. It is important to note, however, that this particular work may not be representative of dummy boards as commercially produced objects because it may have been created for the specific event of the Meschianza. 6 Theories on the practical application of these objects have ranged from theft deterrents to fireboards and imaginary friends (Edwards 2003, 74; Landis 1987). It seems most likely that these figures were originally created for decorative/entertainment purposes. However, many were repurposed as chimney boards in the 19th century (Scott and Scott 1966, 11).

ACP 1552 5

Cornelius Norbertus Gijsbrechts, Cut-Out Trompe l’oeil Easel with Fruit Piece, 1670-1672, oil on panel, 226cm X 123cm X 8.5cm, National Gallery of Denmark

Cornelius Norbertus Gijsbrechts, Trompe l’oeil with Studio Wall and Vanitas Still Life, 1688, oil on canvas, 166.8cm X 134cm X 8cm, National Gallery of Denmark

Christoffel Pierson, Niche with Falconry Gear, c. 1660, pil on canvas, 80.5cm X 64.5cm, National Gallery of Art, DC

Cornelis Bisschop, Dummy board depicting a boy asleep in a chair, mid 17th century, oil on panel, 97.2cm X 66.5cm, Private Collection

On the other hand, many dummy boards, such as ACP 1552, remain unsigned. One theory explaining the mass production of these figures, particularly in the mid-18th century, is that commercial sign painters switched to making dummy boards when signs

ACP 1552 6

were banned from specific districts in England in 1762 and 1763 (Graham 1988, 8; Scott and Scott 1966, 12). The construction and decoration of dummy boards is similar to that of wooden signs for shops and taverns and commercial sign painters may have already had a streamlined manufacturing process, allowing for a rapid explosion of dummy boards on the market.

Anonymous, Tavern or inn sign, 1815, painted and gilded wood, 84.8cm X 100.5cm, Winterthur Museum and Garden

Eliphalet Chapin (woodworker), Bissell’s Inn post-and-rail sign, c. 1777, painted wood, 142.2cm X 92.7cm, Connecticut Historical Society

Anonymous, Pig Feeding from a Bowl, 1750-1800, oil on wood, 25.5cm X 46cm X 16cm, Victoria and Albert Museum

Dummy board painters were likely drawing from the genre subjects of easel paintings, especially those in the Dutch Baroque style. For example, Bisschop, Pieter de Hooch, Nicolaes Maes, and Gabriel Metsu all painted women peeling apples (see images below), a very common scene on dummy boards. Another popular dummy board category is soldiers. The Dutch genre painters were also found of depicting raucous scenes of soldiers entertaining themselves off duty or interacting with females. As this art form of painted figures spread to other countries, it is logical that the regional culture would have influenced the design. The grenadier types appear to be mostly British and Scottish, but these officers would have been quite visible (and a believable presence in a home) to colonists in the second half of the 18th century as England entered war with the American colonies.

ACP 1552 7

Cornelis Bisschop, Girl Peeling an Apple, 1667, oil on panel, 70cm X 57cm, Riksmuseum

Gabriel Metsu, The Apple Peeler, 1655-1657, oil on panel, 28cm X 26cm, Musee du Louvre

Nicolaes Maes, Young Woman Peeling Apples, 1655, oil on wood, 55cm X 46cm, The Metropolitan Museum of Art

Anonymous, “Old Maid” (Seated Woman Peeling Fruit), c. 1730-1750, oil on wood, 118.2cm X 69.6cm X 2.4cm, Winterthur Museum and Gardens

Anonymous, Young Woman Peeling Apples, c. 1690, oil on wood, 14.5cm X 70cmX 1.5cm, Victoria and Albert Museum

Dutch School, A Dummy Board Figure of a Servant Woman Peeling an Apple, c. 1650-1675, oil on wood, 118.7cm X 76.8cm, Dyrham, Gloucestershire National Trust Property

ACP 1552 8

Pieter de Hooch, Two Soldiers and a Serving Woman with a Trumpeter, 1654-1655, oil on panel, 76cm X 66cm, Kunsthaus Zurich

Johannes Vermeer, Officer and Laughing Girl, 1655-1660, oil on canvas, 50.5cm X 46cm, The Frick Collection

By the mid-1700s, dummy boards are documented in England, France, and the American colonies (Graham 1988, 3), and dummy boards reach their height of popularity in terms of material consumption. A multitude of primary accounts about the use of these figures date to the 18th-century. Discussions relate to playing tricks on guests more so than passively decorating a room (Graham 1988, 3, 6; Edwards 2003).7 Pictorial jokes continue to be popular in the 18th century in other formats. Charles Willson Peale created his Staircase Group in 1795 and installed it over an existing stairwell entrance in what is now Independence Hall. Peale’s brushwork and draughtsmanship is well-trained, but his trick also relied on the positioning of the painting in a location where visitors would expect there to be a staircase and people ascending. Likewise, the trompe l’oeil and illusionism of dummy boards relies heavily on the construction of the primary support, the life-size scale of the figure, and placement in a natural room setting.

7 While primary support, design materials, size, and location of display of dummy boards may be more closely related to painted furniture than easel paintings, the subject matter is unrelated to 18th-century painted furniture. Painted designs on furniture included mostly floral motifs and the occasional depiction of people was highly stylized (Ritz 1970). Dummy boards’ relationship to furniture is most relevant when discussing surface coatings and historical care of these objects (see Condition).

ACP 1552 9

Charles Wilson Peale, Staircase Group, 1795, oil on canvas, 227.3cm X100cm, The Philadelphia Museum of Art Dummy boards can be categorized into four main types of subjects: soldiers, servants/ common workers, children, and animals. Soldiers, especially grenadiers, and female servants are most common among surviving examples. While new research into dummy boards is lacking, these figures themselves have served as primary sources for new scholarship on costumes, especially military uniforms (Cormack 2008).8

8 This type of research should be used cautiously because it is difficult to tell if a dummy board was made in the 18th or 19th century without material analysis and the evaluation of the costume could be a Victorian interpretation of colonial era dress.

ACP 1552 10

Unknown, Dummy board figure of grenadier of Royal Scots Regiment (later 21st Regiment of Foot), c. 1738, oil on panel, National Army Museum, London

Attributed to Major John André, British Grenadier, c. 1778, oil on wood panel, 86 ¼” X 27 ½,” Historical Society of Pennsylvania

ACP 1552 most closely falls into the military category because it seems to depict a Turkish Knight based on the type of costume (such as the crossed “bandolier” belt) and the weapon held by the figure. However, no other examples of Turkish-inspired dummy boards have been found. The iconography of ACP 1552 specially relates to the theatrics of the Meschianza (see below), but it is not implausible that it speaks to the Orientalist influence in 19th-century painting. 18th-century fashions were greatly influenced by the Orient, in particular Turkey. The “robe a la turque” was one example of Turkish influence and gauze turbans were worn by both men and women (Werlin 2014).

ACP 1552 11

ACP 1552’s costume is fairly generic and probably represents a Western interpretation of the Orient founded more in myth than primary accounts. Nonetheless, the turban is unique. A similar style with three main gatherings of cloth and added beads and feathers is depicted in an ink wash from 1752-1773 attributed to French artist Nicholas Bocquet (copying an etching by Joseph Marie Vien from 1748). The British Museum catalog describes this style of dress as “Turkish theatrical costume,” and the original subject of the etching was a masquerade (Trustees of the British Museum). This description suggests that this costume was worn to play a Turk and not that a Turkish man wears this to attend the theater.

Attributed to Nicholas Bocquet, c. 1752-1773, pen and ink wash, 22.3cm X 19.6cm, The British Museum

ACP 1552 Overall, Before Treatment

Turkish fashion and uniforms also varied throughout the 18th century ,and ACP 1552 could represent a composite of different styles.

ACP 1552 12

A Tartar of the Ottoman Empire 1800 Drawing By Octavian Dalvimart for The Costume of Turkey (1802)

Janissary Laddle-Bearer in Ottoman Empire Military 1800 Drawing By Octavian Dalvimart for The Costume of Turkey (1802)

Henri II Bonnart, Turc d’Alger, soldat, 1678-1711, etching and engraving on paper, 27.1cm X 19.1cm, The British Museum

Nicolas Bonnart II, Celebi Mehemet Effendi, 1722-1725, etching and engraving on paper, 27.2 cm X 19.3cm, The British Museum

There appears to be a standard method of construction for historical dummy boards, and they may have even been mass-produced, reusing the same outline (see the Apple Peelers above). Nonetheless, no historical treatise has been identified to date.

ACP 1552 13

Some dummy boards are constructed from a single wooden board, but most are joined together from multiple pieces using tongue and groove joints (Graham 1988, 7). The x-radiographs of ACP 1552 do not reveal any doweling or joinery and this dummy board may have been constructed with adhesive alone. The primary support was typically reinforced with wooden battens across the joins (Graham 1988, 7). At least 0.5in thickness is necessary in order for there to be enough wood for the craftsman to cut and bevel the outline (Graham 1988, 7). All dummy boards found to date have this bevel towards the back so that the edge appears softer and a shadow is cast in such a way that the figure appears to have more volume (and could be a real person). The preparation and construction of the primary support seems to follow the pre-existing traditions of panel painting. A radial cut was and is usually selected for more dimensional stability (which was realized even by the creators of Fayum portraits) (Wadum and Streeton 2012, 67). The grain is typically oriented along the length of the figure. The battens are not unlike butterfly keys used to reinforce panel paintings, and indeed battens were nailed to versos of oversized panels, such as altarpieces (Dunkerton 1991, 152; Wadum and Streeton 2012, 71, 92). Joints for panel paintings were often doweled and sometimes reinforced with casein glue (Wadum and Streeton 2012, 92-94). Panel paintings were sanded and scraped to remove imperfections (Wadum and Streeton 2012, 70, 91-92), but ACP 1552 was left rough and no knots were removed. The versos of dummy boards were often painted black or covered in paper or fabric (Graham 1988, 7-8), possibly to disguise imperfections. ACP 1552 has remnants of brown paper on the verso, which could be artifacts of this process. Early panel paintings had canvas laid down first, which evolved to covering over joins with canvas scraps (Wadum and Streeton 2012, 75). There are also some fibers wedged between one of the joins in ACP 1552, which could have played a structural role at one point. It is not documented to date whether there was a standard preparatory layer, such as gesso, applied to dummy boards, but ACP 1552 does not appear to have a gesso (see Condition and Analysis). Another potential influence on dummy board design is theatrical painting. Sets for the theater are designed to be illusionistic and represent a three-dimensional space on a flat surface. Unfortunately, early theatrical treatises such as Serlio, Sabbattini, and Furttenbach (Serlio et al. 1958) focus more on principles of perspective and do not mention the device of beveled edges specifically. Serlio does discuss employing relief in wooden architectural features to enhance illusion of three-dimensionality on a flat frame (Serlio et al. 1958, 29). Their only mention of painting techniques is that the painter “paint [the scenery] as carefully as he can” with some references to color choice and placement of highlights to enhance atmospheric perspective and improve the illusion of a natural light source (Serlio et al. 1958, 59, 84).9 Sabbattini recommends adding size in addition to water (assuming they are using a casein type paint) to prevent flaking (Serlio et al. 1958, 84).

9 These treatises do discuss how to place highlights to indicate a specific light source and the contribution of saturation to atmospheric perspective, both of which may become more noticeable on the Turk after reduction of the discolored coating.

ACP 1552 14

A painted panel of Saint Francis of Assisi (fragment from Crucifixion Group from 1427) at the Philadelphia Museum of Art was initially intended for theatrical use. It is essentially a wooden cutout figure, but it is lacking the beveled edge construction of a dummy board. This type of object could still have served as an inspiration, and life-size cutouts of people continue to be used in modern theatrical performances.

Fra Angelico, Saint Francis of Assisi, c. 1427, tempera and tooled gold on panel, The Philadelphia Museum of Art

View of unbeveled edge

Artistic Attribution— Currently, ACP 1552 is attributed to Major John André, who was an officer in the British army during the occupation of Philadelphia from 1777-1778. André grew up in England in the middle class family of a merchant (Sargent 1861, 8). He was well educated and exposed to the arts (music, painting, drawing, dancing) at an early age and was said to have a natural affinity (Sargent 1861, 7). At the University of Geneva he perfected his talent in military drawings in particular (Sargent 1861, 8). André was not fond of the trade profession and eventually eschewed his father’s business, enlisted in the British army in 1771, and followed his regiment to Philadelphia in 1774 (Sargent 1861, 9, 41; Jacob and Case, 30-31). Few examples of André’s artwork exist. Most of the known works are in relation to the Meschianza or are silhouettes of his friends. Sketching did seem to come naturally to him

ACP 1552 15

as he even produced a self-portrait while in prison awaiting his execution.10 Based on André’s sketches as well as his self-portrait, he did have some basic drafting skills, but was by no means a prodigy. From what is available, it seems that André primarily worked in ink. Underdrawing on ACP 1552 was seen using infrared reflectography (IRR) and revealed significant reworking in the rendering of the hands of the Turk. Most of the other examples of André’s work are portraits or silhouettes only depicting the bust, and so it is logical that he may have struggled with this anatomy.

IR reflectogram, detail proper left hand InGaAs 1650nm

IR reflectogram, detail proper right hand InGaAs, J filter 1100-1400nm

IR reflectogram, detail handle of dagger and bandolier InGaAs 1650nm

IR reflectogram, detail of proper right of hat InGaAs 1650nm

10 André was sentenced and convicted as a traitor for conspiring with Benedict Arnold and was hanged for his crime in 1780 (Baskin 2011)

ACP 1552 16

John André, Self-portrait, produced while awaiting execution, 1780

John André, Silhouette of Major Edward Stanly, 1778, black silk on paper, 13 ½” x 9 ¾”, The Library Company of Philadelphia

John André, detail of sketch for Meschianza guest, The Library Company of Philadelphia

John André, Silhouettes of Batwell & André, 1778, black silk on paper, 8 ¾” X 9 7/8”, The Library Company of Philadelphia

ACP 1552 17

John André, Knight of the Meschianza, c. 1778, Chew House, Cliveden, Germantown, PA This sketch was produced for a souvenir book for Peggy Chew Image courtesy of http://home.golden.net/~marg/bansite/banecdotes/80knight.html

André continued to express his creativity during the War through theatrical productions. André and his colleagues formed their own performance group called “Howe’s Thespians” and took over the former Southwark theater, abandoned by American theater troupes (Jacob and Case 2012, 41). André and Oliver DeLancey were in charge of the scenery and decorations, and André was especially renowned for a drop scene (Jacob and Case 2012, 41; Sargent 1861, 153-154). This painted scene did not survive an 1821 fire, but it has been described as:

…a landscape presenting a distant champagne country, and a winding rivulet extending from the front of the picture to the extreme distance. In the foreground and centre a gentle cascade (the water exquisitely executed) was overshadowed by a group of majestic forest-trees. The perspective was excellently preserved; the foliage, verdure, and general colouring was artistically toned and glazed…It was a drop-scene, and hung about the middle of the third entrance, as called in stage-directions. The name of André was inscribed in large black letters on the back of it, thus placed no doubt by his own hand on its completion…” (Sargent 1861, 153-154)

André is also praised for “his foliage [which] was uncommonly spirited and graceful” (Sargent 1861, 153). His biographer, Winthrop Sargent, goes on to compare André to the likes of William Hogarth, who actually began his own artistic career as a theater painter (Sargent 1861, 153). André could have had access to Hogarth’s work especially while he was living in England. It is interesting that Hogarth painted a portrait of a Turkish man (sometime between 1700-1764) before André left for North America. The facial features on Hogarth’s portrait are very similar to ACP 1552 and the Hogarth could have been the reference that André (or whoever the artist was) had in his mind.

ACP 1552 18

William Hogarth, Portrait of a Turk’s Head (Henry Mossop as Bajazet), 1700-1764, oil on canvas, 67.2cm X 46.3cm, Private Collection

ACP 1552 Detail of Head Before Treatment

Oral history has produced a story that John André created (ACP 1552) a dummy board of a Turk and a British grenadier dummy board (held at the Historical Society of Pennsylvania) for the extraordinary event of the Meschianza in 1778. André is well-documented as being in charge of creating the decorations for the Meschianza, but there is no evidence pertaining to the dummy boards. Sargent agrees that if André did paint these two dummy boards that they were probably used for stage decorations and not the Meschianza (Sargent 1861, footnote to p. 154). Meschianza— This event, which took place May 18, 1778 in Philadelphia, was organized to commemorate the service of General Howe in the British army (Jacob and Case 2012, 47). From 1777 through 1778 the British army occupied Philadelphia during the American Revolution and thereby controlled the social scene as well. In the spring of 1778 Howe “retired” from his position of general mainly because he was not making progress in battle,11 but he was still beloved as a man and a mentor, and his company wanted to send him off properly (Sargent 1861, 164-165, Lossing 1850). As mentioned

11 Howe’s replacement, General Henry Clinton would arrive with orders to retreat from Philadelphia to New York City (Jacob and Case 2012, 45).

ACP 1552 19

earlier, the Meschianza,12 which is an appropriated word from ancient Italian meaning “a mix” or a potpourri,13 was so named to describe the pastiche of pageantry that was to take place during the celebration. The event was much more like participatory theater than a party.

Illustration of the Wharton Estate in 1778, The Library Company of Philadelphia

Modern map indicating location of Wharton Estate relative to the river, Google Maps

All the important guests with General Howe at the helm arrived by boats along the Delaware River around 4:30pm (Lossing 1850) to the bank at the edge of what was then the Wharton Estate in Philadelphia. Fourteen British officers including John André were chosen to play knights, each with their own esquire and a corresponding lady. Seven of the knights represented the “Blended Rose” and seven represented the “Burning Mountain” (Lossing 1850). In the front lawn each camp announced their cause and then enacted a joust and dueling match. There were extremely orchestrated rituals and symbolic presentations of tokens from the ladies to their knights. After these activities the guests proceeded into the house for a cocktail hour and dancing, a formal dinner, fireworks, and more dancing until early in the morning the next day14.

12 Some sources also spell “Mischianza,” but the official invitation to the event entitled it “Meschianza” and so this spelling will be used throughout the report. 13 Secondary sources have cited “Meschianza” as an invented word loosely based on the Italian terms for mixing (mischiare and mescere) (Schwartz Gallery 2014; Jacob and Case 2012, 45). In a personal communication (2014) with native Italian speaker, Ilaria Cianchetta, it was revealed that “meschianza” is a real Italian word, but extremely antiquated and not used in modern conversation. 14 John André had his own written account of the event and it has been transcribed in various sources (e.g. Lossing 1850). John F. Watson (1779-1860), a prominent Philadelphia historian writing in the early 19th century, interviewed attendees of the Meschianza, and their memories are preserved in Watson’s Annals held at the Library Company of Philadelphia. Watson later revised and published some of his writings (see Waters 1974 for complex chronology), but the source at the Library Company is a hand-written manuscript from around 1823 according to their catalog system and gifted to the Company by Watson himself. Some of the illustrations have been removed and are housed separately in the Prints and Photographs Department. Some of the ladies in attendance such as Elizabeth Drinker also described the party in their letters/diaries (see Jacob and Chase 2012).

ACP 1552 20

André was the orchestrator of the entire event, but he enlisted five assistants in the production, each of whom could theoretically have contributed to the painting of decorations. The primary ‘artists’ were André himself and Captain Oliver Delancy (Watson c.1823). Montresor had the title of chief engineer and was aided by Sir John Wrottlesly, Colonel O’Hara, and Major Gardiner (Lossing 1850). The decorations described in primary accounts include two triumphal arches, wall paintings imitating marble, mirrors (one of which is held at the Library Company of Philadelphia), girandoles, flowers, and a firework display at night surrounding the arches (Lossing 1850). The wall paintings and triumphal arches seem in line with the type of theater drops for which André was known.15 André is also credited with designing the invitation/ticket for the Meschianza (see images below). The Library Company invitation may have been an extra as other invitations were known to have included sketches of suggested costumes for the guests. The Turkish influence on the Meschianza is somewhat random. The Ladies of the Knights were reported as wearing Turbans and Turkish style dress, but the suggested hairstyle for other female guests on the invitations is not at all Turkish. In addition to fashion inspiration described earlier, Turkish culture also seemed to be a source of entertainment in the 18th century. The Turkish automaton was introduced in 1770, which has a similar motive of illusion and trickery as a form of amusement (The Turk 2014, Wikipedia). The second time André writes about the Meschianza, he goes into more detail about the Turkish costumes of the Ladies:

They wore turbans spangled and edged with gold or silver, on the right side a veil of the same kind hung as low as the waist, and the left side of the turban was enriched with pearl and tassels of gold and silver and crested with a feather (Lossing 1850)

These jeweled accents could be echoed in the swag of the central part of ACP 1552’s turban and the jewels around the forehead. Although the Knights followed the style of Henry IV of France, their colors included “…a pink and white sword belt, also laced with silver and black; and a white satin hat ornamented with red, white, and black plumes” (Schwartz Gallery 2014). ACP 1552’s bandolier is also cream with red highlights.

15 André describes the interior decorations in his first account of the event:

…the panels painted in imitation of Sienna marble, inclosing festoons of white marble; the surbase, and all below was black…[the] ball-room, decorated in a light, elegant style of painting. The ground was a pale blue, paneled with a small gold bead, and in the interior filled with dropping festoons of flowers in their natural colors. Below the surbase the ground of rose-pink, with drapery festooned in blue. (Lossing 1850)

ACP 1552 21

Ticket for the Meschianza, Historical Society of Pennsylvania, image courtesy of http://johndurang.yorkheritage.org/?p=5

John André, Portrait of Margaret Shippen, Historical Society of Pennsylvania

Ticket for the Meschianza, 1778, designed by John André and engraved by James Smither, 20cm X 16cm, the Library Company of Philadelphia

John André, sketch of what ladies should wear to Meschianza, originally from Jane Craig who attended the event, in Watson’s Annals, the Library Company of Philadelphia

ACP 1552 22

The primary conclusion from first-hand accounts of the Meschianza is that there is no mention of painted wooden figures.16 Germantown Historical Society’s didactic panel for the Turkish Knight dummy board states that it was one of 250 such figures created for the Meschianza and placed along the riverbank. Watson’s Annals (c.1823) do emphasize the massive accumulation of soldiers as well as spectators, and it is possible that the dummy board’s illusionistic qualities confused guests in the commotion of the event that they were live bodies standing guard. One secondary source17 states that “Life-size, hand-painted dummy boards of British grenadiers decorated the regal Wharton gardens” (Nash 2002, 98). Nash seems to be relying on a pictorial representation of the triumphal arch (see below), which also includes the “twenty-four slaves in Turkish outfits serv[ing] courses” that Nash (2002, 98) mentions. However, this illustration was produced around 1908, and is likely a romanticized interpretation. Watson describes 24 slaves as waiters “in oriental dresses with silver collars and bracelets” (Watson ca. 1823, 302; Watson 1830, 690). André’s own description states that the avenue between the two triumphal arches “…was lined on each side with a file of troops; and the colors of all the army, planted at proper distances, had a beautiful effect in diversifying the scene. Between these colors the knights and squires took their stations” (Lossing 1850). Perhaps over the years there has been a misinterpretation of the lines of soldiers and their flags with the placement of dummy boards.

16 Some of these accounts are extremely detailed including the exact width of each of the triumphal arches and the distance between their placements. It seems odd that the chronicler would not have been impressed enough by this massive amount of wooden figures to include them in his/her account. It is also interesting that only two of these figures supposedly produced for the Meschianza are known to have survived. 17 There are actually two secondary sources, but both are written by the same author. (Nash 2002; Nash 2005)

ACP 1552 23

Depiction of Meschianza, Historical Society of Pennsylvania, image courtesy of http://johndurang.yorkheritage.org/?p=5

Violet Oakley, “The Meschianza, a toast to King GeorgeIII,” c. 1908, produced for Philadelphia Pageant publication, charcoal and watercolor on illustration board, 50.8cm X 38.1cm, Pennsylvania Academy of Fine Arts

Later interpretation of the Meschianza, from an illustrated volume, 1876, image courtesy of http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:SMO_V12_D167_The_Meschianza.png

Provenance— The two surviving ‘Meschianza’ dummy boards have the same provenance. The Grenadier, (owned by the Historical Society of Pennsylvania and graphically reproduced

ACP 1552 24

above, p. 9), and the Turk were both owned by the Wister Family of Philadelphia. There is sketch of both of the dummy boards in their location in the front hall of the Wister household in the early 20th century, but it is based only on oral accounts that these were used during the Meschianza. As for the Grenadier, it was reported as being a gift of a descendant of a Meschianza participant in 1900 (Nash 2002, 99).

Joseph Pennell, sketch of Grumblethorpe (summer estate of John Wister), 1912, Germantown Historical Society The Wisters were originally of German descent and arrived in Philadelphia in the 1720s. Sally Wister (1761-1804) theoretically could have attended the Meschianza even though her family members were not loyalists.18 However, her family fled Philadelphia during the British occupation and did not return until July 1778 after the event had occurred (Myers 1902). Sally Wister’s diary entry on 12 December 1777 describes a British grenadier figure in her home successfully scaring a visitor because he was so convinced that the British army had arrived (Graham 1988, 3-4). If this is the same Grenadier

18 There was apparently such a shortage of eligible women that “rebel” women were also invited to the event. Some had to keep it secret from their families and neighbors, but most upper-class women would have been elated to attend such a high profile social event especially during wartime when there were not that many diversions (Watson c. 1823).

ACP 1552 25

depicted in the sketch of the Wister home and subsequently donated to the Historical Society of Pennsylvania it could not have been created solely for the Meschianza, which was not planned until April 1778 (Jacob and Case 2012). Neal Hurst, Lois F. McNeil Fellow at the Winterthur Museum, highlighted during a personal communication (2014) that the uniform of the Grenadier is also outdated for 1778 and represents pre-Revolution British military costumes. The Wisters, not being Loyalists, would likely not have been willing to donate personal belongings to a British military party either. It is, however, possible that the Wisters’ dummy boards did have a theatrical origin. All of the theaters in Philadelphia were shut down when the British invaded and only British military-run theater groups were allowed (McCarthy 2012). Sally Wister’s Philadelphia home (not Grumblethorpe, their summer estate) was located within walking distance (at 325 Market St) (Myers 1902) from the Southwark Theater where the “American Company” performed in 1766 (McCarthy 2012). Popular Culture and Continued Use of Dummy Boards— After the 18th century, dummy boards were “rediscovered” or revived during the Victorian era. As with other revival design elements, dummy boards were likely misinterpreted as having a predominant use as a fire screen. In the 19th century these figures were placed in front of the fireplace to block the draft coming through the chimney when it was not in use (Graham 1988, 4-5; Scott and Scott 1966, 11). In the 20th century the legacy of dummy boards is evident in life-size figures used as signs and advertisements and are even distantly related to tobacconist figures in their life-size presence. Dummy boards can still serve as useful sign posts and one is located in front of the entrance to the “Touch it Room” in the Gallery Reception Area of the Winterthur Museum. Dummy boards’ initial purpose of trickery has even inspired contemporary artists and sculptors in their effort to interact with the viewing public in a humorous way.

ACP 1552 26

Painted metal cutout used for advertising, Pierce Arrow Museum of Transportation, Buffalo, NY

Example of a blog about dummy boards; the author also makes her own dummy boards http://www.pastmastery.com/default.htm http://pastmastery.wordpress.com/

John Ronayne, Dummy Board, 1977, oil on chipboard braced with plywood, 171.5cm X 42cm X 4cm, Victoria and Albert Museum

J. Seward Johnson, Gotcha!, Exhibition in Albany, NY June 2010, image courtesy of https://www.flickr.com/photos/altuwa/sets/72157624336695608/detail/?page=2

ACP 1552 27

Dummy boards are not found in the collections of most major art museums,19 and this could be related to their ambiguous categorization as somewhere between decorative or fine art. The Victoria and Albert Museum of Art and Design has arguably one of the largest single collections of dummy boards. They are more commonly scattered among various local historical societies, historic homes, and in private collections. While dummy boards have sometimes been included in exhibitions on trompe l’oeil painting in general, only one exhibition dedicated solely to these wooden figures is known (May 31, 1981 at Rye Historical Society, NY: Silent Companions: Dummy Board Figures of the 17th through the 19th Centuries) (Reif 1981). Dummy boards have recently been sold at some of the major auction houses and there seems to be a continuing cult obsession in popular culture surrounding these figures.20

19 Except for the Metropolitan Museum of Art, which decided to acquire the pair proposed by Dr. Stoner. 20 There are numerous personal blogs devoted solely to dummy boards and people still produce dummy boards for sale. The majority of articles post 1990 related to dummy boards have been opinion pieces in the Leisure sections of local and national newspapers. The reoccurrence of these reports suggests that there is significant public interest in these objects. Links to auction records: http://www.christies.com/lotfinder/furniture-lighting/an-english-painted-wood-dummy-board-18th-5411400-details.aspx http://www.invaluable.com/catalog/searchLots.cfm?scp=p&hi=1&olf=0&ord=2&ad=DESC&catalogRef=&shw=50&img=0&houseRef=&houseLetter=A&artistRef=&areaID=&countryID=&regionID=&stateID=&fdt=0&tdt=0&fr=0&to=0&wa=&wp=&wo=dummy%2520board%2520hand%2520painted%2520depicting&nw=&upcoming=0&rp=&rem=FALSE&isSC=1&afRedir=true http://www.christies.com/lotfinder/furniture-lighting/an-english-painted-wood-dummy-board-18th-5237893-details.aspx http://www.bonhams.com/auctions/18761/lot/170/

ACP 1552 112

General References: Auffret, Stephanie. 2014. Personal communication. Paintings Studio II, Winterthur Museum Research Building, Winterthur, DE. Baskin, Marg. 2011. John André: trial and execution of André at Tappan, New York. Oatmeal for the Foxhounds: Banastre Tarleton and the British Legion. http://home.golden.net/~marg/bansite/friends/ja_tappan.html (accessed 26 April 2014). Bisschop, Cornelis. 2014. Benezit Dictionary of Artists. In Oxford Art Online. Oxford University Press. http://www.oxfordartonline.com.proxy.nss.udel.edu/subscriber/article/benezit/B00020206?q=Bisschop&search=quick&pos=10&_start=1#firsthit (accessed 26 April 2014). Brockmann, W., P. L. Geib, J. Klingen, and B. Schroder. 2009. Adhesive Bonding: Materials, Applications and Technology. KGaA, Weinheim, Germany: Wiley-VCH GmbH & Co. Accessed from Google Books. http://books.google.com/books?id=CNJZHC7s9XcC&pg=PA90&lpg=PA90&dq=shellac+soluble+in+lipids&source=bl&ots=uD7TzKKXPG&sig=knFRkPEZ4Em1F9bga5QRsg_j-II&hl=en&sa=X&ei=vfpqU5GuNYqsyAGGjoHYAQ&ved=0CD0Q6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=shellac%20soluble%20in%20lipids&f=false (accessed 7 May 2014). Bucklow, Spike. 2012. The classification of craquelure patterns. In Conservation of Easel Paintings, eds. Joyce Hill Stoner and Rebecca Anne Rushfield. New York: Routledge. 285-290. Cianchetta, Ilaria. 2014. Personal communication. Rotunda Auditorium. Winterthur Museum, Winterthur, DE. Cormack, Andrew. 2008. Communications: a pair of dummy boards of 21st foot, the royal Scotch fuziliers, circa 1730. Journal of the Society for Army Historical Research 86: 105-108. Dunkerton, Jill. 1991. Giotto to Durer: Early Renaissance Painting in the National Gallery. New Haven: Yale University Press. Edwards, Clive. 2003. Dummy board figures as images of amusement and deception in interiors, 1660-1800. Studies in the Decorative Arts 10 (1): 74-97. Erisoty, Steven. 1992. Examination and Treatment Report of Meschianza Dummy Board. In curatorial object file for GHS1051 (ACP 1552). Germantown Historical Society. Erisoty, Steven. 2014. Personal communication. Rotunda Auditorium. Winterthur Museum, Winterthur, DE.

ACP 1552 113

Fearon, Andrew. 2009. Copal resin and the practice of oil varnishing in the second half of 19th-century America. In Architectural Finishes in the Built Environment, eds. Mary A. Jablonski and Catherine R. Matsen. London: Archetype Publications Ltd. 105-112. Gettens, Rutherford J. and George L. Stout. 1966. Painting Materials: A Short Encyclopaedia. New York: Dover. Graham, Clare. 1988. Dummy Boards and Chimney Boards. Shire Album Series no. 214. Aylesbury, UK: Shire Publications. Graham, Willie. 2009. Architectural paint research at American museums: an appeal for standards. In Architectural Finishes in the Built Environment, eds. Mary A. Jablonski and Catherine R. Matsen. London: Archetype Publications Ltd. 3-16 Harley, R. D. 2001. Artists’ Pigments c. 1600-1835. 2nd ed. Revised. London: Archetype Publications Ltd. Hinchman, Mark. 2013. The Fairchild Books Dictionary of Interior Design. New York: Fairchild Books. Accessed from Google Books. http://books.google.com/books?id=X3FjAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA81&dq=historical+design++%22dummy+board%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=49tbU7--MsflsASF64Ig&ved=0CDEQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=historical%20design%20%20%22dummy%20board%22&f=false (accessed 26 April 2014).

Hunt, Valerie Reich. 1998. Conservation of folk art: Shelburne Museum’s collection and approach. In Painted Wood: History and Conservation, eds. Valerie Dorege and F. Carey Howlett. Los Angeles: Getty Conservation Institute. 424-436. Hurst, Neil. 2014. Personal communication. Graduate fellows lounge. Winterthur Museum Research Building, Winterthur, DE. Jacob, Mark and Stephen H Case. 2012. Treacherous Beauty: Peggy Shippen, the Woman Behind Benedict Arnold’s Plot to Betray America. Guilford, CT: Lyons Press. Janson, Jonathan. 2014. Dummy board. In The Essential Vermeer Glossary: D-I. http://www.essentialvermeer.com/glossary/glossary_d_i.html#dummyboard (accessed 26 April 2014). Landis, Dylan. 1987. Whimsy born of superstition: decorative deception that’s the cat’s meow. Chicago Tribune, August 23. Lifestyles. http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1987-08-23/features/8703040401_1_boards-chelsea-house-dummy (accessed 26 April 2014). Lossing, Benson J. 1850. Major André’s description of the Meschianza: an endnote to chapter IV. In Pictorial Fieldbook of the Revolution, Vol. 2. Transcribed by Bill Carr 2001. Accessed from Rootsweb, Ancestry.com.

ACP 1552 114

http://freepages.history.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~wcarr1/Lossing1/Chap36a.html (accessed 26 April 2014). Macquoid, Percy and Ralph Edwards, eds. 1924. The Dictionary of English Furniture from the Middle Ages to the Late Georgian Period, vol. 2 Ch-M. London: Hudson and Kearns, Ltd. McCarthy, Jack. 2012. Hippest street in town, circa 1766. In Hidden City Philadelphia. http://hiddencityphila.org/2012/01/hippest-street-in-town-circa-1766/ (accessed 26 April 2014). Myers, Albert Cook, ed. 1902. Sally Wister’s Journal: A True Narrative: Being a Quaker Maiden’s Account of Her Experiences with Officers of the Continental Army, 1777-1778. Philadelphia: Ferris & Leach Publishers. http://www.foulke.org/history/docs/wister/wister1.html (accessed 26 April 2014). Nash, Gary B. 2002. First City: Philadelphia and the Forging of Historical Memory. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Accessed from Google Books http://books.google.com/books?id=EmS4qtTQMr8C&pg=PA99&lpg=PA99&dq=%22Sally+Wister+Meschianza%22&source=bl&ots=yOH1Sv8Fxb&sig=e2o-xgjMO1jTCsmHw-IpkH433yE&hl=en&sa=X&ei=-SRcU4PZNqWzsATBzYHYCA&ved=0CCgQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=meschianza&f=false (accessed 27 April 2014). Nash, Gary B. 2005. The Unknown American Revolution: The Unruly Birth of Democracy and the Struggle to Create America. New York: Viking. Nelson, L.H. 1968. Nail Chronology as an Aid to Dating Old Buildings. Nashville, TN: American Association for State and Local History. Phenix, Alan and Joyce Townsend. 2012. A brief survey of historical varnishes. In Conservation of Easel Paintings, eds. Joyce Hill Stoner and Rebecca Anne Rushfield. New York: Routledge. 253-263. Phenix, Alan and Richard Wolbers. 2012 Removal of varnish: organic solvents as cleaning agents. In Conservation of Easel Paintings, eds. Joyce Hill Stoner and Rebecca Anne Rushfield. New York: Routledge. 524-554. Reif, Rita. 1981. Antiques; the whimsical dummy board. The New York Times, February 8. Arts. http://www.christies.com/lotfinder/furniture-lighting/an-english-painted-wood-dummy-board-18th-5237893-details.aspx (accessed 26 April 2014). Ritz, Gislind M. 1970. The Art of Painted Furniture, trans. Sigrid MacRae. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company.

ACP 1552 115

Safford, Frances Gruber. 1998. Floral painting on early eighteenth-century American furniture at the Metropolitan Museum of Art. In Painted Wood: History and Conservation, eds. Valerie Dorege and F. Carey Howlett. Los Angeles: Getty Conservation Institute. 194-205. Samet, Wendy H. 1988. Condition report and proposal for treatment. In conservation object file for 1989.0002 Dummy Board. Conservation Department, Winterthur Museum. Sargent, Winthrop. 1861. The Life and Career of Major John André, Adjutant-General of the British Army in America. Boston: Ticknor and Fields. Schwartz Gallery. 2014. Description of Frederick James Mischianza, 1881. http://www.schwarzgallery.com/painting/4064/Frederick-James_Mischianza (accessed 26 April 2014). Scott, Amoret and Christopher Scott. 1966. Dummy Board Figures. Cambridge: Golden Head Press. Serlio, Sebastiano, Nicola Sabbattini, and Joseph Furttenbach. 1958. The Renaissance Stage: Documents of Serlio, Sabbattini and Furttenbach, trans. Allardyce Nicoll, John H. McDowll, and George R. Kernodle. Coral Gables, FL: University of Miami Press. Stols-Witlox, Maartje. 2012. Grounds, 1400-1900. In Conservation of Easel Paintings, eds. Joyce Hill Stoner and Rebecca Anne Rushfield. New York: Routledge. 161-185. The Residence of Joseph Wharton, 1775. n.d. Print. P.9991.1. Prints and Photographs Department. Library Company of Philadelphia. The Turk (chess-playing automaton). 2014. Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Turk (accessed 26 April 2014). Thorton, Jonathan. 1998. The use of dyes and colored varnishes in wood polychromy. In Painted Wood: History and Conservation, eds. Valerie Dorege and F. Carey Howlett. Los Angeles: Getty Conservation Institute. 226-241. Trustees of the British Museum. n.d. Collection online. Drawing 1967,0722.8 object record. http://www.britishmuseum.org/research/collection_online/collection_object_details.aspx?objectId=721176&partId=1&subject=16192&view=list&page=1 (accessed 29 April 2014). United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2014. Pennsylvania baseline: part 2 - impact assessment data base, chapter 1 - characteristics and human utilization of natural ecosystems, section 4 - terrestrial ecology: table 2.1.4.-2 list of commercial tree species found on forest survey sample plots in the state of Pennsylvania. http://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyNET.exe/9100GL1A.txt?ZyActionD=ZyDocument&Client=

ACP 1552 116

EPA&Index=1976%20Thru%201980&Docs=&Query=%28softwoods%29%20OR%20FNAME%3D%229100GL1A.txt%22%20AND%20FNAME%3D%229100GL1A.txt%22&Time=&EndTime=&SearchMethod=1&TocRestrict=n&Toc=&TocEntry=&QField=&QFieldYear=&QFieldMonth=&QFieldDay=&UseQField=&IntQFieldOp=0&ExtQFieldOp=0&XmlQuery=&File=D%3A%5CZYFILES%5CINDEX%20DATA%5C76THRU80%5CTXT%5C00000015%5C9100GL1A.txt&User=ANONYMOUS&Password=anonymous&SortMethod=h%7C-&MaximumDocuments=1&FuzzyDegree=0&ImageQuality=r75g8/r75g8/x150y150g16/i425&Display=p%7Cf&DefSeekPage=x&SearchBack=ZyActionL&Back=ZyActionS&BackDesc=Results%20page&MaximumPages=1&ZyEntry=2&SeekPage=f (accessed 26 April 2014). van Loon, Annelies, Petria Noble, and Aviva Burnstock. 2012. Ageing and deterioration of traditional oil and tempera paints. In Conservation of Easel Paintings, eds. Joyce Hill Stoner and Rebecca Anne Rushfield. New York: Routledge. 214-241. Wadum, Jorgen and Noelle Streeton. 2012. History and use of panels or other rigid supports for easel paintings. In Conservation of Easel Paintings, eds. Joyce Hill Stoner and Rebecca Anne Rushfield. New York: Routledge. 51-115. Waters, Deborah Dependahl. 1974. Philadelphia’s Boswell: John Fanning Watson. The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography (January): 3-52. Watson, John F. c. 1823. Annals of Philadelphia. Unpublished extra-illustrated manuscript, index complied by Water Brenner. Yi2 1069.F. Prints and Photographs Department. Library Company of Philadelphia. 242 (illustration), 300-305. Watson, John F. 1830. Annals of Philadelphia, Being a Collection of Memoirs, Anecdotes, & Incidents of the City and Its Inhabitants from the Days of the Pilgrim Founders. Philadelphia: E. I. Carey & A. Hart. Accessed from Google Books. http://books.google.com/books?id=51YQ0TzReWMC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=snippet&q=oriental&f=false (accessed 11 May 2014). Werlin, Katy. 2014. Fashion in Reynolds and Gainsborough: Part 8. In The Fashion Historian. Blog. Blogger. http://www.thefashionhistorian.com/2011/03/fashion-in-reynolds-and-gainsborough_27.html (accessed 26 April 2014)

ACP 1552 119

Further Reading: 1921. The Greatest Highway in the World: Historical, Industrial and Descriptive Information of the Towns, Cities, and Countries Passed Through Between New York and Chicago Via the New York Central Lines: Based on the Encyclopaedia Britannica. New York: New York Central Railroad Company. Accessed from The Gutenberg Project. http://www.gutenberg.org/files/27701/27701-h/27701-h.htm (accessed 26 April 2014). Details on André’s capture and execution Blevins, Christine. 2012. Guest post: Christine Blevins, author of the turning of Anne Merrick. In Tanzanite’s Castle Full of Books. Blogspot. http://shelfandstuff.blogspot.com/2012/04/guest-post-christine-blevins-author-of.html (accessed 26 April 2014). Brommelle, N.S., Anne Moncrieff, and Perry Smith, eds. 1978. Conservation of Wood in Paining and the Decorative Arts. Preprints of the Contributions to the Oxford Congress, 17-23 September 1978. London: International Institute for Conservation of Historic and Artistic Works. This source is best for gaining an understanding of historical treatments applied to paintings on wooden supports. Campbell, William Bucke. 1942. Old Towns and Districts of Philadelphia: An Address Delivered Before the City History Society of Philadelphia February 26, 1941. Philadelphia: City History Society. Accessed through the Franford Gazette. http://frankfordgazette.com/wp1/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Old-Towns-Dist._whole_shrunk.pdf (accessed 11 May 2014). Helpful for understanding the 18th-century landscape of Philadelphia and when certain prominent buildings were erected. Fales, Dean A. 1972. American Painted Furniture, 1660-1880. New York: E.P. Dutton and Company, Inc. Ferguson, R. S. 1895. Picture board dummies. The Archaeological Journal 52: 1-24. Accessed from Google Books. http://books.google.com/books?id=T4nQAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA2&lpg=PA2&dq=Picture+Board+Dummies+at+the+County+Hotel,+Carlisle&source=bl&ots=hdNeftzE-q&sig=ajbjziOAdklUZ1hTsO4NX_uoi5o&hl=en&sa=X&ei=G9xZU7r2McHCywHnu4HoBA&ved=0CDoQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=Picture%20Board%20Dummies%20at%20the%20County%20Hotel%2C%20Carlisle&f=false (accessed 26 April 2014). Fisher, Darlene Emmert. 1970. Social life in Philadelphia during the British occupation. Pennsylvania History (37)3: 237-260. Glore, Ashley and Caroline Nott. 2014. Chapter 11: 18th Century Theater Buildings & Scenery. Blogpost. Prezi. http://prezi.com/0lyh52wrzwrj/chapter-11-18th-century-theatre-buildings-scenery/ (accessed 26 April 2014).

ACP 1552 120

Graham, Clare. 1989. Dummy boards. Antiques Magazine (135)6: 1424-1431. Halttunen, Karen, ed. 2008. A Companion to American Cultural History. Malden, MA: Blackwell. Hansen, Eric F. and Mitchell Hearns Bishop. 1998. Factors affecting the re-treatment of previously consolidated matte painted wooden objects. In Painted Wood: History and Conservation, eds. Valerie Dorege and F. Carey Howlett. Los Angeles: Getty Conservation Institute. 484-497. Authors address similar cleaning issues with respect to removal of an oil coating. Discussion of various solvent gel systems and their efficacy. Hornblow, Arthur. 1919. A History of the Theatre in America from Its Beginnings to the Present Time, Vol. 1. Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott Co. Kovel, Ralph and Terry Kovel. 1997. Dummy boards used as home security in 18th century. Chicago Tribune, March 16. http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1997-03-16/news/9703160215_1_dummy-18th-century-doll (accessed 26 April 2014). Library Company of Philadelphia. 2007. Major John André and the Meschianza. In Art & Artifacts. http://www.librarycompany.org/artifacts/meschianza.htm (accessed 26 April 2014). Meagher, Jennifer. 2013. Orientalism in nineteenth-century art. In Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History. The Metropolitan Museum of Art. http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/euor/hd_euor.htm (accessed 26 April 2014). Moses, Montrose Jonas. 1918. Representative Plays by American Dramatists, Vol. 1. New York: E.P. Dutton & Co. Accessed from Google Books. http://books.google.com/books?id=SwNaAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA7&lpg=PA7&dq=major+andre+theater+%22drop-scene%22&source=bl&ots=7cNXHqX3CL&sig=19KGtN8f2GTV9BgQL3dj2oaUnns&hl=en&sa=X&ei=QchFU9O9EYjSsATr0ICIDg&ved=0CDIQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=major%20andre%20theater%20%22drop-scene%22&f=false (accessed 26 April 2014). Newstead, Susanne M. 2011. Past Mastery: The Blog for and About Dummy Boards. WordPress.com http://pastmastery.wordpress.com/ (accessed 26 April 2014). Newstead, Susanne M. 2013. Past Mastery: an eclectic mix of arts and crafts inspired by the past. http://www.pastmastery.com/default.htm (accessed 26 April 2014). Sally Wister. 2013. Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sally_Wister (accessed 26 April 2014). Schaffer, Michael D. 2003. Capital of the rebellion Philadelphia and the Revolution, 225 years ago. The Philadelphia Inquirer, May 18. http://www.11thpa.org/elk_news_12.html (accessed 26 April 2014).

ACP 1552 121

Stewart, Charles H. N.D. Backdrops and Scenic Design Glossary of Terms. http://www.charleshstewart.com/cat.htm (accessed 26 April 2014). SWHYNES. 2014. The Meschianza at Philadelphia. In Whartons of Philadelphia. http://www.wharton.freeservers.com/meschianza.html (accessed 11 May 2014). The 18th Century Material Culture Resource Center. 2013. Dummy boards. Scribd Inc. http://www.scribd.com/doc/157774902/Dummy-Boards (accessed 26 April 2014)

Blog with multiple images of dummy boards in various collections, especially British. The 18th Century Material Culture Resource Center also has a facebook page with posts about the Turk dummy board from Germantown Historical Society. The National Trust. 2012. The eloquence of a silent companion. In Treasure Hunt blog. WordPress.com. http://nttreasurehunt.wordpress.com/2012/09/12/the-eloquence-of-a-silent-companion/ (accessed 26 April 2014). Ward, Harry M. 2003. The War for Independence and the Transformation of American Society. London: UCL Press. Accessed from Google Books. http://books.google.com/books?id=EWyPAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA93&lpg=PA93&dq=Captain+oliver+delancey+painting&source=bl&ots=V80bIPdB3R&sig=xVpBRWVto55-Y_psSW-92xw6kcU&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Wnw_U-enJ5PmsATorILICg&ved=0CFEQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=Captain%20oliver%20delancey%20painting&f=false (accessed 26 April 2014). Watson, John F. 1914. The Meschianza at Philadelphia. In The World’s Story: A History of the World in Story, Song and Art, Vol. 8, eds. Eva March Tappan et al. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company. 39-44. Accessed from Google Books. http://books.google.com/books?id=pxtZAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q=meschianza&f=false (accessed 26 April 2014). Wharton, Anne Hollingsworth. 1893. Through Colonial Doorways. Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott Co. Williams, Donald C. 2003. Preserving and restoring furniture coatings. In Smithsonian Museum Conservation Institute. http://www.si.edu/mci/english/learn_more/taking_care/coatings.html (accessed 11 May 2014). Worcester Art Museum. N.D. Description of Thomas Sully’s The Capture of Major André, 1812. http://www.worcesterart.org/Collection/Early_American/Artists/sully/capture/discussion.html (accessed 26 April 2014) Includes biographical information on John André and details on his execution.