MONUMENT SQUARE, CHARLESTOWN:
SEEKING TIMELESSNESS IN A TEMPORAL WORLD
by
ELLEN JANE KATZ
B.S.A.D. Massachusetts Institute of Technology
1978
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment
of the requirements for the
Degree of
Master of Architecture
at the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
June 1983
) Ellen Katz 1983
Signature of Author'.
........
S
Certified by
tment of APhitecture
y 13, 1983
. . . . . . . . . .
David Friedman, Associate Professor
of History and Architecture
Thesis Supervisor
OR#&
Accepted by . . . .
. . . . . . . . .
. . . .
Profess r 7an Wampler, Ch irman
Departmental Committe\ for Graduate St dents
Rotct
MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE
OF TECHNOLOGY
MAY 2 6 1983
LIBRARIES
2
MONUMENT SQUARE, CHARLESTOWN:
SEEKING TIMELESSNESS IN A TEMPORAL WORLD
Ellen Katz
Submitted to the Department of Architecture on May 13, 1983
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Master of Architecture
The Bunker Hill Monument, a 220-foot high granite obelisk built from
1825-1842, stands on a grassy mound known as Monument Square.
Today the
situation of the monument incites curiosity, standing as it
does amidst
brick and wooden rowhouses in a residential area of Charlestown, Mass.
The Bunker Hill Mounument Association (BHMA),
builder of the obelisk,
was also responsible for the planning and development of 15 acres
surrounding it.
These memorial builders - lawyers, doctors, and
businessmen - became investors in America's first
commercial railroad, part
of the network moving the granite blocks.
They also became real estate
developers - to help pay for the expensive monument, the BHMA sold part of
the "sacred" battlefield as houselots.
Many factors, some familiar today
and others quite remote,
shaped the monument and its
surround:
technological innovation and capitalism, land-use economics, and at least
one special-interest group - the freemasons.
Through historical research
and visual analysis, this thesis studies these factors as part of the
process through which the product, Monument Square, emerged.
The construction time period of the monument coincided with a
fundamental change in Charlestown housing: the transition from semi-rural
detached homes to the rowhouse.
The houses of Monument Square, built on
the land sold by the BHMA,
afford the opportunity to study communal
agreement as to the form of this newly emerging urbanity.
This agreement
is sometimes explicit, as in the innovative deed restrictions, but also
implicit in aspects of house design not covered by the restrictions.
The durable monument and its open square have helped to maintain the
robustness of the area, which escaped the widespread
clearance which
occurred in other parts of Charlestown during the 1960's.
Thesis Supervisor . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
David Friedman
Associate Professor of History and Architecture
Acknowledgments
3
I would like to thank my thesis advisor,
David Friedman,
who
interrupted his sabbatical to supervise this work, and reader Stan
Anderson for his suggestions.
Any merit this thesis may possess must
reflect on the ability and helpfulness of several people: Ellie Riechlin,
SPNEA; Sally Pierce, Boston Atheneum; Eugene Zepp, BPL Print Dept.; and the
staff of the Bostonian Society.
I am also thankful
of my husband, Jay Werb.
for
the support,
buoyant humor and
typing skills
Table of Contents
Tabl
ofContnts4
4
1. Introduction..................................................6
2. Establishment of the Banker Hill Monument Association..........13
3. Column and Obelisk--............................................20
4. Construction..................................................36
5. "Open to the view of remote posterity"........................50
6. The Ornamental Square.........................................65
7. Some Houses of Monument Square................................80
8. Conclusion....................................................94
Appendix 1..............................................97
Bibliography..-..........................................104
. ...
aY
01%
*
4-
Q1,
~z
etJ
&#
10
1
19
p*ip
AA
rAILpsAA
frnt
A ril
siee vi
w
of
Mouen
qure
Dept.
92
.
Co
rt
s
BL
Prn
5.
66
Introduction
Introduction
Driving north on 1-93, approaching the Tobin Bridge, motorists have an
especially
good
view
Bunker Hill Monument 1,
indistinct
the
fine
course,
of
Boston's
more
remarkable
landmarks.
The
sprouting two hundred and twenty feet from a bed of
structures,
miles-per-hour.
and
of one
is
hardly
diminished
by
Monument
Square,
the grassy mound at
townhouses
framing
it,
being
viewed
at
55
the monument's base,
aren't visible
from
the
freeway,
of
and may seem only incidental to the thousands of tourists who puff
up the 294 steps to
the top of the Monument for the view through the deep
openings in the obelisk's apex.
Revolutionary
War
battle,
Tourists visit the site of the most famous
fought
June
17,
1775.
The
redcoats
won
the
battle, but heavy casualties inflicted by the rebels defending the hastily
erected
redoubt dismayed
the British while giving hope and inspiration to
the Americans.
Everyone
knows
the monument was
yet few people are aware
was
also
responsible
battlefield.
dotted
and
project
in
for
the
urban
1-1.
design
The BHMA,
wealthy businessmen,
1823.
In
to commemorate
this battle,
that the Bunker Hill Monument Association
A sizable chunk of Charlestown,
line on Figure
doctors,
erected
the
a
the
overruns,
rather single-minded architects,
contended
15-acre
this area is
with
portion
plunged
design
of the
bounded by the
corporation
seventeen-year
monument
Association
a
private
sanguinely
tortuous
of
(BHMA)
of lawyers,
into this ambitious
construction
of
compromises,
budget
and commercial interests.
the
7
-
-
/
-
4
.{-
.
.~
/
,
tomK.
m
-e& ssK-eollnnua
f
rr
eMkE.-
-Wt -
!-. , #EKN+46 I;VI-Ai c '04
IA
- y
aV
*,O-g-
n
*W>
E
Oa
4"S4
/N
I'
Figure 1-1.
"own
Modern Charlestown. Study area inside dotted line.
WETEN
OA
OU
E
2
Introduction
8
The battlefield itself
development
step far
land.
is
--
in
1839
removed
emerged a casualty of the siege of real estate
the association
from
the 1823
auctioned
stated
a study of the process
off as
houselots,
objective of maintaining
The resulting combination of monumental
unusual and
it
a
the open
obelisk and residential area
by which the combination emerged
is
key to understanding and appreciating Monument Square.
Significantly
this
area
remains
intact
today,
and,
if
one
imagines
away modern materials such as aluminum siding and asphalt shingling,
much as it
did in
were
in
razed
the nineteenth century.
the
planning
of the
builders
intended,
immovability and
1960's
BHMA
has
the
for
the
at
least
Monument is
the intrinsic
two
Large sections
housing
proved
now an
qualities
projects.
durable.
immovable
looks
of Charlestown
Thus
the
Certainly,
national
of the urban plan
urban
as
icon.
itself
its
Its
helped
insure the robustness of the area.
Background
Charlestown,
proximity
to
the
made
remote
greater
by
urban
its
pennisular
center
of
Boston,
isolation
was
despite
connected
to
its
the
Shawmut penninsula only by ferry until 1786 when the Charles River Bridge
Corporation
nineteenth
located in
built its
century
toll
made
bridge.
Bunker
Hill
Better connections
one
of
few
to
American
Boston in
the
battlefields
an urban area.
Charlestown was settled before Boston,
in
1630,
but the lack of fresh
99
Introduction
Introduction
water and a psychologically and physically damaging first
many settlers
to
relocate
Blaxston's
invitation.
deserted.
Fourteen
and
try anew
Contrary to
stalwarts
in
and
by
inhabited a village boasting some 400 buildings,
and Boston,
town in
maintained,
but
much
then rebuilding
to
the
the
chagrin of
the fact
the
time a Charlestown
site
of
the
that one of the two U.S.
nation's
native
new
descendants
after Salem
plan was
who
1800
largely
thought
shrewd
Yard.
to
This
secure
brought
Charlestown
jobs
and
the
lobbying
Senators from Massachusetts
son combined
Navy
street
In
not
The British burned the
later visitors
Charlestownians had missed a great opportunity.
and
their
a major port,
original
at William
Charlestown was
1775
and overland connections west and north.
1775,
reputably
Boston,
popular belief
remained
winter encouraged
was at
as
the
national
attention to Charlestown.
The town's growth
transportation.
Massachusetts
in
is
directly related
The Middlesex
1803,
bringing
Canal
stone
to
"internal
linked
from
the
improvements"
in
Charlestown
to western
newly-opened
quarries
at
Chelmsford to be hammered by the 300 or so convicts at the new State Prison
in
Charlestown.
Designed by Charles Bulfinch,
pavilion with radiating wings,
still-occupied
By
1-2),
1818,
the prison had a centralized
similar in massing and oppressiveness to the
Charles Street Jail.
the year
the town numbered
Peter Tufts
made
about 7,000
people.
were well built up; Main St. was still
his map
of Charlestown
(Figure
Town Hill and the waterfront
semi-rural and much of the rest of
10
/
mK
r
.
f
lD
S
i;
/
ZX
'r
owb
ticfcrciwc6
V
4
IC
-Af
Z7
-&
/1
9e-e
IA
AAA
JI4ATT
I
7,
Figure 1-2.
Uw
Peter Tufts map,
1818. Boiston Atheneum.
17.
7
11
Introductionl1
Figure 1-3.
James Russell house,
Charlestown was open land.
large,
Hunnewell,
Well-to-do
p.
men
88.
and
their
families
lived
in
detatched wooden or brick houses on as much as an acre of land and
might own pasture elsewhere on the penninsula.
standard set by the James Russell house,
Their houses aspired to the
"the handsomest that ever stood in
the town" 2 (Figure 1-3)
It was the three stories high, the upper one of them low, as
usual, and the first was covered with small boarding pierced by
fourteen handsomely framed windows,
and a door in the centre
covered by a porch.
At each corner there was a Corinthian
pilaster reaching to the cornice, and on top was a cupola.
All
the moldings, capitals, and details were of classic character.
Before the house was a good size yard, bounded by walls at the
sides, and a high open fence in front, and crossed at the middle
by a paved walk.
In the rear, extending to the river, was a
garden with three paths running in that direction, while a paved
driveway, entered from a narrow street westward, passed between
it and the house. In the house there were four rooms on a floor
and a hall through the middle.
12
Introduction
These
their
fine
owners
their
with
Charlestownians
plums,
roses,
had
formed in
greenhouses,
pears,
tulips,
won annual prizes
Widespread
and
other
peonies,
but
fruit
iris,
always
trees,
lilacs,
from the new Massachusetts
--
gardens
and
crammed
and
pinks;
Horticultural
1825.
construction
of mansion
pattern
sometimes
cultivated
yards
Society,
houses
rowhouses
relatively
and garden
real estate maneuver even in
When the
of
1835,
Old Parsonage
this
interrupted
late,
and
seems
to be
judging from Hunnewell's
lands
<Town Hill area>...
semi-rural
daring
a
tone:
were sold,
the Parish Land Co.
was formed,
and on the tract was built
a block of brick houses, three stories with granite
(1835-1836)
basements, brown-stone doorway frames, and pitched roofs. They
were not detached, like the older houses built when land was in
the largest of the kind
less demand, but they formed a blocs,
that had yet been raised in the town.
Thus between
gives
way
to
the
under construction
1818 and 1836
attached
the
ideal
brick rowhouse,
from 1825 to 1842.
of the
detached
even while
As we shall see,
pastoral
the
monument
BHMA
was so
confidently
changing
around
them;
population
increases
as
and
altering
the
Charlestown
rising
land
Monument Square as much as any committee,
1.
2.
3.
landscape,
marched
values
the
determined
1823.
landscape
inexorably
architect,
was
this chronological
overlap profoundly affected the 15 acres purchased by the BHMA in
the
home
to
the
As
was
urbanity,
shape
of
or engineer.
The hill where the battle took place was originally called
Hill. The mix-up occurred when the rebels decided to fortify
Hill, not Bunker's Hill as first ordered. The name Bunker Hill
the site after the battle.
Hunnewell, pp. 89-90.
standing at #7-23
ibid, pp. 97-98. These townhouses are still
St.
Breed's
Breed's
stuck to
Harvard
Establishment of the Bunker Hill Monument Association
The urge
the
BHMA.
Another
dedicated
Grand
to erect
a
a Monument on "Bunker Hill" was not original with
form
memorial,
Master
and
of
association,
with
impressive
battle
casualty
the
Hill
in
1794,
column.
described
placed
joining
Standing
the
on
Joseph
as a "costly monument in
upon
a
platform
eight
Vol
surmounted by a gilt
urn...
and
Though
square
emblems.
military references,
and
the
Freemasonic
Benjamin
The
the
in
the
Lexington in
Most
His
death
was
(Figure
after
high
eight
tribute,
also
2-1)
Bulfinch's
stuccoed-wood
and
Lodge,
Worshipful
feet
was
Beacon
column
form of a Tuscan pillar,
a martial
according
George
Warren
The first
the
Masonic
its
This monument
land,
to
18'
was
high,
square,
and
the masonic open compass
the
Warren column
its adherents,
Washington
column
had
had no
played in
to this day proudly reminds
and
supposedly
Warren was slain, and was one of the first
battlefield.
Warren.
This urn displayed
.
literature
Franklin,
freemasons.
to
four years
feet
Solomon
rather its ornament celebrated Warren as a freemason,
role freemasonry,
revolution.
tht
skyline
donated
King
ceremony,
immortalized by the painter John Trumbull.
erected
13
General
stood
the
Lafayette
on the
very
the
reader
were
spot
all
where
memorials erected on an American
well-documented memorial is
a
small obelisk erected
1799 on the battlefield where eight minutemen where slain;
stone doubles
as a grave
marker,
for
seven of the
eight
are
buried
behind it.
The
mere
suggestion
existence
for
a
more
Revolutionary War monument,
in
1814.
Well-known
actual battle site.
of
this
imposing
minor
Warren
memorial.
monument
The
the Washington Monument in
throughout the country,
first
planted
the
large-scale
Baltimore was begun
this monument did not mark any
The BHMA felt keenly the specialness of their site.
14
Figure 2-1.
frontispiece from Winsor,
corner, Warren monument.
A Memorial History. Upper left
Establishment of the Bunker Hill Monument Association
15
For years before, no stranger visiting Boston would willingly
leave without visiting Bunker Hill and now the people living in
vicinity woke up of a sudden to realize to the full extent
its
2
the immortal fame of the locality.
to
contribute
factors
Many
the event means all subsequent accounts
inevitable death of participants in
and
historical,
must be
1818,
Major General
Bunker
Hill
an account of the Battle of
Henry Dearborn published
the
In
controversy.
historical
to
subject
therefore
assassinated
which
The
of a site.
canonization
the eventual
character
of
the
deceased
by-then
General Israel Putnam. As the battle was clearly passing from current event
into recorded history, the process of codification was begun.
the BHMA was
their
formed,
seventies
all but
older
or
-
when
By 1823,
the youngest veterans of the battle were in
as
Longfellow
rhymed
"hardly
a
now
is
man
alive" . Word-of-mouth was breaking down as the authentic raconteurs died.
The oral
largely in
tradition figured
tour,
tourism; no sythentic walking
no guide books could replace the personal touch.
As strangers came to Charlestown to visit the battlefield,
as
they often inquired after some of the old residents, who,
witnesses of the event, might relate to them the details of the
battle, every year becoming more famous ... <Isaac Warren> would
send invariably for his friend and neighbor, Deacon Miller, and
they would often repair in company, 4 as guides of the interested
traveller to the consecrated ground"
although older
while
Boston
house
and
than
had
other
something
suffered
Charlestown
Boston,
it
John Hancock's
historic
places
following quotation from 1847:
had
of
almost
house,
still
a
Old
civic
no
-
complex
pre-revolutionary
remains,
Paul
Revere's
North
intact.
inferiority
Church,
This
is
revealed
by
the
16
Establishment of the Bunker Hill Monument Association
Time has dealt severely with Charlestown. The monuments of
only
its
grave-yard, its records, and its silent highway are its
antiquit es.
The conflagration of 1775 spared not a dwelling
place..'
All
of these
their
own
Charlestown
existing Warren monument
this
year,
-
two
years
before
semicentennial,
part
of
Warren,
combined
with
underlay
the founding of the BHMA in
-
the
the
BHMA was
battlefield
came
physical
suggestion
milestone
on
the
is
journal the "North American Review",
of the
1823.
In
of the battle's
market
6
purchased the land and held it
William Tudor,
incorporated.
the
chronological
nephew of the hero Warren,
tourism
codification,
having such an important site right
and the civic pride in
and veneration,
in
instigators of monument building -
John
.
C.
while the
intellectual
founder of the leading
credited with the idea
of securing, not only this parcel that was offered for sale,
but all the adjoining land, that the whole battlefield might be
preserved if possible, to posterity, and that a monument should
be erected ther'eon, which shopild be equal if not superior to any
work of the kind in the world -
BHMA
co-founders
statesman;
included
and Edward Everett,
"literary and professional
Handasyd Perkins8
1823,
Tudor;
and
Whig
28-year old Harvard professor of Greek.
This
triumvirate"
and John
C.
Warren.
Daniel
citizens
philanthropic
Nathalia
of
Boston
and
lawyer
sought out merchant
The BHMA was
the 48-th anniversary of the battle.
leading
Webster,
prince Thomas
incorporated
17 June
Its roster of directors included
Charlestown,
many
of
whom
cut
their
teeth with this effort 9
Wright's
comment
"...radical
differences
in
taste
and
17
Establishment of the Bunker Hill Monument Association
systems of fund-raising complicated projects which were simple
experimental
in empires and kingdoms"10 suggests that the organization of the BHMA had a
great
impact
on the
outcome
final
of
have emerged radically different if
such
as
Arc
the
the project had been an imperial order,
Municipal Council of Paris to build in
is
There
combined
end which
no
salad days,
into
unions,
adult
the
and
a society"
11
.
IDe
to
religion.
through
The BHMA,
in
the
its
ability to fund the very
its
Associations and secret societies such as free-masonry
expensive monument.
unrelated
established
of attaining
despairs
certainly projected confidence in
brought
morality,
industry,
the human will
are
associations
States
phenomenon.
ante-bellum
widespread
power of individuals united
ordered
Napoleon
1806.
commerce,
safety,
public
the
a
United
the
"In
wrote:
Toqueville
promote
was
"association"
The
which
du Carrousel,
Triomphe
de
Square might
Monument
the product.
parties
for mutual benefit
education centers,
and
took the place of trade
philanthropic
and
Many of
foundations.
the associations, lyceums, literary unions and societies of ante-bellum New
England
had
building
even
programs,
if
limited
to
providing
and
followed
shelter for
their own activities.
The
BHMA was
organization,
chartered
with officers,
every phase of operations.
first
as
a
corporation
a
corporate
directors and reporting committees overseeing
To raise the
vast
sum of money,
which Everett
estimated at $61,000 - $37,000 for the monument and $24,000 for the
land - the BHMA employed the expensive but usually high-yielding device we
now
called
direct
mail.
Prominent
people
were
asked
to
donate
and
to
18
Establishment of the Bunker Hill Monument Association
circulate
public
subscription lists.
subscription.
The Baltimore Monument was also paid for by
For a contribution of $5
to the BHMA,
one received a
certificate engraved with a scene of the battle at Bunker Hill and with the
signatures of the directors.
Not
who
everyone
was
asked
to
perceived by many as a Boston notion.
State reported
subscribe;
Unsuccessful
distant to claim
the
monument
canvassers
that "most of those called upon seemed
and too
too local
did
to
their participation"
in
was
New York
think the object
12
. Warren
prints
some of the negative responses in his history. D. A. White of Salem thought
it
a
waste
pecuniary
of
aid
money
for
it
"I
could
not
for some other
freedom
splendid,
in
soliciting
but more
immediately
"wanted
to use my influence and pecuniary means to objects,
monument
to
mankind" 1.
because of 'unfair
objects" 13.
same
and
useful
public
less
the
useful
more
necessary
feel
A
Nehemiah
Revolutionary
treatment
war
Hubbard
veteran
of war veterans
-
"And
agreed
in
-
he
my opinion,
denounced
now,
sir,
the
in
room of giving them the bread that was solemnly promised, the debt is to be
paid by a stone!!"
effort,
15
. In the end, the project was supported mostly by local
as 75% of all the money raised came from the Boston area 16
to establish the project
on a national
Efforts
level were never wholly successful;
in fund-raising and in design the outcome was a regional product.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Warren, p. 9.
ibid, p. 22.
Longfellow, Henry Wadsworth, "Paul Revere's Ride".
Warren, p. 22.
Frothingham, p. 94.
This was James Russell's pasture, except for the part he had already
donated to the King Solomon's Lodge for their Warren monument.
Warren, p. 36.
Establishment of the Bunker Hill Monument Association
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
19
T. H. Perkins was offered the position of first Secretary of the Navy
but declined, saying that since his fleet was larger than the
government's he could better serve his country managing his mercantile
affairs.
For example, Everett and George Ticknor, BHMA director, later endowed
the Boston Public Library. H. A. S. Dearborn, also a BHMA director, was
a founder of the Massachusetts Horticultural Society in 1825.
Wright, p. 166.
de Tocqueville, p. 191-192.
Warren, p. 69.
ibid, pp. 60-61.
ibid, p. 75.
ibid, p. 65.
ibid, p. 233.
20
Column and Obelisk
Nineteenth century monument builders had a wealth of historical models
The Napoleonic wars,
available for review.
of monument
building:
as the preferred
certainly
builders.
stone,
Centennial
The
a
the
chord
Bunker
continued
as
such
I
to
Hill
subsequent
Monument.
influence
the
Iron
yet this form emerged
the design of the Bunker
America and
nineteenth-century
And,
structures
Observation
as
Tower
shows,
Zukowsky
built
monument
obelisk projects
16 monumental
lists
obelisks,
in
at
materials
the
other
Philadelphia
the
1
original
structure".
In
objective
of
the
BHMA
was
to
build
a
"monumental
the minds of some of the Directors "monumental structure"
only mean a column.
could
with
triumphal arches,
large-scale obelisk in
the first
Appendix
Carrott's
form
obelisk
than
struck
Europe,
column in
prompted a spurt
Monumental
selection.
rare in
form over the colossal
after
designed
endless
really
Bunker Hill is
Hill Monument.
columns,
classically-derived
were relatively
not unknown,
though
it
a
statues;
equestrian
particular,
in
Edward Everett wrote,
asking
for donations
in
1824:
Everything separate from the idea of substantial strength and
severe taste has been discarded, as foreign from the grave and
serious
character both
of the
men
and
events
to
be
commemorated... It has been ascertained that a monumental column,
of classical model, with an elevation to make it the most lofty
in the world, may be erected of ou' fine Chelmsford granite for
about thirty-seven thousand dollars .
In
called
another
upon
his
era
the ruling autocrat with a mania to build would have
favorite
professional
to
furnish
a
suitable
monument.
21
21
Column and Obelisk
Column and Obelisk
Acquiring a worthy design was not so direct in the age of democracy.
November
4
1824 Solomon Willard was asked to draw up a plan of a column 220
feet high,
the BHMA
They
On
but in
January 1825,
advertized
called
for
in
apparently
after seeing Willard's design,
"leading newspapers"
plans,
preferably,
but
of
not
Boston
and other
exclusively,
of
cities.
columns.
Willard, somewhat miffed, chose not to enter the competition.
The BHMA,
clearly believed
for on 5 April 1825 it
the "Board
Whig
letters;
and
selected
Loammi
two
the
delegation and
division of labor,
exchanged the "Standing Committee for a Design" with
of Artists",
politician;
in
to review all the entries: Daniel Webster,
Baldwin,
artists
-
civil
engineer;
Gilbert
Stuart
received
that
George
Ticknor,
(1755-1848)
and
man of
Washington
Allston (1779-1843).
Over
BHMA's
fifty
stated
submitted,
Monument
the
were
preference
for
in
Baltimore 3
of course,
column,
at
(Figure 3-1).
but Mills'
and
least
in
three
spite
of
obelisks
the
were
the designer of the Washington
The Baltimore Monument was known to
reputation in
serious artistic circles was
"Rembrandt Peale recalled in later years that the winning design <of
Baltimore
Philadelphia'".
Other
Monument>
the
competitions
early
'was
ridiculed
by
all
the
artists
of
Latrobe thought Mills a "wretched designer"4
entries included
uncategorizable amalgamations.
in
a
spring,
including one from Robert Mills,
the BHMA,
low.
entries
mausoleums,
gothic
churches,
and
There was no lack of inventive combinations
nineteenth-century.
Nathalia
Wright,
Horatio
Greenough's
22
2
Column and Obelisk
Figure 3-1.
biographer,
describes
"---a unique
efflorescence
triangular
capital,
pillar
and a
with
round
an
entry
from
S.
W.
of the national
three
cupola
at
equal
plane
the
top"5.
feeling that the monument tradition in
Washington Monument.
Southington,
of
Connecticut
imagination which called for a
sides,
There
a
circular
was
a
base
and
self-conscious
general was not a democratic
again Everett acts as spokesman for a commonly held sentiment:
one -
The beautiful and noble acts of design and architecture have
hitherto been engaged in arbitrary and despotic service.
The
pyramids and obelisks of Egypt, the monumental columns of Trajan
and Aurelius have paid no tribute the rights or feelings or man.
Majestic or graceful as they are, they bear no record but that of
sovereignty, sometimes cruel and tyrannical and sometimet mild;
but never that of a great enlightened and generous people.
23
This was particular apt for the Revolutionary War,
citizen-soldier
had
served
voluntarily,
in
contrast
conscripted troops of so many European campaigns.
ornament,
inimical
to
New
England
granite
in
to
which the common
the
impressed
and
Everett's stance against
anyway,
seemed
a
common
denominator in choosing a design, and the efflorescences were not seriously
The
considered.
expense
of
propaganda
anti-ornament
decorating
aspect
granite,
chiefly
aggrandizement
was
of many antique
Ornament on the historic
consisted
position,
of
apart
from
a
reaction
also
and
glorification
an
individual.
of
The
the
of
the
or
and
despotic
mentioned
column,
despot
cult
difficulty
to
modern monuments
prototypes such as Trajan's
of
the
above.
for example,
-
monarch
Washington
the
adapts
this
glorification tradition - Mills's original Baltimore Monument design was to
bas-reliefs
feature
monument
was
more
of
scenes
democratic.
7
obelisk would say was "Here"
the regional
from
In
Washington's
Greenough's
life
words
all
but
a
the
unadorned
silent
The monument's design must also be seen in
.
context of Boston's Granite Style 8,
a branch of Greek Revival
which produced the simple massing and trabeated granite facades of Parris's
Quincy
Market
Willard's U.S.
of
the
New
(1824-1826)
and
Bank (1824).
Such severity did not travel beyond
England
granite
the
monolithic
quarries
and
Doric
subsequent
granite
obelisks,
columns
of
the market
with
the
exception of the Washington Monument in the Capitol, are more ornamented.
From the inception of the BHMA the monument - whatever its
final form
- was to feature a public lookout.
An elevated monument on this spot would be the first
landmark of
the mariner in his approach to our harbor; while the whole
neighboring country, comprising the towns of Roxbury, Brookline,
Cambridge, Medford and Chelsea, with their rich fields, villages
Column and Obelisk
Column and Obelisk
24
24
and spires, the buildings of the University, the bridges, the
numerous ornamental county seats and improved plantations, the
whole bounded by a distant line of hills, and forming a landscape
which cannot be surpassed in variety and beauty, would be spread
out as in a picture to he eye of the spectator on the summit of
the proposed structure.
The
Washington
Monument
reaching a viewing balcony,
The
tower
observation
manifest
with
destiny - viewing
Pharos
compelling
West",
imagery
but
understood
lighthouse,
the
.
Pharos
and
this is
had
been
The
link
image
special
an 85'
tower has
stone
in
1801
include
and
to
linked
to
manifest
the
sense.
111'
had
destiny
sea
the New London Harbor
tall,
as
quote
indicates
the
and
be
and
were
the Nantucket
as
BHMA emulated
"Go
among
11
.
by
the
Everyone
Sandy Hook
base.
beacon built by
Point)
(Great
These lighthouses,
much
so
Greeley declaimed
be built durably.
conspicuous qualities of immovability and solidity.
above
not
stone walls 7 feet thick at its
who
by
stair
Doctrine
may
Lighthouses
to
Bostonians
the
spiral
Monroe
years before
an 1818 stone tower 70' high.
in
interior
without having to go there - and
Lighthouse,
travelled
an
the colonies and the new republic
structures
lighthouses
Congress
makes
had
a hallmark of American monuments.
frontier
the
built in
these
Other pre-1825
of
10
Baltimore
for a New England monument,
tallest structures
act
role
in
well-known
overland
routes
to
had
The maritime reference
lighthouse
qualities
for
their observation tower.
"Observation
tower"
pedestrian to describe
inspired
in
the
Monument
afforded
age
a
is
the
phrase
Zukowsky
uses,
but
this
is
too
the giddy image a view from such heights must have
when
even
ballooning
was
view the like of which only
rare.
The
steeplejacks
Bunker
Hill
and men in
Column and Obelisk
25
crow-nests enjoyed
before,
and people paid
Even while the monument was unfinished,
and the BHMA installed a telescope.
substitute
an open viewing
breath-taking
the
structure,
-
though
remembered the little
in
torch,
the
with
miles
of
was even suggested to
pyramidal
top.
Perhaps the
open land at
sea,
town
and
the base of
open
land
who
battlefield below?
Florence,
Liberty's
for
the value of the
Going up inside a structure,
Duomo
tourists paid $.0125 for admittance
At one point it
platform
view depreciated
for the privilege (Figure 3-2).
up
gives
the
whether between the double shells of the
steps
a special
of
Bunker
feeling
Hill
or
to
the
Statue
of intimacy with
the
structure,
of
and gaining the god-like view has had its appeal since the Tower of Babel.
The
human
technical
continuing
rides,
popularity
the
BHMA
question was how it
selection
classical
1820's,
In
1823
of
tall
column,
knew
it
structures
Egypt.
resolved
and
the
the
in
mind,
and
World's
is
Fairs,
part
of the
sky
gondola
such
Like
itself
other
tall
into
granite
the national
two
supporting
observation
tower.
The
political
system,
the
parties:
the
one
antique
backing
obelisk.
the
By
the
Egyptian forms would have been quite familiar12
Massachusetts
One
a
should look.
as Carrott shows,
The
wanted
General
Napoleon's campaign resulted in
in
impresses
and bars at the top of skyscrapers.
So
design
achievement
Hospital
owned
and
exhibited
a mummy.
several publications of monuments and ruins
edition
observations et des recherches
"Description de l'Egypte, ou, R6ceuil des
qui ont ete faites
en
Nqypte
pendant
l'expedition de l'armee frangais, publie par les or.dres de la Majeste
26
JI
-r
-JI
151 E Br4wtn troa &Gas Co.
I
EAST
soiruV
a4.
-
I
I.
I
A
~
-
-Li
.- -.
-WW"-
I
V
24,
U
AtAh
*:e
_AP~d
-9
e _3"
Iss
rol.,9
so
Iug~e
I'
r
I
tOL
6
7
9
10
U
Rope Walk 1350ft Long
GraveL 8GreenL
PBtnr Sburley
Deer I
Apple I
16 Frankhan.7.
12 Pulling Pomnt.
13 East Boston Noddles 1) 11 Ship House..
14 East Boston Stesn flourlB wMachine Shop.
Mil.
.
19 Quay Wan.wth bsey.
15 Sugar Hoose. lBoston 20 TunberDock
21 Naval Store Housm
25
22 Steam Engae House and 26 Bomba
: Work-shop.
27 Offioer M i
23 Commadore s Housa
28 G.CalfL&
eW1
Bre.r
24 Ohio 14.
.
29 Onter Breugwr.
35 Gaop 1
40 Chulsea FenyBoat
SeOBoastaLiU.
36 Log1 8.L&Loag.Ligh. 41 Cohaset.
31 Point.Adta.
37 Giws LIFttmrop)
42 nIll..Namasket
32 Georges tFr.Warrai
38 Cunard SnamersT-Aing 43 Em*am.'
44 Raimnrd 1.
33.Loda L 34 Niches ae. 39 EBoston Ferry Boat
6e
-
£4:.&7
5~
5L.L..
.5
...-..
-
Figur 3-2. "Panoramic View From Bunker Hill Monment", 1848. SPNEA.
-%%
45 Peaccks L
51 Wegau&
46 Spectacle 1.
52 Sheep I
47 Casde inspaa
e 53 Qumny
PA.pan1.
54 N
t m'360
49 SlaweL 50 Grapei
56tamospm
64 Old Forts onDorchester. 68
ayain.
SbIjid
SSMban
nIba4t
i--,tafr w ,
ingmun
ltaaw SBostn) Reights
65 Son Hial
66 BosaCuusoa House.
"" Centrd11t.67
Qasy Market
Fangu Hall
69 Werram* Lsehsmee.
70 GopysBiMGmaeTai
71 Gasverta
72 Chalesom.Camnoa
73 OiidColony RRoad
74 Dorchester
75 South Bay
76 Depot Rchburg.R.
77 Chadeuuown budge
78 Waren Bridge
83 BostawStae
79 ManssHose Hotel
84 Depo
80 Carlestown Market
85 De.Lawell R.r
81 Mt. Pleasant entbtSy 86 Facborg B.oad
82 Roxbuy
87 maime ROed. -
QIi.-
RBoa
-aR
C
MiDDan.
*Forbeur
7
97 Brookho
4
98 Pal Road Car n
99 Cambadteprt
iwhidg Budge95 Treimont Rbad
96 Chimn.ey(2 202ft highi at 00 East Cambndge0
.Road
Roxbury LaboratoryRmbury 101. Cage-s Powa Bndge
93 ProudenceeRRoad.
B Craga nridge.
94 Back Bay
Bngaton
Mi2
C"xnbndgerport
aLbnd s
106 C
107 C
it) L
27
rt'
..
4.
.
.
~
.4-A
.4
.,
*.. t..
,.K~'
p 'A
r
*1,,,
V
liii
4944
II
II
II
7T N
'r
~IliLL1LLJ
r11
-
4
-,
WORtTH
WEST
4
~?
a-
~
A
-h
'
-mv
S
y..
IL
.
-
3-
.4.
~b
41
pA
TL~9i
~*',,
a aas a
4~4~444~44
IKI
.i7
L~I
' --
*1>
g~33
II.'.
Harfaid aMonuieut
Wachose Mountain
Iombndie oh, spto
119 Somerville
120Cobble 11111
121eros.ect
til
12 Road to.0am'bridge
125 Mo.nadnock Mt ,
128 West Cambridge
-ll
124 C...ewawal 111 1unl127
hewWi.ter.
2 Ani
123 Charlestown Neck
a
oct
aof
133 WhtiMoutnt nof.W
135
.lat4
VC.,
-
Dlunker
130 Swoeham
134 Udford1
8i
4
.
Hi
131
Mystic Rimr.
138
Maine
8, Roa4
'
139
Malden rd
140)aaldenRwe
141 wuues anm4
-
14,
141 laps At.ini
14!) kbitt.lohkni
1011.
m.14
ImISb.+N
bB
i
1.
,
ie l I I4 i 11,
i
Cht
I .4It l
'
ifiei
I. - - '
Column and Obelisk
28
l'empereur Napoleon le Grand"
W. Eliot1.
Horatio
was presented
These volumes of precise
Greenough
(1805-1852),
a
to Harvard
plates were,
Harvard
presumably,
senior
obelisk design to the monument competition in 1825
when
he
1822 by
available
submitted
to
his
(Figure 3-3).
The
of
College in
artist
Artists
may
members
have
of
shared
the
Board
their
Philadelphia colleagues's opinion of
Mills, but they did favor the obelisk.
The
Board
of
Artists
that
the
$100
prize
Greenough but hedged
the verbatim
recommended
be
awarded
on recommending
adoption of his design,
perhaps in polite deference to the
still-strong column camp.
MODEL
BY HORATIO
GREENOUGH.
FROM A ROUGH SKETCH BY HiM.
Figure 3-3.
Obelisk by Greenough.
Warren,
p.
163.
to
Column and Obelisk
While
submitted
the
29
competition
circular
a model of his obelisk.
steps and massive plinths,
Most striking is
had
The shaft is
Phoenix
the compacted apex,
reached
Greenough
by great
flight of
mark each corner.
quite unlike t'he elegant taper of the
inspired the proportions of his
Greenough's monument closely resembles the Wellington Monument in
Park,
designed
in
1817
by Robert
central stair or viewing room (Figure 3-4).
thesis
drawings,
suitable bases for sculpture,
obelisk at Thebes which Greenough claimed
designs.
specified
to
trace
the possible
Smirke,
It
is
connections between
which
beyond
does
not have
a
the scope of this
the Wellington Monument
and Bunker Hill, but the similarity is undeniable.
SFigure 3-4.
Wellington
Monument,
Phoenix Park,
Dublin.
Architectural Review
(London),
4
Vol-
37,
1915.
30
30
Column and Obelisk
Column and Obelisk
Greenough submitted a model,
everyone else drawings.
Bryan notes that
"the psychological impact of the scale model has not been clearly defined,
but we may observe from experience that our view - offered
of a
building
larger
forms
or
a
and
building
the
major
complex
formal
as
a
whole
tends
relationships
at
by the model -
to emphasize
the
expense
of
,14
detailing"
. Given the predilection of the BHMA against ornament,
of an obelisk was easily more impressive
the essay accompanying
monumental
form,
function.
seemed
Greenough
the column is
to agree,
seventy years
American art,
and Major
advocates
in
Directors
as
he
as he is
approval
regard
to
to
the
accomplishments
Bostonians
fine
of
1825, was
scribbled
London,
ten
ostensibly
gentlemen
who
candlestick"15,
the reigning old master of
"Approved"
remained
Boston
home-grown
degree hard to imagine now.
of
as well as Jefferson,
on
Greenough's
businessman
product,
In 1820,
Boston
"generally
which
they
George
BHMA.
Ticknor
The
same
and
circle
the stamp
proud
with
of
patronized
the
to
a
when Allston returned to Boston from
subscribed
Thomas
16
model
east-facing"1
a
thousand
to buy Allston's unfinished "Belshazzar's feast",
gentlemen the
London,
were
maintain Allston, who had mismanaged his inheritance.
with
with a structural
His opinion would have carried much weight
arts.
the
In
quoted by Swett as saying "a
Boston's own Washington Allston had achieved success in
of
a model
the obelisk as the
ever associated
and had painted the revered Washington,
General Dearborn.
the
old
the
than a drawing of a column.
column would remind him of a peripatetic
Stuart,
with
whereas
Allston
monumental
his model,
the
Handasyd
would
later
dollars
each,
but really to
At least two of the
Perkins
advance
-
were
money
connected
to
Horatio
31
31
Column and Obelisk
Column and Obelisk
Greenough.
Wright suggests that Boston art patrons were very supportive of
what their own relatives,
(Allston met Greenough at Harvard).
obelisk,
the
form
architecture -
had
classmates produced 1 8
friends and fellow Harvard
a
Once Stuart pronounced in
decided
edge.
Allston
"Even the Greek architecture
was
no
favor of the
fan
of
I have never admired,
Greek
for what
is it?
You have the pediment everlastingly and for the sides of a building
a
parallelogram."
mere
19
He
appeared
ready
to
try
Egyptian
forms
in
monumental building.
The columnites
and
their
promoter
continued to defend
conservative
John C.
position
was
Warren was worried
the column on iconographic
economic
too.
Presciently,
that money would
grounds
column
run out before
the
ambitious obelisk was completed.
The
final
type
of
the
Bunker
Hill
Monument
democratically, by a majority vote of the Directors.
voted
The
eleven
Report
to
they
five in
favor
of an obelisk
actually voted
on presented
or
was
determined,
On 2 June, 1825, they
"pyramidal
structure
,,20
plans and cost estimates of
both an antique obelisk and a column.
The obelisk was not Greenough's,
but
the
Giovanni".
the
obelisk
Committee
made it
this
in
the
the
"Square
relocation
and
of
reuse
of the
obelisk
a more suitable model than the obelisks in
particular
obelisk
demonstrates
considered only two "standard"
imply
St.
a
stultifying
differences
between
quest
the
for
that
In
the
opinion
a
European
in
Egypt.
although
genuine
article
and
purity.
the
new
capital
The selection of
the
types - no "efflorescences"
archaelogical
of
Committee
-
There
had
this did not
are
obvious
American monument
32
32
Column and Obelisk
Column and Obelisk
besides
-
size
monolithic
the
stone,
new one
and
had,
public room at the top.
slit
windows.
Since
had
to
from
its
its visual
forms
made
of
inception
were
of greater
age
replete in Boston.
twenty
years
Bulfinch's
Hill
elaborate
Greek
columns.
to
do more
Adopting
the
than
and
Roman,
and
more
on the other
stuccoed-wood
Warren
The enduring obelisks of Egypt
Egyptian
model to generate all the associations
the
The builders of the Bunker
simply build
exciting new prototype while maintaining
or
Column models,
considerably more substantial.
monument wanted
the obelisk
stuccoed brick beacon was torn
of existence
column on Bunker Hill was being replaced.
must have seemed
a
stairway to a
had to change,
than
hand, were
only
rather
associations.
as hieroglyphics were untranslated.
after
blocks
an interior
characteristics
mysterious,
down
dressed
The sketch of Greenough's model even shows little
was obviously valued also for its
Egyptian
be
ever taller
form allowed
and
more
exploration of an
enough resemblance
to an antique
connected with the antique.
It was
an ingenious compromise.
Finally,
it
really
a local
honors
tradition asserts the monument is
Washington,
a
freemason.
The
spheres
freemasonry are often conjoined beginning with the
on Bunker Hill,
corner-stone
fashion in
Lodge.
It
an obelisk because
first
celebrating fallen freemason Joseph Warren.
laying
deference
appears
ceremony
to
this
that the
manipulated by freemasons,
of
the
obelisk
first patriotic
Anti-Masonic
party
for at the 1831
was
of
the
memorial
in
tribute of King's
the
and
erected
Ostensibly,
conducted
considered
BHMA
the
masonic
Solomon's
BHMA to
be
annual meeting the anti-masons
33
3
Column and Obelisk
appeared
force
in
to
only
to BHMA offices,
party members
elected
and
be
voted out again in 1832.
Washington
elected
Warren,
also an officer of
the
BHMA
the
of
supporters
Prominent
in
president
have
18417
Lodge.
King Solomon's
to
ties
and
G.
freemasonry.
chronicler, was
BHMA
one-time
William Wheildon,
Secretary of the BHMA and monument booster since the start of his paper in
1827,
How any
1834.
merged his newspaper with the Boston Masonic Mirror in
freemasonic support which existed at the time of the monument's design may
have
that
influenced
a column.
monument was itself
the
design
expeditions
Napoleonic
particularly
manifestation
of
organization
like
had
freemasons
21
rituals2.
and
freemasonry,
is
it
fair
to
In
an
even before
Egyptian
upon
seized
as
qualities,
processional
its
rites
establishes,
Warren
the
as
especially
as Vidler
However,
European
architecture,
their
problematic,
is
a
formal
international
European
assume
ideas
eventually crossed the Atlantic.
Subsequent additions to Monument Square were undeniably influenced
freemasonry.
When first
finished,
standing in
not part of any processional ensemble,
still
incomplete.
of the Monument
isolation,
by
the obelisk was
but the BHMA considered the monument
"The construction of a Granite Lodge as a component part
has been under consideration
since 1843 22.
The initial
plan of this lodge - the word freemasons use to designate an assembly - was
a triumphal arch at the entrance to the square. But lodge and obelisk would
have
formed
only a
fragment
of a
formal
processional
importance of having wide avenues leading to the
composition.
obelisk has occupied
"The
the
34
Column and Obelisk
for the past thirty years" 2 3 .
attention of the Association
committee
named
proposed
Monument
and
Square
reference
to
to the city a street from High St.
Avenue.
although
This
its
street
is
position
the convenience
skew
was
with
probably
of landholders" 2 4
In
1847,
to Main
reference
made
by
a BHMA
St.,
to
"the
later
Monument
city with
the imaginative can see in
this skewed axial street a recollection of the deflected axis at Luxor.
The granite
lodge,
with Etruscan-like
was finally built in1902 2
windows,
and
column,
deposits
portraits,
idealistic
in
the
flags,
societies,
did
lodge
and
not
battered
Later additions include the 1881 statue
of Colonel William Prescott ("Don't
eyes")
antefixes and Egyptoid
fire until you see the whites of their
and
so
obelisk
on.
-
a
Freemasons,
built
their
own
replica
in
of the Warren
contrast
communities
to
other
apart
from
worldly society but rather their rituals sought to create such places apart
from
the
temporal
activities,
While
short
complex,
however
of
world.
-
did
build
Bunker
Hill
overlap of BHMA and
shared affinity for Egyptian forms it
of form influenced
1.
2.
3.
structures
Boston's first masonic
suggesting
given the
They
as
a
to house
their
own
temple
was begun in
1830.
sort of
freemasonic
temple
freemasonic membership,
and
their
seems likely that freemasonic
ideas
the structures on Bunker Hill.
Zukowsky, p. 580.
Warren, p. 111.
When Nathalia Wright wrote here article "The Monument that Jonathan
built" in
1953
thirteen of the competition entries were in the
collection of the Massachusetts Historical Society. The BHMA removed
its papers, including the entries, from the Mass. Historical Society in
1977. Richard Creaser, of Charlestown, informs me that eight of the
entries, including Mills's, are on display in the Bunker Hill Museum,
on High St. It is hoped the Museum will reopen to the public in the
near future. The other documents are in private hands.
Column and Obelisk
Column and Obelisk
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
35
35
Miller, p. 24.
Wright, p.36.7.
Warren, p. 110.
Wright quotes Greenough, p. 74.
Defined by Bryan as a period beginning in 1803 with Cotting's Cornhill
Row and ending with Young's Custom House in 1843.
Written by Everett in 1824, Warren, p. 111.
Zukowsky, p. 579.
Stilgoe, p. 109-111.
Carrott, pp. 47-51.
ibid, p. 88.
Bryan, p. 64.
Swett, p. 9.
Warren, p.
162,
relates this anecdote: "After the decision of the
never has a
Board, he (Stuart> said to Warren Dutton, Esq., 'An artist
pencil in his pocket: lend me yours'. Mr. Dutton gave him one, and saw
him write the word".
Nathalia. "Horatio Greenough, Boston Sculptor", Old-Time New
Wright,
England, Vol. XLV, No. 3. Jan-Mar 1955, p. 59.
ibid, pp. 57-9.
Richardson, p.o-.
Warren, p. 167.
Vidler, especially pp. 85-89.
Warren, p. 386.
ibid, p.38.
ibid, p.390.
This granite building replaced an 1857 wooden structure of
similar design erected to shelter a marble statue of Warren.
36
3
Construction
C onstruc tion
took a back seat
The design discussion
held June 17,
cornerstone laying ceremony,
of
Master
his
battlefield.
by
the
Most
on
Worshipful
Webster
Daniel
4,000
under
a
Grand
General
while
mortar
led to accusations
the design was quite
As
the
the semi-centennial of the
Abbott,
on.
for
the preparations
tent
gave
an
on
the
parade and other festivities cost
food,
which later
1831.
in
Anti-Masons
for
dinner
sit-down
dollars,
John
looked
apron,
The Masonic ceremony,
thousand
several
masonic
followed
oration,
from
in
1825,
slathered
Lodge,
Solomon
King
the
Layfayette,
fashion
proper Masonic
In
battle.
to
of extravagance
incomplete,
the
cornerstone laid in 1825 was purely ceremonial, but was as indispensable as
the
sulcus
primigenius,
or
first
of the
plowing
ritual
furrow,
in
Romano-Etruscan city-founding.
Meanwhile,
Baldwin1
a
Few,
structure.
individual.
This
designer of
Swett,
chaired
by
"Colonel"
engineer
civil
Loammi
(1780-1838) was preparing a report on the design of the obelisk or
pyramidal
later
committee
historiain;
if
committee
the
lodges
and
any,
BHMA decisions are ever credited to an
include
artist
and gates at
Ticknor.
The
first
Allston;
Mt.
Auburn
three
Dr.
Bigelow,
Jacob
Cemetery;
had been in
Samuel
Baldwin's
class at Harvard.
At this time the proportions of the "obelisk or pyramidal
colaesced.
to Warren:
structure"
Baldwin did this in a particularly democratic manner, according
37
37
Construction
Construe tion
The whole Committee spent much time in determining the
proportions of the Monument.
Colonel Baldwin took them to the
Boston and Roxbury Mill dam, whence,
across the then vacant
snace. the surface of Bunker Hill could be seen; and he fastened
against the railing of the sidewalk, in turn, miniature models he
had prepared of different proportions,
and then, going to a
sufficient distance in the opposite direction, so that the model
would appear to the eye to be transferred to the hill,
as if
standing thereon in full size, he would study with them its
effect as seen at a distance. Thus, by comparison, they were
enabled to decide upon the proper size of base, and the proper
scale of dinim which would seem to be most striking.
In this
way, they fixed upon the size and proportion which they reported.
They departed from the model of Greenough, which showed the form
of an obelisk upon an extended platform twenty feet high, with a
shaft one hundred feet high, reached by a flight of steps on each
of the four sides of the base, with buttresses at the corners,
for the reception of appropriate ornaments; perhaps for the
reason that his plan would be too expensive, but more probably
because a lower platform and a loftier shaft would be more
effective. The reported a platform twenty feet ride, and only two
feet high, which yet remains to be constructed.
As
we
have
members
of
the
pyramidal-obelisk
seen
the
committee
hybrid -
Greenough
wanted
an
model
had
even more
a
compressed
apex.
squatty obelisk;
"to enlarge the base to 40 or 50 feet
Some
almost
a
<instead
of thirty> and give the top a proportionally smaller area, so as to present
in
outline more distinctly pyramidal" 3 .
The Committee Report, largely the
work of Baldwin and hence called the Baldwin Report,
1, 1825.
It
sections
included a detailed
description,
was submitted in
cost estimate,
July
and plans and
of an obelisk of the same from as that executed.
Baldwin resigned from the building committee because of a stipulation,
afterwards
removed,
cost overruns.
Charlestown
and
He
that committee members were personally responsible for
later
Norfolk.
supervised
Estimation
the
was
construction
an
of the drydocks
imperfect
science
during
at
a
38
Construction
4
period of so much innovation
Baldwin could probably estimate the amounts
.
of material accurately, but the expense of special scaffolding and hoisting
apparatus
unique
to
this
a
sizable
and
transportation
The total estimate in
difficult to gauge.
$100,000,
project
costs
were
the Baldwin report is
sum of money considering
a
contemporary
more
an even
bricklayer's
hourly wage of $.018.
After Baldwin resigned,
strength
of
his
recently
Solomon Willard
constructed
architect and superintendent
in
(1783-1865),
U.S.
October,
Bank
1825.
largely on the
branch,
was
appointed
Superintendent meant
that
he was responsible for book-keeping,
contracts and the like as well as the
supervision
at
first
that
the
of
the
$500/year,
but
incurred,
since
honorarium as
work.
He
later insisted
he
received
BHMA
felt observers might
upon his arrival in
the 1830 city directory; he received
modest
reimburse
his
salary
expenses
of
as
misinterpret his $500/year
the real worth of his work.
carpenter/stone-mason
a
Self-taught,
Boston in
several
Willard rose from
1821
to "architect" in
other commissions during his
tenure at Bunker Hill.
Willard was not one to
courses of
dimension
the Monument
to
a
take the easy way out.
to be 18 inches
cyclopean
32
inches.
high,
but
Bryan
5
that
continues:
Baldwin's
"In
estimate
works intended
was
based
Willard
points
consistently uses a very large scale in his work5.
says
Baldwin planned
that
the
Willard
Willard in his own book
on "cheap
for monumental purposes,
that stability is an important consideration.
out
increased
the
construction";
it
he
must be obvious
And stability depends, in a
39
39
Construction
Construction
great
measure,
on
materials used
good
never
and
this,
again,
on the size of the
<emphasis added>; on the bond, or lap of stone upon another;
and also on the clamps
Willard
construction
mentions
written to "correct
and fastenings,
visual
cement,
criteria
in
and mechanical
his
book,
which
was
any misapprehension that may have existed
to the expenses attending it
execution'6
in
largely
relation
<the monument"> 7
Willard may have felt that monolithism contributed to the "stability"
of
the
ancient
monolithism.
Figure 4-1.
for
he
emulated,
His columns for the U.S.
and were hauled
(Figure 4-1).
models,
to
retaining stones
Transporting
Sections...
columns
extent
Bank are one piece 14'
through the even-then congested
The
the
in
of
possible
Doric shafts,
streets of Boston by oxen
the Old Burying Ground
U.
S.
that
Bank.
Willard,
in
Boston,
Plans and
40
4
Construction
Construction
Figure 4-2. Harvard monument, Phipps St. burying ground.
Bunker Hill Monument in background.
which
he
and
Isaiah
Roger
Harvard monument
in
hunk of granite
(Figure
refurbished
the Phipps St.
4-2),
in
1831
are
Burial Ground in
so squat
in
its
immense.
Willard's
Charlestown is
proportions
as
a 15'
to be the
hybrid between obelisk and pyramid that the Baldwin committee considered.
The
cyclopean coursing of the Bunker Hill obelisk and
lack of any reference
to human scale give the obelisk an odd scalelessness
- visually the Brobdingnagian blocks
the
size
of
the
the complete
monument,
as if
seem to deny,
we
Lilliputians
rather than reinforce,
have
stumbled
onto
a
giant's bollard.
Larger blocks cost more.
"The
Warren
referred to Willard when he
idea of what the Monument ought to be,
mind without regard
to the existing
and should be,
wrote
expanded in his
means of the Association."8
At
the
41
Construction
785
UN SUNS.~j
t74
73
a
141b:
4f
4 J. 10
70
-is
l
.1is
-5/ 10 .0
a
i
8
I
al
s
.68
67
66
65
-63 An
PROPOSED
HEIGHT OF 1601X
4trSi-
.
3
41
ein 4---1
is
± 406a
ors J186 H-43 iZI111
s #i O a t v -
44 1"1
59
57
a
S.4:4 .61.0
p1 1
67
55
54
53
52
51
-s,
Fs s
is:
711,
;4!. 00
;'i
7M tre I ff
50 ISse 3 14 If io61 e4 4!
419 17 1 n
J a 5 4 a s
48
i e as 1 .911
8o
47
4:5L
I. 0
s-4
44 j.T
1 4
e
.4
431
fe
P :
ase?
n1
1
al
i:
S
s
0
-63:
#
al
".1
sI
39 sy : 1 * zz .s-i
/I e
36
s le .sa a
.Q s 7
137 s00 11 to w 71 all,
/
2'' EFFORT
TO NOV. 1835.
ss
as
32
0
|
J
J7:0
11
fA 1s 81
2
2
t's
a2
All 1 AL
V!l a
611
4644
40 11 A126
21
711
1EFFORT
TOJAN. IWO9
/4S
00
ma
5%$166
VA
6
6%a
47
t
i
1
4
1W
If
Af L A A14e
AMLe A 6 146
77
'00
3
n
t
AL
~/DV7Pt
Figure 4-3.
Plans and sections of Bunker Hill Monument. Willard, Plans and
Sections...
42
42
Construction
Construction
time,
the
Baldwin
BHMA
seemed
estimate,
compensate
for
rather
with
the
unconcerned
under
$34,000
increased
increased coursing dimension,
cost
in
the
which
cost -
about
it
treasury.
must
accepted
In
inevitably
part
come
to
from
the
to
his
Willard decided that the BHMA should open its
own quarry, rather than buy granite from the already established Chelmsford
quarries.
The
Quincy quarry rights
were
purchased
from
Gridley Bryant,
hardly an arm's length transaction, since Bryant had worked as master mason
on Willard's U.S. Bank.
the stone work,
Willard was ambitious - instead of contracting out
therefore
making cutting
and
transportation
to
the site
the responsiblitiy and headache of the contractor, he suddenly expanded the
BHMA into a major supplier of granite.
From Sept,
construction,
1825,
until Oct.
plans and sections
aptly named
when the building
the
isolated site.
committee
released
7, 1826 Willard was occupied drawing the
for the obelisk (Figure 4-3)9.
Bunker Hill ledge,
Water
funds to begin
built
and
He
worker's
transport was much preferred
in the early nineteenth century.
opened
the ledge,
housing at
the
America,
ledge
the
previously
to
the Milton
product
designed
of the
a
At first, the stones from the ledge were
dock by
one of
continuing
portable
the
to turnpikes and roads
transported by water from Milton to the wharves at Charlestown.
from
final
derrick
Vestiges of the railroad are visible
the earliest
inventiveness
for
the
today (Figures
U.
railroads
of Bryant,
S.
They went
Bank
who
in
had
project.
4-4 and 4-5).
Bryant
used stone sleepers and even stone rails, as the imported English rolled
rails,
not
produced
in
America yet,
were
very expensive.
were pulled by horses - locomotives appeared
7, 1826.
in
Wheeled
carts
1829 - beginning on Oct.,
43
43
Construction
Construction
Figure 4-4.
Granite railroad,
Quincy.
Figure 4-5. Stone ties reused as fence posts, Quincy.
The railroad was a separate corporation, chartered March 4, 1826, with
Thomas Handasyd Perkins as president.
quarry
near
the
Bunker
Hill
Ledge,
The Granite Railroad Co. purchased a
and
closer
to
the
Milton dock,
and
44
Construction
suggested
BHMA abandon
but
Ledge.
Conflict of interest
of the BHMA
proved
benefit
of no
experience to its
operations,
two
mortar
to the Granite Railroad
seems not to
BHMA,
the
have been an issue.
railroad
valuable,
paid,
many of whom were to make enormous amounts of
Willard seems never to have been a great fan
1827,
about
a
year
after
two courses appeared above ground,
above-grade
the
mentions James S.
provided
Though it
construction caused delay and loss of stones.
18,
between
Hill
most of the Granite Railroad directors were
-
railroads.
of the railroad; its
Oct.
the
directors,
money investing in
By
to
-
this Pine
line out to the Bunker Hill
its
the company to extend
convinced
also members
These
the Bunker Hill Ledge and use
The BHMA gave the transportation contract
ledge.
Co.,
the
courses
were
10
stones"1.
The
relaid,
the
railroad
with 15 in
supposedly
Bunker Hill Aurora
Sa-vage as the "architect",
commenced
the foundation.
having
in
"too
August
much
1827,
because Willard's chief mason
had on-site supervision while Willard himself was at the quarry.
Cameron's
article gives a good detailed description of the construction apparatus and
its
place
history of
the
in
quarry at Quincy.
stones
using
Almoran
all
the
Holmes
conveyance
Holmes
done
had
made
Riggers with shipboard experience hoisted
Hoisting
until his death in
was
Willard
stone and the blocks were dressed
dimensional drawings of each different
at the
Construction.
American
with
Apparatus,
1834.
ropes
and
supervised
by
the
inventor
Wire cable did not yet exist
chains.
The
work
the
season
so
was
variable, generally starting in April and ending as early as the beginning
of October or as late as the end of November.
45
Construction
Figure 4-6.
In
View of unfinished monument,
February,
1840,
from Copp's Hill. SPNEA.
1829 work halted due to lack of funds,
BHMA had mortgaged the land around the monument.
phase fourteen courses were completed.
even after the
At the end of this first
Work at the quarry was well ahead
of site positioning; in April, 1828, while erecting the fourth course, the
Bunker Hill Aurora reports
at the site.
apparatus
gave
In
some stones marked
for the 30th course already
1828 a mason fell to his death when part of the hoisting
way;
this
was
the
sole
construction
death1
.
The work
season ended early that year, by the end of September.
When work was suspended $56,525.19 had been spent, significantly more,
pro rata,
than Baldwin's estimate
and some were calling into question the
managerial ability of the BHMA.
The half-finished monument sat (Figure 4-6
and 4-7),
an
defaced
by
vandals,
controversies, until June 17, 1834.
embarrassment
during
the
Anti-Masonic
This year the Massachusetts Charitable
Mechanic's Association (MCMA) agreed to assist the BHMA in fund-raising and
46
Figure 4-7. Sketch of unfinished monument,
1837. Boston Atheneum.
47
47
Construction
Construction
management tasks.
1835,
This second phase of construction lasted until November,
the Monument was about 85'
when
total height was decreased to 159' 6".
for raising money,
At
high.
this time its projected
Desperate measures were suggested
from lotteries to bridge tolls to a special
appeal to
women and little children, but construction had not resumed when the panic
of 1837 made future fund-seeking impossible.
with
third
James
S.
period
Savage
of
now
was
fair held in
funded
1840,
by
ladies
hand-knitted
stockings were sold in
a burst
Steam
appeared
time
continued
exchange
for
the
first
the
12
architect1.
land
to
of election year
operate
the
to make money from the monument even after its
for laying out
sale
and
This
by
a
where $30,000 of baked goods and
spectacular
power
Willard
and
superintendent
construction
Building recommenced in 1841,
fences and walks (Figure 4-8)
enthusiasm.
hoist.
Savage
completion - in
he was
allowed
to
keep tourist receipts for 3 years.
Figure 4-8.
Granite post and
Monument.
iron
'spear'
fence
around
Bunker
Hill
48
Construction
With suitable pomp and probably considerable
placed on July 6, 1842.
on
17,
and
so
pointing
at
the
obelisk,
occurred
the
calculations
the
cost
to
Baltimore.
transporting,
show the
other
thrift
Boston
Although made
following
thundered
Willard's book also appeared in
quarrying,
was
Of course, the dedication ceremony had to be held
June
for
relief the capstone
1843,
"This
year,
when
column
stands
and describes in
lifting
and
buildings
and
of stuccoed
to
brick,
union! 131
on
the
".
stones.
construction
the
Webster,
detail the apparatus
manuvering
of the monument's
Daniel
by comparing
Washington
Willard
His
claims
Monument
this
in
column
cost $220,000, more than twice as much as the official cost of $101,688 of
Bunker
Hill.
success
Hill
of the
monument
The
tone
Quincy
was
of Willard's
quarries,
considered
and
a
book
and
the
railroads,
paid
research
subsequent
suggests
that
opportunity
commercial
the
as
Bunker
much
as
patriotic tribute.
1.
Civil engineering as a profession was just emerging in this country,
the earliest rigorous course of training began at West Point in 1816.
Military engineers were well-respected and it
is not accident that
Baldwin is always referred to as Colonel Baldwin in Warren's history,
even though he never served in the military.
2.
Warren makes an error here which has been perpetuated in diseussions of
the Bunker Hill Monument.
The Boston and Roxbury Mill dam is today's
Beacon St., from which it is and was impossible to see Bunker Hill.
Swett, who was a committee member, says Baldwin placed the models on
the railing of Craigie's bridge (Swett, p.10).
Craigie's bridge went
from Barton's Point, in today's West End, to Lechmere's Point and would
have afforded an excellent view of Bunker Hill.
3.
Warren reprints the text and cost estimate,
4.
Some degree of standardization in the New England granite
industry
arrives with the Rules for Measuring Hammered Granite Stone,
Adopted
April, 1829. Boston: Jonathan Howe, 1835. See Bryan for a discussion
of
standardization.
pp.
182-189.
Construction
49
5.
Bryan, p. 63.
6.
Willard, p. 6.
7.
ibid, p. 1.
8.
Warren, p. 207.
9.
According to their catalog, the American
Worcester has a collection of his drawings.
10. Bunker Hill Aurora,
11.
Oct.
18,
Antiquarian
Society
in
1827.
ibid, Sept. 6, 1828.
12. At this time,
the MCMA insisted on the use of competitively bid
contracts; previously Willard had simply submitted his bills to the
BHMA. Willard did not submit a bid; Savage won the contract, on which
he made money.
13.
Warren,
p. 313.
"Open- to the view of remote posterityt
50
50
"Open to the view of remote posterity"
Bunker Hill is
square
the obelisk.
around
trees freckling the
as it might
time
eventually
made
houselots.
into
complete
in
the
and visualize
the houses
a
this
land
open battlefield.
a
and
But
instead
decision
to
carve
historical interpretation of this
artifice took precedence over nature,
its stated
the monument
up most
Square
original
environment.
rapidly-changing
the unanticipated
A
away
BHMA owned all
to maintain
to
Imagine
except for the
gentle slope down to Bunker Hill St.: Monument
been. The
objective was
long
today covered with brick and wood homes,
of
took a
The
BHMA
the
land
decision shows that
took whatever steps
as the Directors
necessary to insure that they would live to see the obelisk completed.
Although the BHMA was authorized
use eminent
domain
in
the
acquisition
Association bought considerably
by the state
of up to
legislature
five
more - fifteen acres
acres
in
in
of
all.
1825 to
land,
the
The average
price per acre was about $1550, rather high for pasture in Charlestown, and
it appears
that some of the sellers demanded,
and received, unreasonable
sums.
The acquisition of the land required for the objects of the
Association,
on the hill where the battle was fought,
next
engaged the attention of the Standing Committee, as an object of
primary interest. In the prosecution of the object, considerable
delay and some difficulties were encountered.
A portion of the
land was procured on fair terms; for another portion is became
necessary to pay an exorbitant price, while for a small quantity,
it was requisite to receive legislative aid.
The high price of the land indicates that the original vision of the
BHMA was a battlefield open and free from buildings for all time.
51
"Open to the view of remote posterity"
They <the BHMA> obtained an act of incorporation to enable
them to purchase and to hold the land on which the battle was
fought, with a provision to cede it2 to the State when it shall
have been adorned with a monument...
This idea
augmenting
the
of the open battlefield
"monumental
grassy mound boxed in
occasions;
visitors
battlefield
been
structure",
by the townhouses
part
was a novel
is
little
of the memorial,
idea.
Today
used except
in
its
entirety
the
resulting
the
high
on special
the top of the monument and leave.
climb. to
preserved
itself as
Had the
spacious
and
planted park would have been a much different public amenity.
Cleopatra's needle
in Central Park, the Washington Monument
on
the
Mall, the Wellington Monument obelisk in Phoenix Park, or even Willard's
miniature
obelisk
in
the Phipp's Street
burying ground
(Figure 5-1)
more
Figure 5-1.
Phipps St. burying
ground May 30, 1899.
Harvard monument obelisk
in background.
(Bostonian Society)
52
"Open to the view of remote posterity"t
52
"Open to the view of remote posterity"
the ideal combination of monument in
closely achieve
implies
land
set
widely promoted
aside
for
idea in
beauty
and
recreation
a park.
"Park" today
alone.
It
was
not
Compelling reasons were required
the 1820's.
a
to
preserve suitable land from development.
that part of Cambridge was
Mount Auburn Cemetary was set aside while
practically uninhabited.
exacerbated
by crowded urban graveyards,
connected
with
unlikely
partner
Society,
epidemics
Cholera
the
BHMA,
in
to
the
in
New York,
thought
an
in
With
the
Horticultural
Massachusetts
newly-established
Mount Auburn Cemetary was begun
cemetary.
ex urbus
be
several also
prompted Bostonians,
establish
to
1830 as a place for
sanitary
burial as well as the study of living horticultural collections.
Open space
in
urban Boston faced
When
the
BHMA
Reserving
semi-rural.
--
as
late
as 1850
trying to sell the Public Garden as house
the Boston City Council was still
lots.
more opposition
purchased
battlefield
the
did not
the open land
Charlestown
still
the ideas
conflict with
profiting from the land and increasing the town's tax base,
was
of
although this
was soon to change.
main
The
value
as
event
the
today:
argument
the battle
BHMA
for
In
site.
confronted
determining
preserving
the
generate the desired effect.
eighteen foot stuccoed
open
and
still
was
land
deciding how to mark
a problem
amount
the
of
historical
the famous site and
confronting
character
its
memorial
physical
planners
definition
to
In the case of the Battle of Bunker Hill, the
wood column dedicated
to the memory of Warren was
to the view of remote posterity"9
53
53
"pen
"Open to the view of' remote posterity"
Figure 5-2. Bunker Hill during 1875
Centennial celebration. (SPNEA)
monument
of
enduring
ambitious program.
granite
in
would remain intact,
itself
martial events.
and
reserve
the
original
battlefield,
an
Not only would the monument eternally mark the location
- "Here",
of the battle
an extremely expensive
The BHMA wanted to erect
considered insufficient.
Greenough's words - but the actual battlefield
the better to reenact,
in
the mind's eye,
the
3
Pageantry also played
site for yearly celebrations
a part in
the preservation
of Bunker Hill Day,
and for special parades on certain anniversaries
first
-
of the battlefield,
celebrated in
25th,
50th,
1786,
and so on.
If built upon there would be no place for the orator's platform, the tents,
picnic area,
ground
for
fireworks
communal
display,
celebration
marching
(Figure
bands
5-2).
and
other
regalia;
Boston's
July
celebration went unrivalled, but Bunker Hill Day was Charlestown's own.
no
4th
"Open to the view of remote posterity"
1830-2,
period
Possible
sale
of
sale
when
the
the
land
of
is
the
becomes
land
mentioned,
as early as February,
undesirable,
in
the open battlefield surface
of
supporting maintenance
Arguments
the
54
1829;
as
likely.
extremely
although
inevitable
did not resume that
construction
spring due to lack of funds - "Unless fifty thousand dollars can be raised,
of it
part
a considerable
it."
4
Charlestonians
Not
all
wanted
and
be sold,
> must
the opportunity
from being covered with buildings which would
lost for ever of reserving it
disfigure
land
<the
observers
town
their
were
to
opposed
so
partake
in
to
the
the
of
War
1812
the Panic
and
of
1829.
sale.
prosperity
development which had brought a burst of building activity
between
land
the
and
to Beacon Hill
William W. Wheildon,
editorialized
Charlestown booster and an ardent supporter of the monument,
"The citizens of Charlestown ought never consent to give up such a valuable
of
part
their
to
territory,
revert
to
state
the
and
forever
remain
unimproved...5
As the monument rose and began to attract notice the idea occurred of
using
real
the monument to spur development of the area.
estate
advertisement
acknowledges
the monument -
"For Sale,
Salem Hill,
called, with a good
Monument".
the
Bank
Sullivan,
totalling
Dr.
John
Dearborn and Amos Lawrence ultimately
"added value"
of
proximity
one undivided half of a House lot,
<emphasis added>
Suffolk
William
so
the
As early as 1828, a
about $25,000.
C.
situated on
prospect of Boston Harbour,
In 1827 and 1828 the BHMA secured
Warren,
Five
Thomas
gave personal
notes
members
Handasyd
of
the land itself was the security for the money.
and
the
loans from
the
Perkins,
to secure
to
BHMA
-
H.A.S.
the loan,
but
The only part
55
"Open to the view of remote posterity"
55
Open to the view of remote posterity"
reserved was a square 600 x 400 feet, size and shape determined by Willard.
to be the point of no return and led
lots.
Success
of
the
impossible to reserve.
monument
And,
to the division
itself
may
proved
scheme or not,
speculation
whether part of a deliberate
This step,
have
of land into house
made
the
despite the high price paid
open
for some
land
of the
land, the acquisition of ten acres in excess of the legislative mandate was
later seen by cynical contemporaries as a clear indication that real estate
speculation had been the BHMA's covert objective all along.
Events
After
led inexorably toward the
dutifully
printing
Committee of the BHMA,
land
has been
which mentions
plan
of
the
building lots,
plan
Willard
laid
the
December,
raise
1829,
out by Solomon Willard.
the square for the first
land
of land
of
during 1829 and 1830.
report
the Bunker Hill Aurora records
the
Association,
Warren
time.
and
"He
laid
would
have
had
to
provide
money by
lottery was
a
of
the
<Willard>
it
suitable
Building
that a plan for the
describes
upon and near the reserved square." 8
originally conceived as free-standing.
to
sale
out
In
in
this plan,
also made a
streets
drawing up
setting
a
and
this
monument
Fund-raising bogged down; a scheme
rejected by the
State legislature
in the
spring of 1830.9
The anti-masons used
1830;
the land
issue
in
their attempted
they found the original purchase of fifteen acres,
objectionable,
but
the
reasons
any of the official accounts.
for
their
objections
is
takeover in
instead of five,
not
recorded
by
"pen to the view of remote posterity "f
56
56
"Open to the view of remote posterity
The resolutions of the BHMA,
stance,
that
the
suggestion
promoted by some factions:
of
August 13,
land
1830 reveal in
sale
for
house
their defensive
lots
was
clearly
0
Resolved, That, inasmuch as it is certain that a
"...3.
fair price cannot be obtained for the Bunker Hill field, it would
be inexpedient to attempt a sale of any part of it at this time
4. Resolved, That we consider the field of Bunker Hill
as a sacred legacy of our forefathers, defended by their arms and
watered by their blood, and
that it ought to kept open to the
view of remote posterity; and that it would be a permanent
disgrace to the present generation of Americans to employ the
same for house-lots or other ordinary uses
5. Resolved, That means should be adopted to represent
to the Governmemt of the Commonwealth the importance of securing
this land in the hands of the public."
Somehow, the language of #3 is much more convincing than the arguement
presented in #4.
The vacillating position, whether for economic or ideological reasons,
on the land sale is reflected in the popular press.
state legislature
Aurora
advocates
threw out the petition for a lottery and the Bunker Hill
selling
the
land "except
four acres;
expend the balance, if there be any, on the work"".
editor
Wheildon
people
would
be
In February, 1830, the
is
discouraged
willing
ornamental square".
to
and
spend
considered
money
on
it
fancy
pay the debts,
and
But by July 23, 1831,
unlikely
houses
that
"to
enough
form
an
The phrase "ornamental square" suggests Wheildon has
seen and admired Bulfinch's Tontine Crescent or was familiar with Louisburg
Square, which was laid out in 1826 and built up in the 1830's.
His comment
implies a certain awareness, early on, of one implication of any land sale
-
that
any
subsequent
construction
must
be
monitored
to
maintain
the
57
"Open to the view of remote posterity"
dignity of the monument.
address of 1831,
a BHMA
registered in
Wheildon echoes sentiments
which he probably read before writing his editorial:
No one of course would think of selling the land, except on
conditions that the house-lots, into which it should be divided,
should be built upon in a manner to correspond with the
magnificence of the monument. Common brick buildings, two or
three stories in height, such as are usually erected at an
expense of from five to ten thousand dollars, would form a
the eye of taste, with the grand and
in
painful contrast,
imposing style, and materials of the monument. But could it be
possible to dispose of the lots on condition that houses should
be erected on them of stone, or even of brick, on a uniform plan,
and in a style suitable to fom an ornamental square around such
an obelisk? <emphasis added>Ia
William
W.
Wheildon,
born
1805,
in
founded
Charlestown's
major
nineteenth-century newspaper, the Bunker Hill Aurora, published from
1827-1875.
editor,
As its
any indication, probably widely held.
land sale
his publishing longevity is
if
issue would have been widely publicized and,
he was
and the
his opinion on the monument
An active supporter of the monument,
elected Secretary of the BHMA in
18 4 7.
Wheildon's scope included
architectural criticism; he is interested in building and other "mechanical
indeed the original complete
arts",
title
the Bunker Hill
of his paper is
Aurora and Farmer's and Mechanic's Journal.
He
cannot
described as
be
visionary, but then is perhaps a more accurate mirror of his times
Wheildon kept a scrapbook exclusively of monuments,
ink and,
and his notes in
a
13
crammed with clippings
apparently much later, pencil.
Unfortunately,
most of the material in the bulging book is undated, so it is impossible to
Wheildon began collecting during the Bunker Hill Monument's design
tell
if
and
construction.
grandeur;
Wheildon
he took pride in
was
impressed
the achievements,
by
height,
by
technological
age,
and
by
and aesthetic,
58
"Open to the view of remote posterity"
of his
time.
There
was
no
way that
he
could
have
known
seem
to be plentiful
that
"remote
posterity" might have more need of open land.
At this
time house lots of all
Charlestown,
fashionable
bridge tolls inhibited
area
residential
in
were
still
available
Bostonians from relocating
had
expansion
Commercial
plots
descriptions
not
Boston,
even
yet
where
pushed
on
Beacon
to Charlestown
out
the
Summer
Hill
and
anyway.
Street
Daniel
Handasyd
Perkins
and
original
fifteen
acres
Thomas
in
Webster lived.
With
approximately
essentially pawned,
battlefield,
emulate.
eleven
arguments
invoking
Boston
of
the
continued in
Common
as
now
favor of maintaining the open
an
example
Charlestgon
should
Circulars asking for money explained the perilous situation of
the battlefield:
<when the free bridge is approved> no obstacle will exist to the
selection of Charlestown as a convenient and beautiful place of
residence, for a part of the population of this great commercial
vicinity. As there are large tracts of ground within the neck of
Charlestown, equal in every respect to the choicest sites in
Boston, there is no doubt, that as it was in former days the
chosen abode of the Russels, the Dexters, and others, to whom
expense was no object, in selecting a place of residence, so it
will again be a favorite retreat of the same kind, from the dust
and bustle of the business part of the city. The open summit and
sides of Bunker Hill, will then be, to this part of the
population, what Boston Common now is to the community generally,
and in particular to the immediate neighborhood of that
delightful spot. In natural advantages of all kinds, Bunker Hill
is equal to the Common - in command of prospect, superior.
Nothing but a few trees are wanting to make it as attractive a
Suppose these
spot, merely as a promenade, as any in the world.
59
59
"Open to the view of remote posterity"
"Open to the view of remote posterity"
trees to be planted, and the noble monument to be completed, - is
there
an individual in the community, who on the mere score of
beauty, convenience of exercise, healthful recreation, and
enjoyment of prospect, would endure the thought of cutting up
such a spot in the heart of a crowded population into lots, and
covering it with houses, and the buildings connected with them?
Is there a citizen of Boston, who would tolerate the idea of thus
15
destroying the Common, supposing it could be legally done?
With
the
booming
near
increasing
prosperity
the
real
estate
during
monument,
speculation
the mid-1830's,
"planting
with
in
Charlestown
and
and the desirability
trees"
proved
Boston,
of living
insufficient
defense
against eventual development.
A key event occurred in
factor that
single
other
legislature
March,
the
passed an act
1828,
which determined as much as any
land would eventually be
authorizing
the Warren
"Free bridge",
but by the
taxpayers
of Boston
and
a bridge
Charlestown.
The
bridge" was fiercely opposed by the Charlestown Bridge Corporation,
of
the
dragged
older
Boston-Charlestown
on until 1836,
bridge,
opened
in
1786.
state
by a private
from Boston to Charlestown maintained not by tolls collected
corporation
The
sold.
Court
when the free bridge was finally opened;
"free
owners
battles
observers
expected the real estate market to be more active.
The period
its
between the
implementation
in
1836,
passage of
allied
and
1828,
and
coincides with a hiatus of prosperity between
the financial panics of 1829 and 1837.
Bostonians
the free bridge bill in
Charlestonians,
their
Under the protective tariff wealthy
money
industries such as transportation,
seeded
did well.
in
manufacturing
or
By the end of decade
commercial expansion edged out the Summer Street residential area - Th.
H.
60
60
"Open to the view of remote posterity"
"Open to the view of remote posterity"
Perkins moved
Institute
for
prosperity,
of living
from his Pearl St.
the
Thus
Blind.
near the
our
monument
inexhaustible
Washington D.C.
pertinent to
continued
than
the
1832,
increasing
alll
seemed
like
prints
that
the
to the Perkins
population
practical
cost
reasons
site
division
house
for posterity.
intact
oft-cited
into
Boston
Common,
lots
Lack
of
building
in
The precedent is too
so
to
Those who
maintain
of modern precedents,
the
impedes
do
to
the Bunker Hill
be coincidence and was not overlooked by Whieldon.
oppose
and
and the desirability
At one point
battlefield.
source,
good
were met by the sale of house lots.
to
historical
in
giving it
the very real prospect of a free bridge,
promote the settlement of the
Aurora,
1837,
house in
effectiveness
arguments as they draw comparisons between Bunker Hill and
of
the
other
pro-park
the rather-far
removed plain of Marathon.
The pro-development side gained even more of an advantage when in 1834
the Suffolk Bank called the loans made in
1827 and 1828.
To repay the sum
and relieve the five securers of their obligation, a corporation was formed
to sell fifty
shares,
approximately
4
1834
.
preserve
The
reserved
acres
Trustees Thomas Wales,
around
Nathaniel Bowditch,
shares sold quickly.
the open
Title to the land, except the
at $500 per share.
land,
the
monument,
was
conveyed
to
and William Stone on October 30,
In spite
of eleventh hour
once so many people became
efforts
to
involved as investors
the land was lost.
Perhaps
rural
if
location,
the battlefield had also been a cemetery or had
like
Gettysburg, Bunker Hill would have
a more
become the open
"Open to the view of remote posterity"
preserve
first
proposed
height
sanguine
projections
envisioned.
of the
By
the
time
monument was
or
deliberate
61
shares
lowered
were
to 159'
calculation
was
sold
6".
1834
in
the
Whether overly
responsible
for
the
reduced open space, finishing the monument took precedence over maintaining
the land.
Subscriptions
raised during
under
direction
the
the
of
MCMA,
the second period of construction,
were
Like Robert Moses's expressways
monument.
directed
towards
finishing
of the 20th century,
the
once begun
the monument had to be completed.
It
is
Monument
1834
about
this time
Square,
<1834> that the place is
rather than "the square"
the Bunker Hill Aurora
preparing
Monument
plan
a
for
the
disposition
And finally,
Square".
"...
wrote
of
referred
or simply "the
a
committee
the
land
the June 17,
in
first
land".
of
not
to as
In May,
the
needed
BHMA
are
for
the
1834 BHMA report,
"The
Board of Directors have reluctantly come to the conclusion that the ground
must be sold,
reserving a square of 400 feet with streets 50'
wide on the
sides thereof..."
The
shares
but could
three years,
battlefield
shares
"the
sold in
open
would
gentlemen
19
be
advanced by them,
doubt
BHMA
for
be redeemed only for the purpose of preserving the
state government,
took
the
land did
despite Wheildon's
it
more
as
security
assurance
for
the
that
the money
than for any purpose of speculation and there can be no
that they will
great public work.
redemption by the
The only entity with enough money to redeem all
.
the
who
1834 were subject to
readily yield
their claim to the
interest
of
this
62
62
"Open to the view of remote posterity"
"Open to the view of remote posterity"
In April, 1836, a bill was indeed brought before the state legislature
to purchase
the battlefield
and the partially finished monument
for a sum
The timing of the bill --
during an
not to exceed thirty-thousand dollars.
election year combined with the enormous amount of the expenditure
--
may
hurry
the
have contributed to its defeat. 2 (
The
policies
of
the
--
BHMA
construction of the monument --
mortgaging
the
land
to
eventual sale of
practically assured the
the lots, but no move could be made until the right of exemption expired in
1837.
even before
Meanwhile,
the
Shawmut peninsula proper sought to attract commuters.
Commuting
ferry
the
An advertisement in
emphasized - only 1800'
convenience is
trip
outside
East Boston lots offered for sale at auction,
the Bunker Hill Aurora lists
2 June 1836.
areas
"streetcar suburbs",
lasts
only
3.5
minutes
ferry runs to
the
and
from wharf
to wharf,
the
midnight.
Boston had as yet no central water supply 22 and all dwellings
still
were supplied by wells,
of the fresh water available.
keenly
and wistfully
Pemberton
Hill 23,
so the East Boston ad underscores the purity
Developments
in other parts of Boston are
observed by Charlestonians,
to the
development of
from the taking down of
South Boston 2,
reinforcing the
feeling that Charlestown wasn't sharing in the general real estate boom.
letter-writer
beautiful
hills
to the Bunker Hill Aurora
-
Breed's
and
complained
Bunker's were
not
as
early
covered
as
with
rich men settle in Roxbury, Dorchester, Brookline, Brighton" 2.
1831
A
"why
cottages
-
The writer,
evidently dissatisfied with the city government, blamed high assessment and
city debt,
but the toll bridge must have been an impediment as well.
63
"Open to the view of remote posterity"
63
"Opento the view of remote posterity"
The
panic.
1837,
17,
the year of a major financial
Open land backers present desperate fund-raising schemes such as
applying
an
suggest,
tourist
writes,
June
redemption expired
additional
blandly,
bridge
revenues
that
the
might
toll.
If
redeem
trustees
of
the
it
is
somehow
land.
To
no
completed,
avail.
A. Parker,
trained under Loammi Baldwin, start
to
Warren
the land waited one year after the
expiration of the redemption option because of the depression,
had Samuel M. Felton and George
they
but in
1838
surveyors and civil engineers
prepare the
land for house lots.
One last stay of execution postponed the grading and other site work until
October,
1838,
when "the effort to save so large a part of the battlefield
was abandoned for ever. The ground east and west of the square was cut down
from eight to twelve feet." 2 6
1.
Warren, p.119-120.
Warren lists each seller, proceeds, but not
acreage, on p.101-102.
2.
Warren, p. 85. Letter to Selectman of Massachusetts, Oct. 1, 1824.
3.
Greenough quoted, in Wright, p. 174.
4. Warren, p. 2 37.
5.
Bunker Hill Aurora, May 16, 1829.
6.
ibid, June 21,
1828; at that time the monument was about thirty-two
feet high.
7.
The Bunker Hill Aurora,
Oct.
16,
1830, rebuts the charges of
speculation made by the editor of the Williamstown Advocate.
8. Warren, p.216.
9. ibid, p.239.
10. ibid, p. 239.
11. Bunker Hill Aurora, Feb. 20, 1830.
12. "Address on the Concerns of the Bunker Hill Monument Association to the
Citizens of Massachusetts", printed in Swett, unpaginated.
13. Wheildon
ran for representative
on the Whig ticket in
1836
(unsuccessfully), on the same ticket with presidental candidate Webster
(also unsuccessful), and gubernatorial nominee Everett (successful). A
personal friend of Solomon Willard, Wheildon wrote a biography of him,
and also a book on the developnent of Beacon Hill.
At Ammi B. Young's
request, Wheildon wrote a response to an article in an 1844 issue of
North American Review;
Wheildon supported Young's Custom House against
its unfavorable review in N.A.R.
The N.A.R article is credited to
Arthur Gilman, the designer who supposedly laid out the Back Bay.
"Open to the view of remote posterity"
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
64
Fine Arts Dept., Boston Public Library.
The archives of the Bunker
Hill Aurora are in
the Rare Book Department of the Boston Public
Library.
"Address on the Concerns of the Bunker Hill Monument Association to the
Citizens of Massachusetts", printed in Swett, unpaginated.
Middlesex County Registry of Deeds, L. 336 f.588.
Bunker Hill Aurora, May 18, 1834.
Warren, p.2 77.
Bunker Hill Aurora, April 2, 1838.
ibid, April 2, 1836.
Edward Everett, first secretary of the BHMA, was seeking gubernatorial
reelection in 1836, and probably did not want to enter into what could
have been perceived as a conflict of interest.
There is a plan at one point to put a reservoir on Bunker Hill.
A
central water supply arrived with Cochituate water in 1847.
Dutifully reported by Wheildon, Bunker Hill Aurora, May 16, 1835.
ibid, July 1, 1835.
ibid, April 30, 1831.
Warren, p.281.
65
65
The Ornamental Square
TheOrnamental Square
Since
the
controlled
not
surround.
Once
exercised
its
proper
BHMA
only
purchased
the monument
having
made
control
environment
conducted
had
such
itself
the
their
large
but
decision
in design and
for
a
land
obelisk.
with the goal of preserving
sizable
of
area
to
sell
use
regulations
The
the
a
tract
land
the
land
they
forming
its
land,
the
to
distribution
BHMA
provide
was
to
a
be
dignity of the monument and the
sanctity of the battlefield.
The
houselots
fortunately
were
preserved,
lot arrangement
sold
at
includes
(Figure
6-1).
auction
in
1839;
the
auction
catalog,
a plan of the original street pattern and
This
final
scheme
was
drawn
up by
Samuel
Felton and George Parker and is obviously based on the earlier site plan
Willard
delineated
in
1834,
when
the
land
was
conveyed
to
the
Trustees
(Figure 6-2).
Distributing houselots around such a large
as
the
"pyramidal
indicated
obelisk"
in Warren's history.
references
provided
residential design.
responsible
design,
must
but
for
had
the
any
more
Certainly none
as
to
how
to
There are no townhouses in
1834
visited
Richmond, Washington D.C.,
drew the auction
clues
been
have
plan,
many
and prepossessing
had
major
of a
of the original
combine
an
than
is
Egyptian
obelisk
with
Thebes or Karnak.
Willard,
little
or
in
eastern
seaboard
Baltimore and New York.
catalog plan and supervised
as "surveyors" and "civil engineers".
challenge
novelty
no
experience
cities,
urban
including
Felton and Parker, who
the site work,
are described
The most qualified person for such a
complex task as integrating obelisk and house lots,
Bulfinch,
seems not to
66
The Ornamental Square
B
a
IT
N
4
*
K
I
E
I.
L
S
L
T
R
B
E
T
-
M
7
57.6
Bz
7
Olb A
-~---
-
X
LOUSE -LOT S
7
mull1in the.
-ar
3-
z
M
n
-s
-.
A
1-7
'
-8
vicinity of the
KER-HILL MONUMENT.
.01 W.e2
to be sold at
PUBLIC AUCTION
without eserve .
esday. Sept'2
at
3o'cl PM
%1ATMt& k &V mW
11-r
t
Of~
IUM
r.5z
m.
I
-
H
I
G
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
Iq
Figure 6-1.
Plan from 1839 auction catalog.
13.14
73.11
The Ornamental Square
67
t5 U N K E [
ItILL
01
tLLI
41-,
cV
%.
X.
4.-
0
0
U- co
0
U
i4
50feet Street
4~~
4-
4V
V
L
4-
4-
C,)
1Ci
4-i
0
400
L
HiGH
STREET-
FFigure 6-2.
Monument Square, 1834. Plan no.
Registry of Deeds, Cambridge.
7 of
1834,
Middlesex
County
The Ornamental Square The
have been
consulted
monument
(the two
His
.
Louisburg
statues were
added
Sqare68
Square
in
on
Hill featured
Beacon
1850) but Fulfinch
did
as a focal point
to Benjamin Franklin,
dedicated
large urn,
rnaenta
no
place
a
on the green
2
swath
in
front
of
his
Tontine
Crescent
No
.
urban
residential
square
anywhere in America and indeed few in Europe featured anything so large
as
the granite stalk now a-building in Charlestown.
The
auction
of 1839 is
a straightforward
The streets were very wide - 50'
land into lots.
axis with
catalog
the monument, and Lexington
and
subdivision of
the
- with Monument Street on
Concord
Streets
appropriately
named after two other famous Massachusetts Revolutionary War battle sites.
In
1869
the
BHMA
would
propose
called Monument Avenue,
Street,
a southwestern
continuation
of
Monument
running from Warren Avenue to High Street.
High Street itself, running along the crest of the drumlin, topographically
similar
to
Edinburgh's
High
Street,
marked
the
edge
of
the
BHYA
land
holdings.
The
design
plan (Figure 6-1)
houses
behind
as
drawn
in
a self-effacing,
the bottom
of
uniform
facade,
strikingly
the
auction
enclosed by
different
from
As realized the monument seems planted on a burial
mound or earthern mastaba.
idealize this mound (
and more
at
shows the obelisk rising from a flat square,
the Square seen today.
lower
the elevation
symmetrical
Contemporary representations usually smooth and
Figure 6-3),
and man-made,
platform Greenough originally intended.
making it appear
as
if
to give
the
obelisk
the
69
69
The Ornamental Squr
The Ornamental SQuare
Figure 6-3.
Bunker Hill in
1847.
(SPNEA)
70
7
The Ornamental Sauare
of
scale
The
the
and
square
Bulfinch's original Louisburg Square
a
feet by
plaza 460
rectangular
190
the
arrangement
street
axial
Bulfinch planned
proposal of 1796 .
feet,
an area
covering
recall
three
about
times as large as the realized Louisburg Square, with axial sheets entering
on three sides.
The layout is
in
suggest a
I
detail,
carefully worked out,
hypothetical
and instead of just describing it
reconstruction
of the site
planning
process, to show just how deliberate and methodical the plan really is.
Given
pre-existing
unacceptable.
hundred
and
would
High St.
The High St.
seventeen feet
rounded
dimension,
and
and
acres
one
1834.
off,
edge is
separate
becomes
the other street edges.
the
open
left
and
the monument
two hundred
first
Any houses fronting
to
backs
their
have had
Willard
obelisk,
monumental
the shape and size of the square in
determined
on
fifteen
the monument
off.
squared
is
from High St.,
feet
between
-
Two
and this
the obelisk
Moving out concentrically, generous 50-foot
wide streets ring the monument, still leaving ample strips of land between
street and the abutters to the east and west,
easily deep enough for house
lots and common passages behind.
Working with Willard's square, Felton and Parker completed
the
land
1839
map,
but
division
in
1839.
Two
"spur"
streets
-
unnamed
on
the
labeled Lawrel (sic) and Chestnut by 1868 (Figure 6-4), are aligned axially
with the monument.
Laurel and Chesnut are equal in width to Lexington and
Concord and appear as important but in fact go nowhere.
Chesnut was later
The Ornamental Square
71
J LL11 / l lll
.nI 1r-1
h-
H
hUNKE- H ST
o IGO
____ _ tr
it
/5
52
750
ree
746
14+
P421+o
73e
m
12n
11,
118
-7
2
x
MONUNI1-JT
5UAKE
E5pn TT5T
MADON
7 I.po
t1IGM5T1
rMfUr:-W
NONUMENT 3QUAKE IN 10Go
0
FAWiguOM1e W
6-4 Mnu
50
Jo
ap~
Figure 6-4.
Ain868
Monument Square in
1868.
5QUAREF
72
The Ornamental Square
Once
Indeed,
seven lots between today's Chestnut St.
now Tremont St. ; these
and what is
scheme,
that Bulfinch's axial
may seem than
and
and today's Laurel St.
25 foot width4 to take up any slack.
house lots vary from the standardized
It
equal
for symmetry on either side.
seven lots between High St.
there are
Street.
Cedar
an approximately
out,
laid
have been desired
number of house lots would
at
terminates
it
are
"spurs"
axial
east-west
these
and
to materialize
failed
breadth
St.'s
Lawrel
but the great expectations indicated in
extended to Winthrop Square,
or something close to it,
Subsequent alterations, as will be seen, also
was copied rather slavishly.
suggest there were implications in such a plan type which the designers did
not
anticipate.
reconstruct
precise
The
but
it,
clearly
sequence
design
principles
guiding
the
have
not
may
were
I
as
been
symmetry
and
axiality.
lot division between
one other proposed
There was at least
1834 and
Swett published an undated engraving showing an
the final auction catalog.
alternative street pattern for the lots away from the square (Figure 6-5).
45'
wide street running parallel
This scheme placed
lots along an unnamed
to Bunker Hill St.
This meant that today's Monument Street would have been
not
defined,
importance
obelisk.
and
by
formality
implied
This architectural
introduced
blocks
with
but
facades,
houses
by
by
unit
the street's
oxymoron was corrected
back alleys
meeting
in
walls,
end
"T"
axial
negating
alignment
the
to the
by the 1839 plan which
intersections
on both
sides of Monument St.
The
auction
catalog
describes
quite
explicitly
the
attractions
of
73
73
The Ornamental Square
The Ornamental Square
Bunker Hill.
The promoters sought to attract men who worked in Boston, as
well as in Charlestown, by emphasizing proximity to the financial center at
State Street.
Living near the famous battlefield
added prestige,
and the
land was a good investment, with Beacon Hill cited as an example
of
the
ever-increasing value of land close to the city.
The plot layout,
irregular
some
piece
of land,
particularly
drawback,
derived
from placing a symmetrical axial plan on an
resulted
odd-shaped
in
lots of all
pieces
along
shapes
Lexington
and
St.
as the catalog sought to entice a "mixed-income"
sizes,
This
with
was
audience:
no
"They
<house lots> are of every variety of size,
from 1200 to about 5000 square
feet,
taste
so
that
every
B u
one
n k
e
may
consult
H
r
his
i
60
Figre6-5PHpoeghos
Fpd
lot
divisio.Set
l
and
t
his
r
e
et.
means,
in
his
74
The Ornamental Square
1
mi
East side of Concord St.
Figure 6-6.
5
Today one
selection"5.
and
artisans
(Figure
workers
6-6);
the
the houses
sees
lining
Lexington,
hierarchy
frank
of
for middle-class
built by and
Monument,
land
price
and
and
Concord
building
refreshing after the upper-class homogeneity of Beacon Hill's
Streets
type
is
South Slope
or the Back Bay. Once having surrounded the monument with a discreet space,
the plan insured two widely disparate classes of houses - those facing the
square,
and their poorer,
but perfectly respectable,
relations on Concord,
Monument, and Lexington Streets.
The lots fronting the Monument are deeper than those with no monument
frontage.
The
BHMA,
even
though
selling the
condemned earlier as "ordinary uses",
dignity and quality around
1839
plan
were
subject
to
was determined
its obelisk.
deed
land now for what it had
to insure a level of
Lots number 1 through 45 on the
restrictions,
described
in
the
catalog
75
The Ornamental Square
'...
at any
all buildings
stories high -
dwelling houses not less than three nor more than four
purposes
or literary
for religious
buildings
from
to speculate
protect
to
themselves
the
assumed
As domestic architecture in Boston evolved from the detached wooden
role.
mansion
the
to
Crescent,
introduced
the
each
individual
unit
with
were
restrictions
rowhouse
behind
subsumed
unnecessary.
this
But
a
more
project like Bulfinch's Tontine
For a
elegant
which
necessitated
transition
this
rowhouse
masonry
communal attitude towards building.
once
sought
6
that wealthy
zoning codes and building ordinances
before
one another,
restriction is
of the use of deed
cash available
men with excess
or
- that they shall all be of
brick or stone and shall be set back 10 feet from the front line"
A common explanation
shall be
thereon,
to be erected
hereafter
time
type,
built
to Boston,
all
at
common
facade,
deed
ultimately
derived
from
the
Georgian Path and London, did not allow for sequential construction and the
recognition
of individual tastes.
to ensure the
A compromise was needed
degree of conformity deemed necessary for the new urbanity to succeed, and
the deed restriction provided this degree of conformity.
were
first
the
by peer
enforced
pressure
and
the
threat of
Deed restrictions
Perhaps
lawsuit.
the
communal agreement of this sort was the gentleman's agreement between
Mt.
setback
codified
Vernon
for
in
Proprietors,
the
brick
1820
7
.
reached
on
mansions
Esthetic
in
Mt.
values
1801,
Vernon
triumphed
which
St.
set
a
This
over
thirty-foot
agreement was
sovereign
property
rights.
The
large
lot
size,
height,
and
construction
material
restrictions
76
The Ornamental Square
ensured
that any house built around
quality
construction.
desirable
8
Buildings
.
as lyceums
institutions
for
exemption
The
was
church membership
the square would be expensive and of
almost universal
for
-
literary
Lyceum was
founded
highly
time
such
January
15,
that
at
meant
as
surprising,
church buildings
and
purposes
the Charlestown
not
is
churches
Shelters for learning and religion were eminently companionable
1830.
to
the patriotism symbolized in the obelisk.
as
Just
obelisk,
was not
monument
the
the
reciprocity
was
originally
just
planned
as
land
an
such
.
values
Godefroy's battle
home
by neighboring
who wished to prevent development on an open square
obelisk
and
the
for
setting
square
land developer/investor.
was originally proposed
Baltimore
of
quality
a
perpetually open
between
lost on the nineteenth
in
ensured
restrictions
owners
To suggest that the
externality
is
a
bit
far-fetched, given its cost and size, but once it was begun such a function
quickly became evident.
Quite
pictured
striking
at
the
bottom
lithograph by Felton
versions
is
the
of
constrast
the
auction
(Figure 6-7),
between
plan,
the
and
idealized
better
developed
and the square as built.
represent an almost level square,
in
a
The idealized
rather than the present mound,
surrounded by masonry dwellings of extremely uniform facade,
in
elevation
favor of the monument and the sacred field.
self-effacing
The houses have no bay or
bow windows, which many Boston rowhouse did feature by the 1830's, and lack
stoops.
The
ridge
roofs portrayed
were
Back Bay houses built fifteen years later.
still
in
favor and
are found
in
Iron balconies skirt the second
77
The Ornamental Square
Figure 6-7. "View of the Bunker Hill Monument, with the restricted style of
Buildings around the Square". 1839, drawn by Felton. Boston
Atheneum.
stories. Landscaping is minaturized to avoid obscuring the buildings.
monument
is
also
Stylistically,
dwellings,
the
shown
projected
at
its
houses,
reduced
which
height,
may only
about
represent
160
The
feet.
"generic"
follow the Beacon Hill models of the 1820's and early 1830's 10
The swell or bow fronts which were coming into fashion on Beacon Hill may
have
been
slightly
restrictions
in
the
too
new
for
appeal
in
a
sales
brochure;
the
catalog don't mention projections, however, all
19nth century homes except one have at least an oriel window 11.
restrictions for projections do appear in Back Bay deed by 1863.
deed
the
Specific
78
78
The Ornamental Square
The Ornamental Square
Figure 6-8. Charlestown City Seal of 1850.
Cutler Glass Slide Collections. Courtesy BPL
Print Dept.
The
idealized
square
is
also
shown
in
other
representations,
Charlestown City Seal of 1850 (Figure 6-5) and other views.
facades
were
graphically
convenient;
but
also
might have
the
Surely uniform
been
a
highly
desirable image.
Now a mound,
the
square
was originally envisioned
Warren indicates grading had begun in 1838 12,
flat.
Although
before the auction elevation
appeared in 1839, the language of the catalog suggests that the square was
indeed to be graded according to the elevation.
to Warren,
dropped
off sharply to the north,
The topography, according
which may have necessitated
cut-and-fill operation to level out the declivity,
source of fill
was
obtained
by cutting
until 1847.
and perhaps the easiest
down the other sides.
lots were sold building was long delayed,
the first
Hubbell build their paired houses at 6-7 Monument Sq.
road,
with flat stone tracks for wheels,
the monument.
After the
house not being built
That year newly-elected Mayor G. Washington Warren
the interim between auction and house construction:
a
and Peter
Hunnewell describes
"Until 1843,
a sloping
led from the southeast corner to
Soon afterwards, all this was changed and the present square
was substantially completed." 1 3
The Ornamental Square
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
79
not mentioned in connection with urban design in the
Bulfinch is
for Bulfinch, building a
official accounts. However, Willard worked
scale model of the Capitol and doing wood carving for Bulfinch's
Federal St. Church, so he probably knew Bulfinch well enough to seek
his advice on Monument Square.
The only remnant of the Tontine Crescent, this urn can be seen in Mt.
Auburn cemetery.
Chamberlain p.71.
Georgian London in noting that as early as
Bunting quotes Summerson's
Jefferson
English rowhouses were standardized at 24 feet.
1661
which may account for the slight
popularized the decimal system,
American shift to 25 feet.
Catalog, unpaginated.
ibid.
Chamberlain p.89- 9 0.
Insitutions and churches usually elevated land values. Punting records
that when developing the Back Bay, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts
donated about 9 acres of land to attract such institutions as M.I.T.
and the Museum of Natural History.
Miller p.19.
See Weinhardt, section "1819 - 1829", unpaginated.
designed by N.J. Bradlee in 1854, early in his
16 Monument Square,
Information from Boston Public Library, Fine Arts
prolific career.
Dept., address files.
Warren p. as(.
Hunnewell p.80.
80
8
Some houses of Monument Sauare
Figure 7-2.
6-7 Monument Square,
The 1839 houses
shown in
Figure 7-1.
lots number 1 and 2,
1847-8.
lots auction results are tabulated in
Prices
Appendix 2
per square foot of land ranged from $.41
to about $.075 for land not on the Square.
and
for
Most of
the purchasers were from Charlestown or in some way connected with the BHMA
and several individuals bought more than one lot, for investment purposes.
Most of the deeds were conveyed
in
1840,
but building was delayed
and the
first houses were not constructed until 1847-1848. These first dwellings at
81
81
Some Houses of Monument Square
Some Houses of Monument Square
n~
m>
dollar/ft.
150
10
70
=
20
dollar/ft 2 < 200
6 dollar/ft2 < 15
2
i dollar/ft < 10
Blank lots #8, 9, and 37 not recorded with other lots
in Grantors Index 1836-46, A-B; Middlesex Co. Registry of Deeds.
Figure 7-1.
Prices received
for house lots at 1839 auction.
82
Some houses of Monument Square
Figure 7-3. Interior, 7 Monument Square.
Cutler Glass Slide Collection. Courtesy of
BPL Print Dept.
6-7 Monument Square are a pair of brick mansions designed as a single unit
(Figure
7-2).
The
swell
. elaborate iron balconies.
the Summer St.
1830's
and
of
The type is
residential area,
1840's
.
The
earlier wooden mansions in
triple
bow
characteristic
and was popular in
crowning
cupola,
Charlestown,
7-3 shows the interior of this
fronts
a
is
reinforced
by
the
of brick mansions in
Beacon Hill during the
detail
may be a later
commonly found
addition.
on
Figure
house, always maintained as a private home.
Some houses of Monument Square
83
83
Some houses of Monument Square
The east and north edges were mostly built up by the time of the 1868
Sanborn insurance atlas, when building in
was well under way.
The west edge was developed more slowly; lots remained
vacant as late as 1875.
and
12,
for
sellers,
2
18482.
7
had
a sum
and
the New South End and in Back Bay
In 1847 the City of Charlestown purchased lots 11
which
erected
the
can
first
only
be
high
described
school
Lots 13 and 14 became Bartlett St.
taken
advantage
of
"Lawrel"
on
as
this
by 1868,
Street's
a
windfall
site,
for
dedicated
the
in
while the owner of lot
exceptional
breadth
and
maximized precious street frontage by building the houses at numbers I and
2 Laurel St,
shown on the 1868 atlas plan (Figure
6-4).
Laurel St.
never
became the through street its planners intended. Instead, Cedar St. emerged
as
blocks
of
unnamed 20'
(Figure 7-4).
brick
rowhouses
were
placed
along what
was
wide passageway on the western edge of the 1839
This measure,
originally
an
catalog plan
probably not anticipated by Felton,
saved the
Cedar St. developers from the expense of street layout.
Figure 7-4. Western
after
demolition
before construction
Brick rowhouses in
(SPNEA)
edge of Monument Square,
of old high school but
of the 1907 high school.
foreground line Cedar St.
84
84
Some houses of Monument Squr
Some houses of Monument Square
As we have
in
envisioned
the houses as built have much less conformity than
seen,
the
1839
and
restrictions
permitted
organization,
one of the
In
resulting
needed,
deed
facade
to the Back Bay than the South
to
opposed
as
individual
they could approach construction in
standard
houses.
of identical
a block
in
the
in
variety
Often they simply repeated one
number of different ways.
as
of
of
Square as an urban place.
lots,
several
framework
lot
a
closer kin
is
buying single plots,
owner-builders
facade
fostered
strengths of Monument
bought
developers
When
The
elevation.
even
the square
this respect,
End.
Felton
repeated block was three or four houses large
a
unit
When this
provided relief from the
it
ever-changing sequence of individual facades, but if repeated endlessly, at
the
residential
city block,
a
of
size
facade
standardized
an individual
as
uniform facade designed for that larger scale is
Two developer-built
27)
Small.
appear on the
were
its
blocks of townhouses
Numbers 25,26,27,
1868
probably built
Square,
atlas and,
in the mid
these houses are
ornament),
look very
for an entire city block - for such long stretches
good when repeated
built by J. S.
may not
unit
The
monotonous.
of becoming
risk
the
ran
but
much more successful.
front
Monument
ridge
for stylistic
1850's4
roofs
Square,
both
and formerly 28 (now the garden of
reasons
(Figure 7-5).
skirted with lacey ironwork
the
a
have
now
discussed below,
Like 6-7 Monument
(Number
become
26 has lost
flat
roofs,
characteristic of the South End, as are the swell fronts. While the massing
of Small's
Square,
Flat,
units is
detailing,
rectilinear
similar
to that of the earlier pair at 6-7 Monument
such as window surrounds,
lintels
give
way
to
the
has become much more plastic.
eyebrow-like
projections
of
Some houses of Monument Saur
Some houses of Monument Sauare
26,
Figure 7-5.
25,
Figure 7-6.
10, 11,
27 Monument Square.
12, 13 Monument Square, 1857-1858.
85
85
Some houses of Monument Saur
86
Moumen
o
Soare86
Somehoues
curving stone over the windows of 25-27 Monument Square. Unfortunately, the
swell front was developed as an individual or double unit; repeated even as
as in
many as four times,
bow fronts
paired
this example,
almost induces architectural
or
repeated
houses
used
repetition of
the insistent A-A-A-A
seasickness.
reflection
or
Other
reversal
builders of
to
obtain
less
straightforward repetition.
Natural topography sometimes helped to break up the repeated block as
in
another block of houses J.
Monument Square (Figure 7-G).
edge of Monument
despite the topographical
a
kind
Number I I was rebuilt in
-
yet
an arm-linked promenade,
in
the houses are meant
block of four indicate that
of
Numbers 10,
Small built,
12,
11,
shift.
is
much
block
of
the
sophisticated
more
quoins
numbers 12
than
the
framing
read as a block,
to be
The double reading -
and 13
This eastern
1890.
Square slopes down toward Bunker Hill Street,
and 1i3 descending
four
S.
now two
the
now
pair,
Small
previous
experiment.
This
second
four,
according
to
Hunnewell 5,
was
built
in
of quoins and bay windows suggests 10-13 Monument Square
1857-58.
The use
antedate
Small's other block at 25-28 Monument
as the projecting "eyebrow"
Square.
Some details,
such
lintels and paired cornice brackets are common
to both blocks, while the bow front, now considered out of date, is thrown
over for bay windows,
and
slender
supports
very pavilion-like with their large amounts of glass
(Figure
7-7).
The
flat
facade
functions better as a repeated motif than the swell front.
now more fully articulated
as well -
with
bay
windows
Fenestration is
not only do the windows decrease in
87
Some houses of Monument Square
Figure 7-7.
12 Monument Square,
facade detail.
height in the ascending stories, but the openings over the bay windows are
given extra width too.
Not surprisingly,
the houses
around
granite and limestone are used quite frequently in
the
great
solid
stone
basements.
fence
posts
guarding
therefore
one
of
the
stone obelisk;
Besides
the
basements,
austere
earliest
unmistakable;
stone
8 Monument
houses
resemblance of these stout mini-pylons
is
both
of Small's blocks
appears
Square,
(Figures
7-8
in
built
and
have
the massive
in
1848
7- 9).
and
The
to the posts enclosing the monument
perhaps the severity of the facade defers
to the gravity
88
8
Some houses of Monument Sauare
Figure 7-8.
8 Monument Square, 1848.
Figure 7-9.
8 Monument Square,
fence detail.
of the obelisk.
When
dormers,
original massing was similar to its
so its
this house was first
built it
had a ridged roof with
neighbor 6-7 Monument
Square, suggesting an attempt at the conformity depicted in the 1839 Felton
lithograph.
89
89
Some houses of Monument Square
Some houses of Monument Square
Twenty-six years after the construction of 8 Monument Square,
22
has
moved
curvaceous
all
the
basement.
from
far
stringer,
enliven
where
very
7-10
(Figures
and
The
7-11).
the domical capstone and floral motif on the newell,
the high stoop,
high water
severity
Number
table
its height
encouraged
characteristic of
elevated
stoops
to
the Back Bay,
get
a usable
Such stoops were unnecessary on Charlestown's glacial hardpan,
but the style seems to have carried over.
Contrasting
stone
particularly appealing
in
is
used
throughout
a corner building,
-
in
and in
the
quoins,
the picturesque
always
oriel
Figure 7-10. 22 Monument Square,
1874.
90
90
Some houses of Monument Square
Some houses of Monument Square
-I
/
&
4
"--V
Figure 7-11.
and
22 Monument Square,
dormer.
chimneys,
The
oriel
use
of
windows
stoop detail.
contrasting
and a
stone,
floral
free-wheeling
composition are typical of what is
most Back Bay Queen Anne
'
called
attitude
the "Queen
contrasting
stone used throughout the
be achieved
in
reached
Back Bay by
by contrasting
date of this home,
materials;
1874,
elaborate
toward
facade
Anne style".
While
style homes get much of their decorative
from pressed and cut brick, here the ornament is
the
motifs,
is
facade.
supplied primarily by the
The exuberance which might
the application
the result
impact
is
early for Queen Anne,
of detail
has
here
been
unusually dynamic.
The
showing that Charlestown
tastemakers did not lag behind their Bostonian counterparts.
Another
and 24,
striking
built in
composition is
the pair of dwellings
at Numbers
23
1886 and designed by the talented team Cabot and Chandler
91
(Figure 7-12.).
some in
of
This firm
did quite
a quite ornamental
Boston architects
in
a few houses
Queen Anne style.
the
1880's,
in
Back Bay,
including
However, they, and a number
moved
away
from
the
reuse
interpretative rearrangement of imported or archaeological styles.
or
Bunting
summarizes succintly:6
Sloughing off such architectonic ornamentation as window
frames, pilasters and pediments which suggest a structural use
but are not structurally requisite, and relieved of the need to
follow the theoretical order of some historical style, the
designer focussed his attention on the actual proportions of the
facade and the materials with which he was working. As they had a
structural purpose, window and door lintels were retained
frequently they were accentuated by a contrast of materials or by
the method in which the material was laid in place.
23
and 24
Monument
Square
clearly
interest in
the contrast of material.
eschews
stoop,
the
allowing
a wider,
demonstrate
The
Cabot
and
entrance to these
better-lit
entrance
Chandler's
two homes
(Figure 7-13).
Figure 7-12. 23-24 Monument Square, 1886.
92
9
Some houses of Monument Squr
Somehouss ofMonmentSquae
Massive but crisp stone voussoirs, lintels and string courses emphasize the
inherent contrast
in
scale between stone
and brick.
Stretching through
three stories, the oriel window becomes more than an elaborated opening: it
is
the major vertical
element unifying
given greater horizontal
fenestration
is
unlike
independence
that
of
the
the facade.
Each floor level
and definition.
upper
floors;
The
weighty
is
ground floor
cornices both
above and below delineate the uppermost storey, creating bottom, middle and
top zones
in
a controlled,
around the square,
basement
to
precise manner.
the facade is
In most of the other houses
a rather uniform brick skin applied from
roof with elaborated
openings -
entrances
and oriel window -
being the sole category of differentiation.
The Queen Anne style promotes
a
not
looser
zones.
arrangement
23
and
of openings,
24 Monument
yet
Square
does
do
not
really
scream
create
for
horizontal
attention
in
flamboyant way, but they are the most innovative houses on the Square.
change
from
Figure 7-13.
thinking
about
masonry
23-24 Monument Square,
as
entrance.
a
stretched
out
skin
a
The
to
a
93
93
Some houses of Monument Square
Some houses of Monument Square
comprehension of the architectonic possibilities inherent in an exploration
of bottom-middle-top zoning would figure prominently in the development of
Richardson's work and in the development of the American skyscraper.
Because
of the
around the square,
generally high quality
of the
domestic architecture
all of the houses merit more discussion than allowed by
the scope of this work. Not
only are
they significant individually, but
collectively they exhibit a public-spirited attitude towards building. Even
though the deed restrictions specify only that houses must be three or four
storeys
high,
the height of the buildings
of style,
is
material,
further
The
restrictions
deed
remarkably consistent.
acknowledges
are
framing the square,
Generous
use
the very special
only one explicit
of stone,
regardless
an expensive
place the houses
part
of a
larger
adjoin.
implicit
agreement.
I. Lots 8, 9 and 37 are not listed with the other 113 lots in Vol.
of the Grantors Index, Middlesex County Registry of Deeds.
1836-1846,
2.
Weinhardt, section on building during 1830 - 1840 (unpaginated).
Specific examples include 1-5 Joy St., 1832; 69-84 Mt. Vernon, early
1830's; and many homes on Louisburg Square, developed during the 30's
and 40's.
3.
This high school exchanged its pitched roof for a mansard in 1870, when
the building was considerably enlarged. A small apartment building
adjoined the school for the time, but the entire block was removed for
the present high school, erected in 1907. The Wolcott Cutler glass slide
collection has pictures and information about the pre-1907 structure.
4.
Sawyer, p. 457, says this block was "erected by a builder named Small".
Because of the cornice brackets and lintels I assume Sawyer means J. S.
Small.
5.
Hunnewell,
p.
98.
6. Bunting, p. 240.
A-B
94
9
Conclusion
Conclusion
The Bunker
Hill
Monument
Association,
curatorial
function
to the Metropolitan
still
an active
ceded
its
1919.
During the bicentennial Bunker Hill became part of the
District
organization,
Commission
in
National Park
Service.
In
1961
the
Boston
Walter M. Whitehill,
National
Historic
gave the pronouncement
Sites
Commission,
chaired
by
of posterity upon the work of
the BHMA:
Much of the housing on Monument Square need not have entered
the picture at all had the Bunker Hill Monument Association,
organized in 1823, clung to its initial plan of saving the whole
battlefield of Bunker Hill instead of dropping it
to engage
monumentation....
overpowering
majestic
and
exclusively in
Sentiment had been strong in the association not only to
raise the monument but to retain the battlefield and preserve it
as open ground. The ambitious scheme to build the huge shaft of
granite,
however,
made a greater appeal to the popular
imagination of the time than a matter merely of preservation. In
consequence, a move within the association to oppose the sale of
the land was unsuccessful, but even after the monument was
completed and dedicated, a clear-sighted resident of the town and
inveterate student of the battle still ventured the opinion that
"The open battlefield,
undisturbad and unaltered through all
time, would be for many far preferable to any monument"
A decision for all time was reached by the members of the
Bunker Hill Monument Association in
1834 and it
remains for
posterity to abide by that decision now....
Just as Sir Walter Scott's historical
their time,
Hill
to move the twentieth-century
Monument fails to inspire the emotions it
Commission
decay,
fail
novels,
report,
adult reader,
eminent
domain and urban
so the Bunker
was meant to arouse.
written when much of Charlestown
even suggests
popular and admired in
was affected
renewal
clearance
The
by urban
might be
95
9
Conclusion
Conclusion
Figure 8-1.
"Bunker Hill Centennial Memento".
Courtesy BPL Print Dept.
used to restore at least a part of the battlefield immediately to the north
of
Monument
Square.
Posterity
here
would
clearly
prefer
an
open
battlefield to a grandiose monument.
Some of the first
BHMA members shared
this vision,
too,
but were not
able to deflect other interests as the 15-acre purchase shrank to the small
mound at the base of the obelisk. In summary, these interests included: the
selection
of
the rather
single-minded
opportunity for technological
and the overlap between
Charlestown.
The need
their money,
contributed
architect
period with
for visible achievement,
Conquers All" (Figure 8-1).
seizure of the
experiment adaptable for commercial
the construction
too.
Willard;
As an
benefit;
the urbanization of
for something
to show for
1875 cartoon mockingly states
"Labor
96
Conclusion
By the time of the Civil War,
beauty and enjoyment was well under way.
markers continued
although
perhaps
to preserve open land for
the movement
However,
the desire for man-made
throughout the nineteenth-century and into present times,
never
with
so
great
a
lost
opportunity
battlefield of Bunker Hill.
1. Boston National Historic Sites Commission,
p.
167.
as
at
the
Appendix 1
Appendix 1
Lot #
_
Date
97
97
Prices of house lots sold at 1839 auction
Prices of' house lotssold at 1839 auction
Ref.
Grantor
Grantee
$/ft
Price
Note to Appendix 1:
"Ref." column gives book number and then page number of folios in
Middlesex County Registry of Deeds, Middlesex County Courthouse, Cambridge,
Mass.
1,2
25Sept39 388-93
10June47
BHMA
511-114 Jacob Foss
25Sept40 396-223
4,5,6 280ct40 396-443
$2757.41
$.21
David Snow
Union M.E.
Trustees of
350.00
BHMA
Amos A. Lawrence
of Boston
merchant
1152.00
.32
BHMA
Samuel M. Felton
of Charlestown
civil engineer
2620.80
.26
H.L. Jaques
of Charlestown
gentleman
2025.00
561-157 David Snow
of Charlestown
merchant
part of lots 1 and 2
300ct50
3
Jacob Foss
of Charlestown
distiller
6
5June46 487-257
Samuel Felton
4
17June46 486-459
Samuel Felton
note: by 1855 Felton was living in
2412.00
Henry A. Pierce
of Charlestown
merchant
Philadelphia (L.561-f.221)
.29
2Nov40
398-112 BHMA
Abijah Goodridge
of Charlestown
gentleman
1184.94
31Dec44
452-422 Abijah Goodridge
John Cheever
of Charlestown
physician
1184.94
10
24Sept40
396-224 BHMA
William R. Lawrence 659.86 .17
of Brookline
merchant
11
26Sept40
396-250 BHMA
Henry Codman
of Roxbury
esquire
7
10Sept45 468-534
Henry Codman
621.89
Phineas Stone
of Charlestown
trader
21Aug47
511-124 Phineas Stone
City of Charlestown 6338.00
note: City of Charlestown bought lots 11 and 12
.16
2
1
Appendix
ADDend ix 1
Lot
12
#
Date
2Sept40
98
9
Prices of house lots sold at 1839 auction
Ref.
Grantor
Grantee
Price
396-55
BHMA
Orson Swetland
no location
gentleman
$604.82
$/ft2
$.155
Phineas &
Amos Stone
note: Amos conveyed his interest to Phineas, 4 Aug 46,L.459-f-509
22 May45
13
459-509 Orson Swetland
21 Aug 47 511-124 Phineas Stone
see note lot 11
City of Charlestown 6338.00
25Sept40 396-226 BHMA
see lot 10
William R. Lawrence
14,15 280ct40
660.75 .20
396-445 BHMA
Samuel Felton
see lot 4
1489.62
466-400 Samuel Felton
Phineas J. Stone
see lot
975.00
Amos Stone
of Charlestown
housewright
975.00
.22
15
22Sept45
14
22 Sept45 466-399 Samuel Felton
16
60ct40
397-68
BHMA
George W. Warren
of Charlestown
attorney at law
457.43
.145
17
24Sept40
395-541 BHMA
George W. Warren
see lot 16
281.88
.1025
18
14May45
464-123 BHMA
note this deed was conveyed in
14May45
275.00
John C. Warren
of Boston
physician
Suffolk County 29 Sept 40
464-128 John C. Warren
George W. Warren
1.00
William Appleton 550.00
of Boston
esquire
note this deed was conveyed in Suffolk County 29 Sept 40
19,20 14May45
464-122 BHMA
464-127 William Appleton
14May45
note see also lots 39, 40
.10
George W. Warren
1.00
357.50
.10
21
18Sept40
395-516 BHNA
John H. Sweet
of Boston
jeweller
22
25Sept40
396-228 BHMA
William R. Lawrence 545-60 .235
see lot
.13
Appendix 1
Appendix 1
Lot #
23
Date
Grantee
Price
Albert Baker
no location
merchant
$583.62
$.185
396-245 BHMA
Alanson Tucker
of Boston
merchant
1650.00
.12
396-247 Alanson Tucker
William W. Stone 1.00
of Boston
merchant (Trustee)
Ref.
Grantor
19April42 415-160 BHMA
24, 25,26, 27, 28
24Sept40
25Sept40
99
99
Prices of house lots sold at 1839 auction
Prices of house lots sold at 1839 auction
26
19April42 415-164 BHMA
29
60ct40
397-65
30
22Sept40
$/ft
Albert Baker
872.85
.3175
George W. Warren
see lot
562.86
.24
395-514 BHMA
John H. Sweet
658.38
.19
25Sept40
396-241 BHMA
Alanson Tucker
2671.47
.19
37
60ct40
397-66
George W. Warren
1075.63
.285
38
19April42 415-162 BHMA
Albert Baker
875.88
.215
39
464-120 BHMA
14May45
note deed recorded in Suffolk Co.
William Appleton
29Sept40
827.40
.20
BHMA
31,32,33,34,35
BHMA
464-127 William Appleton
14May45
note see lots ,19 and 20
40,41 14May45
464-125 BHMA
464-128 John C. Warren
14May45
note see lot 18
George W. Warren
1.00
John C. Warren
1832.39
George W. Warren
1.00
.20
42
25Sept40
396-230 BHMA
William R.
see lot
43
50ct40
397-38
Philander S. Briggs 1074.02 .215
of Charlestown
gentleman
44
14May45
464-119 BHMA
BHMA
464-127 William Appleton
14May45
note see lots 19,20,34
45
25June42
417-326 BHMA
Lawrence 1337.54 .225
William Appleton
610.13
George W. Warren
1.00
Amos Binney
of Boston
gentleman
1352.43
.34
.32
2
Appendix 1
Appendix 1
Lot #
Date
100
Prices of house lots sold at 1839 auction
Prices of house lots sold at 1839 auction
Ref.
Grantor
100
Grantee
Price
$/ft2
Joseph Curtis
of Boston
$485.41
$-14
Joshua H. Walcott 440.22
of Boston
merchant
.125
Jotham Bush
of Boston
trader
356.93
.100
George W. Warren
547-99
.13
Albert Baker
see lot
903.43
.0875
No deed restrictions:
40
26Sept41
400-114 BHMA
gentleman
47
29?Sept4O 396-239 BHMA
48
24march40 391-291
49
24Sept40
BHMA
395-543 BHMA
50,51,52
19?April42 415-166 BHMA
Nathnaiel Crocker 238.10
of Charlestown
shipwright
.08
John Cheever
of Charlestown
228.58
.08
John Cheever
Hiram P. Remick
of Charlestown
Moroco <sic>
manufacturer
428.59
BHMA
John Cheever
see lot 54
232.75
.085
Amos Stone
of Charlestown
housewright
222.64
.085
53
260ct40
396-408 BHMA
54
1Oct40
397-12
BHMA
1Oct40
397-9
55
1Oct40
397-10
56
280ct40
396-440 BHMA
Abijah Goodridge
396-442 Amos Stone
280ct40
loan
a
for
note : land was used as security
57
60ct40
397-70
BHMA
635-98
Amos Stone
237-52
.095
Abijah Goodridge
760.49
.11
John Cheever
937.50
58,59,60
2Nov40
398-110 BHMA
5 April43 425-563 Abijah Goodridge
Appendix 1
Appendix 1
Lot # Date
Prices of house lots sold at 1839 auction
auction
Prices of house lots sold at 1839
Ref.
Grantor
Grantee
101
101
Price
61
6Jan41
399-95
BHMA
Asahel C. Palmer $228.22
Benjamin F. Whipple
of Charlestown
housewrights
62
60ct40
397-54
BHMA
Daniel J. Coburn
of Charlestown
deputy sheriff
196.51
.09
63
290ct40
396-452 BHMA
Alanson Tucker
174.68
.08
396-453 Alanson Tucker
290ct40
note see lots
William W. Stone
174.68
64,65 2Nov40
398-108 BHMA
Abijah Goodridge
349.36
65
7Sept41
406-345 Abijah Goodridge
John Cheever
of Charlestown
gentleman
545.87
66
25Sept39
388-140 BHMA
Joseph F. Boyd
of Charlestown
sailmaker
169.22
.0775
67
30Sept40
396-302 BHMA
John B. Caldwell
of Charlestown
no occupation
169.22
.0775
68
60ct40
397-62
Phineas J. Stone
of Charlestown
grocer
163.76
.075
69,70 7Sept40
BHMA
396-105 BHMA
$.12
.08
William Sawyer
343.90
attorney at law
Timothy T. Sawyer
merchant
both of Charlestown
.0787
71
60ct40
397-63
BHMA
George W. Warren
195.06
.08
72
24SEpt40
395-545 BHAM
George W. Warren
192.89
.10
73
25Sept39
388-67
John B. Wilson
of Charlestown
no occupation
163.76
.075
BHMA
74,75,76
15July40
395-167 BHMA
James Hunnewell
of Charlestown
merchant
491.28
.075
77,78 17Aug41
408-216 BHMA
James Dana
Charlestown
no occupation
327.52
.075
Appendix 1
Appendix 1
Lot #
Date
102
102
Prices of house lots sold at 1839 auction
Prices of house lots sold at 1839 auction
Ref.
Grantor
79,80,81,82
22July40 394-302 BHMA
BHMA
Grantee
Price
James Hunnewell
of Charlestown
merchant
$796.19
$.0883
John Cheever
233.77
.115
$/ft2
83
1Oct40
397-8
84
18Jan40
389-441 BHMA
Charles Blasdell
of Charlestown
boatbuilder
163.76
.075
406-560 BHMA
Jabez Hayward
of Charlestown
housewright
491.28
.075
29Sept41
406-562 Jabez Hayward
John Hayward
son of Jabez
Hayward
of LYnnfield
shoemaker
1.00
11Feb41
400-158 BHMA
Aaron Crowell
no location
no occupation
163.76
.075
Elijah Bigelow
327.52
.075
85,86,87
29Sept41
88
89,90 60ct40
397-58
BHMA
91
17Sept40
395-534 BHMA
Wilder Beal
of Boston
grocer
169.22
.075
92
220ct40
396-338 BHMA
Samuel Cutter
of Charlestwn
no occupation
191.05
.0875
220ct40
396-340 Samuel Cutter
provision dealer
Richard Lavers
337.51
Samuel Cutter
396-340 Richard Lavers
mechanic
note seems to have settled a debt of $118.75 owed to
237-50
220ct40
Cutter by Lavers
93
60ct40
397-56
BHMA
Charles D. Gibson 219.43
of Charlestown
merchant
.09
94
25Sept39
388-74
BHMA
James Armstrong
of Charlestown
gentleman
.13
250-75
Appendix 1
Appendix 1
Lot #
Date
103
Prices of house lots sold at 1839 auction
Prices of house lots sold at 1839 auction
Ref.
Grantor
103
Grantee
Price
$/ft
95
21Sept40
395-493 BHMA
John Southwick
of Charlestown
housewright
$251.10
$.115
96
7April42
412-294 BHMA
Abel Barker
of Westford
yeoman
196.51
.09
Sampson Warren
of Charlestown
grocer
1146.33
.0112
97,98,99,100.101.102
24Sept40 395-538 BHMA
William Hunnewell 229.27
of Charlestown
wheelwright
.105
Albert Baker
395-92
.1525
Shadrach Varney
of Charlestown
no occupation
1004.84
.12
392-443 BHMA
Henry A. Rice
of Charlestown
housewright
428.08
.1125
389-443 BHMA
103
17Jan40
104
19April42 415-167 BHMA
105,106,107,108,109
17July40 394-217 BHMA
110,111
22May40
112
23JUne40
394-163 BHMA
Charles Freeman
of Charlestown
blockmaker
303.14
.135
113
17Nov42
420-254 BHMA
David Snow
of Boston
merchant
539.68
.187
114,115
29Mar45
453-539 BHMA
other:
120ct40
398-21
2
William W. Wheildon 924.08 .1537
of Charlestown
editor
note this deed was registered in Suffolk Co. 29Sept40
449.82
Nathan Pratt
of Charlestown
merchant
description":Northwesterly half of a 20' passage abutting Pratt's land
BHMA
Total from land sale in 1839:
($ received for the most part in 1840)
(Not including Pratt transaction)
Original cost of land:
$52,542.61
around $23,000
104
Bibliography
BOOKS AND BOOKLETS
New England in
Adams, James Truslow.
Gloucester, 1960.
Bacon,
1928.
Edward
M.
Boston,
Co.
The Belknap Press,
Houses of Boston's Back Bay.
Bunting, Bainbridge.
Cambridge, 1967.
and
Ginn
Boston A Guide Book to the City.
Smith,
Peter
the Republic 1776-1850.
The Egyptian Revival: Its Sources, Monuments, and
G.
Richard
Carrott,
Meaning (1808-1858). University of Berkeley Press, Berkeley, Calif., 1978.
Allen. Beacon Hill: Its Ancient Pastures and Early
Chamberlain,
Boston, 1925. Houghton Mifflin Co.,
Ellis, George E. Memoir of Dr.
Cambridge, Mass. 1880.
America's Old Masters:
James Thomas.
Flexner,
World. The Viking Press, New York, 1939.
Frothingham, Richard.
Brown, Boston, 1845.
John
Jacob Bigelow.
Wilson
Mansions.
and
Son,
First Artists of the New
Charles C. Little and James
A History of Charlestown.
"A Man of Genius" The Art
Gerdts, William H. and Theodore E. Stebbins, jr.
Arts, Boston, 1979.
Fine
of
Museum
(1779-1843).
Allston
of Washington
Hamlin, Talbot. Greek Revival Architecture in
Inc., New York, 1964.
James.
Hunnewell,
Hill, Boston. Boston,
America.
Dover Publications,
Bibliography of Charlestown, Massachusetts and Bunker
1880.
A History of Charlestown,
A Century of Town Life;
----------------.
Massachusetts, 1775-1887. Boston, 1888.
Washington Allston A Study of the Romantic
Preston.
Edgar
Richardson,
Chicago Press, Chicago, Ill. 1948.
of
University
America.
in
Artist
Sawyer,
Timothy.
Old Charlestown.
James H. West,
Stilgoe, John R. Common Landscape of America,
Press, New Haven, 1982.
Co.,
Boston,
1580 to 1845.
1902.
Yale University
Original planning and construction of Bunker Hill Monument.
Swett, Samuel.
J. Munsell, Albany, 1863.
de Toqueville, Alexis.
Knopf, New York, 1945.
Democracy in America.
trans.
by Henry Reeve.
A. A.
U. S. Coast Guard. Historically Famous Lighthouses. Doc. CG-232, no date.
105
Bibliography
Warren, G. Washington. The history of the Bunker Hill Monument Association
J.
K.
Osgood,
during the first century of the United States of America.
Boston, 1877.
Wheildon,
William
W.
Memoir of Solomon Willard,, Architect and
Superintendent of the Bunker Hill Monument.
Bunker
Hill
Monument
Association, Boston, 1865.
Whitehill,
1968.
Walter Muir.
Boston A Topographical History. Rev.
ed.
Cambridge,
Willard, Solomon. Plans and sections of the obelisk on Bunker Hill with the
details of experiments made in quarrying the granite. Boston, 1843.
Winsor, Justin,
1881 -1886.
et al.
Memorial History of Boston.
4 vols.,
Boston,
ARTICLES
Cameron,
1952.
E.
H. "Of Yankee Granite",
Technology Review,
May,
1952 and June,
"Charlestown high school, Bunker Hill Square, Charlestown, Mass".
architect and building news. V. 93, no. 1671, Jan. 4, 1908.
American
"Memorials of War" series of articles in Architectural Review (London).
Vol. 37, 1915 - "Ancient",
"Renaissance",
"Napoleonic",
"Modern British",
and "Modern French".
Vol.
38, 1915 - "Modern Italian",
and "Modern
American".
Miller, J. Jefferson, III. "The Designs for the Washington Monument in
Baltimore", Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians. V. 23, no.
3, March 1964.
Vidler,
Anthony. "The Architecture of the Lodges; Ritual Form and
Associational Life in the Late Enlightenment". Oppositions, summer 1976.
Weinhardt, Carl J. "The Domestic Architecture of Beacon Hill,
Proceedings of the Bostonian Society, 1958, 11-32.
Wright, Nathalia. "The Monument
Vol. 5, Summer 1953, No. 2.
that Jonathan
Built",
1800-1850",
American Quarterly.
OTHER
Atlas of the County of Suffolk, Massachusetts. Vol. 6th including the Late
City of Charlestown, now wards 20, 21 and 22, City of Boston. G. M. Hopkins
and Co., Philadelphia, 1875.
Boston Public
collection.
Library.
four
volumes
of
the
Wolcott
Cutler
Bryan, John. "Boston's Granite Architecture, 1810-1860".
dissertation. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor, Michigan,
glass
slide
Unpublished Ph.d.
1972.
106
Bibliography
Bunker Hill Aurora.
newspaper.
July 12,
1827+
Charlestown Directories. 1831+ . published variously by Charles P. Emmons,
Charlestown and by Adams, Sampon, and Co., Boston. The Bostonian Society
has an incomplete set.
Coolidge and Haskell, auctioneers. "Condition of sale of house lots, in the
vicinity of the Bunker Hill Monument, at public auction...Sept. 25, 1839".
Charlestown, Mass., 1839.
Insurance map of Charlestown, portions of Roxbury and Cambridge,
Daniel Sanborn, Philadelphia.
1868.
"Report of the president, vice-presidents, and several directors of the
Bunker Hill Monument Association". The Boston Daily Advocate, Boston, 1832.
Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme
Volume 90, p. 173. Peter Hubbell vs. George Washington
1864.
Judicial Court.
Warren. January
U.S. Boston National Historic Sites Commission. "Final Report of the Boston
National Historic Sites Commission, March 15, 1961". 87th Congress, 1st
Session. House Doc. 107.
Wheildon,
comments.
William
No date.
W. Unpublished scrapbook of monuments with
Rare books collection, Boston Public Library.
clippings,