Sir Paul Pindar’s house

< Table of Contents



Sir Paul Pindar (c.1565-1650) was a merchant and was James I’s Ambassador to the Ottoman Empire from 1611-1620. He was eventually Knighted for his service in 1623. As a wealthy merchant-nobleman he appears to have owned a rather fine house, built around 1600. Although subdivided after his death, the portion of the façade on display here is particularly rare for being a timber-framed building in London that survived the Great Fire of 1666. It remained in position until 1890, when it was removed as part of the expansion of Liverpool Street station. I am just in awe of this huge piece and a museum that has the foresight to preserve such a big piece and the audacity to display it in a way that allows it to ‘breathe’ in a gallery. It’s just gorgeous.

Sir Paul Pindar's House before being moved to the V&A




Location: Cromwell Rd, Knightsbridge, London SW7 2RL, UK

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

"Always remember to draw the swastika turning to the right": Some thoughts on swastika directionality in Early Medieval Irish Art

Image
Swastikas are, for a number of reasons, endlessly fascinating symbols. Like all symbols, they are only invested with the meanings we give them. Otherwise they are just little shapes and drawings that mean nothing in and of themselves. Owing to its long history and brief (if traumatic) association with Nazism, the swastika probably has a stronger resonance than most. You won’t spend long on the internet attempting to discuss the swastika before someone, trying to be helpful, notes that the Nazi version rotated counter-clockwise (elbows pointing left) and was bad, but the good Buddhist/Hindu version rotated clockwise. They may be trying to be helpful, but they are invariably wrong. It’s true that the version Adolf Hitler designed for the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei only went one direction: counter-clockwise. What’s wrong is that not all other ( i.e. non-Nazi) swastikas turn the opposite direction (elbows pointing right). Rather than dutifully plod through a debun...
Read more

The dreaded first test post!

Image
An irregularly updated blog about archaeology and related madness! ... might just be good! ** I'm always looking for guest writers! So if you have something that you want to say about archaeology, please get in touch! ** [** If you like any of the posts on this blog, please consider making a small donation. Each donation helps keep the Irish Radiocarbon & Dendrochronological Dates project going! **] &amp;amp;amp;lt;A HREF="http://ws.amazon.co.uk/widgets/q?rt=tf_sw&amp;amp;amp;amp;ServiceVersion=20070822&amp;amp;amp;amp;MarketPlace=GB&amp;amp;amp;amp;ID=V20070822%2FGB%2Frobmchaarc-21%2F8002%2Fb7e77064-bfea-4ba8-954d-a415ec05ad0c&amp;amp;amp;amp;Operation=NoScript"&amp;amp;amp;gt;Amazon.co.uk Widgets&amp;amp;amp;lt;/A&amp;amp;amp;gt;
Read more

Three Billboards Outside University College London: A case of approved plagiarism by Prof Andrew Bevan et al.

Image
Introduction The oft-recited adage is that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Going by this logic, there can be no higher praise from an academic than outright plagiarism of your work. I have had recent cause to be on the receiving end of just such praise and I can assure you, dear reader, that it doesn’t feel like a compliment at all. In fact, it sucks. I decided that, rather than meekly accept it, I was going to fight back for the recognition due to my work. To this end, I reached out to the two universities involved (University College London and Plymouth University) and the publishing journal (PNAS) and asked them to initiate investigations into the conduct of their employees/authors. I trusted that these institutions would be keen to ensure that their academics adhered to the highest standards and that any deviation would be met with swift correction. I was wrong and my trust was sorely misplaced. Until now I have only really discussed this issue with my cont...
Read more