Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Finsbury Park Landscape Watercolour, John Ladds, 1905
This picture came with the title Finsbury Park, Landscape Scene With a Red Brick Brick Church (by John Ladds, dated 1905).
When I first posted the picture I was feebly unable to identify the church. Of course, it's the original St. Paul's on Wightman.
John Ladds (1835-1926) was first and foremost an architect. Here's a potted bio I found for him:
John Ladds was born in Ellington, Cambridgeshire, England on 22 April 1835. By 1861 he was practising as an architect in Ellington, however, it is not known where and with whom he trained. He was elected an Associate of the Royal Institute of British Architects (ARIBA) in 1869.
By 1867 he had moved to 4 Chapel Street, Bedford Row, London. By 1881 he was living in the parish of St. George Martyr, London. In the 1891 England and Wales Census his address was given as 7 Doughty Street, St. Pancras, London, where he remained until at least 1901. In 1911 his address was given as 93 Pemberton Road, Harringay, Middlesex [now London] and it was in Harringay that he practised as an architect for the remainder of his career as an architect.
Ladds died on 15 October 1926. At the time of his death his address was given as 93 Pemberton Road, Harringay, Middlesex. His son, Sidney Inskip Ladds (1867-1980) was also an architect
Source: (Biographical Dictionary of British and Irish Architects 1800-1950)
The same source informs us that he was also responsible for the Harringay war memorial, that was installed inside St. Paul's Church, Harringay in 1922 and moved to Hornsey Town Hall after the 1984 fire that burned down the church.
I found some of his and his son's work held in the Norris Library and Museum in St Ives, Cambridgeshire.
-
Comment by Hugh on November 25, 2019 at 23:11
-
Gordon, the signal box is a good idea. But I don't quite buy it. it's the wrong shape and in the wrong place.
-
Comment by Dave W on November 25, 2019 at 23:18
-
Box is oriented wrong for this viewpoint, I agree, but it stands out as a signal box to me - the windows and shape were the first thing I noticed.
-
-
There was a local John Ladds who lived on Pemberton at around the right time. He was an architect who designed many churches. He also designed one of the memorials for St Paul's Harringay. I have no information to confirm that he was the author of the work above or even that he was an artist.But, it it was him, you'd expect a greater than average focus on building details.
-
-
Yes the signalbox orientation isn't right, I agree now. But a building of the right orientation and height would have been the old station building that was burnt down many years ago. Best image here.
-
-
The station building was erected in 1885 and burned down just over 80 years later. I know of no record of it having been rebuilt or remodelled during its eighty year lifespan. So as far as we know its appearance never changed. Is it a close enough match with the building in the picture? For me the angles on the roofline in the image are closer to those on houses. The station roofline is much more raked. So the jury is out for me on this one.
It's appropriate to consider whether any discrepancies we see are attributable to artistic licence or something else, but doesn't it reach a point when the level of those discrepancies has to throw in to doubt either the picture attribution or our interpretation of the viewpoint from which it was painted?
If it was painted by the John Ladds I've identified, he would have been 70 at the time the picture was painted. It's possible that by this age his eyesight was failing and that he was painting with an architect's imagination partly by invention. But that's another big supposition.
My interest in pursuing this is not to be cantankerous and argumentative. I'm interested in establishing the best possible interpretation of what we have in front of us. I come across this quite frequently when researching local history. It's always tempting to force-fit facts to a certain interpretation. Generally, I manage to resist it.
I bought this painting a few years back. It was attributed as Hornsey 1860. Of course I want it to be right. The church works and I can cobble together enough explanations to argue a case for the attribution's accuracy, but I'm still not certain that it's right (and this is one that I have every reason for wanting to be right!).
-
-
I take your point about not forcing facts to fit an opinion, I hope I came across as offering up ideas to see if they provided a close enough fit. Yes there are discrepancies between the painting and available photographs e.g. the size of the fleche.
'Balance of probabilities' versus 'beyond reasonable doubt' in law comes to mind!
-
-
You came across just like that, G. :o)
-
-
Text below image updated with additional information about John Ladds.
Add a Comment
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- Next ›
© 2025 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
You need to be a member of Harringay online to add comments!
Join Harringay online