While reading a book on the contents of the Harvard Natural History Museum, I came across the distinction made by paleontologists of people who, on seeing a new skeleton found in the field, either try to define a new species (splitters) or lump the skeleton into an existing species (lumpers). This applies to how furniture is seen by the antiques trade, according to which category best advertises the piece of furniture.
For example, Thomas Chippendale made very distinctive feet on a great deal of his furniture, regardless of the form. If the legs were straight, the feet were often blocked and if turned, the feet would be bulbous at the ankles. I have a supper table at home which has straight legs that are blocked at the ankles so I lump it into the Chippendale category. Other than the high level of craftsmanship of the table and the good timber it is made from, there is nothing else that relates to Chippendale.
When Christopher Gilbert did his research on Chippendale, one of the discoveries he made was why the rails of his chairs were notched. Gilbert said this was to secure the chairs in the packing crates. Before you knew it, every chair with notches in the rails was made by Chippendale. The lumpers were happy to know this fact.
The late dealer Ronald Lee loved focusing on details and had a wide knowledge of distinctive traits on furniture from eccentric mouldings, unusual hardware, odd feet, etc. He was a splitter who would try to pin down a maker through his details. The problem was that the information was useless without the identification of the maker and a lot of Lee’s knowledge died with him.
More on lumpers and splitters tomorrow.
There is a set of Chippendale dining chairs at Nostell Priory in Yorkshire that are made by Thomas Chippendale. It is a large set and most of the chairs have been kept around the table. However, several of them have been placed in the window alcoves for the last two hundred and fifty years and because of that have been bleached by the sun. They almost look like different chairs because the color of the chairs is so different.
I was once asked to go to Louisiana to look at a John Cobb commode. It was a period commode, serpentine shape with marquetry inlay. Unfortunately, the engraving on the commode had been re-done, most likely because someone had sanded the original surface and caused it to be erased. It was badly re-engraved and looked terrible.
The thing most ignored by people who are lumping and splitting to further define their furniture is the condition that the furniture is in. The Cobb commode was a good period piece, but it was drastically damaged by the poor re-engraving. The Chippendale chairs are just fine in my opinion, but if I was selling them, I know that most potential clients would have problems with the chairs that were sun bleached.
Every piece of furniture is different, not just because it was made one piece at a time, but because it has survived to the present age differently than the piece that might have been made right along side of it. Even, as is the case with the chairs at Nostell, if they have lived in the same room for their entire existence! Split and lump as you like as it is important to make definitions, but choose your furniture according to the condition that it is in today.