1 Pote, J., The Foreigner's Guide (London, 1729), p. 120Google Scholar, quoted in Friedman, Terry, James Gibbs (New Haven and London, 1984), p. 48Google Scholar.

2 See Colvin, Howard, ‘Fifty New Churches’, Architectural Review, 107 (March 1950), pp. 189–97Google Scholar; Downes, Kerry, Hawksmoor (London, 1959), pp. 156–71Google Scholar; Colvin, Howard, ‘Introduction’, in The Queen Anne Churches: A Catalogue of Papers, ed. Bill, E. G. W. (London, 1979), pp. i–xixGoogle Scholar; and Friedman, Terry, The Eighteenth-Century Church in Britain (London and New Haven, 2011), pp. 359–81Google Scholar.

3 Gibbs, James, A Book of Architecture, Containing Designs of Buildings and Ornaments (London, 1728)Google Scholar, p. vi. The designs are illustrated on pp. 16–23.

4 Blackett-Ord, Carol, ‘Letters from William Kent to Burrell Massingberd from the Continent’, Walpole Society, 63 (2001), letter no. 24, pp. 75–109Google Scholar (p. 100).

5 Royal Commission for Historical Manuscripts [hereafter HMC], Calendar of the Stuart Papers Belonging to his Majesty the King, 6 vols (London, 1902), II, p. 92.

6 London, Lambeth Palace Library, Commissioners for Building Fifty New Churches Papers [hereafter LPL], MS 2726, f. 77r.

7 A sketch by James Thornhill, c. 1719, for an uncompleted group portrait also depicts him standing near the church (Art Institute of Chicago, 1922.1283).

8 James Gibbs, The Rules for Drawing the Several Parts of Architecture, facsimile edn, ed. C. Barman (London, 1924), p. 37.

9 London, Sir John Soane's Museum, SM vol. 26, ‘James Gibbs's Notebook’, f. 44r. For the dating, see William Aslet, ‘A James Gibbs Autobiography Revisited: Rome and Self-Memorialisation in the Gibbs Manuscript in Sir John Soane's Museum’, Georgian Group Journal, 25 (2017), pp. 113–30.

10 Terry Friedman, ‘James Gibbs and “This Most Miserable Business of Architecture”’, in Georgian Architectural Practice: Papers Given at the Georgian Group Symposium (London, 1992), p. 12.

11 For recent perspectives on the architect, see Carlo Fontana, 1638–1714: Celebrato Architetto, ed. Giuseppe Bonaccorso and Francesco Moschini (Rome, 2017). In a letter to the Earl of Mar, Gibbs revealed that he had also studied under Abramo Paris, who seems to have run a school for foreign architects in parallel with Fontana's: HMC, Stuart Papers, IV, p. 568. Elisabeth Kieven has recently attempted to bring more information to light on Paris, about whom little is otherwise known. See Elisabeth Kieven, ‘Johann Bernhard Fischer von Erlach und die zeitgenössische Architektenausbildung in Rom: Abraham Paris (Preiß/Preuss) und Nikodemus Tessin’, Barockberichte, 50 (2008), pp. 279–90. If George Vertue is correct, Gibbs also took lessons in perspective from Pier Francesco Garroli: ‘Vertue Notebooks: Volume III’, Walpole Society, 22 (1933), p. 15.

12 John Summerson, Architecture in Britain, 1530–1830 (London, 1953), p. 209. In the ninth edition (1993), Summerson revises this to ‘rather mixed reception’ (p. 324) [this edition hereafter cited].

13 Friedman, James Gibbs, p. 51.

14 See, for example, Giles Worsley, Classical Architecture in Britain: The Heroic Age (London, 1995), p. 122: ‘after the failures of the 1710s Gibbs's concern was not with the style in which he built, but simply to build’.

15 For Campbell's role in the development of Vitruvius Britannicus, see, in particular, T. P. Connor, ‘The Making of “Vitruvius Britannicus”’, Architectural History, 20 (1977), pp. 14–30, 81; Eileen Harris, ‘“Vitruvius Britannicus” before Colen Campbell’, Burlington Magazine, 128, no. 998 (May 1986), pp. 338, 340–43, 345–46; Joanne O'Hara, ‘Colen Campbell and the Preparatory Drawings for Vitruvius Britannicus’ (doctoral thesis, University of York, 2010).

16 Colen Campbell, Vitruvius Britannicus, 3 vols (London, 1715–25), II, p. 2.

17 LPL, MS 2726, f. 76r.

18 Barbara Arciszewska, Classicism and Modernity: Architectural Thought in Eighteenth-Century Britain (Warsaw, 2010), p. 195.

19 Friedman, ‘“This Most Miserable Business”’, p. 13.

20 As Alexander Echlin puts it, borrowing Giles Worsley's metaphor, ‘whilst the revisionist work of the past twenty-five years removed the Palladian straightjacket in respect to the period before Campbell and Burlington, it tightened it in relation to the period after them’. As a consequence, Gibbs's position has remained much the same as before. See Echlin, ‘“The Individuality of James Gibbs”: Gibbs and the Historiography of Eighteenth-Century English Architecture’, Georgian Group Journal, 27 (2019), pp. 13–26 (p. 18). For revisionist accounts of English Palladianism, see John Harris, The Palladian Revival: Lord Burlington, his Villa and Garden at Chiswick (London and New Haven, 1994); Worsley, Classical Architecture in Britain; Richard Hewlings, ‘Chiswick House: Appearance and Meaning’, in Lord Burlington: Architecture, Art and Life, ed. Tony Barnard and Jane Clark (London, 1995), pp. 1–151; John Harris, ‘Is Chiswick a “Palladian” Garden?’, Garden History, 32.1 (2004), pp. 124–36; Barbara Arciszewska, The Hanoverian Court and the Triumph of Palladio: The Palladian Revival in Hanover and England c. 1700 (Warsaw, 2002); Richard Hewlings, ‘Does “Palladian” Architecture Exist?’, Newsletter of the Society of Architectural Historians of Great Britain, 88 (2006), pp. 1–5; Arciszewska, Classicism and Modernity; Alexander Echlin and William Kelley, ‘A “Shaftesburian Agenda”? Lord Burlington, Lord Shaftesbury and the Intellectual Origins of English Palladianism’, Architectural History, 59 (2016), pp. 221–52; Barbara Arciszewksa, ‘The Office of the King's Works and Modernisation of Architectural Patronage in England’, in Companions to the History of Architecture, Volume II: Eighteenth-Century Architecture, ed. Caroline van Eck and Sigrid de Jong (Oxford, 2017), doi.org/10.1002/9781118887226.wbcha046 (accessed on 10 November 2018).

21 LPL, MS 2690, pp. 115, 117, 119, 126. See Friedman, James Gibbs, pp. 9–10.

22 According to Friedman, Gibbs arrived in London by November 1708 (see Friedman, James Gibbs, p. 7). He had already been in London for some time by 10 February 1709, when he wrote to Sir John Perceval of his ‘great many very good friends here’: HMC, Report on the Manuscripts of the Earl of Egmont, 2 vols (London, 1909), II, pp. 234–35.

23 Friedman, James Gibbs, pp. 9–10.

24 LPL, MS 2726, f. 71r.

25 LPL, MS 2726, f. 73r.

26 HMC, Report on the Manuscripts of his Grace the Duke of Portland, K.G., Preserved at Welbeck Abbey, 10 vols (London, 1891–1931), X, p. 301.

27 Downes, Hawksmoor, p. 159.

28 ‘Order'd, That the Surveyors draw Designes on paper, for the New Church to be built in the Strand’, 9 December 1713, LPL MS 2690, p. 132. The completed model is noted in ‘Mr James Gibbs's Bill for Modells’, LPL, MS 2724, f. 2r. See Friedman, James Gibbs, pp. 61, 312.

29 London, Victoria and Albert Museum, E.3024-1909. The drawing is annotated ‘Progetto di Chiesa offerto alli Sigri Commissionarj, dell’ Parlamento Brittanico, per la Construzione di 50. Chiesa nella Citta di Londra, e sue vicinauge; nel tempio della Regina Anna. Levato dall'modello che si trova presentamente nella Cattedrale in St Pietro Westminster’. Although it has been questioned, Friedman's identification of this model, as drawn by Cockerell, with Gibbs's first model for the Strand site is sound. The given scale and its submission in February 1714, three months after the commissioners commanded Gibbs to produce designs for the site, make it highly likely that it was for St Mary-le-Strand. See Friedman, James Gibbs, p. 312; Paul Jeffery, ‘The Commissioners’ Models for the Fifty New Churches: Problems of Identity and Attribution’, Georgian Group Journal, 5 (1995), pp. 81–96; and Anne-Françoise Morel, Glorious Temples or Babylonic Whores: The Culture of Church Building in Stuart England through the Lens of Consecration Sermons (Leiden and Boston, 2019), p. 234.

30 On this design and its relationship to Hawksmoor's proposal, see Friedman, James Gibbs, p. 58, fig. 34.

31 LPL, MS 2690, p. 87, quoted in Friedman, James Gibbs, pp. 303–04.

32 The plans that Gibbs submitted can be identified by reference to ‘Mr James Gibbs's Bill for Modells’, LPL, MS 2724, f. 2r. The models were for a time stored in the South Kensington Museum, and later moved to Westminster Abbey. See Downes, Hawksmoor, p. 158, n. 12; T. L. Donaldson, ‘Some Account of the Models of Churches Preserved in Henry V's Chantry, Westminster Abbey’, Architect, Engineer and Surveyor, 47 (December 1843), p. 351, plate IV.

33 ‘Mr James Gibbs's Bill for Modells’, LPL, MS 2724, f. 2r; Friedman, James Gibbs, pp. 310–11.

34 The earliest examples are Hawksmoor's proposal for a ‘Capella Universitatis’ at Oxford, dated to August 1713, and a design attributed to William Dickinson, which may predate his departure from the commission in August 1713, making both roughly contemporary with Gibbs's proposals. See Downes, Hawksmoor, pp. 122–24, and Anthony Geraghty, The Architectural Drawings of Sir Christopher Wren at All Souls College, Oxford: A Complete Catalogue (London, 2007), no. 174; online edn: codrington.asc.ox.ac.uk/wren/index.html (accessed on 6 July 2020).

35 Campbell, Vitruvius Britannicus, II, pp. 1–2, plate 27.

36 For these proposals, see John Harris, ed., Catalogue of the Drawings Collection of the Royal Institute of British Architects: Colen Campbell (Farnborough, 1973), p. 19, no. 80, figs 172–77.

37 For Archer's appointment, see LPL, MS 2690, p. 157. For the drawing, Oxford, All Soul's College, AS.III.44; Geraghty, The Architectural Drawings, no. 171. On the attribution, see Friedman, James Gibbs, pp. 312, 338, n. 4. The porch is similar to the one Archer designed for St Paul's, Deptford, where it screens a vestibule and provides a visual base for a round steeple.

38 LPL, MS 2690, p. 184. As Gibbs later put it, ‘ther was an end to the Column, and every thing belonging to it’: ‘James Gibbs's Notebook’, f. 44v.

39 LPL, MS 2724, f. 37v.

40 The subcommittee, which first met on 15 July, included several architects: Christopher Wren; John Vanbrugh; Wren's son, also Christopher; and Thomas Archer. LPL, MS 2690, pp. 177, 186.

41 LPL, MS 2690, p. 192. See Friedman, James Gibbs, p. 312.

42 ‘James Gibbs's Notebook’, f. 44v. His recollection in A Book of Architecture that the church had risen ‘20 feet above-ground’ before the column idea was abandoned appears to be an exaggeration: Gibbs, A Book of Architecture, p. vii.

43 Gibbs, A Book of Architecture, p. vii, plates 22–23. Friedman's suggestion that this proposal dates from the period after the death of Queen Anne seems unlikely. By that time, Gibbs would have been very familiar with the constraints of the site. See Friedman, James Gibbs, p. 43.

44 ‘James Gibbs's Notebook’, f. 44v; Gibbs, A Book of Architecture, p. vii.

45 LPL, MS 2726, f. 76r; Friedman, James Gibbs, p. 312.

46 LPL, MS 2697, p. 421.

47 LPL, MS 2726, f. 76r; London, Royal Institute of British Architects, MOD/GIBB/1 and MOD/GIBB/2.

48 LPL, MS 2697, p. 460; LPL, MS 2698, f. 13r.

49 LPL, MS 2697, p. 459.

50 LPL, MS 2721, f. 131, quoted in Friedman, James Gibbs, p. 312.

51 LPL, MS 2697, p. 459.

52 LPL, MS 2724, f. 69v. It is unclear which carvings were considered extravagant. The masons’ work on the interior between 1 January 1718 and 25 March 1719 was summarised as follows: ‘Covering the moldings of the upper Order within ye. Church. Fluting ye. Columns & Pillasters of both ye. Orders. Enriching ye. Moldings of the Pannells Carving the Kings Arm's over the Altar at ye. East End & the Ribs of ye. Arch there. Carving 3 Pannels under ye. East Windows’ (LPL MS 2697, p. 471). On the galleries, see LPL MS 2713, f. 225, quoted in Friedman, James Gibbs, p. 338, n. 20.

53 P. K. Monod, Jacobitism and the English People (Cambridge, 1989), p. 136.

54 LPL, MS 2726, f. 76r.

55 Howard Colvin, ‘A Scottish Origin for English Palladianism’, Architectural History, 17 (1974), pp. 5–52; Alasdair Roberts, ‘James Smith and James Gibbs: Seminarians and Architects’, Architectural Heritage, 2.1 (1991), pp. 41–55. The names Gibbs and Campbell appear in the list of officers, graduates and alumni for the Marischal College in Aberdeen for the years 1696–1700, though without further particulars. See Fasti Academiæ Mariscallanæ Aberdonensis: Selections From the Records of the Marischal College and University, MDXCIII–MDCCCLX, ed. Peter John Anderson, 3 vols (Aberdeen, 1898), II, p. 273; Friedman, James Gibbs, p. 333, n. 8; Joe Rock, ‘New Thoughts on the Biography of James Smith, Architect’, Newhailes New Research, sites.google.com/site/newhailesnewresearch/new-thoughts-on-the-biography-of-james-smith-architect (accessed on 24 April 2020); private communication from Andrew Martindale.

56 HMC, Manuscripts of the Earl of Egmont, II, p. 235.

57 LPL, MS 2726, f. 76r.

58 Colvin, ‘Introduction’, p. ix.

59 Kerry Downes, Sir John Vanbrugh: A Biography (London, 1987), p. 364.

60 Friedman (The Eighteenth-Century Church, p. 361) calculated the sum from the commissioners’ papers.

61 Terry Friedman, ‘Baroque into Palladian: The Designing of St Giles-in-the-Fields’, Architectural History 40 (1997), pp. 115–43 (p. 117); Friedman, James Gibbs, p. 312.

62 James writing to John Sheffield, first Duke of Buckingham, on 20 October 1711. Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Rawl. B376, ff. 8 and 9, quoted in S. Jeffery, ‘English Baroque Architecture: The Work of John James’ (doctoral thesis, Birkbeck College, University of London, 1986), pp. 381–82.

63 Downes, Hawksmoor, p. 157.

64 Edward Gregg, ‘The Jacobite Career of the Earl of Mar’, in Ideology and Conspiracy: Aspects of Jacobitism, ed. Eveline Cruickshanks (Edinburgh, 1982), pp. 181–82.

65 HMC, Stuart Papers, II, p. 92.

66 ‘List of Commissioners and Officers’, in The Commissions for Building Fifty New Churches: The Minute Books 1711–27, A Calendar, ed. M. H. Port (London, 1986), pp. xxxiv–xxxvii.

67 Downes, Vanbrugh, p. 364.

68 Friedman, James Gibbs, p. 27.

69 Friedman, James Gibbs, pp. 13, 309; LPL 2714, f. 15r.

70 LPL 2714, f. 15r; Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, WA1925.341.92.

71 The commissioners may have had an eye on economy, insisting that James restrict the budget to £10,000. LPL, MS 2691, pp. 126, 129, 130. See Port, ed., The Commissions, pp. 266, 269, 270; and Jeffery, ‘The Work of John James’, pp. 81–86.

72 Friedman, James Gibbs, pp. 310–11.

73 For Gibbs's designs for St George's, Hanover Square, see Friedman, James Gibbs, pp. 61–62, 309.

74 Friedman, ‘“This Most Miserable Business”’, p. 12; see also Echlin, ‘“The Individuality of James Gibbs”’.

75 Friedman, James Gibbs, p. 323.

76 Friedman, James Gibbs, p. 51.

77 HMC, Stuart Papers, II, p. 404.

78 Friedman, James Gibbs, pp. 316–17.

79 Ilaria Bignamini, ‘George Vertue, Art Historian and Art Institutions in London, 1678–1768: A Study of Clubs and Academies’, Walpole Society, 54 (1988), pp. 1–148 (p. 29); British Library, Add MS 39167, Papers of the Virtuosi of St Luke, 1697–c. 1743; The Art World in Britain 1660 to 1735, artworld.york.ac.uk (accessed on 15 September 2019).

80 HMC, Calendar of the Manuscripts of the Marquess of Bath, 3 vols (London, 1908), III, pp. 490, 498.

81 Horace Walpole, Anecdotes of Painting in England, 2nd edn, 4 vols (London, 1782), IV, pp. 92–93.

82 ‘James Gibbs's Notebook’, f. 44r.

83 John Summerson, Georgian London, 6th edn, ed. H. M. Colvin (London, 2003), p. 76.

84 Kerry Downes, English Baroque Architecture (London, 1966), p. 99. Downes does not, however, cite earlier buildings in which this ‘Roman character’ is more pronounced. In fact, there are few earlier projects by Gibbs for which we have visual evidence.

85 Friedman, James Gibbs, p. 36.

86 David Watkin, A History of Western Architecture, 3rd edn (New York, 2000), p. 353.

87 Summerson (Architecture in Britain, p. 286) believed Gibbs to be working in a cinquecento mode in these elevations, identifying the Palazzo Branconio dell'Aquila in particular as the source.

88 One author has suggested that Gibbs's use of alternating pediments derives directly from San Giorgio Maggiore, but their treatment there, and the architectural context as a whole, is very different. See S. Lang, ‘Gibbs: A Bicentenary Review of His Architectural Sources’, Architectural Review, 116 (July 1954), pp. 20–26.

89 A contemporary observer, Batty Langley, also drew a parallel between St Mary-le-Strand and the Banqueting House, although criticising both Gibbs and Jones for the manner in which the entablatures break forward in both: Mr. Hiram [Batty Langley], ‘A New Critical Review of the public buildings, &c.’, Grub Street Journal 254, 7 November 1734, p. 1.

90 Friedman, James Gibbs, p. 41.

91 Colvin, ‘Introduction’, p. xiii.

92 See Aslet, ‘A James Gibbs Autobiography’.

93 John Field, ‘The Sources of James Gibbs’ Architecture and his Connection with the Commissioners’ Churches of 1711’ (master's thesis, University of London, 1958), p. 130.

94 The advertisement for the plasterers’ proposals indicates that the design for the vaulting was already fixed before Wilkins's involvement: ‘The Plaisterers may see the Design of the Ceiling of the Church in the Strand, at the said Church’ (London Gazette, 5538, 18 May 1717, p. 2). Wilkins's work on the church took place between 1718 and 1719: LPL MS 2697, pp. 477–78.

95 Andrea Palladio, I quattro libri dell'architettura, 4 vols (Venice, 1570), IV, p. 38.

96 ‘James Gibbs's Notebook’, f. 43v. Contrary to Arthur Bolton's suggestion, it does not appear that Gibbs spent a period after his return from Italy as Wren's draughtsman. The drawings that he ascribed to Gibbs among a folio of Wren's work in Sir John Soane's Museum have since been convincingly reattributed to other hands. See Arthur Bolton, ‘Introduction: Sir Chr. Wren and James Gibbs’, Wren Society, 12 (1935), pp. 7–14. On the reattributions of one to Peter Paul Rubens and Pieter Huyssens, see Michael Jaffé, ‘Rubens’ Drawings at Antwerp’, Burlington Magazine, 98, no. 642 (September 1956), pp. 314–21; for the others to William Talman, see the Soane Museum catalogue, collections.soane.org/OBJECT1907 (accessed on 24 April 2020), and John Harris, William Talman: Maverick Architect (London, 1982), pp. 19, 25, 38.

97 ‘James Gibbs's Notebook’, f. 43v.

98 James Ayres, Building the Georgian City (London and New Haven, 1998), p. 235; Friedman, James Gibbs, p. 338.

99 Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, WA1925.342.129; WA1925.342.130; WA1925.342.131.

100 Friedman, James Gibbs, p. 36.

101 Downes, English Baroque, pp. 99, 104.

102 Batty Langley identified this feature as Gibbs's inspiration, although he used it to allege Gibbs's lack of imagination: ‘the circular portico to this church seems to have been taken from that of St. Clement's; as the portico of St. Martin's was from that of St. George's Bloomsbury, erected by that incomparable architect NICHOLAS HAWKSMORE, Esq’ (‘A New Critical Review’, p. 1).

103 Magna Britannia Antiqua & Nova, 3 vols (London, 1738), III, p. 237.

104 Daniel Defoe, A Tour through the Whole Island of Great Britain [1724–27], ed. P. N. Furbank and W. R. Owens (London and New Haven, 1991), p. 142.

105 James Ralph, A Critical Review of the Publick Buildings, Statues and Ornaments In, and about London and Westminster (London, 1734), p. 38.

106 LPL, MS 2726, f. 76r.

107 Gibbs, A Book of Architecture, p. vi.

108 ‘James Gibbs's Notebook’, f. 44r.

109 Nigel Aston, ‘St Paul's and the Public Culture of Eighteenth-Century Britain’, in St Paul's: The Cathedral Church of London, 604–2004, ed. Derek Keene, Arthur Burns and Andrew Saint (New Haven and London, 2004), p. 365.

110 Robert O. Bucholz, ‘“Nothing but Ceremony”: Queen Anne and the Limitations of Royal Ritual’, Journal of British Studies, 30 (1991), pp. 288–323 (p. 294); Hugh Joseph Claffey, ‘Thanksgivings in the Reign of Queen Anne’ (doctoral thesis, Trinity College, Dublin, 2018), p. 8.

111 Bucholz, ‘“Nothing but Ceremony”’, p. 297

112 Bucholz, ‘“Nothing but Ceremony”’, p. 288.

113 Kevin Sharpe, Rebranding Rule: The Restoration and Revolution Monarchy, 1660–1714 (New Haven, 2013), p. 579.

114 Julie Farguson, ‘Promoting the Peace: Queen Anne and the Public Thanksgiving at St Paul's Cathedral’, in Performances of Peace: Utrecht 1713, ed. Renger de Bruin et al. (Leiden and Boston, 2015), pp. 207–22 (pp. 213–14).

115 Claudine van Heusbergen, ‘Carving a Legacy: Public Sculpture of Queen Anne, c. 1704–1712’, Journal for Eighteenth-Century Studies, 37 (2014), pp. 229–44.

116 Aston, ‘St. Paul's’, pp. 366–67.

117 For more on the Thanksgiving for the Peace of Utrecht, see Farguson, ‘Promoting the Peace’.

118 Journals of the House of Commons (1688–1834), XVII (1711–14), pp. 455–56.

119 Donald Burrows, ‘Handel and the English Chapel Royal During the Reigns of Queen Anne and King George I’, 2 vols (doctoral thesis, Open University, 1981), I, pp. 105–06.

120 The Political State of Great Britain, with the Most Material Occurrences in Europe (July 1713), p. 31.

121 Sharpe, Rebranding Rule, p. 621.

122 Gary Stuart de Krey, A Fractured Society: The Politics of London in the First Age of Party (Oxford, 1985), p. 264.

123 The Post Boy, 3022, 21 September 1714, p. 1; The Flying Post: Or the Post-Master, 3544, 21 September 1714, p. 1.

124 Journals of the House of Commons (1688–1834), XVII (1711–14), pp. 456, 466.

125 LPL, MS 2690, p. 157; ‘Mr. James Gibbs's Bill for Modells’, LPL, MS 2724, f. 2r.

126 ‘Mr. James Gibbs's Bill for Modells’, LPL, MS 2724, f. 2r.

127 Friedman, James Gibbs, p. 43.

128 LPL, MS 2690, p. 177.

129 Emily Mann, ‘In Defence of the City: The Gates of London and Temple Bar in the Seventeenth Century’, Architectural History, 49 (2006), pp. 75–99 (pp. 83–85).

130 Bucholz, ‘“Nothing but Ceremony”’, p. 295.

131 ‘April 1644: An Ordinance for the Better Observation of the Lords-Day’, in Acts and Ordinances of the Interregnum, 1642–1660, ed. C. H. Firth and R. S. Rait (London, 1911), pp. 420–22; online edn: British History Online, british-history.ac.uk/no-series/acts-ordinances-interregnum/pp420-422 (accessed on 5 April 2020). See Rogers, Pat, ‘The Maypole in the Strand: Pope and the Politics of Revelry’, British Journal for Eighteenth-Century Studies, 28 (2005), pp. 83–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar (p. 85).

132 Weekly Packet, 52, 4 July 1713, p. 1.

133 Weekly Packet, 304, 3 May 1718, p. 2.

134 The telescope was set up in Sir Richard Child's gardens in Wanstead, Essex. For the subsequent fate of the column, see the Weekly-Journal: Or, Saturday's-Post. With fresh Advices Foreign and Domestick, 44, 12 October 1717, p. 259; 73, 3 May 1718, p. 434; Weekly Journal: or, British Gazetteer. Being the freshest Advices Foreign and Domestick, 15 April 1721, p. 1894; and Weekly Packet, 304, 3 May 1718, p. 2. See also Rogers, ‘The Maypole’, p. 86.

135 Friedman, Terry, ‘Foggini's Statue of Queen Anne’, in Kunst des Barock in der Toskana. Studien zur Kunst unter dern letzten Medici (Florence and Munich, 1976), p. 39Google Scholar.

136 In the absence of Foggini's statue, one newspaper reported that Bird's statue would be moved to the Strand church: Weekly-Journal: Or Saturday's-Post, 79, 14 June 1718, p. 467.

137 Friedman, The Eighteenth-Century Church, p. 9.

138 For this model, see John Wilton-Ely, ‘The Architectural Model’, Architectural Review, 142 (July 1967), pp. 26–32; John Wilton-Ely, ‘The Architectural Model: 1. English Baroque’, Apollo (October 1968), pp. 250–59; Friedman, James Gibbs, p. 312.

139 Friedman, James Gibbs, p. 58.

140 John Talman to Robert Nelson, 8 September 1714, in the archives of C. Hoare & Co, Bankers. Quoted in Friedman, ‘Foggini's statue of Queen Anne’, p. 53.

141 Friedman, James Gibbs, p. 45. For the vicissitudes of Foggini's sculpture, see Friedman, ‘Foggini's statue of Queen Anne’.

142 Weekly-Journal: Or Saturday's-Post, 28, 22 June 1717, p. 165. Foggini's statue was cast, but, in spite of public interest, the money was not forthcoming and it was never delivered.

143 Hawksmoor and James reported that ‘The Affair of the Queen's Statue requires yr. honrs: [the commissioners’] Consideration’, LPL MS 2724, f. 69v. For the completion of the urn, see LPL MS 2697, p. 471.

144 For some preliminary thoughts on Gibbs's training, see Aslet, William, ‘Il Ritorno di “Signor Gibbi” in Patria: James Gibbs's Training in Italy and its Bearing on his Later Career’, Georgian Group Journal, 27 (2019), pp. 1–13Google Scholar.