The Victorian Barracks, 1878–1965
With 'commendable justice', (ref. 30) the War Office gave the
commission for designing the new barracks to T.H. Wyatt,
the winner (with his brother M. D. Wyatt) of the cavalry
barracks competition of 1855. (fn. a) In doing so the War Office
was following the precedent set at the infantry barracks at
Chelsea, rebuilt in the early 1860s to the designs of the aged
George Morgan, winner of the first premium in the
infantry section of the 1855 competition. But any thought
that the Wyatts' competition scheme, for an imaginary site
of some twenty-two acres, could be adapted to fit the comparatively tiny space available at Knightsbridge was obviously vain. No sooner had proposals for demolishing the
old buildings been announced than the site was further
restricted by the paring away of a strip of ground for roadwidening (a necessary public improvement which had been
in prospect for some years). (ref. 31)
In the event, the planning of the new complex bore no
resemblance to the competition scheme: on the contrary,
the arrangement of the Victorian barracks was to follow
quite closely that of its derided Georgian predecessor. The
competition scheme had the men's quarters and stables
along three sides of a large quadrangle, in the centre of
which, approached by covered ways from each side, were a
riding-school, kitchens, dining-rooms, a library and reading-room. In front of the quadrangle was the paradeground, flanked by the officers' quarters on one side, and
the sergeants' quarters, hospital, canteen and chapel on the
other. At the back, another covered way led to the horse
infirmary. The buildings at Knightsbridge could not have
been arranged on such a spacious plan without considerable enlargement of the site. Stabling, living accommodation and ancillary rooms were to a large extent stacked one
over another in large blocks rather than disposed horizontally about the site.
Wyatt's appointment may have been just, but it appears
that his role from the start was essentially limited to that of
providing attractive façades for a project which enjoyed little if any public favour. As one of the contractors employed
on the rebuilding explained:
'it is no secret that the War Department, in virtue of a long-standing arrangement with Mr Wyatt, selected his drawings for the elevations, and reserved to themselves the right of providing their
own specifications and quantities and furnishing also their
preparatory plans for all the internal arrangements.' (ref. 32)
Preliminary designs for the barracks may have been in
hand before Wyatt was officially appointed, probably in late
1875. (ref. 33) The Royal Engineers' architect, Lieut. H. H. Cole,
was certainly engaged in 1875 in 'making new plans for
Knightsbridge Barracks'. (ref. 34) Three other Royal Engineers
officers are known to have been involved in the project.
Colonel E. C. Gordon, later commandant of the School of
Engineering at Chatham, was named in 1880 as the officer
superintending the rebuilding, and a Colonel Scott, probably Henry Y. D. Scott, architect of the Royal Albert Hall,
as having supervision of the work. Gordon's name
appeared on plans dated January 1877, which were in existence when the barracks was again rebuilt in the late
1960s. (ref. 35) The third man was Captain Elliott Wood, the executive officer appointed to the Royal Engineers' London
district in 1876. 'Eighty great sheets of plans for Knightsbridge were given me', recalled Wood in his memoirs, 'and
I found important structural alterations to be necessary'. (ref. 36)
Just whose plans they were is not known.
Figure 19:
Knightsbridge Barracks of 1878–80, site plan. T. H. Wyatt, architect. Demolished
Although the rebuilding was total, it was not at first
intended that it should be, and it was for this reason, as
much as because of the shape of the site, that the layout was
so similar to the old. The original proposal was that the
officers' quarters should be retained (with a new mess
wing), together with the existing riding-school. When it
was decided to rebuild these as well, the lack of space made
it necessary to align the new and much larger riding-school
north-south instead of east-west as before. (ref. 37)
The arrangement (fig. 19) may have recalled the old barracks, but the scale of building was considerably greater
and the architectural treatment contrastingly lavish. This,
at least, was some compensation for local residents. As
Wyatt wrote to the prospective purchaser of South Lodge
on the south side of Knightsbridge in 1877:
'instead of the Barn-like looking Riding School which used to face
the road nearby to the house in question we shall now have the
most important front of the Barracks (being the Officers' Quarters) immediately facing the road. I cannot doubt but that the
rebuilding of the Barracks on an improved and more ornamental
scale, and the widening of the roadway immediately adjoining will
have the effect of improving the value of all this neighbourhood.' (ref. 38)
The new barracks provided accommodation for 23 officers,
352 NCOs and single men, 40 married men and their families, 386 troop horses and 76 officers' chargers. Construction began in 1878 and was completed in May 1880, when
the Royal Horse Guards (The Blues) moved in to their new
quarters from Albany Street Barracks. (ref. 39) The general contractor was George Shaw of Earl Street, Westminster, late
of the firm Jackson and Shaw, whose estimate for the work
was £150,000. (ref. 40) .
The buildings, of 'palatial appearance and magnitude',
were in a mixed classical style, chiefly Renaissance Italian
but with a strong French influence evident, particularly in
the roofs of the main barrack blocks – most appropriate to
the boulevard-like location (Plates 40, 41, 42, 43). They were faced
in red brick with Portland-stone dressings and sculptured
decoration. (Plain stock brick sufficed for the comparatively dour 'internal' elevations.) Two sorts of red brick
were used, both pointed with black mortar: red Suffolks for
the elevations to Knightsbridge, and 'deep crimson'
Hampshires for the park fronts.' (ref. 41) Sculptural ornament,
though nowhere used in great profusion, was heaviest on
the Hyde Park side. It was all carried out by Thomas Earp.
The two principal ranges, the Barrack Blocks, were
designed as grand palazzi with prominent pavilions
beneath tall mansarded roofs (Plate 40). The basements
and ground-floor fronts were areaded and heavily rusticated, and the façades were divided into bays by giant-order
pilasters of similarly rusticated brickwork. Although in the
same general style, the two blocks were not identical, partly on account of the site, and partly because of the different
accommodation within.
The Knightsbridge block, with 'a façade of dignified
simplicity', was the taller building by a full upper storey,
and, taking advantage of the fall of the ground from north
to south, also had a basement for storage. Stabling occupied the ground floor, above which were the married
soldiers' quarters, together with orderly-rooms and
recreation rooms. The stables in this block were lighted
from the parade-ground side, and were screened from the
street by a blind wall, pierced only with small ventilation
gratings. The basement underneath was arcaded, but this
aspect of the design was all but invisible from the street
behind the barracks wall. The entrance to the paradeground was in the centre of the block, a tall archway
between close-set pavilions, framed by a pedimented surround with engaged columns ornamented with squared
vermiculated bands (Plate 42b). At either end of the range
were large gateways to the barrack-yard, the copings to the
gate-piers bristling with sculpted trophies.
A particular feature of the Knightsbridge range was the
large number of chimney stacks, rising above the rusticated pilasters (Plate 40c). These reflected the many individual apartments within, each with their own fireplaces.
Married privates were allocated a self-contained flat with
balcony access from the parade-ground side of the building. Each consisted of a sitting-room about 15ft square
(and a lofty 14ft high), with a cooking-stove, a 'large' bedroom and a scullery. In the west pavilion at first-floor level
was the sick bay, comprising a dispensary, two wards (one a
detention ward), and the orderly's quarters. A communal
laundry was provided at attic level, with hot-air closets and
space outside on the roof for drying. There was also a children's playground on the roof. The flats were said to be
based on those in model dwellings, and the internal elevations of both barrack blocks resembled such utilitarian
apartment buildings (Plate 43a). (ref. 42)
The lower park-side range was similarly composed, with
terminal and central pavilions, the latter topped by domes
and tall finials, rather than mansards. An open terrace and
loggias under the domes were designed to give the men
somewhere to relax and smoke. There were few chimneys,
the rooms being mostly on a large scale for communal use.
The entrance here, with carvings of the royal arms in the
tympanum of the archway and military accoutrements in
the arch spandrels, was flanked by niches containing two
life-sized sculptures of guardsmen, one in the uniform of
1879, the other in that of 1779 (Plate 42c). These statues
are preserved in the NCOs' mess of the present barracks
and the royal arms now decorate the wall of the staircase
leading to the mess. This block contained stables on the
ground floor, and accommodation for unmarried troopers
above. On the third floor were ancillary rooms, including a
kitchen and dining-room, cleaning-rooms, lavatories and
baths, a tailor's shop, a fencing-room and a schoolroom. (ref. 43)
Of course, with stabling immediately beneath the soldiers' living quarters, the barrack blocks perpetuated the
very arrangement that had been found so objectionable in
the old barracks. However, the floors between the stables
and the quarters above were now thickly constructed of
iron and concrete on the fireproof, and hopefully fumeproof, Fox & Barrett system.
Next to the barrack blocks, occupying the full depth of
the site and dividing them from the officers' quarters further west, was the Riding-school (Plates 42a, 43b). Considerably larger than its predecessor, it was stylistically
rather similar, on the conventional riding-school pattern
with Diocletian windows at high level. There were
entrances on either side, for troopers and officers respectively; inside, the walls, lined with timber to a high dado
rail, were battered so as to protect the riders' legs when
their horses were close to the edge of the concourse. The
roof was iron-trussed, with a louvred skylight along the
ridge. A viewing gallery was provided at the south end, in
a short projecting annexe with an ogee-domed staircase
tower.
The riding-school's front to Hyde Park was one of the
most appealing features of the whole barracks (Plate 43b).
Because of the sloping site, the exposed wall at this end was
greatly reduced, giving the impression of an unusually low
building and greatly emphasising the weight of Earp's
carved stone pediment filling the gable end. Here the function of the building was vividly expressed in stone by the
heads and forequarters of rearing horses emerging from
scrolling acanthus leaves. When the barracks was demolished the pediment was saved and incorporated into the
new main gateway (Plate 115b).
On the west side of the riding-school was the third of the
principal blocks, the Officers' Quarters (Plate 41). While
its predecessor had resembled a gentleman's country
house, the new building, on a considerably larger scale,
with a prominent clock-turret, had more the architectural
character of a town hall or hospital. But on the park front
its militaristic nature was made obvious by its ornamentation. The building was of E-shaped plan, with the wings
extending towards the park.
The front to Knightsbridge, from which it was partly
screened by the high boundary wall topped by big ball
finials (which carried on to the west end of the barracks),
was much the plainest of the two chief elevations. Lacking
the exaggerated pavilion towers of the barrack blocks, the
great width of the facade was kept from monotony by shallow breaks in the frontage, a pediment over the middle
three windows, and by variation in the fenestration pattern
– close-set at the centre, widely spaced at the ends. Sculptured ornament was restricted to the royal arms in the central pediment (a relic of the old barracks) and a crown in an
arched panel a couple of floors below.
The park façade was the most ornate of all the elevations
of the three main blocks, with the greatest concentration of
sculptured decoration. As on the Knightsbridge front, the
centrepiece was tightly proportioned. A bow window on
the ground floor, with a balcony over, was flanked by an
attractive garden terrace (Plate 41b). Carved portrait heads
of former army commanders – Wellington, Marlborough,
Combermere, Anglesey and Oxford – gazed from laurelwreathed niches over the bow window. Busts of four more
military worthies – Somerset, Raglan, Londonderry and
Hill – perched on brackets on the wall to either side. These
last have been preserved in the officers' mess of the present
barracks (Plate 45a, 45c).
Living quarters were on the upper floors, the senior officers having apartments overlooking the park. The mess, a
narrowly proportioned room, ran the full depth of the
building on the ground floor, terminating with the bow
window looking out to Hyde Park. It was ornamented in
a ponderous classical manner, its chief features being a
screen of Corinthian columns at the Knightsbridge end
and a deeply coved moulded plaster ceiling. There was a
massive carved marble fireplace, above which latterly hung
Sir Alfred Munnings' painting of a drum horse (Plate 41c).
Today this picture hangs in the new officers' mess.
Beyond the officers' quarters, at the narrow western end
of the site, were two long rows comprising the Officers'
Stables, and beyond these, at the far end of the site, the
Infirmary Stables, which could accommodate fifteen
horses. On the Knightsbridge side, only the roof of the
stables was visible over the barracks wall. The park-side
range, with squat mansarded end-pavilions and a pedimented centrepiece, was set back slightly behind a dwarf
wall and railings.
The barracks façades were among T. H. Wyatt's most
accomplished public-building designs, and the new barracks itself was acknowledged by the army to be 'the finest
in the kingdom' in its standards of accommodation and
sanitation. (ref. 44) The Building News was sufficiently impressed
to feel that 'even the well-founded objections raised at first
against the appropriation of such a site to barrack accommodation, now appear to lose somewhat of their force'. (ref. 45)
But some reactions were so coloured by the long-standing
campaign to have the barracks moved to a less important
site as to be unjust. One critic, far from convinced of the
wisdom of replacing the old buildings on the same spot,
found the barracks, not yet finished, 'more presentable
(though still sufficiently ugly)'. It was probably the same
writer who, after their completion, did not feel that the
buildings were 'quite equal to what might have been
wished for in so very conspicuous a site'. (ref. 46) A more extreme
view was expressed by the London correspondent of the
Leeds Mercury, who, while glad to see the back of the
'wretched collection of dirty sheds' comprising the old
barracks, dismissed the new as no more than 'a tasteless
muddle of red brick and stone, which do not even suggest
its use and purpose'. (ref. 47)
In 1922, as part of the post-war restructuring of the army,
the 2nd Life Guards (then at Knightsbridge) and the
1st Life Guards (at Albany Street) were amalgamated.
Knightsbridge Barracks had inadequate space and facilities
either to drill the augmented regiment, or for training and
riding instruction, and so Albany Street became the Life
Guards' new home. (ref. 48) The future of Knightsbridge Barracks remained uncertain for some years, but the War
Office had nothing to gain from its disposal as the site
would have reverted to the Crown. In 1925 half a battalion
of Foot Guards were moved there: this left the stabling still
largely unused (except to a limited extent as storage), a situation which aroused some criticism. (ref. 49) Scenting opportunity, developers began making enquiries about the site. In
1931 the Frank Committee, appointed to consider the disposal of surplus government property, recommended that
the barracks should be relinquished by the Army and the
site let commercially on a building lease. The barracks
were valued tentatively at £500,000, but after discussions
between the Commissioners of Crown Lands, the Office of
Works and the Treasury no mutually satisfactory scheme
could be found. (ref. 50) The disruption to traffic caused by the
Life Guards' journeys between Albany Street and Whitehall led the Metropolitan Police to press for the Household
Cavalry to re-occupy Knightsbridge Barracks, which it did
in autumn 1932. (ref. 51)
The barracks escaped serious damage during the Second World War, but behind the seemingly well-preserved
façades living conditions were becoming intolerable. The
cookhouse, for instance, was on the third floor of the parkside barrack block, and the stores on the third floor of the
Knightsbridge block. Whenever the decrepit lift up to the
cookhouse broke down a fatigue party had to carry the food
up the stairs. Access to the married quarters was equally
poor, and small children, prams and shopping had to be
carried up two flights of stairs. The children used the
barrack yard as a playground, and the balconies were a
favourite vantage point from which to drop milk bottles on
to the officers below. The familiar complaint of the stench
of horse urine pervading the living quarters was voiced
once again, in addition to which there was an infestation of
rats. By the early 1960s the barracks was considered to be a
military slum. (ref. 52) But by that time plans for rebuilding the
entire complex were well in hand.