Adam Bowett is establishing something of a name for himself as a ‘revisionist’ furniture historian. In an essay published in 1999, Bowett alluded to the insular construction of the history of furniture, suggesting that ‘we should question very closely the accretion of received wisdom which constitutes the present state of knowledge’. This new publication builds on Bowett's earlier book (2002) on the history of furniture in the period 1660–1714 and continues his project to challenge the established knowledge structures of furniture history by de-bunking such ‘myths’ as that of the ‘Queen Anne’ chair and of the ‘Age of Walnut’. Bowett rightly directs critical attention to some of the canonical texts of furniture history and asks searching questions of the legacy and the objectivity of the scholarship that first began to map out the chronology and discursive frameworks of furniture history during the 1920s and 1930s.

The focus of the book is again on English furniture, specifically on London-made furniture, with detailed discussion of general furniture types, from case furniture and seat furniture to tables and mirrors. The discussion is supplemented by a large number of illustrations of furniture, with some useful and informative close-up photographs and associated line drawings of constructional details, maker's marks and trade labels. The majority of the illustrations are in colour and are up to the usual high production standards of ACC publications, with very useful captions and clear and concise information on the objects shown. The text is intelligently written and Bowett's observations and contentions for the revision of the accepted dating for some articles of furniture are supported by a wide range of documentary evidence, including inventories, trade invoices, letters and contemporary published sources.

However, the real documents for this investigation are the objects themselves. This focus on the objects is a well-established approach, one that is at the heart of the discourse of furniture history. Such an approach, for example, was one that had been advocated by the furniture historian Herbert Cescinsky during the 1920s when furniture history was emerging as a ‘scientific’ discourse; the arguments between the furniture historians Percy Macquoid (an advocate of documentary evidence) and Herbert Cescinsky (an advocate of the evidence provided by the construction of furniture itself) are legendary. Bowett offers us a useful synthesis of the reliance on documentary evidence and the investigation of material properties of the objects in this new study, and here he is right to highlight the significance of ‘modern research methods’ in the development of furniture history.

Bowett is clearly knowledgeable about materials and construction techniques and has a good critical eye, guiding the reader through a close examination of furniture construction and directing attention to some significant technical and constructional innovations. Whilst the language is at times somewhat technical, this plays to his intended audience, and he offers some interesting suggestions, well supported with documentary evidence, on the potential meaning and significance of technical changes and constructional developments. Bowett states that this focus on construction and technology is a deliberate strategy; as he writes, ‘furniture was first a manufacturing process’. He is less interested in discussing broader issues; there is little point in the ‘material culture’ approach until the ‘facts’ have been established, he writes.

Bowett's purpose and method are clearly articulated throughout the book; this is an empiricist project, one which seeks to establish the ‘facts’ of furniture history. This is both a considerable strength but also a potential weakness in the project. One is reminded of the dictum of the antiquary, Sir Richard Colt Hoare (1812): ‘We speak from facts not theory’. In Bowett's text, there is perhaps a danger that the ‘facts’ are left to speak for themselves; and whilst the importance of evidence in support of contentions is not in question here, it is also perhaps a weakness that the text does not sufficiently acknowledge the relationship between evidence and interpretation. That said, Bowett's book will surely become a standard text on the subject and does much to progress the study of furniture history.

Bowett, A 1999. ‘The English “Horsebone” chair, 1685–1710’, The Burlington Magazine, cxli (no. 1154), May, 263–270

Bowett, A 2002. English Furniture 1660–1714, from Charles II to Queen Anne, Woodbridge: Antique Collectors’ Club