Talk:Banqueting House

Facts from the old WP page that be may used if a ref can be found and they seem needed
The Undercroft was originally designed as a drinking den for James I and a place where he could escape the rigours of public life. The King would come here to savour a glass of wine from his extensive cellars, or simply enjoy some private time with his favourite courtiers.


 * Historic Royal Palaces -- Banqueting House
 * The Banqueting House at the Survey of London
 * Great Buildings website
 * View of Whitehall in 1669, showing the Banqueting House and Holbein Gateway

Copied from G's page for link and discussion value
G, do you want to mention the single cube room at the Queen's house or are you sticking to double cubes? --Joopercoopers (talk) 19:53, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I think we have to try and stay on subject, I only realy mentioned the double cube at Wilton because I stumbld on the ref and it seemed a shame to waste it. Giano (talk) 22:26, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Any info on the 19th century re-facing? --Joopercoopers (talk) 20:11, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes and No, I have a feeling Soane was involved, which should thrill the man that keeps pesterimg me to write about Soane, but i can't find a ref, buyt I'm sure in my subconscious I have read it somewhere. Giano (talk) 22:26, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Seems he won a medal for drawing it as a young man. This is rather interesting reading for the post-1698 history.  --Joopercoopers (talk) 23:26, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Coo, that's ineresting, it's coming back to me, i think he was the one who allowed the refacing in his position as Clerk of Works - I have looked through all the books I have here and cannot find where I read it. Giano (talk) 23:29, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 * "The architect James Wyatt was directed to provide additional seating for more than 2,000 soldiers, necessitating the building of a second gallery (later removed). At the same time, Wyatt rebuilt the northern annexe, which contained the main entrance staircase. The Times of March 1815, recorded that the 'new alterations and the new organ by Elliot attracted a crowded chapel'." Strangely, our article on him doesn't mention it. Here's a nice historical overview from the same site. My books draw a blank on the banqueting house, but my book on Greenwich makes it clear Jones was at court both because of his study of palladianism in Italy, but more importantly, because of his collaboration in the masques with Johnson.--Joopercoopers (talk) 23:46, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Hang on I remember writing some red links for Bishonen years ago about Carolean drama, I think Jones may have designed fantastical stes with moving scenery, or was that someone else - Bishonen will rmemeber. Giano (talk) 23:52, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm sure that's on the money. He got the Queen's house commission on the back of it. --Joopercoopers (talk) 23:56, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Wyatt was known as the "Destroyer" after several ill-advised acts of vandalism on medieval cathedrals and churches, so he'd perhaps have been controversial all by himself. --Joopercoopers (talk) 21:42, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I've finished a light copyedit; more by others probably wouldn't hurt.Bishonen | talk 21:08, 16 December 2008 (UTC).
 * Thanks a bunch sweat heart. Giano (talk) 22:26, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

and also from the sagelike Wetman....

Hi again Wetman - Am I correct in thinking you have Colvin? Does he shed any light on James Wyatt's refacing of the Banqueting house completed c.1815? I know he died in 1813, so it must have been one of his last works. --Joopercoopers (talk) 00:00, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
 * 'Deed I do. Colvin (3rd ed. 1995) mention Wyatt's staircase added at the north end, 1808-09, but not refacing. Colvin's reference to Wyatt at the Banquetting House is History of the King's Works, vi.545f, but I don't have that series of volumes.--Wetman (talk) 12:51, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Many thanks Wetman - you might be interested in the thread on Giano's talk at user talk:Giano II - any contributions no doubt gratefully received. Fond regards --Joopercoopers (talk) 12:54, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

other notes
 * "Touching for the kings evil" not as rude as it sounds, but good filler for the idea of 'divine right'
 * "maundy Thursday"

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on Banqueting House, Whitehall. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081216085837/http://www.imagesofengland.org.uk:80/details/default.aspx?pid=1&id=207615 to http://www.imagesofengland.org.uk/details/default.aspx?pid=1&id=207615
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120118133247/http://www.rusi.org/about/venue/history/ to http://www.rusi.org/about/venue/history/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 10:24, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Banqueting House, Whitehall. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110901223028/http://www.hrp.org.uk/aboutus/whoweare/default.aspx to http://www.hrp.org.uk/aboutus/whoweare/default.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 08:02, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Interior image
Why has this image been moved from the section headed interior and put elswhere? Murgatroyd49 (talk) 18:19, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
 * The top of the article should contain the most important images, namely the interior and exterior - especially as for once we actually have a decent photo of the interior. Two common delusions among some less-experienced WP editors are:
 * 1) a large proportion of readers actually work their way through long texts, especially "history" sections. They don't.
 * 2) Photos should always be next to the relevant text. Its nice when they can be, but this is NOT the top priority.
 * I hope this helps. The "interior" section is nicely illustrated with a photo of the ceiling. It might in fact be better to put the long history section, less interesting to most readers, below the description of the interior and exterior. Having the history too high up is a bad habit WP has fallen into. Then the photos could be next to the relevant text. Johnbod (talk) 18:35, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
 * There is an argument that says, in this case, that the most important image is the ceiling. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 18:46, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I think the exterior is the most important. The painting pic is very vertical, which with the infobox, would take up too much space. Johnbod (talk) 04:54, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I was referring to the current positioning of the interior image. It is not helped by the fact that the infobox necessarily pushes it down the article so it's actual position is something of a lottery. Returning it to the relevant section gives it more meaning. Alternatively add it to the infobox so you have exterior and interior views together. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 08:53, 14 January 2023 (UTC)