Springsbury Farm

SPRINGSBURY FARM: A LANDSCAPE STUDYPrepared for

The Garden Club of Virginia

Prepared byEmily Peterson

2011 William D. Rieley Fellow

Copyright © 2011 by The Garden Club of VirginiaAll Rights Reserved.

Reproduction:

All material contained herein is the intellectual property of the Gar-den Club of Virginia except where noted. Permission for reproduc-tion, except for personal use, must be obtained from:

The Fellowship Committee ChairThe Garden Club of VirginiaThe Kent-Valentine House12 East Franklin StreetRichmond, VA 23219www.gcvirginia.org

FOREWORD AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This report attempts to chronicle the landscape changes at Springsbury Farm over the course of the last 200 years, focusing on the 1935 - 1937 additions,

which radically altered the property. In my investigation of historical photographs, architectural drawings and personal accounts, I have encountered a dynamic

cultural landscape, one that encapsulates a bygone era of great American gardens. It is my hope that the gardens described herein will be restored to their

former beauty, thus preserving a valuable chapter in our landscape history.

Many thanks are due for the opportunity to complete this work: to the Garden Club of Virginia for their generous support and interest in this type of work;

to Will Rieley and the staff at Rieley and Associates for their patience, assistance and mentorship; to the staff at Casey Trees, LLC, notably Barbara Shea, Mark

Buscaino and Brian Mayell for allowing me access to the Springsbury grounds and for providing valuable information about the property; to the staff at the

Rare and Manuscripts Collection at Cornell University for their enthusiastic and helpful assistance in locatiing Shipman drawings; to the Clarke County His-

torical Society for providing access to a number of useful photographs and accounts; and finally, to Maral Kaliban, whose work documenting the architectural

history of the property provided valuable background to my research.

Shipman, “Sketch.” (Shipman Papers, Cornell Rare and Manuscripts Collection)

INTRODUCTIONSPRINGSBURY FARM | BERRYVILLE, VA

The Springsbury Farm property sits along a bend in the Shenandoah River in Clarke County, Virginia. Appearing

on record as early as 1799, Springsbury (or, alternatively, “Springberry”) has been home to several generations of

prominent Virginia families, including the Holkers, McCormicks, Greenhalghs and Caseys.

For much of its history, Springsbury consisted of a Federal style dwelling (constructed by John Holker in the

1790s), an accompanying log cabin, and an assortment of outbuildings. The property remained generally unaltered

for nearly 140 years. But in 1935 the Greenhalghs, a wealthy Ohio couple, purchased the property and undertook

a massive renovation that dramatically altered the appearance and size of Springsbury. Employing some of the most

respected professionals of their day, including the architecture firm of Perry, Shaw and Hepburn and landscape

architect Ellen Biddle Shipman, the Greenhalghs transformed Springsbury into a premier country estate.

The gardens at Springsbury are of utmost interest for they count among the few remaining designs of Ellen Biddle

Shipman. Although she was a prolific designer in her day (drafting close to 600 designs), most of her projects have

been destroyed over the years. Springsbury provides the unique opportunity to protect and restore a Shipman

garden designed at the apex of her professional career. The garden demonstrates a sophistication and confidence

that represents the best elements of the cottage gardening movement.

Springsbury Farm is currently the property of Casey Trees, a non-profit organization. Casey Trees works to protect

the tree canopy of the nation’s capital and maintains a tree nursery and offices on the Springsbury property.

SPRINGSBURY FARM REPORT | PAGE 4

Image credit: Will Rieley

TABLE OF CONTENTSIntroduction Site Maps

1. Context

2. Development of Springsbury Farm

3. Springsbury in 1935

4. Architectural Additions

5. Ellen Biddle Shipman: Landscape Architect

6. General Designs for Springsbury

7. Entry Gate 8. Roads

9. Service Court

10. Forecourt

11. Terraces

12. Planting Design

13. Tennis Courts

14. Vegetable/Picking Gardens

15. Hill House

16. Swimming Pool Area

17. Letters

18. Other Shipman Projects in Clarke County

19. Springsbury since the Greenhalghs

20. Final Recommendations

Appendix

3 - 4

7 - 10

11 - 16

17 - 22

23 - 26

27 - 28

29 - 34

35 - 38

39 - 40

41 - 42

43 - 44

45 - 50

51 - 62

63 - 70

71 - 72

73 - 74

75 - 76

77 - 80

81 - 82

83 - 84

85 - 86

87 - 88

CONTEXT MAP

1. TROOPER HOUSE

2. SPRINGSBURY LANE

3. BARN / STABLES

4. NORTH COTTAGE

5. OUTBUILDING

6. PIERCE HOUSE

7. MAIN HOUSE AND GARDENS

8. FORMER TENNIS COURTS

9. SWIMMING POOL

10. CHAPEL RUN

11. SHENANDOAH RIVERSPRINGSBURY

1

2

N

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

Background aerial: GoogleEarth image

SPRINGSBURY KEY

1. SPRINGSBURY LANE

2. FORECOURT PLANTER

3. FORECOURT

4. SERVICE COURT

5. FORMER SITE OF HILL HOUSE AND GARDENS

6. MAIN HOUSE

7. SOUTH TERRACE

8. UPPER TERRACE

9. NORTH TERRACE

10. LOWER TERRACE

11. FORMER TENNIS COURTS

12. TERRACE VEGETABLE / PICKING GARDENS

13. SWIMMING POOL

14. TERRACE / BATH HOUSES

*Study area within Springsbury property

N


1.

2.

3.

4.5.

6.

7. 8. 9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

1. CONTEXT AND HISTORYCLARKE COUNTY: A PLACE APART

The Springsbury site is on the eastern edge of Berryville, Virginia, within the borders of present day Clarke County. At 730 acres1, it is one of the largest undevel-

oped agricultural properties in the region. The area of Clarke County that encompasses Springsbury is comprised of rich agricultural land, irrigated by tributaries

of the Shenandoah River. Rolling green hills dotted with elegant estates are set against a backdrop of the Blue Ridge Mountains. The proportion of open pasture

to forest is three to one2 , thus allowing expansive views throughout the valley.

The majority of Clarke County was part of the 1730, 50,212-acre grant from Lord Fairfax to Robert (“King”) Carter (part of the Northern Neck Proprietary

land grant)3 . When Robert Carter died in 1732, the land was left to his heirs in the Tidewater region. As Maral Kaliban notes in her report on the Greenway

Historic district, “The majority of Clarke County’s land was therefore unavailable for settlement by pioneers from the North, thus creating a dramatic social dif-

ference between the people who inhabited the area that later became Clarke and those who inhabited the rest of Frederick County.”4

The influence of Tidewater families began to take effect around the 1780s, when the heirs moved to Clarke County as their own land became less profitable. The

well-drained limestone soils made for productive agricultural land and thus fueled a steady influx of these Tidewater families and their unusual land-use patterns.

A real estate brochure for Springsbury describes the distinct character of the region at that time:

“These early landowners established in Clarke County, around Berryville, an aristocratic little colony, which endeavored to carry on the English way of life, com-

pletely apart from the pioneer character of the surrounding valley. The distinguished houses and farms around Berryville today represent the natural culmination

of this cultural background, agricultural wealth and an inherent tradition of gracious living.”5

Due to the impact of the wealthy Tidewater families, the land was never subdivided as it was in much of the surrounding area. For the most part, the serene ex-

panses of pastureland remain relatively undisturbed. This area is now part of the Greenway Historic District, a network of historically significant properties within

southwestern Clarke County.

1 Kaliban, Historical Report, 12 Kaliban, Greenway Historic District, Section 7, page 53 Kaliban, Historic Report, 134 Kaliban, Greenway Historic District, Section7, page 75 Real Estate Brochure. Clarke County Historical Association


SPRINGSBURY FARM REPORT | PAGE 1Fry-Jefferson map of Virginia, 1751

SPRINGSBURY

HYDROLOGY AND SOILS

Springsbury’s location in the rich bottomlands of the

Shenandoah River makes it an ideal place for agriculture.

However, the proximity of the river also makes structures

vulnerable to the occasional flooding regime; an addition to

the main house sits just within the 100-year floodline (as

seen in the diagram to the right).

The soils are comprised of a mix of Chagrin, Monongahela-

Zoar complex and Timberville silt loam (see map on fol-

lowing page), with occasional limestone outcrops. These

limestone enriched soils supported hearty wheat crops in

the era before the Civil War when large-scale plantations

comprised most of Clarke County. In the era after the war,

most plantation owners turned to fruit and hay production,

crops that were less labor intensive.


Springsbury Lane

Brigg’s Road

10-YR FLOOD

100-YR FLOOD

main house

barn

N


SOIL TYPES:

2B Braddock loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes4 Buckton soils10 Chagrin soils 25B Monongahela loam, 3 to 826B Monongahela-Braddock complex26C Monongahela-Braddock complex,27B Monongahela-Zoar complex30B Nicholson-Duffield silt loams38B Poplimento-Webbtown complex38C Poplimento-Webbtown complex38D2 Poplimento-Webbtown complex39B Poplimento-Webbtown complex,39C Poplimento-Webbtown complex, 39D2 Poplimento-Webbtown complex, 43C Rock outcrop-Opequon complex46B Swimley-Hagerstown silt loams47B Swimley-Hagerstown silt loams, rocky49B Thurmont loam, 3 to 8 percent slope51B Timberville silt loam52B Udipsamments,55D Udults-Udalfs association56 Weaver silt loam57C2 Webbtown-Poplimento-Rock outcrop complex57D2 Webbtown-Poplimento-Rock outcrop complex

*information courtesy of the USDA soil survey

N


1700

1800

OWNERS

CHANGES

Northern Neck Proprietary Land Grant includes area of Springs-bury.

Death of Robert Carter. Land left to Tidewater heirs,

Land owned by Colonel Fielding Lewis.

Springsbury par-cel inherited by George Lewis. John Holker

owns the Spring-sbury property.

Holker dies,land passes to wife, Nancy.

Log cabin built on site.

Main house built by Holker.

Mill and distillery operating on site. Land farmed by slave labor.

Land divided into large parcels for plantation style farming.


1900

2000

Land passes between members of the Mc-Cormick family.

Springsbury ownedby Dr. Hugh Taylor and his wife, Minnie.

Minnie Taylor leaves property to Episco-pal Diocese, which then sells property to Greenhalghs.

Greenhalgh era.

Springsbury owned by Eugene and Betty Casey.

Property donated to Casey Trees, LLC.

Land divided into two parcels: Springbsury and Land’s End.

Massive renovation of house, horse barn and gardens. Several new outbuildings constructed at this time as well.

Casey Trees reno-vates outbuild-ings for offices. Constructs a tree nursery.Construction of

swimming pool.

Springsbury and Land’s End par-cels rejoined.

2. THE DEVELOPMENT OF SPRINGSBURY FARMTHE HOLKER ERA: 1790-1840

As part of the King Carter land grant, the Springsbury site came under the ownership of descendants of Robert “King” Carter. Robert Carter Nicholas inherited

the land, and in turn conveyed 3,078 acres to Colonel Fielding Lewis, George Washington’s brother-in-law, around 17501. Upon the Colonel’s death, 1078 acres were

willed to his son, George Lewis. A log cabin was built during this time and remained until the Greenhalgh additions (around 1935-1936).

George Lewis sold the property not long after he inherited it. The land passed through a number of hands between 1781 and 1790, whereupon John Holker finally

purchased it. The core of what is now the Springsbury house was built sometime in the 1790s, not long after the purchase was made. Its location was selected due

to its proximity to a spring. Thus, the property earned the name, “Springsbury,” which appears on record for the first time in 1799. At this point, records indicate

that the property consisted of 1,076 acres.

John Holker was indeed one of the more colorful owners of the property. Holker was of Scotch descent but lived in France after his father fought for the pretender

to the Scottish throne, Bonnie Prince Charlie. He was sent to America by the French government during the Revolutionary War and was later named Consul Gen-

eral of France. According to reports, Holker was very prosperous, owning properties in Pennsylvania, Kentucky and Illinois, among other locales. In a 1930 manu-

script from the Garden Club of Virginia, Holker is described as having “displayed during the whole war a taste and luxury hitherto strangers in America; his house

was the resort of all the first people on the continent and after the arrival of the French army of all their officers of distinction.” 2

A dabbler in a variety of trades and projects, Holker was undeniably entrepreneurial. His farm records, kept between the years of 1801 and 1803, indicate that there

was both a mill and distillery on site3. Unfortunately, not all his ventures were financially viable, and the property was mortgaged in 1799 (the first time Springsbury

appears on public records) 4. According to the architectural report on the property, Holker tried to sell it in 1814. He never found a buyer.

There are also indications that Joseph Bonaparte, brother to Napoleon, entertained the idea of purchasing Springsbury around 1815.5 The very fact that Joseph

considered such a purchase is testament to the wealth of the Springsbury house and grounds at the time.

1 Kaliban, Historical Report, 13-142 Manuscript. Garden Club of Virginia, 1930, Clarke County Historical Association3 Kaliban, Historical Report, 154 Griffith, “Springbury,” 315 Kaliban, Historical Report, 16



John Holker died in 1822 and his land continued to be held in part by his third wife, Nancy Holker, between 1822 and 1839. Between 1839 and 1842, the estate

was the subject of a legal battle among the Holker heirs, which was never resolved. In 1842, all land and slaves of John Holker were sold at public auction and pur-

chased by Colonel Hugh M. Nelson of Long Branch.1

1 Kaliban, Historical Report, 18

Photograph, Springsbury pre-1937, Clarke County Historical Association (CCHA) Archives.

THE MCCORMICK/TAYLOR ERA: 1842-1933

In 1842, Charles McCormick purchased Springsbury from Colonel

Hugh Nelson. Charles was the son of Francis McCormick, one of

the earliest settlers of the valley. The McCormick clan was extremely

prosperous, excelling in a number of professions, which allowed

them to indulge in “the fine art of good living.” 1

Charles McCormick died shortly after the purchase and the land

was divided among his brothers: Province McCormick, Francis Mc-

Cormick, and Dr. Cyrus McCormick2. Under Charles McCormick’s

will, a trust was created to support his widowed sister, Hannah,

and her two children, Eliza and William. Substantial litigation ensued

when it came time to execute the will due to the complexity of the

partition.

Ultimately, Francis McCormick deeded 531 acres to Hannah and

William in 18513. The remaining land, known as the Land’s End parcel,

was given to Eliza and her heirs. Under the tutelage of the McCor-

mick family, both Springsbury and Land’s End properties flourished.

Even in the years immediately following the Civil War, the property

did not depreciate substantially. Springsbury was one of the rare

estates that prospered after the war, even with the shift from slave

to paid labor.

1 Griffith, Springsbury, 332 Griffith, Springsbury, 333 Griffith, Springsbury, 34


Photograph, view from northwest, circa 1936, courtesy of Rieley and Associates.


Over the next 20 years, the land moved among different members of

the McCormick clan. In 1873, Hannah Taylor conveyed the property

to her son, William Taylor, who lived there with his son, Samuel.1 A

decade later, in 1884, William conveyed the land to Samuel, who lived

on the property with his family. When the widow of William Taylor,

Gertrude, finally passed away in 1894, the land was again conveyed

to her daughter, Annie Taylor.2

Annie Taylor died in 1912 and Dr. Hugh Taylor, one of her sons,

eventually purchased the land3. At that time, the property consisted

of 410 acres. The acquisition was recorded in the local papers, sug-

gesting that Springsbury was a noteworthy place in Clarke County

at the time. It should be noted that Dr. Hugh Taylor was a reputable

physician in Richmond, acting as secretary and treasurer of the Medi-

cal Society. He retained a primary residence in Richmond and visited

Springsbury on occasion.

Upon Dr. Hugh Taylor’s death, the land was passed to his wife, Minnie

Taylor, a noted philanthropist. When she later died in 1933, she willed

the Springsbury property to the Episcopal Diocese of Virginia4. Her

hope was that the property would be used as a school for orphan

boys. However, the Diocese decided not to keep Springsbury, and

sold it shortly thereafter to the Greenhalghs.

1 Kaliban, Historical Report, 192 Kaliban, Historical Report, 193 Griffith, Springsbury, 344 Griffith, Springsbury, 35

Detail. Chrisman, Map of Clarke County, 1922. UVa Special Collections.


THE GREENHALGH FAMILY 1935 - 1958

Unlike previous owners of Springsbury, the Greenhalghs did not have Virginia roots. George P. Greenhalgh was born in St. Louis, Missouri in 18781 and went on to

attend Yale and Harvard for business school. By 1910, census records indicate that he worked as a lawyer in Toledo, Ohio2. Marie, his wife, was born in Winchester,

Massachusetts in 1884. Her family was associated with the Libbey Glassware Company, which relocated to Toledo, Ohio in 1888.3 Presumably, the paths of George

and Marie intersected in Toledo, and the couple was married sometime between 1910 and 1920.

George appears to have held a number of different professions over the years; census records list him as a lawyer, broker, and then finally, in the 1930s, as a

manufacturer4. By the 1930s, George and Marie were living in Perrysville, Ohio and had achieved a very high standard of living. Both the value of their house and a

record of decadent vacations evidence a couple that was financially very well off.5

It is around this time (1935) that the Greenhalghs purchased Springsbury. They were introduced to the area by one of George’s Yale classmates, whose fam-

ily owned Fairfield, a large colonial mansion in Clarke County6. As dedicated breeders of thoroughbred horses, the Greenhalghs must have been taken with the

equestrian culture and beauty of the surrounding countryside. And they were not alone: the Greenhalghs were part of a larger migration of northern industrial-

ists to Clarke County, motivated by the culture and affordability of land. These northern transplants purchased languishing plantation properties and transformed

them into country houses used for entertaining guests and fox-hunting, among other leisure activities. The photograph to the right shows the Greenhalghs after

one of such hunting outings with friends.

Upon purchasing the property, the Greenhalghs decided to undertake a series of renovations and additions. What transpired altered the fabric of Springsbury and

turned it into the elaborate country estate that exists today.

1 Kaliban, Historical Report, 212 Kaliban, 223 Kaliban, 224 Ancestry.com “Greenhalgh”5 Kaliban, 226 Kaliban, 22


Photograph, “Hunt Breakfast”, circa 1930s (Marie and George pictured), CCHA Archives

3


3. SPRINGSBURY IN 1935A SNAPSHOT OF THE PROPERTY BEFORE THE ADDITIONS

Before discussing the changes made to the property, it is important to understand what it was like when the Greenhalghs first purchased it. Only by contrasting

the renovations with the state of the property in 1935, does the extent of the changes register. Thankfully, a survey of the Springsbury grounds was completed in

July, 1935 in order to install a sewage system for the property. It is one of the rare documents that provide a glimpse of the estate before the Greenhalgh’s reno-

vation. From the drawings, an inventory of trees and structures can be compiled.

Trees present on Springsbury at time of survey: Structures at time of survey:

• Elm 39”• Elm 30”• Elm 4”• Elm 5”• Sycamore 30”• Walnut 18”• Cottonwood 2”• Locust 33”• Willow 6”• Ash 2”• Sugar Nut 30”• Maple 4”• Ash 30”• Ash 30” • Sugar Nut 2”• Peach 3”• Peach 2”• Cedar Bush• Locust 3’ • Cottonwood 2”• Sycamore 30”

• Sugar Nut 30”• Sycamore 36”• Sycamore 8”• Sycamore 15”• Sycamore 12”• Hedge Bush 10’ tall• 4” Elm Bushes, 20’ tall• Maple 8”• Pear 8”• Apple 6”• Pear 2”• Lilac bushes 8’ tall• Grape arbor• Grape Arbor• Lilac bushes• Elm 2”• Pear 4”• Pear 4”

• Main house with front and back porches, elevated above ground level.

• 18th century log cabin • Pierce house (not shown on survey)• Barn

3

INSIGHTS FROM THE SURVEY

In analyzing the survey, redundancies become evident. Certain trees,

hedges and topographical elements on the survey appear again in the

final designs for the property. The drawings to the right exhibit three

features that ultimately structured components of the final plan:

1. The flood line: The main house fell just outside the 100-year flood-

plain. In order to prevent flooding of house and grounds, gardens

would have to be elevated above this line.

2. The lilac hedge: This hedge bounded the original Springsbury gar-

den (which is described in detail on the following page). It appears in

multiple drawings, acting as a means of aligning elements. Ultimately,

the pool is placed along the northern lilac hedge.

3. The Sugar Nut Tree: This tree appears again and again throughout

design iterations for the property. A concerted effort was made to

maintain this particular specimen for reasons that will be discussed

in later chapters.

*See appendix for survey

Flood line. All details from “Topographic Map”, 1935, Shipman Papers, Cornell RMC.

Lilac hedge detail. Sugar Nut Tree detail.



THE GARDENS

In addition to the survey, a 1930 Historic Garden Tour led by the Garden Club of

Virginia provides a vivid description of what the Springsbury gardens looked like only a

few years before the renovation:

“The south lawn is bordered by a dancing brook whereby the waters from the large spring

find their way to the nearby Shenandoah. To the north of the house was the garden, it was

reached by a path bordered on either side by beds filled with a wealth of old fashioned

companionable flowers. The garden was entered through a wicket gate, the box bordered

path from this gate spread into a large circule in the center of the garden. This circule was

intersected by two grass paths, the four beds thus formed being filled with a wealth of flowers.

On the west behind the box hedges were planted the vegetable and small fruits. And the west

side of the garden was bordered with a magnificent hedge of purple lilacs. The path from the

east side of the circule led into a garden gently terraced to the point where it lost itself in the

blue grass meadow which was washed on the east by the waters of the Shenandoah. Through

this meadow the driveway approached the house. “1

The image at top right shows another Virginia garden that follows a similar configura-

tion to that described by the Garden Club. Below that is an example of a terrace gar-

den. While it is likely more elaborate than the one constructed at Springsbury, it shows

the sense of prospect and status that such a garden provided.

Images on the following page show the possible locations of the gardens described in

the tour.

1 Manuscript. Garden Club of Virginia, 1930, Clarke County Historical Association “

“Flower de Hundred Garden” Historic Virginia Gardens, 1923.

“Walk at Carter’s Grove.” Early American Gardens, date unknown.


Probableboundaryof original garden

Area of possible terracing

1936 aerial confirmspresence of terraces, although they might have been altered during the renovations.

“ Aerial photograph of Springbsury, 1936, Rieley and Associates.

“Topographic Map”, 1935, Shipman Papers, Cornell RMC.


4. ARCHITECTURAL CHANGESTHE PERRY, SHAW AND HEPBURN ADDITIONS

When it came time to renovate the property, the Greenhalghs spared no expense. They hired the prestigious Boston firm of Perry, Shaw and Hepburn to design

additions to the house as well as two outbuildings (Trooper House and Hill House). It is likely that Marie Greenhalgh was familiar with the firm due to her Mas-

sachusetts upbringing.

At the time, Perry, Shaw and Hepburn had just completed work at Colonial Williamsburg, which was funded and overseen by John D. Rockefeller. The project had

earned the firm great notoriety within the state of Virginia and had inspired a renaissance in Colonial revival architecture. In seeking architects for a historically

sensitive and large-scale renovation, the Greenhalghs had located among the best in the field.

The designs drawn up by the firm transformed the modest Federal style dwelling into a

“sprawling U-shaped Georgian Colonial revival style mansion reminiscent of Tidewater

plantations.1” Most of the original house, beyond the brick core of the existing house

was demolished including: “the east porch, vestibule and steps; the complete west wing

and porches; the north entrance and platform; and the south entrance and steps.”2 Also

worth noting is the fact that the additions forced the mansion to make an about-face,

shifting the front to the back and vice versa. For that reason, the house definitely ap-

pears idiosyncratic: the main entry has two doors and the back seems grander than the

front despite attempts to make it appear otherwise.

The peculiar color scheme included white walls, pink trim and green shutters. The mo-

tivation for this unique color scheme is uncertain, although it matches the Vitrolite glass

colors used in the bathrooms3. It is likely that the colors were simply the preference of

the Greenhalghs and have no historical significance.

1 Kaliban, 12 Kaliban, 4 3 Kaliban, 4

Perry, Shaw and Hepburn, “Elevation of East Facade,” 1935. (Shipman Papers, Cornell RMC)

SPRINGSBURY FARM REPORT | PAGE 1Perry, Shaw and Hepburn, “Site Plan”, 1935 (Shipman Papers, Cornell RMC).


5. ELLEN BIDDLE SHIPMANSPRINGSURY’S LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT

In 1935, Ellen Biddle Shipman was at the height of her

career as a landscape architect. Her work had already been

featured in numerous nation-wide publications including

House Beautiful and House and Garden, among others. The

Greenhalghs were probably keenly aware of her talents

from the magazine spreads, which featured lush perennial

gardens and meticulous architectural details.

Image: House and Garden, September 1930.


THE MAKING OF A LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT

Shipman has an interesting history, and the path that led her to the Greenhalgh es-

tate in 1935 is worth detailing. Born in Philadelphia in 1867, Shipman’s early life was

marked by unusually rich experiences with nature. Her father was in the military,

and much of her childhood was spent in the west, in Nevada and Colorado1. One of

her earliest memories is of her father’s insistence on maintaining trees in the arid

western climate:

“One of my earliest recollections was the excitement of seeing water that my father had ordered brought for miles to a Nevada post, running in a ditch, or essahia, as it was called there, to feed the trees he had planted along the driveways – the only trees in our vicinity.”2

Her love of nature was fostered by sightseeing trips throughout the country, includ-

ing the east coast, where her extended family lived. The margins of her childhood

notebooks were filled with drawings and plans of gardens, evidencing an ever-bur-

geoning talent. One of her teachers took note and gave her an architectural history

book to provide some additional encouragement.3

It took Ellen slightly longer to realize what her teacher saw in her at such a young

age. Although she went to college at Radcliffe (also known as the Harvard Annex)

for a year, she never studied landscape architecture. Her brief tenure at the school

ended when she met Louis Shipman, an aspiring playwright, and fell in love. Despite

disapproval from her family, she married Shipman in 1893 and moved with him to an

artist’s colony in Cornish, New Hampshire.

1 Way, Thaisa, Unbounded Practice, 662 Shipman, “Garden Notebook.”3 Shipman, “Garden Notebook” Portrait of Ellen Biddle Shipman, date unknown, Shipman Papers, Cornell RMC.


The move to Cornish precipitated a resurgence of Shipman’s gardening interests. The charming colony attracted a slew of artists, which made the atmosphere

ripe for innovation and the exchange of aesthetic ideas. Of the place, she wrote, “Here was the renaissance of gardening in America.”1

Although Shipman experimented extensively with her own gardens at Cornish, she did not design for anyone but herself. However, her talents did not go un-

noticed. During a stay at the house of Charles Platt, she accidentally left some of her drawings at his house. Platt was impressed and shortly thereafter sent her

drafting materials with a note imploring her to keep drawing2.

At that time, Shipman had three children and her life was spent contentedly caring for her family. But this domestic bliss was short lived: in 1910 Louis left for

New York, leaving Shipman to fend for herself and three young children. His departure prompted her to consider new ways to support herself, which led her to

pursue landscape architecture.

1 Shipman, “Garden Notebook” 2 Tankard, Judith. “The Gardens of Ellen Biddle Shipman,” 18

1 2 3Gardens by Ellen Shipman: 1. House Beautiful, July 1924. 2. House and Garden, Septmber, 1925. 3. House Beautiful, July 1924.


Her Cornish connections enabled this sudden career shift, and she began training under her old friend,

Charles Platt. Under his mentorship and training, her modest skill began to blossom into a veritable

talent. Platt would design the house and other architectural features and have Shipman compose the

gardens and grounds. For nearly a decade, Shipman worked in close collaboration with Platt; but by

1920, she was ready to embark on her own practice.

She set up an office in New York City and relied on connections she had created and maintained both

in her years living at Cornish and in her time working under Platt. Her resilient character, astute design

skills and general affability served her well and her practice flourished. No project was too small or

too undignified, and Shipman took on projects many of her contemporaries (including Beatrix Far-

rand) would have refused. As her practice grew, she hired young female graduates from the Lowthorpe

School to help her draft designs. She developed close relationships with the Lowthorpe graduates and

actively donated money and time to Lowthorpe despite her own lack of formal education1.

Over the years, Shipman designed close to 600 gardens, most of them in the northeastern United

States. By the early 1930s, she was heralded as the “Dean of women landscape architects,” a high hon-

or by any measure. Shipman remained deeply committed to the profession throughout her life despite

its hardships and occasional setbacks.

Toward the end of her career, Shipman attempted to compile a notebook detailing her design knowl-

edge and philosophy. Due to failing health (and the lack of a market for such a book), the work was

never completed. However, some of her pages remain and one quote in particular seems to sum up

her democratic and unpretentious design philosophy: “To the individual, gardening opens a door wider

than any other of the arts – all mankind can walk through, rich and poor, high and low, talented and

untalented. It has no distinctions, all are welcome.”2

1 Tankard, 562 Shipman, “Garden Notebook”

Lowthorpe school brochure: Image courtesy of Wikipedia.

Shipman advertisement, courtesy of All About My Garden.


SHIPMAN’S DESIGN INFLUENCES

Shipman differed from her contemporaries in both her lack of education and her inability to travel abroad. Thus, her landscape inspirations were more eclectic

and local than the likes of Beatrix Farrand and Marian Coffin. Her earliest education in gardening came from her time spent with Louis at Cornish. The gardens

there “brimmed with old-fashioned flowers, dirt paths, and simple ornaments and features, such as rose arbors and circular reflecting pools.”1

Because she did not have the means to travel, Shipman pored through copies of House Beautiful and House and Garden, magazines that would eventually feature

her work. The Shipman archives at Cornell have a number of her magazine clippings of gardens and details that inspired her. Perhaps unsurprisingly, her clippings

featured a wide range of styles and aesthetics.

Her time working under Charles Platt gave her another design vocabulary, one lifted from pages of Italian villa gardens. The basic axial plans she developed under

Platt provided the compositional strategy for much of her career. In working with Platt, she learned the importance of integrating house and garden, considering

the garden the “shadow of a house.”2

But, unlike her mentor, Shipman had a greater appreciation for the existing qualities of site. She approved of formality within close proximity to the house, but

advocated less intervention on the periphery. This sort of attitude was consistent with the work of William Robinson, who advocated hardy plants with a more

natural appearance outside the garden proper. Shipman describes her own stance on the use of native “natural” plantings in her Garden Notebook:

“Native plants and shrubs will be found best to use outside the garden proper. There are many reasons for this but to give only a few. First they are apt to do well.

Second they look less as if they come from a nursery. Third they blend into the distant landscape and give your property a larger aspect, for no matter how big

one’s place may be there is always the desire to extend one’s landed possessions.”3

1 Tankard, “Shipman’s New England Gardens,” 472 Tankard, “The Gardens of Ellen Biddle Shipman,” 473 Shipman, “Garden Notebook”


Shipman’s primary genius was reserved for the space within the garden boundaries, in lush perennial beds, expertly choreographed to remain in bloom through-

out the year. She was particularly inspired by the work of Gertrude Jekyll, a preeminent gardener and author who championed the hardy perennial border. An

article from a 1930 issue of House and Garden describes the appeal of Jekyll’s approach: “Miss Jekyll made us believe ourselves artists in embryo with a color box

to our hands and a canvas ready stretched before us. She opened up to us a new delight in gardening and new possibilities in ourselves and set us a most radiant

and enticing example.”1

Shipman certainly took to this brand of landscape gardening, painting radiant compositions in peony, foxglove and narcissus. In terms of planting, Shipman’s designs

were robust, colorful and dynamic.

1 “New Colour Schemes for the Garden.” House and Garden, 1930

Image of Gertrude Jekyll Garden: Thomas Henry Hunn The Pansy Garden, Munstead Wood, Surrey. Watercolor. Courtesy of artnet.com.


6. GENERAL DESIGN PLANSSHIPMAN’S APPROACH TO SITE

Shipman had a very exacting regimen when it came to creating a landscape design for any property. She was a big proponent of site-based design and found it

necessary to spend time getting to know the place and its peculiarities. Shipman herself once said, “I never have done and never expect to do a piece of work

without seeing the place and making the plans especially for it.”1

During her site visits, she recorded her observations in notes and photographs2. Although no specific evidence exists of her visit to Springsbury since most of her

correspondence and notes prior to 1940 have been lost, it is likely that her manner of working there followed suit. In drafting the design, she would also consult

surveys of the grounds (see appendix) to get a better sense of overall layout and topography of the site.

Shipman employed a similar rigor when it came to observing the local flora. Her Garden Notebook gives a vivid description of how she approached developing a

planting plan:

“Frequently when doing work in a new part of the country people will ask me how I know what plants I will want to use. My answer is that I will not know until

I SEE what there is. After two of three days driving about the country to note the native growth and natural combinations of trees, shrubs and ground covers and

visiting gardens to see which plants that I use in other parts of the country do well under local conditions, as well as noting requirements of new plants that suit

my taste and needs, I will have made a good working basis.”3

Although site analysis and observation played important roles in Shipman’s design process, there were certain geometries and spatial strategies that she regularly

employed. Her strong belief in the relationship between house and garden led her to incorporate architectural features from the house and carry them through

her construction details.

1 Shipman, quoted from Tankard, “Gardens of Ellen Biddle Shipman,” 782 Tankard, 783 Shipman, “Garden Notebook”

SPRINGSBURY FARM REPORT | PAGE 36Shipman, Ellen. “General Design Plan.” Date unknown. (Shipman Papers, Cornell RMC)


Shipman, “Preliminary design plan.” September, 1935

EVOLUTION OF SHIPMAN’S DESIGNS

Shipman, “Sketch” Date Unknown

*All images from Shipman Papers, Cornell RMC


Shipman, “General Design Plan.” December, 1935 Shipman, “Revised Design Plan.” August, 1936


1 (beyond frame)

2

34

5

6

7

8

OVERVIEW OF SHIPMAN’S DESIGN FEATURES


4

5 6 7 8

The Gateway The Roads The Service Court The Forecourt

The Terraces Tennis Courts Vegetable/Picking Gardens The Swimming Pool

Not all elements of Shipman’s ambitious plans were realized. The features that were ultimately completed by the Greenhalghs included the gateway, roads, service

court, forecourt, terraces, tennis courts, and swimming pool. The following chapters will elaborate more specifically on each of these elements.

1 2 3

7. THE GATEWAYAN ENTRY TO SPRINGSBURY

The entrance to Springsbury is framed by two curving walls made of attractive local flagstone. While the road into the property, Springsbury Lane, existed before

the additions, Shipman’s gateway creates a distinct moment of arrival.

In keeping with the surrounding pastureland, the gateway has a more rustic appearance. The aesthetic is similar to the pillars on the original barn, which feature a

comparable stone and finish. The common approach to landscape architecture at the time was to concentrate the more formal, designed elements of a plan near

the house and to leave the outskirts of the property more “wild” by comparison. By that logic, the gateway encapsulates a rougher aesthetic than that reproduced

around the house. However, despite its less refined look, it still contains architectural motifs that are repeated throughout the garden and the house.

The entrance gate appears nearly as Shipman planned it with the exception of the molding on the cap. It should also be noted that the trees contained in the cur-

rent view of Springsbury Lane have been planted by Springsbury’s current owner, Casey Trees. The trees in the allee are a variety of elm cultivars1 grown by the

organization, which has a nursery on site.

1 Casey Trees, LLC: http://www.caseytrees.org/about/casey-tree-farm



*Note: some drawings have been inverted or edited for greater legibility. Full drawings are available at the Cornell Rare and Manuscript Collection in Ithaca, NY.

1. Entry to Springsbury 2. Shipman, “Construction details for entrance walls,” 1935. (Shipman Papers, Cornell RMC) 3. Elevation of entry gate (Shipman Papers, Cornell RMC) 4. Detail of entry gate 5. Shipman, Detail. “Construction details for entrance walls,” 1935. (Shipman Papers, Cornell RMC)

2

3

4

5

8. THE ROADSCHOREOGRAPHING AN APPROACH

Shipman’s drawings and notes for the roads at Springsbury demonstrate

the depth of her knowledge in all aspects of the design process. The Cor-

nell archives contain a number of documents like the one drawn up for

the Greenhalghs (right)1, specifying all details of road construction, from

the height of the crown to the sealant. There is also a keen understanding

of the way in which water should be conveyed off the road depending on

its slope. Such specificity is truly impressive and shows that Shipman had

learned not only from her experience working with architects, but also in

her time with engineers.

Also worth noting is the way in which the roads are set into the slope. A

drawing for the entry roads at the Jenkins property (see page 84), display

the way in which she studied a site’s topography and aligned the road to

curve gracefully along swells in the landscape. The photographs below show

the way movement is choreographed through the drives at Springsbury.

1 Shipman, “Specifications for Gravel Road.”


Shipman, “Specifications for Gravel Road.” (Shipman Papers, Cornell RMC)

SPRINGSBURY FARM REPORT | PAGE 1Shipman, “Plan for Stable Road and Parking Lot.” (Shipman Papers, Cornell RMC)


9. THE SERVICE COURTARCHITECTURAL DETAILS

As a wealthy family in the 1930s, the Greenhalghs did a large

amount of entertaining and likely had a sizeable staff working on

the property. The generous service kitchen indicates a manner

of living consistent with a cooking and serving staff rather than

one used privately. Originally the service drive served both Hill

House (the guest house just north of the main house, no longer

on site) and the main house. The driveway was likely meant to

allow shipments to be delivered directly to the kitchen without

disrupting activity in the rest of the house.

In keeping with the more domestic nature of that side of the

property (and the cottage feel of Hill House), the building details

are less monumental. The rounded wooden posts set into a brick

base, flanked by the occasional brick column with wooden crown

molding. The juxtaposition of the pink and white give it a distinct

warmth, especially in combination with the lush green foliage that

surrounds it.

The gate that once led to Hill House still remains, although the

house it leads to does not. For more information on the house,

see page 75.

Shipman, “Plan for layout of entrance court and service drive.” (Shipman Papers, Cornell RMC)1

SPRINGSBURY FARM REPORT | PAGE 46Image 6: Shipman, “Detail of Moulded Brick at Base of Post.” (Shipman Papers, Cornell RMC)

2

3

4

5

6


10. THE FORECOURTTHE FORECOURT WALLS

Shipman had an interesting philosophy when it came to the design of walls. An article from the Winston-Salem journal describes a lecture by Shipman given on

the topic:

“She stressed the right manner of building walls where walls were necessary, so that they might seems a permanent part of the garden and not just put together

for the moment, and, too, that they might readily hold the lovely vines which would eventually cover them.”1

In other words, walls were meant to seem grounded in a place rather than arbitrarily constructed. Shipman’s logic in this lecture seems to apply to her design in

the forecourt. The walls extend off the architecture of the house, demarcating the place of entry and turnabout drive. Along their perimeter, a number of small

trees, shrubs and vines are specified, including wisteria, small-leaf English ivy, climbing hydrangea and trumpet vine (see page 50 for planting plan). These vines were

meant to cover the walls, making them appear firmly integrated into the site.

The brick pattern on the forecourt walls is the same as on the house, making the walls appear as an extension of the architecture rather than as an addition. The

drawing bears a note that reads: “All walls to have same brick and laid in same bond as house.”2 Shipman was known to have said that the garden was the shadow

of the house, and her choice to treat the walls in such a manner shows her desire to bind the two in close relationship to one another.

The bronze eagles which perch atop the two entry columns are prominent gate markers, although their exact significance to the Greenhalghs remains unknown.

The eagle has long been used in heraldry motifs, signifying strength and nobility. Perhaps the Greenhalghs were making a statement about their own status, or

maybe they simply appreciated the symbolism behind the bird; either way, the eagle markers provide an impressive frame for the Springsbury residence.

.

1 “Mrs. Ellen Shipman, Famous Landscape Architect, Thrills Hearers.” Winston-Salem Journal. October 8, 1932. (Shipman Papers, Cornell RMC)2 Shipman, Ellen. “Forecourt” (Shipman Papers, Cornell RMC)

SPRINGSBURY FARM REPORT | PAGE 48*Images 1 and 4: Shipman, “Construction drawing of forecourt walls,” 1937 (Shipman Papers, Cornell RMC)

1

2

3

4


THE FORECOURT TREE

In the 1935 survey and all subsequent drawings, one feature remains: the consistent,

steadfast “Sugar Nut”1 tree. Shipman had always been an advocate for maintaining existing

specimens, but there seem to be a number of factors at work in the preservation of this

particular tree. For one, it was the only tree indicated on the survey that fell within the

boundaries of the forecourt walls. In such a monumental space, a large tree was probably

necessary to provide a place of visual grounding.

Then there is the question of the tree’s off center placement. Was the placement a result

of Shipman’s commitment to this specific tree or was some other motivation at work? In

closely examining the house, one thing becomes clear: it is not symmetrical. The spaces to

either side of the two entry doors are unequal and the chimney is not centered. In being

off-center, the tree helped provide a sense of balance, creating the illusion of architectural

symmetry (or, perhaps, simply acting as a distraction from house’s asymmetry).

Regardless of the motivation for the preservation of the tree, it eventually became the

primary feature of the forecourt. Shipman designed a slate planter, held together with bolts

and steel connecting plates, to create a frame for this fine specimen. The large planter ties

together the slate from the roof and entry stairs into the landscape, thus maintaining the

continuity between house and garden.

Although the only label for the tree is “Sugar Nut,” a common name unknown to current

practitioners, it seems likely that it was simply a misnomer for “Sugarberry” or Southern

Hackberry (Celtis laerogata)2 as it is now known. Unfortunately, this hypothesis cannot be

confirmed since the tree no longer exists.

1 McBond C., Walker. “Topographic map of estate.” (Shipman Papers, Cornell RMC)2 Conversation with Will Rieley, Landscape Architect, August 11, 2011.

SPRINGSBURY FARM REPORT | PAGE 50Images 1, 2, 4 and 5 from Shipman Papers, Cornell RMC; Images 6, 7, and 8 from CCHA Archives, Real Estate Brochure, 1958.

1

2

4

5

3

6 7 8


PLANTING PLAN FOR FORECOURT

From Shipman’s plans it is clear that the forecourt, or entry court, as it is occasionally labeled, was not meant to act as a garden. It was a place of arrival and

greeting rather than of intimacy. As such, her planting plan consists primarily of low maintenance trees, shrubs and vines which would help camouflage the sur-

rounding walls. The one exception to this rule is on south side of the forecourt, where a gateway leads to a terraced garden, planted with rhododendrons and

hosta (still relatively low maintenance plants).

Real Estate Brochure for Springsbury, 1958. CCHA Archives.


PLANTS SPECIFIED:

English IvyWisteriaBoxwoodMagnolia GrandifloraSmall leaf English IvyClimbing rose – Dr. Van FleetAnchusa Myosotiflora (12)Andromeda (6)Wisteria Prunus Climbing HydrangeaRhododendron Carolinanum (6)Viburnum LantanaRhododendron Album Elegans (6)Funkia Lanc (15)Pulmonaria (20)GordoniaMalus MicromalusViburnum CassanoidesHemlockThorn LocustNarcissus Poeticus Reuruus (50)Wisteria Prunus HavenClimbing Rose Star of PersiaCornus FloridaHighbush BlueberryVinca MinorKalmia Latifolia (50)Vinca Minor (100)Climbing Rose MermaidElm PlumbagoClimbing Rose New DawnBoxSaxifragePrunus Amanagawa

Cornus FloridaVinca Minor (100)Kalmia Latifolia (50) Small Leaf English IvyPrunus Amanagawa Cotoneaster SimonsiMyosotis (30)HemlockWisteria Peony ThereseTaxus Cuspidata Baccata (6)Lilium Regale (12)Syringa JosikaraLithospermElmMagnolia StellataClimbing Rose JacotteLaburnumAnchusa Myosotidiflora (20)Varnish TreeKalmia LatifoliaAndromeda (3)Magnolia Soulamgeana trained on wall

Today, the forecourt still contains the old slate edging that once defined the border plantings, however, few original specimens remain. The photograph on the

previous page shows how the area looked in its prime, circa the 1950s. Below is the planting plan.

Shipman, “Planting Plan for the Forecourt.” (Shipman Papers, Cornell RMC)


11. THE TERRACESEARTHWORK AND RETAINING WALLS

The terraces are the crowning achievement of Shipman’s Springsbury designs. Seamlessly integrated into the house, providing a sense of prospect that extended

past the hay fields and the Shenandoah River, the terraces were expertly designed to maximize the site’s natural beauty. While the terraces seem so integrated

as to appear almost intuitive, a closer inspection reveals some clever planning and design ingenuity.

Remember, the original Springsbury house, built by John Holker, (see page18) was elevated. A porch had once helped to offset this awkward change in elevation

but was demolished in anticipation of the new additions So, in 1935, the grade change problem again presented itself: how could one not only compensate for

this elevation change but create a design that incorporated it?

Furthermore, the property fell just within the 100-year floodline (see page 13). Not only was the house at risk of flooding but also any landscape additions sited

on the back of the estate. Shipman’s solution to this problem was to create enormous terraces that not only helped offset the grade change but also provided a

barrier against potential flooding by the Shenandoah River. To achieve this goal, Shipman designed massive retaining walls, with concrete bases as wide as 6 feet.

8 inches and a depth of close to 3 feet (4). It is likely Shipman sought some assistance in drafting these walls, since she typically subcontracted grading work to

engineering consultants.1

The result of this problem-solving was a robust landscape feature that served utilitarian as well as aesthetic aims. In the end, four distinct spaces emerged as a

result of the design strategy: the north terrace, the south terrace, the upper terrace and the lower terrace.

1 Tankard, “The Gardens of Ellen Biddle Shipman,” 77


4 5

“Shipman, “Grading plan for terraces and entrance court.” (Shipman Papers, Cornell RMC)

1936 aerial photograph courtesy of Rieley and Associates

Real Estate Brochure, courtesy CCHA Archives, 1958.

“Shipman, “Wall section.” (Shipman Papers, Cornell RMC) “Shipman, Ellen, “Construction drawings of walls.” (Shipman Papers, Cornell RMC)

1

2

3


AREAS OF PAVING AND PLANTING ON TERRACES

STANDARD BRICK PAVING SPECIAL BRICK DETAILS

Basket Weave Herringbone Running Bond HeadersHalf Basket Weave


TURF GRASS PLANTING BEDS


NORTH TERRACE

The north terrace is a simple rectangular shape, lined with intricate perennial beds. It connects to both the upper terrace (by the circular stairs) and the lower

terrace (by traditional brick stairs). The paving is comprised of molded brick arranged in a basket weave pattern and defined on either side by a border of brick

headers. The brick patterns at Springsbury were commonly used by Shipman, who preferred to keep the architectural elements simple and to let the intricate

plantings perform most of the work. 1The extents of the terrace are defined by low brick walls, which demarcate the space and create a frame for the colorful

perennial plantings.

The entry to the north side of this terrace is flanked by two Japanese Yew specimens, which were specified by Shipman and remain to this day.

1 Tankard, “The Gardens of Ellen Biddle Shipman,” 53

1 2 3

4 5 6

SPRINGSBURY FARM REPORT | PAGE 58Shipman, “Perennial Plan for north terrace garden.” (Shipman Papers, Cornell RMC)

63

5

1


SOUTH TERRACE

The south terrace receives significantly less sun due to its proximity to a number of large trees along the southeastern side. Perennial beds hug the perimeter of

the terrace, the center of which bears the same basket-weave brick pattern as adjacent terraces. Due to the strange topographical variations at Springsbury, the

south terrace is elevated significantly higher above ground level than the north terrace. For that reason, Shipman designed a curving staircase that conveys one

from the terrace to the ground below. A single crepe myrtle tree, planted at the base of the stairwell, overhangs the terrace. The tree was not specified on the

plan and it seems to have been an addition by owners of the house rather than the landscape architect. As in the north terrace, a low wall defines the boundary

of the terrace, creating a sense of seclusion and privacy.

Real Estate Brochure, Clarke County Archives, 19581

2 3


Shipman, Ellen, “Perennial plan for south terrace.” (Shipman Papers, Cornell RMC)


UPPER TERRACE

The upper terrace at Springsbury is defined by a large brick expanse in the typical basket-weave pattern. As

the image below indicates, the paved area acted as a patio space for leisure and entertaining. The unpaved

portion of the terrace was planted with turf grass and two symmetrically placed elm trees, meant to frame

the back entry to the house (see following page for image). Although Shipman specified elm trees in her

drawings, the fate of these trees remains uncertain. Perhaps they fell victim to Dutch Elm disease, or maybe

they were never planted at all. Regardless, whether at the garden’s genesis or shortly thereafter, the elms

were replaced by Zelkova trees, a species native to Japan. Because the species is highly resistant to Dutch

Elm disease, it has been widely used as a replacement throughout the Northern United States1.

At present, only one of the two Zelkova trees remain, providing an asymmetry Shipman would likely have

eschewed. The health of the remaining Zelkova is dwindling due to included bark, which makes the tree

particularly weak and vulnerable. There are plans to remove it in the near future.

1 Zelkova Serrata.” Floridata

Real Estate Brochure, CCHA Archives, 1958.Shipman, Ellen, “Grading plan for terraces and entrance court.” (Shipman Papers, Cornell RMC)


LOWER TERRACE

Shipman’s designs for the lower terrace are minimal. Although plans for square, flagstone-paved areas

exist (see plan below), it appears that they were never executed; perhaps they were deemed unnecces-

sary. At any rate, the final, completed terrace consisted of a large expanse of turf grass, bounded by a

clipped boxwood hedge. The exterior of the wall was meant to be disguised by a combination of flow-

ering trees and shrubs including Japanese tree lilac, Sheepberry and Magnolia. None of the specimens

identified on the plan remain, with the exception of the boxwood.

It should be noted that although a distinct boxwood hedge remains, it is not comprised entirely of origi-

nal plantings. Additional specimens were added by the Caseys, the couple who purchased Springsbury

from the Greenhalghs in the 1950s1.

1 Conversation with Brian Mayell, Nursery and Grounds Manager, Casey Trees, LLC

Real Estate Brochure, CCHA Archives, 1958. Shipman, Ellen,“Tree, shrub and vine plan around house.” (Shipman Papers, Cornell RMC) Real Estate Brochure, CCHA Archives, 1958.


TERRACE STAIRWELL DETAILS

The circular stairwells are some of the more interesting architectural features in Shipman’s designs for

Springsbury. They appear to have been influenced by stairs described by Sebastiano Serlio, author of The

Five Books of Architecture1. The drawing to the right shows one of Serlio’s drawings, which feature stairs that

appear nearly identical to those drawn up by Shipman.

This influence is unsurprising considering Shipman’s training under Charles Platt, a champion of Italian de-

sign. During her time with Platt, Shipman had become well acquainted with Italian design motifs. Platt, after

all, had traveled extensively throughout Italy and had written the very successful book, Italian Gardens2. His

book helped bring the Beaux Arts style to the United States, along with the application of formal, architec-

tonic elements3.

Shipman’s circular stairs at Springsbury act as transition points between the upper terrace and the sunken

north and south terraces. Their form echoes the semi-circular windows designed by Perry Shaw and Hep-

burn for the main house.

NEXT PAGE: Drawings 1, 2, and 6 Shipman, “Construction details of Terrace B.” Shipman Papers, Cornell RMC. 7: Serlio, Sebastiano, “Five Books of Architecture.”

1 Serlio, Sebastiano. “The Five Books of Architecture.”2 Cultural Landscape Foundation, “Charles Platt”3 Cultural Landscape Foundation, “Charles Platt”


1 2

3 4 5

6 7


12. PLANTING DESIGNSHIPMAN: A MASTER OF TIMING

Shipman viewed a garden’s walls and paving as the frame for her planting designs, and indeed, her horticulural knowledge is what made her gardens so remark-

able. Unlike many of her contemporaries who sought to divorce landscape architecture from the practice of gardening, Shipman continued to promote thoughtful

garden making, saying of her designs, “I am never quite satisfied until there is some place I can walk between flowers”1

Shipman had an amazing ability to harness the temporal qualities of design, seeing in time the possibilty of choreography, change and evolution. The garden was

a place that could slowly unfold its beauties throughout the season, and could morph along with the whims and preferences of her clients. Shipman “used no

more than six to eight main flowering plants in each design and let each, in its season, dominate the garden. For each time one flower is the guest of honor and is

merely supplemented with other flowers.”2

Shipman made extensive plant calendars, a couple of which were published in House and Garden magazine. One such calendar gives a good sense of the way in

which plants were meant to arise and then supplant one another throughout the year:

“The next main plant which dominates the garden...would be the iris, beginning with the earlier varieties and running into the German iris...From the iris under

the fading late June, we would run into the early and later peonies. Before the peonies have gone, the early larkspur comes, and the then larkspur completely

dominates the garden..Before the larkspur is gone the early Phlox comes...By the time the phlox is gone, the autumn garden has come and the later phlox, set off

by the autumn flowers, the hardy asters, Boltonia and the Euparotiums, agerotoides and colesdestinum, the later coniutum, anemone, dahlias, which have been set

in to take the place of the Dephinium, that were cut back…By late autumn, the anemone japonica and the late hardy asters and chrysanthemums, and the very

late aconitum and pyrethrym.”3

1 Shipman quoted by Tankard, “Gardens of Ellen Biddle Shipman,” 1092 Tankard, 943 Shipman as quoted by Tankard, 116


ON COLOR

At the time Shipman was designing a plant palette for the Greenhalghs, there was a general preference for more muted color tones over bolder ones. An article

in a 1930 issue of House and Garden provides insight into the predominant color approach at that time:

“All strong color was banished from polite purlieus – though it keeps up a low muttering in the outlands – we became chaste and chastened in our color predi-

lections. Fragile mauves and buffs, shadowy blues, soft pinks and salmons, lavenders, heliotropes and saffrons, with an admixture of fleecy white flowers and gray

foliage, were the only hues suffered in our garden.”1

It should be noted that this article was attempting to encourage readers to be more liberal in their use of color. A palette of pastel hues off set by whites and

greys had been popularized by Gertrude Jekyll, and Shipman’s designs seemed to generally follow suit. Shipman’s favored color scheme was comprised of blues,

whites and an occasional yellow2. However, considering the sea change this article evidences (circa 1930) and the colors specified at Springsbury, Shipman seems

to have loosened her color preferences. An array of yellows, oranges and reds are specified, although Shipman herself provides the caveat:

“It will be seen, in going over the shrubs and flowers that certain shades such as orange or any of the red yellows, reds or red purples, are seldom, if ever listed. It

is because they draw too much attention to themselves. However, if one desires them, a shrub planting, such as azaleas or a flower border in which you use these

tones as high notes, can be gradually built up to their level of color. It will be found best to introduce some pale yellows and use trees or shrubs to tone down

their blatant notes.”3

In short, bolder colors could be used, but in moderation, and only when they were diluted by other plantings. The following pages provide a visual analysis of Ship-

man’s planting plan for Springsbury, providing a sense of how this philosophy manifested itself in her actual design.

1 “New Colour Schemes for the Garden”, House and Garden, 19302 Tankard, 1153 Shipman, “Garden Notebook”


Albatross Daffodil Alexander’s White Anemone September Charm

Rock-cress Aster Barrs Pink Basket of Gold Bellflower Bicolor Buttercup Butterfly Bush Summersweet

Climbing Hydrangea

Common Periwinkle

Coral Flower Cotoneaster Dahlia Rose Daylily Mixed Delphinium Dianthus Sugar Plum

Dr. Rose Van Fleet Dwarf Aster

Empress Daffodil English Dogwood Feverfew Flax Fleabane Forget-me-not Foxglove Garden Peony Grape Hyacinth

Hollyhock

Highbush Blueberry

Hosta Hybrid Columbine Iceland Poppy Iris King Karl Iris Pallida Iris Ambassadeur Iris Lord of June Japanese Anemone Japanese Lily

PLANTINGS ON TERRACES


Japanese Yew Japanese Iris Lavender Madonna Liily Magnolia Stellata Morrow’s Honeysuckle

Narcissus Seagull Peony Festiva Maxima

Peony Therese Peony Couronne D’Or

Persian Yellow Rose

Miss Lingard Phlox Columbia Pincushion Flower Pyrethrum Daisy Regal Lily Seneca Sheepberry Snow White Iris Snowball Bush

Sweet William Tartian Honeysuckle

Thermopsis Thunbergia Trumpet Vine Tulip Murillo Tulip Peachblossom

Viburnum Arrowood

Yellow Viola Common Violet

Virginia Bluebells Wayfaringtree Winter Honeysuckle

Wormwood Boxwood Anchusa Phlox Thermopsis Smokebush Thalictrum

FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE

Hosta (Hosta lancifolia)Thunbergia (Thunbergia)

Sheepberry (Viburnum lentago)Iris Ambassadeur (Iridaceae iris)

Helios daffodil (Amarylidaceae narcissus)Early Tulip Murillo (Liliaceae tulipa) Japanese Iris (Iris sanguinea)

Pyrethrum Daisy (Chrysanthemum cinerarifolium)Forget-me-not (Boraginaceae anchusa)

Fleabane (Erigeron species)Albatross Daffodil (Amarylidaceae narcissus)

Lavender (Lavandula angustifolia)Anemone September Charm (Anemone hybrida)

Trumpet Vine (Campsis radicans)Virginia Bluebells (Mertensia virginica)

Emperor Daffodil (Amarylidaceae narcissus)Empress Daffodil (Amarylidaceae narcissus)

Garden Peony (Edulis superba)Hybrid Columbine (Aquilegia hybrida)

Iceland Poppy (Papaver nudicale)Peach Leaf Bellflower (Canpanula persicifolia)

Daylily (Hemerocallis fulva)

Persian Yellow Rose (Rosa foetida)

Peony Couronne D’Or (Paeonia)

Peony Therese (Paeonia lactiflora)

Pincushion flower (Scabiosa caucasia)Regal Lily (Lilium regale)

Iris Snow White (Iridaceae iris)

Winter Honeysuckle (Lonicera fragrantissima)Hollyhock

Early Tulip Peachblossom (Liliaceae tulipa)

Sugar Plum (Dianthus plum)Sweet William (Carophyllaceae dianthus)

Yellow Viola (Viola Pensylvanica) Alexander’s White (Iberis sempervirens)

Common Violet (Viola odorata)Basket of Gold (Alyssum citrinum)

Rock-cress (Arabis alpina)Grape Hyacinth (Azureum species)

FeverfewMorrow’s Honeysuckle (Lonicera morroni)

English Dogwood (Philadelphus coronarius)Japanese Snowball Bush (Viburnum tomentosum)

Arrowwood (Viburnum dentatum)Tartarian Honeysuckle (Lonicera tatarica)

Himalyan Cotoneaster (Cotoneaster simonsii)Dr. Rose Van Fleet (Rosaceae rosa)

Common Periwinkle (Vinca minor)Bi-color Buttercup (Aconitum columbianum)

BLOOM CALENDAR

As the calendar to the right indicates,

Shipman was particularly attuned

to timing in her gardens. Plantings

specified for the terrace beds were

designed to maintain their bloom

from February through October, an

astonishing range of time.

*information and images courtesy of contributors to Dave’s Garden: http://davesgarden.com/

Coral Flower (Heuchera brizoides)

Iris Pallida (Iridaceae iris)Madonna Lily (Lilium candidum)

Japanese Anemone (Ranunculaceae anemone)Aster Barr’s Pink (Asteraceae family)

Iris Lord of June (Iridaceae iris)

Miss Lingard (Phlox caroliniana)

Japanese Lily (Lilium specioisum)

Iris Ambassadeur (Iridaceae iris)

Japanese Iris (Iris sanguinea)

Lavender (Lavandula angustifolia)Anemone September Charm (Anemone hybrida)

Garden Peony (Edulis superba)

Peach Leaf Bellflower (Canpanula persicifolia)

Regal Lily (Lilium regale)

Feverfew

Tartarian Honeysuckle (Lonicera tatarica)

JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER

Coral Flower (Heuchera brizoides)

Iris Pallida (Iridaceae iris)Madonna Lily (Lilium candidum)

Japanese Anemone (Ranunculaceae anemone)Aster Barr’s Pink (Asteraceae family)

Iris Lord of June (Iridaceae iris)

Miss Lingard (Phlox caroliniana)

Japanese Lily (Lilium specioisum)Wormwood (Artemesia lactiflora)

Summersweet (Clethra alnifolia)


LAYERING PLANTS

The following diagrams show the way in which Shipman combined shape, color, texture and height in her planting beds. She tended to arrange plants in drifts, de-

ciding upon size, orientation and number according to intuition. After spending a lifetime in careful observation of plant form and habit, she knew how to arrange

plants to their best advantage. The way in which Shipman composed color should also be noted; at Springsbury she widened her typical palette of blues, whites

and yellows by adding some hints of pink and purple. White flowers were typically used as points of transition, helping to soften juxtapositions or offset brighter

tones. These diagrams were made using the perennial plan Shipman drafted for one of the north terrace perennial beds. The planting logic displayed here is similar

to that employed throughout the terrace beds.

BOXWOOD HEDGE

REGAL LILY

PEONY THERESE

THERMOPSIS

SECTION ELEVATION


AN

CH

USA

SMO

KEB

USH

TH

ALI

CT

RUM

CAT

NIP

TH

ERM

OPS

IS

PHLO

X

BOX

WO

OD

PEO

NY

TH

ERES

E

JAPA

NES

E IR

IS

GER

. IR

IS

PHLO

X

DIA

NT

HU

S

DAY

LILY

REG

AL

LILY

PLAN ORIGINAL DESIGN

SPECIFIED PLANTS


13. TENNIS COURTS

As a wealthy mid-century couple, the Greenhalghs likely entertained guests not only with fox hunting and fine dining but also with the

more casual tennis game. The tennis courts laid out by Shipman were once bordered by Hill House on the north side and by the swim-

ming pool and bath house on the south. According to the description provided by the Garden Club of Virginia in 1930, the courts sup-

planted the old four square garden was once located at this spot (see page 25).

The Shipman archives at Cornell possess a number of brochures that Shipman must have perused when choosing a tennis court design for

Springsbury. A 1950s real estate brochure describes the tennis courts as having a Har-Tru surface1, a popular tennis company that is still

in operation today. Image 2 shows the cover of the Har-Tru brochure contained in the archives and Image 5 displays the “correct tennis

court layout.” Shipman’s drawing (image 1) seems to have followed the instructions.

A 1936 aerial photograph of the site shows the tennis courts as they must have looked around the time of their construction. Chain-link

fencing (similar to the kind remaining on grounds - see images 4 and 6) bounded the courts. A flagstone terrace and bench appear to have

been designed adjacent to the courts, however, they were likely demolished at the same time as the courts.

Today, little evidence remains of the Har-Tru tennis courts that once existed there. The chain link perimeter fence (not the original) pro-

vides a sense of the dimensions but now simply demarcates a swath of turf grass.

1 Har-Tru Brochhure, 1935 (Shipman Archives, Cornell RMC)


1 2

3 4 5

61. Shipman, Ellen. “General Design Plan.” Date unknown. (Shipman Papers, Cornell RMC) 2 and 5. Har-Tru Brochhure, 1935 (Shipman Papers, Cornell RMC) 3. 1936 aerial photograph (Rieley and Associates)


14. VEGETABLE/PICKING GARDENSThe fate of the vegetable and picking gardens designed by Shipman remain the primary mystery in the Springsbury story. In her plans for the es-

tate, Shipman designed an elaborate series of parterred gardens, allees and formal walks. The 1936 aerial photograph (image 1) show no evidence

of the plans Shipman envisioned beyond the primary walkway. Further investigation at the site level reveals brick edging, (image 3) confirming that

the path, if not the planting beds, did exist along the central axis. Also worth noting is the description of the space in 1930 by the Garden Club of

Virginia, which claimed a terraced garden once existed in this location. Due to the erosive nature of such gardens, it is hard to confirm this ac-

count one way or another.

Today, the area is difficult to decipher. On the west side of the pathway is a haphazard line of volunteer Hackberry trees, which appear to have

arisen along a former hedgerow (possibly lilac, see page 26). The east side is lined with a wooly, untamed mix of Black Walnut, Boxelder and Hack-

berry. Both rows of trees seem to have been maintained by a mowing regime which avoided them, allowing the specimens to mature.

At present, a couple rows of boxwood and peonies line the western edge of the pathway. They were planted by the Casey family and are not part

of the Shipman scheme for the property.

1. Shipman, Ellen. “General Design Plan.” (Shipman Papers, Cornell RMC)


1

2 3 4

5

1936 aerial photograph


15. HILL HOUSEFROM OUTBUILDING TO GUEST HOUSE

Besides enlarging the main house, Perry, Shaw and Hepburn also designed additions to Hill House, an adjacent outbuilding. According to one account, Hill House

was formerly the residence of a priest John Holker (circa 1800s) once housed on the property.1 The living and dining rooms of Hill House are part of the original

structure constructed by Holker.

Shipman created the robust landscape plan for the grounds around the house consisting of a number of large trees and shrubs, including Oaks, Elms, Locusts and

Sycamores. Clearly, from the plant palette, Shipman was hoping to create some sense of privacy for the Greenhalgh’s visitors, designing a veil of plantings that

separated guest house from main house. Little remains of Shipman’s plans besides a couple small sets of stairs which once connected Hill House to the gardens

below. Hill House was moved off the property by Marie Greenhalgh in 19422 and is now known as Stubblefield.

1 Farland, Mary. “In the Shadow of the Blue Ridge, 552 Farland, 55

1936 aerial photograph, courtesy of Rieley Associates

SPRINGSBURY FARM REPORT | PAGE 78Shipman, Ellen. “General Planting Plan for area around cabin.” (Shipman Papers, Cornell RMC)


16. SWIMMING POOLNEW ADDITIONS IN 1945

The swimming pool was not part of the original 1935 plans for Springsbury. In 1945, Marie Greenhalgh again enlisted the help of Shipman to design a pool and

bath houses for the property. At that time, Shipman’s practice was languishing; the war had curtailed all construction and commissions were few and far between.

Tankard describes Shipman’s situation as follows: “Shipman had almost no work during the war aside from a few interior design commissions and her business

was running in the red. When the war ended, the resumption of her specialized, residential practice did not look promising. Labor and materials were in short

supply; lifestyles had changed dramatically. “1 As a result, Shipman had begun writing to many previous clients in the hope of securing small jobs to keep the prac-

tice afloat; so, when Marie wrote to ask for her design assistance, Shipman was likely thrilled to oblige.

1 Tankard, “The Gardens of Ellen Biddle Shipman.” 175

1

2 3Real Estate Brochure, CCHA Archives, 1958.Photograph, “Swimming Pool” CCHA Archives, 1988.


She drew up a number of plans for a pool and

bath houses, many of which were significantly

more elaborate than the plans Marie eventually

settled upon. Like many of Shipman’s clients, Ma-

rie’s post-war tastes and priorities had shifted.

Cornell has the original drawings for the bath

houses Shipman initially proposed. According

to the plan, two bath houses, both octagonal

in shape, were joined by a colonnaded brick

pathway (see drawing to the left). The structures

were planned on the western side of the pool,

and would have blocked the view to the barn

beyond. The built design was more connected

to its surroundings, with an uninterrupted view

from pool to barn.

As for plantings, Shipman seems to have decided

upon a simpler scheme, opting for a lilac hedge

border around the pool area (possibly the old

hedge referenced in the survey, page 24). Small

flowering trees were meant to overhang the

flagstone terrace (to the left of swimming pool),

though none remain.

Shipman, “Plan Showing location of proposed bath houses.” (Shipman Papers, Cornell RMC)


THE END OF THE SWIMMING POOL

The final scheme for the pool area included the swimming pool, flagstone terrace with bench and root/tool cellars (set below footprint of terrace, see image 10).

A pathway on the south side of the pool connected the tool cellar to the swimming area, portions of which still remain. Ongoing demolition of the swimming

pool has hindered documentation, which is extremely unfortunate as no previous studies have covered this territory. As of August, 2011, most of the pool had

been removed, along with the flagstone terrace (Images 3, 4, 5, 8, 9).

Like many of Shipman’s designs, the swimming pool at Springsbury is a casualty of changing needs and values. The demolition of the pool and its adjacent cellar,

rather than infilling one and stabilizing the other, means they will not be available for future study. The inability to reconcile future plans with this rare original

Shipman fabric thus resulted in the erasure of a valuable piece of landscape architectural history--a reminder of the tenuous nature of these sometimes unappre-

ciated elements of our surviving landscape design heritage.

1 21 and 2: Shipman, Ellen. “Construction drawing for bath houses.” (Shipman Papers, Cornell RMC Archives)


3 4 5

6 7 3 98

10Images 3-5, 10: Shipman, Ellen. “Plan for swimming pool area.”(Shipman Papers, Cornell RMC)


17. LETTERSMARIE AND ELLEN

Correspondence between Marie Greenhalgh and Ellen Shipman during the design of the swimming pool offers a few interesting insights into the relationship

between the two women. In addition to speaking about design, they also shared bits of personal information about the war, their children and their own health

difficulties. Shipman was known to have close relationships with her clients and these letters confirm a warmth and familiarity between Shipman and Marie.

When making site visits, Shipman typically stayed in the houses of her patrons, a habit that helped facilitate the types of friendships she formed with her female

clients. Several exchanges between Marie and Ellen regarding train shedules and visit dates, corroborate this type of relationship.

The closeness that developed between Shipman and her clients was also fostered by the very act of designing the gardens. Judith Tankard, Shipman’s biographer,

speculates that gardens were a rare creative outlet for her clients: “At a time when women’s expressiveness was not encouraged – at home or in the world

generally, flower gardens provided female clients with sensous havens and a grounding link to seasonal rhythms and cycles. Shipman’s power to facilitate the

development of such gardens suggests that she may have played a highly charged emotional as well as aesthetic role in the lives of her women clients.”1

Indeed, Shipman was willing to put aside her own aesthetic preferences in favor of a client’s, or even to admit her own fault. In a letter to Marie about the plant-

ing for the pool area she writes: “I am delighted that the hedge looks so well and I can see your reason for taking out the little jog. My reason for putting it in

was to reduce the space of grass on either side of the pool which I thought had gotten into too big proportions, but as you are there you can probably see it all

much better than I.”2

The correspondence at the time of the swimming pool evidences a firmly established working relationship, one in which Marie and Shipman could exchange

opinions openly and honestly. It is unfortunate that correspondence prior to 1940 has been lost; it would have been fascinating to have charted the develop-

ment of this relationship during Springsbury’s design development phase.

1 Tankard, “The Gardens of Ellen Biddle Shipman,” 1202 Correspondence. November 16, 1945. (courtesy of Cornell RMC Archives)

1

2

3

4SPRINGSBURY FARM REPORT | PAGE 84

Images 1-4: Correspondence with Marie Greenhalgh, 1945. (Shipman Papers, Cornell RMC)


18. NEARBY PROJECTS

OTHER SHIPMAN GARDENS IN CLARKE COUNTY

In acquiring new projects, Shipman often relied on the recommendations of

current and former clients. And, sure enough, it appears that Shipman drew

up designs for two other residences in the Clarke County area around the

time she was working for the Greenhalghs. For Mr. and Mrs. Edward Jenkins

of Millwood (of Red Gate), she created plans for a garden, gazebo structure

and entry drive. It appears that the Jenkins were also making additions to

their property and likely sought the expertise of Springsbury’s landscape

architect to help complete their vision1. The drawings to the right showcase

some of the main features of her design for Red Gate. The present state of

this garden is unknown and would be fertile territory for future research.

In addition to drafting designs for the Jenkins, Shipman also drew up some

small details for an entry gate for the property of Mrs. Stacy Lloyd, also of

Millwood. The modest nature of this project evidences Shipman’s willingness

to take on designs of all sizes and prestige.

1 Farland, Mary. “In the Shadow of the Blue Ridge, 93

1Images 1-3” Shipman, Ellen. Drawings for Red Gate (Shipman Papers, Cornell RMC)


2

3Images 1-3” Shipman, Ellen. Drawings for Red Gate (Shipman Papers, Cornell RMC)


19. SPRINGBSURY AFTER THE GREENHALGHS1955 - PRESENT

In 1958, 701 acres of the Springbsury and Land’s End parcels were sold to Mr. and Mrs. Casey1. Mr. Eugene Casey had been the agricultural

advisor to the Roosevelt administration and had secured his wealth in land development in the years after World War II. His land holdings

included rural tracts in Maryland in addition to Springsbury. During the Casey’s tenure at Springsbury, few changes seem to have been made

to the property.

When Eugene Casey died in 1986, the land passed to his wife, Betty. In 2008, as benefactor of the Eugene B. Casey foundation, she deeded

the Springsbury property (and the adjoining Land’s End parcel) to Casey Trees, LLC. 2The organization, which was founded in 2001 by Betty

Casey, seeks to protect and restore the tree canopy of the nation’s capitol. Since Casey Trees has acquired the property, they have restored

many of the outbuildings, including the Trooper and Pierce House, among others. They are currently in the process of renovating the exterior

of the main house, which had become vulnerable to water damage.

Additionally, Casey Trees, LLC has planted a variety of Dutch-Elm resistant elm cultivars along the entry road into Springsbury as well as

established a tree nursery in the southwestern corner of the property. 3The gravel roadways have been repaired and are presently in excel-

lent condition. Over the next decade, Casey Trees intends to expand their nursery operation and it promises to be an exciting time for the

organization and for Springsbury.

1 Kaliban, 242 Kaliban, 243 Casey Trees, LLC: http://www.caseytrees.org/about/casey-tree-farm


20. FINAL RECOMMENDATIONSNEXT STEPS AND ADDITIONAL RESEARCH OPPORTUNITIES

Now is a time of great change and opportunity for the Springsbury property. Under the ownership of Casey Trees, LLC, the gardens at Spring-

sbury have the capacity to educate and inspire the public about a period in landscape architectural history that is too often erased by the rav-

ages of time or taste. Few of Shipman’s gardens remain; Casey Trees has the unique ability to restore the gardens at the property and to act

as steward to this valuable resource. As a non-profit organization with the goal of fostering a better environment for the public, Casey Trees’

restoration of such a garden seems not only consistent but necessary.

Due to the intact nature of the walls and paving of much of the Shipman designs, restoration efforts would be relatively minimal. Plans specify-

ing plantings are readily available and could be laid out and planted much as Shipman would have intended. Preliminary research on the types

and hardiness of plants within Shipman’s bulb and perennial plans have been done (see appendix) but additional horticultural investigation

would have to be completed to ensure the quality and accuracy of the plantings.

It should also be noted that the garden’s significance extends beyond the landscape architect; Shipman was a practitioner who saw her proj-

ects as a portrait of her clients. Springsbury, then, is a portrait of the Greenhalghs. In preserving the garden, one also preserves the story of

the people who lived there.

Moving forward, let us work to prevent Springsbury’s gardens from succombing to the fate of other Shipman gardens, keeping in mind a

quotation from her Garden Notebook: “If one can gauge the height of civilization by the beauty of the gardens, one can also judge the spirit of

democracy in a people by the prevalence of gardens among all its classes.”

Shipman, Ellen. “Construction Details for Terrace A.” (Shipman Papers, Cornell RMC)

APPENDIX

UPPER TERRACE CONSTRUCTION DRAWING

1935 SURVEY

McBond C., Walker. “Topographic map of estate.” July 23, 1945. (Shipman Papers, Cornell RMC)

Shipman, Ellen. “Construction Details for Terrace B.” (Shipman Papers, Cornell RMC)

SOUTH TERRACE CONSTRUCTION DRAWING

Shipman, Ellen. “Details of Garden Gate.” (Shipman Papers, Cornell RMC)

GARDEN GATE CONSTRUCTION DETAILS

Shipman, Ellen. “Construction Details for Terrace B.” (Shipman Papers, Cornell RMC)

SOUTH TERRACE CONSTRUCTION DRAWING

1936 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS

Images courtesy of Will Rieley and Associates.

Cf

Mp

Cc

Po

Mp

Qs

Ls

Ps As

Jv Jv

Jv

Jv Jv

JvJv

Cc Cc Co

JnMa

Ma

Ma MaCo

Co

Co

Co

Co

Co

Po

Po

Po

Co

Co

Co

Co

Co

Co

Co

Co

Co

Co

Co

Co

Co

Co

An

Zs

Fp

Fp

Jn

CoBs Bs Bs

Co

Gt

Tc

Tc

Po

DENSE MIX:CoJnAn

Ma

Ma

Ma

MaCo

CoMa

Ma

Ma

Ma

Ma

Ma

Ma

MaMa

Co

Ma

Ma

Pc

Pt

OSAGE ORANGE (Maclura pomifera)

REDBUD (Cercis canadensis)

CHERRY (Prunus virginiana)

EASTERN RED CEDAR (Juniperus virginiana)

SWEET GUM (Liquidambar styraciflua)

COMMON HACKBERRY (Celtis occidentalis)

BOXELDER (Acer negundo)

SILVER MAPLE (Acer saccharinum)

BLACK WALNUT (Juglans nigra)

HONEY LOCUST (Gleditsia triacanthos)

GREEN ASH (Fraxinus pensylvanica)

FLOWERING DOGWOOD (Cornus florida)

JAPANESE YEW (Taxus cuspidata)

BOXWOOD (Buxus species)

WHITE MULBERRY (Morus alba)

AMERICAN SYCAMORE (Platanus occidentalis)

ZELKOVA (Zelkova serrata)

BRADFORD PEAR (Pyrus calleryana)

PRINCESS TREE (Paulonia tomentosa)

OAK (Quercus species)

Mp

Cc

Pv

Jv

Ls

Co

An

As

Jn

Gt

Fp

Cf

Tc

Bs

Ma

Po

Zs

Pc

Pt

Qs

TREES:

COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME HEIGHT SPACING SUN EXPOSURE HARDINESS BLOOM TIMESedum Sedum species <6" 9-12" full sun 5a - 5b mid summerStar Magnolia Magnolia stellata 10-12' 12-15' sun - part shade 4a - 9b late winter/mid springHosta Funkia Hosta lancifolia 10-18" 24-36" partial - full shade 3a - 8bThunbergia Thunbergia 12-15' 4-6' full sun - part shade 10a - 11 late winter/early springSheepberry Viburnum lentago 12-15' 10-12' sun - part shade 2a - 8b late spring/early summerWayfaringtree Viburnum lantana 12-15' 12-15' sun - part shade 3a - 7b late spring/early summerHelios Daffodil Amarylidaceae narcissus 12-16" partial - full sun 3a - 9b mid-late springEarly Tulip Murillo Liliaceae tulipa 12-18" 3-6" full sun 3a - 8b mid springJapanese Iris Iris sanguinea 12-18" 18-24" full sun 4a - 9b very latePyrethrum daisy Chystanthemum cinerarifolium 12-18" 12-15" full sun 10a - 10b late spring - mid summerForget-me-not Boraginaceae anchusa 12-18" 9-12" full sun late spring - early fallFleabane Erigeron species 12-18" 15-18" full sun 5a - 9b late spring - early fallAlbatross Daffodil Narcissus albatross 12-18" 3-6" full sun - part shade 4a - 9b late winter/mid springSeagull Daffodil Narcissus seagull 12-18" 3-6" full sun - part shade 4a - 9b late winter/mid springLavender Lavandula angustifolia 12-18" 18-24" sun - part shade 5a - 9b mid summer - early fallDaffodil Narcissus Poeticus 12-18" 3-6" full sun - part shade 2a - 9b mid spring/early summerFringe Tree Chioanthus virginica 12-20' 10-20' sun - light shade 3b - 9a mid springJapanese Tree Lilac Syringa reticulata 12-20' 10-12' full sun - part shade 3b - 7a mid spring/early summerAnemone September CharmAnemone hybrida 12-36" spreads sun - part shade 5a - 7b early fall/summerTrumpet Vine Campsis radicans 15-20' 36-48" full sun - part shade 4a - 10b blooms repeatedlySeneca Viburnum sieboldii 15-30' 15-30' full sun - light shade 4a - 8b late spring/early summerVirginia Bluebells Mertensia virginica 18-24" 9-12" partial - full shade 3a - 9b mid springEmperor Daffodil Amarylidaceae narcissus 18-24" 3-6" full sun - part shade 4a - 9b mid springEmpress Daffodil Amarylidaceae narcissus 18-24" 3-6" sun-partial shade 4a - 9b late winter - springGarden Peony Edulis superba 18-24" 24-36" full sun - part shade 4b late spring/early summerHybrid Columbine Aquilegia hybrida 18-24" 12-15" sun - part shade 3a mid spring - mid summerCoral Flower Heuchera brizoides 18-24" 6-9" sun - part shade 4a - 9b mid summerIceland poppies Papaver nudicale 18-24" 12-15" full sun 3a - 10b late spring/mid summerPeach Leaf Bellflower Canpanula persicifolia 18-24" 24-36" full sun - part shade 3a - 8b mid summerPeony Festiva max? Paeonia lactiflora 18-24" 24-36" full sun - part shade 3a - 8b late spring/early summerButterfly Bush Buddleia 18-24" shrub18-24" full sun - part shade 5a - 9b late spring - mid fallIris Pallida Iridaceae Iris 18-36" 12-24" full sun 3a - 8b late midseasonSmoke Bush Conospermum 18-48" sun - light shade late winter/early springMadonna Lily Lilium candidum 24-36" 9-12" full sun 3a - 7b mid summerDaylily Hermerocallis fulva 24-36" 15-18" full sun - part shade 5a - 10b early/reblooming

PLANTS SPECIFIED THROUGHOUT SPRINGSBURY

Japanese Anemone Ranunculaceae Anemone 24-36" 4-6' light - full shade 5a - 8b late summer/early fallAster Barr's Pink Asteraceae 24-36" 12-15" light shade - full shade 5a - 8b late summer - mid fallIris Lord of June Iridaceae Iris 24-36" 12-15" full sun 3a - 8b mid-late seasonPersian Yellow Rose Rosa foetida 24" - 6' 4-6' shade tolerant 6a - 10a mid springPeony Couronne D'Or Paeonia Couronne d'Or 3' 3' full sun 2a late spring/early summerMiss Lingard Phlox carolina 36-48" 18-24" full sun 3a - 8b mid summerPeony Therese Paeonia lactiflora 36-48" 36-48" full sun 2a - 8b late spring/early summerPincushion flower Scabiosa caucasia 36-48" 18-24" sun - part shade 4a - 8b repeatedly

Plumbago 36-48" 24-36" sun - partial shade 8a - 11 blooms repeatedlyIris Ambassadeur Iridaceae Iris 36-48" 12-15" full sun 3a - 8b lateIris Snow White Iridaceae Iris 36-48" 12-24" full sun 3a - 8b early - midseasonRegal Lily Lilium regale 36-48" 12-15" full sun 3a - 8b late spring/early summerJapanese Lily Lilium speciosum 4-6' ? full sun - light shade ? late summer/early fallWormwood Artemesia lactiflora 4-6' 15-18" full sun 5a - 8b late summer/mid fallWinter Honeysuckle Lonicera fragrantissima 4-6' 6-8' sun - part shade 4a - 8b late winter/early springHollyhock 4-6' 36-48" full sun 3a - 11 blooms repeatedlySummersweet Clethra alnifolia 4-6' 4-6' full sun 3a - 9b mid summer/early fallWhite Rod Viburnum Viburnum cassinoides 4-6' 4-6' sun - part shade 3a - 7b mid springEarly Tulip Peach Blossom Liliaceae tulipa 6-12" 3-6" full sun 3a - 8b mid springSugar Plum Dianthus plum 6-12" 12-15" full sun 5a - 10b blooms repeatedlySweet William Caryophyllaceae dianthus 6-12" 3-6" sun - part shade mid spring - summerYellow Violas Viola pennsylvanica 6-12" 3-6" sun - part shade 4a - 7b mid spring - early summerAlexander's White Iberis sempervirens 6-12" 12-15" full sun - part shade 3a - 9b mid spring - early summerCommon Violet Viola odorata 6-12" 15-18" sun - full shade 4a - 9b late winter - early summer

Dianthus plum 6-12" 12-15" full sun 5a - 10b repeatedlyBasket of Gold Alyssum citrinum (?) 6-12" 9-12" full sun 3a - 10b late spring/early summerDianthus 'Beatrix' Caryophyllaceae dianthus 6-12" 12-15" full sun 4a - 9b late spring/early summerRock-cress Arabis alpina? 6-12" 15-18" full sun 3a - 8b late winter/early springGrape Hyacinth Azureum 6-12" 3-6" full sun 4a - 8b late winter/mid springFeverfew 6-12" 6-9" full sun 5a - 9b late spring/mid summerForget-me-not Myosotis arvensis 6-12" sun - full shade mid spring - mid summerMorrow's Honeysuckle Lonicera morroni 6-8' 4-6' full sun - part shade 3b - 6b mid spring/early summerEnglish Dogwood Philadelphus coronarius 8-10' 6-8' sun - part shade 4a - 8b late spring/early summerJapanese Snowball Bush Viburnum tomentosum 8-10' 15-20' light shade 5a - 9b mid springArrowwood Viburnum dentatum 8-10' 8-10' sun - part shade 3a - 9b late spring/early summer

WisteriaWhite LilacBoxwoodRose AlbertinaLilac Belle de MaryMermaid RosePaul’s Lemon Pillar RoseSmall Leaf English IvyClematis Dutchess of EdinburghSilver Moon RoseGordoniaElmApple TreeAndromedaElderberryMallowClimbing hydrangeaPulmonariaCrabappleHemlockWisteria Prunus HavenClimbing Rose Star of PersiaFlowering DogwoodHighbush blueberryElm plumbagoClimbing Rose New DawnElmVarnish TreeHardy Aster ClimaxHollyhock Pink

Victoria DaffodilAlice Knight DaffodilMadame de Graaf DaffodilDelphiniumDahlia RoseButtercupDwarf astersFoxgloveFlaxPhlox ColumbiaPink DelightMoonbeamWhite BeautyCoral Queen DaffodilSir Wilkin DaffodilFair Queen DaffodilWhite Lady DaffodilBarrii Conspicuus’ DaffodilPhlox C. VandenbergChrysanthemumPear TreeHibiscusPhlox BridesmaidsAster Queen MaryHawthorneArtemesiaLilac purplePhlox RhinelanderPlane Tree

Dahlias PinkPhlox Frau BuchnerChrysanthemum Yellow NormandyPeony Mons JulesPeonies Sarah Bernhardt

Tatarian Honeysuckle Lonicera tatarica 8-10' 6-8' full sun - part shade 4a - 10b late spring/early fallHimalayan Cotoneaster Cotoneaster simonsii 8-10' 4-6' full sun 3a - 7b late spring/early summerRose Dr. Van Fleet Rosaceae Rosa climber 8-10' unknown 6a - 10b late spring/early summerHackberry Celtis occidentalis over 40' 10' full sun - part shade 3a - 8bCommon Periwinkle Vinca minor under 6" 15-18" full sun - full shade 4a - 8b mid spring/mid fallKing Karl Iridaceae iris unknown 12-15" full sun 3a - 8bJapanese Yew Taxus cuspidata up to 30' 8-10' sun - light shade 4b - 8b mid summerButtercup bicolor? Aconitum columbianum varies 9-12" full sun - part shade 2a - 5b mid summer - early fall

OTHER: trees + generic + unidentified

REFERENCESREFERENCE BOOKS AND ARTICLES

Brown, Stuart E. Jr. Annals of Clarke County Virginia, Vol. 1: Old Homes, Families, Etcetera. Berryville: Virginia Book Company, 1983. Print.

Chrisman, Arthur Bowie, and Everard Kidder Meade. Clarke County 1836-1936: Historical Sketch. Berryville, Va.: Clarke Courier Press, 1936.

Farland, Mary Gray. In the Shadow of the Blue Ridge. Richmond: William Byrd Press, 1978. Print.

Gold, Thomas Daniel. History of Clarke County, Virginia and Its Connection with the War Between the States: with Illustrations of Colonial Homes and of Con-federate Officers. [Berryville, Va.: Printed by C. R. Hughes, 1914.

Griffith, Richard E, and William H Kerfoot. Early Estates of Clarke County : Comprising the Histories of Chapel Hill, Llewellyn, Springsbury, The Tuleyries, Mon-tana Hall, Bellfield, Lakeville, Farnley, Fairfield and Audley. [Berryville, Va.]: Clarke County Historical Society, Carr Pub. Co., 1954.

Hofstra, Warren R. A Separate Place: The Formation of Clarke County, Virginia. Madison: Madison House Publishers, 1999. Print.

Tankard, Judith. The Gardens of Ellen Biddle Shipman. Sagaponack: Sagapress, Inc., 1996. Print.

Tankard, Judith B. and Martin A. Wood. Gertrude Jekyll at Munstead Wood. Sagaponack: Sagapress, Inc., 1996.

Tankard, Judith B. Ellen Biddle Shipman’s New England Gardens. Arnoldia, Spring 1997: 2-11

Way, Thaisa. Unbounded Practice: Women and Landscape Architecture in the Early Twentieth Century. University of Virginia Press, 2009. Print.

ARCHAEOLOGICAL / HISTORICAL REPORTS

Kaliban, Maral S. “Greenway Historic District.” National Register of Historic Places Nomination Report. Richmond: VDHR, July 1993.

Kaliban, Maral S. “Springsbury Farm: Historical Report.” April 2009.

Rivanna Archaeological Services, LLC. Blandy Experimental Farm, University of Virginia Phase I Archaeological Investigations. Charlottesville, 2008.

WEBSITES

Casey Trees, LLC: http://www.caseytrees.org/

Dave’s Garden for photos/plant information

Greenhalgh Family Tree. Ancestry.com

Zelkova Serrata.” Floridata. 4 May 2009

CLARKE COUNTY ARCHIVES

Article, Newspaper. 1960 article on the Horse industry in Clarke County. Many photos of places and horses. Persons cataloged. Clarke County Historical Soci-ety, Item #2006.00018.025.

Manuscript. Clarke County-Historic Houses, c 1930. Talk on historic houses of Clarke County for an early Virginia Garden Club tour. Clarke County Historical Archives, Item #2004.00053.029.

Print, Photographic. Springsbury. Printed Vol 11, Proceedings. 1952. Clarke County Historical Archives, Item #1954.00230.006.

Print, Photographic. Springsbury, pre 1937, Clarke County Historical Archives, Item #1971.00286.001.

Print, Photographic. Springsbury-Priest’s Cottage, pre 1937, Clarke County Historical Archives, Item #1971.00286.002.

Print, Photographic. Springsbury-West Courtyard, 1977. Clarke County Historical Archives, Item #1986.00224.110.B.

Print, Photographic. Hunt Breakfast, Springsberry, c1930s. Clarke County Historical Achives, Item # 1985.00161.015.

Print, Photographic. Springsbury - West Façade, 1988. Clarke County Historical Society, Item #1989.00317.074.A.Brochure. Real Estate Brochures-Clarke Co. Houses, Springsbury. 1950s. Clarke County Historical Society, Item #1985.00143.198.

Print, Photographic. Springsbury Swimming Pool, 1988. Clarke County Historical Archives.

Springsbury Real Estate Brochure. 1958. Clarke County Historical Archives. Item #1976.00165.068.B

HISTORIC PERIODICALS

Cummin, Hazel E. “What Constitutes a Good Garden? The Garden of Mr. and Mrs. George Meade in Dayton, Ohio, Answers This Question,” House Beautiful, March 1931, 241-45.

“Notes from Some Virginia Gardens, “ House Beautiful, August 1930, 164, 179-80.

“Design in a Michigan Garden.” House and Garden, September 1926, 108-9.

“The Edging Plant in Herbaceous Gardens,” House Beautiful, July 1925.

“A Focal Point for the Garden,” House and Garden, January 1927, 69.

“A Garden by the Sea,” House Beautiful, March 1930, 290-91.

“The Garden in Good Taste,” House Beautiful, August 1923, 132.

“The Garden of James Fenimore Cooper at Cooperstown, New York,” House Beautiful, July 1924, 30-31.

“The Garden of Samuel Morris, Esq., in Chestnut Hill, Pennsylvania,” House Beautiful, July 1927, 30-31.

“In a Michigan Garden,” House and Garden, March 1927, 88-91.

“A Pool for Every Garden,” House and Garden, June 1920, 26.

Perrett, Antoinette. “A Rose and Purple Garden in July,” House Beautiful, July 1922, 21, 72.

Piper, Adaline D. “The Charm of Chatham,” House Beautiful, April 1926, 437-41.

Russell, Elizabeth H. “A House on Beekman Place,” House Beautiful, November 1927, 512-516, 568-69.

“To Link the Lawns and Garden,” House and Garden, August 1930, 49, 55-57.

“Variety of Form and Abundance of Bloom within a Small Area: The Garden of Mrs. Henry V. Greenhough, Brookline, Massachussetts,” House Beautiful, March 1931, 259-62.

Warren, Dale. “The Garden as a Frame for the House,” House Beautiful, October 1926, 426-27.

ELLEN MCGOWAN BIDDLE SHIPMAN PAPERS, #1259. DIVISION OF RARE AND MANUSCRIPT COLLECTIONS, CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY:

Shipman, Ellen Biddle. “Drawings and Papers, 1914-1946.” [Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Library Division of Rare and Manuscript Collections].

Shipman, Ellen. “Construction Details for Swimming Pool.” 1945. (Folder 48)____________. “B.P. of residence.” (Folder 48)____________. “Proposed sewage system.” 1935. (Folder 48)____________. “Sewage Disposal Details.” (Folder 48)____________. “Plan for layout of entrance court and service drive.” (Folder 48)____________. “Construction drawing for bath houses.” (Folder 48) ____________. “Plan for swimming pool area.” (Folder 48)____________. “Construction drawing for bath houses.” (Folder 48)____________. “Plan of stable road and parking spaces.” (Folder 48)____________. “Construction drawing of forecourt steps.” (Folder 48)____________. “Plan for swimming pool area.” (Folder 48)____________. “Detail of swimming pool gutter.” (Folder 48)McBond C., Walker. “Topographic map of estate.” July 23, 1945. (Folder 48)Shipman, Ellen. “Detail of dog watering trough.” (Folder 49)____________. “Plan of stable road and parking spaces.” (Folder 49)____________. “Construction drawing of forecourt steps.” (Folder 49)____________. “Sketch.” (Folder 49)____________. “Preliminary design plan.” September, 1935 (Folder 49)____________. “Revised layout plan of entrance and service drives.” October 1935. (Folder 49)____________. “Construction details for entrance walls.” October 1, 1935. (Folder 49)____________. “Grading plan for terraces and entrance court.” October 1936. (Folder 49)____________. “General design plan.” December 1935. (Folder 49)____________. “Revised design plan.” August 1936. (Folder 49)

____________. “Construction drawing for watering trough.” (Folder 49)____________. “Construction plan and details of picket fence.” (Folder 49)____________. “General plan for area around cabin.” April 1937. (Folder 49)____________. “Wall sections.” June 1937. (Folder 49)____________. “Construction drawings of walls.” (Folder 49)____________. “Construction drawings of garage court gate.” (Folder 49)____________. “Details of wrought iron post and rail.” (Folder 49)____________. “Bulb planting plan for south terrace.” September 1937. (Folder 50)____________. “Perennial plan for south terrace.” September 1937. (Folder 50)____________. “Construction drawing of forecourt walls.” April 14, 1937. (Folder 50)____________. “Plan around Hill House.” Sepember 1937. (Folder 50)____________. “Revised drawing of service court.” December 1937. (Folder 50)____________. “Tree, shrub and vine plan around house.” September 1937. (Folder 50)____________. “Detail of post at bottom of east terrace stairs.” (Folder 50)____________. “Construction details of Terrace A.” May 1937. (Folder 50)____________. “Bulb Planting Plan for north terrace garden.” September 1937. (Folder 50)____________. “Details of Garden Gate.” July 1937, (Folder 50)____________. “Construction details of Terrace B.” June 1937. (Folder 50)____________. “Plan for the Forecourt.” September 1937. (Folder 50)____________. “Perennial Plan for north terrace garden.” September 1937. (Folder 50)____________. “Detail of limestone cap for brick pias in forecourt.” (Folder 50)____________. “Detail of wooden cap for brick gate ports in service court.” January 1938. (Folder 50)____________. “Location plan of bath houses.” August 1, 1945. (Folder 50)____________. “Construction drawing for swimming terrace.” June 1945. (Folder 50)

____________. “Garden Notebook” (Box 10, Folder 15)____________. “Specifications for Gravel Road: Mrs. George P. Greenhalgh.” July 8, 1935. (Box 9, Folder 8)

Correspondence with Marie Greenhalgh, 1945. (Box 9, Folder 8)

Print, Photographic. Ellen Biddle Shipman. (Box 10, Folder 8)

“Mrs. Ellen Shipman, Famous Landscape Architect, Thrills Hearers.” Winston-Salem Journal. October 8, 1932. (Box 10, Folder 7)

“Preparation of Soil for Grass Terrace.” (Box 10, Folder 8)

Har-Tru Brochure (Box 10, Folder 11)

Springsbury Farm

Documents

Transcript of Springsbury Farm