The Oval Table with Falling Leaves - Essay Example

This oval table dates back to the period between 1715 and 1740, created by using soft maple and Pine. Its accession number is 10.125.130, which can be viewed in gallery 774.

Irvin Lyion, the author of an 18th-century book on furniture provides modern-day readers with the original details related to the object in the Metropolitan Museum. Page 198, of his book, shows that the oval table with falling leaves was sold in 1669, by a man known as Antipas Boyes from Boston. The location of the owner of the table coincides with the information at the Metropolitan Museum, which shows that the table could be found in different geographical locations, such as Boston and New England, as noted in the title of this book. From Lyion’s table, it is also clear that the table was on sale for £ 3.10. It is also evident that tables with an oval top with falling leaves and at times with folding parts were fashionable in England for one of two decades (Lyion, 199). As stated by Lyion, the tables were in existence in the latter part of the 17th century and later became common during the 18th century. This information also coincides with the information on the oval table at the Metropolitan Museum.

As described by Lyion, people used to call them “oval tables” and loved them because they occupied small spaces in the house. Though the oval tables were narrow in the frame, Lyion states that the leaves were often large and had many legs to support their weight. From this source, I also learnt that these tables were not only used at homes but in hospitals such as the hospital that Lyion mentions on page 199, the Heriot Hospital in Edinburgh. Others could also be found at the Connecticut Historical Society of Hartford. The legs of the table were plain before the 1750s, but after this year they were all made with certain patterns (Lyion, 201).

In Brock Jobe’s book on Portsmouth furniture, he also provides his readers with details of the 17th-century tables and when most of these tables were made. For example, on page 2187, he makes a brief analysis of the time that the oval table was created, between 1740 to 1770, in Portsmouth. He also describes the tables as “oval on the upper side” (p.177). He also states that such oval tables were created with cabriole legs and pad feet and oval tops, in a manner that he considered “the typical New England” style (p. 241). This is similar to the information on the oval table at the Metropolitan Museum which is shown to exist in the Geographical location addressed in Jobe’s book. Another thing I learnt from this source is that in the 17th and 18th centuries, carpenters also emulated the shapes and designs of other carpenters from other geographical locations. This is evident in the book where he notes that the Portsmouth maker might have had access to a Boston sample of a table which he emulated while making other tables (Jobe, 241).

In conclusion, this research helps me to understand the use of oval tables in the 17th and 18th centuries, the cost of the tables and why the buyers were fond of these tables. These two sources have assisted me in knowing what other types of tables people wanted in contemporary American society and their purpose. For example, the Trestle table, which is the first table at the bottom of the Museum web page almost, looks like a version of the oval table, but without the leaves. The table perhaps serves the same purpose as the oval table with falling leaves.