For most of the twentieth century, historicism – understood here as the conscious use of forms and styles from the past – was seen as an outdated, reactionary, and backward mode of design. Closely associated with the architecture and decorative arts of the nineteenth century, it has led to an understanding of historicist objects as being about empty retrospection and a lack of invention, evidence of a temporary lapse in artistic progress before the advent of modernism at the end of the century. This dissertation challenges these notions by examining how the use of historical styles and forms was perceived and understood in the nineteenth century itself, incorporating both debates on architecture and on the design of decorative arts. As the nineteenth century marked an explosive growth in printed matter of all sorts, the (illustrated) press played an increasingly important role as the public arena in which debates surrounding style played out. This dissertation therefore utilizes this broad archive to explore the use of historical style through three aspects: the language used around the revival and adaptation of historical styles; specific narratives of identity that surrounded historicizing objects; and the underlying logic of appropriation that underlay the use of historical forms.

The first chapter sets out the wider debate surrounding the use of style in British design and manufacturing, focusing on four main stakeholders: government-sponsored reformers and educators, in particular those involved in the Great Exhibition of 1851 and the South Kensington project; the art press, as embodied by The Art-Journal; manufacturers and artisans; and finally, the ‘silent majority’ of the consuming public. Subsequent chapters present a kaleidoscopic view of the treatment of various historical styles in the nineteenth century. The second chapter, on the ‘Alhambresque’, contrasts the theories and artistic practice of Owen Jones (1809-1874) to the reception of his architectural schemes by (near) contemporary audiences, to examine what it means for a modern building to be understood through the framework of a historical referent. The third chapter, on ‘Archaeological Styles’, considers the question of adaptation of historical ornament through the lens of jewellery, examining the range of language used to describe the appropriation of historical forms and the transhistorical relationships between the nineteenth-century object and its historical model this implies. The fourth and final chapter, on ‘Modern Gothic’, considers the tension between historical ornament and modern circumstances, examining to what extent the use of modern manufacturing techniques and materials, and adaptation to modern uses impacted perceptions of objects made in medieval styles, focusing particularly on those exhibited in the international exhibitions between 1851 and 1871.

Together, these chapters present a new understanding of the use of historical styles as operating within a manifold debate that looks both forward to the future and back towards the past, and is deeply concerned with its purpose for the present.