In the 17th century it was the royal and court gardens that set the trends and dictated taste. The determining factor was French influence, Charles II having spent his exile there. The most magnificent garden of the time was Hampton Court, its canal being originally the longest stretch of garden water. At the same time, however, there were extensive avenue gardens being laid out, as at Badminton, which stretched into three counties. But, after the Glorious Revolution of 1688, the rise of the Protestant succession ensured a gradual weakening of the power of French (Catholic) taste, and this was combined with the supremacy of Parliament which diminished the authority of the monarch. Translated into garden terms, this meant that the aristocrats who ran the country through Parliament, mainly the Whigs in the 18th century, began to create the grandest gardens in the country, eclipsing those of the monarch.

While gardens were still largely formal, the royal estates, especially those that were open to the public, like Kensington Gardens, continued to hold importance even though they were now being challenged by such creations as Stowe and Wanstead (the ‘English Versailles’). They were depicted in prints and were well known and admired. But although the royal gardens tended to uphold tradition – especially Hampton Court – the early stirrings of the landscape movement can be detected in two of the sites, Richmond Gardens and Kensington Gardens. It is likely that Queen Caroline, wife of George II, was responsible for both initiatives, though working through the designers Bridgeman and Kent. Later gardens, especially Virginia Water and the second phase of Kew, show the full flowering of the landscape garden.

Richmond Gardens

Richmond Gardens, comprising the riverside strip of present-day Kew, were at the time separate, and not amalgamated with Kew until 1802. It was the property of the monarch, as opposed to Kew, which was in the care of the Prince of Wales, and, later, his widow Augusta. The two gardens could hardly have contrasted more.

In the case of Richmond, the layout by Bridgeman was formal but asymmetrical, and some irregular curves can be seen in the network of paths.