US Embassy Algiers / CMR Historic Structures Report

Algiers

VOLUME 1: ARCHITECTURAL & HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE

United States Embassy, Algiers, Algeria • Chief of Mission Residence (CMR)

Historic Structure & Cultural Landscape Report

Final Submission • 14 June 2023

OBO Contract # SAQMMA15D0118 • Task Order # 19AQMM19F3532

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Introduction / CMR

OVERVIEW

This four-volume set comprises the Historic Structure and Cultural Landscapes Report (HSR/CLR) for the Chief of Mission Residence that is part of the US Diplomatic Mission properties in Algiers, Algeria. The US Department of State, Bureau of Overseas Buildings Operations (OBO) commissioned this HSR/CLR from the Davis Brody Bond Study Team comprised of Davis Brody Bond, architects and planners, Robinson & Associates, architecture researchers and historians, Building Conservation Associates, building restoration specialists, Rhodeside Harwell, landscape architects, Thornton Tomasetti, structural engineers, and WSP, MEP engineers. The Team developed this report after visiting the CMR during the week of June 26-30, 2022. Volume 1 will be available to the broad reading public. Volumes 2, 3, and 4 will be available to readers with USG authorized access. Each volume contains specific information as described following:

• Volume 1 presents the architecture and landscape histories and significance of the property, its characterdefining features, and its status under Algerian preservation/cultural heritage law.

• Volume 2 documents and discusses existing conditions of the landscape, building, and building systems.

• Volume 3 includes paint and stucco analyses, and estimated construction cost information.

• Volume 4 offers operations and maintenance information and recommendations.

While it is possible to use each volume independently, the Study Team recommends that authorized first-time readers start at the beginning, developing an acquaintance with Volumes 1 and 2, before passing on to Volumes 3 and 4.

PURPOSE OF THE REPORT

Paraphrasing the SOW, the purpose of this Historic Structure and Cultural Landscapes Report follows:

The objectives of the HSR/CLR are to identify and document original and lost design and building history, and to describe the current conditions of architecture and building systems. It includes discussion of deterioration and causes; and proposes treatments to maintain and restore its historic character within the requirements of DoS Diplomatic use.

The content and objectives of the HSR/CLR are guided by the How to Write a Historic Structure Report by David H. Arbogast (2011); “Preservation Brief 43: Preparation and Use of Historic Structures “, National Park Service, 2005; Chapter 8 w/appendix C of NPS-28: Cultural Resource Management Guideline; The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for the Treatment of Cultural Landscapes ed. by Charles Birnbaum (1996); and “Preservation Brief 36: Protecting Cultural Landscapes: Planning, Treatment and Management of Historic Landscapes,” National Park Service, 1944.

A DoS HSR/CLR has critical differences from a traditional HSR/CLR produced for structures and landscapes within the United States which may be eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places. Its sole purpose is to fulfill a legal and moral stewardship responsibility within and subject to the requirements of the DoS and a diplomatic mission: it will inform and guide the Department in its use and maintenance of the structure and grounds and provide the knowledge by which to judge potential proposed alterations. A majority of the document itself will not be distributed outside DoS: Volume 1, “Architectural and Historical Significance” section will be available for academic or public research purposes.

Introduction / CMR

METHODOLOGY

Research methods include the examination of both primary and secondary sources from select US, Algerian, and French archives and repositories. Sources are listed in the bibliography; some appear in the text.

The existing building and landscape were studied during a Site Trip the week of June 26-30, 2022, by the A/E team of historical, engineering, preservation, conservation, landscape, and architectural professionals. During the visit, the team conducted field observation and recording, including review and field verification of extant documentation, field measurement and sketching, detail and HABS-level 2 photography, and laser scanning.

Team members interviewed Embassy staff including David Treleaven, Tewfik Tizioualou, and Mahdi Tayeb, Post Building Systems SMEs, and CMR house staff including Mr. Boudjema, Chief Gardener regarding the practices of day-to-day and special event use, the history of maintenance, equipment and systems upgrades, and prior and forthcoming renovation projects. Team members performed site and building tours of areas of disciplinary interest accompanied by Post SMEs. The team members participated in a tour of the DCMR led by Professor Samia Chergui, an Algiers architectural historian. A local preservation/conservation contractor with project experience at the CMR, Mr. Francisco Javier Escribano Lax, led a tour of the CMR, highlighting conservation work performed, methods and materials used, and what he viewed as appropriate next steps in the stewardship of the building.

SITE VISIT TEAM

ARCHITECTURE / ENGINEERING CONSULTANT TEAM

Davis Brody Bond

Architecture

• Christopher K. Grabé, FAIA

• A. Eugene Sparling, AIA

WSP

MEP / IT / SEC

• Michael Cosentino

Thornton Tomasetti

Structure

• Evan Lapointe, PE

Robinson & Associates

Historical Analysis

• Daria Gasparini

• Tim Kerr

Professor Samia Chergui

University of Saad Dahleb, Bilda, Algeria

Local Architecture History and Research

Rhodeside & Harwell

Landscape

• Faye Harwell, FASLA

• Rachel Schneider, LA

BCA

Paint & Materials Analysis Field Measuring, Scans, and Photographs

• Christopher Gembinski (BCA)

• Rimvydas (Danius) Glinskis (BCA)

• Alexander (Alex) Ray (BCA)

• Erica Morasset (BCA)

• Fernando Viteri (Langan)

• Joseph Magers (Langan)

• T. Whitney Cox (Whitney Cox Photography)

Introduction / CMR (cont’d)

US DEPARTMENT OF STATE BUREAU OF OVERSEAS BUILDINGS OPERATIONS (OBO)

• Virginia Price, OBO, OCH

• Andrew Fackler, OBO, OCH

EMBASSY OF THE UNITED STATES ALGIERS, ALGERIA

• Ambassador Aubin, AMB

• Mr. Aubin

• Kristin Rockwood, MGT

• Greg Geerdes, RSO

• Tobias Slaton, RSO Office

• David Treleaven, FM

• Tewfik Tizioualou, FM Office

• Leila Kouroughli, FM Office

• Mahdi Tayeb, FM Office

Visitor to Embassy

• Francisco Javier Escribano Lax (Masmoudi Construction)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This historic structure and cultural landscape report for the Chief of Mission Residence of the US Diplomatic Mission in Algiers benefits from the cooperation and contributions of individuals and organizations which Davis Brody Bond gratefully acknowledges.

First and foremost, we thank Ambassador Aubin who generously opened the CMR to the team throughout the five-day visit and primed the Post to support the project wholeheartedly. The report also benefits from the contributions of others at Post. Mr. Dan Aubin, guided tours of the CMR and DCMR and freely shared his extensive experience of both buildings, offering knowledge and ideas about their proper preservation and stewardship. Kristin Rockwood, MGT, and Tobias Slaton (RSO office) provided an introductory tour and security briefing, and image review. Ms. Rockwood arranged and accompanied an evening tour of the Casbah. Greg Geerdes, RSO, offered a focused security briefing. David Treleaven, FM, provided the Team with workspace, building access, secure storage, background information, access to Post archives, and generally assured a smooth and productive Site Visit. Tewfik Tizioualou, Mahdi Tayeb of the FM Office, facilitated meetings between visiting consultants and Post maintenance and building engineering staff, provided recent building maintenance information and more. Leila Kouroughli in the FM offices facilitated local travel and coordinated expert assistance for arrivals and departures.

We are very grateful for the extensive research work performed by Samia Chergui, Professeur en histoire de l’architecture, Institut d’Architecture et d’Urbanisme (Université Saad DAHLAB/Blida 1) who uncovered in Algerian archives and repositories information that informs the entire study, including building and urban histories, significant historic maps and other records. Mr. Francisco Javier Escribano Lax, an Algiers architectural conservation contractor met with the Team and led a tour of the CMR highlighting conservation work he had completed there and offering thoughts on future projects.

The Team also greatly thanks Virginia Price, the OBO project manager for the project. Virginia gathered and provided access to records in the Real Estate division at OBO as well as documents in the Cultural Heritage office, including drawings, photographs, reports, and correspondence that helped document acquisition of the buildings by the United States, as well as changes to the CMR and DCMR during US ownership. She also helped organize the Casbah tour, which greatly added to the Team’s understanding of architecture in Algiers during the periods of Ottoman and French rule.

1.1 Executive Summary / CMR

The US Department of State, Bureau of Overseas Buildings Operations (OBO) commissioned this four volume Historic Structures and Building Conditions Report / Cultural Landscapes Report from the Davis Brody Bond Team comprised of Davis Brody Bond, architects and planners, Robinson & Associates, architecture historians, Building Conservation Associates, building restoration specialists, Rhodeside Harwell (RHI), landscape architects, Thornton Tomasetti, structural engineers, and WSP, MEP engineers. This four-volume report was developed following a visit to the CMR during the week of June 26-30, 2022. It includes an overview of the architecture and landscape histories and significance of the property now serving as the Chief of Mission Residence for the US Embassy in Algiers. The report also includes a survey of the existing conditions of the building and site, materials analysis, and an operation and maintenance program. A summary of the four volumes of the report follows.

The Chief of Mission Residence at 6 Chemin Cheikh, Bachir Ibrahimi in Algiers was built as a luxurious villa on northeast-facing slopes above the city in the midnineteenth century and remodeled multiple times. The property appears on the OBO List of Significant Properties and on the Secretary of State’s Register of Culturally Significant Properties. It is not identified as a historic cultural resource under Algerian law.

VOLUME 1 ARCHITECTURE AND HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Volume 1 describes the Architectural and Historical Significance of the property. It traces the urban development of Algiers and offers a broad outline of Algerian architecture and landscape design in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. It describes the CMR’s chronology of ownership, use, and development in its context. There is a summary of ongoing US-Algerian diplomatic relations beginning in Ottoman times.

Following the US Department of the Interior guidelines for applying the National Register of Historic Places criteria for evaluation, Robinson & Associates establishes a long period of significance for the CMR from 1866-1948. Together, Rhodeside Harwell and Robinson & Associates provide detailed descriptions of the landscape and the building exteriors and interiors, identifying copious character-defining features.

VOLUME 2

EXISTING CONDITIONS

During the June 2022 Site Visit, DBB Team members examined the CMR, recording with field notes, sketches, and photographs existing conditions pertaining to their respective professional disciplines. Volume 2 presents the record created, and disciplinary analyses of the existing conditions in the field. In summary:

CHAPTER 1

STRUCTURE

Thornton Tomasetti (TT), project consulting structural engineer reviewed visible structure at all levels and examined select concealed structure with the use of a borescope. In addition, TT visited existing outbuildings. The structural report finds the building structure to be in good condition overall with localized conditions warranting attention.

CHAPTER 2:

MEP/FP/FA/IT/TSS

WSP, project consulting building systems engineer reviewed and documented existing mechanical, plumbing, fire protection, electrical, telecommunications, and security systems installations in the field. In addition, WSP interviewed engineering staff charged with the operation and maintenance of existing systems. Generally, WSP finds the existing building systems to be in acceptable working order. For details, please refer to Vol. 2.

CHAPTER 3

LANDSCAPE EXISTING CONDITIONS

Rhodeside Harwell (RHI) walked, analyzed, photographed, and sketched the CMR site. It describes the landscape spatial organization, topography, uses, vegetation, and defining features in text and graphics.

CHAPTER 4

LANDSCAPE TREATMENT

Rhodeside Harwell (RHI)'s section on landscape treatment suggests establishing a philosophy and strategies of care for the CMR property. If offers specific treatment recommendations and suggests periodic maintenance practices.

CHAPTER 5

EXISTING ARCHITECTURE

BCA and DBB reviewed, documented, and discussed the building interiors and exteriors during the Site Visit. This chapter presents representational spaces by way of measured room plans, HABS Level 2 photographs and detail photographs. A data sheet for each representational space notes character-defining architectural features, their historic and current materials, assesses their conditions, and identifies treatment guidelines. Exterior elevations and spaces are similarly described. Overall, BCA and DBB find the building to be in good condition.

CHAPTER 6

TREATMENT OPTIONS AND WORK RECOMMENDATIONS

Guided by the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, this chapter proposes that all work on the CMR shall respect the significance and historic condition of the building and its constituent elements. Preservation Zoning diagrams show the relative importance of different spaces, and treatment guidelines suggest appropriate conservation strategies in different preservation zones.

CHAPTER 7

ACCESSIBILITY

The CMR was built before accessibility was a matter of concern to most architects and many building owners. This chapter maps accessibility issues in the house and landscape. It offers conceptual remedies for selected instances of non-compliance. These range from simple measures to more complex and costly interventions, such as adding an accessible toilet room, a lift, or elevator. Notably, ABA Guidelines do not require retro-active compliance of pre-existing elements. However, in historic buildings, alteration projects do trigger accessibility upgrades in the work area. To respect and maintain the historical significance of the CMR’s representational spaces, OBO/PDCS/DE and OBO/OPS/CH guide the precise character of accessibility upgrades.

VOLUME 3

DIAGNOSTIC DOCUMENTATION

BCA performed extensive diagnostic sampling for paint and exterior stucco. Analysis reports on the samples provide bases for historically appropriate restoration work. The volume also includes a cost report.

VOLUME 4 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PROGRAM

The Operations and Maintenance Program assists and guides CMR stakeholders charged with the care and protection of this culturally significant property.

DIGITAL COMPONENTS

The HSR/CLR project deliverables comprise standalone digital files separate from this four-volume print report. Among them are raw, registered and photo-textured laserscanned point clouds of the building, and a Revit model constructed from the point cloud. Digital work also includes panoramic virtual tours with interactive points of interest content for OBO-identified representational spaces. Digital products will be posted independently of print documents.

Detail from Figure 1.2.2

1.2 Historical Background & Context / CMR

DEVELOPMENT OF ALGIERS AND ITS SURROUNDINGS

Origins

The Imazighen, known also as the Berbers, have been present in the Maghreb (the part of North Africa west of Egypt) since the beginning of recorded history, having been noted by ancient Egyptian dynasties as early as the thirteenth century BCE. Reaching the area by way of the Mediterranean Sea, Phoenician traders from what is now Lebanon established hundreds of settlements along the North African coast after 800 BCE. One of these settlements became known as Icosium. Both the Carthaginians in the fifth century BCE and later the Romans knew the town (Figure 1.2.1). The inhabitants of Icosium occupied four of the small islands in what is now the Bay of Algiers and a narrow strip of land along the shore. The town became a Roman colony in the first century CE. The Romans laid out Icosium’s streets in a grid pattern, established public baths, a necropolis, and other urban elements, and constructed a rampart with towers to protect the land side of the settlement. They also built villas with gardens in the hills outside the walls. Remains of Roman Icosium have been found in what is now known as the Casbah.1

Firmus, a Berber Numidian prince and son of a Roman general, sacked Icosium in 373 CE as part of a tribal revolt against the established Roman authority. The Romans put down the revolt, but the town was conquered again in the fifth century, this time by the Vandals, a Germanic tribe that crossed into Africa via Spain.2 The Vandals controlled all of Roman North Africa until the Byzantine general Belisarius and his army defeated them in 533. The Byzantines and then Islamic Arabs reduced

Icosium to ruins by the seventh century, and the settlement would not be revived until the tenth century, by which time the dominant cultural and political influences emanated from Islam, which had been introduced in North Africa from Egypt.

Indigenous Berbers initially opposed foreign rule by the Islamic caliphate headquartered in the Arabian Peninsula, but Arab forces ultimately prevailed and extended their rule throughout North Africa and, eventually, across the Mediterranean into the Iberian Peninsula. During the Fatimid period (909–1171), the rule of the area encompassing modern-day Algeria was left to the Zirids, a Berber dynasty that centered significant power in the region for the first time. In 944, Buluggin (or Bologhine) ibn Ziri, the founder of the Zirid dynasty, established a town on the site of ancient Icosium. He called it al-Jaza’ir, a name meaning “the islands” in reference to the islands off the coast. The period that followed was marked by constant conflict and economic decline. Algiers was ruled by successive Arab dynasties as a minor port from the arrival of the Almoravids in the early twelfth century until the sixteenth century.3 The Arab Muslims fortified the town with perimeter walls, which are believed to have incorporated existing ramparts and later formed the basis of the walls built during Ottoman rule.4

A watershed moment for medieval Algiers was the recapture of Spain by Christians in the fifteenth century, which resulted in a wave of Muslim refugees to the city. The Christian powers in Europe ended trade across the Mediterranean from North Africa, reducing markets for the products of Arab and Berber agriculture and industry. Some of those formerly engaged in merchant enterprises therefore turned to privateering the seizure of money, commercial products, ships, and sailors through piracy.

1. “Icosium,” The Princeton Encyclopedia of Classical Sites, Richard Stillwell, William L. MacDonald, Marian Holland McAllister, editors (Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1976), Tufts University website, http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus% 3Atext%3A1999.04.0006%3Aentry%3Dicosium, accessed September 24, 2022; “Algiers” and “North Africa,” Encyclopædia Britannica, Encyclopædia Britannica website, https:/www.britannica.com/place/Algiers, accessed September 24, 2022.

2. Stillwell, et al., “Icosium,” The Princeton Encyclopedia of Classical Sites; “Algiers,” Encyclopædia Britannica.

3. Helen Chaplin Metz, ed., Algeria, a Country Study, 5th edition (Federal Research Division, Library of Congress, 1994), 11-17.

4. Zeynep Çelik, Urban Forms and Colonial Confrontations (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1997), 13; Metz, Algeria, a Country Study, 11.

Figure 1.2.1

A Punic stela from Icosium dating to circa 300-100 BCE. (Courtesy Livius.org, available at https://www.livius.org/pictures/algeria/algiers-icosium/icosiumstela-of-a-punic-lady/)

1.2. Historical Background & Context / CMR

Privateering soon became a state-sponsored business in North Africa, with Algiers becoming “the privateering state par-excellence” between 1560 and 1620. The practice was organized and regulated by the kingdoms along the coast. Captains of the corsairs who carried out the raids on mercantile shipping formed a community known as the taifa that ensured the stability of the industry. Europeans who converted to Islam could become members of the taifa.5

Algiers During the Ottoman Period (Early 1500s–1830)

Algiers came under the rule of the Ottoman Empire, centered in Constantinople (now Istanbul), Turkey, in the early sixteenth century. Supported by Ottoman Sultan Selim I, two brothers, Aruj and Khair ad-Din, took control of Algiers in 1516. The pair had originally operated as privateers for the Berber Hafsid dynasty off what is now Tunisia. Aruj was killed in 1518, but Khair ad-Din, known to Europeans as “Barbarossa,” or “Red Beard,” succeeded him as military commander of Algiers. Khair ad-Din subsequently secured an agreement with the sultan, whereby, in exchange for their assistance in fighting Spanish invasions, Khair ad-Din would acknowledge Ottoman authority in the lands he conquered. In 1519, however, before the Ottoman troops arrived, the Spanish occupied Algiers, and it would be another ten years before Khair ad-Din successfully forced them out of the city. With Turkish troops and artillery supplied by the sultan, Khair ad-Din subdued the North African coast between Constantine in the east and Oran in the west (both in modern-day Algeria) and was named the area’s provincial governor. Algiers became the center of Ottoman authority in the Maghreb during Khair ad-Din’s regency.6

The Ottoman Empire maintained loose control over the city and the surrounding country. New walls were built in roughly the same location as those constructed in the Arab era. The walls ran continuously for 3,100 meters (roughly 10,170 feet), enclosing the town on all sides and limiting access to five gate points (Figure 1.2.2). Within

these walls, the lower part of the city, called “the plain” (al-wata), developed into the administrative, military, and commercial quarter. In this zone were mosques, military barracks, markets, warehouses, and the grand homes of the city’s political and military leadership and of its privateers, who accumulated great wealth. The upper zone, called “the mountain” (al-gabal or al-jabal), was a residential district, which became known as the Casbah, where narrow, crooked streets cut through small, densely developed neighborhoods.7

The rural countryside beyond the city walls of Algiers was a green and fertile landscape characterized by hills, valleys, and numerous springs and streams. This landscape was enhanced with public fountains erected by the Ottomans and sophisticated irrigation systems composed of norias (a water-powered device used for lifting water from a lower elevation, such as a river, to a higher elevation, such as an aqueduct), conduits, and basins. By the beginning of the nineteenth century, the countryside was relatively densely developed with farms, fruit plantations, and the country houses and pleasure gardens of the Algerian elite. Scattered along the ridges and slopes of the Algerian heights, these country estates, known as djnâyan (or djnân in the singular), typically featured expansive gardens, as well as orchards, vegetable gardens, shaded courtyards, water features, and outbuildings. They offered their owners both an escape from the crowds, noise, and heat of the medina and an opportunity to experience and interact with nature and wildlife. These country estates usually fell into one of two categories. They were either official summer residences of the governor, known as a dey, or his senior officers, or they were private residences belonging to rich merchants or privateers. The official residences included private quarters for the officer and his family, as well as spaces in which to conduct the business of the state. Private villas were smaller than the official ones and more informal. Whether sumptuous villas or modest dwellings, most shared a similar plan centered around an interior courtyard.8

5. Metz, Algeria, a Country Study, 21-24; Bennoune, The Making of Contemporary Algeria, 1830-1987, 36-39.

6. Çelik, Urban Forms and Colonial Confrontations, 19; Henry S. Grabar, “Reclaiming the City: Changing Urban Meaning in Algiers after 1962,” Cultural Geographies 21, no. 3 (July 2014), 392.

7. Zeynep Celik, Empire, Architecture, and the City: French-Ottoman Encounters, 1830-1914 (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2008), 72.

8. Çelik, Urban Forms and Colonial Confrontations, 27; Celik, Empire, Architecture, and the City, 72.

This map of Algiers was created in 1575 and published in Cologne, Germany, with the title, “View of Algiers, Seat of Power of the Saracens, in the Numidian Province of Africa and Situated on the Edge of the Balearic Current in the Mediterranean Sea, across from Spain, under the Princes of the Ottoman Empire.” It is one of the earliest printed maps of the city of Algiers. (Maps Division, Library of Congress)

Figure 1.2.2

French Colonization (1830–1962)

France had conducted significant trade with the port cities of the Maghreb since the thirteenth century, importing leather and skins, beeswax, cumin, sugar, dried figs, and fleece from across the Mediterranean. Over time, the French established commercial enterprises in Algeria run by French merchants. Although the French monarchy had been restored after Napoleon’s defeat, it remained unpopular and vulnerable to attack by other nations interested in colonization. To strengthen its own authority, the French government envisioned Algeria as a colony capable of absorbing the men and women in France made idle, and therefore susceptible to revolutionary ideas, by the poor economy. Colonists would produce raw materials to ship to France for conversion to finished goods for domestic and international markets. At the same time, the decline in privateering in the early nineteenth century led to a loss of the wealth the Regency of Algiers needed for defense, as did Ottoman defeats elsewhere in Europe. North Africa was therefore vulnerable.9

France used the occasion of a perceived insult to its consul by the dey as justification to blockade Algiers’ port in 1827. The blockade lasted three years but did not force Ottoman submission; the French then invaded, landing west of the city in June 1830. They captured the city in three weeks, and Hussein Dey, the last dey of Algiers, fled. The French did little to endear themselves to the Algerians during the invasion and later subjugation of the city. Thirty thousand people were either killed or exiled in the first year of the war, and thousands of properties were confiscated. In 1834, France annexed the parts of the country it occupied. Settlers from southern Italy, Spain, and France, called colons (colonists) or, more popularly, pied noirs (black feet), poured in.10

When France invaded Algeria in 1830 they encountered a dense, fortified city with monuments, public buildings, and a street network, developed over centuries, which they

found bewildering and irrational.11 Early French interventions were aimed at taking over the headquarters of the Ottoman military forces, appropriating a range of strategically significant buildings, including the palaces of local families, and clearing the urban fabric to create the spaces needed for the movement of the troops.12 Initially, these interventions were concentrated in the lower part of the city along the seafront, which came to be known as the quartier de la Marine (Marine Quarter), where military engineers were especially concerned about housing troops and cutting new arteries through the city to enable rapid maneuvers. French authorities confiscated houses, shops, and religious buildings for the purposes clearing a place d’armes, constructing new buildings, and opening streets.13 French colonizers also transformed the hills of the Sahel, where country estates were subjected to forced sales or expropriations.14 “Many officers and officials, immediately after the conquest, bought the finest gardens for a mere trifle in the communities of Mustapha and of Bujarea. The Turks were banished, the Moors began to emigrate, and both classes sold their property, parting with the most magnificent villas and farms at any price,” wrote one historian of the French invasion.15 Often, valuable materials (wood, iron, glazed tiles, marble columns) were stripped from these estates and sold, leaving many properties in ruins.

Later, as French planners began the work of redesigning Algiers to French tastes and to house the new Europeans arriving in the city, the redevelopment of the Casbah, the old residential district of the upper city, proved to be a formidable challenge. High population densities made relocation particularly difficult, and the topography and concentration of densely packed old buildings made new construction and the cutting of new streets difficult without large-scale demolition. In addition, a romantic/ Orientalist appreciation of the aesthetic values of the buildings of the Casbah inspired an interest in preserving them. French poet and novelist Théophile Gautier commented in 1845 that the Casbah ought to be preserved and that the Europeans should limited

9. Mahfoud Bennoune, The Making of Contemporary Algeria, 1830-1987: Colonial Upheavals and Post-Independence Development (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2002), 28-35; Metz, Algeria, a Country Study, 21.

10. Metz, Algeria, a Country Study, 21-24; Bennoune, The Making of Contemporary Algeria, 1830-1987, 36-39.

11. Çelik, Urban Forms and Colonial Confrontations, 19; Henry S. Grabar, “Reclaiming the City: Changing Urban Meaning in Algiers after 1962,” Cultural Geographies 21, no. 3 (July 2014), 392.

12. Zeynep Celik, Empire, Architecture, and the City: French-Ottoman Encounters, 1830-1914 (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2008), 72.

13. Çelik, Urban Forms and Colonial Confrontations, 27; Celik, Empire, Architecture, and the City, 72.

14. Zaki Bouzid, Algérie Palais et Somptueuses Demeures (Alger: Zaki Bouzid Editions, 2014), 27.

15. Francis Pulszky, The Tricolor on the Atlas; Algeria and the French Conquest (London: T. Nelson and Sons, 1854), 43.

16. Çelik, Urban Forms and Colonial Confrontations, 26.

themselves to the lower part of the historic city, closer to the harbor.16 In 1865, Napoleon III called a halt to the éventrement (gutting) of the Casbah (Figure 1.2.3). Its preservation was viewed as a way to safeguard regional culture and to attract tourists.17

While colonists arrived Algiers looking for economic opportunity in the city and on agricultural properties, by the middle of the nineteenth century many Europeans and some Americans came as visitors, attracted to the city’s temperate weather and perceived exoticism. The earliest came for health reasons rather than tourism. Encouraged by doctors who extolled the curative properties of a warm, sunny climate, patients with pulmonary ailments took extended stays during the winter season, which lasted from October to May. Some visitors found lodging in hotels or rented houses. Those with enough wealth bought country estates in the fohôs, a term used to describe the peripheral zones of Algiers, where they built houses or renovated existing villas.18 English guidebooks, medical texts, and travelogues promoted travel to Algiers, encouraging tourism. The trip for a British visitor required a train from London through Paris to Marseilles, then a steamship to Algiers. Later, direct steamer service operated from Liverpool and London.19

A popular destination for wealthy British and Americans was the neighborhood of Mustapha Supérieur. After a visit in 1857, one English visitor to Algiers wrote: “To those who desire a permanent dwelling-house, and who intend to keep what is called a regular establishment, no situation could be more delightful, nor more desirable that than of upper Mustapha.”20 Another travel writer in 1895 described the neighborhood as “well situated on the slopes of the hills south of Algiers amongst gardens and pine woods…being at a considerable elevation above the sea, it has the great advantage of being fresher and more healthy than the town.”21 The first hotels in Mustapha Supérieur opened in the late 1880s, catering to visitors who did not take villas. J. Hildenrbrand, proprietor of the Hotel d’Orient and Hotel Continental, boasted that his

establishments offered magnificent views, lawn tennis, and “telephone to Algiers.” Moreover, he provided guests with omnibus service upon their steamship arrival.22 The seasonal visitors and residents of Mustapha Supérieur and the adjacent neighborhood of El-Biar formed a compartmentalized society. The British, for example, founded an Anglican church, a hospital, social clubs, and weekly newspapers. Although the golden age of AngloAmerican migrations to Algiers peaked in the last third of the nineteenth century, the city remained a popular destination until the eve of World War I.23

Mustapha Supérieur was incorporated into the city of Algiers in 1904, and, gradually, the built fabric of city climbed far onto the surrounding hills. Over time, the nineteenth-century pattern of Moorish-style villas in gardens on the heights was replaced by much denser settlement patterns where the “buildings of modern Algiers” crowded out “the cubic houses of the Arab city.”24 The increased urbanization of Mustapha Supérieur prompted many American and European owners to sell their estates to French colons 25 Following World War I, Algiers experienced a decline in its popularity as a winter retreat. The opening of trans-Mediterranean air travel in 1931 made short stays easier and decreased the need for season-long visits. The worldwide Depression of the 1930s essentially ended the seasonal gatherings of wealthy Europeans and Americans in Algiers.

A nascent preservation movement emerged in the early twentieth century in response to the city’s rapid urbanization. In 1905, Henri Klein founded the Old Algiers Committee (Comité du Vieil Alger), which served as the movement’s leading voice. Klein and his associates documented the city’s historic buildings and monuments in the periodical Feuillets d’El-Djezair and organized tours of Ottoman djnâyan (Figure 1.2.4). Journals and magazines such as L’Afrique du Nord Illustrée also published stories highlighting notable historic villas and gardens (Figures 1.2.5 and 1.2.6). The first urban planning law in France, known as the Cornudet Law (1919, revised

17. Michelle Lamprakos, “The Idea of the History City,” Change Over Time 4, No. 1 (Spring 2014), 18.

18. Bouzid, Algérie Palais et Somptueuses Demeures, 25.

19. Liz Davenport, Woodchester, A Gothic Vision (Gloucestershire, England, 2014), Chapter 12.

20. Rev. E. W. L. Davies, Algiers in 1857 (London: Longman, Brown, Green, Longmans, & Roberts, 1858), 52.

21. R. Lambert Playfair, Handbook for Travellers in Algeria and Tunis (London: John Murray, 1895), 106.

22. Handbook Advertiser, 1893-1894, in R. Lambert Playfair, Handbook for Travellers in Algeria and Tunis (London: John Murray, 1891), 5.

23. Osman Benchérif, The British in Algiers, 1585-2000 (Algiers: RSM Communication, 2001), 42.

24. “Jardins D’Alger,” L’Afrique du Nord Illustrée, Nouvelle série, no. 130 (October 1923), 5, translated by S. Chergui.

25. Christopher Ross “American Embassy Properties in Algiers: Their Origins and History” (typescript), April 1991, US Department of State, Office of Overseas Buildings Operations, 10.

Figure 1.2.3

View of Algiers after the construction of the main waterfront artery, boulevard de Impératrice, completed in 1866, which was built on a series of high arches recalling an aqueduct. (Prints and Photographs Division, Library of Congress)

1.2. Historical Background & Context / CMR (cont’d)

Figure 1.2.4

Members of the Comité du Vieil Alger visiting the Villa Mouhoub, a residence the owner “accommodated to modern needs while respecting the character of the past.” (“Le Vieil Alger a la Villa Mouboub,” L’Afrique du Nord Illustrée December 1937)

Figure 1.2.5

View of a Moorish façade, 1931. (“Dar ed Djezair,” L’Afrique du Nord Illustrée October 1931)

Figure 1.2.6

Elaborate entry portal of an Algerian djnân, 1928. (L’Afrique du Nord Illustrée February 1928)

1.2. Historical Background & Context / CMR (cont’d)

in 1924) became applicable in Algeria with minor modifications by decree on January 5, 1922. The law created “zones of architectural protection” in the areas near historic monuments and proposed that French cities over a certain size submit a “plan for development, extension and embellishment.” The urban development plan for Algiers was approved in 1929, which divided the territory of the city of Algiers into four zones with different development limits and introduced planning tools such as no-building zones (zone non-aedificandi). Mustapha Supérieur was located Zone C, a residential district where gardens and trees were to be protected (Figure 1.2.7).

After World War II, Islamic immigration to Algiers increased substantially, putting pressure on the historic city. Bidonvilles squatters’ communities named for the gas barrels used to build walls for shelter proliferated, and overcrowding in the Casbah created extremely congested conditions. In 1957, General Charles de Gaulle unveiled a new development plan for Algeria which aimed to improve, among other things, housing deficiencies and congestion, but the administration never took action to address the issues facing residents of the Casbah. During Algeria’s war for independence, the area became a frequent site of urban guerrilla warfare.26 The effect on the heights of Algiers over time was to make the area more urban than rural in character.

Algerian Independence (1962–Present)

One of the immediate goals of Algerian leadership following independence was “to liquidate, in all its forms, colonialism as it manifests itself.”27 Across the country, streets and squares were renamed, and French statues and monuments were taken down. Soon after taking power, Algeria’s strongly centralized government instituted Ordinance 66-102, which gave it the authority to appropriate “bien vacants” properties deemed to be abandoned by their owners. Titles to these properties passed to the state, yet conflict over the issue persisted for years. As a result of the abrupt departure of French

colons in 1962 and 1963 (about one million French left within a period of seven or eight months), the city of Algiers experienced a rapid and destabilizing population transfer. Since the French had maintained control of many sectors of the municipal government, Algiers was left with a vacuum in administrative expertise and experience. At the same time, many rural residents flowed into the city seeking employment, resulting in a continuous increase in the urban population. While the primary character of the Sahel did not immediately change, green space within the city did disappear as parks and public gardens were developed for new housing.28 Despite government attempts at urban planning to account growth in the recent past, political upheavals, economic problems, and social changes have negated the impact. The suburbs have grown erratically and sometimes illegally, with a resulting loss of parkland and haphazard development in the hills surrounding the old city.29

For decades following independence, efforts to break away from its colonial past defined Algerian national identity. The classification of new monuments for safeguarding overwhelmingly prioritized archaeological sites from prehistory and antiquity. In the 1990s, however, government officials took important steps toward recognizing and protecting a broader array country’s cultural heritage, including heritage attached to the Ottoman and French presence. The Casbah was inscribed as a UNESCO World Heritage Site in 1992, and in 1998, the president passed a new law (Law 98-04) that established regulations for identifying and registering historic sites and defining the rules for their protection. Since that time, conservation efforts have expanded to better reflect the extent and richness of the country’s national historic heritage.30

26. Çelik, Urban Forms and Colonial Confrontations, 45-46.

27. Grabar, “Reclaiming the City: Changing Urban Meaning in Algiers after 1962,” 391.

28. Ibid. 398.

29. Çelik, Urban Forms and Colonial Confrontations, 79-80; Azzeddine Bellout, “Monitoring Settlements Growth and Development in Algiers City Eastern Area,” February 17, 2021, Research Square website, https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-187885/v1; Edward Karabenick, “A Postcolonial Rural Landscape: The Algiers Sahel,” Yearbook of the Association of Pacific Coast Geographers 53 (1991), 98-99.

30. Abdeloushed Oukebdane, et al., “A Critical Review on the Classification Process of Historical Monuments in Algeria,” Conservation Science in Cultural Heritage 21, no. 1 (2021), 149-166.

Figure 1.2.7

Development plan for the city of Algiers, 1930. The Villa Montfeld (circled in red) is located at the far western edge of the Mustapha Supérieur, zoned for “pleasure dwellings.”

1.2. Historical Background & Context / CMR (cont’d)

RESIDENTIAL ARCHITECTURE OF ALGIERS

Islamic Heritage

Islamic architecture refers to the built heritage “made by or for people who lived under rulers who professed the faith of Islam or in social and cultural entities which, whether themselves Muslim or not, have been strongly influenced by the modes of life and thought characteristic of Islam.”31 Faced with the complex interplay of theological, sociological, economic, political, and technological factors that this heritage represents, historian Ernst Grube has identified a list of key qualities that sets Islamic architecture apart. The first, he writes, is its inward-oriented focus. While the most common expression of this quality is the Muslim house, which is organized around an interior courtyard and often presents a windowless wall to the outside world, it also translates to public and religious buildings. The second key quality is the absence of a specific architectural form for a specific function. In other words, he writes, “an Islamic building does not automatically reveal, by its form, the function it serves.”32 The third quality is the emphasis on decorative expression of interior spaces. Decorative treatments, with the exception of the dome and entrance portal, are reserved for the interior, and exterior articulation is minimal. Grube theorizes that the principal purpose of Islamic decoration is to dissolve or negate all elements that emphasize or express the structure — the walls, the vaults, the columns to focus attention on space. Another important characteristic of Islamic architecture is its organic quality. Buildings rarely have a balanced plan or axial arrangement, and additions are never bound by symmetry or an inherent directionality.

Islamic architecture uses of a multitude of decorative treatments (mosaics, stone, stucco, tiles, painted polychrome) and a rich selection of designs, with the main elements being epigraphic, geometric, and foliated. On interior and, less frequently, exterior surfaces, decoration is typically controlled by primary and

secondary grids, which create rectangular or square panels. Another organizational unit is the mihrāb motif an arched niche, either deeply recessed or shallow, contained in a rectangular frame. Epigraphic decoration might use cursive or kufic script, a style of Arabic script preferred for architectural decoration. Foliation might be realistic or stylized into intricate patterns as part of arabesque decoration. The star, whether six points, eight, sixteen or more, is a fundamental shape in Islamic geometric design, and intricate geometric patterns are used to cover flat as well as curved surfaces. Decorative motifs might be repeated at different scales on the same wall or used interchangeably from one medium to another, creating sumptuous and exuberant spaces. The use of perforated screens or grilles (claustra) decorated with colored glass added another dimension to these highly decorated surfaces by projecting a secondary pattern over floors and walls.33

Although Islamic architecture encompasses a broad spectrum of vernacular dwelling types, common characteristics can be identified. The Islamic house is an introverted form reflecting the emphasis on domestic privacy in Islamic culture. The courtyard house is an ancient vernacular expression of this form in which the walls of the house enclose an open courtyard, allowing for outdoor activities while offering protection from wind, dust, sun and demarcating public and private life. Entry into an Islamic house is usually indirect. The main door leads to a vestibule or passage that is connected to the domestic quarters by a right angle turn so that is it impossible to see inside from outside. Interior rooms are not allotted to a specific activity, but rather are used interchangeably for eating, sleeping, recreation, and domestic tasks, and the use of cushions, mats, and rugs that can be easily rolled up and stored or moved reflect this flexibility. Rooms of an Islamic house often feature open niches or storage cupboards built into the walls.34

The urban houses found in the Casbah of Algiers embody many of these traits. Dwellings are highly interiorized,

31. Richard Ettinghausen, Islamic Art and Architecture 650-1250 (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2001), 3.

32. George Mitchell, ed., Architecture of the Islamic World: Its History and Social Meaning (London: Thames & Hudson, 1978), 12-13.

33. Ibid., 144-164.

34. Ibid., 184-200.

Figure 1.2.8

Photochrome print the Casbah circa 1890-1900. Note the decorated entry portals, corbeled alcoves, wood struts, and window grilles that characterize the exterior walls of its urban dwellings. (Prints and Photographs Division, Library of Congress)

reflecting the importance of family privacy and gender separation. The typical urban house does not have many exterior windows, relying instead on a central courtyard for light and ventilation. Houses share a similar plan whether they are modest or palatial. The entry hall, or sqîfa, creates a bent axis that kept the interior of the house out of view. Benches (doukana) embedded in the side walls of the sqîfa give visitors a place to rest while awaiting entry. The courtyard, or wast al-dār, is the heart of the home. It is located as centrally as possible on the lot, open to the sky, and typically surrounded by arcades on the ground floor and upper level. The rooms surrounding the courtyard are rectangular, and, if they face the street, an alcove (k’bou) might be built into the wall facing the door. This is materialized on the exterior wall by a corbel, sometimes supported with wood struts (Figure 1.2.8). In large houses, the alcove might be replaced by an ancillary space (iwān) topped with a cupola, creating a T-shaped room. The open courtyard facilitates the movement of air through the house, and its proportions create a microclimate that was reinforced by use of plants and water features, such as a fountain (Figures 1.2.9 through and 1.2.11). Galleries surrounding the courtyard opening provide shade and prevent the sun from hitting internal walls (Figure 1.2.12). Large doors around the courtyard are mounted so that they can be opened flat against the wall, maximizing ventilation. Each leaf contains a smaller door, used when the house is to kept warm. The courtyard also functions as a hybrid indoor/outdoor gathering space that affords members of the household tranquility, safety, and privacy from the urban environment. Roof terraces are another standard element of the Algerian house. Richly decorated interiors contrast strongly with the austere exteriors. Frequently, exterior ornament is limited to door openings, which might feature elaborate, carved stone surrounds.35

Algerian Djnâyan

As discussed previously, during the Ottoman period, the Algerian elite built country houses, known as djnâyan, along the ridges and slopes of the Sahel. These houses

resembled, in plan, the urban houses of the Casbah, but the availability of space made it possible to extend the dwelling into the landscape with ancillary rooms, large exterior courtyards that were either walled or surrounded by covered arcades, and terraces that extended down the hillsides. In addition to the main house, these rural estates might include a guest house (douèra), freestanding pavilions for enjoying the outdoors (riyādh), a guardhouse at the entrance to the property, or other outbuildings.

Like urban houses, the main residence (dâr) of a country estate was organized around a central courtyard surrounded by arcaded galleries. In the summer months, the courtyard, or wast al-dār, functioned to keep the house cool and well ventilated. During the day, the galleries facing the courtyard shaded the interior walls, protecting them from direct sun. At the same time, the open construction of the courtyard encouraged the movement of air. Small openings in the upper walls of the interior rooms, often fitted with decorative grilles or claustra, helping keep the house cool by allowing for the natural ventilation of warm air. At night, the courtyard allowed cool air to enter the house, and doors facing the courtyard could be fully opened to encourage the ventilation of adjacent rooms. During the winter months, the high thermal capacity of the house’s thick masonry walls helped keep it warm. In contrast with the urban house form, the floor plan of a country house would frequently incorporate iwān, small ancillary rooms off the main rooms that were covered with octagonal domes. Windows in the iwān caught prevailing winds in the summer, and small openings in the dome allowed for the release of warm air. Since these were freestanding houses, there were a greater number of window openings and both windows and doors were larger than those in the city.36 The window openings featured wrought-iron grilles. An example of such a property is the Villa Abd-el-Tif (Figures 1.2.13 through 1.2.15). Constructed in the middle of the seventeenth century in a wooded area on the hillside, it exemplifies the features of the Ottoman period djnân

35. Federico Cresti, “Algiers in the Ottoman Period: The City and Its Population,” in The City in the Islamic World, ed. Salma K. Jayyusi, vol. 1 (Boston: Brill, 2008), 407–43; Gwendolyn Peck, “The Casbah of Algiers: Cultural Heritage as a Political Tool” (master’s thesis, University of Virginia, 2016), 4; Lila Adli-Chebaiki and Naima Chabbi-Chemrouk, “Vernacular Housing in Algiers: A Semantic and Passive Architecture,” International Journal of Design and Nature and Ecodynamics 10, no. 2 (2015), 154-164.

36. L. Adli-Chebaiki and N. Chabbi-Chemrouk, “Vernacular Housing in Algiers,” 154-156.

Figure 1.2.10

Courtyard of the Dar Mustapha Pacha, built in 1798-99 and located in the Casbah of Algiers, 2022. The main door of the palace opens to a multichambered entry hall, or sqîfa, which leads indirectly to the courtyard. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.2.9

Late nineteenth-century view of the interior courtyard of the Palace of the Archbishops. (Prints and Photographs Division, Library of Congress)

Figure 1.2.11

This depiction of the Djenina Palace in Algiers by the nineteenth-century Orientalist artist Paul Lapra provides a sense of how natural light, water elements, and plant materials contributed to the function and character of the courtyard space. (Bouzid, Algeria Palaces and Splendid Residences)

Figure 1.2.12

Late nineteenth-century photograph of a woman standing in the gallery overlooking the courtyard of a house in Algiers. Note how the gallery shades the interior walls of the house. (Prints and Photographs Division, Library of Congress)

1.2. Historical Background & Context / CMR (cont’d)

The seventeenth-century Villa Abd-el-Tif possesses all the features of a typical djnân, including a principal residence and other buildings enclosing a courtyard, a riyādh, or gallery, water features, a well, and a guest house. (Adli-Chebaiki and Chabbi-Chemrouk, “Vernacular Housing in Algiers”)

The open courtyard (here spelled west-ed dar) of the Villa Abd-el-Tif helped ventilate the rooms around it. (Adli-Chebaiki and Chabbi-Chemrouk, “Vernacular Housing in Algiers)

Figure 1.2.13

Figure 1.2.14

1.2. Historical Background & Context / CMR (cont’d)

Figure 1.2.15

Richard Maguet, View from the Villa Abd-el-Tif (Vue de la villa Abd-ef-Tif), ca. 1932. (Vidal-Bué, L’Algérie des peintres, 1830-1960)

In terms of construction, these houses were load-bearing, brick masonry structures laid with lime-based mortar. Foundations might incorporate rubble stone into the walls for extra stability. The thermal mass of masonry construction minimized temperature extremes within the house, and limewash coatings on the exterior walls and roofs reflected solar radiation. Ceilings and floors were vaulted or post-and-beam construction with wood beams and joists set directly into thick walls. Arches on columns were used to support long spans of large interior spaces. Roofs were predominately flat with low parapets that functioned as railings. Exterior walls integrated two types of conduits flues for the evacuation of smoke from oil lamps and pipe drains for channeling rainwater from roof terraces to underground reservoirs. As water passed through the internal conduits, it cooled the rooms. Some houses incorporated small, domed spaces. The most commonly used dome form was a ribbed, hemispheric dome with eight panels assembled on an octagonal base. The base of the domes featured horizontal belts made up of chains of logs. On February 3, 1716, Algiers was rocked by a devastating earthquake that destroyed many homes, palaces, and mosques. The earthquake resistant construction techniques that emerged after the earthquake included inserting wood logs as longitudinal ties within masonry walls and rows of logs at the base of arches to absorb rotational movements (Figure 1.2.16).37

Nineteenth- and early twentieth-century travelogues and memoires written about Algiers are full of evocative descriptions of the djnâyan that graced the hills of the Sahel. Eugène Fromentin, a French painter and writer, who published, in 1857, a travel diary of his visits to Algeria in the 1840s and 1850s, wrote about the landscape fringing the city and the houses he observed there. On a visit in December 1852, he observed: “I ended my day among the trees, looking at Turkish houses. There is a whole part of the hills where these elegant buildings are in great number. They can be seen here and there over the foliage, at a very small distance from each other, and so well surrounded that each of them seems to have its own park. They are all

L.

Figure 1.2.16

Logs placed at the base of an arch to absorb movement caused by earthquakes. (L. Adli-Chebaiki, et al., “Vernacular Housing in Algiers: A Semantic and Passive Architecture”)

37.

Adli-Chebaiki and N. Chabbi-Chemrouk, “Vernacular Housing in Algiers,” 154-164; Nadjiba-Kheira Drioueche-Djaalali, “Traditional Construction Techniques of Domes in the Kasbah of Algiers (1500-1800),” Construction History 32, no. 2 (2017), 1-18; Drioueche Nadjiba and Naima Chabbi-Chemrouk, “The Role of Traditional Know-how in Sustaining Urban Environments: The Casbah of Algiers,” Procedia Engineering 21 (2011), 1132-1135.

1.2. Historical Background & Context / CMR (cont’d)

built in a picturesque situation, on an echelon of wooded slopes, and all of them look out over the sea. As you stand on this vast amphitheatre, regularly arranged in terraces, you can imagine the beautiful and great view enjoyed by the inhabitants of these beautiful residences.”38

Moorish Revival Style in Algiers

The large influx of European and American visitors to areas like Mustapha Supérieur and el-Biar beginning in the mid-nineteenth century and continuing through the early twentieth contributed to its urbanization and altered the character of its residential architecture. While some hivernants (winterers) valued the authenticity of and were content living in Ottoman-period dwellings, many others saw fit to renovate existing buildings or build new houses, bringing their own ideas about architecture to the Sahel. This especially affected the internal layout of houses. Whereas in a typical Islamic house, the primary space and “heart” of the dwelling was the interior courtyard, European sensibilities introduced large, carefully appointed spaces that were given equal importance in the floor plan and were assigned specific functions.

Continental and North American visitors, however, were often deeply affected by the exotic aspects of the existing architecture and landscape and saw no reason to replace its decorative motifs with imitations of the buildings of their homeland. This interest in and appreciation of the art, architecture, language, and history of what was broadly defined as “the East” meaning Asia and the Middle East, but also North Africa is often subsumed into an art, literature, and cultural category known as Orientalism. During the nineteenth century, painters from many nations came to Algiers to record their impressions of the exotic people, costumes, and customs of the locals. In his book Orientalism, Edward Said, a PalestinianAmerican professor at Columbia University, saw in the romanticizing of “the East” a persistent prejudice that helped justify colonizing its people.39

In architecture, “homage” to native buildings could take the form of restoring existing Ottoman-period djnâyan or creating new Moorish Revival designs using the forms of the Algerian villa. The Moorish Revival (or Neo-Moorish) style was one of many revival styles adopted by architects of Europe and the Americas in the nineteenth century that reflected a growing interest in medieval architecture together with a rejection of Neoclassicism. It reached the height of its popularity in Europe after the mid-nineteenth century and was strongly linked to the decorative arts and a flourishing academic interest in the art and architecture of Andalusia. Welsh architect Owen Jones was one of the most influential design theorists of the nineteenth century. Working with French architect Jules Goury, Jones spent months studying and meticulously documenting the Alhambra outside the city of Granada, Spain, one of the most influential examples of Moorish architecture. He published his research in a highly influential book titled Plans, Elevations, Sections and Details of the Alhambra (Figure 1.2.17), which helped stimulate wide interest in Islamic architecture. His 1856 book The Grammar of Ornament also became a seminal design sourcebook for architects interested in NeoMoorish and other revival styles.

To imbue these colonial-era residences (and their associated gardens) with authenticity, architects and builders salvaged original materials and features from buildings in the Casbah and elsewhere to reuse in the new construction. New construction might feature elegant tile panels made in the Qallālīn workshops of Tunis, which featured distinctive green, blue, and yellow pigments. Carved stone courtyard columns and carved stone door surrounds, often featuring crescent moon, floral, and six-pointed or eight-pointed star motifs, were reused in courtyard arcades and at door openings. Interior wood doors featuring elaborate geometric panels known as qâyam-nâyam were retrofitted in new openings, or their design reproduced for niche cupboards. Reclaimed wall and floor tiles were also used to decorate the interior surfaces of European and American homes.

38. Eugène Fromentin, Une année dans le Sahel (Paris, M. Lévy frères, 1859), 89-90, translated by S. Chergui.

39. M.C. Thomas, “Orientalism,” Encyclopedia Britannica, https://www.britannica.com/science/Orientalism-cultural-field-of-study, accessed January 9, 2023; John MacKenzie, Orientalism: History, Theory and the Arts (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1995), 62-67.

Figure 1.2.17

This plate of the Hall of the Two Sisters appears in Plans, Elevations, Sections, and Details of the Alhambra published by Owen Jones and Jules Goury in 1842. (Jones and Goury, Plans, Elevations, Sections, and Details of the Alhambra, available from Smithsonian Libraries)

The architects of Moorish Revival buildings in Algiers, and especially in the Sahel, were likely to have been trained in Europe, given French command over such positions in Algeria at this time. Builders, artisans, and contractors were likely to be colons as well. The British architect Benjamin Bucknall, who settled in Algiers in the fall of 1878, was a practitioner of the Moorish Revival style and developed a client base in the Sahel. A colleague of and collaborator with Bucknall was the Algerian contractor Barthélémy Vidal. (See text below for additional information on Bucknall and Vidal.)

One important distinction between Ottoman and French colonial construction was structural. One of the construction methods in common use in new buildings erected during this period was known as plancher à voûtains vaulted floors. The technique employed iron or steel “I” beams as floor joists connected with low vaults of solid or hollow bricks which landed on the flat surface of the beams. Floors were laid on top of the vaults and, since the technique was not employed in traditional Algerian architecture, a flat ceiling was often applied to the underside to hide the modern method. This means of constructing floors had begun to be used widely in France in the middle of the nineteenth century to exploit the potential new methods of producing iron and steel. It continued to be used in France until World War II.40 While the precise dating of its use in Algeria is not known, it is assumed that it was introduced not long after it began to be used across the Mediterranean and continued for the same period of time. It is referred to by current architectural historians and preservation specialists in Algeria as “French construction.”

RESIDENTIAL GARDENS AND LANDSCAPES OF ALGIERS

Elements of Islamic Gardens

In the history of Islamic landscapes, the archetypal formal garden plan is the so-called chahar bagh, a four-part garden laid out with axial walkways that intersect at the garden center. In early examples of this highly structured geometric scheme, the quadrants took the form of shallow expanses of turf for sitting or were sunken below pavement level and planted with a careful arrangement of flowers or shrubs to produce a colorful “carpet” effect when seen from above. Water channels, or runnels, and fountains, arranged symmetrically or axially within the four-part form, were a key element of the garden. They served the practical purpose of irrigation and added to its sensory experience (Figure 1.2.18). Another typical water element was the chadar, a stone or marble chute, sometimes with a textured surface, used to create a gentle cascade. The quadripartite plan of the Court of the Lions in the Alhambra, which dates to the Nasrid period (1232-1492) demonstrates the form. It features a central fountain, in this case composed of a large basin resting on the backs of twelve lions, and axial runnels that intersect at the fountain to create a four-part arrangement (Figure 1.2.19). According to landscape historian Dede Fairchild Ruggles, while the chahar bagh is typical, it should not be considered ubiquitous. Variations of the four-part plan might include a single, long rectangular bed with a central watercourse, a paved courtyard with a fountain, a sunken basin surrounded by potted plants, or multiple beds aligned on terraces carved into a sloping hillside.41 The Court of the Myrtles at the Alhambra, for example, is a courtyard garden with a large, rectangular central pool that receives its water from fountains at either end. It also dates to the Nasrid period.

The earliest surviving Islamic gardens, which date to the seventh to the mid-tenth century, were enclosed by walls. Trellises were used to create “living walls” and provided a

40. Antoine Le Bas, Architectures de Brique en Île-de-France, 1850-1950 (Paris: Somogy, 2014), 112-114.

41. D. Fairchild Ruggles, Islamic Gardens and Landscapes (Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2008), 39, 44, 74, 131.

Figure 1.2.18

Painted manuscript depicting the Mughal emperor Babur (1483-1530) overseeing the lay out of the Garden of Fidelity at Kabul. The garden was divided into four quadrants by intersecting runnels, bordered with orange and pomegranate trees, and surrounded by a wall. (Victoria and Albert Museum, London)

Figure 1.2.20

A drawing of the Karabali Garden in Istanbul made by a visitor in 1608. (Wikipedia, Creative Commons)

Figure 1.2.19

A nineteenth-century photograph of the Alhambra’s Court of the Lions. As part of a recent restoration of the Islamic courtyard, marble pavers were installed in the four quadrants surrounding the fountain, returning it to its late fifteenth-century appearance. (Library of Congress, Prints and Photographs Division)

structure for the display of flowers or fruit. Another typical feature was an outdoor seating pavilion, or riyādh, which provided a place to relax and offered shelter from the elements. In palace gardens, the pavilion might be placed in the center of the chahar bagh, as an expression of power. The fluid relationship between architecture and landscape, with structures such as arcaded porches forming an integrating element, was another important design consideration.42

Gardens of the Islamic world were made to appeal to the senses. Fragrant flowers, fruits, or herbaceous borders perfumed the air. A trickling fountain, rustling branches, and the presence of birds animated the garden with sounds. The smooth feel of tile or marble surfaces appealed to the sense of touch, as did the feel of running water. Fruit trees rewarded one’s sense of taste and smell, and everywhere sight was rewarded with contrasting colors, the interplay of light and shade, and reflections on water. The Muslim conception of paradise is a perfect garden where the faithful dwell in eternity. Ruggles argues, however, that a garden divided into four parts does not reflect a specifically Muslim conception of paradise. Rather, the description of paradise in the Qu’ran reflects a pre-existing garden form and vocabulary.43

Ottoman gardens were more sensitive to the natural topography of their sites and generally did not impose an artificial grid on the landscape.44 An unusual example of the chahar bagh plan in an Ottoman garden was built in the early sixteenth century near the Topkapı Palace in Istanbul. Known as the Karabali Garden, it featured intersecting axial paths broad enough for the passage of three horses and was entirely surrounded by a double row of cypress trees that formed an oval around the garden quadrants (Figure 1.2.20). The Ottoman-era djnâyan built on the foothills surrounding Algiers were often sprawling estates with extensive gardens watered by a multitude of springs. Located high above sea level, the gardens provided a healthy retreat, a place of refuge, and captivating views. They also served as a demonstration of

the wealth and status of their owners. Characteristic elements included courtyards, terraces, pavilions, trellises, and ornamental water features, as well as orchards and vegetable gardens. Irrigation systems might include wells, waterwheels (or noria), aqueducts, irrigation canals, ponds, and cisterns. These properties were unfenced; instead, boundaries were marked by hedges of myrtle, hawthorn, aloe, or Barbary figs (prickly pear).45

In her book Six Years Residence in Algiers, Elizabeth Broughton, daughter of Henry Blanckley, who served as British consul general to Algiers starting in 1806, recounted her childhood spent in Algeria. In her memoir, she writes about the courtyard of their country house, and one can discern in her description the underlying influence of Islamic gardens and identify key features characterizing the gardens of Ottoman djnâyan. “On one side of the courtyard,” she writes, “was a very pretty little garden in which grew five very tall orange trees giving the best fruit in the country, both for its size and its remarkable taste. Just before leaving, we had planted banana trees there, next to a channel formed by the water that overflowed from a large marble fountain.” She continues, “Along the three sides of the courtyard, there were flowerbeds maintained by low brick walls three to four feet high, which as well as those surrounding the courtyard, were whitewashed.” She also describes a trellis “that supported the branches of a magnificent vine, which took root in the flowerbeds.”46 Broughton also provides a description of the road that led to their country house: “The road…was bordered on both sides by high and thick hedges, impenetrable to both men and animals. They were double: there was a first row of plants called prickly pears and a second of aloes, whose giant flowers could not exceed their beauty in the landscape. On the other side of these enclosures, there were vast fields of wheat and barley.”47

42. D. Fairchild Ruggles, Islamic Gardens and Landscapes (Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2008), 42, 44.

43. Ibid., 89.

44. Ibid., 50.

45. Chabbi-Chemrouk and Hocine, “Reuse of Djenane Abd-el-Tif, An Emblematic Islamic Garden in Algiers,” 135.

46. Alain Blondy, Six ans de résidence à Alger Par Mrs. Broughton (Editions Bouchène, 2011), 214-15, translated by S. Chergui.

47. Ibid., 212, translated by S. Chergui.

In November 1852, while staying in Mustapha Supérieur neighborhood, the French artist and writer Eugène Fromentin described the garden of his house, writing, “I almost have two gardens. One is small, enclosed by walls, planted with roses, orange trees, rubber trees, and high foliage trees that will lend me shade…My second garden is, strictly speaking, only a parterre enclosed in a meadow that recent rains have made a little green, and which is beginning to be filled with wild mallows.”48 In a separate diary entry the same year, he describes the garden’s water features, including the “hollow marble gullies, where the water meanders and draws mobile arabesques” and a “vast cistern where the water is no more than a meter high, paved with the finest white marble and opened by arches over an empty horizon.”49 He also provides a vivid description of the djnâyan scattered across the hillsides. “There is a whole part of the hills where these elegant buildings are in great number. They can be seen here and there over the foliage, at a very small distance from each other, and so well surrounded that each of them seems to have its own park. They are all built in a picturesque situation, on an echelon of wooded slopes, and all of them look out over the sea. As you stand on this vast amphitheater, regularly arranged in terraces, you can imagine the beautiful and great view enjoyed by the inhabitants of these beautiful residences,” he writes.50

The Djnân Abd-el-Tif, located in Bab Azzoun on the outskirts of Algiers, is considered one of the best remaining examples of the city’s Ottoman-era country houses and one in which the Islamic-style garden has survived. Built sometime before 1715, the buildings and structures that comprised the estate, which included the main house, a guest house (douèra), and several ancillary buildings, were all organized around and oriented toward the garden, which features fountains, an ornamental pond, and terraces (Figure 1.2.21).51

European Trends and Influences

During the last decades of the Victorian period in England, the cottage garden became the model for gardeners who rejected the formality of the Gardenesque, an early nineteenth-century style championed by botanist and garden designer John Claudius Loudon and characterized by displayed plants, exotics, and elaborate parterres. In the tradition of the Picturesque, the cottage garden “began with a premise in which a delight of the natural sets the scene,” and featured compositions of plants that were intermingled and sometimes intertwined, as in the wild.52 The practitioner most associated with the English cottage garden style was William Robinson, an Irish gardener and journalist, whose seminal work, The English Flower Garden, published in 1883, attracted a wide readership and ran to sixteen editions. Often associated with the Arts and Crafts movement, Robinson’s cottage garden style promoted rock gardens, wild gardening, herbaceous borders, and naturalistic effects. A frequent collaborator of Robinson’s was Gertrude Jekyll, the garden designer and artist who built a successful design practice with the architect Edwin Lutyens.53 Jekyll was known for her painterly approach to garden design, creating schemes that favored shapes, textures, and broad masses of color. She wrote several books, was the author of the chapter on color in Robinson’s The English Flower Garden, and became a contributor to Country Life magazine in 1901.

Concurrent with the development of the English cottage garden style was a resurgence of interest in Italianate gardens, with their broad terraces, staircases with balusters, and urn-shaped finals, and in ornamental French parterre de broderie. Yet another important source of influence on garden design in the late Victorian period was Reginald Bloomfield, an architect by training, who advocated for a return to design formality in the English garden. “To suppose that love of nature is shown by trying to produce the effects of wild nature on a small scale in a garden is clearly absurd,” he wrote.54

48. Fromentin, Une année dans le Sahel, 13-14, translated by S. Chergui.

49. Ibid., 91, translated by S. Chergui.

50. Ibid., 77-79, translated by S. Chergui.

51. Chabbi-Chemrouk and Hocine, “Reuse of Djenane Abd-el-Tif, An Emblematic Islamic Garden in Algiers,” 136.

52. Elizabeth Barlow Rogers, Landscape: A Cultural and Architectural History (New York, NY: Harry N. Abrams, Inc., 2001), 378; Monique Mosser and Georves Teyssot, eds., The History of Garden Design: The Western Tradition from the Renaissance to the Present Day (London, Thames & Hudson, 1991), 424-25.

53. Lutyens designed the British Ambassador’s Residence in Washington, D.C.

54. Rogers, Landscape: A Cultural and Architectural History, 379-383.

Figure 1.2.21

The ornamental pond and arcaded garden pavilion at the Djnân Abd-el-Tif. (Wikipedia, Creative Commons, Till Vallee)

1.2. Historical Background & Context / CMR (cont’d)

OWNERS OF THE CHIEF OF MISSION RESIDENCE

A Period of Speculation, 1837–1862

There is scant information on the ownership history of the country estate in Mustapha Supérieur that would later become the site of the CMR until 1837, when, according to a history of US embassy properties in Algeria prepared by former Ambassador Christopher Ross, it was sold to a French citizen. Ross describes the pre-1837 owners as “various Moors and Morresses [sic],” which may be a phrase taken from legal documents of the time. He also notes that these may have been multiple heirs of one owner.56 This was during a time when French colonists were expropriating the country estates of many Ottoman elite. The property’s hillside location in the Mustapha Supérieur neighborhood also made it an attractive piece of real estate. Over the next twenty-six years, title to the property would be transferred seven more times, on each occasion to a French national. The frequency in which the property traded hands was not unusual for the period. Francis Pulszky, in his history of the early colonial period noted, “Some of these splendid residences have often changed proprietors, each of them selling it as a premium to some new-comer, as there were always speculators enough, who, in the believe that the epoch of great European immigration had arrived, disproportionally enhanced the prices…”57

British Occupants of the Villa, 1863–1932

In 1863, the English merchant Archibald Briggs purchased the property, which at the time featured a “large dwelling house” built by the previous owner on the site of an earlier “Moorish-style house.”58 Briggs was one of a wave of European and American visitors who came to Algiers in the middle of the nineteenth century for its temperate weather and exotic locale.

The Briggs family had its origins in Yorkshire, England, where it amassed a fortune in the coal mining industry

during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. The family firm, Henry Briggs, Son & Co., which operated the Whitwood and Methley Junction Collieries, became a pioneer in the profit-sharing movement that developed in England in the 1860s.59 Beginning in 1865, the firm changed its corporate structure from a privately owned operation to a join stock limited liability company, making shares available to its employees and creating profit incentives. Archibald Briggs was promoted to secretary of the firm for the purpose of carrying out the experiment. His brother, Henry Currer Briggs, served as managing director until the death of their father, at which time he became chairman and Archibald resumed the responsibilities of managing director. Archibald retained the title of managing director of Henry Briggs, Son & Co. until 1876, when the health of his family obliged him to move abroad. He published an essay on the firm’s experience with the profit-sharing movement in the book Profit-Sharing between Capital and Labour, published in 1884.60

While the specific reason for Briggs’ move to Algiers in 1863 is unknown, health may have been a factor, as it was the reason for his 1876 move abroad. Briggs’ decision to sell the Algiers estate after only three years of ownership was likely due to professional and familial responsibilities related to Henry Briggs, Son & Co., of which, by that time, he was managing director.

The next owner of the property was Anna Leigh Smith (1831–1918), a British citizen who, for years prior, had made Algiers her winter home as a guest of her sister, Barbara Leigh Smith Bodichon, who owned an Ottomanera country house on 12 acres in the Mustapha Supérieur neighborhood.

Born in Sussex, England, in 1831, Anna Leigh Smith was one of five extra-marital children of Benjamin Leigh Smith (1783–1860), a Whig politician, and Anne Longden, a milliner. Her family history is full of remarkable and wellaccomplished men and women. Her grandfather, William Smith, was a member of Parliament and a radical

56. Ross, “American Embassy Properties in Algiers: Their Origins and History,” 16.

57. Pulszky, The Tricolor on the Atlas, 43-44.

58. Ross, “American Embassy Properties in Algiers: Their Origins and History,” 15-16.

59. Leeds University Library, Special Collections Finding Aid, “K. M. Briggs Collection, Special Collections MS 1309,” available at https://explore.library. leeds.ac.uk/multimedia/17151/157MS1309Briggs.pdf; R. A. Church, “Profit-Sharing and Labour Relations in England in the Nineteenth Century,” International Review of Social History 16, no. 1 (1971), 3.

60. Sedley Taylor, Profit-Sharing between Capital and Labour (London: Kegan Paul, Trench & Co, 1884), 131-132; Ross, “American Embassy Properties in Algiers: Their Origins and History,” 16.

Figure 1.2.22

Barbara Leigh Smith Bodichon painted many scenes of the Sahel, including this panoramic view from her country house, which was known as Campagne du Pavillon (formerly Campagne Pougnet). This painting (date unknown) is titled Nonnes travaillant dans notre champ, avec vue sur le port d’Alger (Nuns working in our field, with a view of the port of Algiers). (M. Vidal-Bué, L’Algérie des peintres 1830-1960, 15)

Historical Background & Context / CMR (cont’d)

abolitionist. Florence Nightingale was her cousin. Her father, a politician and philanthropist with radical views, sent all of his children to local schools, despite being a member of the landed gentry, and gave each an annual income of equal share when they reached adulthood rather than favoring his male progeny. One of her brothers, Benjamin Smith (1828–1913), was an Arctic explorer, but the most well-known member of her immediate family was her sister, Barbara Leigh Smith Bodichon (1827–1891), a renowned nineteenth-century feminist, women’s rights advocate, publisher, and founder of Girton College, Cambridge. Barbara made her first trip to Algiers in 1856, where she met Eugène Bodichon, a French physician, whom she married the following year (Figure 1.2.22). For many years Barbara divided her time between Britain and Algiers.61

Anna Leigh Smith, known to her friends and family as Annie or Nannie, was described as “a woman of stern intellectual vigor and an unwavering kindness.”62 In December 1856, Anna and her sister were visited in Algiers by George MacDonald, the Scottish author, poet, and minister, who described the pair as “rather fast, devil-may-care sort of girls…not altogether to our taste, but very pleasant…one of them (Anna) who is in poor health, is more sweet and womanly.”63 Finding MacDonald’s judgement of the Leigh Smiths somewhat unsympathetic, his biographer (and son), offered up the following explanation: “The intimacy with women so well read and cosmopolitan as the Leigh-Smiths, and belonging to an order of free-thinking intelligence different from any [MacDonald] had yet had intimacies with, offered, I conceive, a new outlook.”64

Anna Leigh Smith was wealthy, liberal minded, and unconventional, and, like her sister, she was an artist and a key figure in the women’s movement. She sat on the board and helped finance the English Woman’s Journal, a monthly journal co-founded by Barbara in 1858 dedicated to female employment and equality issues.65 She also contributed several chapters to Algeria; Considered as a

Winter Residence for the English, a guidebook published in 1858 by her sister from the offices of English Woman’s Journal Anna Leigh Smith was thirty-five years old when she purchased a djnân immediately north of her sister’s property, which she christened “Mountfield” after one of her family’s estates in Sussex, England. The anglicized spelling was soon dropped in favor of the French “Montfeld,” and the property was known for many years as Campagne Montfeld. She shared her home at Campagne Montfeld with her companion, Isabella Blythe, using it on a seasonal basis until about 1890.66

Anna Leigh Smith made significant changes to the roughly 5-acre property she purchased in 1866, including building the house that now functions as the CMR and reimagining the gardens and grounds. Indeed, close study of the CMR suggests that the residence as it stands today may be the result of three separate building campaigns, all carried out during the Anna Leigh Smith ownership period (1866-1909). Leigh Smith worked with the English architect Benjamin Bucknall and contractor Barthélémy Vidal, although questions remain about the exact timing of their involvement and the extent of the interventions. (Analysis of the architectural and landscape development of the CMR is covered in Chapter 3.)

Architect Benjamin Bucknall

Benjamin Joseph Bucknall (1833–1895) was born in 1833 near the town of Stroud, which played a key role during the Industrial Revolution as a manufacturing center for broadcloth. Stroud is located in Gloucestershire County at the western edge of the Cotswolds, a region of southwest England known for its honey-colored limestone buildings. Benjamin was the fifth of seven sons of Edwin Bucknall, an accountant and bank and insurance agent, and Mary Clissold Bucknall, whose family had long been in the wool trade. At the age of 18, he started working as an apprentice to a millwright, a profession that required knowledge of mechanics, practical engineering, and construction. In 1852, Bucknall and his two younger

61. Girton College Archives, Finding Aid, “Personal Papers of Barbara Leigh Smith Bodichon,” available at https://archiveshub.jisc.ac.uk/search/archives/7357bcf3-2755-33f7-9e47-9193d56b8c1f; Encyclopedia Britannica, “Barbara Leigh Smith Bodichon,” available at https://www.britannica. com/biography/Barbara-Leigh-Smith-Bodichon;

62. Greville MacDonald, George MacDonald and His Wife (London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd.), 269.

63. Ibid., 270.

64. Ibid., 271

65. Sharon R. Gordon, “Representations of Feminist and Lesbian Consciousness and the Use of Subversive Strategies in Selected Poetry of Isabella Jane Blagden” (Ph.D. diss, Edinburgh Napier University, 2016), 55, footnotes 1 and 2.

1.2. Historical Background & Context / CMR (cont’d)

brothers converted to Catholicism, and through connections within the religious community he was introduced to and began to work for Charles Francis Hansom, an architect based in nearby Bristol. Hansom had built his reputation as an architect of ecclesiastical and collegiate buildings in the Gothic Revival style, and one of his patrons was William Leigh, who had acquired a vast estate called Woodchester Park in Gloucestershire, near Stroud, in 1845, where he endeavored to promote the Catholic church and foster a community of the faithful.67

Leigh had first engaged Charles Hansom in 1846 to prepare drawings and erect a church on the Woodchester Park estate (the Church of the Annunciation, completed in 1849).68 This project was followed by a commission for a Dominican monastery, completed 1853, and a new house, begun about 1857. Benjamin Bucknall, by then a pupil of Charles Hansom, was involved in the design of Woodchester Mansion and assumed responsibility for it sometime after the dissolution of Hansom’s firm, circa 1859–62. Together, the architects designed an imposing Gothic Revival-style mansion, which was designed around a central courtyard and built almost entirely of stone (Figure 1.2.23).

By the time Bucknall took over the design Woodchester Mansion, he had been studying and practicing architecture for about ten years and had developed a keen interest in the work and theories of the French architect Eugène-Emanuel Viollet-le-Duc (1814–1879).

Beginning in the 1840s, through his work for the French Commission of Historic Monuments, Viollet-le-Duc was responsible for the restoration and reconstruction of many of the country’s finest churches and cathedrals, including Notre Dame, the Basilica of Saint-Denis, and Amiens Cathedral. As a scholar of the French Middle Ages, he developed highly influential ideas on the Gothic style, first presented in the Dictionary of French Architecture from the 11th to the 16th Century, published 1854-68. Although Viollet-le-Duc’s restorations would later be criticized for emphasizing reconstruction, in order

to achieve an ideal level of completeness, over the act of preservation, his writings and architectural theories had a lasting impact. In 1861, Bucknall, who had taught himself French in order to study Viollet-le-Duc’s writings, traveled to Paris and was given a meeting with the architect.69

In 1862, Bucknall married Henrietta King, who gave birth to her first daughter the following year, and the couple would go on to have three more children. In 1864, the architect moved with his young family from the Cotswolds to Swansea in southwest Wales, a town experiencing rapid growth and where his two younger brothers were also working as architects and builders. In Swansea, Bucknall went into partnership with an established architect named William Richards, whose local connections resulted in numerous commissions. After two years, Bucknall’s association with Richards ended, and, by 1867, he formed a new firm with Thomas Donnelly. Throughout his time in Wales, Bucknall had continued to work on William Leigh’s Woodchester Mansion. This arrangement came to an end, however, in 1868, when construction abruptly stopped. Leigh had run out of funding for the house, which was left only partially complete, and remains so today.70

Bucknall’s youthful interest in Viollet-le-Duc only grew deeper as he advanced his career, and just over a decade after his first meeting, he visited the architect again, in 1872. This meeting marked the beginning of a long collaboration with Viollet-le-Duc, during which Bucknall translated five of his books into English. Bucknall was instrumental in introducing Viollet-le-Duc to a wider audience and disseminating his theories outside France.

In 1876, Bucknall traveled to Algiers for health reasons and stayed for the winter season. Shortly after, he made the decision to settle permanently there, returning in the fall of 1878 and living in a series of rented villas. Bucknall soon made the acquaintance of Barthélémy Vidal (d. 1880), a master mason who had developed a successful business as a building contractor in el-Biar, the

67. Davenport, Woodchester, A Gothic Vision, Chapters 6 and 12.

Leigh hired Hansom

69. Charles Wethered, “The Late Mr. Bucknall,” Stroud News, December 2, 1895.

70. Davenport, Woodchester, A Gothic Vision, Chapters 6 and 12; and Stephen A. Bucknall, “Benjamin Joseph Bucknall, Disciple of Viollet-le-Duc and His Brothers Robert and Alfred,” in Minerva, Transactions of the Royal Institute

68.

after extensive consultation with the architect Augustus Pugin, who played a pioneering role in promoting the Gothic Revival style and is best known for his work at Westminster Hall in London and as the architect of Big Ben. See Davenport, Woodchester, A Gothic Vision, Chapters 5-6.

of South Wales, Volume 2 (Swansea, Royal Institute of South Wales, 1994), 8-14.

Figure 1.2.23

Woodchester Mansion in Gloucestershire, England, designed by Charles Francis Hansom and Benjamin Bucknall. Construction of the house began in 1858 but was never finished. (Woodchester Mansion Trust, https://www.woodchestermansion.org.uk/ )

1.2. Historical Background & Context / CMR (cont’d)

neighborhood adjoining Mustapha Supérieur, and his son and business partner, also called Barthélémy (1851–1922). Eager to set up an architectural practice, Bucknall embraced the architectural motifs of his adoptive country. He quickly became well known and greatly admired for his Moorish Revival-style residences. These projects included new construction as well as renovations. Bucknall worked often with Vidal, who brought knowledge of local construction techniques and materials, as well as connections to local suppliers and craftsmen. In addition to the Villa Montfeld, Bucknall is credited with designing or renovating the Villa Peyroux, the Villa Arthur (or Djnân el Mufti), the Villa Sisi Salah, the Villa Macleay (or Djnân Ali Rais, now the Japanese Ambassador’s Residence), and the DCMR.71

In 1909, the British lawyer Robert Bevan (d. 1915) purchased the Campagne Montfeld from Anna Leigh Smith. According to the Ross history, Bevan started wintering in Algiers for health reasons since at least 1891 and had been renting Campagne Montfeld from Leigh Smith before purchasing it. When Bevan died of pneumonia at the age of 58, his widow, Constance Helen Ross Bevan, inherited his estate, including the property in Algiers.72

French Ownership Before World War II, 1933–1947

The next transfer of ownership of Campagne Montfeld occurred in 1932, when the executors of Constance Helen Ross Bevan’s estate sold the property to Paul Perrier, founder and president of the French-language dailies Echo d’Oran and La Dépêche algérienne. Perrier was a resident of the Algerian city of Oran, located roughly 250 miles west of Algiers, and it is not clear how or how often he used the estate. Four years later, in 1936, he sold the property to his son and daughter-in-law, Lucien Raoul Perrier and Suzanne Lacanaud Perrier, who were already living in Algiers. According to Ross, it was during the period of the Perrier’s ownership that the name of the property was known simply as “Montfeld.”73

In 1941, Suzanne Perrier hired the Algerian architect Léon Claro (1899-1991) to embellish the gardens at Montfeld.74 Claro, a native of Oran, came from a family of builders and architects. He studied at the School of Fine Arts of Algiers in 1916-17 then moved to Paris to attend the Ecole des Beaux-Arts, matriculating in 1926. In 1927, he won a competition to design the Civic House, completed in 1935, which featured a concert hall, exhibition space, and municipal library. It is now the headquarters of the General Union of Algerian Workers. In 1930, he designed the “Indigenous House,” or “La Maison Indigène,” a model house built at the intersection of the boulevard de la Victoire and rue de la Casbah as part of the celebrations of Algeria’s centennial (Figures 1.2.24 and 1.2.25). This “traditional” house, which utilized many architectural elements salvaged from demolitions in the Casbah, was meant as a demonstration of local building methodologies and materials.75 In 1932, Claro was a founding member of the Algerian group of the Society of Modern Architects. Later commissions included the Tizi-Ouzou hospital in 1952, and a new building for the School of Fine Arts in Algiers in 1950-55, where he served as the head of the architecture workshop from 1940 to 1964.76

CHIEF OF MISSION RESIDENCE AT THE VILLA MONTFELD

US Foreign Service Building Program

Throughout the nineteenth century, with one exception, the US government did not own property abroad and did not provide official consular accommodations or residences for its foreign envoys.77 Instead, it was typical at the time for foreign service officers to rely on personal funds to cover their housing expenses and supplement their income abroad. This led to noticeably uneven representation, ranging from extravagant palaces to modest apartments.78 Critics of this arrangement, which many believed was undemocratic and favored the independently wealthy, began to demand reforms.

71. Davenport, Woodchester, A Gothic Vision, 12.

72. Ross, “American Embassy Properties in Algiers: Their Origins and History,” 17-18.

73. Ibid., 19.

74. Vidal-Bue, Villas et palais d’alger due XVIIIe siècle à nos jours, 239, translated by S. Chergui.

75. Çelik, Urban Forms and Colonial Confrontations, 98-100.

76. “Léon Claro,” Dictionnaire des élèves architectes d l’École des beaux-arts de Paris (1800-1968), published on AGORHA, database of the Istitut national d’histoire de l’art, available at https://agorha.inha.fr/ark:/54721/fea7b4c2-043a-4349-82e7-0646e04dd6ca.

77. Jane C. Loeffler, The Architecture of Diplomacy: Building America’s Embassies, 2d ed. (New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 2011), 13. The exception is the American Legation in Tangier, Morocco, which was given to the United States as a gift in 1821 and is the oldest diplomatic property continuously owned by the United States.

78. Ron Robin, Enclaves of America: The Rhetoric of American Political Architecture Abroad, 1900-1965 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1992), 18.

Figure 1.2.25

Detail of a stair in “La Maison Indigène.” (“Maison mauresque,” L’Afrique du Nord Illustrée, Nouvelle Série, no. 506, January 1931, 10)

Figure 1.2.24

Figure 1.2.24: Façade of “La Maison Indigène” designed by Léon Claro. (“Maison mauresque,” L’Afrique du Nord Illustrée, Nouvelle Série, no. 506, January 1931, 10)

One of the first steps in modernizing American diplomatic and consular facilities abroad was the passage of the Lowden Act in 1911, which authorized the federal government to buy land and construct diplomatic buildings in foreign countries. The act signified a growing recognition of America’s global diplomatic role and the need for suitable representational offices and residences. Moreover, it supported a more professional and democratic foreign service. While the Lowden Act spurred the acquisition of some properties, the American presence abroad was still limited. By 1924, only six additional buildings or sites had been acquired under the legislation.79

Another important step in expanding the scope and authority of the US foreign building program was the passage of the Foreign Service Building Act in 1926, which created the Foreign Service Buildings Commission to oversee the purchase and construction of foreign buildings and set up a dedicated fund to finance such projects.80 The establishment of the commission marked the culmination of a hard-fought campaign to strengthen the US presence in the world with greater, more consistent diplomatic representation. While the Supervising Architect of the Treasury was initially responsible for the design and supervision of all foreign building projects under the act, greater authority was later given to contract with private architects.81 The first large-scale building projects of high diplomatic value under the 1926 act included the construction of the US Chancery and Ambassador’s Residence in Tokyo, completed in 1931, and the US Embassy in Paris, designed by the New York firm Delano & Aldrich and completed in 1932. In 1936, Frederick A. “Fritz” Larkin was appointed chief of the Department of State’s Foreign Service Building Office, an adjunct to the FSBC. His arrival, in the words of historian Jane Loeffler, signaled “the beginning of a new phase in the program’s history.”82 Under Larkin’s direction the building program made a conscientious effort to avoid projects that might be considered elaborate or overly ostentatious and focused on developing designs that fit better into their foreign sites.83

In addition to new construction, the Department of State acquired existing buildings for chanceries and residences for ambassadors and ministers. In fact, in the early years of the foreign building program, the United States more commonly purchased existing buildings than commissioned new construction. The US government bought a suburban villa in Oslo in 1924 that had belonged to famed Swedish scientist and inventor Alfred Nobel. Five years later, the Bosch Palace in Buenos Aires was acquired for the ambassador to Argentina. The Bluecher Palace in Berlin became home to the US ambassador to Germany after it was purchased in 1931. World War II significantly slowed the building program, although a chief of mission residence in Lima was completed in 1944.84 In the postwar era, with newfound influence in shaping world affairs, the US government embarked on an ambitious foreign building program, characterized by an enthusiastic embrace of modernism.

In 1944, the Foreign Service Buildings Office became the Office of Foreign Buildings Operations (FBO), and the functions of the Foreign Service Buildings Commission gradually diminished to a largely advisory role. The FBO’s responsibilities included identifying overseas sites, selecting architects, and approving plans for foreign buildings. With the United States emerging from World War II as a preeminent power with vastly increased global responsibilities, the FBO experienced a period of enormous growth that greatly amplified America’s presence abroad. While there had been a relatively small rise in the number of embassy buildings owned by the United States in the twenty years since Congress passed the Foreign Service Building Act in 1926, the total quickly climbed in the five-year period between 1946 and 1951.85 This was due in some measure to the ample supply of discounted properties available on the overseas markets following the war. Another contributing factor was that in 1946, the Department of State received congressional authorization to use $110 million in postwar foreign credits for overseas acquisitions and construction projects. This had the profound effect of greatly

79. Loeffler, Architecture of Diplomacy, 16, 17.

80. Ibid., 19.

81. Ibid., 21.

82. Ibid., 31.

83. Ibid., 32.

84. Ibid., 22, 35.

85. Ibid., 47.

Figure 1.2.26

Detail from Plan des Environs D’Alger, 1830, showing the location of the American consulate. (Defense Historical Service, Vincennes Castle, Paris, France)

expanding the FBO’s financial resources. It allowed the Department of State to bypass the usual budgetary review process and, because FBO spending used nontax dollars, Congressional oversight was minimal. This circumstance also gave the Department of State’s foreign building program the benefit of a strong endorsement by politicians who supported it as a way to recoup American assets following the war. Foreign countries that owed the United States for wartime loans could repay their debts by supplying building materials, equipment, or local labor.

US Presence in Algiers and the Acquisition of Villa Montfeld

In 1830, the United States consulate in Algiers was located near the British and French consulates in an area known as the Vallée des Consuls, situate in the hills north of the Casbah (Figure 1.2.26). Research to date has not determined how long the consulate remained in the Vallée des Consuls or the locations of subsequent consular offices. Early US diplomatic facilities in Algiers were most likely temporary accommodations or leased buildings.

In January 1940, the office of the US consulate was moved from an “old Moorish villa” that had been demolished and replaced with a public square to the third and fourth floors of an apartment building on rue Michelet 119 (now rue Didouche Mourad) near Algiers’ Sacred Heart Cathedral. At the time, the rue Michelet was the city’s principal business street.86 Felix Cole, the American Consul General, boasted that the new offices on rue Michelet were better than those of any other mission, including the British, Italian, and Swiss. At the time, there were no residence quarters associated with the office.87

After the end of World War II, the US consular office began a search for a permanent home for its chief officer.

Initially, the office considered purchasing one of two potential properties Oued El Kilaï (now the location of the DCMR and embassy compound) and the Villa Klene, both in the neighborhood of el-Biar.88 By January 1947, however, the US Consul General Harold Finley (1945–1949) was made aware that anther residence, Montfeld, a Moorish-style residence in Mustapha Supérieur directly across the street from Oued El Kilaï, had been offered to the United States to purchase.89 According to the history of US embassy buildings written by Ambassador Ross in 1991, there are two competing stories for how Montfeld came to the attention of the US government. One story is that Finley was looking for a place to live and an acquaintance named Bâtonnier Marinaud told him about Montfeld. The second story involves a woman named Daisy de Liouville, who was a friend of the Perriers. They told her that they were in danger of having the property confiscated if they did not sell it quickly. De Liouville knew the FBO officer in Paris and told him of the opportunity.90 Research to date has not been able to verify either story.

Regardless of how he learned about Montfeld, Consul General Harold Finley visited the property and declared it one of the finest in Algiers. He noted that the house needed to be painted and some repairs were required to the bathrooms and heating system, but otherwise the house was “basically in excellent condition.”91 Raoul Perrier, acting on behalf of his parents, negotiated the sale. In March, the US Department of State approved the purchase of the villa for up to 46 million francs.92 On May 7, 1947, after two month of negotiations with Perrier over the price, the US government signed a purchase agreement to acquire Montfeld for 50 million francs (Figure 1.2.27).93 Consul General Finley moved into the residence in July 1948.94 Besides Montfeld, which the US government took to calling the Villa Montfeld, there were no other US government-owned or leased quarters in Algiers.95 No

Secretary of State, August 8, 1940, Central Decimal Files, 1940-1944, Box 825, RG 59, NARA.

87. Post Report, American Consul General, Algiers, Algeria, March 14, 1945, Central Decimal Files, 1945-49, Box 1254, RG 59, NARA.

88. Harold D. Finley, Consul General, to Secretary of State, March 9, 1946, Central Decimal Files, 1945-49, Box 1254, RG 59, NARA; Airgram, April 23, 1946, Central Decimal Files, 1945-49, Box 1254, RG 59, NARA.

89. Harold Finley to Secretary of State, January 29, 1947, Central Decimal Files, 1945-49, Box 1254, RG 59, NARA.

90. Ross, “American Embassy Properties in Algiers: Their Origins and History,” 19-20.

91. Harold Finley to Secretary of State, January 29, 1947, Central Decimal Files, 1945-49, Box 1254, RG 59, NARA.

92. Dean Acheson, Acting Sec. of State, to US Embassy, Paris: For Alan B. Jacobs, March 20, 1947, Central Decimal Files, 1945-49, Box 1254, RG 59, NARA.

93. Incoming Telegram, May 7, 1947, Central Decimal Files, 1945-49, Box 1254, RG 59, NARA.

94. Ross, “American Embassy Properties in Algiers: Their Origins and History,” 20.

95. Post Report, American Consulate General, Algiers, January 13, 1949, Central Decimal Files 1945-49, Box 1254, RG 59, NARA.

86. Post Report, American Consul General, Algiers, Algeria, March 14, 1945, Central Decimal Files, 1945-49, Box 1254, RG 59: Records of the Department of State, National Archives and Records Administration, College Park, MD, hereafter shortened to RG 59, NARA; Ross, “American Embassy Properties in Algiers: Their Origins and History,” 12; Felix Cole, American Consul General, Algiers, to

Figure 1.2.27

View of the entrance to Montfeld in 1938, about a decade before it was acquired by the US government to serve as a chief of mission residence. (Marion Vidal-Bué, Villas et Palais d’Alger)

1.2. Historical Background & Context / CMR (cont’d)

further action was taken with the Oued El Kilaï or Villa Klene properties at the time. Early the following year, however, the US government acquired a second property, the Villa Mustapha Raïs, in the El-Biar neighborhood, for 20 million francs with the intention of constructing and office building on the land.96

The consular offices at rue Michelet 119 were subject to a number of terrorist attacks in the late 1950s and early 1960s (described below), and, partly in reaction to these events, the US government began to look for additional space outside the city. In 1961, the chancery was relocated to the Villa Mektoub at 4 chemin Cheikh Bachir Ibrahimi in Mustapha Supérieur, which they leased from the French government. This property was immediately adjacent to the Villa Montfeld at 6 chemin Cheikh Bachir Ibrahimi. Later the same year or early the next, the US government also started leasing the Villa Inchallah, which was adjacent to the Villa Mektoub, for use as a chancery annex. The Villa Mektoub, a former residence likely constructed in the early twentieth century, had been being used as an office building.97 Both properties were once part of the estate owned by Barbara Leigh Smith Bodichon before it was carved up in the late nineteenth or early twentieth century. In November 1962, the US government also signed a lease on the Villa Oued El Kilaï. This property was also used as a chancery annex and accommodated the General Services Section and other embassy offices, the American School of Algiers, and the deputy chief of mission’s residence.98

In 1983, the title to Mustapha Raïs was exchanged in a deal with the Algerian government for the title to Oued El Kilaï. When the current chancery was built on the Oued El Kilaï grounds in 2007, the Villa Mektoub and Villa Inchallah properties became obsolete and the leases were terminated.

DIPLOMATIC RELATIONS BETWEEN ALGERIA AND THE UNITED STATES

Algeria and the United States during Ottoman Rule

The early diplomatic relationship between Algeria and the United States was shaped by disputes over piracy. Beginning in 1785, many American ships, crews, and cargoes fell into the hands of the Algerines (residents of Algeria) and other Barbary corsairs. From 1785 to 1793, Algiers alone captured at least fifteen American ships. In 1795, the United States and Algeria signed the Treaty of Peace and Amity, which committed the Ottoman dey of Algiers to ensuring the safe passage of American ships. The first American diplomatic envoy to Algeria, serving as a consul general, was appointed in 1797. The treaty initially succeeded, but by 1812, the corsairs of Algiers demanded that Dey Hadj Ali Pacha declare war and renew the seizure of American vessels. The US consul was ordered to leave Algeria, and at least one American ship was seized. The end of the War of 1812 allowed the United States to focus its efforts on resolving the dispute with the Regency of Algeria. Commodore Stephen Decatur was sent with American naval forces to the Mediterranean Sea where Decatur defeated the corsair commander Raïs Hamidou in the Straits of Gibraltar and later threatened Algiers from its bay. After negotiating a new treaty and having it repudiated by the dey, the British and Dutch navies restored the terms of the treaty in 1816, when a new Treaty of Peace and Amity was signed, ending Algerian corsair attacks on American ships permanently.99

96. Incoming telegram, January 6, 1948, Central Decimal Files 1945-49, Box 1254, RG 59, NARA.

97. Ross, “American Embassy Properties in Algiers: Their Origins and History,” 11-12.

98. Ibid., 22, 26.

99. Christopher Ross, “The United States Mission in Algeria: A Historical Sketch,” April 1991, 6-10, https://dz.usembassy.gov/wp-content/uploads/ sites/236/2017/04/ US-Mission-to-Algeria-A_Historical_Sketch.pdf, accessed September 30, 2022; US Department of State, Office of the Historian, “A Guide to the United States’ History of Recognition, Diplomatic, and Consular Relations, by Country, since 1776: Algeria,” US Department of State website, https://history.state.gov.countries/algeria, accessed September 23, 2022.

1.2. Historical Background & Context / CMR (cont’d)

Algeria and the United States during French Occupation

The French occupation led to the installation of a new administration in Algiers, which prompted the Department of State to downgrade Algiers to a consulate. From 1830 to 1924, a series of consuls carried out the duties of the American mission. In 1924, a growing workload prompted the Department of State to begin assigning principal officers the rank of consul general, and informally, at least, the post functioned as a consulate general.

Following Hitler’s invasion of France in 1940, Algeria fell under the control of Marshal Philippe Pétain’s Vichy Regime, which collaborated closely with Nazi Germany. On November 8, 1942, Allied forces launched a major offensive into western North Africa codenamed Operation Torch. Led by General Dwight Eisenhower, the Allies retook French Morocco and Algeria over the course of a four-day campaign. An additional six months was necessary to capture Tunisia, establishing the liberation of northern Africa and gaining strategic positions from which to combat Axis forces in Sicily and other parts of the Mediterranean. After the Allied landing, “life in Algiers underwent a violent change” and “several thousand hotels, apartment, villas, and rooms were immediately requisitioned by the Allied military authorities.”100 In recognition of the Algeria’s growing importance, the consulate was formally elevated to a consulate general in September 1944.

During the Cold War, American policy makers were intent on maintaining an Atlantic alliance against the growing threat of the Soviet Union. The US government recognized France’s full and exclusive domination in North Africa and worried that a retreat of European power in the region would create opportunities for communist infiltration.101 President Harry Truman supported France in the war for Algerian independence, and, despite being initially reticent, the Eisenhower administration provided military equipment for France to carry out its mission

against Algerian fighters.102 On July 2, 1957, Senator John F. Kennedy took a bold stance against American policy when he publicly denounced French colonialism in Algeria. He criticized the Eisenhower administration for its “head-in-the-sand” policy of refusing to condemn French colonialism in Algeria and supplying weapons to France. The battle against communism in the “Third World” would be lost, Kennedy warned, unless the West recognized that “the worldwide struggle against imperialism, the sweep of nationalism, is the most potent force in foreign affairs today.”103

Algerian War of Independence

During the first decades of the twentieth century, after nearly a century of colonial rule, a rapidly changing Algerian society began to place demands on and contest the French state. Resistance to colonial control and a movement for Algerian independence began during World War I and continued over the following decades. Proposed French reforms following World War II were found hopelessly insufficient and outdated. The Algerian War of Independence began in November 1954, when the Algerian National Liberation Front (FLN) began a guerrilla campaign against France. The FLN sought the end to French colonial control and diplomatic recognition at the United Nations to establish a sovereign Algerian state.104

Most of the fighting in the war occurred in the Algerian countryside, particularly along the country’s borders. Algiers, however, was subject to a significant amount of battle. FLN fighters launched a series of violent urban attacks in the city that came to be known as the Battle of Algiers (1956–57). On July 4, 1957, a bomb exploded by the consular door on the third floor of the US consul general office at rue Michelet 119. The damage to the building was considered superficial, and the bomber made no attempt to enter the building.105 A second bomb exploded at the consular office in April 1958. The building was not damaged, but a cleaning woman was injured.106 Although the French army regained the city, public

100. Post Report, American Consul General, Algiers, Algeria, March 14, 1945, NARA, Central Decimal Files, 1945-49, Box 1254, RG 59, NARA.

101. Yahia H. Zoubir, “The United States, the Soviet Union and Decolonization of the Maghreb, 1945-62,” Middle Eastern Studies 31, no. 1 (January 1995): 61. 102. Ibid., 66.

103. Jeffrey A. Lefebvre, “Kennedy’s Algerian Dilemma: Containment, Alliance Politics and the ‘Rebel Dialogue,’” Middle Eastern Studies 35, no. 2 (April 1999): 61.

104. “Algerian War,” Encyclopedia Britannica, available at https://www.britannica.com/event/Algerian-War, accessed May 14, 2020; McDougall, A History of Algeria, 184.

105. Clark to Secretary of State, July 4, 1957, Central Decimal Files, 1955-59, Box 704, RG 59, NARA.

106. Clark to Secretary of State, April 17, 1958, Central Decimal Files, 1955-59, Box 704, RG 59, NARA.

1.2. Historical Background & Context / CMR (cont’d)

opinion in France turned against the war, and new French President Charles de Gaulle grew increasingly convinced that French control of Algeria was untenable. De Gaulle pronounced in 1959 that that “self-determination” was necessary for Algeria.

On January 20, 1961, a plastic explosive charge was placed against the entrance to the consul general office, but the bomb did not explode. The incident coincided with the inauguration of US president John F. Kennedy. Political tracts condemning Kennedy and supporting the Algerian FLN arrived in the mail at the consulate shortly after the incident.107 A few months later, in April, yet another bomb exploded outside the consulate, causing heavy material damage and injuring a police officer.108 An official in the consular office stated that it was the “latest in a series of Algerie Francaise terrorist gestures.”109 Despite his earlier stance, during his presidency Kennedy largely deferred to French president Charles de Gaulle on matters related to Algeria. At the same time, prominent advisers to Kennedy, including Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs Mennen Williams, pushed for American communication with the FLN at higher levels of the US government.110

After several years of negotiations following de Gaulle’s announcement of the “self-determination” plan, France signed a cease-fire with the FLN on March 18, 1962, and withdrew from Algeria. France recognized Algeria as an independent state on July 3, 1962, and Algeria elected its first president, Ahmed Ben Bella, that September.111

107. American Consulate General, Algiers, to Department of State, January 27, 1961, Central Decimal Files, 1960-1963, Box 297, RG 59, NARA.

108. Gavin, U. S. Embassy, Paris, to Secretary of State, April 6, 1961, Central Decimal Files, 1960-1963, Box 297, RG 59, NARA.

109. Lyon, US Consulate, Algiers, to Secretary of State, April 6, 1961, Central Decimal Files, 1960-1963, Box 297, RG 59, NARA.

110. Martin S. Alexander & John F. V. Keiger, eds., France and the Algerian War, 1954-62: Strategy, Operations and Diplomacy (New York: Routledge, 2012), 146.

111. Department of State, Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, “Background Note: Algeria,” available at https://2001-2009.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/8005. htm#relations; Christopher Hitchens, “A Chronology of the Algerian War of Independence,” The Atlantic (November 2006), available at https://www. theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2006/11/a-chronology-of-the-algerian-war-of-independence/305277/, accessed May 14, 2020.

1.2. Historical Background & Context / CMR (cont’d)

Algeria and the United States since Independence

The United States established diplomatic relations with Algeria upon its independence from French rule in 1962, and William J. Porter was appointed the first US ambassador. US-Algerian relations after independence were difficult, and the consulate general suffered the pains of quick growth into an embassy.112 In 1967, Algeria severed diplomatic relations with the United States in the wake of the Arab-Israeli War, but reestablished relations in 1974.113 During the interim period, the US operated an Interests Section in the Swiss Embassy.

In January 1979, Islamic fundamentalists led by the Ayatollah Khomeini deposed the Shah of Iran, a longtime ally of the United States. In the wake of the successful revolution and instigated by President Carter’s decision that October to allow the Shah to travel to the United States for medical treatment, a group of Iranian students seized the US embassy in Tehran on November 4, 1979, and detained fifty-two Americans. Initial diplomatic negotiations for the hostages’ release in early 1980 failed, as did a rescue mission by the US military in April 1980. Hope for the hostages’ safe return was kindled that September, however, when the Department of State learned through the German embassy in Iran that the ayatollah had authorized a high-ranking Iranian official to open discussions. Upon learning the news, President Carter selected Deputy Secretary of State Warren Christopher to lead the negotiations. Christopher attended initial meetings with the Iranian delegate in Germany in September 1980, but Iraq’s invasion of Iran shortly thereafter ended Iran’s interest in talks.

Negotiations only resumed after Algeria agreed to act as a neutral intermediary represented by foreign minister Mohammed Ben Yahia. Christopher’s first trip to Algiers was on November 9, which was followed by meetings in Washington and a second, thirteen-day trip in early January 1981. During both stays, Christopher and his team resided at the CMR as guests of Ambassador Ulric

“Rick” Haynes and his wife Yolande. The United States and Iran completed negotiations for the hostages’ release on January 19, 1981, which was signified by the signing of the Algiers Accords. The hostages were released the following day, bringing an end to the 444-day-long crisis.114

In 1989, Algeria adopted a new government that allowed the formation of political parties other than the FLN. One of the most successful new parties was the militant Islamic Salvation Front (FIS). Facing an FIS victory in balloting for the National People’s Assembly, the army cancelled elections in January 1992, and the country descended into civil war. For the next ten years, the political landscape was dominated by violence and terrorism known as the “Black Decade,” during which many Algerians died at the hands of illegal Islamic groups as well as the state security services.115

In 1999, Abdelaziz Bouteflika was elected president of Algeria and held the office until his resignation in 2019. Early during his term, the government focused on restoring security and stability to the country. In 2001, President Bouteflika became the first Algerian president to visit the White House since 1985. This and subsequent meetings with US officials were a demonstration of the growing relationship between the United States and Algeria. Today, Algeria and the United States maintain a strong diplomatic partnership, with Algeria playing a constructive role in promoting regional security.116

112. “Algeria’s Struggle for Independence,” Association for Diplomatic Studies and Training, available at https://adst.org/2016/10/algerias-struggleindependence/.

113. Department of State, Office of the Historian, “A Guide to the United States’ History of Recognition, Diplomatic, and Consular Relations, by Country, since 1776: Algeria, available at https://history.state.gov/countries/algeria.

114. Warren Christopher, Chances of a Lifetime: A Memoir (New York: Scribner, 2001), 103-04, 108-09.

115. Dept. of State, Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, “Background Note: Algeria,” available at https://2001-2009.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/8005.htm#relations.

116. Department of State, Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, “Background Note: Algeria,” available at https://2001-2009.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/8005. htm#relations; Department of State, Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, “ US Relations with Algeria,” available at https://www.state. gov/u-s-relations-with-algeria/.

Detail from Figure 1.2.15

Detail from Figure 1.3.29

1.3 Chronology of Development & Use / CMR

EARLY DEVELOPMENT OF THE CMR SITE (PRE-1837)

The CMR is located at 6 chemin Cheikh Bachir Ibrahimi (formerly chemin Beaurepaire) in the neighborhood of Algiers historically known as Mustapha Supérieur. No information on the ownership history of the CMR property before 1837 has been found to date as part of research for this report.1 In his history of US embassy properties in Algeria, former Ambassador Christopher Ross suggests that the site may have once been part of a privately owned djnân or part of the larger estate of Mustapha Pacha, who served as the Dey of Algiers from 1797 to 1805.2 This notion seems to be based in part on the details recorded on a French map of northern Algeria dated 1834 that identifies topographic features, watercourses, roads, and buildings, unlabeled in most instances, and covers the area that would become the Mustapha Supérieur neighborhood (Figure 1.3.1). One of the unnamed ridge roads shown on the map follows a similar route to the current chemin Cheikh Bachir Ibrahimi, and along the east side of this road (the side of the CMR) are several small buildings. Yet farther east, across a large swath of terrain that extends nearly to the bay, the map is labeled with the words “Jardine de Mustapha Pacha” (Garden of Mustapha Pacha). While this map does not provide enough detail to state with certainty that any of the buildings on the east side of the road fall within the area corresponding to the present-day boundary of the CMR property or that any of those structures were associated with the garden of Mustapha Pacha, it clearly demonstrates a strong presence of Ottoman period development in the area.

EARLY FRENCH COLONIAL PERIOD (1837–1866)

After the French occupied Algiers in 1830, Europeans began to transform the hills of the Sahel. Turkish citizens were expelled from the region, and djnâyan were bought

and sold. In the middle of the nineteenth century, Europeans and Americans began to come to Algiers seeking the curative properties of its temperate climate and for tourism.

Architecture

In 1863, the English merchant Archibald Briggs purchased the property. According to Ross, the 1863 deed transferring the property to Briggs describes the presence of “a ‘large dwelling house’ built by the previous owner on the site of an earlier ‘Moorish-style house’.”3 Ross clarifies that the owner of the property before Briggs possessed it from 1853 to 1863 and suggests that the ‘large dwelling house’ described in the deed corresponds to the two-story main block of the current CMR. Consequently, while acknowledging that the house is difficult to date, Ross assigns the period 1853–1863 as the construction date of the CMR.4

While the Ross history states the house was built on the site of an earlier Moorish-style house, it is not clear whether this language is a direct translation of a deed or whether it is the author’s interpretation of the text. Either way, the phrase “on the site of” deserves closer examination. One interpretation is that the older, Moorishstyle house described in the deed was razed to clear the land for the new house. A second interpretation is that the older Moorish-style structure, or a portion of it, was incorporated into the construction of the new house rather than being razed. Lastly, the phrase “on the site of” may simply mean that the house was built on the same property as the older house without requiring any alteration to or demolition of it. No date is given for the Moorish-style house, which could reference a djnân built during the Ottoman period (pre-1830) or a dwelling built by one of the French owners who possessed the land

3. Ibid, 16.

4. Ibid, 15.

1. The introduction to Ambassador Christopher Ross’s history of US government owned properties in Algiers notes that he reviewed sales documents as part of his research, although no specific deed citations are given. Information on the nineteenth-century ownership history of the CMR could not be independently verified during research for this report.

2. Christopher Ross, “American Embassy Properties in Algiers: Their Origins and History,” (typescript), April 1991, US Department of State, Office of Overseas Buildings Operations, 6, 15.

Figure 1.3.1

Detail from a topographic map of Algiers and its surroundings dated 1834. This image shows a portion of the coastal landscape beyond the walls of the city center (at top right). By this date, hundreds of estates were scattered across the rises and slopes of the Sahel. (Jean-JacquesGermain Pelet, “Carte du territoire d’Alger, dressée au Dépôt général de la guerre,” 1834, Bibliothèque nationale de France, available from Gallica)

before 1853. Ross points out that the rate of turnover from one owner to another from 1837 to 1853 suggests that the property was treated as an investment, which may indicate that money was not spent on capital improvements and that the Moorish-style house was Ottoman rather than from the early colonial period.

Three years later, the property is sold again, this time to Anna Leigh Smith, a British citizen who had wintered in Algiers with her family for years prior. The 1866 deed transferring the property from Briggs to Leigh Smith provides more detail on the property, describing it as having “a large dwelling house, built with a ground floor, a first floor, and outbuildings, which is reached by [a] tree-lined lane, two other small, low houses with tiled roofs, along with grounds in the form of a garden, an orchard, etc.”5 The reference to a house with a ground floor and first floor is likely a translation of the French terms rez-de-chaussée and premier étage reflecting European floor-naming conventions and should be understood as a two-story house.

1866 CADASTRAL MAP

In April 1866, the Algiers Land Registry Service prepared a cadastral map of the Mustapha Supérieur area showing the boundaries and ownership of land parcels. This map serves as a key source of information on the use and appearance of the property during the first year of Leigh Smith’s ownership (Figure 1.3.2).

The cadastral map identifies the Leigh Smith property as lot numbers 3060 to 3065 and 3011. The property encompassed roughly 5.079 acres, according to later land records.6 It was an irregularly shaped parcel located on the northeastern slope of one of the ridges forming the Tell Atlas bound on the north, west, and south by local roads and on the east by private property belonging to the estate of Barbara Leigh Smith Bodichon.7 The map appears to show at least six buildings on the Leigh Smith property in 1866. While the original cadastral sheet used

color to designate the construction material of each structure (red for masonry, black for wood), only a black and white copy was obtained through research for this report, and it is difficult to ascertain from the copy whether the buildings are shaded red or black on the original. Masonry construction, however, was typical for dwellings during this period. The cadastral map does not identify the buildings by their function, so it is not immediately clear which served as the main, two-story dwelling house described in the 1866 deed, which were outbuildings, and which were the two “small, low houses with tiled roofs.” (To facilitate analysis of the cadastral map, an annotated copy is provided that designates the buildings as A through F, starting with the building farthest to the northwest and proceeding clockwise. See Figure 1.3.3.)

Access into the property at the time was via a road that entered the site near its southwest corner and followed a straight, northerly route before terminating at roughly the center point of the parcel. This feature is likely the “treelined lane” mentioned in the 1866 deed. Four of the buildings on the property were clustered at the north end of this lane — buildings B and C to the north and buildings D and E to the south. Given the existing topography of the site, the buildings and structures clustered at the north end of the lane would have occupied the relatively level ground of a terrace that ran roughly northwest-southeast through the center of the site. Four of the buildings shown on the map have a rectangular footprint, while two have an irregular form. Buildings A and B appear to have small rectangular appendages, perhaps indicating an entry porch. These buildings may be the two small houses described in the deed. Building D appears to be the largest structure on the site and may represent the two-story dwelling house also described in the deed.

Markings on the cadastral map indicate the locations of two exterior courtyards (marked with a “C” for cour) and the locations and limits of two pleasure gardens (“JA” for jardin d’agrément). Along the north end of building B, for

5. Ibid, 16.

6. Cadastral Map, Commune of Mustapha, 11th Sheet, April 25, 1866, Algiers Land Registry Service, Algiers, Algeria; Property Deed, March 9, 1909, OBO Archives, Rosslyn, VA. It is not known whether Leigh Smith’s property encompassed the parcel numbered 3011 at the time of the initial purchase in 1866 or whether this was a later acquisition.

7. The Bodichon estate encompassed 12 acres and an Ottoman-period residence known as Campagne du Pavillon. See Kathryn Bradley-Hole, Villa Gardens of the Mediterranean: From the Archives of Country Life (London: Aurum, 2006), 36.

Chronology of Development & Use / CMR (cont’d)

Figure 1.3.2

Detail of an 1866 cadastral map of the commune of Mustapha Supérieur showing the property owned at the time by Anna Leigh Smith. (Cadastral Map, Commune of Mustapha, 11th Sheet, April 25, 1866, Algiers Land Registry Service, Algiers, Algeria)

Figure 1.3.3

Another detail of the 1866 cadastral map with buildings numbered A through F and landscape elements highlighted. (Cadastral Map, Commune of Mustapha, 11th Sheet, April 25, 1866, Algiers Land Registry Service, Algiers, Algeria)

instance, was a long, narrow courtyard, and to the west was a walled garden. A courtyard also defined the space between buildings D and E, located on the south side of the access lane. Another, much larger garden, also walled, was located at the north end of the lane. It wrapped around buildings D and E and encompassed much of the property’s lower slope. The position of building D relative to the large courtyard and pleasure garden seems to support the idea that it may have been the main, twostory dwelling house. Its east-facing elevation would have offered expansive views of the surrounding landscape and the bay. If building D was a residence, existing evidence does not clarify whether it might have been the “large dwelling house” built circa 1853-1863 or the older “Moorish-style house,” both referenced in the 1863 deed. Buildings C and F were small structures and may have been outbuildings. Building E also could have served as an outbuilding or, given its relation to the courtyard and to building D, as a riyādh, a structure in the landscape that provided shelter and was used as a place for relaxation.

By overlaying the 1866 cadastral map with a current site survey, it is possible to get a sense of where these mid-nineteenth-century structures and landscape features were located in relation to the CMR and other existing site elements. The limits of the site generally reflect existing conditions, and, as noted earlier, the access lane aligns with an existing cypress allée and its associated path. Close analysis of the locations of the six buildings recorded on the cadastral map reveals that only one overlapped, and only in part, with the footprint of the CMR. This is building D, which had a long, irregular footprint and was possibly a large residence, given its relationship to the courtyard and garden. Comparing the historic map with existing conditions, it seems that a portion of the north end of building D was roughly in the same location as southeast corner of the CMR. Today, there is a basement under that corner of the CMR with groin-vaulted masonry ceilings (Figure 1.3.4), a form not evident anywhere else within the residence, with the exception of the entry hall, and a construction method typical of Ottoman-era structures rather than buildings of the French colonial period. This may indicate that the southeast portion of the basement of the CMR is the oldest part of the residence and may be the only part of the CMR that existed in 1866. A second interesting aspect of building D relates to its eastern façade, which was roughly in the same location as the existing masonry retaining wall of the CMR’s east terrace.

As such, the east terrace retaining wall may also have existed in 1866. With the exception of the vaulted area of the basement and the retaining wall, analysis of the 1866 cadastral map strongly suggests that very little of the built features that characterized the landscape during the mid-nineteenth century remain today and that the bulk of the two-story, main block of the CMR postdates 1866. This contradicts the conclusions presented in the Ross history of the CMR, which gives 1853-1863 as the construction date of the main block of the CMR.

Figure 1.3.4 Partial basement floor plan of the CMR showing the general area (in orange) of the groin-vaulted masonry ceilings that may be remnants of an earlier structure that was incorporated into the Villa Montfeld when it was built in the second half of the nineteenth century. (Plan courtesy BCA)

Landscape

The 1866 cadastral map is an important source of information on the character of the landscape during this period of the site’s development. The map delineates the exact boundaries of the roughly 5-acre parcel, which was defined on four sides by three perimeter roads. Interior circulation features included the access lane that crossed the southwest sector of the site and terminated near the center of the parcel. As noted above, this circulation element remains evident today in the form of a broad footpath lined with cypress trees. Although secondary circulation features, such as garden paths or paths used to travel from one building to another, are not identified on the map, it is likely that such features existed. Given existing topographical conditions, the majority of the buildings and structures seem to have been located on the terrace that extends across the middle of the site. This cluster arrangement is another characteristic of the mid-nineteenth-century landscape that carries forward to today with the greenhouse, north pavilion, CMR, south belvedere, and several outbuildings arranged along it. In contrast, Building A would have been built into the gentle slope of the upper terrace in the western portion of the site.

The cadastral map indicates the location and footprint of six buildings (described above). Two of these built features deserve mention relative to the existing landscape. The first is building B, which was at the same location as a lower parterre garden, suggesting that parterre may partially rest on early foundations. The second is building F, which was roughly in the same location as a concrete water basin located in the sloped section of the landscape south of the residence. While the existing basin is not a nineteenth-century feature, the cadastral map suggests that there has been a structure at that location since at least 1866.8

The map identifies the size and location of two walled courtyards one north of building B and a larger one between buildings D and E. Likely attached to houses, these courtyards provided residents an additional layer of privacy and may have been paved or embellished with fountains, trees, or flowers. The landscape also featured two pleasure gardens. Given the existing topography of the site, the small garden west of building B may have encompassed the south end of an existing path and the slope to the west. The larger pleasure garden east of buildings D and E would have descended the slope that characterizes the eastern portion of the property. One might surmise that residents had outstanding views of the garden, the surrounding landscape, and the Mediterranean Sea from several of the buildings and from certain high points within the garden itself.

According to the cadastral map, the Leigh Smith property did not have orchards (indicated with a “V” for verger) or vegetable gardens (“JP” for jardin potager) at this time. This, however, contradicts the 1866 deed, which describes the property as having an orchard. The inconsistency may relate to the distinction between a small orchard used for personal use versus a commercial orchard. Indeed, in 1866, land use seems to have been limited to residential, passive recreational, and, perhaps, light agricultural functions. According to the cadastral map, the landscape had at least one constructed water feature. This was a well (puits) at the northwest corner of the parcel, in roughly the same location as an existing reservoir. Given the presence of courtyards and pleasure gardens at the time, however, it is probable that other water features, such as fountains, existed in 1866.

8. The existing concrete basin functions as a transit basin, collecting rainwater from the south patio deck and draining it into the city sewer system.

1.3. Chronology of Development & Use / CMR (cont’d)

Adjacent properties shown on the 1866 cadastral map include Campagne Mayfair, also known as Oued El Kilaï, which today is part of the embassy complex and serves as the DCMR. It is interesting to note that, in 1866, the south end of the CMR access lane aligned with a road that defined the southern edge of the Campagne Mayfair property. This may indicate that the CMR and embassy properties were once part of a single, larger property. (Figure 1.3.5)

Period Plan : 1866

Legend

BUILDINGS

APPARENT PROPERTY BOUNDARY

ENTRANCE

VEGETATED AREA

HARDSCAPE AREA

WELL

Figure 1.3.5

1866 Period Plan

ANNA LEIGH SMITH OWNERSHIP AND THE BUCKNALL RENOVATION (1866–1909)

Anna Leigh Smith purchased the Briggs property on October 29, 1866, for 30,000 francs.9 Like many European hivernants (winterers), Leigh Smith used the house on a seasonal basis, starting in 1866 until about 1890.

Architecture

During the second half of the nineteenth century, Anna Leigh Smith made significant changes to the site, although the basic facts about the character of these changes and the sequence in which they occurred is largely unknown due to a lack of textual, photographic, or graphic records. As demonstrated in the preceding section, it is reasonable to consider that the CMR as we know it today dates to the Leigh Smith ownership period and not earlier. This premise seems to be supported by the deed that was prepared when Leigh Smith sold the property in 1909, which states that most of the constructions were built by her, meaning Leigh Smith, using her personal funds (“la plus grande partie des constructions pour avoir été édifiée par elle, de ses deniers personnels”) and the surplus of the buildings by means of the acquisition from Briggs (“et le surplus des constructions et le sol au moyen de l’acquisition qu’elle en a faite de M. Archibald Briggs”).

Most sources on the history of the CMR state that the British architect Benjamin Bucknall, working with a local contractor named Barthélémy Vidal, was responsible for renovating and expanding the residence in the late nineteenth century. There is a lack of consensus, however, as to when he worked on the house. The architect settled permanently in Algiers in 1878 and died in the city in 1895, at the age of 61. According to Ross, it was Leigh Smith who engaged Bucknall and Vidal to renovate the house. Leigh Smith stopped wintering in the city around 1890, which suggest that the renovation occurred sometime between 1878 and 1890. Newspaper

accounts, however, indicate that Leigh Smith’s brother continued to use the residence through at least 1893, and she maintained ownership of the property until 1909, leasing it after she was no longer making trips to Algiers to the British lawyer Robert Bevan starting in 1891. It was Bevan who would purchase Campagne Montfeld from Leigh Smith in 1909. An undated memo, prepared by William J. Porter, US Ambassador to Algeria between 1962 and 1965, states, incorrectly, that Bevan purchased the property from Leigh Smith in 1892. More important to this discussion, however, is that the Porter memo asserts that it was Bevan who hired Bucknall, which would date his involvement to the last years of his life, about 1891–1895. Historian Liz Davenport, author of the book Woodchester, A Gothic Vision, which dedicates an entire chapter to Bucknall and is the most thorough discussion of his career found to date, claims that Bucknall renovated Montfeld in 1892. However, given the lack of clear evidence, one might broadly define the period of Bucknall’s involvement as circa 1878–1895.10

LATE NINETEENTH-CENTURY CONSTRUCTION CAMPAIGNS

Close study of the CMR’s construction methods and materials and architectural features and finishes suggests that the residence as it stands today may be the result of three separate building campaigns, all carried out during the Anna Leigh Smith ownership period (1866–1909). The two-story, main block, with the possible exception of Room 205 (discussed below) and the inclusion of several one-story elements (also discussed below), may represent the first phase of construction. The addition of a second-story room (Room 205) over the dining room may represent the second phase of construction, and possibly a third phase added the three-story, north wing and its one-story west appendage.

The organization of the floor plan and the continuity of architectural elements and materials both interior and exterior suggest that the first phase of the CMR’s

9. Bradley-Hole, Villa Gardens of the Mediterranean, 36.

10. The 1893 date comes from the Swiss & Nice Times, which noted, “Mr. and Mrs. Leigh-Smith are at the Campagne Montfeld.” Since Anna Leigh Smith never married, this likely is a reference to one of her brothers. See “Algiers,” Swiss & Nice Times, December 10, 1893, via Gallica, National Library of France. Ross’s discussions of this issue appear on pages 17-18 of “American Embassy Properties in Algiers: Their Origins and History.” The Porter memo is undated and archived at OBO. Bucknall’s career is discussed in Liz Davenport’s Woodchester, a Gothic Vision (Gloucestershire, England, 2014), Chapter 12.

construction included the two-story main block and several one-story elements. The original two-story main block consisted of what is now the entry hall (Room 121), atrium (Room 102), dining room (Room 107), small salon (Room 104), living room (Room 105), and the interstitial spaces between those rooms, as well as the stairhall (Room 113) and the following second-floor rooms the atrium gallery (Room 208), the balcony (Room 209), the hallway (Room 204), the main bedroom (Room 201), the study (Room 202), and the family kitchen (Room 200). The one-story elements included what is now the entry courtyard (Room 110), the one-story, L-shaped west wing (Rooms 106, 109, 111, 129), and the south porch (Room 117). The interior and exterior treatment of these spaces suggest a single construction campaign.

The list of original second-floor spaces does not include the room currently used a guest bedroom (Room 205), over what is today the dining room (Room 107). This is due to several design anomalies that suggest that this space was not part of the first phase of construction. First, the exterior walls corresponding to that section of the residence feature a molded belt course with a different profile than all other parts of the building (Figure 1.3.6). Second, that section of the residence features a molded cornice, whereas the rest of the building has dogtooth brick cornices (Figure 1.3.7). Third, the exterior walls are articulated with raised stucco banding along the roofline and at the corners (Figure 1.3.8). No other parts of the residence exhibit this banding element. On the interior, the wall partitioning the second-floor hallway (Room 204) from the guest bedroom (Room 205) features two arched openings set relatively close to one another one is a large, horseshoe arch opening that holds a double door and the other is a smaller, blind arch featuring a carved stone surround (Figure 1.3.9). In the latter, the wall panel within the former opening is faced with decorative tiles. There is no evidence of this blind arch visible within the bedroom. The difference in the size and decorative treatment of these openings might suggest two different construction periods. Assuming

that the current dining room is original to the two-story main block11 and the room above is a later addition, it is possible that the roof over the dining room originally functioned as an outdoor terrace and that one of the arched openings in the hallway more likely the blind arch with carved stone surround was once a door to the terrace. If the dining room (Room 107) is also not original to the two-story main block, then the entire bay may have been built during one construction phase, and the two interior doors served a different purpose than access to a terrace (see text below in the section addressing US government ownership). Evidence against the guest bedroom (and the dining room) being part of a later addition to the main block is the style of the tile used on the floors. It is the same tile used for the floors of the small salon, the arcade surrounding the entry courtyard, and other spaces in the main block.

The three-story, north wing was added during a third phase of construction. Although similar in style and form to the main block, interior and exterior differences suggest a separate period of construction. On the exterior, the north wing has a dogtooth cornice without clay roof tiles, while the main block features a dogtooth cornice with tiles. There are also subtle differences in the ornamentation at the window openings. For example, none of the windows of the north wing have drip moldings. On the interior, many spaces of the north wing feature terrazzo flooring, whereas this material is not used anywhere in the main block.

Existing documentation does not clarify which phase or phases of construction that Bucknall was involved in or when the different phases were carried out. A deed of sale dated 1909, however, provides a description of the residence by the end of this period of its development.12 It states that the first floor was divided into a grand salon with dome (“grand salon avec marabout”), dining room, four additional rooms (functions unspecified), vestibule, kitchen, and office. The reference to a dome suggests that the grand salon is the term used for the atrium (Room

11. An examination of the basement may help to understand whether the dining room was built at the same time as the main block. While the majority of the basement Room 024 is located under the dining room (Room 103), the south end of the space extends under the atrium (Room 102). It seems more likely that basement rooms 023 and 024 were built at the same time than the south end of Room 024 was excavated after the atrium and the rest of the two-story, main block were constructed.

12. Property Deed, March 9, 1909, OBO Archives, Rosslyn, VA.

1.3. Chronology of Development & Use / CMR (cont’d)

Figure 1.3.6

View looking south of the north façade of the two-story main block with exposed basement. The molded belt course between the first- and secondfloor levels (marked with an arrow) has a different profile than all other parts of the building (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.3.7

Detail of the molded cornice. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.3.9

View of the wall partitioning the second-floor hallway (Room 204) from the guest bedroom (Room 205). (Whitney Cox)

Figure 1.3.8

View of a portion of the east façade of the main block. The window in the image is located in the small alcove (Room 112) off of the dining room. The banding detail on this portion of the east façade is not found elsewhere on the building exterior. (Robinson & Associates)

102).13 The dining room is likely referring to the current dining room (Room 107). The function of the “four additional rooms” is unspecified, but this could be a reference to some combination of the following rooms: the entry hall (Room 101), the small salon (Room 104), the living room (Room 105), the library (Room 106), the anteroom (Room 109), or the Moorish café (Rooms 111 and 129). The vestibule may refer to the entry hall (Room 101), the sequence of spaces between the small salon and the living room (today Rooms 128, 108, and 116), which were once one contiguous space, the pantry (Room 118), or the staff room (Room 125). The kitchen is likely referring to the current kitchen (Room 122) and the office to the current office (Room 121). The deed also describes the entry courtyard as having a basin and water jet.

According to the 1909 deed, the second floor had a “large hall that can be used as a painting workshop” (“un grand hall pouvant server d’atelier de pienture”), four bedrooms, two bathrooms, a vestibule, and a terrace. The reference to a “large hall that can be used as a painting workshop,” may describe an art studio of some type (Leigh Smith was an amateur painter) and may refer to the atrium gallery (Room 208) or the balcony (Room 209), which would have both been well illuminated with natural light, or perhaps the hallway (Room 204). The description of the house as having four bedrooms is difficult to parse, as today there are more than four rooms on the second floor that either currently do or previously could have served as bedrooms (Rooms 201, 202, 205, 206, and 207). The bathrooms are also difficult to assign, as today there are at least six rooms that do or previously could have served as bathrooms (Rooms 200, 203, 211, 216, 217, and 214). The vestibule may be referring a second-floor hallway (Room 204 or Room 212), and the terrace possibly to the balcony (Room 209) off of the atrium gallery or the small terrace off of the linen room (Room 213). The attic is described as one large room, meaning the space was not subdivided.

As described above, the north wing was a later addition to the residence and the location of the kitchen by 1909.

This chronology raises the question of where the kitchen was located before the north wing was constructed. One possibility is that it was located in an outbuilding that no longer exists today. Another is that it was in the basement, although the only existing internal staircase between the basement and the first floor that is not in the north wing was installed much later in the 1980s (see text below). Yet a third possibility is that it was in a wing along the north façade that was razed when the current north wing was built. Functionally and aesthetically, a kitchen in this location would have been logical, as it would have been close to the dining room and screened from visitors by the courtyard and the wisteria wall.

The number and function of the rooms described in the 1909 deed, and specifically the reference to an attic a space that does not exist in the two-story, main block strongly suggests that the three-story, north wing was added before 1909 and that the CMR as it exists today is largely a product of the Anna Leigh Smith period (1866–1909).

ORIGINAL DESIGN

With little record of Anna Leigh Smith’s construction projects at Campagne Montfeld or of Bucknall’s interventions, the remaining physical evidence provides the most helpful source of information on its design as realized during this period (1866–1909).

The residence was built in the Moorish Revival style with a complicated massing and an irregular footprint that incorporated a courtyard, a semi-enclosed south porch, and terraces. These spaces blurred the line between interior and exterior space, integrated the house into the landscape, and offered places to experience nature and the outdoors while remaining sheltered from the elements emulating the style of Algerian villas that Leigh Smith and Bucknall admired. The construction utilized load bearing, unreinforced masonry walls on a masonry foundation, and several types of floor framing systems. These included

13. The French term marabout refers to a Muslim funerary monument or shrine and translates to qubba in Arabic. Muslim qubbas are often rectangular in plan and topped with a dome, and the word qubba can also refer to a dome or cupola. Within the context of the CMR, it would be correct to translate the phrase “grand salon avec marabout” as “grand salon with a dome.” Author correspondence with architect and historian Samia Chergui, September 18, 2022.

short-span masonry vaults between steel beams, wood plank spanning between wood joists, and masonry groin vaults.14 The roof was predominantly flat and screened by parapet walls. At several locations, the flat roof was interrupted by a domed projection, such as over the interior atrium. The house’s volumetric composition, asymmetrical massing, flat wall surfaces, and roof terraces were allusions to the vernacular residential architecture of Algiers.

The house was oriented toward chemin Beaurepaire (today chemin Cheikh Bachir Ibrahimi), with the front door facing west. This entrance featured an ornate wood door set within a carved stone arch. Additional first-floor entrances were located on the south façade, in the north-facing wall of the courtyard, and in the west façade of the north wing. The exterior walls were surfaced with smooth stucco and articulated with simple belt courses and cornices. Decorative embellishment was achieved primarily at window and door openings. Many of the window openings, for example, featured horseshoe arches separated by columns and molded sills. While other windows were more minimally expressed, elements such as slate drip caps, drip moldings, and iron window grilles added visual interest to the wall surface. The style and material of the original windows and window frames is unknown.

The house had an asymmetrical interior layout that was influenced by the planning traditions of Ottoman-era residences built in Algiers, but primarily reflected the European preferences of its owner. For example, it featured a domed atrium that incorporated traditional courtyard elements, but this space was not centrally located as it would be following Algerian design tradition. Instead, interior spaces were arranged in a roughly U-shaped plan that wrapped around an exterior courtyard. Within this plan were large, carefully appointed spaces that were given an equal measure of design attention as the atrium, as well as auxiliary rooms primarily used for circulation. This arrangement reflected the way

of life of its nineteenth-century English owner. Other references to local custom were the L-shaped entry hall, which provided indirect access to the interior, and several rooms that featured small ancillary spaces with windows that served a similar function to a traditional k’bou. These generously fenestrated ancillary spaces provided ventilation and light and offered views of the surrounding landscape. The design also played homage to traditional Algerian residential architecture by incorporating elements such as horseshoe arches, Algerian arches (or arc algérois, an arch form distinctive to Algeria with a flattened shape and lobed or scalloped detailing at the crown), and the mihrāb motif (an arched niche, either deeply recessed or shallow, contained in a rectangular frame). The rooms featured tile floors and wainscots, wall niches, sometimes fitted with cabinets, exposed log joists, and decorative grilles in the walls for ventilation (claustra). The fireplace in the living room was decorated with horizontal and vertical bands of tile that define five niches, evoking a “chini khana,” a term used to describe a panel or wall of niches used for displaying precious vessels or other objects.

Like many new houses or renovated houses being constructed on the hills and slopes of Algiers during the colonial period, the Campagne Montfeld incorporated architectural fragments salvaged from Ottoman-era buildings located in the medina as a way to imbue the design with a sense of authenticity. Salvaged exterior materials and features included carved stone courtyard columns, carved stone arches framing doorways, painted tiles used for floor and wall surfaces, Qallālīn tile wall panels, and traditional style doors featuring a very elaborate pattern of geometric panels known as qâyamnâyam. It is believed that these elements were recovered from buildings in the lower Casbah that were destroyed during the early decades of the French colonial period. Another source may have been the buildings on the site that were razed for the construction of the new house (see text below).

14. The term plancher à voûtains refers to the structural system consisting of short-span masonry vaults between steel beams. It is characteristic of construction from the French colonial period.

Landscape

There is little in the historic record about Leigh Smith’s tenure in Algiers; therefore, her interventions related to the landscape and intentions in setting up her gardens are unknown. At least initially, before Leigh Smith made significant changes to the site, including the construction of the Moorish Revival residence, one might assume that landscape was similar in character to the grounds of her sister’s neighboring estate. This property is described in Algeria; Considered as a Winter Residence for the English, published by Barbara Leigh Smith Bodichon in 1858:

Here is plenty to paint. My room is in the roof; I have to pass through the open air to get to it. It was two windows, looking respectively to the north-west and south-east. I see over the roof and garden some low buildings and yards, where goats are herded, and sometime camels. Beyond these is the shore, and the range of Atlas mountains across the way. North-west I look upon a hill side, overground in patches with aloes, cacti, and olives…One must pick one’s way to the imminent risk of one’s coat tails up to the highest pathway, whence can be seen, the bay, the town, and neighbouring hills, spotted with white country houses, each nestled in its garden of oranges and lemons, and guarded by its strong chevaux de frise of the said spikes and prickles. Dwarf palms cover the hills as ferns do in our own Wales and Scotland.15

Later in the passage are descriptions of wildflowers (“blue lily and narcissus, a beautiful cyclamen, both white and lilac crocuses”), little groups of olive trees, and “a group of poplars, towering over the savage mass of spike aloes and prickly cacti.” Bodichon also described “tall weeds grow[ing] over the water courses,” and identified many plants and trees by name, including clematis, cistus, wild rose, blue iris, aloe, geranium, “which grows wild in the hedges,” and almond, apple, and orange trees.16

The garden elements and built features of the CMR that remain today, however, represent an interpretation of Islamic gardens as seen through the filter of Ottoman influences on the rural residential development of Algiers. In addition, perhaps, it retains elements reflecting the garden design trends of late nineteenth-century England, namely the English cottage garden style advanced by Robinson, Jekyll, and others.

Gertrude Jekyll was a friend of Anna Leigh Smith’s sister, Barbara Bodichon, and, during the winter of 1873–1874, Jekyll spent five and a half months with her at her country house in Algiers.17 Jekyll, in fact, helped plan the garden of Bodichon’s Sussex home, Scalands Gate.18 The connection with Jekyll is interesting in that, while the stronger design influence on the landscape is Islamic (as filtered through Moorish and Ottoman lenses), the influence of English cottage garden style can, perhaps, be seen in the naturalistic, dry-laid stone walls lining the entry drive and loop and forming terrace retaining walls and the gently curved route of the upper terrace garden stairs and the overlook terrace connection. With the exception of certain long-lived plant species that have been preserved throughout the property’s successive owners, much of what Leigh Smith may have planted is likely gone, so it is impossible to know for certain what her specific influences were.

At some point during this period, Leigh Smith obtained an additional 38.5 square meters (approximately 414 square feet) of land from her brothers, who had inherited their sister Barbara Bodichon’s property.19 The date of this acquisition is unknown, but likely occurred after their sister’s death in 1891. In 1894, when chemin Beaurepaire (today chemin Cheikh Bachir Ibrahimi) was realigned to the southeast, a portion of the old roadbed (122 square meters or approximately 1,313 square feet) also became part of the Campagne Montfeld property. The land acquired from her brothers and as a result of road improvements totaled 160.5 square meters (roughly 0.04 acres). Whereas the majority of this property was located

16. Ibid., 78-79.

17. “Gertrude Jekyll: Beyond the Boots,” Surrey Gardens Trust, available at https://www.surreygardenstrust.org.uk/.

18. Charlotte Moore, “Aunt Barbara’s Fireplace,” The Spectator, June 19, 2010.

19. Ross, “American Embassy Properties in Algiers: Their Origins and History,” 17.

15. Eugène Bodichon and Barbara Leigh Smith Bodichon, Algeria; Considered as a Winter Residence for the English (London, English Woman’s Journal Offices, 1858), 75-77.

1.3. Chronology of Development & Use / CMR (cont’d)

Figure 1.3.10

Detail of an 1870 map of Algiers and its surroundings showing the Campagne Montfeld (circled in red). (“Plan of Algiers and surroundings,” 1870, Glycines Library, Algiers, Algeria)

in the commune of Mustapha Supérieur, the small piece of land from the family was in the commune of Birmandreis.20

The residence as realized during this period was positioned on level terrain that comprised part of a terrace that ran northwest-southeast across the property and roughly bisected it. As documented in the cadastral map, there were likely at least six structures on the property when Leigh Smith acquired it in 1866. It is unknown whether she had those buildings all razed (or razed with the exception of a portion of a preexisting building that was incorporated into the basement of the new house) prior to the construction of the existing house, whether one or more of the buildings were left standing perhaps to serve as Leigh Smith’s residence while construction was underway, or whether some of the buildings were left standing for a time to function as outbuildings.

The 1909 deed provides some insight into the character of the landscape by the end of this period. It describes three outbuildings by name “maison de domestique divisée en trois pièces, écurie et remise,” which translates to a “staff house divided into three rooms, stable and shed.” These outbuildings are likely those that stand today near the entrance gates, with the staff house referring to the guest house, the stable referring to the Personal Security Unit (PSU) break room/garage, and the shed possibly referring to the small shed that stands between the PSU break room/garage and the guest house. These buildings do not appear on the 1866 cadastral map, and therefore date to the Leigh Smith period. Indeed, the 1909 deed states that most of the buildings on the site were built by Leigh Smith with the “surplus” being the result of acquisition from the previous owner (Briggs). This seems to suggest that some of the outbuildings still standing in 1909 dated the Briggs period.

The existence of the staff house, stable, and shed by 1909 strongly suggests that the existing entry drive, the entry drive loop, and a gated entrance on the street were also established during this period.

Other landscape features described in the 1909 deed include a reservoir, pleasure garden, trees of various species, and a few agricultural tools (“outils agricoles”). It should also be noted that the deed described the house with a “cave,” or cellar, and a “salle de bains, deux bassins,” which translates to “bathroom, two basins.” It is not clear from the text whether the cellar or the bathroom were part of the house or separate structures. Since they are listed after two outbuildings, the staff house and reservoir, it may be that they, too, were outbuildings.

1870 MAP

A map of Algiers published in 1870 provides a great degree less information about the property than the 1866 cadastral map and appears to show only one building on the site rather than six (Figure 1.3.10). It is a small, square building surrounded by a courtyard wall. This may be taken as evidence that Anna Leigh Smith made substantial alterations to the property between 1866 and 1870, and that the building shown is the two-story, main block of the current residence. The building’s footprint and courtyard wall, however, bear little resemblance to the configuration of the existing main block, suggesting that the map is either inaccurate or that the main block postdates 1870. Despite the lack of detail and seemingly contradictory evidence the 1870 map presents regarding the house, it is worth noting that a road is depicted on the map in the same general location and following the same route as the access lane recorded in the 1866 cadastral survey. The road, however, doesn’t terminate at the center of the parcel, but appears to continue through the site to intersect with another local road to the north (possibly chemin des Glycines).

20. Property Deed, March 9, 1909, OBO Archives, Rosslyn, VA.

Figure 1.3.11

View of the east façade, looking south, with the arched openings to the T-shaped basement space (Room 023) visible on the right. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.3.12

The front part of the “chapel” has a “tomette” tile floor, tall tile baseboards, and plaster walls. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.3.14

Detail of the wall surrounding the east terrace, which features a tiled surface and an “Algerian arch” niche. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.3.13

Painting titled “Les femmes d’Alger dans un intérieur” (date unknown) attributed to Yvonne Kleiss Herzig depicting a space that bears a strong resemblance to the T-shaped basement space, the “chapel,” below the atrium of the CMR. (Source: Artnet)

1.3. Chronology of Development & Use / CMR (cont’d)

EARLY TWENTIETH CENTURY (1909–1932)

Architecture

In 1909, Anna Leigh Smith sold the Campagne Montfeld for 137,000 francs to a British lawyer who had been renting the property named Robert Bevan. When Robert Bevan died in 1915, his wife, Constance Helen Ross Bevan, inherited the property and retained ownership for another seventeen years.

A 1932 deed provides a description of the property at the end of this period. This document uses nearly identical language to describe the house and grounds as the 1909 deed, suggesting that the Bevans did not carry out any meaningful alterations during that period. Indeed, the only difference between the 1909 and 1932 deeds, in terms of the character of the property, is that the latter omits any mention of agricultural tools.

BASEMENT CHAPEL

The Ross history of the CMR suggests that Robert Bevan may have been responsible for building what he refers to as the “chapel” in the section of the basement below the atrium.21 This is a T-shaped space (Room 023) that can be accessed only from the east terrace where there are three basement-level, horseshoe arch openings in the east façade (Figure 1.3.11). The openings have marble thresholds and are fitted with decorative iron grills. The grill in the middle opening is hinged so that it can function as a door. Today, the front part of the space, closest to the east terrace, is tiled with a pattern of hexagonal terracotta tiles and glazed green triangular tiles, known as tomettes or qirātī, tall tile baseboards, and plaster walls (Figure 1.3.12). In contrast, the rear part of the space features a more elaborate decorative scheme. It is articulated with a horseshoe arch that rests on carved stone columns, and there are horseshoe arch niches along the north and south walls. At the west end of the space, the corners of the end wall are curved to form a niche for a narrow table, resembling an altar, supported by spiral fluted columns.

The floor is finished with decorative tiles, and the walls are plaster with a tile wainscot. Within the floor is a small panel of tile with a different design than the field, intended, perhaps, to mimic a carpet. It is not clear whether the interior finishes of this section of the basement were implemented during the Anna Leigh Smith period or by the Bevans or whether it was originally designed as a chapel or later adopted for that use. Some of the finish materials used in the space can be found in other parts of the house that date to the Anna Leigh Smith period, such as the tomette tiles, used for the floor of the entry porch, and the painted floor tiles, which feature the same pattern as the floor tiles of the arcade surrounding the entry courtyard. If the finishes are original to the Leigh Smith period, it is possible that Bevan’s contribution was limited to the installation of the “altar.” Later documentation (discussed below) notes that the chapel was dedicated to Saint Theresa, who was not canonized until 1925, which might suggest that the religious use of the space began around that time.

Yvonne Kleiss-Herzig (1895–1968) was a French-Algerian painter, trained at the School of Fine Arts in Algiers and the Ecole des Beaux-Arts in Paris, who achieved recognition in the 1920s for her drawings and gouache paintings of animals, landscapes, portraits, and scenes of life in northern Algeria.22 Kleiss-Herzig completed a watercolor of the Campagne Montfeld in 1938 (discussed below), so it is known that she visited the property in the 1930s. Another painting attributed to her titled “Les femmes d’Alger dans un intérieur” (date unknown) depicts two women (one seated, one standing) within a room that bears a strong resemblance to the T-shaped basement space below the atrium or chapel (Figure 1.3.13). The room in the painting has a tomette tile floor, a green tile baseboard, and horseshoe arch openings fitted with grilles, and beyond the center opening is a tiled wall with an Algerian arch (or basket handle) niche that resembles the wall surrounding the east terrace (Figures 1.3.14 through 1.3.16). While additional research is required to determine whether the setting of this painting is the Campagne Montfeld, it is interesting to note that the space was not depicted as a place of worship.

21. Ross, “American Embassy Properties in Algiers: Their Origins and History,” 18.

22. Roger Benjamin, Orientalist Aesthetics: Art Colonialism, and French North Africa, 1880-1930 (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 2003), 270-271.

Period Plan : 1929

Figure 1.3.15

Detail of the Kleiss Herzig painting “Les femmes d’Alger dans un intérieur.” (Source: Artnet)

Figure 1.3.16

Terracotta pots on the east terrace that bear a strong resemblance to the pot seen in the background of “Les femmes d’Alger dans un intérieur.” (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.3.17

Detail of a 1929 map of Algiers with the Campagne Montfeld circled in blue. (“Alger et ses environs,” 1929, Bibliothèque nationale de France, available from Gallica)

1.3. Chronology of Development & Use / CMR (cont’d)

Landscape

There are few sources of information of the development of the landscape during this period. Some information, however, can be gleaned from a 1929 map of Algiers and its surroundings (Figure 1.3.17). In addition to the residence, the map depicts several outbuildings, including what appears to be the staff house (today the guest house), the stable (today the PSU break room/garage), the reservoir, and the north pavilion.

The map also appears to show the wall surrounding the lower parterre, which suggests that the wisteria trellis may have also been in place, although it is not shown on the map. In fact, the wisteria growing on the trellis is estimated to date to the Leigh Smith period (pre-1909), which would date the trellis and, possibly, the north parterre, to the previous period of development (1866-1909).

Figure 1.3.18

1929 Period Plan

Figure 1.3.19

Image of a garden in Algiers published in L’Afrique du Nord Illustrée showing reclaimed arches purportedly taken from Volubilis, the ancient Roman city in what today is Morocco. (“Jardins D’Alger,” L’Afrique du Nord Illustrée, October 1923)

Chronology of Development & Use / CMR (cont’d)

Circulation features include the access lane (today the cypress allée path), the entry drive and entry drive loop, and the northern access path. The access lane and entry drive loop are both delineated with a red double line. The map legend indicates that this notation is reserved for a “local road or other passable road” (“chemin vicinal ou autre chemin carrossable”). In contrast, the entry drive and northern access path are delineated with dashed red lines, the symbol reserved for a dirt road (“chemin de terre”). This suggests that the northern access path once may have served as an extension of the entry road. Later documentation (described below) confirms that there was once a secondary entrance to the property on chemin des Glycines, and a 1948 survey of the property shows the location of two gates one near the corner with chemin Cheikh Bachir Ibrahimi, which aligns with the north end of the northern access path, and a second further down chemin des Glycines.

In the collection of the British Museum is a postcard dated January 25, 1921, written by a guest of Constance Bevan’s at the Campagne Montfeld to a friend in London. The guest briefly describes the property, writing “This villa & garden [are] too beautiful — masses of violets - rosesmimosa -bougainvillea & palms. Really a dream. High up. Looking over Alger.”23 Mrs. Bevan seems to have been an avid gardener. In 1923, she made the local news when her bed of “superb carnations” were trampled on “like common begonias,” despite the barbed wire that she used to protect it.24

PERRIER FAMILY OWNERSHIP (1932-47)

In 1932, Paul Perrier, a newspaper publisher, purchased Campagne Montfeld from the estate of Constance Helen Ross Bevan for 2,045,000 francs. Four years later, in 1936, he sold the property to his son and daughter-in-law, Lucien Raoul Perrier and Suzanne Lacanaud Perrier. During this period the name of the property was shortened to “Montfeld.”25

Architecture and Landscape

While living at Montfeld, Suzanne Perrier approached the Algerian architect Léon Claro to embellish the gardens. According to historian Marion Vidal-Bué, in May 1941, Claro noted in his diary his satisfaction with “the beautiful effect of the white marbles and pink bricks, the splendid sculpted marble door brought from the district of the city known as the ‘quartier de la Marine,’ the wrought-iron gates closing the porch of the chapel dedicated to Saint Theresa, and the ‘small garden treated in the Spanish manner.’”26 The mention of a “sculpted marble door” is a reference to the “Casbah arch” that marks the passage from the east terrace to the south patio. The placement of a marble arch salvaged from the medina in the Montfeld garden was not an unusual way to embellish the landscape and reflects a long tradition of giving new life to historic fragments in new design (Figure 1.3.19). Claro describes a chapel dedicated to Saint Theresa, which is likely the T-shaped, basement space (Room 023) below the atrium (described above), and his reference to a “small garden treated in the Spanish manner” might apply to the lower parterre, the upper parterre, or perhaps, the south patio. Indeed, according to the undated memo prepared by Ambassador Porter (referenced above), it was under the ownership of the Perriers that the south patio was constructed, replacing a garden.27 Attributing the south patio to the Perriers seems to be supported by the 1929 map (see Figure 1.3.17), which dates to before their ownership and depicts the lower parterre, but not the south patio.

23. Postcard, museum number EPH-ME.5520, The British Museum, London, postcard inscription and curator’s comments available at The British Museum website, https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/W_EPH-ME-5520, accessed September 23, 2022.

24. “Amateur de Fleurs,” Les Nouvelles, journal quotidien du soir, January 12, 1923, via Gallica, National Library of France.

25. Ross, “American Embassy Properties in Algiers: Their Origins and History,” 19.

26. Marion Vidal-Bue, Villas et palais d’alger due XVIIIe siècle à nos jours (Paris: Editions Place des Victoires, 2012), 239, translated by S. Chergui. 27. Porter memo, no date, OBO Archive, Rosslyn, VA.

Figure 1.3.20

View of the entrance to Montfeld in 1938. (Marion Vidal-Bué, Villas et Palais d’Alger)

Figure 1.3.21

View of the CMR entrance in 2022 taken from the same vantage point as the 1938 photo. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.3.23

Current view of the lower parterre and fountain, 2022. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.3.22

View of the lower parterre and fountain, 1938. Note the small basin (no longer extant) surrounding the fountain spout. (Vidal-Bué, Villas et Palais d’Alger)

1.3. Chronology of Development & Use / CMR (cont’d)

PERRIER PHOTOS

A small number of photographs dated to circa 1938 provide documentation of the residence and landscape during the Perrier period of ownership. These photographs likely portray the site after Claro’s interventions, as they include the south patio. A photograph looking north from the north end of the entry drive captures most of the west façade of the residence, as well as the entry porch to the courtyard, the entry drive loop, and the wisteria wall (Figure 1.3.20). With only a few exceptions, the west façade of the residence appeared in 1938 much like it does today (Figure 1.3.21). One noticeable difference relates to the west exterior wall of the space referred to as a Moorish café (Room 111). Around 1938, this was a solid wall with no openings or projections. Today, however, it features a projecting bay with arched niches and, above the bay, three small rectangular openings. based on photographic records, this change occurred sometime between 1938 and 1965.

Another difference relates to the fenestration of the north wing. Originally, there was a south-facing second-floor window on the west façade (south wall of current Room 207). This window is no longer extant, a change that occurred sometime between 1938 and 1947. Additionally, there were originally only two west-facing, third-floor windows in the north wing. Today, there are three, with a small window added for a bathroom (current Room 304), likely installed when the third floor was subdivided, which occurred sometime before 1947. The photo also shows that there were once slate drip caps above the westfacing second-floor windows of the north wing. Today there are none. Lastly, circa 1938, there were no window grilles at the third-floor windows. At some point after 1965 and before 1999, grilles were added to these windows. The 1938 image of the west façade also indicates that the north wing originally featured a domed roof projection. Given its location relative to the west parapet wall, it appears that the dome may have been located above the top stair landing. Windows in the dome would have provided the landing with natural light. Based on photographic evidence, the dome was removed at some point between 1965 and 1999.

Landscape features of note in the circa 1938 photo of the west façade include the wisteria wall with arched openings, the brick-lined gutters and stone retaining walls along the entry drive, and the concrete curb around the entry drive loop. Today, the arched openings in the wisteria wall are closed, a modification that occurred sometime between 1969 and 1974. The other landscape features have not been altered and continue to characterize the landscape today.

The second exterior photograph from circa 1938 is an image taken from the lower parterre looking southeast toward the north façade of the residence (Figure 1.3.22). While most of the house is obscured by trees and other plant material, the photo indicates that the third-floor windows of the north wing were originally without grilles. At some point after 1965 and before 1999, grilles were added to these windows. Although many elements of the lower parterre have not changed since 1938, the character of the space is much different than it is today (Figure 1.3.23). The floor of the garden appears to have been lower, leaving more of the tile around the octagonal fountain basin visible. The fountain itself featured a raised marble basin (no longer extant). There were only a few vines growing along the knee wall and piers of the perimeter wall, allowing views from the lower parterre to adjacent spaces. Today, the bougainvillea planted along the inside edge of the perimeter wall on both the east and west sides obscure the wall. Lastly, the beds appeared to have a natural edge circa 1938, and small signs on stakes were used to identify plant materials. Today, the beds are edged with low concrete curbs and there are no garden stakes.

of Development & Use / CMR (cont’d)

Figure 1.3.24

View looking southeast across the south patio and reflecting pool (no longer extant), 1938. Note the paving, the tiled bench (at right), and the open character of the space. (Vidal-Bué, Villas et Palais d’Alger)

Figure 1.3.25

View of the south patio in 2022 taken from the same vantage point as the 1938 photo. Note the addition of the perimeter wall (at right) and fence (center and left). (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.3.27

View of the upper gallery, 1938. (Vidal-Bué, Villas et Palais d’Alger)

Figure 1.3.26

Room identified by historian Marion Vidal-Bué as a Moorish café, 1938. (Vidal-Bué, Villas et Palais d’Alger)

Figure 1.3.28

Current view of the gallery, 2022. (Robinson & Associates)

The third historic photograph of the exterior is a view from the south belvedere looking southeast across the south patio (Figure 1.3.24). In the late 1930s, the space featured a reflecting pool with marble coping, brick and tile paving with marble edging, and a curved bench surfaced with decorative tiles. In 1954, the reflecting pool was converted into a swimming pool, and in 2021 the swimming pool was removed, filled, and paved (Figure 1.3.25).28 The marble coping, however, remains. Another key change was the addition of the perimeter wall and fence. The perimeter wall on the south is a solid wall with intermittent openings and tile band along the top edge. On the east, the perimeter fence is composed of masonry posts with metal railings in between. Based on photographic evidence, the perimeter wall and fence appear to have been added after 1999.

There are two interior photographs from 1938. The first captures the original design of the Moorish café (Figure 1.3.26). It is taken in the larger room (Room 111) looking south into the smaller, domed room (Room 129). The larger space appears much as it does today, with a tiled floor and wainscot, tiled benches, niches with spiral fluted, stone columns, and a barrel-vaulted ceiling with small arched openings holding colored glass. A globe light hangs from the ceiling (no longer extant), and a horseshoe arched opening (now closed) provides access into the smaller domed space. Although the photo captures only a small portion of the adjacent space, it appears to have a tiled floor and a tiled wall with niches.

The second interior photograph (Figure 1.3.27) is taken from the second-floor hallway (Room 219) looking north toward the west end of the atrium gallery (Room 208). This space also appears much as it does today, with the exception of the light fixture (Figure 1.3.28).

YVONNE KLEISS HERZIG WATERCOLOR

As mentioned above, the Algerian artist Yvonne Kleiss Herzig painted a watercolor of Montfeld around 1938 (Figure 1.3.29). The work depicts the front façade of the residence and several landscape elements in the springtime. Wisteria covers the arched wall separating the entry drive loop and the north landscape as well as the north end of the west-facing wall of the entry courtyard. Vines with dark red blossoms or foliage cover the south end of the courtyard wall and much of the west façade of the main block. This image also clearly illustrates the dome that originally projected from the roof of the north wing.

28. The date of the installation of the swimming pool is from Ross, “American Embassy Properties in Algiers: Their Origins and History,” 20.

Figure 1.3.29

Watercolor of Montfeld by Yvonne Kleiss Herzig, 1938. Note the resemblances to the 1938 photograph the vine on the west façade, the dome over the north wing. (Vidal-Bué, Villas et Palais d’Alger)

WORLD WAR II BOMB SHELTER

Without a clear picture of the character and extent of Léon Claro’s interventions for the Perrier’s, one might conclude that the most significant architectural alteration during this period was the construction, during World War II, of an underground bomb shelter and access tunnel.

During World War II, Montfeld was requisitioned by the French authorities and occupied by two consecutive governor generals Marcel Peyrouton (January 17 to June 3, 1943) followed by Georges Catroux (June 3, 1943, to September 8, 1944). According to Ross, Catroux was responsible for building the bomb shelter as a refuge from German air raids.29 A Post report dated 1947, however, suggests that it may have been the French General Henri Giraud, who also resided at the residence during the war (see text below).

The earliest documentation found to date of the bomb shelter is a plan dated 1979. This plan reflects its current layout. The space is located roughly three stories below the basement level and is accessed via a spiral staircase located in a small room in the basement (Room 012). At the bottom of the stair landing is a narrow, L-shaped tunnel that branches into two tunnels, each leading to a small, rectangular chamber. A second, longer tunnel extends east from the chambers to a dead end.

Yet a third tunnel extends south to a double flight of straight-run stairs. At the top of the stair is a steel hatch that opens to a location close to the eastern edge of the property (Figure 1.3.31). The tunnels have a barrel vault shape and are roughly 6 feet high and 2.5 feet wide (Figure 1.3.32); construction materials include brick and concrete.

29. Ross, “American Embassy Properties in Algiers: Their Origins and History,” 19.

Figure 1.3.31

Photo, looking north, of the access hatch leading to the bomb shelter, 2022. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.3.32

Bomb shelter tunnel, 2022. (Robinson & Associates)

US GOVERNMENT ACQUISITION AND THE CONSUL GENERAL RESIDENCE (1947–62)

The Villa Montfeld, as it was then being called, was acquired by the US government in June 1947 for use as an official residence of the consul general.30 The State Department carried out several projects during its first fifteen years of ownership that impacted both the building and the landscape.

Architecture

A Post report dated January 30, 1947, a few months before the US acquisition was finalized, provides a detailed description of the property at the time.31 Key passages are extracted below.

The house is in Moorish style. The main door opens into a Moorish court, open to the sky and surrounded by a columned passage which is covered. All the public rooms are wainscoted in tiles in the Moorish style. The main salon is about fifty feet square; has a fireplace; looks out through large high windows to a courtyard with reflecting basin….There are two small salons, also a hall which separates the salons from the dining room. This is large enough to seat sixteen.

The kitchens, pantries etc. are beyond the dining room and are reached by a service entrance from the drive. Below stairs are well-aired storage rooms, furnace for the central heating (whose radiators are not, however, of the most modern design) and coal storage space. Below the cellar, General Giraud, who occupied the house during the war, constructed an “abri,” some seventeen feet below ground. There are laundry installations and a kitchen patio hidden from the rest of the house.

Upstairs, the owner’s suite, which can be shut off, consists of a large bedroom, bathroom and study. The bedroom overlooks the court; the study, the city and port of Algiers. The Moorish inside court rises to the second floor and from it a large plate glass window gives onto the city and port. The guest bedrooms, which can also be shut off, number three with three baths. On the third floor are servants rooms. There are also rooms for sewing and pressing.

Note that the Post report attributes the construction of the bomb shelter to the French General Henri Giraud rather than Catroux. According to Giraud’s memoir of his time in Algiers, he lived at Montfeld, although research to date has not clarified the timing of his stay as it relates to Peyrouton or Catroux.32 The Post report also indicates that the third floor of the north wing had been partitioned by 1947.33 Originally, it was one unsubdivided space.

30. Telegram, May 7, 1947, Box 1254, CDF 1945-49, Record Group 59: General Records of the Department of State, National Archives and Records Administration, College Park, MD, hereafter shortened to RG 59, NARA; Ross, “American Embassy Properties in Algiers: Their Origins and History,” 20.

31. Airgram, January 30, 1947, Box 1254, CDF 1945-49, RG 59, NARA.

32. Translated from French, Giraud wrote, “During the short journey from the Maison-Blanche to the villa Montfeld, where I live, I learn how the attack took place.” It is not clear from the text, however, when exactly Giraud used it as his residence. See Henri Giraud, Un seul but, la victoire: Alger 1942-1944 (Paris, 1949), 74, via Gallica, National Library of France.

33. This contradicts the Ross report, which dates this change to 1960. See Ross, “American Embassy Properties in Algiers: Their Origins and History,” 20.

1947 FLOOR PLANS

In August 1947, the State Department’s Office of Foreign Buildings Operations (FBO) prepared a first-floor plan (plan du rez de chaussée) and second-floor plan (plan du 1er étage) of the residence. These plans supplement the Post report of the same year and provide additional detail about the house and information on initial room functions to accommodate its new use as a consul general’s residence.

On the first-floor plan, the entry courtyard is labeled as “grande cour” in contrast with the atrium, which is marked as the “cour Mauresque.” The small salon and living room are both simply labeled as “salon.” The dining room is shown in the same location as it is currently. The room identified today as the library (Room 106) is not labeled on the 1947 plan, but is shown with an arrangement of three small rectangular tables each with four chairs, suggesting, perhaps, that it was used, or intended to be used, as a card room. The most notable difference between the 1947 first-floor plan and the current plan relates to the space between the two salons (today Rooms 104 and 105). In the older plan, this is a corridor consisting of three volumes two squares bracketing a rectangle that linked the cour Mauresque with the door leading to the south patio (Figure 1.3.33).

In the north wing, the first-floor spaces were subdivided differently than they are today. In the 1947 plan, the area currently occupied by the kitchen (Room 122) is subdivided into three rooms a kitchen at the northeast corner, a small dining room, perhaps for staff, in the northwest corner, and a narrow room in between. Additionally, the space currently used as a pantry (Room 118) is subdivided into two rooms, with, perhaps, one serving simply as a passage to the dining room and the other used as a storage room.

On the second floor, the primary difference between the 1947 plan and the current plan relates to the large bedroom (Room 205) over the dining room. In the older

plan, this space is divided into two rooms — a large room to the north marked bedroom (chambre) and a smaller, unlabeled, room to the south (Figure 1.3.34). A doorway at the east end of the partition wall linked the two spaces. It is unclear from the 1947 drawing whether the small arched opening with a carved stone surround (see Figure 1.3.9) along the west wall of this room was open at the time when the bedroom was subdivided or whether it was a blind arch as it remains today. The 1947 plans are marked up to suggest that FBO wished to tear down the partition wall to create one larger space. While this change was carried out at some point before 1979 (as shown in drawings of that date), the exact date of the modification has not been determined.

In November 1947, the State Department approved funding to paint the residence, and Consul General Harold D. Finley officially moved in the following July, although the house had reportedly not been certified by FBO as being ready for occupancy.34

In a State Department memo written in February 1950, Consul General George Tait described the “highly unsatisfactory condition” of the residence and censured interior decorator Daisy de Bellville and architect Georges Fratacci for abandoning their work “well before it was completed.”35 According to the Porter memo, this interior decorator, who is referred to as Daisy de Liouville, was a French national and a friend of “the FBO man in Paris” who helped that office make the decision to purchase the residence. Subsequently, she received the contract to refurbish the interior.36 Research to date has not determined how Fratacci became involved. Evidently, Tait’s concerns did not fall on deaf ears. Two months later, the State Department authorized the expenditure of “up to 251,000 French francs to complete repairs Villa Montfeld.” In February of the following year, 1951, an additional 77,000 francs were allocated for repairs.37 At the time, this was roughly equivalent to $93,800 over two years.38 Records from this period, however, do not identify the work that was carried out with this funding.

34. Memo, February 9, 1950, Box 802, CDF 1950-54, RG 59, NARA.

35. Airgram, November 13, 1947, Box 1254, CDF 1945-49, RG 59, NARA; Memo, February 9, 1950, Box 802, CDF 1950-54, RG 59, NARA.

36. Porter memo, undated, OBO Archives, Rosslyn.

37. Airgram, April 20, 1950, Box 802, CDF 1950-54, RG 59, NARA; Airgram, February 15, 1951, Box 802, CDF 1950-54, RG 59, NARA.

38. This calculation is based on a 1950 exchange rate of 3.49 French francs to the American dollar. See PACIFIC Exchange Rate Service, Foreign Currency Units per 1 US Dollar, 1950-2020, https://fx.sauder.ubc.ca/etc/USDpages.pdf, accessed October 4, 2022.

Figure 1.3.33

Detail of a 1947 first-floor plan, showing the corridor between the salons at the south end of the main block. The central segment of the corridor would later be closed off and converted first into a music room and then into a stair hall. (Record Group 59, Cartographic and Architectural Records, National Archives, College Park, MD)

1.3.

of Development & Use / CMR (cont’d)

Figure 1.3.34

Detail of a 1947 second-floor plan, showing the partition wall that once subdivided the bedroom over the dining room. (Record Group 59, Cartographic and Architectural Records, National Archives, College Park, MD)

Chronology

Figure 1.3.35

Detail from a circa 1954 second-floor plan for the installation of central heating in the CMR showing a sketch of the design of the radiator grilles. (Record Group 59, Records of the US State Department, National Archives and Records Administration)

Figure 1.3.36

The existing radiator grilles match the design shown in the circa 1954 plans suggesting they date to that period. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.3.37

The handrail of the main stair, 2022. (Robinson & Associates)

CENTRAL HEATING UPGRADE AND MINOR REPAIRS

As part of a project to install radiators and other equipment to upgrade the central heating system, the State Department had a set of plans prepared of the residence. These plans, which are stamped “R. Richard et Cie. Chauffage Central,” are undated, but are labeled “consulate general’s residence,” which indicates they were made before 1962, when the consulate general was raised to embassy status.39 It is likely that they were prepared around 1954 because in October of that year the following repairs were authorized: 1) insulation of boiler and pipes, installation of thermostat control, and removal of unused oil lines ($531), 2) plumbing and water supply ($550), 3) sewerage disposal line to main city sewer ($400). In addition, small sums (less than $200) were allocated for painting, roof patching, waterproofing, chimney cleaning, plumbing, and telephone renovation.40 The radiator grills installed during this period remain in place today (Figure 1.3.35 and Figure 1.3.36).

In 1955, a new railing was installed along the principal stairway.41 This is likely the east rail of the existing railing (Figure 1.3.37) in the main stair hall (Room 113). A later photo of the stairway shows only the east rail in place, indicating that the west rail was a later addition.

Landscape

The January 1947 Post report also provides a description of the landscape. Key passages are extracted below.

[The Villa Montfeld] is situated on the upper rim of the amphitheater of hills on which Algiers (El Biar) is built in probably the best residential district….The main entrance is on Chemin Beaurepaire and a subsidiary one on Chemin [des] Glycines.

Note the reference to a secondary entrance on chemin des Glycines. As mentioned earlier in the chapter, this may refer to an entrance (no longer extant) at the corner of chemin des Glycines and chemin Cheikh Bachir Ibrahimi, which aligned with the north end of the northern access path, or a second entrance (also no longer extant) further down chemin des Glycines.

At the main entrance gate there is a porter’s lodge presently occupied by a junior French army officer and his family; also a garage for three cars equipped with pit. Chauffeur’s living quarters are above. The drive is cement and leads to the house…

The porter’s lodge likely refers to the staff house noted in the 1909 deed, which is today used as a guest house. The Post report also indicates that by 1947, the stable (today the PSU break room/garage) had been converted into a garage with living quarters above. 39.

Figure 1.3.38

View of the south patio of the CMR published in the October 16, 1947, issue of Liberté, a Communist weekly published in Algiers. Note the large palm tree in the planter (no longer extant) near the south door and what appears to be a protective window blind over the large south window in the south façade. The Moorish café (not visible in this image) is located off the south porch. (Press clipping, Central Decimal Files, 1945-49, Box 1254, Record Group 59, Records of the US State Department, National Archives, College Park, MD)

Figure 1.3.39

Another view of the south patio taken during Independence Day celebrations on July 4, 1953. (“La Vie des Consulats,” Revue municipale d’Alger 7, July 1953)

The 1947 report then goes on to describe the south patio, although the author confuses the cardinal directions, mistakenly identifying east as north, and so forth. In the passage below, the correct cardinal points are given in brackets.

As noted previously, a paved courtyard is just east [south] of the house. On the north [east] there is the view of the city and port and the lower gardens; on the east [south] of it are trees screening the next property; and the southeast [southwest] corner a pair of ornamental iron gates giving onto the entrance drive; on the south [west] a well with a fountain and at the southwest [northwest] corner a covered Moorish arcade from which opened a handsomely tiled Moorish semi-enclosed dining room and small charcoal kitchen (constructed especially for serving Arab food and coffee). In the center is a reflecting pool of pleasing design and at the corner of the house two huge palm trees.

Through a reconstructed Roman marble archway at the northwest [northeast] corner of the courtyard, stairs lead to a formal garden below, a chapel has been built into the basement of the house and overlooks the gardens and the sea.

There are two items of interest in this passage. The first is the mention of a well with a fountain on the west side of the south patio. No water feature exists in this location today, which is occupied by the south belvedere. Nor is a well shown on the detailed survey of the property prepared in 1949, which indicates the locations of other fountains (fontaine). The second item of interest is the reference to “a handsomely tiled Moorish semi-enclosed dining room and small charcoal kitchen (constructed especially for serving Arab food and coffee).” This is likely describing the Moorish café (Rooms 111 and 129) adjacent to the south porch (Figures 1.3.38 and 1.3.39).

1949 SURVEY

As noted above, soon after acquiring Villa Montfeld, the FBO commissioned local surveyor, R. Bourlon, to prepare a topographic survey of the property. This survey, dated March 1949, provides a highly detailed record of the landscape at the time (Figure 1.3.40). It shows the locations and footprints of the residence, outbuildings, and other built features, such as the fallout shelter outlet. It delineates the entry drive, pedestrian paths, and other circulation features, including steps and stairs. The entry drive and loop were paved with concrete (cimentée); the material of the garden paths is not indicated, suggesting they may have originally been paved. The survey identifies the locations of reservoirs, fountains (fontaine), gutters (caniveau d’eau), and decorative pools. By this date, a portion of the site’s upper slopes had been terraced and ornamented with two formal parterres, one with a fountain, and what appears to be an orchard, as evidenced by its orderly rows of trees. Several landscape features in the southwest quadrant of the property are identified by name, including the orangerie, the rose garden (roseraie), and the cypress allée. The lower slopes of the site, east of the residence, had a more informal character. Paths cut through the landscape, and portions of the slopes were terraced.

The survey also provides a key source of information on what is likely the original design of the east terrace and the south patio. At the time, the east terrace did not have a stair at its north end as it does today, and it could only be accessed from the south patio or from a door in the basement. At the north end, a bed ran alongside the terrace walls, and two small planters one octagonal and one square, embellished the space. An outline of the square planter is visible in the existing terrace paving (Figure 1.3.41). The south patio originally featured a large reflecting pool, two large, polygonal planters, a small, star-shaped basin, two curved benches, and several planted beds. Decorative tile embellished the built features, and the floor of the patio was also tiled.

Figure 1.3.40

A survey of the consul general’s residence property dated March 1949. (OBO Archive)

of Development & Use / CMR (cont’d)

Figure 1.3.41

Detail of the east terrace paving showing the location of a former planting bed. (Robinson & Associates)

VEGETATED AREA

1.3. Chronology of Development & Use / CMR (cont’d)

The survey also indicates the limits of two no-building zones (zone non aedificandi) and a projected way (voie projetée) between them. These were related to zoning and development restrictions imposed by the French authorities, although chemin Cheikh Bachir Ibrahimi was never rerouted to follow the gentle curve indicated in the survey.

FEATURES / POOLS

Period Plan : 1949

Legend

BUILDINGS

APPARENT PROPERTY BOUNDARY

ENTRANCE

VEGETATED AREA

HARDSCAPE AREA

TREES

WATER FEATURES / POOLS

Figure 1.3.42

1949 Period Plan

Figure 1.3.43

1965 photo of the south patio, a little over a decade after the reflecting pool had been converted into a swimming pool. (OBO Archive)

1954 SWIMMING POOL INSTALLATION

According to the house history prepared by Ambassador Ross, the reflecting pool on the south patio was converted into a swimming pool in 1954 (Figure 1.3.43).42 The same year, the State Department authorized $500 for the grounds and fences although how this funding may or may not have been related to the swimming pool is unknown.43

AMBASSADOR’S RESIDENCE IN THE LATE TWENTIETH CENTURY (1963-91)

As noted earlier, the United States established diplomatic relations with Algeria in 1962, and, during that year, the consul general’s residence was redesignated as the ambassador’s residence. Other than a set of thirteen black and white photographs from 1965, information on this period of the CMR’s chronology is scant and relies heavily on the history prepared by Ambassador Ross in April 1991. Most of the documented changes to the property during this period impacted the landscape.

Architecture

Between 1974 and 1977, the kitchen in the north wing was renovated.44 According to a circa 1960s first-floor plan (Figure 1.3.44), prior to the renovation, the kitchen area was subdivided into two rooms — a large room on the east that served as a kitchen and dishwashing area (“plonge”) and a smaller room on the west, which was used as a staff room (“salle de gens”). The renovation in the 1970s eliminated the partition wall to create one large room (Figures 1.3.45 and 1.3.46).

The next major building projects occurred in 1988-89, when, according to the Ross history, two bathrooms (locations unspecified) were tiled and the basement space under the small salon was renovated to accommodate changing rooms (Rooms 015 and 016), presumably for those using the swimming pool in the south patio.45 Although Ross does not specifically

mention it, this project may have encompassed all of the spaces currently in this section of the basement, which, in addition to the changing rooms, includes a corridor and two bathrooms. Indeed, these spaces (Rooms 014 through 022) currently share identical materials and finishes (Figure 1.3.47), indicating that they all likely date to the same renovation campaign, and the two bathrooms Ross mentions as being tiled at this time may have been these basement-level bathrooms (Rooms 017-018 and Rooms 019-022).

Since no drawings of the basement renovation project have been found to date, the character of this space before the project and its exact scope are unknown. As such, it is not certain whether the interior spiral staircase (Figure 1.3.48) that accesses this space from the first floor (Room 108) was put in as part of the work. A photograph of the staircase under construction (Figure 1.3.49), which is undated but may date to the late 1980s, seems to indicate that it was installed as part of the basement renovation. The fact that the spiral stair does not appear in a first-floor plan of the residence from 1979 supports this idea. Before the spiral stair was installed and first-floor space was converted into a stair hall, a partition wall had been added at its south end to separate it from the vestibule to the south (Room 115), and the space was used as a music room containing a stereo and related equipment (Figure 1.3.50).46

Ross notes several major projects in 1989-91, including refinishing the exterior walls and roof surfaces of the residence, replacing the plumbing and heating systems, and remodeling the kitchen. Research to date has not found additional documentation to fill in the details about these projects.

42. Ross, “American Embassy Properties in Algiers: Their Origins and History,” 20.

43. Department of State Instruction, November 10, 1954, Box 802, CDF 1950-54, RG 59, NARA.

44. Ross, “American Embassy Properties in Algiers: Their Origins and History,” 21.

45. Ibid.

46. CMR furnishings list, dated circa 1988, OBO Archive.

Figure 1.3.44

Detail from a circa 1960s first-floor plan showing the north wing of the residence. Note the kitchen area had been divided into two rooms. (Record Group 59, Records of the US State Department, National Archives, College Park, MD)

Figure 1.3.46

Kitchen (Room 122), circa 1988, looking east. (OBO Archives)

Figure 1.3.45

Circa 1988 photo of the Kitchen (Room 122), looking west, showing its appearance after the space was renovated around 1974-77. (OBO Archives)

Figure 1.3.47

View of the hallway outside the changing rooms in the basement of the CMR, 2022. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.3.48

The top landing and spiral staircase leading to the basement, 2022. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.3.49

Photo, dated circa 1988, of the spiral staircase under construction. (OBO Archive)

Figure 1.3.50

Detail of an undated first-floor plan showing the space between the small salon and the living room partitioned from the vestibule and being used as a music room. (OBO Archive)

1.3. Chronology of Development & Use / CMR (cont’d)

Landscape

According to the Ross history, around 1967-69, “the terrace and retaining wall adjacent to the northeast corner of the residence was rebuilt and reinforced.”47 This is likely a reference to the east terrace, indicating that the existing retaining wall, posts, railing, tile floor, and decorative tilework dates to the late 1960s (Figure 1.3.51). The stair from the overlook terrace to the east terrace, which does not appear on the 1949 survey, also likely dates to this project (Figure 1.3.52). In addition, it may have been at this time that the octagonal and square planting beds documented in the 1949 survey were removed.

In 1969, the State Department carried out a perimeter security upgrade that involved the installation of a perimeter wall to replace the wire fencing that had previously marked the property boundary.48 The 1949 survey indicates that, at that time, there was a wall along only a portion of the site, near the entry gates (see Figure 1.3.40). There was also a short length of wall along the south property line. It is unclear whether the 1969 project extended these existing walls or replaced them.

Sometime after 1965, perhaps in association with the perimeter wall project, the wooden gate at the main entrance to the residence was replaced with a metal gate.

The next landscape project occurred around 1969-74, when the arches of the wisteria wall were filled in.49 This change may have been carried out to screen the activities taking place in the service yard behind the wall from visitors arriving at the house.

In 1969-70, a clay-surface tennis court was laid out north of the lower parterre garden (Figure 1.3.53).50 Previously, a path had cut through the landscape in this location, connecting the lower parterre with the perimeter path. To build the court, the ground was leveled and resurfaced, a high retaining wall was built along the west edge of the space, and a tall chain-link fence was installed around the court’s perimeter.

Another significant change to the use and character of the landscape occurred in 1978-79, when the swimming pool complex, which included a pool and pool house, were constructed. The swimming pool was built on the upper terrace, northwest of the residence and north of the formal parterre gardens. Drawings for the project, dated 1979, are of poor quality, and many features are faint and hard to read.51 These drawings seem to indicate that the pool complex may not have originally included the patio area that currently exists north of the pool and pool house or the perimeter beds and perimeter wall assembly (Figures 1.3.55 through 1.3.57)

That the pool area was developed in two phases seems to be supported by a 1979 site plan, which shows the pool and pool house, but not the patio area.

In his history of the residence, Ross states that, in 1988-89, “the portion of the east courtyard adjacent to the living room [was] tiled.”52 This seems to be a reference to the northern end of the south patio, which, according to the 1949 survey, originally featured a small, star-shaped basin and two planted beds one roughly rectangular and one lozenge-shaped. Since no documentation of this project has been found in research to date, the exact scope of the work is unknown. A photo of the area dated 1983, however, shows that the lozenge-shaped bed had been removed by that point (Figure 1.3.60), and perhaps its removal was one factor necessitating the 1988-89 retiling project.

47. Ross, “American Embassy Properties in Algiers: Their Origins and History,” 21.

48. Ibid.

49. Ibid.

50. Ibid.

51. Cartographic and Architectural Records, RG 59, NARA.

52. Ross, “American Embassy Properties in Algiers: Their Origins and History,” 21.

(Robinson & Associates)

(Robinson & Associates)

(Note: Figure 1.3.54 has been removed.)

Figure 1.3.51

View of the railing and posts that surround the east terrace, 2022. The retaining wall was rebuilt around 1967-69, and the railing, posts, tile floor, and decorative tilework likely date to that repair project.

Figure 1.3.52

Looking south toward the stair to the east terrace, 2002. This stair and railing are not original and may have been constructed around 1967-69.

Figure 1.3.53

View across the tennis court, looking southeast. 2022. Note the retaining wall on the right of the image. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.3.55

View looking south across the swimming pool in the upper terrace, 2022. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.3.56 Pool house, 2022. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.3.57

View of the patio area north of swimming pool, 2022. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.3.60

View looking north across the south patio, 1983, showing that the lozenge-shaped bed that had been removed by that date. (Record Group 59, Cartographic and Architectural Records, National Archives, College Park, MD)

RECENT PROJECTS (1992–2022)

Architecture

Exterior Painting

At some point after 2009 and before 2017 (exact date undetermined), the exterior façade of the CMR was painted with a decorative scheme that used yellow paint to highlight certain architectural features, including the rectangular recesses and columns of the arches that embellish many of the window openings, the underside of stucco drip moldings and sills, the stone surround at the south door, the rectangular recesses of the arches decorating the exterior wall of the Moorish café, the rectangular recesses of the second-floor balcony arches, and the flat band of molding that decorates certain bays of the east façade.53 In addition, dark red colored paint as well as yellow were used on the stone and plasterwork of the entry portal. Previously, these features all had a white finish. As a result of various stone restoration projects (see text below), some of this decorative painting has been removed. In addition, in at least two areas, the polychromatic painting has been covered with white, such as the stone surround at the front door and the rectangular recesses of the arches decorating the exterior wall of the Moorish café.

Kitchen Renovations

Records indicate that the CMR kitchen was renovated around 1974–1977 and remodeled again in 1989–1991. The current finishes and fixtures are more recent than the early 1990s, suggesting that another renovation has occurred; however, the date of that work has not been determined. Similarly, most of the bathrooms in the residence appear to have been updated in the recent past. For example, the ambassador’s bathroom (Room 203) and one of the third-floor bathrooms were renovated in 2018. The dates of the other bathroom renovations have not been determined.

Window Replacement

In 2013, all of the windows in the CMR were replaced with wood sash (beech) windows with a stained finish (Figure 1.3.61). Most of the windows are casements, and the sash are divided into multiple rectangular lights of different sizes as well as a light with an arched mullion.

Entry Courtyard Restoration

In December 2017, the embassy carried out a restoration project to repair the molding at the spring line of one of the arches supporting the ceiling of the entry courtyard (Figure 1.3.62). Formwork was prepared based on the profile of existing molding from another arch, stainless steel pins were inserted into the stone substrate, and stucco was applied to restore the feature (Figures 1.3.63 and 1.3.64).

This project was followed closely by the restoration of the wood door and stone surround of the courtyard entry portal. As part of this project, carried out in 2019, the bronze hardware and rivets of the door were removed and cleaned; the bronze grill was cleaned to remove oxidation; the door was repaired and restained; and the hardware was reinstalled (Figures 1.3.65 and 1.3.66). The interior base of door frame, where there had been a previous repair that used cementitous mortar, was also restored. The hard mortar was removed, the wood was treated for termite damage, and the void was refilled with a wood hardener and consolidating paste (Figures 1.3.67 and 1.3.68). As part of the repair of exterior stone arch, the decorative paint was removed and the stonework restored (Figures 1.3.69 and 1.3.70).54

Interior Repairs

In late 2020, there was a leak in a third-floor bathroom of the CMR that caused extensive damage to a secondfloor bedroom (Room 207) and to the linen room (Room 213). Repairs were carried out in early 2021, first to the bedroom then to the linen room. In the bedroom, the repair work included removing the damaged portions of the plaster ceiling, removing the surface corrosion from

53. A set of photos dated 2009 shows the residence before the white and yellow paint scheme was implemented, and photos from 2017 show the house with the paint scheme in place. See photographic collections in OBO Archives.

54. Project files, Facilities Office, US Embassy, Algiers.

Figure 1.3,61

The windows in the CMR date to 2013, including this multi-sash window in the atrium. (Whitney Cox)

Figure 1.3.62

Photo of damaged molding at the spring line of one of the arches supporting the ceiling of the entry courtyard before its December 2017 restoration. (Facilities Office, US Embassy, Algiers)

Figure 1.3.63

Photo of the molding during restoration. (Facilities Office, US Embassy, Algiers)

Figure 1.3.64

Photo of the molding after restoration. (Facilities Office, US Embassy, Algiers)

1.3. Chronology of Development & Use / CMR (cont’d)

Figure 1.3.65

Entry portal door before the 2019 restoration. (Facilities Office, US Embassy, Algiers)

Figure 1.3.66

Conservator using wood paste to repair the door. (Facilities Office, US Embassy, Algiers)

Figure 1.3.68

Door frame after the restoration. (Facilities Office, US Embassy, Algiers)

Figure 1.3.69

Conservator making a masonry repair to the stone surround. (Facilities Office, US Embassy, Algiers)

Figure 1.3.67

Previous repair to the interior base of the entry portal door frame before the 2019 restoration. (Facilities Office, US Embassy, Algiers)

Figure 1.3.70

Entry portal door after the 2019 restoration. (Facilities Office, US Embassy, Algiers)

the lower flanges of the steel beam that the plaster lathe had been attached to, repainting the beams with an anti-corrosive paint, replacing most of the wood framing with beechwood, installing new plaster lathe (cane mats laced together with stainless wire), and replastering the surface (Figures 1.3.71 through 1.3.75).55 A similar project, also in 2021, was carried out in a basement storage room (Room 011), where there had been damage to the ceiling and a wall.

South Porch Repairs

In 2020-21, the embassy carried out several repairs to the south porch. First, in 2020, the plaster finish of the interior walls around the door openings to the Moorish café (Rooms 111 and 129) was repaired to correct moisture damage that had caused voids in the plaster and blistering and peeling paint. The project involved removing the existing cement-based plaster from the stone substrate and refinishing the walls with a limebased plaster (Figure 1.3.76). In 2021, the embassy carried out repairs to the tile roof overhang of the porch and to a section of the soffit. The roof work was needed to correct a deflection in the overhang along the south exterior wall and to repair a long, horizontal crack in the masonry wall above the tiles. The soffit project involved replacing plaster that had sloughed off, likely due to corrosion of steel flanges.56

Landscape

South Patio Changes

Over the last three decades, one of the most frequent spaces of intervention in the landscape has been the south patio. At some point between 1988 and 1999, the tiles in the section of the patio surrounding the pool were replaced. Older photos show the space surfaced with decorative tiles with a floral or geometric motif, similar, perhaps, to the existing tiles in the south belvedere area. The replacement tiles were yellow and terracotta-colored, hexagonal tiles.

At some point after 1999 but before 2017, the south patio was enclosed on the east with a fence comprised of

masonry posts and metal railings and on the south with a solid wall with intermittent openings. The masonry posts were designed with a pyramidal-shaped top that replicated the masonry posts around the lower parterre garden, which date to at least 1938, and the posts of the fence around the east terrace, which are of more recent vintage.

In 2002, Ambassador Janet A. Sanderson planted a cypress tree near the south belvedere in commemoration of the first anniversary of the September 11th terrorist attacks on Washington, D.C., and New York City.

At an undetermined date sometime after 2009, the rectangular bed was removed from south patio. When that area was repaved, decorative tile panels were installed in the paving (Figure 1.3.77).

In 2014, a barrier, constructed of glass panels, was installed in the south patio around the swimming pool. The barrier was short-lived, as it would be taken out when the pool was removed (see text below).

In 2017-18, the embassy carried out a careful restoration of the marble arch, known as the “Casbah arch,” located at the north end of the south patio where it joins with the east terrace (Figures 1.3.78 through 1.3.81). The feature is composed of a carved marble arch affixed to the south side of an arched brick support structure surfaced with stucco. The marble restoration included cleaning and dutchman repairs using stainless steel pins. The stucco was carefully chipped away from the brick substrate, cracks in the masonry were repaired, and new stucco was applied.

In 2020, extensive repairs were made to the granite and tile bench at south end of south patio which had been badly cracked and displaced in several places from tree roots (Figure 1.3.82). To repair the bench, the trees and roots causing the issue were removed, the bench foundation was excavated, sections of the bench were lifted and repositioned using a steel A-frame and hoist, and the tilework and granite capstones were restored (Figures 1.3.83 through 1.3.86).

55. Project files and email correspondence, Facilities Office, US Embassy, Algiers.

56. Project files, Facilities Office, US Embassy, Algiers.

Finally, in the summer of 2021, the south patio swimming pool, which had been leaking increasingly for many years, was removed (Figures 1.3.87 through 1.3.90). The space was backfilled and paved with terracotta and marble tiles. Salvaged marble coping was reset at grade in an arrangement that matched the outline of the original reflecting pool. As a consequence of this project, the glass barrier that had been installed around the pool was taken out, and the pool pump and filter that had been located in a nearby shed were also removed.

Most recently, in 2022, double-globe light standards were installed in various locations around the south patio (Figure 1.3.91).

Lower Parterre Improvements and Restorations

In the past few years, the embassy has carried out several projects involving the lower parterre garden and adjacent greenhouse area. In August 2021, it was discovered that part of the masonry wall defining the west side of the greenhouse area had partially collapsed, and that other areas of the west and north walls were structurally unstable. The repair project involved removing the plant material along the outer face of the west wall, chipping away the existing stucco from both walls, removing roots that had grown into the interior, reinforcing the foundations, rebuilding parts of the walls and posts using salvaged stones and lime mortar, covering the wall surfaces with stucco (lime render), and installing new wood railings between the posts (Figures 1.3.92 through 1.3.95). The only change from the original was that a portion of the new wall was capped with roof tiles. This change was made to help shed water from the wall surfaces.

Around the same time as the wall project, the embassy restored the marble fountain in the parterre garden. Originally this fountain featured a carved marble pedestal, a bowl-shaped basin, and a carved marble spout, all set in the center of a quatrefoil-shaped basin. While the fountain with its basin intact appears a 1938 photo of the garden, it has since been lost, and the fountain pedestal and spout had become encapsulated with a thick layer of surface accretions (Figure 1.3.96). To

restore the fountain, the acretions were carefully chipped away in situ, and, once enough material was removed, the fountain pedestal and spout were removed for additional cleaning off site. Both pieces were then reinstalled on the original base, which had been fitted with a new pipe (Figure 1.3.97 through 1.3.100).

Most recently, in the summer of 2022, the border of the flower beds in lower parterre, which had been brick, were replaced with concrete faced with brick (Figure 1.3.101).

Playground Construction

In the fall of 2021, a playground was installed on the upper terrace between the north parterre and the swimming pool. Previously, the area was terraced, planted with turf and at least one tree, and play structures were arranged in the open space (Figure 1.3.102). Historically, there was an orchard in this space. To create the new playground, the area was leveled, and a rubber surface and new play equipment were installed (Figure 1.3.103).

North Pavilion Column Repair

In 2022, the embassy repaired the limestone (tufa) column of the north pavilion, which had several cracks and areas of spalling. To carry out the work, the pavilion structure was shored up so that the column could be moved to an off-site workshop. The column was stabilized with a noncorrosive pin, which was placed in the center void, then reassembled, and new brick cap constructed (Figures 1.3.104 through 1.3.106).

Garden Gate Restoration

In the summer of 2022, the embassy had the wrought-iron garden gate restored. Prior to the project, the garden gate, which is located along the path from the entry drive to the south patio, was heavily corroded and parts were missing (Figure 1.3.107). It was restored off-site in the summer of 2022 and reinstalled in its original location (Figure 1.3.108).

of Development & Use / CMR (cont’d)

Figure 1.3.71

Ceiling damage to the second-floor bedroom (Room 207), winter 2020. (Facilities Office, US Embassy, Algiers)

Figure 1.3.73

Ceiling damage linen room (Room 213), winter 2020. (Facilities Office, US Embassy, Algiers)

Figure 1.3.74

Linen room (Room 213) ceiling during repairs, spring 2021. (Facilities Office, US Embassy, Algiers)

Figure 1.3.72

Photo of the bedroom (Room 207) ceiling with the damaged plaster and lathe removed exposing the floor structure, spring 2021. (Facilities Office, US Embassy, Algiers)

Figure 1.3.75

New lathe and plaster being installed in the linen room (Room 213), spring 2021. (Facilities Office, US Embassy, Algiers)

Figure 1.3.76

In 2020, the interior walls of the south porch were replastered to repair water damage. Two coats of lime-based plaster were applied to the wall as part of the work. (Facilities Office, US Embassy, Algiers)

Figure 1.3.78

The “Casbah arch” before restoration. (Facilities Office, US Embassy, Algiers)

Figure 1.3.77

Tile panel in the south patio, 2022. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.3.79

Stucco removal from the brick support structure. (Facilities Office, US Embassy, Algiers)

Figure 1.3.80

Crack in the masonry of the support structure. (Facilities Office, US Embassy, Algiers)

Figure 1.3.83

Excavation of the bench foundation. (Facilities Office, US Embassy, Algiers)

Figure 1.3.82

Cracks and displacement of the curved bench at the south end of the south patio. (Facilities Office, US Embassy, Algiers)

Figure 1.3.84

Bench after relocation. (Facilities Office, US Embassy, Algiers)

Figure 1.3.81

The “Casbah arch” after restoration. (Facilities Office, US Embassy, Algiers)

1.3. Chronology of Development & Use / CMR (cont’d)

After the pool floor and walls were demolished, the marble coping was removed, and the void was filled and compacted. This image shows the space prepped for the placement of the concrete slab. (Facilities Office, US Embassy, Algiers)

Figure 1.3.85

Middle section of the bench being lifted off of its foundation before repositioning. (Facilities Office, US Embassy, Algiers)

Figure 1.3.87

Photo of the swimming pool in 2021 prior to the project to remove it. Note the glass barrier surrounding the pool deck. (Facilities Office, US Embassy, Algiers)

Figure 1.3.86

Image showing one of the new tiles, which were hand-painted to match the existing. (Facilities Office, US Embassy, Algiers)

Figure 1.3.88

Figure 1.3.89

Workers replacing the marble coping at grade in an arrangement that matched the outline of the original reflecting pool. (Facilities Office, US Embassy, Algiers)

Figure 1.3.91

South patio double-globe light standards, installed in 2022. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.3.90

View of the south patio after the pool removal project was complete. The slab was paved using large square terracotta tiles and small square marble tiles. (Facilities Office, US Embassy, Algiers)

Figure 1.3.92

Collapsed section of the west segment of the wall around the greenhouse area before restoration. (Facilities Office, US Embassy, Algiers)

Figure 1.3.93

North segment of the wall before restoration. This segment of the wall abuts the greenhouse. (Facilities Office, US Embassy, Algiers)

Figure 1.3.94

West segment of the wall during restoration. (Facilities Office, US Embassy, Algiers)

Figure 1.3.95

North segment of the wall after restoration. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.3.96

The fountain pedestal and spout before restoration. (Facilities Office, US Embassy, Algiers)

Figure 1.3.97

Fountain during restoration. (Facilities Office, US Embassy, Algiers)

Figure 1.3.98

Removal of the pedestal and spout for cleaning off site. (Facilities Office, US Embassy, Algiers)

Figure 1.3.99

Cleaning the marble of the fountain spout. (Facilities Office, US Embassy, Algiers)

Figure 1.3.100

The marble fountain after restoration and reinstallation. (Facilities Office, US Embassy, Algiers)

Figure 1.3.101

Formwork for the concrete and brick borders being installed in the lower parterre. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.3.102

The area of the upper terrace between the north parterre and the swimming pool before the current playground was installed in the fall of 2021. (Facilities Office, US Embassy, Algiers)

Figure 1.3.103

The playground after installation. (Facilities Office, US Embassy, Algiers)

Figure 1.3.106

North pavilion column after the 2022 repair and restoration. (Facilities Office, US Embassy, Algiers)

Figure 1.3.104

Detail of a crack at the base of the limestone (tuff) column of the north pavilion, before restoration. (Facilities Office, US Embassy, Algiers)

Figure 1.3.105

Shoring up the roof to remove the column for repairs. (Facilities Office, US Embassy, Algiers)

Figure 1.3.107

Detail of the garden gate before restoration. (Facilities Office, US Embassy, Algiers)

Figure 1.3.108

The restored garden gate reinstalled in its original location. (Facilities Office, US Embassy, Algiers)

1.4 Evaluation of Significance / CMR

The contents of this chapter follow US Department of the Interior guidelines for evaluating the significance of historic resources adapted to the specific requirements for historic structure reports and cultural landscape reports prepared for the Department of State.1 As such, the chapter provides an analysis of the significance of the CMR both as an architectural resource and as a cultural landscape, information on the property’s landmark status in both the United States and in Algeria, and an evaluation of the integrity of the property’s current architectural and landscape features and qualities. An evaluation of the architectural and landscape characteristics that contribute to the significance of the CMR is provided in Chapter 5.

The statement of significance presented in this chapter is based on the history of the CMR property and an understanding of the historic patterns or trends that provide a perspective from which to understand its value. It follows US Department of the Interior guidelines for applying the National Register of Historic Places criteria for evaluation. Under this framework, historic properties can be significant according to the following criteria:

Criterion A, for resources associated with significant events, historic trends, or broad patterns of history; Criterion B, for resources associated with significant persons; Criterion C, for resources that embody distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, resources that represent the work of a master, or resources that possess high artistic value; and Criterion D, for resources that yield information important to prehistory or history.

The period of significance for a historic building or landscape is based upon the length of time that the resource made the contributions or achieved the character on which the significance is based. Properties may have one or more periods of significance, and some

periods of significance may be as brief as a single year. For resources significant for their design, the period of significance may be the date of construction and/or the dates of any significant alterations or additions. For the site of an important event, the period of significance is the time when the event occurred. For properties associated with historic trends or important contributions to the broad patterns of history, the period of significance is the span of time when the property actively contributed to the trends.

Integrity is defined as the ability of a historic property to convey its significance. This chapter evaluates the integrity of the CMR as a single resource (architecture and landscape), comparing findings from the CMR’s historic development with existing conditions to identify which aspects of the building and site contribute to its historic significance.

STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE

The CMR is significant for its associations with Algiers’ urban development, its architectural and landscape design, and its association with the diplomatic history of the United States.

Under the first category, urban development, the CMR is significant for its role in and influence on the colonial settlement patterns of Algiers, specifically the development of the fohôs as an Anglo-American winter colony starting in the mid-nineteenth century and continuing until the eve of the first World War. During that time, Mustapha Supérieur and other neighborhoods in the heights became an October-to-May resort for wealthy British and Americans. Many of these seasonal residents, like Archibald Briggs, who purchased the CMR property in 1863, came for the curative properties of the city’s warm,

1. These guidelines can be found in multiple National Park Service publications, including National Register Bulletin 15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation; National Register Bulletin 18: How to Evaluate and Nominate Designed Historic Landscapes; and the Guide to Cultural Landscape Reports: Contents, Process, and Techniques (1998), among others.

sunny climate. Others came as tourists, drawn to the North African coast by the perceived exoticism of Algiers yet comforted by the familiarity of its French administration. While some visitors found lodging in hotels or rented houses for the season, others purchased Ottoman-era country estates, known as djnâyan, which they renovated or redeveloped. Anna Leigh Smith, a British woman of independent means, purchased the CMR property from Briggs in 1866, where she built a grand, Moorish Revival residence. The next owners, Robert and Constance Bevan, also British, purchased the property from Leigh Smith in 1909, contributing to the pattern of seasonal residency by foreigners well into the twentieth century.

The CMR is also significant in the area of design as an important example of nineteenth-century Moorish Revival architecture in Algiers. The 12,000-square-foot residence was originally built circa 1866-1909, possibly on the site of and incorporating elements of an earlier, Ottoman period structure. The architecture of the CMR is a highly successful expression of the Moorish Revival style as interpreted by its original British owner, Anna Leigh Smith, working with Benjamin Bucknall, a British architect living in Algiers, and the local contractor Barthélémy Vidal. While imported sensibilities influenced much of the design, the residence’s volumetric composition, asymmetrical massing, flat wall surfaces, and roof terraces drew inspiration from the vernacular domestic architecture of Algiers. The client, architect, and builder reputedly benefited from the gradual demolition of the lower Casbah to acquire antique tiles, stone arches and columns, doors, and other decorative features from Ottoman-era buildings and reuse them in the design of the CMR. The CMR is also distinctive for its setting, which reflects the site’s historical development from an Ottoman-era country estate, or djnân, into a cultivated residential landscape combining European and Moorish stylistic influences. The landscape was designed to integrate interior and exterior spaces and to take advantage of the hillside terrain.

Lastly, in the realm of US diplomatic history, the CMR is significant as the chief diplomatic residence of the US mission in Algiers and for its role as the headquarters of Deputy Secretary of State Warren Christopher and his team during the mediation of the Tehran hostage crisis in 1980-81. On November 4, 1979, the American Embassy in Tehran was occupied by militants, who took a group of US diplomats and citizens hostage. Algeria mediated the crisis in December 1980-January 1981, which was resolved with the signing of the Algiers Accords on January 19, 1981, and the release of the hostages.

Periods of Significance

The CMR has two periods of significance. The first period extends from 1866 to 1948 and covers a) the period in which the CMR achieved its design significance, b) its contribution to the trends that shaped the urban development of Algiers, and c) its establishment as the chief US diplomatic residence in Algeria. This period of time encompasses the property’s role during the French colonial period in the development of the Algerian fohôs as an Anglo-American winter colony, the CMR’s development, circa 1866-1909, as an outstanding example of Moorish Revival residential architecture in Algiers, and the first year of its official use as a chief of mission residence in 1948. For the purposes of this report, the years 1866 to 1948 serve as the primary period of significance used for evaluating the property’s design integrity and its character-defining features.

The second period, 1980-81, acknowledges the CMR’s historic significance related to Deputy Secretary of State Warren Christopher’s role during the Tehran hostage crisis and in helping to negotiate the Algiers Accords of January 19, 1981.

1.4 Evaluation of Significance / CMR (cont’d)

EVALUATION OF INTEGRITY2

Integrity relates to the degree to which the characteristics that define a historic property’s significance are present. The aspects or qualities that, in various combinations, can establish the integrity of a historic property, according to the National Register of Historic Places, include location, setting, feeling, association, design, workmanship, and materials. The CMR is over one hundred and fifty years old and has had multiple owners and occupants of various nationalities and representing a range of political and cultural influences. Algiers has expanded from its earlier walled limits to engulf the hills above, incorporating formerly outlying areas of the Sahel into the urban fabric. Despite these conditions, the residence retains a moderate to high degree of integrity, due largely to its continued use as a private residence for over eight decades and its careful stewardship by the United States Government since 1948.

LOCATION

Location is the place where a historic property was constructed or the place where the historic event associated with the property occurred.

The CMR was developed on a 5.1-acre parcel on the northeastern slope of one of the ridges forming the Tell Atlas, the range of coastal hills that frames the city of Algiers. The residence remains in its original location and retains its intended prominence on elevated ground overlooking the Bay of Algiers. The site boundaries continue to be defined by public streets and private property. Given these considerations, the location of the CMR retains a high degree of integrity.

SETTING

Setting is the physical environment of a historic property.

The setting of the CMR retains a moderate level of integrity. While key aspects of the CMR’s immediate setting remain intact (sloped and terraced landscape, formal gardens, cypress allée, entry drive), the addition of the tennis court, the swimming pool and pool house, and various storage sheds and utility buildings since the period of significance, as well as alterations to the south patio, have impacted the integrity of its setting. The CMR’s broader setting, outside the property limits, has also changed since the period of significance. The subdivision of historic estates and urbanization of Mustapha Supérieur and adjacent neighborhoods has significantly changed the character of the area, negatively impacting the CMR’s setting.

DESIGN

Design is the combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, structure, and style of a property.

The CMR’s design retains a moderate level of integrity primarily due to changes to the landscape. The CMR was originally built and subsequently enlarged in the Moorish Revival style as interpreted by its original owner, Anna Leigh Smith, and her architect Benjamin Bucknall and implemented by various local builders and artisans, including the Algerian contractor Barthélémy Vidal. The principal elements that composed the original design remain intact, and residence continues to strongly reflect its original architectural style. The residence retains many of its original interior and exterior features, as changes to the building exterior have been limited, and interior alterations have mainly impacted secondary spaces, such as bathrooms and the kitchen. No additions have been made since its acquisition by the US government, nor has major demolition occurred. Alterations to the landscape since the period of significance, however, have impacted the CMR’s overall design integrity. Significant changes

2. This assessment is based on the National Park Service bulletin “How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation,” which provides guidelines for evaluating the integrity of a historic property. See Rebecca H. Shrimpton, ed., “National Register Bulletin 15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation” (Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, revised 2002).

have included the addition of the CAC, the construction of the pool, pool house, and tennis court, the removal water features from the south patio, and the installation of new internal and perimeter walls and fencing, among other changes. While these changes have primarily impacted the landscape or the upper terrace, the formal design elements immediately surrounding the residence have also been altered.

MATERIALS AND WORKMANSHIP

Materials are the physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular period of time in a particular pattern or configuration to form a historic property. Workmanship is the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory.

The design of the CMR utilized and was a showcase for a fine collection of architectural elements and features salvaged from Ottoman-era buildings. These features included elegant tile panels made in the Qallālīn workshops of Tunis, locally manufactured ceramic tiles with hand painted designs, carved stone columns and door surrounds, and elaborately paneled wood doors and cabinets, among others. In addition to these reclaimed elements, finely crafted vaulted ceilings (in the front hall and main stair), highly detailed plasterwork featuring geometric and arabesque design motifs, and carefully designed claustra, sometimes with fitted with colored glass, went into the design. Many of the new and reclaimed materials and elements used in the residence were also integrated into the landscape design, such as ceramic tile benches, marble fountains, a marble arch, carved limestone columns, and other quality elements. Although some of the tilework represents later repairs, ancillary components such as original light fixtures and original window sash have been replaced, and there have been removals of historic landscape features that define a sense of craftsmanship, the materials and workmanship of the CMR retains a moderate to high level of integrity.

FEELING

Feeling is a property’s expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period of time.

The historic feeling associated with the CMR is moderate to high. The CMR was constructed as a private residence, and the property’s expression of this historic function has not changed. While the residence’s architectural expression as a Moorish Revival-style residential building from the last half of the nineteenth century remains evident, the landscape’s expression of the period of significance is less clear.

ASSOCIATION

Association is the direct link between an important historic event or person and a historic property.

The CMR is associated with the early colonial settlement patterns of Algiers, specifically the development of the fohôs as an Anglo-American winter colony starting in the mid-nineteenth century, and this association remains strong.

LEGAL STATUS (UNITED STATES)

Properties under the jurisdiction of the Department of State are guided by the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966, as amended (54 USC. 300101), Section 402 (54 USC. 307101e). Under Section 402, the Department of State is required to take into account the effects of its undertakings on historic properties listed or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places, recognized by UNESCO World Heritage, and/or designated by the countries in which they are located. The purpose of this approach is to avoid, mitigate, or resolve adverse effects to historic properties caused by federal undertakings.

Outside the United States, the Department of State upholds the National Register of Historic Places through

1.4 Evaluation of Significance / CMR (cont’d)

the compilation of the Bureau of Overseas Buildings Operations (OBO) List of Significant Properties. This list is an inventory of overseas properties recognized for their architectural, cultural, and/or historical importance, identified following the same criteria established to determine eligibility for listing in the National Register.

In addition to the OBO List of Significant Properties, the Department of State maintains the Secretary of State’s Register of Culturally Significant Property. The Register is an honorific listing of United States’ diplomatic properties important to the nation’s international heritage. Properties in the Secretary of State’s Register are evaluated under seven criteria: 1) acknowledgement by a foreign government as significant, 2) encompassing an important part of US overseas heritage, 3) association with a significant person or event, 4) exemplifying important architecture or having been designed by an important architect, 5) embodying a distinctive theme or assembly, 6) functioning as a unique object or visual feature, or 7) importance as an archaeological site. Since 2010, all properties added to the register must also demonstrate their significance to the diplomatic history of the United States.

The US Ambassador’s Residence (CMR) in Algiers, Algeria, was listed in the Secretary of State’s Register of Culturally Significant Property in 2016 in recognition of its architectural significance and for its role in United States diplomatic history.

LEGAL STATUS (ALGERIA)

Under Algerian law, the regulations for identifying and registering national cultural heritage, defining the rules for its protection and preservation, and setting out the conditions for implementing those rules are codified in Law 98-04: Protection of Cultural Heritage (1998). This act categorizes immovable cultural property into historic monuments, archaeological sites, and urban or rural

complexes. Algeria categorizes historic resources into three types, which include 1) entry in the additional inventory (l’inventaire supplémentaire), 2) classification (le classement), and 3) the creation of protected sectors (secteurs sauvegardés). The inventory is for cultural property that is of interest from the point of view of history, archaeology, science, ethnography, anthropology, art, or culture. Resources are listed in the inventory by the Minister of Culture through consultation with the National Commission for Cultural Property, and cultural property recorded in the inventory that is not awarded final classification within ten years is removed from the list. Classification is a definitive protective measure and is also determined by the Minister of Culture through consultation with the National Commission for Cultural Property. Built or unbuilt areas surrounding a classified property are also protected as a means to safeguard its setting. Decrees for initiating classification or awarding classification are published in the “Official Journal of the Algerian Republic.”3 Protected sectors are urban or rural complexes that, due to their architectural and aesthetic unity, are of historical, architectural, artistic, or traditional interest and qualify for preservation. The city of Algiers has one protected sector, the Casbah. Regulations concerning the management of protected cultural property can be found in Executive Decree No. 03-322 of October 5, 2003, and the May 31, 2005, Executive Order of the Minister of Culture.

Research into the status of the CMR under Algerian law has determined that, as of May 2022, the property is not listed in the inventory, it has not been the subject of a classification decision nor have classification proceedings been initiated, and it is not within a protected sector. Given this status, the property is not subject to local preservation ordinances. The unlisted status of the CMR under Algerian law, however, is due to its ownership by the US government. While not officially classified, the CMR’s historical interest and cultural significance as one of few djnân remaining in the countryside of Algiers is recognized by the Ministry of Culture.4

3. The “Official Journal of the Algerian Republic” can be found at https://www.joradp.dz/HFR/Index.htm.

4. Letter, Abdelouahab Zekagh, Director General, National Office of Management and Exploitation of Protected Cultural Properties, Ministry of Culture, to Amy Schedlbauer, Deputy Chief of Mission, US Embassy, Algiers, October 20, 2015, OBO Archive.

1.5 Physical Description & Character-Defining Features / CMR

METHODOLOGY

The following chapter provides a narrative description of the elements, materials, and spaces of the CMR to provide a written record of the current character and appearance of the residence and landscape. This description supplements and enhances the architectural renderings, site plans, photographs, and other methods of documentation also included in this report that provide a basis for preservation planning.

The chapter is organized into three principal sections landscape, exterior, and interior. The first section is organized by landscape characteristics, defined as the tangible or intangible aspects of a place that have either influenced the history of a landscape’s development or are products of its development. The text describing the CMR exterior begins with an overview that discusses the building’s style, shape, size, and orientation then provides narrative descriptions of each façade that note the character and appearance of major building elements and ancillary components. Since the entry courtyard (Room 110), which was defined in the scope of work as a representational space requiring enhanced documentation, is only partially enclosed under a roof and functions primarily as an exterior space, it is described in the exterior section. The physical description of the CMR interior addresses two categories of spaces. The first category includes the representational spaces identified in the scope of work. These spaces have been zoned for preservation and include the entry hall (Room 101), atrium (Room 102), atrium gallery (Room 208), living room (Rooms 105 and 116), and dining room (Rooms 107 and 112). The second category includes rooms that were not specified for enhanced documentation but are zoned for preservation. These include the small salon (Room 104), south hall (Room 128), main stair hall (Rooms 113 and 210), and the balcony (Room 209) off the atrium gallery.

To supplement the written descriptions and photographs in this chapter, drawings depicting the CMR as it currently exists can be found in Volume 2 of the HSR. More specifically, plans of the representational rooms are in

Volume 2, Chapter 5, Existing Conditions Analysis; landscape drawings are in Volume 2, Chapter 3, Landscape Existing Conditions; and current floor plans are in Volume 2, Appendix A, HABS Drawings. In addition, historical plans of the CMR are located in Volume 2, Appendix B, Reference Drawings. Lastly, HABS Level II photographic documentation can be found in Volume 2, Appendix C, HABS Photographs.

In addition to providing physical descriptions, this chapter identifies the character-defining features of the CMR. Character-defining features are the physical features and visual aspects of the residence and landscape that define their essential nature, embody the distinctive characteristics of their original design, and retain integrity. Integrity relates to the degree to which a feature reflects its appearance during the period of significance. The period of significance of the CMR, as defined in Chapter 4 of this report, begins in 1866 and ends in 1948. The identification of character-defining features can be used to develop appropriate maintenance and treatment strategies for the building and site and guide the ongoing stewardship of the resource.

A few additional notes on methodology:

• The contents of this section related to the landscape follow the guidelines established in the National Park Service’s Guide to Cultural Landscape Reports: Contents, Process, and Techniques (1998) adapted to the specific requirements for landscape reports prepared for the Department of State.

• Following the convention used in other sections of this report, the building’s front entrance is described as a component of the west façade although its true compass orientation is west-southwest. Adhering to this model, the secondary facades are thus designated as north, east, and south.

• Each of the four principal facades of the CMR is characterized by an asymmetrical arrangement of elements that makes it difficult to describe using the standard convention of stories and bays. Instead, the narrative uses the primary building components of

the residence as a framework for describing the exterior. These include the two-story main block, the three-story north wing, the entry courtyard, and the one-story L-shaped wing that extends from the west side of the main block.

• While the entry courtyard and the south porch are assigned room numbers (Room 110 and Room 117, respectively), these spaces are only partially enclosed under roofs and function primarily as exterior spaces. For these reasons, these spaces are described in the exterior section of the text. Additionally, due to the indoor/outdoor nature of these spaces, there are also references to the entry courtyard and south porch in the landscape description.

• It should be understood that some elements designated as character-defining may include in-kind replacement of original details or materials. This is especially true of the decorative tilework in the CMR, which in many rooms includes tiles dating to the period of significance and later replacements.

LANDSCAPE

General Description

The CMR is located at 6 Chemin Cheikh Bachir Ibrahimi in El Mouradia, one of 57 communes, or municipalities, of the province of Algiers. Chemin Cheikh Bachir Ibrahimi is a ridge road that traverses the coastal hills that characterize the city’s terrain. It follows a northwesterly route between El Mouradia Forest (formerly Atlas Forest and, before Algerian Independence, Bois de Boulogne) on the south and Rue Mohamed Chabane on the north. The roughly 6-acre campus of the US Embassy is located across the street from the CMR on the west side of Chemin Cheikh Bachir Ibrahimi. Located high above the waterfront, both the CMR and embassy properties offer sweeping views of the surrounding landscape and the Bay of Algiers.

The CMR is sited roughly in the center of an irregularly shaped, 5.1-acre parcel bound by Chemin Cheikh Bachir Ibrahimi on the south and southwest, Chemin des Glycines on the northwest and north, and private property on the east. The site is residential in character and strongly reflects its historical development, primarily during the second half of the nineteenth century, as a country estate, or djnân. While significant elements of the historic landscape remain in place, alterations for

diplomatic security, recreation, and other changes in use are also evident. Circulation features include a paved vehicular drive that enters the site from the south, where there is a gate accessing the property from Chemin Cheikh Bachir Ibrahimi. The drive follows a gently curved route and terminates in a loop in front of the CMR. The site also features a network of pedestrian paths, diverse in function, material, character, and age. This network includes a historic cypress allée path that today connects a modern CAC with the entry drive loop, paved and earthen garden walks, and a perimeter path primarily used by security staff. Many of these paths are sloped, following the natural topography of the hillside terrain. Formal treatments characterize how the landscape is used immediately surrounding the residence on the north, west, and south and include a walled garden patio, parterre gardens, a trellis, orchards, and lawns planted with specimen trees. Recreational features, clustered in the northwestern portion of the site, are located outside this more formally treated landscape zone. The terrain east of the residence is steeply sloped and densely planted. In addition to the residence, the site supports a variety of buildings and structures including multiple guard stations, a pool house, a historic gate house, a reservoir, belvederes, a greenhouse, storage sheds, and utility buildings. Water features, once an integral part of the landscape, are now limited to two fountains, both located within parterres, and the fountain in the entry courtyard. The CMR landscape features views and vistas that shape one’s experience of the landscape, define relationships between physical features within the site, and establish contextual links between the site and its exterior setting.

Landscape Analysis

NATURAL SYSTEMS AND FEATURES

This landscape characteristic refers to the natural aspects that influence the development and resultant form of the landscape.

HILLSIDE TERRAIN

HISTORIC: The historic center of Algiers lies at the base of the Tell Atlas, which forms part of the Atlas Mountain range that stretches across North Africa and divides the Mediterranean and Atlantic coastlines from the Sahara Desert. Also known as “the land of hills,” the Tell region

was established early in Algiers’ development as an important area for agricultural cultivation and raising livestock. During the Ottoman period, dignitaries of the regency established estates on the scenic hillsides of the Tell, which provided ample space and fertile soils for laying out pleasure gardens, presented scenic views of the bay, and offered escape from the crowded conditions of the Casbah.

The CMR was built on the northeastern slope of one of the ridges forming the Tell, and this geographic location had a direct influence on the siting and massing of the residence and the character of the garden structures and features surrounding it. The residence was constructed into the hillside itself and featured terraces and patios that extended the residence’s living spaces into the landscape. The gardens were also designed in response to the hillside terrain. On the upper slope, parterres and garden paths were laid out along terraces to maximized views. Elsewhere, natural promontories were transformed into overlook terraces or were utilized for the placement of belvederes.

EXISTING: The sloped, hillside terrain that characterizes much of the Tell region remains evident today, and this natural landform continues to characterize the CMR landscape. While tall perimeter walls now obscure this natural aspect of the terrain from surrounding streets, it can be clearly read from within the gardens and from the residence. The hillside terrain and elevated aspect of the site continue to make the property a desirable one for a residential dwelling with dual private and public functions.

ANALYSIS: The site’s hillside terrain is a character-defining feature of the CMR landscape.

LAND USE

This landscape characteristic refers to the historical activities that influenced the development or modification of the site.

RESIDENTIAL

HISTORIC: During the Ottoman period, dignitaries of the regency and others with means built country houses with elaborate pleasure gardens on the hills surrounding the port of Algiers. In the nineteenth century, the area became a popular seasonal destination for Europeans seeking

warmer winter climates. These land use traditions shaped the development of the site, which, since at least the early nineteenth century and likely longer, has been residential and privately owned until its acquisition by the US government in 1947.

EXISTING: The site supports ongoing, year-round, private residential and public diplomatic use by the US ambassador and his or her guests, both private and official.

ANALYSIS: Historically and today, the site’s primary use has been residential, and this residential use is a characterdefining feature of the CMR landscape (Figure 1.5.1).

RECREATIONAL

HISTORIC: Although the primary use of the site, historically, was residential, the landscape would have also supported the social and passive recreational uses of its owners. This may have included activities such as picnicking, bird watching, walking, or exploring the gardens.

EXISTING: The recreational function of the landscape has expanded since the period of significance to include tennis and swimming. The buildings and structures that have been added to the landscape to support these active recreational uses include a tennis court, a pool, and a pool house. These additions have impacted the historical organization and shape of the landscape at its north end and the character of the surrounding vegetation.

ANALYSIS: Recreation is a historic and current use of the CMR site. The passive recreational use of the landscape is a character-defining feature (Figure 1.5.2). The active recreational use, however, is not, as the buildings and structures that support this use postdate the period of significance.

AGRICULTURAL

HISTORIC: An 1866 deed describes the site as having an orchard, and it is probable that the land supported light agricultural use even earlier. Although the specifics of the orchard, such as its location, are unknown, fruit was likely harvested for private, rather than commercial use. By 1949, the portion of the upper terrace north of the Personal Security Unit (PSU) break room/garage was the site of an orangerie.

Figure 1.5.1

View of the CMR looking north along the entry drive. The site’s residential use is a character-defining feature of the landscape. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.3

View of the CMR kitchen garden which occupies the northern terraces of the lower slopes. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.2

Historically and today, garden paths and other features of the landscape promote passive recreational use of the site. (Robinson & Associates)

EXISTING: Today, the terraces in the northeast quadrant of the site are used for a kitchen garden, and there are small pockets of the landscape planted with fruit trees. This includes the portion of the upper terrace east of the CAC, historically the site of an orangerie, and today planted with lime, fig, and plum trees, as well as orange trees. There are several fruit trees, including apple and pear, planted north of the tennis court. Another small grove is located on the overlook terrace.

ANALYSIS: Agriculture is a historic and current use of the CMR site, and this use is a character-defining feature of the landscape (Figure 1.5.3).

CLUSTER ARRANGEMENT

Cluster arrangement refers to the location of buildings and structures in the landscape.

RESIDENTIAL CORE

HISTORIC: During the period of significance, the arrangement of structures in the landscape has reflected its residential use, with the residence given primacy in the approximate center of the site with associated garden structures, hardscape features, and indoor/outdoor spaces surrounding and complementing it. The central placement of the residence allowed for views of the surrounding landscape from nearly every window.

EXISTING: The residential core cluster arrangement continues to characterize the landscape. The residence is the largest building within the residential core, and, grouped around it, are two historic garden structures (the wisteria trellis and the north pavilion), historic hardscape features (east terrace, south patio), and key architectural spaces that serve indoor/outdoor functions (entry courtyard, south porch, south belvedere). The residential core has been modified to some extent since the period of significance with the addition of sheds, utility buildings, and other small-scale service structures that have been inserted into cluster.

ANALYSIS: The residential core cluster arrangement is a character-defining feature of the landscape despite modern intrusions, such as storage and utility sheds, that detract from the historic condition.

ENTRY ZONE

HISTORIC: By 1909, the entry drive had been introduced into the landscape, and, grouped along the south edge of property at the entrance to this drive from Chemin Beaurepaire (today Chemin Cheikh Bachir Ibrahimi) were a “staff house divided into three rooms, stable and shed.” These outbuildings were intentionally set apart from the residential core and grouped close to the road. Walls were used to define a separate setting for these outbuildings, and landscaping was limited.

EXISTING: The entry zone cluster arrangement remains evident today with alterations. The historic outbuildings include the guest house (originally a staff house or maison de domestique), the PSU break room/garage (a former stable, later converted into a garage), and a small shed located between the PSU break room/garage and the guest house. New structures include a carport and shed, a guard tower, modern security gates, and a utility building. These structures are built up against the south edge of the property, and the relationship between the historic buildings with the rest of the site remains unchanged.

ANALYSIS: Despite new construction after the period of significance, the entry zone cluster arrangement is a character-defining feature of the landscape.

CIRCULATION

Circulation refers to the spaces, features, and materials that constitute systems of movement.

CYPRESS ALLÉE PATH

HISTORIC: By 1866, a linear, tree-lined access lane extended north from Chemin Beaurepaire (today Chemin Cheikh Bachir Ibrahimi) to the residential cluster. The original function of the lane may have been for pedestrians, wagons, or horse-drawn carriages. At some point, likely before 1909, the access lane was modified to accommodate the loop of the entrance drive. These changes may have included paving over the north end of the lane, thereby shortening its length, and building steps to accommodate the change in grade between the lane and the entrance drive loop. By 1949, but perhaps as early as 1909, the vehicular function of the access lane ceased, and it evolved into part of the site’s pedestrian

Description & Character-Defining Features / CMR (cont’d)

Figure 1.5.4

View of the cypress allée path looking south from the roof of the CMR. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.5

View along the cypress allée path looking true north toward the CMR entry porch. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.6

The entry drive, seen here looking southeast toward the entry gates, is a character-defining feature. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.7

View of the entry drive loop, looking northwest toward the upper parterre gardens. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.8

View looking north along the northern access path. The tennis court is on the right, just outside of the image. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.9

Looking south along one of the upper terrace garden paths. (Robinson & Associates)

1.5 Physical Description & Character-Defining Features / CMR (cont’d)

circulation system. Two garden paths were added to the landscape to intersect with it one at the south end and one at the midpoint.

EXISTING: The tree-lined access lane endures today in the form of the cypress allée path. The path extends from the CAC to the entry drive loop in front of the residence. It is surfaced with compacted earth and gravel, which is thin in places, and edged with low, rectangular, concrete curbs at its south end and with border stones of random shape and size at its north end. The path is relatively level along its length until it reaches the entry drive loop, where a short flight of brick steps spans the distance between the path and the drive, which is at a lower elevation. Cypress trees to either side of the path frame views of the residence. The spaces between the trees are planted with hibiscus, rose, agapanthus, and other flowering plants.

ANALYSIS: The cypress allée path is a character-defining feature of the landscape (Figures 1.5.4 and 1.5.5). The route of the path, the width of the allée, the cypress trees, the steps at the north end of the allée, and the border stones are contributing. The concrete curbs of the path and the plant materials between trees are noncontributing.

ENTRY DRIVE AND LOOP

HISTORIC: During the period of significance, a gently curved road was established between the entry gates on Chemin Beaurepaire (today Chemin Cheikh Bachir Ibrahimi) and the residence. This drive was east of and separate from the tree-lined access lane. The drive sloped gradually down as it approached the residence, and dry laid, stone retaining walls defined the edges of the drive at its north end. West of the entry courtyard, the drive formed an oval loop where carriages or cars could turn around. While the original paving material is unknown, the drive and loop were paved with concrete (cimentée) by 1949. A historic photograph of the north end of the entry drive shows open, brick gutters along the portion of the drive visible in the image, although gutters are not indicated in that location in a 1949 site survey.

EXISTING: An entry drive extends between a modern vehicular gate on Chemin Cheikh Bachir Ibrahimi to the front of the residence, where it terminates in a loop. The route of the drive has not been altered since the period of significance, and it remains paved with concrete (resurfaced since the period of significance). Along the outer edges of the drive are open, brick gutters. At its

south end, low, rectangular, concrete curbs form an edge between the brick gutters and the adjacent beds or lawn. Dry laid, stone retaining walls define the edges of the drive at its north end where it slopes down toward the level of the loop drive and the entrance to the residence.

ANALYSIS: The entry drive and loop are existing historic features (Figures 1.5.6 and 1.5.7). The route and width of the drive and loop as well as their associated stone retaining walls and brick gutters are character-defining features. The concrete curbs along the entry drive are not historic.

NORTHERN ACCESS PATH

HISTORIC: By 1929, a dirt road extended in a northwest direction from the entry drive loop to the northern corner of the property where there was a gate to the public road. By 1949, this path or road had evolved into a pedestrian path. It featured a wide, approximately 432mm, gutter along its west edge that extended along half its distance roughly between the wisteria wall on the south to just beyond the upper terrace garden stair on the north. In addition, along the west side of the path and near the stair was a stone retaining wall.

EXISTING: Today, the north access path has been reduced to a pedestrian path connecting the service court to the north corner of the perimeter path. The materials and character of this path are not consistent along its length. At its south end, the path is paved with random cut stone. Along the west side is an open concrete gutter and a dry laid, stone retaining wall. Where the path passes by the tennis court, it is paved with concrete, has a concrete gutter (uncovered for most of its length) and stone retaining wall on the west side, and has a modern stone wall on the east side. At its north end, the path is paved with concrete and has an open concrete gutter and a low concrete curb on the west. Above this curb is a low, stone retaining wall which transitions to a short length of steel tube railing.

ANALYSIS: The northern access path is an existing historic feature of the CMR landscape (Figure 1.5.8). The route and width of northern access path, its associated open gutters (concrete material is noncontributing), and the adjacent historic stone retaining wall are all characterdefining features. The paving materials of the northern access path, its associated modern retaining walls, and the concrete curbs are not historic.

Physical Description & Character-Defining Features / CMR (cont’d)

Figure 1.5.10

The upper terrace garden stairs connect the northern access path with the parterre gardens of the upper terrace. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.11

View along the west branch of the south patio path, looking east toward the entry drive. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.12

Figure 1.5.12: View of the south patio path and its intersection with the entry drive. (Robinson & Associates)

1.5 Physical Description & Character-Defining Features / CMR

UPPER TERRACE GARDEN PATHS

HISTORIC: By the end of the period of significance, a portion of the site’s upper slopes had been terraced through the construction of stone retaining walls and ornamented with formal parterres, orderly rows of trees, and a fountain. Circulation through the upper terrace gardens was achieved by a series of linear and curvilinear garden paths that traced the edges of features, such as the parterres, and provided linkages between the parterres, the cypress allée path, and the orangerie. While the routes of the upper terrace garden paths during the period of significance are documented, the paving material and associated plantings are unknown.

EXISTING: The upper terrace garden paths remain largely intact today, although there has been loss, mainly related to the northernmost parterre, minor alterations, and the addition of small linkages. Today, the upper terrace garden paths are surfaced with compacted earth and gravel and feature poured-in-place concrete curbs.

ANALYSIS: The routes of the upper terrace garden paths are a character-defining feature of the CMR landscape that contribute to the historic circulation system (Figure 1.5.9). The paving material and curb material of the paths are not historic.

UPPER TERRACE GARDEN STAIRS

HISTORIC: By the end of the period of significance, the northern access path and the upper terrace garden paths were connected via garden stairs that featured stone cheek walls and stone treads. The stairs followed a slightly curved route to cross the steep slope between the upper and middle terraces.

EXISTING: The upper terrace garden stairs remain today and serve their original function. The stone treads have been stabilized with concrete, and railings have been installed.

ANALYSIS: Despite minor changes to their material and character, the upper terrace garden stairs are a characterdefining feature of the CMR landscape (Figure 1.5.10).

SOUTH PATIO PATH

HISTORIC: By the end of the period of significance, a path had been established in the southeast quadrant of the site that took a slightly curved route from the south end of the cypress allée path to the entry drive. A corresponding path on the opposite side of the entry drive took an L-shaped route that extended east from the drive to the patio and gate at the entrance to the south belvedere then north to the entry drive loop. This path provided a key entry point to the south patio. While the route of the south patio path during the period of significance is documented, the paving material and associated plantings are unknown. Associated features included steps at the south and north ends of the path and a low wrought-iron railing and gate located along the length of the path between the entry drive and the entrance to the south belvedere.

EXISTING: Today, the south patio path continues to serve as a key component of the site’s pedestrian circulation system. This roughly L-shaped path is paved with concrete for its entire length; the east-west portions have a (red) painted finish. The path also has poured-inplace concrete curbs. The patio area at the entrance to the south belvedere is paved with stone. The steps at the north end of the path have tiled treads and risers, while the steps at the south end have brick treads and tiled risers. The wrought-iron railing and gate remain in their original location along the path and have recently been restored.

ANALYSIS: The route of the south patio path, its associated wrought-iron railing and gate, and the tiled treads and risers of the north steps are character-defining features of the CMR landscape (Figures 1.5.11 and 1.5.12). The paving material, concrete curbs, and south steps are not historic.

OVERLOOK TERRACE CONNECTION

HISTORIC: By the end of the period of significance, the overlook terrace, which is located east of the residence’s north wing, and the eastern segment of the perimeter path were connected via a short flight of steps and a sloped path. The path followed a slightly curved route to cross the lower slopes. A gutter extended along the south side of the path.

EXISTING: Today, a long run of steps connects the overlook terrace with a segment of the perimeter path, and there is no evidence of a gutter. The steps are concrete with treads of varying depth. The steps have a railing and stone cheek walls that have been stabilized with concrete.

ANALYSIS: Alterations, including transforming the path segment into steps, eliminating the gutter, and adding a railing, have impacted the historic integrity of the overlook terrace connection. Therefore, the overlook terrace connection is not a character-defining feature of the CMR landscape.

PERIMETER PATHS

HISTORIC: By the end of the period of significance, the pedestrian circulation system included two paths that extended along the upper and lower slopes of the property and met at its northern point. The paths ran roughly parallel to the property line, with greater or lesser setbacks in some locations depending on topography and other factors. Multiple branches extended from the paths to link site features, provide shortcuts across slopes, or provide access to perimeter gates. The eastern perimeter path traced a continuous route along the lower edge of the lower slopes from the outbuildings at the south end of the property to its northern point, where there was a gate to Chemin des Glycines. The western path had a discontinuous route with a northern segment that extended from the northern point of the property to the reservoir and a southern segment that extended from the north end of the upper terrace garden path to the south end of the cypress allée path. While the routes of the perimeter paths during the period of significance are documented, their paving material and associated plantings are unknown. A gutter and stone retaining wall extended along a portion of the eastern path where the lower slopes were terraced.

EXISTING: The perimeter paths constitute an important component of the circulation system, and their function as a route for security patrols has led to enhancements, including the addition of new branches that access guard stations. Today, the perimeter paths are paved with concrete “double-T” pavers and feature concrete curbs. Portions of the path are lined with steel pipe railings.

ANALYSIS: Alterations, including modern paving, curbs, and railings, and the accumulated impact of additional branches to the perimeter paths have impacted the historic integrity of the feature. Therefore, the perimeter paths are not a character-defining feature of the CMR landscape.

TOPOGRAPHY

Topography refers to the historical, human-created shape of the ground plane.

MIDDLE TERRACE

HISTORIC: The CMR was constructed on a long terrace that extended north-south across the midpoint of the parcel. It is probable that, when the property was first developed for residential use during the Ottoman period, its natural, sloped topography was altered somewhat to create this flat expanse, roughly at the site’s center point, for the construction of a house and courtyard. By 1866, as documented in a cadastral map, multiple buildings and landscape features were grouped in a cluster at the center of the site on this terrace. When the current residence was constructed, it occupied the midpoint of this middle terrace with landscape elements occupying the flat areas to the north and south.

EXISTING: Today, the middle terrace continues to function as the immediate setting of the CMR as well as multiple landscape features including the entry drive loop, the wisteria wall and wisteria trellis, the northern access path, and the overlook terrace, all north of the residence, and the south porch, south belvedere, and south patio on the opposite side. These spaces within the landscape provide a formal garden setting for the residence and offer views toward the bay. A significant change since the period of significance has been the addition of the tennis court at the north end of the middle terrace. Although this addition did not change the topography of the terrace, it alters the historic setting created by the landscape elements that have historically framed the residence.

1.5 Physical Description & Character-Defining Features / CMR (cont’d)

ANALYSIS: Despite the construction of the tennis court, the middle terrace contributes to the historic significance of the landscape and is a character-defining feature (Figures 1.5.13 and 1.5.14).

UPPER TERRACE

HISTORIC: By the end of the period of significance, the topography of the CMR landscape featured an upper terrace that roughly extended between the cypress allée path on the south and the north branch of the west perimeter path on the north. This terrace had a gentle, natural slope that descended from west to east. At the south end of the upper terrace was broad, open lawn. North of the lawn was a parterre garden, then a small grove of trees planted in a grid, and, at the far north end, another lawn. Linking these features was a network of pedestrian paths. The features of the upper terrace served to extend the formal garden areas of the landscape and offered additional spaces for passive recreational use.

EXISTING: Since the period of significance, the upper terrace has been modified to include a children’s playground, located on the site of the former grove, and a swimming pool, pool house, and outdoor grill area on the former north lawn. The addition of the playground, the swimming pool, and associated buildings and spaces has added active recreational activities to the upper terrace, which detract from the formal garden function of the space as established during the period of significance.

ANALYSIS: Despite new construction that has impacted the historic integrity of the feature, a significant portion of the upper terrace remains formal in character with parterre gardens, garden paths, and open lawn and retains its natural slope. The upper terrace is a characterdefining feature of the CMR landscape (Figure 1.5.15).

LOWER SLOPE TERRACES

HISTORIC: As described above, the CMR was built on a sloped, hillside site overlooking the Bay of Algiers. The eastern edge of the property has historically been characterized by steeply sloped terrain. An 1866 cadastral map indicates that there was once a walled pleasure garden within the southern half of the lower slope. This walled garden was likely demolished as part of

the construction of the current residence. By the end of the period of significance, the lower slope was planted with trees and cut through with paths. Stone retaining walls were used for erosion control and to create terraces. Along the northeast edge of the lower slope was a series of six stepped terraces that were oriented perpendicular to the eastern branch of the perimeter path. The original function of these terraces is unknown.

EXISTING: Today, there are remnants of terracing along northeast edge of site that serve as the location of a kitchen garden. In several other areas, the retaining walls that historically created terraces within the lower slopes are evident but deteriorated and obscured by overgrown plant materials.

ANALYSIS: The lower slope terraces in the northeast quadrant of the site are a character-defining feature of the CMR landscape (Figures 5.16 and 5.17). The use of these terraces as a kitchen garden is not contributing.

VEGETATION

Vegetation includes indigenous or introduced trees, shrubs, vines, ground covers, and herbaceous materials.

HISTORIC: Pleasure gardens were a key component of the djnâyan established in the countryside surrounding the urban core of Algiers, and, by 1866, the property featured two walled pleasure gardens. It is likely that the landscape and gardens were redesigned by Anna Leigh Smith as part of the construction of the CMR in the second half of the nineteenth century, but many of the details of this era of the landscape chronology are unknown. Anna Leigh Smith and her sister were acquaintances of the garden designer and artist Gertrude Jekyll, a proponent of the English cottage garden style, which may have had an influence on the landscape design during this period. Islamic gardens and local Algerian traditions also undoubtedly had a strong influence. Circa 1936-41, architect Léon Claro was brought in to embellish the Montfeld gardens, although his exact contributions are unknown. A highly detailed site survey prepared in 1949 provides the best evidence of the character of the landscape close to the end of the period of significance.

EXISTING: The use of functional and ornamental trees and shrubs for the purposes of formal designed elements and informal plantings continue to characterize the CMR landscape.

Figure 1.5.13

As the location of the residence and significant landscape features, the middle terrace is a character-defining feature of the landscape. This view, looking south from the entry porch, shows the southern section of the middle terrace. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.14

View of the northern section of the middle terrace, looking south toward the tennis court from the perimeter path. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.15

View of the upper terrace looking south. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.16

View from the perimeter path looking southeast. The lower slope terraces are visible on the right. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.17

View looking southwest across the lower slope terraces, which are currently planted as a kitchen garden. (Robinson & Associates)

ANALYSIS: The following is a list of character-defining plant materials:

- Wisteria at the wisteria wall (Figure 1.5.18)

- Wisteria at the wisteria trellis (Figures 1.5.19 and 1.5.20)

- Cypress trees along the cypress allée path (Figure 1.5.21)

- Fruit trees (orange, lime, fig, plum, and others) comprising the orchard adjacent to the CAC

- West lawn (Figure 1.5.22)

- Palm trees in ellipse created by entry drive loop (Figure 1.5.23)

- Palm trees of upper parterre garden

- Bougainvillea growing on fence east and west of the lower parterre (Figure 1.5.24)

- Carob tree along south patio path (Figure 1.5.25)

- Row of cypress trees along northeastern perimeter of property

- Two pairs of cypress trees on south patio (Figure 1.5.26)

- Aleppo pine along the east side of entry drive (Figure 1.5.27)

BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES

Buildings and structures include the threedimensional constructs of the landscape such as houses, barns, or bridges.

RESIDENCE AND ENTRY COURTYARD

HISTORIC: The CMR in its earliest form likely dates to the second half of the nineteenth century, and this building, including its associated entry courtyard, has been the primary focus of the landscape as it evolved over the period of significance. The CMR is the largest building on the site and the most visible. Landscape elements, such as the south patio, the cypress allée, the upper belvedere, the entry drive, and others, were all laid out and designed to highlight and emphasize the residence.

EXISTING: The CMR continues to be the focus of the landscape despite new construction on the site. While some of the new construction, such as the CAC and the pool house, is located far away from the residence, other outbuildings, such as the storage sheds and utility buildings north of the residence and south of the south patio are closer and intrude on its landscape setting. The

new outbuildings that are close to the residence, however, are not visible from the main representational rooms of the CMR.

ANALYSIS: The residence and its associated entry courtyard are character-defining features of the CMR landscape (Figure 5.1.28).

GUEST HOUSE

HISTORIC: At some point before 1909, a staff house was constructed along the east side of the entry drive just inside the gate along Chemin Beaurepaire (today Chemin Cheikh Bachir Ibrahimi). This building was part of a small cluster of outbuildings that were intentionally set apart from the residential core and grouped close to the road. The staff house was a one-story structure with masonry walls and a steel beam and masonry vault floor and roof system. There were three rooms on the first floor and a partial basement. The main entrance was on the northwest façade facing the entry drive, and a rear door provided access to an upper yard behind the house. North of the upper yard was a lower yard, where the door to the basement area was located. The two yards were separated by a wall and connected with each other by a stepped ramp.

EXISTING: By 1979, the staff house had been converted into a guest house, and it continues to function in this way today. It is a one-story, masonry structure with smooth stucco exterior walls, a dogtooth brick cornice, and a roof that features an eight-sided dome over the front room but is otherwise flat. The main entrance to the guest house is located in north bay of the front (west) façade. This entrance features a wood, board-and-batten door and a wood frame set in a carved limestone surround. A shed roof clad with clay tiles and supported on brackets shelters the entrance. The rear entrance on the east façade has a modern, board-and-batten, wood door. Windows include double casement, wood sash windows with exterior louvered shutters and exterior grilles and small, rectangular and arched windows set in the upper walls. The building has an irregular floor plan that is divided into four rooms. The front room has a domed ceiling pierced with four small windows and a fireplace built with a stucco and tile surround and a marble mantle. The floors of the front room are terrazzo, and the walls are plaster. The rear rooms have modern tile floors and

Physical Description & Character-Defining Features / CMR (cont’d)

Figure 1.5.18

Wisteria growing along the wisteria wall. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.20

Another view of the wisteria trellis. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.19

Wisteria specimen at the trellis. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.21

Cypress trees planted in an allée leading to the front entrance of the residence. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.22

View of the west lawn looking south. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.23

Palm trees in the ellipse created by the entry drive loop, looking northwest. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.24

Bougainvillea growing along the fence along the east and west sides of the lower parterre. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.25

Magnificent carob tree along the south patio path. (Robinson & Associates)

Physical Description & Character-Defining Features / CMR (cont’d)

Figure 1.5.26

Pair of cypress trees on the south patio. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.27

Aleppo pine along the east edge of the entry drive. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.28

As the principal building within the landscape, the CMR is a character-defining feature. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.29

View of the front façade of the guest house, originally a staff house or maison de domestique, looking southeast. (Robinson & Associates)

plaster walls. Interior features include Algerian arch niches. The setting of the guest house has changed significantly since the period of significance. Today, a one-story, concrete utility building has been built in the upper yard, the wall between the upper and lower yards has been extended to cut off the ramp connection between the two spaces, and a high security fence abuts the north façade of the building.

ANALYSIS: Despite changes to the building’s setting, the guest house retains architectural integrity and reflects the historical development of the entry zone during the period of significance. For these reasons, the guest house is a character-defining feature of the CMR landscape (Figure 1.5.29).

PERSONAL SECURITY UNIT BREAK ROOM/GARAGE

HISTORIC: At some point before 1909, a stable was constructed along the west side of the entry drive just inside the gate along Chemin Beaurepaire (today Chemin Cheikh Bachir Ibrahimi). It was a two-story structure with masonry walls and a steel beam and masonry vault floor and roof system. The exterior walls were smooth stucco with a dogtooth brick cornice, and the building had a flat roof. The first floor had a rectangular plan and a pair of wide double doors on the east façade. The second floor had a smaller, L-shaped plan and an open L-shaped terrace that extended over the front façade to shelter the stable doors. Exterior stairs along the south façade provided access to the second-floor level. East and south of the stable were yards defined by tall walls.

EXISTING: At some point prior to 1979, the stable was converted into a garage with living quarters above, and currently the building functions as a PSU break room and garage/carport. The building retains its original massing a rectangular first-floor level with a smaller, L-shaped, second floor accessed by exterior stairs on the south façade. Changes since 1979 have included removing the double doors on the east façade and replacing the openings with a solid wall. In the north bay of this wall is a narrow, clerestory window filled with glass blocks. There is a similar window in the south bay, which also has a door to the interior. At the time of the survey, the building was being restored to repair a crack in the masonry and corroded steel beams. Plaster had been removed from several large sections of the wall to determine the extent

of the damage, and the first-floor garage/carport opening was shored up.

ANALYSIS: Despite alterations, the PSU break room/garage is a character-defining feature of the CMR landscape (Figure 1.5.30) that originally functioned as a stable.

ENTRY SHED

HISTORIC: In addition to the staff house and stable, outbuildings within the entry zone historically included a small shed that was located in the northeast corner of the stable yard. It was a one-story, masonry structure with a flat, steel beam and masonry vault roof. The original function of the shed is unknown. A 1949 site survey seems to indicate that a small, one-room addition was added to the south side of the shed by that date.

EXISTING: The entry shed appears to retain its original form as well as the one-room addition. On the west façade of the original structure, which is used for storage, is an arched opening with an arched steel door. There is a bathroom located in the addition, which has a modern, board-and-batten, wood door, also on the west facade.

ANALYSIS: Since the entry shed dates to the period of significance and has not been significantly altered, it is classified as a character-defining feature of the CMR landscape (Figure 1.5.31).

WISTERIA TRELLIS

HISTORIC: The wisteria trellis has been a key design element of the formal garden north of the residence since at least 1938. The exact date of its construction is unknown. The design and materials of the trellis structure are similar to those used for the fence that defines the perimeter of the adjacent parterre garden, suggesting that the two elements are contemporary. Trellises are a characteristic feature of Islamic gardens, which influenced the development of Algerian pleasure gardens and likely served as a design source for the Villa Montfeld landscape.

EXISTING: The wisteria trellis is composed of eight robust, masonry piers arranged to create an octagonal space with a circular pier at its center. Between each of the four piers that comprise the south side of the octagon is a

Figure 1.5.30

View of the east façade of the PSU break room/ garage, originally a stable then a garage. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.31

View of the entry shed, looking east. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.32

Looking south across the parterre garden at the wisteria trellis. (Robinson & Associates)

tiled wall and bench, and between each of the opposite set of piers are steps that lead down to the parterre garden. Two sets of piers off of the west and east sides of the octagon create short entry passages into the structure. Wood beams pocketed into the tops of the piers form a frame that supports a mature wisteria specimen, which forms a vegetative “roof” over the space. The floor of the wisteria trellis is paved with loose gravel.

ANALYSIS: The wisteria trellis is a character-defining feature of the CMR landscape (Figure 1.5.32).

NORTH PAVILION

HISTORIC: Although the exact date of its construction has not been determined, the north pavilion has been a key design element of the formal garden north of the residence since the period of significance. The north pavilion was constructed to provide shelter and shade for visitors to the lower parterre garden and also served as a place to rest and relax while enjoying views of the parterre and views encompassing the wisteria trellis and the residence. In this sense it functions as a riyâdh, or a covered space to relax in, which is a typical element of Islamic gardens.

EXISTING: The north pavilion is a small, one-story masonry structure with a rectangular footprint. The north and east walls of the pavilion are masonry, while the south and west elevations are open. The structure has a flat roof supported on two sides by the exterior walls and at the southwest corner by a spiral fluted, tufa column. The column, which was repaired and restored in 2022, is older than the north pavilion itself, having been salvaged from another building for reuse here. Along the interior walls of the pavilion are built-in benches decorated with tiles. Above the tiling, the interior walls are stucco. The floor of the structure has a tile field with a slate border. The roofline features a tiled frieze and a dogtooth brick cornice covered with clay roof tiles.

ANALYSIS: The north pavilion is a character-defining feature of the CMR landscape (Figure 1.5.33).

SOUTH PORCH

HISTORIC: As originally built, the south porch was an L-shaped covered passageway that extended along the south and east facades of the residence’s one-story, L-shaped wing. The porch offered an outdoor space where residents and guests could admire and enjoy the south patio and its reflecting pool while remaining sheltered from the elements. From the interior of the residence, the south porch could be accessed via the first-floor anteroom (Room 109) between the living room (Room 105) and the library (Room 106). Doors along the east-facing wall of the south porch provided access to the Moorish café (Rooms 111 and 129).

EXISTING: The L-shaped south porch extends from the southwest corner of the main block of the residence and connects the residence with the Moorish café and the south patio. It is a semi-enclosed space that extends the living quarters into the garden. It has a flat roof supported by two styles of marble columns unfluted columns with Composite capitals and columns with an octagonal base, spiral fluting above, and Composite capitals. The floor of the porch is tiled with a pattern of hexagonal terracotta tiles and glazed green triangular tiles, known as tomettes or qirātī, and is identical to the floor of the entry porch.1 The ceiling is stucco. The interior walls of the porch are stucco with a tiled base and crown molding. The southfacing interior wall has a door set in a round-arch opening and two Algerian arch niches with tiled bottom shelves. At the north end of the east-facing wall is a glazed double door (accessing the north end of the Moorish café, Room 111) flanked by double-sash, wood, casement windows screened by spiral-fluted columns. The middle portion of the east-facing wall has a door (accessing the north end of the Moorish café, Room 129) set in a round-arch opening. The door is board-and-batten with bronze studs and a wrought-iron handle. The rest of the east-facing wall features a large tile wall panel that features Qallālīn tiles with their distinctive yellow, green, and blue color scheme. The south end of the porch features a large opening with a marble sill and a decorative metal screen.

1. The tiles known as tomettes or qirātī were produced in Algiers during the Ottoman period and in Provence and other regions of France beginning in the seventeenth century but experienced a revival with the industrialized manufacturing in the nineteenth century. These hexagonal and triangular tiles are arranged geometrically as well as chromatically so that their colors – red and green – alternative harmoniously. Author correspondence with architect and historian Samia Chergui, January 5, 2023, and “Tomette,” Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia, https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomette#Notes_et_r%C3%A9f%C3%A9rences, accessed September 13, 2022.

Figure 1.5.33

View of the north pavilion, looking east. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.34

View from the north leg of the south porch, looking south. (Robinson & Associates)

ANALYSIS: The south porch is a character-defining feature of the CMR landscape (Figure 1.5.34). It forms a cohesive architectural and landscape unit together with the south porch and the south belvedere.

SOUTH PATIO

HISTORIC: Although the exact date of its construction has not been determined, the south patio has been a key design element of the landscape south of the residence since the period of significance. Originally, the south patio was a tiered hardscape element embellished with two water features a large reflecting pool and a small fountain as well as several planted beds. Its perimeter was defined by the south porch and the south belvedere on the west, a semi-circular bench on the south, and planted beds on the east. The south patio could be accessed from the residence via a door in the south façade or by the door on the south porch. A connection between the south patio and the east terrace was marked with a marble arch known as the “Casbah arch.” This architectural remnant was salvaged from the city’s historic quarter. A staircase at the southeast corner of the patio provided a connection between the middle terrace and the property’s lower slopes. The south patio offered sweeping views of the Bay of Algiers.

EXISTING: An accretion of alterations since the period of significance has changed the character and appearance of the south patio to a certain extent. For example, on the patio’s upper tier, closest to the south façade, a small fountain and two planting beds have been removed and the spaces paved over. The middle tier originally featured a reflecting pool. This was converted into a swimming pool in 1954. In 2021, the swimming pool was removed, the void was filled, and the surface was tiled. Circa 1999-2017, a fence, consisting of masonry posts and streel railings, was constructed along the southern and eastern perimeters of the space. Despite these changes, the south patio retains large expanses of original paving tiles and the two original planted beds on the middle tier. Tiled curbs continue to define the planted areas around the perimeter, and the semi-circular bench at the south end has recently been restored.

ANALYSIS: The south patio is a character-defining element of the CMR landscape (Figures 1.5.35 and 1.5.36). It forms a cohesive architectural and landscape unit with the south porch and the south belvedere.

SOUTH BELVEDERE

HISTORIC: Although the exact date of its construction has not been determined, the south belvedere has been a key design element of the landscape south of the residence since the period of significance. It defined the west edge of the south patio and served as a formal space for enjoying views of the residence, views across the south patio, its plants and pools, and sweeping views out toward the broader landscape. It was a highly embellished space with carved stone columns, tiled niches, and marble benches. The centerpiece of the belvedere was a tall, horseshoe-shaped niche. The floor of the belvedere was also tiled.

EXISTING: The south belvedere is located along the west side of the south patio, south of the south porch. It serves as a formal outdoor space and is finely decorated with tilework, decorative niches, and stone columns. Since the period of significance, the landscape along the east edge of the south patio has changed in character, with dense tree coverage that largely blocks views once enjoyed from the south belvedere. However, the space still offers a slightly elevated platform for enjoying views of the south patio and of the residence. The south belvedere is divided into seven bays and is symmetrically arranged around a tall, horseshoe-shaped niche with a marble bench, a tiled back wall, and decorative plasterwork.

ANALYSIS: The south belvedere is a character-defining element of the CMR landscape (Figure 1.5.37). It forms a cohesive architectural and landscape unit with the south porch and the south patio.

VIEWS AND VISTAS

Features that create or allow a range of vision which can be natural or designed and controlled. The term “view” refers to the expansion or panoramic prospect of a broad range of vision, which may be naturally occurring or deliberately contrived. A “vista” is the controlled prospect of a discrete, linear range of vision that is deliberately contrived.

HISTORIC: The site selected for the CMR when it was originally built offered sweeping views of the surrounding landscape and the Bay of Algiers due to its location high above the waterfront on the northeastern slope of one of the coastal hills that characterized the city’s terrain. The CMR was sited roughly in the center of

Figure 1.5.35

View looking southeast across the south patio. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.36

Looking west across the south patio with the bench on the left. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.37

South belvedere, looking northwest. (Whitney Cox)

its 5.1-acre parcel, creating opportunities for views from every elevation, and the residence and gardens were carefully designed to exploit existing views and create new internal views and vistas.

EXISTING: Several historic views are no longer extant, such as the sweeping view from the reservoir belvedere looking east and encompassing the bay, which has lost integrity due to overgrowth of vegetation and new construction. Views from the overlook terrace have also been lost due to the overgrowth of trees.

ANALYSIS: The following views and vistas are characterdefining elements of the CMR landscape:

- The panoramic view from the entrance drive encompassing the loop drive, wisteria wall, residence, and west wall of the south porch and south belvedere

- The vista north along the cypress allée path toward the residence (Figure 1.5.38)

- The view from the north pavilion looking south and encompassing the lower parterre and the wisteria trellis (Figure 1.5.39)

- The views from the wisteria trellis looking north across the parterre

- The view from the south door of the residence looking south across the south patio

- The view from the overlook terrace looking east toward the bay

- The vistas south and southwest from the “Casbah arch” looking across the south patio (Figure 1.5.40)

- The panoramic view from the south belvedere across the south patio and encompassing the residence and bay (Figure 1.5.41)

- The view from the south patio bench looking north toward the south façade of the residence

- The vistas looking north and south along the upper terrace garden paths

- The views from within and around the upper terrace parterres of the residence (Figure 1.5.42)

- The sweeping view across the landscape from the entry porch

- Views of the surrounding landscape from the roof of the residence (Figure 1.5.43)

- Views of the city of Algiers and of the bay from the roof of the residence (Figure 1.5.44)

CONSTRUCTED WATER FEATURES

Constructed water features include the built features and elements that utilize water for aesthetic or utilitarian purposes.

ENTRY COURTYARD FOUNTAIN

HISTORIC: The 1947 first-floor drawings and the 1949 survey of the CMR both show an octagonal fountain basin in the entry courtyard, and it is likely that a fountain in this location dates to the original construction of the main block and courtyard. In Algerian domestic architecture, water features, such as fountains, were used in courtyards to humidify and refresh the air, and this tradition likely influenced the design of the CMR courtyard.

EXISTING: The fountain in the entry courtyard is located on axis with the entry porch within the eastern half of the courtyard. The fountain has an octagonal pool, and in the center of the pool is a marble pedestal supporting a bowl-shaped basin and spout. The exterior face of the fountain pool is tiled with rectangular green tiles around the base (replacements) and decorative tiles above (also replacements). The decorative tiles form a repeating floral pattern. Marble slabs (modern replacements of the original marble) form the top face of the rim of the pool. The interior face of the pool is covered with the same modern decorative tiles as the exterior face, and square blue tiles are used for the basin floor. The marble, bowlshaped basin in the center of the octagonal basin, which is original, is supported by a marble pedestal, also original. The fountain is operational.

ANALYSIS: Despite repairs that replaced the original tile surfaces and marble rim of the fountain, the entry courtyard fountain is a character-defining element of the CMR landscape (Figure 1.5.45).

Physical Description & Character-Defining Features / CMR (cont’d)

Figure 1.5.38

Vista north along the cypress allée path toward the residence. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.39

The view from the south end of the lower parterre garden looking north toward the north pavilion. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.40

The vista looking south from the “Casbah arch” across the south patio. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.41

View from the south belvedere across the south patio toward the bay. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.42

View of the residence from the edge of the upper terrace parterre. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.43

View looking northwest of the gardens from the roof of the residence. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.44

Views looking north of the city of Algiers and of the bay from the roof of the residence. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.45

Entry courtyard fountain. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.46

Quatrefoil fountain is in the center of the lower parterre. (Robinson & Associates)

QUATREFOIL FOUNTAIN IN LOWER PARTERRE

HISTORIC: The quatrefoil fountain appears in a circa 1938 historic photograph of the lower parterre and has historically served as a focal point of the parterre garden. Traditional Islamic gardens, which may have served as a design source for the lower parterre, were commonly adorned with fountains, trellises, and lavish displays of water.

EXISTING: The quatrefoil fountain is in the center of the lower parterre. The fountain basin has an octagonal exterior surface and an interior surface in the shape of a quatrefoil. The outside surface is tiled with decorative tiles, while the inside has square, glazed, yellow tiles. The top ledge, or coping, of the basin is marble. In the center of the basin is a marble pedestal and fountain spout, both restored in 2021. The fountain is operational, with the depth of the water in the basin is maintained at 20 centimeters.

ANALYSIS: The quatrefoil fountain in the lower parterre is a character-defining element of the CMR landscape (Figure 1.5.46).

FOUNTAIN IN THE UPPER PARTERRE

HISTORIC: The 1949 survey of the CMR shows an octagonal fountain basin in the southernmost upper parterre. It formed the focal point of the parterre, with the garden paths emanating from the basin like the spokes of a wheel.

EXISTING: The fountain in the upper parterre has a shallow, octagonal, concrete basin that is covered with wedge-shaped marble slabs. The marble cover appears recent, and the concrete basin may not be original. At the center of this marble cover is a tiered fountain with two bowl-shaped basins and a spout. The fountain spout is operational. Additional research is required to determine whether the tiered element is original.

ANALYSIS: While the octagonal basin may be a replacement and additional research is required to determine the date of the tiered element, there is evidence of an octagonal fountain in the upper parterre since the period of significance. The shape and location of the fountain in the upper parterre is a characterdefining element of the CMR landscape (Figure 1.5.47).

REMNANTS OF EARLY DRAINAGE SYSTEM

HISTORIC: A circa 1938 historic photo shows open, brick gutters along the entry drive, and the 1949 site survey indicates that the site’s drainage system included gutters (caniveau) in three additional locations along the northern access path, along the overlook terrace connection, and along the portion of the eastern path where the lower slopes were terraced. The wide, approximately 17-inch, gutter along the northern access path ran along its west edge and extended along half its distance roughly between the wisteria wall on the south to just beyond the upper terrace garden stair on the north, where it turned east. The gutter along the overlook terrace connection extended along the south side of the path. The last location was along the segment of the eastern perimeter path where the lower slopes were terraced.

EXISTING: Today, the gutter along the northern access path is a concrete gutter that is uncovered for most of its length. The open, brick gutters along the outer edges of the entry drive remain in place. There is no evidence, however, of a gutter along the overlook terrace connection or along the eastern perimeter path.

ANALYSIS: The gutters along the northern access path and along the entry drive are important remnants of the site’s early drainage system and are character-defining features of the landscape (Figures 1.5.48 and 1.5.49).

RESERVOIR

HISTORIC: A deed for the property from 1909 describes the presence of a reservoir, and its location along the western edge of the property is depicted in the 1949 survey of the site. It is possible that there was a water feature in this location as early as 1866, as a cadastral map from that year marks the location of a well (puits) in roughly the same location as the reservoir. In 1866, the property featured courtyards and pleasure gardens, and wells, norias (a water-powered device used for lifting water from a lower elevation, such as a river, to a higher elevation, such as an aqueduct), conduits, and basins would have been instrumental for irrigation. The reservoir would have been used for drinking water, for watering gardens, and, perhaps, to supply decorative fountains and pools.

Figure 1.5.47

Fountain in the upper parterre. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.48

View of the gutter along the northern access path. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.49

View of brick gutters along the entry drive. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.50

Reservoir, looking northwest. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.51

Detail of a niche and tiled bench of the reservoir belvedere. (Robinson & Associates)

1.5 Physical Description & Character-Defining Features / CMR

EXISTING: The reservoir is located near the western edge of the property, northwest of the upper parterre gardens. It is a one-story, masonry structure with smooth stucco exterior walls with a molded cornice. The exterior walls terminate at a parapet that obscures views of the roof from the ground. Ornament is largely limited to the east façade, which features a belvedere composed of three arched openings with tile benches and partially tiled walls. Since the reservoir is located on an elevated portion of the site, the belvedere offers sweeping views across the landscape to the Bay of Algiers. In addition to the tile work, the belvedere features a dogtooth brick cornice covered with glazed roof tiles. A small, shed-roof projection on the south side of the reservoir contains a pump room.

ANALYSIS: The reservoir is a historic water feature and a character-defining element of the CMR landscape (Figures 1.5.50 and 1.5.51).

SMALL-SCALE FEATURES

Elements that provide detail and diversity combined with function and aesthetics.

HISTORIC: Small-scale features have defined the CMR landscape since the period of significance. Many were functional items required for irrigation or erosion control, such as drains and stone retaining walls. Others were more decorative, such as the ornate wrought-iron fence and gate located along the south patio path. It is likely that many original small-scale features have been lost over time. For example, the character of the original garden lighting, if any, is unknown.

EXISTING: While research has not identified all of the small-scale features that characterized the landscape during the period of significance, there are several categories that remain and contribute to the integrity of the landscape.

ANALYSIS: Character-defining small-scale features of the CMR landscape include:

- Remnant water feature now used as a planter west of the carob tree and south of the cypress allée path (Figure 1.5.52)

- Dry laid stone retaining walls (various locations) (Figure 1.5.53)

- Bunker outlet (Figure 1.5.54)

- Masonry walls around the lower parterre, north pavilion, and greenhouse (Figure 1.5.55)

- Gate posts at the main entrance2

- Low wrought-iron fence and gate along the south patio path (Figures 1.5.56 and 1.5.57)

2. No documentation of the age of the gate posts was found during research, but they appear to be masonry construction and contemporary with the historic buildings and structures of the entry zone. For this reason, they are listed as character-defining features. If additional information on their date of construction is found in the future, this classification can be amended as necessary.

Figure 1.5.52

View looking northeast of the remnant water feature now used as a planter. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.54

View of the bunker outlet, looking north. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.53

Dry laid stone retaining walls along the entry drive. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.55

View of the masonry walls around the lower parterre, north pavilion, and greenhouse. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.56

View looking east from the entry drive of the wrought-iron fence along the south patio path. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.57

Detail of the wrought-iron gate along the south patio path. (Robinson & Associates)

EXTERIOR

GENERAL

Overall Description

The CMR is a 12,000-square-foot, Moorish Revival residence originally built circa 1866-1909 possibly on the site of and incorporating elements of an earlier, Ottoman period structure. The building has a complicated massing that incorporates one-, two-, and three-story elements and an irregular footprint that includes several semienclosed projections and terraces that blur the line between interior and exterior space. The CMR likely achieved its current form after several expansion projects, including a late-nineteenth-century or early twentieth-century renovation that added a three-story wing on the north end.

Structurally, the CMR is built with load-bearing masonry walls on a masonry foundation. The exterior walls are surfaced with smooth stucco and articulated with a narrow band of tile at the foundation, belt courses of various materials and styles at each floor level, and either a molded stucco or dogtooth brick cornice at the roofline. The roof is predominantly flat and screened by parapet walls, although there are four spaces enclosed with eight-sided domes that are visible above the parapet. Decorative embellishment is achieved primarily at window and door openings. With a few exceptions, all of the windows of the CMR are wood casement windows installed circa 2013. While most of these windows are located in rectangular openings, others are screened by sculptural arcades featuring horseshoe arches and unfluted, spiral fluted, or partially spiral fluted columns. While window elements such as slate drip caps, stucco drip moldings, and iron window grilles provide a functional purpose, these features also add visual interest to the wall surface.

The CMR is oriented toward Chemin Cheikh Bachir Ibrahimi with the principal entrance on the west façade. This entrance, which features an ornate wood door set within a carved stone arch, is sheltered by the roof of an arcade that defines an entry courtyard. The courtyard, as well as an elevated terrace along the east façade and an expansive garden patio and L-shaped porch at the south end of the residence, create spaces that integrate the residence into the surrounding landscape.

The architecture of the CMR is an expression of the Moorish Revival style as interpreted by its nineteenthcentury European owners and designers. While imported sensibilities influenced much of the design, the residence’s volumetric composition, asymmetrical massing, flat wall surfaces, and roof terraces are allusions to the vernacular domestic architecture of Algiers. The reuse of architectural elements taken from Ottoman period buildings was another method used to imbue the design with a sense of authenticity. Salvaged exterior materials and features include carved stone courtyard columns, carved stone arches framing doorways, painted tiles used for floor and wall surfaces, tile wall panels, and interior doors. It is believed that many of these elements were recovered from buildings in the Casbah that were razed during the early decades of the French colonial period.

Character-Defining Features

 Asymmetrical massing

 Irregular footprint

 Orientation toward Chemin Cheikh Bachir Ibrahimi

 Architectural elements that integrate building and landscape

 Salvaged architectural elements that predate the residence

ENTRY COURTYARD

Physical Description

The entry courtyard is an open rectangular space defined on three sides by an arcade and on the fourth side by the west façade of the CMR. The arcade, which defines the courtyard, but is also an integral part of it, functions as a covered passageway and features a series of open archways that face the courtyard interior. The arcade is one-story tall with masonry walls and a flat roof that is interrupted at each corner by an octagonal dome. The exterior-facing walls of the arcade are finished with smooth stucco and feature a dogtooth cornice composed of a single horizontal band of bricks laid diagonally. A low parapet rises above the cornice. There is an entry porch in the center of the west-facing exterior wall, which has an elaborate composition befitting its function as the primary public entrance to the residence. It features a flat roof supported by curved brackets with decorated soffits

1.5 Physical Description & Character-Defining Features / CMR (cont’d)

that rest on marble columns. The roof structure shelters a carved limestone arch and a heavy wood door with bronze studs and a decorative bronze handle. The lower walls to either side of the stone arch are decorated with tiles. The floor of the entry porch is tiled with hexagonal terracotta tiles and glazed green triangular tiles, known as tomettes or qirātī

For the purposes of this description, the interior walls of the arcade are described as either inner passageway walls or outer passageway walls (the inside surfaces of the exterior-facing walls, described above). The inner passageway walls feature a series of pointed horseshoe arches (four per side) that rest on limestone (tufa) columns. The columns are octagonal on their lower half and spiral fluted above. Above the arched openings, the inner passageway walls have dogtooth cornices. In contrast with the exterior-facing walls, however, the brickwork is exposed (not stuccoed) and topped with glazed, clay roof tiles. The outer passageway walls of the arcade have a green tile base, a tile wainscot, limestone (tufa) pilasters, and stucco upper walls. Both the pilasters and the arcade columns were originally fabricated for an older structure and repurposed for the courtyard of the CMR.3 The floor of the arcade is paved with painted ceramic tiles. Its inner border (under the arches) is composed of white marble pavers, while the pavers of the outer border (along the outer passageway walls) are black marble. As noted above, the arcade has a flat roof with corner domes. The flat portions of the arcade ceiling are wood with exposed joists, while the corner domes are faced with plaster. Each dome is pierced by small, arched openings fitted with glazing, and a traditional-style lantern hangs from the apex.

The arcade shelters a door along its south arm, which leads to an interior anteroom (Room 109), and the front door of the residence (described below as part of the west façade). The former is a board-and-batten, wood door with bronze studs and a rectangular bronze grille. It is set in an arched opening. There are two windows along the outer passageway walls of the arcade — one along the south arm (opening to Room 105 on the interior) and one along the north (opening to the north service yard).

The south window (located in the north-facing outer passageway wall) holds a double-sash, casement window and has a slate drip cap, slate sill, and grille. The doublesash, casement window along the north arm (located in the south-facing outer passageway wall) is set in an Algerian arch opening. It has a tiled reveal and a slate lintel that separates the rectangular window frame from the arched element above. On the exterior, this window has a slate drip cap, a slate sill, and a grille.

Typical of an Algerian country house, there is a fountain located in the open portion of entry courtyard. It is placed on axis with the entry porch. The fountain has an octagonal pool, the rim of which is wide enough to function as a bench. Marble slabs (modern replacements of the original marble) form the top face of the rim, and the sides are clad with painted ceramic tiles (also replacements). The floor of the pool is paved with square blue tiles. A marble pedestal (original) rises from the center of the pool and supports a circular marble basin with a waterspout (original). The courtyard itself is paved with hexagonal marble tiles.

Character-Defining Features

(Figures 1.5.58 through 1.5.72)

 Exterior-facing masonry walls with smooth stucco finish, dogtooth cornice (without glazed roof tiles), and roof parapet

 Entry porch, including

- tomette tile floor

- marble threshold

- marble columns

- curved brackets with decorated soffits

- dogtooth brick cornice with glazed, clay roof tiles

- flat roof with parapet, exposed wood beams, decorated soffit, and inscriptions

- arched limestone (tufa) door surround

- vertical band of wall tiles to either side of door surround

- board-and-batten wood door with bronze studs and bronze handle

- arched wood door frame with bronze studs and bronze grille

3. Traditionally, columns with octagonal bases, such as these, would have been used for the upper galleries of courtyards with railings intersecting the columns at one of the flat sides of the octagon

1.5 Physical Description & Character-Defining Features / CMR

Figure 1.5.58

View of the west-facing exterior wall of the entry courtyard, looking true north, illustrating its masonry walls, dogtooth cornice, roof parapet, and domed projections. (Robinson & Associates)

 Interior-facing inner passageway masonry walls with pointed horseshoe arches, limestone (tufa) columns, dogtooth cornice with glazed roof tiles, and roof parapet

 Interior-facing outer passageway masonry walls with tile wainscoting, plaster upper walls, and limestone (tufa) pilasters

 Decorative wall tile under north dome

 Arcade floor tiles with marble inner and outer borders

 Wood ceiling

 Domed ceilings (2) with small, glazed, arched openings

 Arcade lanterns4

 Door opening along north-facing outer passageway wall, including

- arched door opening

- board-and-batten wood door with bronze studs and rectangular bronze grille

 Size and location of the arched opening in the southfacing outer passageway wall and its interior tiled reveal, interior slate lintel, rectangular window opening (doublesash casement window is noncontributing), exterior slate drip cap, exterior slate sill, and exterior grille

 Size and location of the rectangular window opening in north-facing outer passageway wall and its interior slate drip cap, interior slate sill, and interior grille (double-sash casement window is noncontributing)

 Courtyard fountain, including

- shape and size of octagonal pool (green base tiles, decorative tiles on interior and exterior face of pool, and marble coping are noncontributing)

- marble pedestal, basin, and fountain spout

4. No documentation of the age of the arcade lanterns was found during research. They are listed as character-defining features, but if additional information on the date of the fixtures is found in the future, this classification can be amended as necessary.

Physical Description & Character-Defining Features / CMR (cont’d)

Figure 1.5.59

Courtyard entry porch, looking east. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.60

Detail of the tile floor of the courtyard entry porch. The floor tiles are known as tomettes or qirātī. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.62

Limestone column with faceted bottom half and spiral fluted upper half. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.61

Interior-facing, inner passageway masonry walls with pointed horseshoe arches, looking south. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.64

Interior-facing, outer passageway walls with tile wainscoting, plaster upper walls, and limestone pilaster. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.65

Decorative wall tile under the north dome. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.66

Arcade floor with ceramic tiles and marble inner and outer borders. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.63

Detail of dogtooth cornice and glazed roof tiles of the interior-facing, inner passageway wall. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.67

Wood ceiling of arcade. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.68

Door opening along north-facing outer passageway wall, looking south. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.70

Window opening on the north-facing exterior wall corresponding to the arched opening in the southfacing outer passageway. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.71

Rectangular window opening in north-facing outer passageway wall and its interior slate drip cap, interior slate sill, and interior grille. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.69

Arched opening in the south-facing outer passageway. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.72

Courtyard fountain, looking south. (Robinson & Associates)

Physical Description & Character-Defining Features / CMR

1.5 Physical Description & Character-Defining Features / CMR (cont’d)

WEST FAÇADE

Physical Description

The west façade of the two-story main block has smooth stucco walls with a tile base (square green tiles that match the base of the interior wall of the arcade), a molded stucco belt course, and a brick cornice. The cornice is composed of two horizontal bands of dogtooth bricks capped with glazed, clay roof tiles. Above the cornice is a high parapet. A key element of the west façade is the front door (opening to the entry hall (Room 101). It is sheltered by the arcade of the entry courtyard and features an arched, limestone (tufa) surround carved with six- and eight-pointed stars, flowers, and medallions. The door is board-and-batten construction with bronze studs, a bronze knocker, and a bronze handle. The door frame is also decorated with studs and has a grilled opening. Another focal point of the west façade is a projecting, second-story bay that is supported by timber struts and brick corbeling.5 It features a triple-sash, casement window with an arcaded opening composed of three horseshoe arches supported by columns. Above this opening is a stucco drip molding, below is a stucco apron, and the window is protected by a grille. In addition to this opening, the west façade of the main block has six first-floor windows and six additional second-floor windows. The first-floor windows include a small singlesash, casement window with a grille that is integrated into the window reveal and five double-sash, casement windows set in rectangular openings with grilles and some combination of slate drip caps, slate sills, and molded aprons. Second-floor windows include four double-sash casements with grilles and some combination of slate drip caps, drip moldings, slate sills, and molded aprons. There are also two smaller, doublesash, casement windows with arcaded openings that light an interior staircase. Both of these windows have molded drip caps, but only one has a grille. In addition, the west façade of the main block has a single-sash, casement window with a grille at the attic level which lights the interior stair to the roof terrace.

A one-story, L-shaped wing (corresponding to Rooms 106, 109, 111, 129, and the south porch) extends from the south end of the main block. This section of the west façade has smooth stucco walls and a dogtooth brick cornice, with the exception of the exterior-facing wall of the south porch, which has a molded cornice and a parapet. In the northernmost bay (corresponding to Room 106), there is a double-sash, casement window in a rectangular opening with a grille below a small, arched opening. The west façade of the Moorish café (Room 111) features a projecting bay with a clay tile roof. Three arched niches articulate the bay, which is supported on corbeled and stuccoed bricks. Above the roof element are three rectangular openings, and similar openings are found on the side walls. The south end of the Moorish café is domed, and two small, arched openings pierce the exterior walls. The remainder of this façade, which constitutes the exterior-facing wall of the south porch (Room 117) is unfenestrated.

The west façade of the north wing has smooth stucco walls, molded stucco belt courses, and a brick cornice composed of two horizontal bands of dogtooth bricks. Above the cornice is a high parapet. A one-story wing (corresponding to Rooms 123, 124, and 125) extends from the north wing into the service yard. This component features a simple molded stucco cornice that matches the profile of the belt courses of the north wing. The firstand second-story windows of the north wing and its one-story projection are set in rectangular openings of various sizes with exterior or integrated grilles. Several of these windows have slate drip caps and/or slate sills. At the third-floor level, there are two small rectangular window openings and three arcaded openings with drip moldings. These windows also have grilles. With the exception of a first-floor pivot window (corresponding to the kitchen, Room 122), the west façade of the north wing has single or double-sash wood casement windows.

5. The use of struts, corbeling, or a combination of the two, are traditional local methods for supporting elements that project from the building façade and can be seen on many buildings in the Casbah.

1.5 Physical Description & Character-Defining Features / CMR (cont’d)

There is a door to the north wing located under the portion of the service yard that is sheltered by a roof with a skylight. This is a board-and-batten, wood door with bronze studs and a bronze grille. It is set in an arched opening in the wall, and a wood frame affixed to the outside face of the wall supports a wood storm door.

Character-Defining Features

Main Block (Figures 1.5.73 through 1.5.78)

 Masonry walls with smooth stucco finish

 Molded belt course

 Dogtooth brick cornice with glazed, clay roof tiles

 Roof parapet

 Chimney projection

 Projecting 2nd-story bay w/ timber struts and corbeling

 Rectangular window openings (various sizes)

 Paired and tripartite arcaded window openings

 Slate drip caps

 Drip moldings

 Slate sills

 Molded aprons

 Iron window grilles

 Small, arched openings

 Front entrance, including - marble step at threshold

- arched limestone (tufa) door surround

- board-and-batten wood door with bronze studs, knocker, and handle

- arched wood door frame with bronze studs and grille

One-Story, L-Shaped Wing (Figures 1.5.79 through 1.5.81)

 Masonry walls with smooth stucco finish

 Dogtooth brick cornice

 Molded cornice and parapet of exterior-facing wall of south porch

 Size and location of rectangular window opening with grille (casement window is noncontributing)

 Small, rectangular and arched openings

North Wing and One-Story Service Wing6 (Figures 1.5.82 through 1.5.87)

 Masonry walls with smooth stucco finish

 Molded belt courses of north wing

 Dogtooth brick cornice

 Simple molded cornice of one-story service wing

 Roof parapets of north wing and service wing

 Chimney projection

 Rectangular window openings (various sizes)

 Paired and tripartite arcaded window openings

 Slate drip caps

 Drip moldings

 Slate sills

 Iron window grilles

 Small, rectangular and arched openings

 Small, square vent openings under cornice

 Arched door opening and board-and-batten wood door from service yard

 Flat roof with skylight and bracketed beam sheltering south entrance7

6. In an effort to simplify understanding of the character-defining features list, all exterior elements of the one-story service wing (south, west, and north facades) are described in this section.

7. No information about this feature was found during research. Since it may be original to the north wing, it is listed as a character-defining feature. If additional information on its construction date is found in the future, this classification can be amended as necessary.

Description & Character-Defining Features / CMR (cont’d)

Figure 1.5.73

West façade of main block, looking southeast, with masonry walls and simple molded belt course. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.74

Detail of dogtooth brick cornice with glazed tiles and roof parapet. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.75

Roofline detail showing chimney projection. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.76

Projecting second-story bay with timber struts and brick corbeling. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.77

Rectangular window opening with slate drip cap, slate sill, and grille. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.78

Front entrance with arched limestone surround, wood door, and marble step. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.79

View of the one-story wing that extends from the west façade of the main block, looking true north. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.80

Domed roof over the south end of the Moorish café (Room 129). (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.81

Character-defining features include the smooth plaster walls, dogtooth cornice, the rectangular window opening with iron grille, and the small, arched and rectangular openings. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.82

Constructed after the main block, the three-story north wing features masonry walls with a smooth stucco finish. The one-story service wing extends into the service yard. (Robinson & Associates)

Physical Description & Character-Defining Features / CMR (cont’d)

Figure 1.5.83

Detail of molded cornice of the north wing. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.84

Detail of roof parapet and chimney projection. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.85

Detail of corbeled brick cornice and small rectangular vent openings at the top of the wall. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.86

Window detail showing a slate drip cap, drip sill, and metal grille. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.87

Arched entrance and wood door with grille, rectangular window openings (various sizes), and small arched openings. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.88

View of north façade of north wing. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.89 Rectangular window openings with grille and slate drip cap. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.90

Molded belt courses, molded cornice with glazed, clay roof tiles, and roof parapet. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.91

Size and location of rectangular window openings, iron grille, slate drip cap and slate sill. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.92

Size and location of basement-level door opening. (Robinson & Associates)

NORTH FAÇADE

Physical Description

The north façade of the north wing has an exposed basement and therefore extends four stories from ground level to roof. The exterior walls are smooth stucco, and the molded belt courses and dogtooth cornice from the west façade carry over to the north. At the basement level there are four casement windows evenly spaced across the façade. These are modern casement windows set in rectangular openings with grilles. Only the easternmost of these windows has a slate drip cap. The two first-floor windows (corresponding to the kitchen, Room 122) are pivot windows set in rectangular openings with grilles. One window has a slate drip cap. There are small, arched openings in the wall surface above the first-floor windows. The second-floor level has two casement windows one large and one small — both with grilles. There are two arcaded windows at the third-floor level, both with grilles. The north façade of the one-story wing (corresponding to Rooms 123, 124, and 125) that extends from the north wing into the service yard features a single rectangular window opening with a modern double-hung sash window with slate drip cap, slate sill, and grille. The wall features a simple molded stucco cornice that matches the profile of the belt courses of the north wing.

The north façade of the main block is three-stories tall due to an exposed basement level. The stucco wall surface is articulated with a simple molded belt course between the basement and first-floor levels and a more elaborate stucco belt course between the first and second floors. The cornice is also molded stucco, rather than dogtooth brick, and it is covered with glazed, clay roof tiles. A parapet terminates the wall at the roof. There is a basement-level door located at the bottom landing of the exterior stairs that lead up to the east terrace. The door opening holds a flush-style, steel exterior door with a barred transom and a ventilation grille at the base. At the second-floor level, there is evidence of a former window opening that has been filled. Although the window has been boarded, the frame, slate drip cap, and slate sill remain in place.

Character-Defining Features

North Wing and One-Story Service Wing (Figures 1.5.88 through 1.5.89)

 Masonry walls with smooth stucco finish

 Molded belt courses

 Dogtooth brick cornice of north wing

 Simple molded cornice of one-story service wing

 Roof parapets of north wing and service wing

 Size and location of rectangular window openings (casement windows are noncontributing)

 Paired and tripartite arched window openings with columns (casement windows are noncontributing)

 Slate drip caps

 Slate sills

 Iron window grilles

 Small, arched openings

Main Block (Figures 1.5.90 through 1.5.92)

 Masonry wall with smooth stucco finish

 Molded belt courses

 Molded cornice with glazed, clay roof tiles

 Roof parapet

 Chimney projection with dogtooth brick cornice

 Size and location of rectangular window opening (casement window is noncontributing)

 Size and location of rectangular window opening (now closed) with slate drip cap and sill

 Iron window grill

Physical Description & Character-Defining Features / CMR

EAST FAÇADE

Physical Description

Similar to the north façade, the east façade of the north wing has an exposed basement and extends four stories from ground level to roof. The exterior walls are smooth stucco, and there are simple molded belt courses between the first and second floors and between the second and third. The walls terminate in a dogtooth cornice and parapet. At the basement level there is a door and two rectangular window openings. The door opening holds a narrow, flush-style, steel exterior door with a barred transom. The interior door is a wood, board-andbatten door with a glazed transom. The window south of the door has a slate drip cap and a grille; the window to the north has a slate sill and grille. At the first-floor level there is a pair of casement windows (corresponding to the pantry, Room 118) set in rectangular openings with grilles

one with a slate drip cap and one without. A smaller casement window to the north is set in a rectangular opening (corresponding to Room 127) and has a drip cap and grill. North of this is a larger opening with a pivot window (for the kitchen, Room 122), slate sill, and grille. Two smaller openings at the first-floor level provide light into the stair hall of the north wing. These rectangular windows hold single-sash casements, and their security bars are integrated into the window reveal. The secondfloor level has two large rectangular window openings with casements and grilles. A small opening with a single-sash casement and a similar window at the thirdfloor level provide light to the stair hall. Unlike the corresponding windows below, however, the security grilles are affixed to the exterior wall. In addition to the stair hall window, the third-floor level has an arcaded opening and a single horseshoe arch opening, both with a grille and drip molding.

Although the east façade of the main block is a secondary façade, in that there is no public entrance to the residence from the east side of the building, it features elaborate bay windows, a loggia, a tile belt course, and other decorative features. The east façade is three-stories tall due to an exposed basement level and can be loosely divided into three bays. The northernmost bay has stucco walls articulated with a molded belt course, a molded cornice with glazed, clay roof tiles, and a flat band of molding that extends along the edges of the façade and under the cornice. The small, two-story wing that extends from this bay (corresponding to Room 112 on the interior) features a similar band of molding, but one that only extends about a third of the way down the edges of the east wall. The center bay has a molded belt course between the first and second floors, a dogtooth cornice covered with glazed, clay roof tiles, and a parapet. In the south bay, the molded belt course is replaced with a wide band decorated with tiles. This tile belt course is not original and was installed at some point between 1965 and1999. In the recessed portion of the south bay, the belt course is not tiled. The south bay repeats the cornice treatment and parapet of the center bay.

Most of the window openings fenestrating the east façade of the main block are arcaded. In the small, twostory wing that extends from the north bay, there is a narrow, horizontally oriented, rectangular opening at the basement level and an arcaded opening above it that is composed of a pair of tall horseshoe arches without a central column. This opening has a slate drip cap and a grille. There are single horseshoe arch window openings with grilles on the north and south walls of the one-story wing. The only other first-floor window of the north bay is a casement window in a rectangular opening with a grill. Second-floor windows of the north bay include one rectangular opening with a slate drip cap and grille and two arcaded openings with molded drip caps, molded aprons, and grilles. At the basement level, the center bay has three horseshoe arch-shaped openings that lead to the former chapel (Room 023). Each opening has a marble threshold and holds a decorative wrought-iron grille that is affixed to the interior edge of the opening.

Above these openings at the first-floor level is a bay window featuring a molded apron and an entablature supported by brackets and pilasters. The roof over the window is clad with glazed, clay roof tiles. The four-part casement window in this bay is protected by a grille and by a metal rolling shade that, when retracted, is concealed by the entablature. The wall above this window is pierced by five small, rectangular openings with small, arched openings to either side. The second-floor level of the center bay features a loggia with three horseshoe arch openings set in shallow rectangular recesses and spiral fluted columns and pilasters. Since the basement below the south bay is at a lower level than the rest of the basement under the main block, the basement-level door is approached by two flights of steps — one leading down from the east terrace and one from the south patio. The opening holds a flush-style, steel exterior door with a barred transom and a marble step at the threshold. The interior door is paneled wood with a transom consisting of a wood panel fitted with two ventilation fans. The first floor of the south bay has two window openings. The more prominent of the two is a bay window featuring a molded apron, a bracketed sill, and a molded cornice covered with glazed, clay roof tiles. The window in this bay is composed of a pair of tall horseshoe arches without a central column. It is secured by a grille set within the window reveal. Three small, arched openings pierce the wall above the bay. The other first-floor window is located in the recessed portion of the south bay and is a casement window set in a rectangular opening with a grille. The third floor features double and tripartite arcaded openings with molded aprons, molded drip caps, and grilles.

Character-Defining Features

North Wing

(Figures 1.5.93 through 1.5.96)

 Masonry walls with smooth stucco finish

 Molded belt courses (tiled belt course is noncontributing)

 Dogtooth brick cornice (without tiles)

 Roof parapet

 Size and location of rectangular window openings (various sizes) (casement windows are noncontributing)

 Paired arched window openings with columns (2)

 Slate drip caps

 Drip moldings

 Slate sill

 Iron window grilles

 Small, arched openings

 Basement-level wood door and glazed transom (steel door is noncontributing)

Main Block (Figures 1.5.97 through 1.5.104)

 Masonry walls with smooth stucco finish

 Flat band of molding articulating north bay

 Molded belt course

 Molded cornice with glazed, clay roof tiles

 Dogtooth cornice with glazed, clay roof tiles

 Roof parapet

 Chimney projection

 Small, square vent openings under cornice

 Size and location of rectangular window openings (casement windows are noncontributing)

 Paired and tripartite arched window openings with columns

 Paired arched window openings (without columns)

 Projecting window bay with molded apron, bracketed lintel, and tiled roof

 Projecting window bay with molded apron, bracketed sill, and tiled roof

 Loggia with arched openings set in shallow rectangular recesses and molded apron

 Basement-level, arched openings with marble thresholds and wrought-iron grilles

 Small, arched and rectangular openings

 Slate drip caps

 Drip moldings

 Molded aprons

 Iron window grilles

 Size and location of basement-level door opening (interior wood door and exterior steel door are noncontributing)

Physical Description & Character-Defining Features / CMR (cont’d)

Figure 1.5.93

Masonry walls with smooth stucco finish, molded belt courses, dogtooth brick cornice, and roof parapet. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.94

Detail of molded belt course around terrace. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure1.5.95

Rectangular window opening with iron grille and slate sill. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.96

Size and location of basement-level door opening. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.97

Masonry walls with smooth stucco finish, molded cornice with glazed, clay roof tiles, molded belt course. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.98

Detail of flat band of molding articulating north bay. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.99

Basement-level, arched opening with marble threshold and wrought-iron grille. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.100

Size and location of basement-level door opening. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.101

Paired arched window opening with slate drip cap and grille. (Robinson & Associates)

Physical Description & Character-Defining Features / CMR (cont’d)

Figure 1.5.102

Projecting window bay with molded apron, bracketed lintel, and tiled roof. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.103

Projecting window bay with molded apron, bracketed sill, and tiled roof. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.104

Second-floor loggia with arched openings set in shallow rectangular recesses and molded apron. (Robinson & Associates)

SOUTH FAÇADE

Physical Description

The south façade of the main block stands two stories tall and can be divided into two bays. The eastern bay has smooth stucco walls with a tile base (square green tiles that match the base of the west façade of the main block), a belt course consisting of a wide band decorated with tiles (matching the tiled belt course of the south bay of the east façade, which was installed circa 1965-1999), a dogtooth cornice capped with glazed, clay roof tiles, and a parapet. With the exception of the tiled belt course, these elements are all repeated on the west bay. The first floor of the south façade has a door opening and window in the east bay and an arcaded window in the west bay. The door surround is composed of a carved limestone arch (painted) with a molded cornice capped with glazed, clay roof tiles. The arch features crescent moon and floral motifs. A heavy, glass door with a wrought-iron frame and decorative grille is set in the opening. A short flight of steps leads up to the south door from the surrounding patio. The steps have marble treads and a tiled landing, risers, and cheek walls. The window to the east of the door is a three-part casement set in a rectangular opening with a slate drip cap and grill. There are three small rectangular windows in the wall immediately above this window. The window to the west of the door (corresponding on the interior to the living room, Room 105) is more ornate. It is a triple-sash casement window set in an arcaded opening with a marble sill, a center column, and decorative tiling. Part of a one-story, projecting bay, the arcaded opening is crowned by a bracketed entablature capped with glazed, clay roof tiles. The window sash are protected by a grille that is set in the window reveal and by a metal rolling shade that, when retracted, is concealed by the entablature. A wrought-iron and tile shelf is affixed to the wall below the window opening. Each of the second-floor windows of the south façade is arcaded and features a molded drip cap, molded apron, and grille.

Character-Defining Features

Main Block

(Figures 1.5.105 through 1.5.113)

 Masonry walls with smooth stucco finish

 Tiled base

 Tile panel around waterspout

 Dogtooth cornice with glazed, clay roof tiles

 Roof parapet

 Chimney projection

 Small, square vent openings under cornice

 South entrance, including

- steps to entrance with marble treads, tiled risers, tiled cheek walls, tiled landing

- arched limestone (tufa) door surround

- glass door with wrought-iron frame and grille

- cornice capped with glazed, clay roof tiles

 Size and location of rectangular window openings (casement windows are noncontributing)

 Paired and tripartite arched window openings with columns

 Projecting window bay with marble sill, bracketed lintel, and tiled roof

 Wrought iron and tile shelf

 Small, arched and rectangular openings

 Slate drip caps

 Drip moldings

 Molded aprons

 Iron window grilles

/ CMR (cont’d)

Figure 1.5.106

Tiled base of exterior walls and tile panel around waterspout. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.105

Contributing south façade wall elements include the molded belt course, dogtooth cornice with glazed, clay roof tiles, and roof parapet. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.107

South entrance with arched limestone door surround, glass door with wrought-iron frame and grille, and cornice capped with glazed, clay roof tiles. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.108

Detail of steps to south entrance. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.109

Representative image of a rectangular window opening with slate drip cap, slate sill, apron, and iron grille. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.110

Projecting window bay with paired arched opening, column, tilework, marble sill, bracketed lintel, and tiled roof. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.113

Detail of dogtooth cornice and small, square vent openings under cornice. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.111

Detail of the wrought iron and tile shelf of the projecting window bay. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.112

Representative image of a paired arched window opening with column, drip molding, and apron. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.114

L-shaped south porch with flat roof, marble columns, tile frieze, and shed roof projection with exposed rafters and glazed, clay roof tiles. (Robinson & Associates)

1.5 Physical Description & Character-Defining Features / CMR (cont’d)

SOUTH PORCH

Physical Description

The south porch is an L-shaped covered passageway that extends along the south and east facades of the one-story, L-shaped wing.8 It has a flat roof supported by two styles of marble columns unfluted columns and Composite capitals and columns with an octagonal base, spiral fluting above, and Composite capitals. The columns support a tiled frieze (matching the belt course on the east bay of the south façade) sheltered by a narrow, shed projection with exposed rafter tails and glazed, clay roof tiles. The floor of the porch is tiled with hexagonal terracotta tiles and glazed green triangular tiles, known as tomettes or qirātī, and is identical to the floor of the entry porch. The ceiling is plaster. The interior walls of the porch are plaster with a tiled base (green rectangular tiles) and crown molding. The south-facing interior wall has a door set in a round-arch opening and two Algerian arch niches with tiled bottom shelves. The door is board-and-batten with bronze studs and a rectangular bronze grille. At the north end of the eastfacing wall is a glazed double door (accessing the north end of the Moorish café, Room 111) flanked by doublesash, wood, casement windows screened by spiral-fluted columns. The columns rest on low walls pierced by small, Algerian arch niches two niches below each window opening. The middle portion of the east-facing wall has a door (accessing the north end of the Moorish café, Room 129) set in a round-arch opening. The door is board-andbatten with bronze studs and a wrought-iron handle. The rest of the east-facing wall features a large tile wall panel featuring Qallālīn tiles. The south end of the porch features a large opening with a marble sill and a decorative metal screen. The wall below the sill is tiled. The porch is lit by a single decorative lantern.

Character-Defining Features

(Figures 1.5.114 through 1.5.120)

 Tiled floor

 Masonry walls with smooth stucco finish

 Tiled base

 Crown molding

 Flat plaster ceiling

 Decorative lantern9

 Arched door opening and door to Room 109

 Arched door opening and board-and-batten door to Room 129

 Marble steps to Room 111 and Room 129

 Large wall niches (2)

 Glazed double door and casement windows to Room 111

 Small wall niches (4)

 Qallālīn tile wall panel

 Tiled frieze

 Shed roof with exposed rafter tails and glazed roof tiles

 Marble columns and pilasters

 South opening with marble sill

 Grille in south opening10

9. Similar to the lanterns lighting the arcade around the entry court, no documentation of the age of the south patio lantern was found during research. It is listed as character-defining features, but if additional information on the date of the fixture is found in the future, this classification can be amended as necessary.

No

8. The west-facing exterior walls of the one-story, L-shaped wing are described as part of the west façade. The east- and south-facing exterior walls of the L-shaped wing are described as part of the south porch following the approach used for the north-facing exterior wall, which is described as part of the entry courtyard.

10.

documentation of the age of the grille was found during research, but its design resembles that of the wrought-iron gate at the south patio path. If additional information on its date of construction is found in the future, the classification of the grille as a character-defining feature can be amended as necessary.

Figure 1.5.115

Tile floor, plaster walls with tiled base and crown molding, and tile panel. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.116

Column detail. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.117

Door on south-facing wall. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.119

Door on east-facing wall (corresponding to Room 129). (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.118

Door and window assembly at north end of east-facing wall and Algerian arch niches on south-facing wall. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.120

Detail of tile wall panel. (Robinson & Associates)

Physical Description & Character-Defining Features / CMR (cont’d)

INTERIOR

General Description

The CMR has an asymmetrical interior layout that is influenced by, but does not closely follow, the planning traditions of Ottoman-era residences built in the fohôs of Algiers. In a traditional Algerian country house, the courtyard, or wast al-dâr, was the central element around which all other spaces were organized stairs to the upper level originated from it and all rooms opened onto it. Rooms surrounding the courtyard were typically rectangular or t-shaped, with the latter featuring a small ancillary room, or iwān, that had openings for ventilation and views. Access to the courtyard from the exterior was indirect, and additional exterior wall openings were limited. Most importantly, country houses were integrated into the surrounding landscape by incorporating elements such as terraces, patios, and exterior courtyards.

In plan, the CMR primarily reflects the European preferences of its earliest owners. The residence has a U-shaped plan that wraps around the entry courtyard. The atrium (Room 102) incorporates traditional courtyard elements, but it is not centrally located or is it open to the air, and the living room (Room 105), small salon (Room 104), and dining room (Room 107) are large, carefully appointed spaces that occupy equally important spaces in the floor plan as the atrium. This arrangement of spaces reflects the way of life of its nineteenth-century French and English owners rather than Algerian design tradition in which the courtyard is treated as the “heart” of the house and given the most prominence. In a nod to local customs, however, the L-shaped entry hall (Room 101) does not provide direct access from the exterior, and several rooms feature small ancillary rooms with windows that provide ventilation, light, and views of the surrounding landscape.

In addition to the principal rooms described above, the first floor of the CMR features a library (Room 106), a Moorish café (Rooms 111 and 129), three small hallways (Rooms 109, 115, and 128), a bathroom (Room 114), and two stair halls. The stair to the second floor (Room 113) is accessed from the atrium. The second stair hall (Room 108) contains a spiral stair to the basement level. The Moorish café comprises two rooms off of the south porch and can only be accessed from the south porch.

The north wing is a later addition to the residence. Firstfloor spaces in the north wing include a kitchen (Room 122), office (Room 121), staff room (Room 125), pantry (Room 118), two closets, and two bathrooms.

Rooms on the second floor include the atrium gallery (Room 208), a balcony (Room 209), four bedrooms, an office, a family kitchen, an ironing room, four bathrooms, and two stair halls. Only the north wing has a third floor, which is divided into three bedrooms and three bathrooms. The stair hall in the main block provides access to the roof terrace.

The CMR has four basement spaces that are, for the most part, not connected internally with each other. Three of these spaces are below the main block. The southernmost of these features two changing rooms with showers and two bathrooms. These spaces were likely created in conjunction with the former CMR swimming pool, which was installed in 1954, replacing an original reflecting pool located on the south patio. The swimming pool was removed in 2021. This basement area (Rooms 114 to 122) can be accessed externally from a door on the east façade or internally via a spiral staircase. The basement space below the atrium (Room 023) is T-shaped in plan and features tile floors, baseboards, and wainscotting. It is now used for storage but once served as a chapel. A small window opening in the north wall of this space connects it with the basement space at the north end of the main block, which is below the dining room. This space (Room 024) currently functions as a mechanical room. The basement area below the north wing is divided into several spaces, including a laundry room, boiler room, bathroom, wine cellar, and others. The basement below the north wing also provides access to a bomb shelter, which is located roughly three stories below the basement floor level. The bomb shelter consists of two rooms and a series of long corridors. There is a secondary exit from the shelter located within the lower slopes of the site, near the eastern edge of the property.

The first category of interior spaces to be described includes the representational rooms identified in the scope of work. These rooms have been zoned for preservation and are of high significance.

1.5 Physical Description & Character-Defining Features

ENTRY HALL (ROOM 101)

Physical Description

The entry hall is an L-shaped space that links the entry courtyard (Room 110) and the atrium (Room 102) and provides access between the main block with the north wing. The largest section of the room is rectangular in plan with the short walls on the north and south. In this portion of the room, the ceiling is composed of two rib vaults with beading along the groins. A pointed horseshoe arch separates the two vaults. It is supported by engaged limestone columns (painted) that have an octagonal plan on the lower half and a spiral fluted upper half. The ceiling of the smaller portion of the room, which forms a vestibule at the front entrance, is a pointed horseshoe vault. The entry hall is lit with a brass pendant light, installed in 1974. The room has a tile floor composed of octagonal marble tiles (modern), a tile baseboard, and plaster walls. On the west wall is the front entrance which features a paneled wood door in a paneled wood surround with a wood lintel and modern hardware. There is a grilled opening in the surround above the door. The west wall also has two windows — a single casement window with a tiled sill that lights the entry and a larger, double casement window with a tiled sill. There are two doors on the north wall. One is a paneled wood door in the vestibule area that leads to a closet. The second is a tall, paneled, double door with a smaller door set within each leaf. This door is affixed to the entry hall side of an arched opening that leads to the north wing. This door, and others like it in the residence, features a very elaborate pattern of geometric panels known as qâyamnâyam and was likely salvaged from an Ottoman-period residence. The east wall features two pairs of Algerian arch niches, each with a spiral-fluted marble column, a marble sill, and tiled back and side walls. The style of these niches and their location in the entry hall references the design of a traditional Algerian sqîfa. The south wall of the entry hall has a pointed horseshoe arch opening that leads to the atrium (Room 102).

Character-Defining Features

(Figures 15.121 through 1.5.125)

- Tile baseboards

- Plaster walls

- Wall vents with decorative plaster grilles (3)

- Engaged limestone columns (2)

- Vaulted ceilings

- Pair of Algerian arch niches with marble column, marble sill, and tiled side and back walls (2)

- Wood paneled front door with wood surround (hardware is noncontributing)

- Paneled, wood, double door with smaller inset doors in north door opening

- Paneled, wood door to closet (Room 120)

- Size and location of window opening in vestibule with tiled windowsill (casement window is noncontributing)

- Size and location of large window opening (double casement window and tile sill are noncontributing)

ATRIUM (ROOM 102)

Physical Description

The atrium is an airy and light-filled room that integrates interior space both vertically and horizontally and serves as a focal point of the residence. It is a large room with a rectangular plan that is subdivided by a series of arcades. The arcades consist of pointed horseshoe arches that rest on stone columns with an octagonal plan on the lower half, a spiral fluted upper half, and a capital with stylized volutes. Two arcades run east-west through the space and divide the room lengthwise into three bays. The outer (north and south) bays are narrower than the center bay. Two additional arcades run north-south through the space and intersect with the east-west arcades to define a square-shaped central core. This core is open to the second floor and covered with a tall, eight-sided dome.

Figure 1.5.121

Stucco wall with tile baseboard and engaged limestone column. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.122

Algerian arch niches with spiral-fluted, marble column, marble sill, and tiled back and side walls. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.123

Wood paneled front door with wood surround. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.124

Paneled, wood, double door with smaller inset doors in north door opening. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.125

Size and location of window opening in vestibule with tiled windowsill. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.126

Arcades consisting of pointed horseshoe arches and stone columns with a faceted lower half, a spiral fluted upper half, and a capital with stylized volutes. (Robinson & Associates)

1.5 Physical Description & Character-Defining

The floor of the atrium is laid with marble tiles and consists of a field of gray, square tiles and a central panel, located within the central core, that features gray, octagonal tiles and red, square tiles. A border of black marble separates the central panel from the field. This border aligns with the arcade columns that define the central core of the room. The atrium has plaster walls with a decorative tile wainscot and plaster crown molding. The flat section of the atrium ceiling is divided into coffers, their size corresponding to the divisions created by the arcades. Within each coffer are exposed log joists that evoke traditional Algerian building techniques, but in this case are decorative rather than structural. Two brass pendant lights hang from the flat portion of the atrium ceiling one at the west end of the room and one at the east end. These were installed in 1974.

As noted above, the central core of the atrium is a domed, multilevel space. The upper wall of the first-floor arcade is embellished with vertical bands, or swâlaf, in this case unadorned plaster, that align with the column locations and a wide, tiled, horizontal band, or hzâm. At the second-floor level, the upper walls of the arcade feature vertical plaster bands at the column locations and a horizontal component consisting of a series of arched recesses. The drum of the dome features alternating pendentives and windows, and the dome itself is pierced by four, arched, plaster grilles, or claustra, with small pieces of colored glass. A brass pendant light with glass inserts, also installed in 1974, hangs from a long chain attached to the apex of the dome.

The north wall of the atrium has two door openings one at the west end that leads to the entry hall (Room 101) and one in roughly the center of the wall that leads to the dining room (Room 107). The opening to the entry hall takes the form of a pointed horseshoe arch set within a shallow rectangular recess. The reveals of the arch are decorated with a tile baseboard and tile panels. There is no door affixed in this opening. In the wall above the arch are three rectangular vents with decorative plaster grilles. The opening to the dining room takes the same form as the opening to the entry hall, but in this case, there is a tall, paneled, wood, double door affixed to the atrium side of the opening. The door features qâyam-nâyam paneling and a smaller door set within each leaf. In the wall above the door are three rectangular vents with decorative plaster grilles. At the east end of the north wall is a large, Qallālīn tile panel, which is set directly above the

wainscoting, and an Algerian arch niche with a paneled wood cabinet. Above the niche is a rectangular vent with a decorative plaster grille. Two radiator grilles are set within the wainscot of the north wall.

In east wall features an eye-catching arrangement of tile panels and window openings. In the center of the wall, which can be separated into three bays, is a large window with four casements and a deep, tiled sill. Above this opening is a narrow tile panel and, over that, a row of five decorative plaster grilles fitted with stained glass. The north and south bays feature Qallālīn tile panels that are set directly above the wainscoting.

The south wall of the atrium is a mirror image of the north with the exception of the Algerian arch niche. Instead of holding a wood cabinet, the niche on the south wall is fitted with a double casement window with a tile sill. The openings in this wall lead to the small salon (Rm 104) and the south hall (Rm 128) that connects with the living room.

The west wall of the atrium is divided into three bays. In the south bay is a round arch opening with a carved limestone surround and a wood paneled door. This door leads to a restroom. In the center bay, there is a pointed horseshoe arch recess in the wall and two Algerian arch niches within the recess. Each niche holds a glass-fronted cabinet. In the north bay is a round arch opening that leads to the main stair hall. It features a carved limestone surround. There is a rectangular vent with a decorative plaster grille in both the wall above the opening to the restroom and the wall above the opening to the stair hall.

Character-Defining Features (Figures 1.5.126 through 1.5.135)

- Tile wainscot

- Plaster walls

- Plaster crown molding

- Arcades consisting of pointed horseshoe arches and stone columns with an octagonal plan on the lower half, a spiral fluted upper half, and a capital with stylized volutes

- Vertical plaster bands and a horizontal band of tile decorating upper wall of arcade of central core

- Qallālīn tile wall panels (5)

- Coffered ceilings with exposed logs

- Dome

- Paneled, wood, double doors w/ smaller inset doors (2)

Description & Character-Defining Features / CMR (cont’d)

Figure 1.5.127

Tile wainscot. (Whitney Cox)

Figure 1.5.128

Qallālīn tile wall panel with its distinctive yellow, blue, and green color scheme. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.130

Coffered ceiling with exposed timber logs.

Figure 1.5.129

Vertical plaster bands (swālaf) and horizontal tile band (hzâm) of tile decorating upper wall of arcade of central core. (Whitney Cox)

1.5 Physical Description & Character-Defining Features / CMR (cont’d)

Figure 1.5.131

Domed ceiling. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.133

Carved stone surround at entry to the main stair hall. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.132

Paneled, wood, double doors with smaller inset doors. (Whitney Cox)

Figure 1.5.134

Carved stone door surround. (Whitney Cox)

Figure 1.5.135

Window opening, tile panel, and rectangular openings with decorative plaster grilles fitted with stained glass. (Whitney Cox)

- Paneled wood door to restroom

- Algerian arch niche with paneled wood cabinet

- Algerian arch niche with glass fronted cabinets (2)

- Size and location of Algerian arch window opening with tiled windowsill (casement window is noncontributing)

- Size and location of window opening in east wall with tiled windowsill (casement window is noncontributing)

- rectangular openings with decorative plaster grilles fitted with stained glass (7)

- rectangular vents with decorative plaster grilles (14)

ATRIUM GALLERY (ROOM 208)

Physical Description

The atrium gallery, or s’hîn, is a second-floor space that wraps around the central core of the atrium. It serves as an extension of the atrium and shares many of that room’s finishes and features. At the center of the gallery is a four-sided arcade that defines the opening around the atrium’s central core, which rises up through the second floor of the residence to a domed ceiling. The arcade consists of eight, pointed horseshoe arches that rest on stone columns. The columns have an octagonal plan on the lower half, a spiral fluted upper half, and capitals with stylized volutes. Set between the columns is a finely carved wood railing with corner shelves. The marble floor of the gallery matches the central panel of the atrium floor and features a pattern of gray, octagonal tiles and red, square tiles. A border of black marble aligns with the arcade columns. The gallery has plaster walls with a decorative tile wainscot and plaster crown molding. Four Qallālīn tile panels decorate the upper walls of the gallery two on the north wall and two on the south. The gallery ceiling is divided into coffers, and within each coffer are exposed logs.

The north wall of the gallery has one opening at the west end that leads to the hall (Room 204). This opening takes the form of a pointed horseshoe arch set within a shallow rectangular recess. The reveals of the arch are decorated with a tile baseboard and tile panels. There is no door affixed to this opening. In the wall above the arch is a single rectangular vent with a decorative plaster grille. At the center of the east wall of the gallery is a pointed horseshoe arch opening with tall, paneled wood double doors that are affixed to the inside face of the opening. Above this opening is a row of three decorative plaster

grilles. To either side of the door is a casement window with a tile sill set within an Algerian arch niche. Below each window niche is a radiator grille and above is a decorative plaster grille. The south wall of the atrium gallery has one opening at the west end that leads to the hall (Room 219). Like the wall opposite, this opening takes the form of a pointed horseshoe arch set within a shallow rectangular recess. In this case, however, the opening is fitted with paneled, wood double doors on the gallery side and on the hall side. The door on the gallery side features qâyamnâyam paneling and has smaller doors set within each leaf. Above the opening are three rectangular vents fitted with decorative grilles. The west wall of the gallery features one Algerian arch niche with shelves and arched openings to the stair to the first floor and the stair to the roof terrace. The opening to the roof terrace stair is embellished with a carved stone door surround. Above this is a rectangular vent with a decorative plaster grille.

Character-Defining Features (Figures 1.5.136 through 1.5.144)

- Tile wainscot

- Plaster walls

- Plaster crown molding

- Qallālīn tile wall panels (4)

- Coffered ceilings with exposed logs

- Pendant light (1)11

- Arcade consisting of pointed horseshoe arches and stone columns with an octagonal plan on the lower half, a spiral fluted upper half, and capitals with stylized volutes

- Wood railing and corner shelves

- Pointed horseshoe arch door openings

- Carved stone door surround (1)

- Paneled, wood, double doors w/ smaller inset doors (1)

- Paneled, wood, double doors (1)

- Algerian arch niche with shelves

- Size and location of Algerian arch window openings w/ tiled windowsills (casement windows are noncontributing) (2)

- Rectangular vents with decorative plaster grilles (10)

11. While most of the CMR’s light fixtures are replacements installed after the period of significance, no documentation of the age of the pendant light in the atrium gallery was found during research. For this reason, it is listed as a character-defining feature. If additional information on the date of the fixture is found in the future, this classification can be amended as necessary.

Physical Description & Character-Defining Features / CMR (cont’d)

Figure 1.5.136

Tile wainscot and plaster walls. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.137

Tile wall panels. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.138

Plaster crown molding and coffered ceilings with exposed timber logs. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.139

Figure 1.5.139: Pendant light. (Whitney Cox)

Figure 1.5.140

Wood railing and arcade consisting of pointed horseshoe arches and stone columns. (Whitney Cox)

Figure 1.5.142

Paneled, wood, double doors with smaller inset doors. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.141

Carved stone door surround to stair to roof terrace. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.143

Paneled, wood, double doors. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.144

Rectangular wall vents with decorative plaster grilles. (Robinson & Associates)

1.5 Physical Description & Character-Defining Features /

LIVING ROOM (ROOMS 105 AND 116)

Physical Description

The living room and the small ancillary room at its south end (Room 116) serve as one of the CMR’s principal representational spaces.12 The living room shares many attributes of the small salon (described below) and the dining room (Room 112). It has a wood parquet floor and wood baseboards, plaster walls with decorative plasterwork and crown molding, and a flat plaster ceiling. All windows in the living room are wood sash casement windows installed around 2013.

The north wall of the living room has a single window opening fitted with a double sash, casement window. The windowsill is tile. The wall above the window features three large, rectangular openings with decorative plaster grilles fitted with stained glass. The plasterwork band that runs below the crown molding wraps around these openings.

The east wall has two door openings. The opening on the north leads to the atrium via the south hall (Room 128). This is a pointed horseshoe arch opening, but the arch is concealed on the living room side by a paneled wood door and paneled wood surround that is affixed to the face of the opening. The door features a wrought-iron handle and latch and ring hinges. The upper portion of the door surround has a rectangular wood grille. Given its style and construction, which uses qâyam-nâyam paneling, the door is likely a salvaged architectural artifact that was reused in the residence. The opening on the south end of the east wall provides access to a hallway that connects with the small salon and provides outdoor access via the south exterior door. This is a pointed horseshoe arch opening. There is a grouping of three rectangular vents with decorative plaster grilles set in the wall above both openings along the east wall.

In the center of the south wall is a pointed, cusped, horseshoe arch with decorative plasterwork adorning the spandrels and soffit. The ancillary room behind this arch has a tall, triple-sash, casement window on the south wall and double-sash casements on the east and west walls. There are rectangular openings with decorative plaster grilles fitted with stained glass in the walls above the east and west windows, and all of the

windows have tile sills. There is a radiator grille set into the wall below the east window.

The west wall has a window opening at its south end, an arched door opening with a paneled wood door at its north end, and a pointed, cusped, horseshoe arch in between. The window is a double-sash casement with a tile sill. A mini-split air conditioning unit is attached to the wall above the window. The arch defines a large fireplace niche with a small casement window with a tile sill on the south wall. The niche has a barrel vault ceiling embellished with painted plasterwork. A decorative band at the base of the vault is unpainted. Three modern light fixtures on the back wall of the niche illuminate the vaulted ceiling. The fireplace has a plaster surround featuring crescent moon, floral, and palm frond motifs. The threshold is tile with a raised stone edge. The wall surrounding the fireplace is decorated with horizontal and vertical bands of tile that define five niches. This feature evokes a “chini khana,” a panel or wall of niches (interior or exterior as a garden element) used for displaying precious vessels or other objects. A large rectangular niche is located above the fireplace and to either side are smaller niches with horseshoe arch and Algerian arch openings.

Character-Defining Features

(Figures 1.5.145 through 1.5.154)

- Parquet wood floor and wood baseboards13

- Plaster walls

- Plaster crown molding

- Decorative plasterwork

- Interior wall vents with decorative plaster grilles

- Flat plaster ceiling

- Ancillary room defined by pointed, cusped (or multilobed), horseshoe arch

- Fireplace alcove defined by pointed, cusped (or multilobed), horseshoe arch with barrel vault ceiling (light fixtures illuminating barrel vault are noncontributing)

- Fireplace elements, including tiles, decorative plasterwork, niches, marble threshold, and mantle

- Paneled wood door & paneled door surround on east wall

- Paneled wood door in arched opening on west wall

- Size and location of window openings and tiled windowsills (casement windows are noncontributing)

- Rectangular openings with decorative plaster grilles fitted with stained glass (8)

12. For the purpose of this description, the living room (Room 105) and the ancillary space to the south (Room 116) will be treated as a single space.

13. No documentation about the age of the wood flooring and baseboards in the Living Room was found during research. While these elements are listed as character-defining features, if additional information on their date of installation is found in the future, this classification can be amended as necessary.

Physical Description & Character-Defining Features / CMR (cont’d)

Figure 1.5.145

Plaster walls, plaster crown molding, and decorative plasterwork. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.146

Rectangular openings with decorative plaster grilles fitted with stained glass. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.147

Pointed, cusped (or multilobed), horseshoe arch dividing the living room from the ancillary room. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.148

Fireplace alcove defined by pointed, cusped (or multilobed), horseshoe arch. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.149

Barrel vault ceiling of fireplace alcove (light fixtures illuminating barrel vault are noncontributing). (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.150

Paneled wood door and paneled door surround on east wall. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.152

Fireplace. (Robinson & Associates)

1.5.151

Interior wall vents with decorative plaster grilles. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.153

Window opening with decorative plaster grille above. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.154

Tiled windowsill. (Robinson & Associates)

1.5 Physical Description & Character-Defining Features

DINING ROOM (ROOMS 107 AND 112)

Physical Description

The dining room occupies the northeast corner of the main block and is situated between the atrium (Room 102) on the south and the pantry (Room 118) in the north wing. A small ancillary space (Room 112) along its east wall shares similar architectural features and finishes to the dining room and will be included as part of this description. The dining room has a tile floor and tile baseboards, plaster walls, plaster crown molding, and a plaster ceiling that has been faux grained to resemble wood. An ornate brass chandelier, installed in 1974, hangs from the center of the ceiling. There are two styles of tile laid on the floor one design is used for a rectangular field in the center of the floor, which is currently covered with a rug, and a different design is used for the perimeter.

The north wall of the dining room is organized into three bays with a round arch opening in the west bay that leads to the pantry, a fireplace with window above in the center bay, and an Algerian arch niche in the east bay. The fireplace has a marble mantel supported by two pairs of spiral-fluted, marble columns, a plaster and tile surround, and a tile threshold with a raised, marble edge. The plaster band that is incorporated into the design of the surround features the “floral chain” motif that is also used in several of the limestone door surrounds found within the residence. The window opening above the fireplace features two plaster arches (the Algerian arch type) separated by a marble, spiral fluted column. The sill is tiled with modern replacement tiles, and the windows are double casement, wood sash with a wood frame. The lower portion of the niche in the east bay holds a cabinet with paneled wood doors.

At the north end of the east wall is a wood sash, double casement window set in a deep opening with a tile sill and plaster reveals and soffit. Below the window is a radiator grille that matches those used in the small salon, living room, and library. Above the window is a small rectangular opening with a decorative plaster grille fitted with stained glass. In the south half of the east wall is a pointed horseshoe arch opening that leads to the small alcove (Room 112) off the dining room. The arched opening is set within a shallow rectangular recess in the wall, and there is a small rectangular opening with decorative plaster grille

fitted with stained glass in the wall above the opening. The alcove uses the same floor tiles as the perimeter tiles of the dining room but adds an outer band of green glazed tiles. The walls of the alcove have tile wainscoting and plaster above. The tile wainscotting carries over to the side walls of the arched opening. The window in the east wall of the alcove features two plaster, pointed horseshoe arch openings separated by two marble, spiral fluted columns arranged back-to-back. Within each arch is a single casement window with a glazed transom in the shape of a pointed horseshoe arch. A wood panel set behind the columns separates the window frames. The window opening has a tile sill.

The south wall is divided into three bays. In the center bay is a pointed horseshoe arch opening set within a shallow rectangular recess in the wall. This opening has a more ornate arch than the opening on the east, to the alcove. Affixed to the atrium side of the arched opening is a tall, paneled, double door with a smaller door set within each leaf. This door, and others like it in the residence, was likely salvaged from an Ottoman-period residence. The side walls of the door opening are decorated with tile panels. In the wall above the rectangular recess is a row of three small rectangular ventilation openings with decorative plaster grilles. To either side of the door is an Algerian arch niche with that holds a cabinet with paneled wood doors. The back walls of the cabinets are mirrored, and the shelves are glass. Below each niche is a radiator grille.

The east wall of the dining room is an interior wall, and the only features are two small, rectangular vents with decorative plaster grilles.

Character-Defining Features (Figures 1.5.155 through 1.5.162)

- Tile floor of dining room and alcove

- Tile baseboards of dining room

- Tile wainscot of alcove

- Plaster walls of dining room and alcove

- Plaster crown molding of dining room

- Interior wall vents with decorative plaster grilles (5)

- Rectangular openings with decorative plaster grilles fitted with stained glass (2)

- Plaster ceiling of dining room

- Ceiling of alcove

- Round arch door opening in north wall

Physical Description & Character-Defining Features / CMR (cont’d)

Figure 1.5.155

Floor tiles (design used for central field at top left and design used for perimeter at right and bottom). (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.156

Plaster walls, plaster frieze and crown molding, faux-grained plaster ceiling. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.157

Rectangular vent with plaster grille. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.158

Plaster ceiling and chandelier. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.159

Arched opening in shallow rectangular recess on east wall providing access to the east alcove (Room 112). (Whitney Cox)

Figure 1.5.161

Niche on south wall with wood cabinet. (Robinson & Associates)

1.5.160

Double arch window opening on north wall with spiral fluted, marble column and tiled sill. (Whitney Cox)

Figure 1.5.162

Fireplace with marble columns, marble mantel, and tile and plaster surround. (Whitney Cox)

1.5 Physical Description & Character-Defining Features / CMR (cont’d)

- Horseshoe arch door opening in rectangular recess on east wall with tiled reveal

- Horseshoe arch door opening in rectangular recess on south wall with tile wall panels in reveal

- Double horseshoe arch window opening in north wall with spiral fluted, marble column (windowsill tiles and double casement window are noncontributing)

- Size and location of rectangular window opening on east wall with tiled sill (double casement window is noncontributing)

- Double horseshoe arch window opening in east alcove with back-to-back, spiral fluted, marble columns and tiled sill (casement windows are noncontributing)

- Algerian arch niches with cabinets (3)

- Fireplace w/ marble, spiral fluted columns, plaster and tile surround, tile and marble threshold & marble mantle

The second category of spaces includes rooms that were not specified for enhanced documentation in the scope of work but are zoned for preservation.

SMALL SALON (ROOM 104)

Physical Description

The small salon is a rectangular shaped room at the southeast corner of the floor plan that has direct access to the atrium. Two alcoves extend the footprint a large alcove along the east wall and a smaller fireplace alcove along the west wall. The room has a tile floor and tile baseboards, plaster walls embellished with decorative plasterwork, plaster crown molding, and a wood ceiling. There are two tile designs laid on the floor — one for a rectangular field in the center of the floor, which is currently entirely covered with a rug, and one for the rest of the floor, including the east alcove. Decorative plasterwork is applied in and around the alcove openings and as a wide band below the crown molding. The wood ceiling is decorated with applied wood strips that create a geometric pattern. All windows in the small salon are wood sash casement windows installed around 2013.

The north wall of the small salon has an arched door opening set in a shallow rectangular recess. The side walls of the reveal have tile wall panels, and the threshold is marble. Set within the opening is a tall, paneled, double door with smaller inset doors. The door has wrought-iron slide locks one for the main door and two for the smaller doors. There are three rectangular vents with decorative plaster grilles in the wall above the door.

The opening to the alcove along the east wall is defined by a pointed, cusped (or multilobed), horseshoe arch. The spandrels and soffit of the arch are covered with ornate decorative plasterwork. The east alcove features a double horseshoe arch window opening with two back-to-back, spiral fluted, marble columns between the arches. Two single casement windows with fixed, glazed transoms are affixed to the outside edge of the opening, which has a marble sill. Above the window are three small rectangular openings with decorative plaster grilles fitted with stained glass. Each of the short walls of the alcove has an Algerian arch niche with wood shelves and a tiled sill. The niche on the south wall was formerly a window; the original sash is visible from the exterior. There is a small rectangular opening with a perforated decorative plaster grille fitted with stained glass in the wall above each of the niches. North of the alcove on the east wall is an Algerian arch niche with a double sash casement window in the lower half. The window is affixed to the outside edge of the opening, and the niche has a tiled still. Below the niche is a radiator grille, and there is a small rectangular opening with a decorative plaster grille in the wall above. Near the upper corner of the wall near this grille is a mini-split air conditioning unit.

In the center of the south wall is a triple sash, casement window with a tile sill. Below the window is a radiator grille. The wall above the window featured three large, rectangular openings with decorative plaster grilles fitted with stained glass.

The fireplace alcove on the west wall is also defined by a pointed, cusped, horseshoe arch; the same style of plasterwork as the east alcove decorates the spandrels, soffit, and upper half of the back wall of the west alcove. The lower half of the alcove wall is tiled. The fireplace has a richly decorated surround featuring decorative tiles and a plaster arch, a marble mantle supported by plaster brackets, and a tiled threshold with raised marble trim.

South of the alcove on the west wall is a horseshoe arch opening set in a shallow rectangular recess. There are three rectangular vent openings with decorative plaster grilles in the wall above the door. North of the alcove is an opening in the wall in the shape of an Algerian arch that is fitted with a metal grille with a wood panel insert. The opening has a tiled sill, and there is a rectangular vent with a decorative plaster grille in the wall above.

Character-Defining Features

(Figures 1.5.163 through 1.5.174)

- Tile floor

- Tile baseboards

- Plaster walls

- Plaster frieze

- Plaster crown molding

- Decorative plasterwork

- Interior wall vents with decorative plaster grilles

- Wood ceiling

- Alcoves defined by pointed, cusped (or multilobed), horseshoe arches (2)

- Wood double door with smaller inset doors and wrought-iron hardware in north door opening

- Tile wall panels in reveal of north door opening

- Double horseshoe arch window opening on east wall with two back-to-back, spiral fluted, marble columns

- Algerian arch niches with tiled bottom shelves (2)

- Algerian arch window opening

- Size and location of window openings and tiled windowsills (casement windows are noncontributing)

- Rectangular openings with decorative plaster grilles fitted with stained glass (9)

- Algerian arch opening in west wall with metal and wood grille and tiled sill

- Fireplace elements, incl. tiled panels & bands, decorative plasterwork, bracketed mantle & marble threshold

SOUTH HALL (ROOM 128)

Physical Description

The south hall serves as a small, transitional space between the atrium (Room 102), the living room (Room 105), and the stair hall (Room 108). It has a marble tile floor (modern), tile baseboards, plaster walls with a decorative plaster frieze, crown molding, and a molded plaster ceiling. A brass pendant light, installed in 1974, hangs

from the center of the ceiling. The opening to the atrium is on the north wall. This is a pointed horseshoe arch opening set in a shallow, rectangular recess. Tile panels decorate the reveals of the arch. Above the arch are three small, rectangular vents with decorative plaster grilles. In the east wall is an opening into the small salon (Room 104) in the shape of an Algerian arch set within a rectangular recess. The arched opening is fitted with a metal grille with a wood panel insert. The opening has a tiled sill, and there is a rectangular vent with a decorative plaster grille in the wall above. In the south wall is a door to the stair hall. This opening has a painted, carved limestone surround that features the “floral chain” motif and Berber crescents. A paneled wood door with a paneled wood surround is affixed to the stair hall side of the opening. In the wall above the stone arch surround is a double arched opening with central column and decorative plasterwork. The west wall of the hallway has a pointed horseshoe arch opening set in a shallow, rectangular recess. This opening leads to the living room, and a paneled wood door with a paneled wood surround is affixed to the living room side of the opening. Above the arch are three small, rectangular vents with decorative plaster grilles.

Character-Defining Features

(Figures 1.5.175 through 1.5.180)

- Tile baseboards

- Plaster walls

- Plaster frieze

- Plaster crown molding

- Plaster ceiling

- Interior wall vents with decorative plaster grilles (7)

- Double arched opening with column on south wall

- Grilled opening on east wall

- Horseshoe arch door opening in rectangular recess on north wall with tile wall panels in reveal

- Horseshoe arch door opening in rectangular recess on west wall

- Paneled wood doors with wood surrounds in south opening and west opening

Physical Description & Character-Defining Features / CMR (cont’d)

Figure 1.5.163

Tile floor and tile baseboard. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.165

Wood ceiling. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.166

Alcove on east wall defined by a pointed, cusped (or multilobed), horseshoe arch. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.164

Plaster walls, plaster frieze, plaster crown molding, wood ceiling, and rectangular opening with decorative plaster grille fitted with stained glass. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.167

Decorative plasterwork. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.170

Algerian arch niche with tiled bottom shelf. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.168

Double door with smaller inset doors and wrought-iron hardware in arched opening set within shallow rectangular recess. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.169

Tile wall panel in reveal of north door opening. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.171

Interior wall vent with decorative plaster grille. (Robinson & Associates)

Physical Description & Character-Defining Features / CMR (cont’d)

Figure 1.5.172

Algerian arch opening in west wall with metal and wood grille and tiled sill. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.173

Algerian arch window opening on east wall. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.175

Tile baseboard and tile panel in reveal of north door opening. (Whitney Cox)

Figure 1.5.174 Niche and fireplace on west wall. (Robinson & Associates)

1.5 Physical Description & Character-Defining Features / CMR (cont’d)

Figure 1.5.176

Plaster walls, decorative plaster frieze, crown molding, and plaster ceiling. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.177

West wall with arched opening in shallow rectangular recess, paneled wood door in paneled wood surround, and rectangular vents with plaster grilles. (Whitney Cox)

Figure 1.5.178

Opening in east wall with metal grill and wood insert. (Whitney Cox)

Figure 1.5.179

Carved limestone surround and wood paneled door in south wall. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.180

Arched opening in upper south wall with column and decorative plasterwork. (Whitney Cox)

Figure 1.5.181

View of stair looking north. Note tiled wainscot, plaster walls, and arched plaster ceiling. (Whitney Cox)

1.5 Physical Description & Character-Defining Features / CMR (cont’d)

MAIN STAIR (ROOM 113)

Physical Description

The stair connecting the first floor with the second is located in the main block of the residence along the west side of the atrium. It contains a double L-stair (a half-turn stair with two intermediate landings, each offering a 90-degree change of direction) with marble tiled landings, marble treads, and tiled risers. The walls have a tiled wainscot with an upper edge that follows a stepped, rather than a strait, line up the wall. Above the wainscot, the walls are plaster, and the ceiling is composed of a series of arches in plaster. The width of each arch corresponds to the width of each “step” in the wainscot. Although the arches are round, at the crown of each is a scalloped detail that resembles the crown of an Algerian arch. At the lower landing, there is a Qallālīn tile panel on the north wall and a casement window in the west wall with a decorative plaster grille fitted with stained glass in the wall above. The upper landing is also lit by a casement window with a small plaster and stained glass opening above. The south wall of the upper landing features an Algerian arch niche with a tiled sill and a small decorative tile panel on its back wall. Pendant lights hang from the ceiling over each of the landings. The staircase has metal railings (not original) along the walls, and a metal gate at the lower landing (not original).

Character-Defining Features

(Figures 1.5.181 through 1.5.185)

- Double L-stair configuration

- Tile wainscot and plaster walls

- Decorative plaster grilles fitted with stained glass (2)

- Arched plaster ceiling

- Pendant lights (2)14

- Size and location of window openings and tiled windowsills (casement windows are noncontributing)

- Qallālīn tile panel on north wall of bottom landing

- Algerian arch niche at top landing with tiled sill and decorative tile wall panel

BALCONY (ROOM 209)

Physical Description

The second-floor balcony is located on the east side of the residence and offers sweeping views of the surrounding landscape and bay. The balcony is a rectangular room accessed from the atrium gallery (Room 208). It has tile baseboards and a marble tile floor that is composed of the same tiles (gray octagonal and red square) as the gallery floor. The walls and ceiling are plaster. In the center of the west wall is a wide pointed horseshoe arch opening that is fitted on the gallery side with tall, double doors and on the balcony side with a large, plate-glass door set in a paneled wood frame. Along the wall to either side of the door are casement windows secured with metal grilles. On the north wall is an Algerian arch niche with a tiled sill, and above the niche is an arched opening with a decorative plaster grille. The east wall of the balcony has three large, pointed horseshoe arch openings with spiral fluted columns that rest on a marble sill. A decorative metal grille (not original) is installed along the outer edge of the opening for safety. On the south wall is a casement window with a tiled sill. Above the window is an arched opening with a decorative plaster grille.

Character-Defining Features

(Figures 1.5.186 through 1.5.189)

- Tile baseboards

- Plaster walls and ceiling

- Arched openings with decorative plaster grilles (2)

- Plate-glass door with paneled wood frame

- Algerian arch niche with tiled sill (1)

- Arcade with pointed horseshoe arches, spiral fluted columns, and marble sill

- Size and location of window openings in west wall (casement windows are noncontributing)

- Metal grilles over window openings on west wall

- Size and location of window opening in south wall with tiled windowsill (casement window is noncontributing)

14. While most of the CMR’s light fixtures are replacements installed after the period of significance, no documentation of the age of the pendant lights in the main stair hall was found during research. For this reason, they are listed as character-defining features. If additional information on the date of the fixtures is found in the future, this classification can be amended as necessary.

Physical Description & Character-Defining Features / CMR (cont’d)

Figure 1.5.182

View of stair looking south. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.183

Size and location of window openings and tiled windowsills. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.184

Qallālīn tile panel at bottom landing. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.187

Tile baseboards, plaster walls and ceiling, and plate-glass door with paneled wood frame. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.185

Algerian arch niche at top landing with tiled sill and decorative tile wall panel. (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.186

Arcade with pointed horseshoe arches, spiral fluted columns, and marble sill and Algerian arch niche on north wall. (Whitney Cox)

Figure 1.5.188

Size and location of window openings in west wall and metal grilles (casement windows are noncontributing). (Robinson & Associates)

Figure 1.5.189

Size and location of window opening in south wall with tiled sill. (Robinson & Associates)

Glossary of Architectural & Landscape Terms

GLOSSARY OF ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPE TERMS

The purpose of this glossary is to define and provide visual examples of the principal foreign-language or specialized architectural or landscape terms used in the report. Key sources for definitions include:

- Adli-Chebaiki, Lila, and Naima Chabbi-Chemrouk “Vernacular Housing in Algiers: A Semantic and Passive Architecture.” International Journal of Design and Nature and Ecodynamics 10, no. 2 (2015).

- Chergui, Samia. “Le lexique des patrimoines architectural dans la Régence d’Alger.” In Patrimoines du Maghreb et inventaires. Paris: Hermann, 2016.

- Harris, Cyril, ed. Illustrated Dictionary of Historic Architecture. New York: Dover Publications Inc., 1977.

Term English Translation or Definition Image Algerian arch (or arc algérois)

§ An arch shape distinctive to Algeria with a flattened shape and lobed or scalloped detailing at the crown

§ Also referred to as a basket-handle arch

arabesque

§ Intricate pattern of geometric forms or stylized plants used to enrich flat surfaces

§ Arabesque decoration can be painted, inlaid, or molded in stucco

Casbah (or Kasbah)

claustra

djnân (pl. djnâyan)

driba

douèra

duqqâna (or doukana)

§ term adopted during the French colonial period to designate the ensemble of the old town of Algiers within the boundaries marked by the ramparts and dating back to the Ottoman period

§ perforated decorative partition

§ in Algerian domestic architecture, a claustra can function as a wall vent to allow for airflow

§ during the Ottoman period, this type of wall vent was typically made from plaster; during the French Colonial period, it would typically be made from cement

§ during the Ottoman period, if filled with glass (clear or colored), this feature is called a shamsiyât or qamariyât, in reference to the sun rays or the moon light that illuminates a room from these decorated screens

§ Arabic word for garden which was adopted during the Ottoman period as a term used for a country house or country estate

§ entrance space located at the front of the sqîfa

§ guest house or guest room of a country house

§ masonry bench or seat embedded in the thickness of the wall inside the sqîfa for the comfort of visitors awaiting entry

§ often covered with polychrome ceramic tiles, slate, or marble and crowned with an Algerian arch

2

Glossary of Architectural & Landscape Terms (cont’d)

dâr

§ large house with a courtyard around which are arranged a variable number of rooms for domestic use

fahs (pl. fohôs) § the countryside surrounding the historic center of Algiers, also considered as pleasure suburbs

§ during the Ottoman period, dignitaries of the regency of Algiers had their palaces and gardens in the fohôs horseshoe arch (or Arabic arch, Moorish arch)

§ a rounded arch whose curve is a little more than a semicircle so that the opening at the bottom is narrower than its greatest span

§ variations include the pointed horseshoe arch

hzām and swālaf § horizontal (hzâm) and vertical (swālaf) ceramic bands decorating an arcade

qbū (or k’bou) or iwān § in general, an arched alcove built into the wall facing the door of the room; its depth depends on the availability of urban space

§ when the qbū is located in the wall facing the street, it is materialized on the outside by a corbel

§ in large houses inside and outside the city, the qbū becomes an iwān topped

with a cupola, which gives the room a Tshaped configuration marfa’ (pl mrâfa’) § this term means shelf and refers to the shelves found in Algerian arch niches of Moorish Revival residences

noria (or na‛ūra)

§ a device for lifting water from a source to a higher level, such as a waterwheel

§ term is used to refer to both water- and animal-powered wheels qâyam-nâyam

§ refers to the elaborate geometric paneling typically seen on the wood doors of Algerian

§ qâyam refers to the vertical panels, nâyam to the horizontal

plancher à voûtains § structural system consisting of shortspan masonry vaults between steel beams

Glossary of Architectural & Landscape Terms (cont’d)

Qallālīn

§ characterizes construction from the French period

§ a reference to tiles made in the Qallālīn tile workshop in Tunis between the seventeenth and nineteenth centuries

§ typical colors are blue, yellow, and green

riyādh

s’hīn

§ a structure in the landscape that provides shelter and is used as a place for relaxation

§ gallery surrounding a central courtyard, usually laid out in a continuous manner around the wast al-dār

sqîfa (pl sqâyaf)

thuya

tomette (or qirā tī)

§ entrance vestibule; a place for receiving and “filtering” visitors

§ often arranged at an angle with a blind spot in order to protect the privacy of the household

§ might be situated some way from the house and be part of the surrounding wall

§ a residence might have more than one sqîfa

§ a genus of evergreen coniferous trees in the cypress family

§ also known as Barbary thuja

§ native to northwestern Africa in the Atlas Mountains

§ thuya logs are used in traditional Algerian construction

§ hexagonal and rectangular terracotta tiles used for floors and produced in Algiers during the Ottoman period

§ arranged geometrically as well as chromatically

§ produced in Provence and other regions of France beginning in the seventeenth century but experienced a revival with the industrialization of manufacturing in the nineteenth century

wast al-dār or (wast eddar)

§ generally, a patio or interior courtyard with a paved or tiled floor, forming the central space of the house and the core of all its distribution

§ literally “middle of the house”

Glossary of Architectural & Landscape Terms (cont’d)

Bibliography

Bibliography

Primary Sources (United States)

National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), College Park, Maryland

Record Group 59, General Records of the Department of State

Textual (paper) records within Record Group 59 include the Central Decimal Files and the Subject Numeric Files, which together cover the period 1910-73 and generally consist of correspondence, telegrams, and reports between the State Department and its diplomatic offices overseas. Most documents in these series have been declassified, but others remain unavailable for research. All documents in this record group are in English.

Records from Record Group 59 related to the CMR included a detailed narrative description of the residence prepared in 1946 as part of the State Department’s larger campaign to acquire property in Algiers, correspondence between the Foreign Buildings Office and the embassy related to the acquisition of the CMR, correspondence between the State Department and the embassy about alterations to the CMR in the 1950s, and documentation related to property issues between the newly independent government of Algeria and the United States. Only a few records address actual changes made to the buildings and grounds during the period of U.S. occupancy.

The photograph and graphic works collections at NARA from Record Group 59 include print images of foreign political, economic, and cultural activities and digitized photographs documenting embassies, consulates, and other overseas buildings from the period 1763 to 2002.

The cartographic and architectural records at NARA include maps, charts, and architectural drawings, among other graphic documents. Materials documenting the CMR included at least two sets of floor plans (dates illegible), a site plan and floor plans dated 1979, and drawings for the swimming pool project. The drawings are archived on aperture cards. The quality of the digital copies produced from the aperture cards is generally poor, and several of the drawings are difficult to read. However, important details from the drawings are legible.

U.S. Department of State, Overseas Buildings Operations (OBO), Rosslyn, Virginia

Documentation located at the Bureau of Overseas Buildings Opera tions (OBO) includes materials from the real estate records and the OBO archives, both located in Rosslyn, Virginia. The real estate records include primary source documents, including deeds for the CMR from 1901, 1932, and 1947, floor plans of the CMR, and a highly detailed site plan of the CMR from 1949. This site plan provides important information about water elements, circulation patterns, outbuildings, and other features of the Villa Montfeld landscape around the time the United States acquired the property. There are several boxes of information in the OBO archives related to Algiers. This

documentation includes several sets of photographs of the CMR. Also among the materials at OBO is a lengthy history of the U.S embassy properties in Algiers, including the CMR, written in 1991 by U.S. Ambassador to Algiers Christopher Ross.

Primary Sources (Algiers)

Office of Facilities Management, U.S. Embassy, Algiers

Materials from the Facilities Management Office in Algiers included photographic and limited textual documentation of recent projects, mainly from the last fifteen years These materials addressed major conservation projects and repairs, often with detailed information on repair techniques and technologies.

Additional local research in Algiers was conducted over several months by Professor Samia Chergui of the Institute of Architecture and Urban Planning at the University “Saad Dahlab” Blida 1, Algeria. She visited key research repositories in Algeria including the library of the Glycines Center for Diocesan Studies (Les Glycines Centre d’études diocésain), the National Library of Algeria (Bibliothèque nationale D’algérie), and the National Archives (Centre nationale des Archives). Sources at the Glycines lib rary included nineteenth-century books and travel journals, twentieth-century periodicals, and historic maps. The travel journals written by nineteenth-century foreign visitors to Algiers provided informative descriptions of the architecture and landscape of the Algerian fohôs Periodicals included titles such as L’Afrique du Nord illustrée, a weekly magazine published from circa 1907 to 1939; Feuillets d’El Djazair (Leaflets of El-Djezaïr), published from 1910 to 1937 by the Committee of Old Algiers, which was founded in 1905 to promote the preservation of the city’s historic buildings; Alger, revue municipale, a monthly magazine published from 1934 to 1962; and the quarterly magazine Revue chantier, among others. These periodicals, particularly Feuillets d’El Djazair, informed the contextual understanding of the development of the CMR. Records at the Algerian National Archives included maps and government records related to the administrative organization of Algiers during the post-World War II period, information on historical monuments and sites (1908-1950), and records related to the expropriation for reasons of public utility (1930-1954) Another important source of information was the Algiers land registry service which holds cadastral maps for the Comm une of Mustapha, where the residence is located. The cadastral maps provided early and highly detailed records of the property and its associated landscape elements. In addition to these primary sources, Professor Chergui reviewed and translated key passages from books and scholarly articles covering topics such as Ottoman architecture, urban development, gardens, and traditional construction methods and materials.

Secondary Sources

Books and Periodicals

Adli-Chebaiki, Lila, and Naima Chabbi-Chemrouk. “Vernacular Housing in Algiers: A Semantic and Passive Architecture.” International Journal of Design and Nature and Ecodynamics 10, no. 2 (2015).

Alexander, Martin S., and John F. V. Keiger, eds. France and the Algerian War, 1954-62: Strategy, Operations and Diplomacy. New York, NY: Routledge, 2012.

Barrucand, Marianne and Achim Bednorz. Moorish Architecture in Andalusia. London, UK: Taschen, 2007.

Benchérif, Osman. The British in Algiers, 1585-2000. Algiers, Algeria: RSM Communication, 2001.

Benjamin, Roger. Orientalist Aesthetics: Art, Colonialism, and French North Africa, 1880-1930 Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 2003.

Bennoune, Mahfoud. The Making of Contemporary Algeria, 1830-1987: Colonial Upheavals and Post-Independence Development. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2002.

Blair, Sheila, Jonathan Bloom, and Richard Ettinghausen. The Art and Architecture of Islam, 1250-1800. Yale University Press: New Haven, CT, 1996.

Blondy, Alain. Six ans de résidence à Alger Par Mrs. Broughton. Editions Bouchène, 2011 Translated by S. Chergui.

Bodichon, Barbara Leigh Smith and Eugène Bodichon Algeria Considered as Winter Residence for the English. London: English Woman’s Journal Offices, 1858.

Bouzid, Zaki. Algérie Palais et Somptueuses Demeures. Alger: Zaki Bouzid Editions, 2014. Translated by S. Chergui.

Boyer, Pierre. La vie quotidienne à Alger, à la vielle de I’intervention française. Paris: Hachette, 1964. Translated by S. Chergui.

Bradley-Hole, Kathryn. Villa Gardens of the Mediterranean: From the Archives of Country Life. London, UK: Aurum, 2006.

Bucknall, Stephen A. “Benjamin Joseph Bucknall, Disciple of Viollet-le-Duc and His Brothers Robert and Alfred.” In Minerva, Transactions of the Royal Institute of South Wales, Volume 2. Swansea, Wales: Royal Institute of South Wales, 1994.

Celik, Zeynep. Empire, Architecture, and the City: French-Ottoman Encounters, 1830-1914. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press, 2008.

Urban Forms and Colonial Confrontations: Algiers Under French Rule. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1997.

Chergui, Samia. “Le lexique des patrimoines architectural dans la Régence d’Alger.” In Patrimoines du Maghreb et inventaires. Paris, France: Hermann, 2016.

Christopher, Warren. Chances of a Lifetime: A Memoir New York, NY: Scribner, 2001.

Church, R. A. “Profit-Sharing and Labour Relations in England in the Nineteenth Century ” International Review of Social History 16, no. 1 (1971), 2-16.

Cresti, Federico. “Algiers in the Ottoman Period: The City and Its Population,” In The City in the Islamic World, ed. Salma K. Jayyusi, vol. 1. Boston, MA: Brill, 2008.

Cruickshank, Dan, ed. Sir Banister Fletcher’s A History of Architecture. 20th ed. New York, NY: Architectural Press, 2004.

Davenport, Liz. Woodchester, A Gothic Vision Gloucestershire, England, 2014. Kindle Edition

Davies, Rev. E. W. L. Algiers in 1857. London, UK: Longman, Brown, Green, Longmans, & Roberts, 1858.

Drioueche-Djaalali, Nadjiba-Kheira. “Traditional Construction Techniques of Domes in the Kasbah of Algiers (1500-1800).” Construction History 32, no. 2 (2017), 1-18.

Ettinghausen, Richard, Oleg Grabar, and Marilyn Jenkins-Madina. Islamic Art and Architecture, 650-1250. 2nd Edition. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2001.

Fromentin, Eugène. Une année dans le Sahel. Paris, M. Lévy frères, 1859. Translated by S. Chergui.

Giraud, Henri. Un seul but, la victoire: Alger 1942 -1944. Paris, 1949.

Golvin, Lucien. Palais et demeures d’Algér à l’époque ottomane, Algiers: INAS, 2003.

Goodwin, Godfrey. A History of Ottoman Architecture. New York, NY: Thames & Hudson, 2003.

Gordon, Sharon R. “Representations of Feminist and Lesbian Consciousness and the Use of Subversive Strategies in Selected Poetry of Isabella Jane Blagden.” Ph.D. diss, Edinburgh Napier University, 2016.

Grabar, Henry S. “Reclaiming the City: Changing Urban Meaning in Algiers after 1962.” Cultural Geographies 21, no. 3 (July 2014), 389-709.

Harris, Cyril, ed. Illustrated Dictionary of Historic Architecture. New York, NY: Dover Publications Inc., 1977.

Hitchens, Christopher. “A Chronology of the Algerian War of Independence.” The Atlantic (November 2006).

Hoag, John D. Western Islamic Architecture. Mineola, NY: Dover Publications, 2005.

Hocine, Malika and Naima Chabbi-Chemrouk. “Reuse of Djenane Abd-El-Tif, an Emblematic Islamic Garden in Algiers.” Journal of Islamic Architecture 3:3 (June 2015).

Hume, Cameron. Mission to Algiers: Diplomacy by Engagement. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2006.

Karabenick, Edward. “A Postcolonial Rural Landscape: The Algiers Sahel.” Yearbook of the Association of Pacific Coast Geographers 53 (1991).

Lamprakos, Michelle. “The Idea of the History City.” Change Over Time 4, No. 1 (Spring 2014), 3-38.

Le Bas, Antoine. Architectures de Brique en Île-de-France, 1850-1950. Paris, France: Somogy, 2014.

Lefebvre, Jeffrey A. “Kennedy's Algerian Dilemma: Containment, Alliance Politics and the 'Rebel Dialogue.'” Middle Eastern Studies 35, no. 2 (April 1999).

Loeffler, Jane C. The Architecture of Diplomacy: Building America’s Embassies 2nd Edition New York, NY: Princeton Architectural Press, 2011

MacDonald, Greville. George MacDonald and His Wife. London, UK: George Allen & Unwin Ltd.

MacKenzie, John Orientalism: History, Theory and the Arts. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press, 1995.

McCormack, Kathleen. George Eliot in Society. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University, 2013.

McDougall, James. A History of Algeria. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2017.

Metz, Helen Chaplin. Algeria, a Country Study. 5th edition. Federal Research Division, Library of Congress, 1994.

Mitchell, George, ed. Architecture of the Islamic World: Its History and Social Meaning. London, UK: Thames and Hudson, 1978.

Mosser, Monique and Georves Teyssot, eds. The History of Garden Design: The Western Tradition from the Renaissance to the Present Day. London, UK: Thames & Hudson, 1991.

Nadjiba, Drioueche and Naima Chabbi-Chemrouk “The Role of Traditional Know-how in Sustaining Urban Environments: The Casbah of Algiers.” Procedia Engineering 21 (2011)

Ouargli, N. “Recognizing the Residences of the Algerian fahs ” In Patrimoines du Maghreb et inventaires. Paris, France: Hermann, 2016.

Oukebdane, Abdeloushed, et al. “A Critical Review on the Classification Process of Historical Monuments in Algeria.” Conservation Science in Cultural Heritage 21, no. 1 (2021).

Peck, Gwendolyn. “The Casbah of Algiers: Cultural Heritage as a Political Tool ” Master’s thesis, University of Virginia, 2016.

Playfair, R. Lambert. Handbook for Travellers in Algeria and Tunis. London, UK: John Murray, 1895.

Pulszky, Francis. The Tricolor on the Atlas; Algeria and the French Conquest. London, UK: T. Nelson and Sons, 1854.

Robin, Ron. Enclaves of America: The Rhetoric of American Political Architecture Abroad, 1900-1965. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1992.

Rogers, Elizabeth Barlow. Landscape: A Cultural and Architectural History. New York, NY: Harry N. Abrams, Inc., 2001.

Ross, Christopher. “American Embassy Properties in Algiers: Their Origins and History” (typescript). April 1991. U.S. Department of State, Office of Overseas Buildings Operations.

. “The United States Mission in Algeria: A Historical Sketch” (typescript). April 1991. U.S. Department of State, Office of Overseas Buildings Operations.

Ruggles, D. Fairchild. Islamic Gardens and Landscapes. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2008.

Saidouni, Nacereddine. L’Algérois rural à la fin de l’époque ottoman, 1791-1830. Beirut, Lebanon: Dar al Gharb al islami, 2001. Translated by S. Chergui.

Taylor, Sedley. Profit-Sharing between Capital and Labour. London, UK: Kegan Paul, Trench & Co, 1884.

Trachtenberg, Marvin, and Isabelle Hyman. Architecture: From Prehistory to Post-Modernism Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall and Harry N. Abrams, 1986.

Vidal-Bue, Marion. Villas et palais d’alger due XVIIIe siècle à nos jours. Paris, France: Editions Place des Victoires, 2012. Translated by S. Chergui.

Zoubir, Yahia H. “The United States, the Soviet Union and Decolonization of the Maghreb, 1945-62.” Middle Eastern Studies 31, no. 1 (January 1995).

Online Sources

“Algerian War,” “Algiers,” “Barbara Leigh Smith Bodichon,” “North Africa,” and "Orientalism." Available from the Encyclopædia Britannica website at https:/www.britannica.com

“Algeria’s Struggle for Independence.” Available from the Association for Diplomatic Studies and Training website at https://adst.org/2016/10/algerias-struggle-independence/ Bellout, Azzeddine. “Monitoring Settlements Growth and Development in Algiers City Eastern Area.” February 17, 2021. Available from the Research Square website at https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-187885/v1

Finding Aid, “K. M. Briggs Collection, Special Collections MS 1309.” Leeds University Library, Special Collections. Available from the University of Leeds Library website at https://explore.library.leeds.ac.uk/multimedia/17151/157MS1309Briggs.pdf

Finding Aid, “Personal Papers of Barbara Leigh Smith Bodichon.” Girton College Archives, University of Cambridge. Available from the ArchivesHub website at https://archiveshub.jisc.ac.uk/search/archives/7357bcf3-2755-33f7-9e479193d56b8c1f.

Foreign Currency Units per 1 US Dollar, 1950-2020. Available from the PACIFIC Exchange Rate Service website at https://fx.sauder.ubc.ca/etc/USDpages.pdf

“Gertrude Jekyll: Beyond the Boots.” Available from the Surrey Gardens Trust website at https://www.surreygardenstrust.org.uk/

Hitchens, Christopher. “A Chronology of the Algerian War of Independence.” The Atlantic (November 2006). Available from The Atlantic website at https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2006/11/a-chronology-of-thealgerian-war-of-independence/305277/.

“Icosium.” The Princeton Encyclopedia of Classical Sites. Richard Stillwell, William L. MacDonald, Marian Holland McAllister, editors. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1976. Available from the Tufts University website at http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus% 3Atext%3A1999.04.0006%3Aentry%3Dicosium

“Léon Claro.” Dictionnaire des élèves architectes d l’École des beaux-arts de Paris (18001968). Available from AGORHA, Database of the Istitut national d’histoire de l’art at https://agorha.inha.fr/ark:/54721/fea7b4c2-043a-4349-82e7-0646e04dd6ca

“Official Journal of the Algerian Republic.” Available from the Algerienne Secretariat General du Gouvernement website at https://www.joradp.dz/HFR/Index.htm

“Tomette.” Available from Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia at https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomette#Notes_et_r%C3%A9f%C3%A9rences

US Department of State, Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs. “US Relations with Algeria.” Available from the US Department of State website at https://www.state.gov/u-s-relations-withalgeria/.

_____. “Background Note: Algeria.” Available from the US Department of State website at https://2001-2009.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/8005.htm#relations.

US Department of State, Office of the Historian. “A Guide to the United States’ History of Recognition, Diplomatic, and Consular Relations, by Country, since 1776: Algeria.” Available from the US Department of State website at https://history.state.gov.countries/algeria

Architects