Quant au 99, exact encore, et j'en fais la démonstration éclatante dans la Marque du Dr Wade, Editions Kronos, après une étude aussi poussée que méticuleuse...
En cadeau, je remets le plan détaillé de la barre d'immeubles
99 bis park Lane
Modérateur : Rédacteur-Administrateur
Re: 99 bis park Lane
Exact, et j'ai aussi remarqué que les colonnes avec globes vont et viennent à l'envi d'un côté ou de l'autre de la chaussée ; tantôt, ils délimitent le parc, tantôt, c'est le bâtiment ???
Quant au 99, exact encore, et j'en fais la démonstration éclatante dans la Marque du Dr Wade, Editions Kronos, après une étude aussi poussée que méticuleuse...
En cadeau, je remets le plan détaillé de la barre d'immeubles
Quant au 99, exact encore, et j'en fais la démonstration éclatante dans la Marque du Dr Wade, Editions Kronos, après une étude aussi poussée que méticuleuse...
En cadeau, je remets le plan détaillé de la barre d'immeubles
Re: 99 bis park Lane
Je ne dis pas le contraire.
Mais quid du 99bis? 
Non mais j'ai trouvé un siteoù l'on fait in petit peu l'historique du pâté de maison.
Une traduction du texte par Google:
Ça vaut ce que ça vaut....mais ça n'ajoute rien à ce que Kronos avait déjà posté ici !Cette maison de ville mitoyenne est un exemple d'habitation pour les personnes aisées. Construite entre 1823 et 1825, elle fut conçue par l'entrepreneur Samuel Baxter. Elle fait partie d'un ensemble de sept maisons, toutes datant de la même époque, mais non identiques. La façade est recouverte de stuc blanc et les bow-windows constituent un élément architectural important. Au premier étage, elle possède une véranda/balcon en fonte avec un toit en forme de tente. Les cinq maisons centrales de la rangée présentent la même caractéristique. L'intérieur fut en grande partie redécoré dans le style français en 1900 par Charles Mallier et Cie. Le numéro 93, la maison voisine, fut celle de Disraeli de 1839 à 1872. Il fut Premier ministre en 1868 et de 1874 à 1880.
Well then, Legitimate Edgar, I must have your land.
Re: 99 bis park Lane
Maison de Disraeli dont le porche d'entrée se situe sur Upper Grosvenor Streetarchibald a écrit : ↑Hier, 18:06Ça vaut ce que ça vaut....mais ça n'ajoute rien à ce que Kronos avait déjà posté ici !Cette maison de ville mitoyenne est un exemple d'habitation pour les personnes aisées. Construite entre 1823 et 1825, elle fut conçue par l'entrepreneur Samuel Baxter. Elle fait partie d'un ensemble de sept maisons, toutes datant de la même époque, mais non identiques. La façade est recouverte de stuc blanc et les bow-windows constituent un élément architectural important. Au premier étage, elle possède une véranda/balcon en fonte avec un toit en forme de tente. Les cinq maisons centrales de la rangée présentent la même caractéristique. L'intérieur fut en grande partie redécoré dans le style français en 1900 par Charles Mallier et Cie. Le numéro 93, la maison voisine, fut celle de Disraeli de 1839 à 1872. Il fut Premier ministre en 1868 et de 1874 à 1880.
Pour ceux qui seraient intéressés à liere le détail en anglais, voici le texte tiré des Archives britanniques :
""Park Lane
Pages 264-289
Survey of London : Volume 40, the Grosvenor Estate in Mayfair, Part 2 (The Buildings), Ed. F H W Sheppard, Pages 264-289 http://www.british-history.ac.uk/survey ... /pp264-289 Originally published by London County Council, London, 1980.
CHAPTER XV
Park Lane
Today, looking over the wide dual carriageway of Park Lane with Hyde Park stretching beyond, it is difficult to imagine that this road was once a narrow, rutted and unlit track alongside a high brick wall which screened it from the park. In 1741 Tyburn Lane (as it was then known) was one of a number of roads taken over by the Kensington Turnpike Trust because they had, 'by reason of many heavy Carriages, frequently passing through the same, become very ruinous, and many Parts thereof are, in the Winter and wet Seasons, so bad, that the same are dangerous to Passengers' (fn. 5). The Trust paved the southern end of the road but the northern part, skirting the Grosvenor estate, was merely repaired with ballast obtained from the nearby building operations (fn. 6).
It is small wonder that builders were circumspect in treating for those parts of the estate which fronted on to the lane. A short terrace of houses—King's Row on the site of the present Nos. 93–99 (consec.) Park Lane—was built there in the 1720's and 1730's, but it was set back from the roadway behind a small plantation, and few other houses were erected directly along its remaining frontage. When Norfolk (now Dunraven) Street was laid out in the 1750's the houses on the west side turned their backs to Park Lane, a circumstance that eventually led to much picturesque modification of these rear elevations still visible in the surviving houses of the range between Green Street and North Row (Plate 74a, 74b: see also Plate 19c in vol. XXXIX).
Nevertheless from the 1730's some independent houses of substance were built sporadically along or near its length (including, on the Grosvenor estate, those of Lords Dudley, Petre, Bateman, and Camelford), but the social ascent of Park Lane had no precise starting point. By the end of the eighteenth century it was recognized as a desirable situation even if 'long neglected', and improvements were being mooted (fn. 7).
It was in the years 1822–32 that Park Lane finally came into its own, however, with a spate of reconstruction which obliterated some of the more slipshod parts of previous development and dramatically enhanced property values. At the southern end, these were the years of Benjamin Wyatt's remodelling of Londonderry House and of Apsley House (the latter strictly in Piccadilly). Further north, Dudley House was rebuilt and Grosvenor House was enlarged. Among the smaller buildings, Nos. 93–94, 96–99, 117 and 138 were rebuilt to a grander scale, and at about the same time many older residences received decorative additions in the shape of balconies and verandahs facing the park (Plates 73a, 73b, 73c, 74a, 74b, fig. 62: see also Plate 19 in vol. XXXIX). There was a general rise in fashionable house prices at this time, but the inflation along Park Lane was exceptional. Old Dudley House fetched £6,510 in 1789, but was believed (with improvements and a new lease) to be worth £24,000 in 1826. A year earlier, £14,000 was asked for No. 93 Park Lane, a house of only moderate size (fn. 8). A little earlier, Lord Grenville managed briefly in 1816 to exact a yearly rent of no less than £2,500 for Camelford House, perhaps with a full establishment thrown in; yet less than twenty years before, Somerset House next door, with quite a substantial term of years in its lease still to come, had realized only £9,450 at auction.
A partial explanation for these rebuildings and increases in value may lie in the improvements made to Hyde Park in 1825–9, under the superintendence of Decimus Burton and James McAdam. For residents, the greatest boon was the substitution of iron railings for the old high wall which had hitherto impeded their prospect of the park. Some parts of this wall had already disappeared, however, for the Office of Woods' survey of 1823 which recommended these changes stated: 'The external Fences of the Parks, have of late years been considerably improved, without any charge to the public, by the Owners of Houses who have at their own Expence, and with the Sanction of the proper Department of the Government, removed the unsightly Brick walls, and substituted open Iron Railing opposite to their respective Mansions. This improvement does not however, appear likely to be carried farther at the Expence of Individuals (fn. 9).
High-class residents on the estate also benefited from a change in the position of Grosvenor Gate, their chief point of access into the park for the drives and promenades so fashionable at this period. The original Grosvenor Gate was opposite King Street Mews (now Culross Street) and had a lodge attached (Plate 13a, 13b in vol. XXXIX). It had been opened in 1724 following a petition to the Crown: Sir Richard Grosvenor, who had probably instigated the petition because the gate would add to the amenity of his new developments, had agreed to pay for the lodge and gateway and to find the keeper's salary (fn. 10). By 1791 the lodge had cowsheds attached and was out of repair, but the Estate would do little, as it was hoped to remove the gate to a smarter position, possibly opposite Upper Brook Street (fn. 11). Shortly after making minor repairs to the lodge in 1806–7, Earl Grosvenor asked permission to take down the Duke of Gloucester's old riding school (which had been built just inside the park wall in 1768 and detracted from his view from Grosvenor House), and to use its materials to build a new lodge (fn. 12). The Government rejected this application, and a further initiative in 1808 from its own Surveyor General to build nine select villas in this sector of the park and move the gate to Upper Brook Street came to nothing, after a well-orchestrated outcry (fn. 13). Instead, the old lodge was demolished by Earl Grosvenor in 1811 and apparently rebuilt close to the same spot, so as to allow for a new course already projected for the inner road behind the park wall (fn. 14) (Plate 67a).
Then, when Decimus Burton's comprehensive improvements to the park were finally sanctioned, this was the first sector to be improved. Work began on the revised course of the internal road in 1825, in which year the new fence was erected by Moorman and Westmacott and the Grosvenor Gate transferred to a position opposite Upper Grosvenor Street, where a new Doric lodge was ready for occupation by November (Plate 67c). The riding school close by had been demolished in 1824, but Burton's ambitious plans to enlarge the reservoir of the Chelsea waterworks next to it and build a central obelisk seem to have been frustrated; the ramshackle building which housed the engine (Plate 67b) did not disappear until 1835, at last leaving Grosvenor House with an unimpeded view over the park (fn. 15). Burton's small Grosvenor Gate lodge disappeared in about 1960–3, at the time of the most recent remodelling of Park Lane.
By 1845 it was possible for an advertiser of a small house close to the corner with Upper Grosvenor Street to recommend its situation as 'one of the most recherché in London, enjoying the Varied Scenery of the Park, the distant Hills of Surrey, and the salubrious Air therefrom, while at the same time it is placed in the Centre of Fashion' (fn. 16).
Though comparatively little major building occurred in Park Lane for many years after the outburst of activity in the 1820's, what did then appear was on the largest scale. Dorchester House, most opulent of all the Park Lane palaces, rose just off the estate in 1851–7, and Brook House followed further north in 1867–9 (Plate 72a). In both fact and fiction, no London address was so sought after during the mid-Victorian period as Park Lane.
But in view of increasing traffic, its uneven alignment and width began to cause serious inconvenience. In 1851 the Marble Arch, then 'lying piecemeal in an inclosure in the Green-park' following its ignominious expulsion from the forecourt of Buckingham Palace, was re-erected at Cumberland Gate, next to the junction of Oxford Street and Park Lane (fn. 17). This led to the widening of a small section at the north end of Park Lane, but the enlargement as far as Grosvenor Gate at one time predicted did not take place. Nor could the notorious bottleneck at the narrow southern end, where Park Lane met Piccadilly, be altered for many years. But the accident of the great Reform demonstration of 23 July 1866, when the railings separating Park Lane from Hyde Park were trampled down by demonstrators almost all the way from Marble Arch to Stanhope Gate, allowed the Government to turn the occasion to minor advantage, and in about 1868 the road was widened from Oxford Street to Stanhope Gate (fn. 18). In 1870–1 Hamilton Place was opened up to relieve the south end of Park Lane, but with ever-increasing traffic between Paddington and Victoria stations using this route the problem remained unresolved (fn. 19).
Nevertheless Park Lane remained as eligible as ever until about 1905, though it began gradually to assume a nouveau riche tone. The Grosvenor estate's sector enjoyed its quota of the millionaire mineowners and financiers so prominent in Edwardian society. But men such as Sir Joseph Robinson of Dudley House, Alfred Beit of Aldford House and Sir Ernest Cassel of Brook House represented the dependable rather than the risqué element in new riches; adventurers like Barney Barnato and Whitaker Wright lived further south, Barnato being specifically blocked from acquiring a lease on the estate. Most of these magnates tried their hand at rebuilding or at least adapting their houses, but in few cases were the results of much architectural interest. Perhaps only Aldford House (by Balfour and Turner, 1894–7) offered real originality, and even this was not generally held to be successful (Plate 93). The ostentation of these new homes led a commentator to complain in 1901 that the street's old casual elegance was being lost in favour of a 'frippery and extravagance' which bade fair to convert Park Lane into another Fifth Avenue (fn. 20).
The American analogy was a shrewd one, for changes over the next sixty years were to make Park Lane resemble nothing so much as one of the great avenues of New York. In 1905 a newspaper article questioned 'whether this thoroughfare is becoming a less popular place of residence, eight of the houses being to be let or sold' (fn. 21). Soon afterwards, the first of many complaints of noise from motor buses was registered (fn. 22). By 1909 the diminution in values was so pronounced that 'only an exceptionally attractive house would have any chance of finding a purchaser' (fn. 23). These were the factors which led to the demolition of Somerset House and its replacement with the first flats in Park Lane. Despite some public opposition to this scheme, Frank Verity's Nos. 139–140 Park Lane went ahead in 1915–19 (Plate 48a in vol. XXXIX).
It was the neo-Georgian tradition championed by Detmar Blow and Edmund Wimperis rather than Verity's neo-Grec which triumphed in the flats built between the wars along the Grosvenor estate's frontage to Park Lane, as the great houses became uneconomic and were one by one torn down. The Grosvenor House development (1926–30) was the first (Plate 74d, fig. 61). The size and prestige of the project induced Blow to bring in Lutyens as consultant, and he continued subsequently to help with the elevations of later blocks. His contribution was undoubtedly largest at Grosvenor House, but there is a general stylistic correspondence between this and the new Brook House, which also involved a degree of collaboration between Lutyens and the main architects, Wimperis, Simpson and Guthrie. The new Aldford House and Fountain House (both by Myer and Watson-Hart) are more independent, and Lutyens was certainly not involved in the latter.
With these flats, shops for the first time crept into Park Lane, their lessees being 'regarded rather in the light of pioneers' (fn. 24). The expectation that Park Lane would in time be considered as a shopping street has not been so far fulfilled. But the new blocks did introduce another novelty to the estate in the shape of the luxurious penthouse flat overlooking the park, of which the Mountbattens' at Brook House was by far the most impressive (Plate 72c, 72d).
Few save capitalists and contractors rejoiced over the changes in character of the new Park Lane (which, as the Dorchester Hotel recalls, were not confined to the Grosvenor estate). There were questions in the House of Commons and letters to The Times over Grosvenor House in 1928, and in the same year a thoughtful article in The Architect and Building News suggested a competition for a new façade for the whole length of Park Lane (fn. 25). In employing Lutyens as consultant for the later flats, Blow and the Estate were perhaps thinking along these lines, but nothing as comprehensive as their policy for Grosvenor Square was ever attempted here. The new buildings did, however, precipitate a sudden onset of affection for the remaining stucco fronts along Park Lane, with Maxwell Fry in the van (fn. 26). The new sentiment probably helped to save Nos. 93–99 when their future was seriously in doubt in 1931.
The war of 1939–45 and its aftermath have not been kind to these remaining houses. A direct hit in the centre of the range between Wood's Mews and Green Street led to the demolition of Nos. 25–31 Dunraven Street (among which No. 29 was of special interest) and their replacement by a building of no character. Dudley House too was badly damaged, losings its ballroom and picture gallery, though a skilful restoration here has made partial amends. All the older houses along the Grosvenor estate's frontage to Park Lane are now offices, and one or two (for instance No. 129) have been almost wholly reconstructed. Meanwhile, several of the freeholds of the new flats have been sold by the Estate.
When traffic had once again greatly increased, a large slice was taken out of Hyde Park and a broad dual carriageway with a green swathe in the centre built in 1960–3. This has once again affected Hamilton Place and the southern reaches of Park Lane more drastically than the northern end. But the 'parkway'-like character of the new arrangements has helped to fulfil the prediction made in 1901 that Park Lane would lose its individuality and become merely cosmopolitan. Nevertheless, sufficient remnants of the old houses still survive to fascinate, in their picturesque variety, the passer-by or even the speeding motorist, and to give him an inkling of former plutocratic glories.
The houses in Park Lane have twice been officially renumbered—in 1872 and again in 1934. Those discussed here extend northward of the Dorchester Hotel.
Nos. 93–99 (consec.).
The present houses constituting this attractive range between Upper Grosvenor Street and Culross Street were not the first to fill these sites. In accordance with the haphazard development of the estate's frontage to Park Lane, there originally stood here a row of modest, flat-fronted houses occupying shallow plots, erected between about 1727 and 1733 by a number of building tradesmen among whom the principal was Lawrence Neale, carpenter (fn. 115). At first they were called King's Row, but in the early years of the nineteenth century the alternative name of Grosvenor Gate was adopted. By then the houses were shielded from Park Lane at the south end by some mature trees that had grown up on the strip of land in front, while at the other end a number of outbuildings had appeared (Plate 13a, 13b in vol. XXXIX).
The mistake of tolerating such poor houses on this site had been appreciated by 1791, when William Porden took the unusual step of suggesting that leases here should not be renewed, 'with a view to the building [of] houses better qualified to range with Lord Dudley's and Lord Petre's in order if possible to gain the advantage which was lost in originally laying out the ground of making a handsome front towards Hyde Park' (fn. 116). At this time the social character of King's Row was mixed, with a public house at either end but, among other inhabitants, the fifth Earl of Scarbrough and Thomas Sanders Dupuis, composer and organist at the Chapel Royal (fn. 117). The standard of the houses may perhaps be better judged from a tenant's complaint in 1811 as to the thinness of the walls and the lack of sewers or drains, 'which obliges me to submit to a cesspool and its bad smells' (fn. 118).
Though Porden's policy was adhered to for twenty years, continued pressure by some of the tenants led to the renewal in 1811 of three of the leases, on the sites of Nos. 94, 95 and 96. This meant that when rebuilding became a reality in the 1820's, it could be undertaken only in parts and the old sites had, by and large, to be retained. But the rebuilt houses did adopt the prominent bays, bows and external ironwork gradually coming into fashion in Park Lane, though they were different from other such houses on the Grosvenor estate's sector in having their entrances on the west (fig. 62: see also Plate 19a, fig. 10 in vol. XXXIX). Whether architects were employed on most of the houses is doubtful, but John Goldicutt certainly designed Nos. 98 and 99.
The 'Grosvenor Gate' addresses were dropped in 1872, when these houses became Nos. 29–35 (consec.) Park Lane, which they remained until the present numbering was adopted in 1934. During later Victorian and Edwardian days the houses continued to be popular and were variously adorned with extra storeys, balconies and internal decorations, but increased traffic subsequently made them less fashionable. Rebuilding was on several occasions debated by the Estate, notably in 1931 when it was reported that four of the seven houses were unoccupied and two of the other lessees were keen to sell their interests (fn. 119). But again no action was taken, and eventually each of the houses was made available for office use.
No. 93, at the corner of Upper Grosvenor Street, is notable as the home of Benjamin Disraeli from 1839 to 1872. Together with No. 94 it was rebuilt as a speculation by Samuel Baxter of Regent Street, builder, in 1823–5. As it covered the site not only of the old King's Head public house at the corner but also of the previous No. 24 Upper Grosvenor Street, No. 93 enjoyed an L-shaped plot of some size and depth, with a strip extending right back to behind No. 97 (fn. 120). The house, at first called No. 1 Grosvenor Gate, had from the start stuccoed fronts, four main storeys, a bow to Park Lane and an entrance in Upper Grosvenor Street (Plate 60c), but a later attic has concealed what was once a prominent domed skylight over the staircase. In November 1825 Wyndham Lewis, M.P., was reporting to his wife that 'Baxter's House is still for sale but he now asks fourteen thousand Pounds for it being an addition of two thousand since we were last in Town'. Rather over a year later, in February 1827, they clinched the deal and in the following May George Morant of New Bond Street was estimating for decorating the drawing-rooms (fn. 121).
Wyndham Lewis died in 1838, bequeathing to his wife a life-interest in the house. In the following year she married the thirty-four-year-old Disraeli, and the couple were to live here until her death in 1872. It was at No. 1 Grosvenor Gate that much of Coningsby, Sybil and several other of the novels were written. In 1842 Disraeli obtained a mortgage on the house, and an accompanying inventory itemizes its contents. The first-floor drawing-rooms seem to have been furnished in the French taste with carved and gilt chairs, an ormolu clock and several ornamental tables, while in the ground-floor dining-room and library the furniture was mostly of mahogany. Disraeli's books occupied 'a magnificent winged bookcase of ebonized wood richly ornamented with omolu ... the upper part enclosed with plate glass and supported by carved and gilt female figures' (fn. 122).
In 1874 the house (by now No. 29 Park Lane) was bought and subsequently altered by the builder Charles Fish (fn. 123). By 1876 he had sold to a new tenant, who employed the builders Jackson and Graham to make additions at the rear (fn. 124). In 1887 further changes were being made, and in 1903 the dining-room was enlarged by the architect William Wallace for Mr. and Mrs. Hornby Lewis, who however were forbidden to throw out an additional small bow window towards the park (fn. 125). Despite three such subsequent applications, the second Duke of Westminster refused to countenance external alterations to the house because of the association with Disraeli, to whom a plaque was erected at his expense in 1913. An attempt in 1914–16 to add No. 94 to No. 93 in exchange for the back premises behind Nos. 95, 96 and 97 also came to nothing. In 1931 the lease was purchased by the Estate, and since 1936 the building has been used for offices (fn. 126).
The present interior of No. 93 combines good surviving features of Baxter's original house of 1823–5, particularly the stairs and fine toplight, with much decoration in the French and Adam tastes carried out since 1872, perhaps principally by William Wallace for the Hornby Lewises. The chief fittings of interest are two fine figurative marble chimneypieces in the Greek taste in the first-floor drawing-rooms (Plate 75a), which could either belong to the original house or have been imported at a later date.
Occupants include: Wyndham Lewis, M.P., 1827–38: his wid., Mary Anne, 1838–9: her 2nd husband, Benjamin Disraeli, Prime Minister, 1839–72. 2nd Baron Robartes, later 6th Viscount Clifden, 1889–96. Arthur Hornby Lewis, iron-master, 1900–26.
No. 94, like its southern neighbour, was rebuilt in 1823–5 by Samuel Baxter, who had acquired the reversionary lease of the premises granted in 1811–12 and exchanged it for a new one from Earl Grosvenor. Baxter let the house to Lady Mary Ross in December 1825 and mortgaged his head lease, but Wyndham Lewis of No. 93 appears subsequently to have acquired an interest in this house as well as his own (fn. 127). Though both houses were stuccoed and had bows towards the park they were not part of a single design, as No. 94 (originally No. 2 Grosvenor Gate) was much smaller and had lower storey heights than No. 93. No further details of the house are known until 1874, when it had become No. 30 Park Lane and alterations were being made by C. and W. Moxon, decorators (fn. 128). In 1900 the decorators Charles Mellier and Company divided the ground floor to make two rooms ; (fn. 129) it was perhaps then that the drawing-rooms received their present French character and a new stair was put in. Recently a lift has been installed and an extra storey added. There are however a few traces of Baxter's work remaining within the house.
Occupants include: Joseph Kelway, musician, 1746–82: his servant, Ann Philips, 1783–90. Robert Bourke, M.P., later Baron Connemara, 1870–4. (Sir) Arthur Frederick Bradshaw, principal medical officer to H.M. forces in India, later K.C.B., 1895–1900. Sir Philip Grey-Egerton, 12th bt., 1911–12. Laurance Lyon, M.P., 1917–19.
No. 95 was not rebuilt until 1842–4 because General William Thornton, tenant of the previous house here from 1797 to 1842, had been so persistent that his lease had been renewed in 1811 (fn. 130). The new house (at first No. 3 Grosvenor Gate and later No. 31 Park Lane) was erected by John Harrison of Green Street, gentleman (fn. 131). It is taller than its neighbours, having always had six full storeys above ground, with a three-sided bay running through them all; the front is mainly of brick.
Occupants include: Col. (latterly lieut.-gen.) William Thornton, 1797–1842. Col. Algernon G. A. Durand, formerly Military Secretary to the Viceroy of India, 1911–22.""
Re: 99 bis park Lane
Pas de muret ni pilastre ni globe lumineux.
En 1955 cette configuration reste identique.
En 1985 on ne discerne pas le muret ni les pilastres ni les globes lumineux.et surtout on remarque bien l.espace entre l’immeuble et la voie publique carrossable.
Re: 99 bis park Lane
Ce n'est pas exactement le même texte , car le décorateur français (cocorico) n'est pas mentionné et le tien est beaucoup plus complet donc grand merci à toi.Kronos a écrit : ↑Hier, 20:12..../...
Pour ceux qui seraient intéressés à lire le détail en anglais, voici le texte tiré des Archives britanniques :
""Park Lane
Pages 264-289
Survey of London : Volume 40, the Grosvenor Estate in Mayfair, Part 2 (The Buildings), Ed. F H W Sheppard, Pages 264-289 http://www.british-history.ac.uk/survey ... /pp264-289 Originally published by London County Council, London, 1980.
.../...
J'ai relancé le sujet principalement dans l'idée de faire un état des lieux sur les reprises du 99 bis , plus que pour relancer une discussion.
Comme je l'ai dit par ailleurs ,je deviens blasé et rien ne pourra changer les erreurs déjà faites!
Au rythme imposé, il ne faut pas en demander trop aux petits nouveaux....
Sabotage Je n'ira pas jusque là! Mais négligence, surement!
Cette vue de haut est intéressante car on voit bien ce que j'appelle la contre-allée !
Well then, Legitimate Edgar, I must have your land.
-
Capitaine Blake
- Mécanicien sur le SX1
- Messages : 33
- Enregistré le : 18 oct. 2025, 12:21
- Localisation : Londres
Re: 99 bis park Lane
Je viens de lire une partie de cette conversation, dont la page présente et me pose une question de novice dans la connaissance des sources : si j'ai bien saisi ce qu'a écrit hier soir DLPRR, le 99 bis est purement imaginaire tandis que l'immeuble qui en inspire l'architecture est en fait le 99 de l'artère connue à Londres sous le nom de Park Lane ? Peut-être est-ce une évidence pour vous qui êtes de fins connaisseurs, mais je veux m'en assurer pour bien comprendre les enjeux de la discussion, passionnante par ailleurs, car l'ampleur et la précision des recherches que vous avez conduites les uns et les autres sont impressionnantes !
By Jove, Francis !
Re: 99 bis park Lane
Que nenni !Capitaine Blake a écrit : ↑Aujourd’hui, 10:44.../... si j'ai bien saisi ce qu'a écrit hier soir DLPRR, le 99 bis est purement imaginaire tandis que l'immeuble qui en inspire l'architecture est en fait le 99 de l'artère connue à Londres sous le nom de Park Lane ? .../..
Oui l'adresse 99 bis est purement imaginaire.
Mais si il existe bien un numéro 99 sur Park Lane , l'immeuble qui a inspiré Jacobs est au numéro 94.
Ce n'est pas simple n'est-ce pas ?
Et la reprise de ce lieu par les successeurs n'est pas toujours très claire; c'est pourquoi j'ai sugé bob de faire une petite récap au début de cette page...
Well then, Legitimate Edgar, I must have your land.
Re: 99 bis park Lane
Je pense que les Nouveaux qui voudraient aborder ce Sujet feraient bien, de prime abord, de lire TOUT le Sujet depuis le bédu ! Cela éviterait les redites, le Sujet du 99bis ayant largement été débattu-analysé-détaillé-cartographié depuis son origine, tant par Archibald que par moi-même
En Résumé, le 99bis est un amalgame fait par notre ami Jacobs des 93 et 94 qu'il a inconsciemment réunis en un seul logement désormais appelé "99bis", très probablement en référence et hommage au 221bis Baker street des comparses Holmes et Watson d'Arthur Conan-Doyle ; de même, mais c'est totalement hors sujet, qu'il a fait une référence-hommage au Monde perdu du même Conan-Doyle dans l'Atlantide et, plus tardivement, dans le Piège...
En Résumé, le 99bis est un amalgame fait par notre ami Jacobs des 93 et 94 qu'il a inconsciemment réunis en un seul logement désormais appelé "99bis", très probablement en référence et hommage au 221bis Baker street des comparses Holmes et Watson d'Arthur Conan-Doyle ; de même, mais c'est totalement hors sujet, qu'il a fait une référence-hommage au Monde perdu du même Conan-Doyle dans l'Atlantide et, plus tardivement, dans le Piège...
-
Capitaine Blake
- Mécanicien sur le SX1
- Messages : 33
- Enregistré le : 18 oct. 2025, 12:21
- Localisation : Londres
Re: 99 bis park Lane
Très bien, merci de ces précisions ! J'ai commencé de lire le sujet, mais je dois avouer que devant son ampleur, je n'ai pu tout lire pour l'instant car je veux pouvoir comprendre avec précision les informations qui sont données. Pour l'heure j'ai seulement lu ici et là quelques passages qui m'ont d'emblée frappés : comme par exemple les détails de l'organisation des pièces dans La marque Jaune et la page actuelle. D'où le fait que je pose sans doute des questions sur des points déjà traités. Veuillez m'en excuser.
By Jove, Francis !
Re: 99 bis park Lane
Le bis est imaginaire.Capitaine Blake a écrit : ↑Aujourd’hui, 10:44Je viens de lire une partie de cette conversation, dont la page présente et me pose une question de novice dans la connaissance des sources : si j'ai bien saisi ce qu'a écrit hier soir DLPRR, le 99 bis est purement imaginaire tandis que l'immeuble qui en inspire l'architecture est en fait le 99 de l'artère connue à Londres sous le nom de Park Lane ? Peut-être est-ce une évidence pour vous qui êtes de fins connaisseurs, mais je veux m'en assurer pour bien comprendre les enjeux de la discussion, passionnante par ailleurs, car l'ampleur et la précision des recherches que vous avez conduites les uns et les autres sont impressionnantes !
Le 99 se trouve à gauche du bloc d’immeuble, le 94 réel correspond au 99bis de B&M.
J’imagine que le Maître ne s’est jamais posé la question de l’intrigue qu’il suscite aujourd’hui sur ce lieu
….malgré son esprit imaginatif d’anticipation
Je vous remercie de m’avoir lu… j’aimerai tellement que que les repreneurs en fassent autant…
