Talk:Diana Fountain, Bushy Park

Comment

The statue and fountain known as the Diana Fountain was designed by the French sculptor, Hubert Le Sueur for Charles I. He submitted an invoice in 1637 for a 'great Diana' for £200. The assumption has to be that this was the statue which was placed on a fountain, also designed by Le Sueur three years previously.

The statue and fountain were set in the garden of Henrietta Maria at the royal residence of Somerset House. Diana (Greek: Artemis) was in the first rank of both Greek and Roman gods and was an appropriate subject for a Queen's garden. It is interesting that the Walpole Papers reveal that the King consistently refused to pay the full amount for the several works carried out for him by Le Sueur. The invoice for the 'great Diana' was the only one paid in full from the royal coffers.

During the Commonwealth, the statue and fountain were moved from Somerset House to Hampton Court in 1656 and placed in the Privy Garden there. In an inventory of Cromwell's goods following the accession of Charles II there is a reference to the statue on a fountain 'known as Arethusa': an appropriate name for a fountain as it was Diana (Artemis) who transformed a water nymph called Arethusa into a fountain to save her from the unwanted attentions of a minor river god. Interestingly, Latin/English dictionaries in the last century gave 'fountain' as a meaning of the word 'Arethusa'. The statue of Diana (Artemis) is placed on top of the fountain (Arethusa) as a powerful image of the protection offered by this great goddess.

At the end of the seventeenth century, Christopher Wren drew up his grand plans for an avenue to run from the Palace gardens through the length of Bushy Park. There are references to repairs to the statue known as Diana and to the cost of a further plinth made for the fountain. In 1713 the statue and fountain were placed in a basin in the middle of Wren's grand avenue, where they have been known and loved as 'the Diana' for the last three hundred years.

For some obscure reason, possibly following the installation of a troubled water construction named after Princess Diana in Hyde Park, The Royal Parks have now chosen to refer to the statue in Bushy Park as 'Arethusa'. Any enquiry as to the reason or evidence for this new name has been ignored. No historical reference has been forthcoming. The statue was designed and built on the orders of Charles I, who was not only a stickler for protocol, so would never have created a mere water nymph for his queen; It was far too lowly - only a goddess would do, but he was also making sure that his gardens were rivals to the French gardens; another reason for having a statue of a goddess rather than a water nymph, so the naming of a statue after an insignificant water nymph, which had been bought by a king for his queen's garden, is absurd.

The Royal Parks should keep the Diana name for this statue. It has been its name for best part of 400 years and should remain so.

There will be growing interest in it in the years to come with its restoration due, so we should state quite clearly now that it is "Diana" and not the unsubstantiated "Arethusa".

One further piece of evidence for Diana is the two Titian paintings Diana and Callisto (circa 1555-1559) and The Death of Actaeon (circa 1559-75). Both show her hair in a very similar style to the Bushy Diana. One has a simple crescent and the other a more complicated decoration. The Bushy Diana also has a crescent which may become more obvious after the restoration — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.164.208.228 (talk • contribs)

The article tries to cover the controversy, but as with any controversy it would be best resolved off wikpedia. I would hope that if some classicist can explain to the Royal Parks how Diana came to be depicted without a bow, or better still a painting or description is unearthed of "the Great Diana", then the matter can be settled in favour of the statue being intended to be Diana. But in the meantime are there any reliable sources that we have missed in writing this article? Jonathan Cardy (talk) 13:38, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Diana Fountain, Bushy Park/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: 12george1 (talk) 21:15, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

• Wikilink "London" and "England" in the opening sentence.

I thought either would be overlinking per Wikipedia:OVERLINK#What_generally_should_not_be_linked. But since you've raised it I've linked London, hopefully that will avoid any confusion with London, Ontario. Jonathan Cardy (talk) 07:03, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

• "contains a 400' diameter pool surrounded by lawns" - Don't write "400'", either put 400-foot or 400 foot. After that, convert 400 feet to metres.

Fixed. Jonathan Cardy (talk) 07:03, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

• "have been attributed to his rival Francesco Fanelli,[3], and also to Le Sueur;" - Why is there a comma before and after the reference?

Fixed. Good spot. Jonathan Cardy (talk) 07:03, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

• "Charles I had the Longford River dug from the river Colne to Hampton Court Palace in order to power the palace water features, and in 1713 Sir Christopher Wren utilised this water to give the complex a set of gravity fed water spouts. In the 297 years after the statue was relocated to its current site in the park many of the waterspouts became clogged and only four were functioning before the renovations of 2009/10." - Unsourced
• "In the 297 years after the statue was relocated to its current site in the park many of the waterspouts became clogged and only four were functioning" - Add a comma between "park" and "many".
• "only four were functioning before the renovations of 2009/10." - Write-out "2009/10", because I cannot tell whether that is October 2009 or 2009-2010.
• "The Diana Fountain is at the junction of two long straight tree lined avenues, Lime Avenue and Chestnut Avenue which cross at right angles. The Junction is off centre to both Avenues." - Unsourced
• "Chestnut Avenue crosses Bushy Park from Teddington to Hampton Court Palace and contains a road with wide lawns on both sides. There are multiple rows of horse chestnut trees on both sides of Chestnut Avenue." - Unsourced
• "Lime Avenue is grassed and has multiple rows of lime trees on both sides of it, The longer of its two sections runs between The Diana Fountain and White Lodge." - Unsoucred;
• in addition, why is the word "The" start with a capital letter (two occurrences)?

The only examples I could see of this were the sentences that started that way. Jonathan Cardy (talk) 07:03, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

• None of the references to online sources are in the cite web format.
• Reference #1 has the wrong title; it should be "Diana Fountain, Teddington".
• Reference #3 also has the wrong title; it should be "Bushy Park - A Playground for the People".
• Reference #12 is a "dead-link"
• Reference #14 is missing the date and author. In addition, the article has the wrong title, it should be "D-Day planning at Bushy Park".
• Reference #15 has the exact same issues.
• Reference #16 has a similar problem, although the name of the author is unknown.

Drive by comments by SilkTork

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

• Clear, pleasant and readable prose.
• Lead gives a useful overview, but could be developed a bit further per WP:Lead - example information that could be included - the discussion on the name, Longford River, the move to Hampton Court Palace.
• There are possibly too many images per Wikipedia:Layout#Images; consider if the images are appropriate for a gallery per WP:Galleries.
• Article is stable and contains a reference section.
• Broad coverage - article is interesting and informative. I question the vistas section - is this a little too much detail for a general encyclopedia entry?
• Images are legal and pass GA copyright criteria, though there are too many of them to meet the "appropriate" criteria. The quality of some of the images is not good - some are blurred or misty - but that is not a GA issue.
• I've not checked sources.
• On the whole a pleasant, attractive and interesting article. SilkTork *^{Tea time} 09:24, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

No edits to the article in two weeks, perhaps it should be failed. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 03:42, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Articles hasn't been touched since both reviewers noted issues, so for now this fails GA. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 00:13, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Diana Fountain, Bushy Park. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120220095542/http://www.royalparks.org.uk/parks/bushy_park/landscape_history.cfm to http://www.royalparks.org.uk/parks/bushy_park/landscape_history.cfm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:06, 10 September 2017 (UTC)