History repeating itself?
Some people think that these two structures are a bit of artistic license, added to make the house look more impressive than it really was, or perhaps to show future plans. However, some architectural historians argue that the style of windows in these buildings would have been old fashioned for a house built around 1716 let alone a painting of 1751.
Does this suggest that they really were there? Interestingly, another painting by these artists of nearby Temple Newsam (near Leeds) also shows side buildings which cannot be seen today. Archaeological research eventually showed they had been there. Are Beningbrough’s also waiting to be found?
The first stables?
The most usual function of such buildings in early 18th century houses seems to have been as extra service blocks for the main house - stables, riding houses (to train horses), or sometimes kitchens (a fire risk to have in the house).
Owning horses was an important sign of social status as well as practical, especially in Yorkshire and the Tees Valley in the later 17th and 18th century where racehorse breeding was an important activity. We know that the Bourchiers were involved in this and perhaps this is why they might have invested in such large structures?
Earlier the fashion was to have the stables near the house, but later in the 18th century they tended to be moved further away and have the parkland run up to the house.
This might explain why, presuming they existed, the blocks were demolished and replaced by the more modest stable block that exists today, probably around the 1760s or later.