Redfords Story
Redford 'Art Sales' was published in 1888. Looking back to 1887, or before, he was preparing entries for his book. His prime records were catalogues of various auction houses many from Christie's. Richard and Samuel Redgrave's 'A Century of Painters' published 1866 and Samuel Redgrave's 'A Dictionary of Artists' of 1874 were both availabe together with a reprint of 'A Dictionary of Artists' of 1878. Samuel Redgrave was dead (d.1876) and Richard was 82 or 83 (d. 1888). Also available to Redford were RA Exhibition Catalogues and copies of 'The Art Journal'.
The Story of Curator_1
In 1925 Bristol Museum & Art Gallery purchased 'Hotwell House' a
watercolour-drawing by JMW Turner. It was a familiar scene; Since 1897
Bristol Fine Art Academy had owned a similar but smaller scene called 'The
Old Hotwell House in 1791', a watercolour known to have been painted by
Turner whilst staying with the Narraways in 1791.
The 1925 purchase was from Rev. J. Patton. At that time knowledge
about the painting was limited to the title by which it was sold and the
signature on the lower right hand side of the painting. Patton would
almost certainly know the identity of the previous owner, Mrs H. S. Fussey
and the owner before, a (Mr.?) 'Hull'. He did not have anything before
that because if he had he would have sold the painting with a different
and more explicit (and more valuable) title.
In 1931Bristol Museum & Art Gallery purchased 'The Old Hotwell
House in 1791' from Bristol Fine Art Academy and therefore had the two
watercolour-drawings, as it were, 'side by side'. The timings expressed
here for Curator_1's study of the pictures is arbitrary; His study could
have taken place at any time after 1925 and before 1958.( 'The Old Hotwell
House in 1791' was deaccessioned in 1958 and sold in 1960.)
Cutator_1's references would have included Armstrong's book of 1902.
A glance at the watercolour section under 'Bristol' would reveal the
original provenance of the smaller watercolour 'The Old Hotwell House in
1791' and, if not already supplied by Bristol Fine Art Academy the
provenance of that watercolour would be complete. What Curator_1 did not
fully appreciate is that a mention of the larger watercolour - 'Hotwell
House' - was missing from Armstrong's book altogether. He clearly saw that
it was not there in Armstrong's text but overlooked the implications. So
to the next of two logical possibilities; he examined C.F. Bell's book of
1901; or he examined the original Royal Academy Exhibition Catalogues.
What he did not do was to examine the five Redgrave books. He could have
used other references but the conclusion he came to was the same as C. F.
Bell viz: the 1793 exhibit at 323 was a watercolour-drawing with the title
'The rising squall, hot wells, from St. Vincent's rock, Bristol'.
Curator_1's knowledge of 'rising squalls' must have been quite limited
because his picture, 'Hotwell House', showed no sign of any squall at all
it was rather a scenic view of the River Avon looking towards Hotwell and
St. Vincent's Rock. Curator_1, instead of questioning the sources, merely
set about completing the provenance for his watercolour as if it were 'The
Rising Squall'. At this point it is not clear exactly what he found or
what reference he had to hand but what is clear is that, in his belief
that his watercolour was 'The Rising Squall' he began to research the
wrong painting. He discovered that 'The Rising Squall' had been given to,
sold or commissioned by Rev. Nixon of Foots Cray in 1793 and appeared in
the 9th July 1864 sale.
The story is missing something here. All the previously gathered evidence points to two oils being in the 9th July 1864 sale. But that leaves the whereabouts of the watercolour - the 'real' 'View on the Avon' - unknown. It has to have been sold after the exhibition - where did the other exhibit go? 316 'Gate of St. Augustine's monastery, Canterbury' emailed Mellon 22/12/2019
.