Peter Cunningham

[_HOME_][_SITE_INDEX_]

cunningham short extract

Peter Cunningham described a 1793 oil by Turner and referred to it as
'Rising Squall over St. Vincent's Rocks at Bristol'.

These notes refer to Peter Cunningham's Memoir, preface to John Burnet's 'Turner And His Works', published 1852.
[_MEMOIR_PAGES_16_TO_19_]

'Rising Squall over St. Vincent's Rocks at Bristol' is an oil:

In the short extract above Cunningham mentions two works by Turner. This analysis shows that one is a watercolour and the other an oil. An examination of Cunningham's text from the bottom of page 16 to the top of page 19 reveals that he highlights a number of works under the general heading of 'watercolour drawings'. At the bottom of page 16 he writes,

'...his (Turner's) first exhibited work, "A view of the Archbishop's Palace at Lambeth."
The "View" was a watercolour drawing - as indeed most of his early works were'.
(note: 'most', not 'all'; 'work', not 'picture'.)

This statement crosses over the page onto page 17 where Cunningham proceeds to list more watercolour drawings (including 'The Avon, near St. Vincent's Rocks') with descriptive words such as 'works' and 'subjects for his pencil'. Towards the bottom of page 17 there is a reference to "View of the Pantheon" - reproduced in the short extract above - which is known to be a watercolour drawing. [_PANTHEON_WATERCOLOUR_]
However, when, at the bottom of page 17 and top of page 18, Cunningham descibes "Rising Squall over St. Vincent's Rocks at Bristol" it is described as 'a picture', which, at this point, slightly sets it apart from the 'watercolour drawings' already mentioned and compares it to, inter alia, Gainsborough. His use of the word 'picture' is not reserved specifically for oils but it is the change in terminology together with the comparison to Gainsborough that suggests that he is now describing something different to a 'watercolour drawing' and, in the phrase 'maintained and perhaps strengthened', perhaps something special or moving on from or more important than a 'watercolour drawing'. That would be an oil. A comparison to Gainsborough can be meaningful only in the context of an oil. From the short extract it appears that Cunningham's source was an eye witness who made the comparison in 1793, five years after Gainsborough's death. At that time public perception of Gainborough's work would be his greatest oils. (If Cunningham himself was making the comparison in 1852 then it must likewise be a comparison of oils for it is simply inappropriate to imply that a watercolour-drawing could suggest 'genius' equal to or greater than Gainsborough). [_COMPARISONS_WITH_GAINSBOROUGH_AND_OTHERS_]

The issue is not straightforward because Cunningham uses 'pictures' to describe the 1795 exhibits en bloc; none of Turner's 1795 exhibits were oils. However, on page 19, Cunningham lists three exhibited works; again describing them as 'pictures'. These three works are known to be oils. [_THREE_PICTURES_]

There is additional evidence that 'Rising Squall over St. Vincent's Rocks at Bristol' is an oil. Again it is not straightforward because the additional evidence, the RA catalogue, shows that, of three works that Turner exhibited at the 1793 RA Exhibition, one was an oil but if that one was 'Rising Squall over St. Vincent's Rocks at Bristol' then the catalogue entries were inadvertantly transposed.[_TURNERS_1793_EXHIBITS_]

Cunningham states that the exhibition year is 1793.
It is certain that this is correct:

In [_THREE_PICTURES_](above) it was shown that Cunningham made a mistake when quoting 1798 as the exhibition year for 'Fishermen Becalmed previous to a Storm - Twilight'. The correct year was 1799. This indicates that Cunningham did not refer to exhibition catalogues when writing his 'Memoir'. So can the year 1793 be relied upon for the year of exhibition of 'Rising Squall over St. Vincent's Rocks at Bristol'?
Looking again at the short extract above, Cunningham refers twice to the year. It is first referred to as the year following the year of the Pantheon fire and second actually written as '1793'. The Pantheon fire is well documented and without doubt happened on 14th January 1792. [_PANTHEON_FIRE_]
Evidence (mentioned above) in the 1793 Royal Academy Exhibition catalogue supports Cunningham's statement. It is shown that Turner exhibited an oil that year in the 'Anti-Room'. [_TURNERS_1793_EXHIBITS_]. The year '1793' in Cunningham's statement is therefore, beyond reasonable doubt, accurate.

[_HOME_]