John Crome the Elder, Volume I: Text and Critical Catalogue 0814729576, 9780814729571

Citation preview

John Crome the Elder

Publication of this book has been aided by a grant from The Millard Mciss Publication Fund of the College Art Association of America The publication of this book has been aided by a grant from the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation.

NORMAN L. GOLDBERG

JOHN CROME the

ELDER I • TEXT AND A CRITICAL CATALOGUE

NEW YORK • NEW YORK UNIVERSITY PRESS • 1978

|OJW

I

u. *

Copyright © 1978 by New York University Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 75-27046 ISBN: 0-8147-2957-6

Manufactured in the United States of America

Dedicated to my wife for she herself has been a helper of many, and of mine ownself.” Romans 16:2

Contents

VOLUME I

Preface and Acknowledgements

List of Illustrations

xvij

PART i

I

II

III

IV

The Artistic Background of Crome The East Anglian Heritage The Catton House Role

3 11

The Aesthetic Theory of Crome: Origin and Application Theory of Expression From Theory to Methods and Style Aesthetic Sources

15 15 20 33

The Style of Crome: Growth and Development 1783-90 1790-92 1792-1805 1805-13 1813-21

35 38 38 40 47 59

Crome as a Draftsman The Drawings and Watercolors The Etchings

69 72 80

3

vii

V

VI

Copies, Imitations, and Forgeries

85

Discernment of Style and Standard of Quality

9°

Workshop Practices and Cromc Forgers

99

Crome and the Norwich School

I05

Birth and Decline of the Norwich School of Artists and Annual Exhibitions

107

Impact of the Changing Attitude to Nature and Local Art Collections

no

Lack of Recognition in the History of Art

114

Appendixes A

Biographical Summary

IT9

B

Works Exhibited Directly by John Crome or on his Behalf, 1805-1824

127

C

Catalogue of Pictures in the Cromc Memorial Exhibition, Norwich, 1821

133

D

Chronology of the Chief Events of the Norwich School

137

E

Documents

D1

Document Relating to Prices Paid for John Crome Pictures before 1819

151

A Holographic Invoice of John Crome for Pictures Sold to the Reverend John Homfray

r54

Document Showing a Holographic Invoice by John Crome

155

PART 11

A Critical Catalogue I

Notes on the Scope and Arrangement of the Catalogue

159

II

Summary Bibliography, Exhibitions, and Abbreviations

165

The Authentic Works in Oil

169

III

IV

The Landscapes

169

The Portraits

232

The Inn Signs

233

The Authentic Works in Pencil, Ink, Chalk, and Watercolor The Drawings and Watercolors

V

VI

The Authentic Works in Etching

235 235 275

The Etchings

275

The Soft-Ground Etchings

284

Concordances

287

Chronological Concordances of Paintings

287

Chronological Concordance of Drawings and Watercolors

289

Concordance of Paintings in the Cromc Memorial Exhibition, Norwich, 1821, and the Present Work viii

291

Register of Places 293 Note on the Problem of Authenticity

299

Index 301

VOLUME II

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Frontispiece The Landscapes

VII IX-82 Figs. 1-60, Figs. 63-68, Figs. 70-84, Figs. 87-95, Figs. 98-116

The Portraits

87 Figs. 122-123

The Inn Signs

9i

Figs. 124-126 The Drawings and Watercolors

97 Fig. 127 Figs. 129-211

The Etchings

147 Figs. 212-235

The Soft-Ground Etchings

161 Figs. 237-243

Work by Crome and John Berney Crome

82 Fig. 117

Work by Thomas Gainsborough

99 Fig. 128

Copies, Imitations, and Forgeries

83 Figs. 118-121

Comparative Illustrations by Copyists

43 Figs. 61, 62 47 Fig. 69 57 Figs. 85, 86 64, 65 Figs. 96, 97

Unpublished Etchings

284, 236 288, 244, 245 IX

Preface and Acknowledgements The need for a book on John Crome which includes an up-to-date catalogue, as well as critical and historical information that serves as a practical guide to connoisseurship is obvious. C. H. Collins Baker’s fine monograph of 1921 is now antiquated. The Messrs. Derek and Timothy Cliffords recent book of 1968 does not include a sustained analysis of Crome’s style and development, nor does it present the artist’s range of brushwork and physical structure of his works, and, more importantly, the catalogue of paintings and drawings is considered unreliable by experts. Although additions have been made to the bibliography of the master, it is still far from exhaustive or definitive. An appropriate bibliography is cited in the notes to the text of this book and also in the catalogue. Even after making so important contribution to Crome studies, Collins Baker was aware thirty years later—when our correspondence first began—that there was a fresh need for Crome to be better understood in the light of modern art-historical methods. Matters of location, attribution, and dating of works remained in need of further study and clarification. In 1954, he suggested to me that a revision of his catalogue was indicated, as he realized that a number of earlier attributions to the master had been questioned and criticized. After some two years of correspondence, prodding by Collins Baker fired my curiosity. From a list of pictures he submitted to me I undertook to locate a number of Crome paintings first in America and then in Canada, to study them for style and technique under his critical eye, and then, as he advized, to inspect additional work whose whereabouts by this time I had re¬ discovered. As my work progressed under his long-distanced supervision—he in London and I in St. Petersburg, Florida—until his death in 1959—new proceedures for pursuing my Crome studies were proposed. Early in that year additional study in England, particularly at Norwich and London, had been suggested by Mr. Creighton E. Gilbert, now the Jacob Gould Schurman Professor of the Ffistory of Art at Cornell University, but at that time curator of paintings at the John and Mable Ringling Museum of Art, Sarasota, Florida. The same advice was reiterated a few months later by Mr. Daniel Catton Rich, now deceased, xi

but at this juncture in my research, director of the Worcester Museum of Art, who kindly introduced me to many scholars and museum officials in Great Britain, and from whom I greatly benefited. These introductions opened the way to far-reaching studies of pertinent documents, paintings, drawings, and watercolors by Crome to which I would not have had access. For this gesture by Mr. Rich I am most grateful. Aside from this assistance, Professor Sir Anthony Blunt, now retired, but at this time director of the Courtauld Institute of Art, London, furnished me with a complete list of Crome collectors and photographs from the Witt Photographic Library collection, which provided a fruitful source for locating works in advance of my initial visit to England. A few individual paintings and watercolors have been the subject of iconographical inquiry—notably by Mr. Francis W. Hawcroft—but much remains to be done. In i960 Mr. Hawcroft was the leading Crome scholar, and I thought it wise to head for his doorstep in Manchester—and I did. I feel deeply indebted to Mr. Hawcroft, my generous friend of long standing, keeper of the Whitworth Art Gallery of the University of Manchester, but prior to i960, keeper of the City of Norwich Museums. Sensitive to problems of out-of¬ country research, Mr. Hawcroft arranged appointments with private collectors elsewhere in England, gave freely of his time on the artist and his works, and was aware of problems that beset the art historian. Traveling the length and breadth of England, Scotland and Wales by automobile, and flying to Ireland, in i960, to visit private collections, public galleries and museums, my studies were done with some thoroughness. In the United Kingdom the effort sparked fresh enthusiasm, it enlivened a new level of interest in Crome. The impact has been to arouse a fresh curiosity in other artists of the Norwich School as a side effect, particularly in the concern of historians, museum personnel, dealers in paintings, and private collectors in London and the provinces of England, later spreading to Scotland and America. For the first time within the present generation Crome began to communicate, but he had to communicate his communication. My response has been continued study of the master’s work uninter¬ ruptedly to the present time, including return visits to England and the Continent in 1961 and 1968 and again in 1976. I should like to make it clear that my text and and catalogue differs substantially from the one published by Collins Baker more than fifty years ago, nevertheless I remain beholden to his research and documentary discoveries, which have provided the foundation for all subsequent studies of Crome’s work. There are, indeed, a few paintings and a sizable number of drawings and watercolors, which were unknown to him or that he considered to be of derivative character. On these individual works I have centered attention when able to locate or examine them. Since 1955 numerous works unknown to earlier writers have appeared, and other pictures of questionable authenticity have passed through such a number of collectors, auction houses, and dealers that their identities or correct histories are no longer certain. To the problem of unraveling these conundrums and of determining the present locations of authentic pictures formerly in the possession of other collectors, I have devoted much time. In this connection, I am grateful to Professor Sir Ellis Waterhouse, Emeritus Professor at Birmingham University, England, an expert on sales catalogues and the history of European art in general; Mr. L. G. G. Ramsey; the late Mr. D. T. C. Baskett and Mr. J. Byam Shaw, xii

formerly directors of P & G. Colnaghi & Company, Limited; Mr. Hugh Agnew and Mr. Evelyn Joll, Directors of Thomas Agnew & Sons, Limited; Mr. Hugh Leggett, director of Leggett Brothers, Limited; Mr. John C. Quilter, director of Hazlett, Gooden and Fox, Limited, the late Mr. Oscar Johnson, formerly director of Oscar and Peter Johnson, Limited; the late Mr. Arthur Tooth, formerly director of Arthur Tooth & Sons, Limited; Mr. Frederick L. Wilder, formerly of Sotheby & Company, London; Mr. William A. Martin, formerly of Christie, Manson & Wood, Limited, London; and my friend of long standing, the late ist Viscount Mackintosh of Halifax, formerly treasurer of the Arts Council of Great Britain. The first volume of the present book is divided into two major sections: an interpretative analysis of Crome s work correlated with the artist s life and movements and a critical analysis of authentic works. The second volume is devoted to illustrations. In the text of the first section are included the local and regional artistic background of Crome, a discussion of his aesthetic sources and their application in painting, the growth and development of the master s style throughout his career, and a chapter on his draftsmanship, another on copies, imitations, and forgeries, and finally one on his relation to the foundation and life of the Norwich Society of Artists and the Norwich School. Crome s biographical summary and a chronology of the chief events of the principal artists and activities of the Norwich School are provided in the Appendixes A and D, respectively. It should be pointed out however that the sources of the dates of Appendix D are many and vary greatly in reliability. Filling in gaps and checking these dates, which have not been drawn from primary sources, is con¬ tinuous so that while the list is a true mirror of our knowledge today, it could easily become out of date within a short time. In this regard, I am deeply indebted to Dr. Miklos Rajnai, keeper of paintings of the City of Norwich Museums, for providing a number of dates included in the chronology which otherwise would not be available. On many occasions Dr. Rajnai has been most cooperative in allowing me to consult archival files and the in¬ valuable volume of early newspaper clippings under his jurisdiction in the museum. The catalogue consists of Crome’s extant oeuvre, and is based on a first-hand examination and analysis of each work of art. The analysis, critical and historical in character, is intended to serve as a frame of reference for my opinion on individual works. My conclusions may differ from those scholars whose opinions I otherwise respect and from whom I have learned. But connoisseurship of Crome is a subject to which I have devoted much time and thought. It is, moreover, according to my view, basically dependent on criteria embedded in the accouterments of style and technique, Crome’s handicraft. Nor is it based solely on what historians like to designate as the “interpretive approach” to the history of art, which otherwise may be applicable to other painters of landscape, portraiture, or genre. Such an approach applied to Crome leads to fragile attributions. Obviously, Crome’s brush strokes are one with his images and composition, while those of pupils and followers, imitators and forgers are not. These uncreative fellows are unable to acquire or counterfeit the master’s sustained manner, his sentience of touch, and hence of naturalist vision and image, on which we depend for aesthetic impact and understanding of his art, nor translate the meaning of his brushwork. I have criss-crossed America and Canada on three occasions, and traveled wide and long, back and forth, in Great Britain and on the Continent, for the material of this book, the manuscript of which I began as early as 1963. Corrections and additions were made in xiii

Norwich, London, and St. Petersburg, Florida, after the last major John Crome exhibition of 1968, which was organized by the Arts Council of Great Britain to mark the bicentenary of the artist’s birth, and in 1976. In the course of my studies I received many courtesies from English and American collectors, from the Arts Council of Great Britain, as well as from museums and public galleries on both sides of the Atlantic. My debt to scholars and museum officials for facilitating my research on John Crome are many. First of all, in the United States I wish to thank the late Mr. Theodore Rousseau, Jr., who, until his death in January, 1974, was vice-director and curator in chief of the Metro¬ politan Museum of Art. At many meetings he was most encouraging and made suggestions concerning the pictorial and practical needs of a book on the artist; Mr. Felix Fabrizio, New York, who generously made available an annotated copy of C. H. Collins Baker, Crome, by the late Mr. Percy Moore Turner; Mr. Charles C. Cunningham, chief curator, The Sterling and Francine Clark Art Institute; Mr. Andrew C. Ritchie, formerly director of the Yale University Art Gallery and Professor Robert L. Herbert, Department of the History of Art, of Yale University; Professor Egbert Haverkamp-Begemann, of the Institute of Fine Arts, New York University, and consultative curator of Dutch and Flemish painting at the Metropolitan Museum of Art; Mr. Robert R. Wark, curator of the collection of the Henry E. Huntington Library and Art Gallery and a student of eighteenth and nineteenth century British art; Mr. Henry S. Francis, formerly curator of paintings, of the Cleveland Museum of Art; Mr. Evan H. Turner, former director, and Miss Barbara Sweeney, curator of the John G. Johnson Collection, of the Philadelphia Museum of Art; the late Mr. Paul L. Grigaut, former chief curator, and Mr. Frederick J. Cummings, director of the Detroit Institute of Arts; Mr. Thomas N. Maytham, director of the Denver Art Museum, but then assistant, Department of Paintings, of the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston; and the late Professor W. G. Constable, museum advisor, art historian and former director of the Courtauld Institute of Art, London, who have done me favors. The late Mr. Daniel Catton Rich, who, from time to time, outlined procedural methods of study on some of the perplexities of the artist, is already mentioned above. My heartfelt gratitude and warmest thanks must go to Professor Horst W. Janson, Emeritus Chairman of the Department of Fine Arts, of New York University, for putting at my disposal his profound scholarship and his specialized knowledge of manuscript editing, and, in particular, an almost heroic patience. He watched my plans for this book take original shape and added the generous service of reading the chapters of the text, offering valuable advice and imparting criticism when they were assuming their final form. For helping to reduce errors of fact and presentation in Chapter IV and for his comments, I want to thank Professor Albert E. Elsen of the faculty of Stanford University, California. Closer to home, I wish to express my gratitude to Mrs. Peri Tucker, an art writer living at Harbor Bluffs, Florida, who has gone over portions of the manuscript and made many corrective suggestions. Among the scholars and museum officials in Canada, I must register my appreciation to Professor William S. A. Dale, until recently chairman of the Department of Fine Arts, of the University of Western Ontario, London, but then deputy director of the National Gallery of Canada at Ottowa; to Mr. Robert E. Hubbard, chief curator of that institution; to the late Mr. Martin Baldwin, former director, of the Art Gallery of Ontario at Toronto; and to many provincial museum officials, each of whom were most helpful in allowing me to study their attributed works to Crome and for general assistance.

xiv

In the United Kingdom scholars, museum officials, and private collectors have done much to assist me in my studies: in the problem of gaining admission to privately owned pictures, in gathering material for study in their respective institutions, in obtaining photographs of works and documents, and in miscellaneous ways. I particularly wish to thank the late Sir Martin Davies, then director, and Miss Pamela Eyres, librarian, of the National Gallery, London, Sir Trenchard Cox, then director, Mr. Graham Reynolds, until recently keeper, and Mr. Jonathan Mayne, deputy keeper, of the Department of Paintings and Prints and Drawings, of the Victoria and Albert Museum; Professor Sir Anthony Blunt, then director, Mr. Peter Murray, former librarian, and Mr. John Sutherland, librarian, of the Courtauld Institute of Art; Mr. E. Croft-Murray, formerly chief keeper, and Mr. Dudley Snelgrove, then research assistant, and Mr. Paul L. Hulton, deputy keeper, Department of Prints and Drawings, of the British Museum; Mr. Martin Butlin, keeper, and Miss Judy Egerton, research assistant, of paintings of the Tate Gallery; Miss Mary Woodall, then director, and Mr. John Woodward, then keeper of paintings, but now retired, and Mr. Denis Farr, director, of the Museums and Art Gallery, Birmingham; Mr. Robert Rowe, director of Leeds City Art Galleries; Mr. Ralph Fastnedge, keeper of the Lady Lever Art Gallery; Mr. Colin Thompson, keeper of paintings of the National Gallery of Scotland; Mr. G. L. Conran, then keeper, and Mr. John Jacoks, keeper of paintings, of the Iveagh Bequest, Kenwood; and Miss Constance-Anne Parker, assistant librarian of the Royal Academy of Arts. I am deeply grateful to Miss Mary Charmot, now retired, but at the time of my research, assistant keeper of paintings of the Tate Gallery, for examining a painting for me in Melbourne, Australia. Both the Courtauld Institue of Art and the City of Norwich Museums were most generous in allowing me to study their photographic files, use their libraries and granted permissions to quote from documents. In Norwich I received many courtesies. The late Mr. Rainbow Clarke, formerly director, and Mr. Francis Cheetham, director, of the City of Norwich Museums, arranged access to the galleries all hours of the day and night and during holidays. It is a particular pleasure to express my deep gratitude to my friend, Mr. Alec M. Cotman, until recently guide lecturer and historian, in the Department of Paintings of the City of Norwich Museums, for patiently acquainting me with the antiquity of ancient Norwich and East Anglia. His energies have been boundless and his knowledge endless. And for invaluably informative answers to innumerable problems of Norwich folklore and local history, generously supplied over the years, I am beholden to him. An unforgettable experience in Europe was an enthusiastically and personally conducted tour by the late Mr. Fritz Lugt of the Institute Neerlandais, Paris, after

9PM,

in

1961.

When,

at nearly the hour of midnight, from his more than five thousand letters of artists, Mr. Lugt enriched my researches with a holograph letter from John Crome to James Stark—the unexpected highlight of this European journey. Over a span of some twenty-five years—covering the period of my Crome studies—some individuals who have rendered services or information of inestimable value may have been inadvertently omitted from recognition. To them, I humbly express my apology and warm thanks. A special word of appreciation is due private collectors in America and England for their magnificent generosity and courtesies. Particular thanks are also due Mr. Frederick L. Wilder and Mr. John C. Quaker, in England, and Mr. Paul Mellon, in America, for supplying photographs of figures

30, 184,

199, and figures

93, 94,

95, and figures

39, 40, 47, 49, 72, 99,

xv

132, 133, I74» 188, 195, 210, and the color transparencies for plates X and XII, respectively, and the Metropolitan Museum of Art for supplying the color transparency for plate V. I profoundly thank Mr. Herbert J. Peck, photographer of the Department of Fine Arts, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee, for photographing the Crome etchings. The photographs used for the rest of the figures have been made available by private and public collections, by dealers in New York, London, and Norwich, or are the author’s property. St. Petersburg, Florida, September 1977

Norman L. Goldberg

List oj Illustrations Unless otherwise indicated, all of the works of art reproduced are in Great Britain, The sequence of the color plates, having been influenced by consideration of design and pro¬ duction, are not strictly chronological, but with few exceptions, the works belonging to a particular period have a stylistic rather than biographical or historical relationship.

ILLUSTRATIONS IN COLOR Plates

I II

Norwich from Mousehold Gravel Pits. Private Collection. Cat. No. 3 Slate Quarries. Tate Gallery, London. Cat. No. 20

III

Yarmouth Jetty. City of Norwich Museums, Norwich. Cat. No. 29

IV

The Beaters. National Gallery of Scotland, Edinburgh. Cat. No. 43

V

Hauthois Common. Metropolitan Museum of Art (Gift of Henry G. Marquand, 1889), New York. Cat. No. 45

VI New Mills: Men Wading. City of Norwich Museums, Norwich. Cat. No. 55 VII

Norwich from St. Augustine’s Gate. Collection Mr. John Gurney, Walsingham Abbey, Norfolk. Cat. No. 56

VIII

Boulevard des Italiens, Paris. Collection Mr. R. Q. Gurney, Bawdeswell Hall, Norfolk. Cat. No. 75

IX X

Marlingford Grove. Lady Lever Art Gallery, Port Sunlight, Cheshire. Cat. No. 77 The Wensum at Thorpe: Boys Bathing. Yale Center for British Art, Paul Mellon Collection, New Haven, Connecticut. Cat. No. 101

XI

Yarmouth Beach and Mill, looking North. Collection Mr. David Dugdale, Crathorne Hall, Yorkshire. Cat. No. 107 xvii

XII

A Barge with a Wounded Soldier. Paul Mellon Collection, Upperville, Virginia. Cat. No. 103

XIII

Norwich River: Afternoon. Collection Mr. Max Michaelis, Rycote Park, Oxfordshire. Cat. No. 108

XIV XV

Mousehold Heath, Norwich. Tate Gallery, London. Cat. No. 109 Yarmouth Water Frolic. Private Collection. Cat. No. no

XVI The Fishmarket at Boulogne. Collection Mr. R. Q. Gurney, Bawdeswell Hall, Norfolk. Cat. No. 114

ILLUSTRATIONS IN MONOCHROME THE LANDSCAPES

Frontispiece. Portrait of John Crome. Denis Brownell Murphy. Collection the Right Honor¬ able Viscount Mackintosh of Halifax, Barford, Norfolk. 1

The Cow Tower on the Swannery Meadow, Norwich. City of Norwich Museums, Norwich.

2

View on the Coast of Baiae. City of Norwich Museums, Norwich.

3

Norwich from Mousehold Gravel Pits. Private Collection.

4

Horse Watering. City of Norwich Museums, Norwich.

5

Farmyard. Collection the Right Honorable Viscount Mackintosh of Halifax, Barford, Norfolk.

6

A Cart Shed, at Melton, Norfolk. Collection Dr. Arnold Renshaw, Manchester.

7

Cottage and Pigsty. Collection Mrs. R. F. Colman, Brundall, Norfolk.

8

Storm, Mousehold Health. Whereabouts unknown.

9

Back of the New Mills, looking North. Collection Dr. Norman J. Townsley, Norwich.

10

Sheds and Old Houses on the Yare. Collection the Right Honorable Viscount Mackintosh of Halifax, Barford, Norfolk.

11

A Mill near Lakenham. Collection the Right Honorable Lord Mancroft, London.

12

A Cottage near Lakenham. Collection the Right Honorable Lord Mancroft, London.

13

Composition in the Style of Wilson. Collection the Right Honorable Viscount Mackintosh of Halifax, Barford, Norfolk.

14

A Castle in Ruins, Morning. City of Norwich Museums, Norwich.

15

Scene in Cumberland. National Gallery of Scotland, Edinburgh.

16

Early Dawn. City of Norwich Museums, Norwich.

17

The Bell Inn. Private Collection.

18

A Cottage on the Yare. Collection Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother, London.

19

A Norfolk Cottage. With M. Bernard, London.

20

Slate Quarries. Tate Gallery, London.

21

Carrow Abbey. City of Norwich Museums, Norwich.

22

The Limekiln. Collection the Honorable Lady Courtauld, Umtali, Rhodesia.

23

The River Yare. Collection Mrs. W. W. Spooner, Lullington, Somerset.

XVlll

24 25 26 27 28

48 49

Old Mill on the Yare. Museum of Art (George W. Elkin Collection), Philadelphia. The Yare at Thorpe, Norwich. City of Norwich Museums, Norwich. View near Weymouth. Institute of Arts, Detroit. View at Hellesdon. Collection the Honorable Doris Harbord, Norwich. View near Thorpe. Collection Dr. and Mrs. Norman L. Goldberg, St. Petersburg, Florida Yarmouth Jetty. City of Norwich Museums, Norwich. Cottage near Yarmouth. Collection Mr. Frederick L. Wilder, Woodford Green, Essex. Gibralter Watering Place, Heigham. With Marshall Spink, London. By the Roadside. Collection the Right Honorable Viscount Mackintosh of Halifax, Barford, Norfolk. Moonrise on the Yare. Tate Gallery, London. The Blacksmith’s Shop, Hingham. Museum of Art (John M. McFadden Collection), Philadelphia. Detail of Figure 34. Landscape. Washington University Art Gallery, St. Louis. A View on the Wensum. City of Norwich Museums, Norwich. View on the Yare. Collection the Right Honorable Malcolm Macdonald, London. River Landscape with Barge. Yale Center for British Art, Paul Mellon Collection, New Haven, Connecticut. Yarmouth Jetty. Yale Center for British Art, Paul Mellon Collection, New Haven, Connecticut. St. Martin s River and Gate. Collection the Honorable James Bruce, Balmano Castle, Scotland. Ruins, Evening. National Gallery of Canada, Ottawa. The Beaters. National Gallery of Scotland, Edinburgh. Detail of Figure 43. Hautbois Common. Metropolitan Museum of Art (Gift of Henry G. Marquand, 1889), New York. Back of the New Mills, Norwich. City of Norwich Museums, Norwich. A Woodland Scene near Norwich. Yale Center for British Art, Paul Mellon Collection, New Haven, Connecticut. A Sandy Bank. Collection Mr. Christopher Norris, Dorking, Sussex. Yarmouth Beach and Jetty. Yale Center for British Art, Paul Mellon Collection, New

50 51

Haven, Connecticut. Old Trowse Bridge. City of Norwich Museums, Norwich. Landscape at Blofield. Collection the Right Honorable Viscount Mackintosh of Halifax,

52 53 54 55 56

Barford, Norfolk. Study of Flints. City of Norwich Museums, Norwich. The Skirts of the Forest. Victoria and Albert Museum (Crown Copyright), London. St. Martins Gate, Norwich. City of Norwich Museums, Norwich. New Mills: Men Wading. City of Norwich Museums, Norwich. Norwich from St. Augustine’s Gate. Collection Mr. John Gurney, Walsingham Abbey,

57

Norfolk. View on Mousehold Heath. Victoria and Albert Museum (Crown Copyright), London.

29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47

xix

58

Yarmouth Jetty. City of Norwich Museums, Norwich.

59

The Way through the Woods. City Museum and Art Gallery, Birmingham.

60

Hingham Lane Scene, Norfolk. Tate Gallery, London.

61

(Copy), Hingham Lane Scene, Norfolk. Collection Mrs. Leonard A. Toome, Greenwich, Connecticut.

62

Detail of Figure 61.

63

A Windmill near Norwich. Tate Gallery, Nowich.

64

View of Kirstead Church. City of Norwich Museums, Norwich.

65

Study of a Burdock. City of Norwich Museums, Norwich.

66

At Honingham. City of Norwich Museums, Norwich

67

Clump of Trees, near Salhouse. Corcoran Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C.

68

The Old Oak. National Gallery of Canada, Ottawa.

69

(Copy), The Old Oak. Collection Mr. and Mrs. M. Walker, New York.

70

The Return of the Flock. Collection the Right Honorable Viscount Mackintosh of Halifax, Barford, Norfolk.

71

Study of Dock Leaves. City of Norwich Museums, Norwich.

72

Thistle and Water Vole. Yale Center for British Art, Paul Mellon Collection, New Haven, Connecticut.

73

St. Martin s Gate. Museum of Art (William L. Elkins Collection), Philadelphia.

74

The Edge of a Common. Henry E. Huntington Library and Art Gallery, San Marino, California

75

Boulevard des Italiens, Paris. Collection Mr. R. Q. Gurney, Bawdeswell Hall, Norfolk.

76

Detail of Figure 75.

77

Marlingford Grove. Lady Lever Art Gallery, Port Sunlight, Cheshire.

78

Catton Lane Scene. Collection Mr. Humphrey A. Day, Saxmundham, Suffolk.

79

View near Norwich, Harvesters. City of Manchester Art Galleries, Manchester.

80

Wherries on the Yare. City Art Galleries, Leeds.

81

Road with Pollards. City of Norwich Museums. Norwich.

82

Bruges River—Ostend in the Distance—Moonlight. City of Norwich Museums, Norwich.

83

The Gate. Private Collection.

84

Detail of Figure 83.

85

(Copy), The Harling Gate, near Norwich. National Gallery of Art (Widener Collection), Washington, D.C.

86

Detail of Figure 85.

87

A Road near Bury St. Edmunds. Collection Mrs. Oscar Ashcroft, Eastbourne, Sussex.

88

An Old Watermill. Collection Dr. and Mrs. Norman L. Goldberg, St. Petersburg, Florida

89

Pockthorpe: Boat and Boathouse. Private Collection.

90

The Windmill near Norwich. Museum of Fine Arts, Boston.

91

Woodland Scene with Sheep. Collection the Right Honorable Viscount Mackintosh of Halifax, Barford, Norfolk.

92

The Harling Gate. Collection Dr. and Mrs. Norman L. Goldberg, St. Petersburg, Florida.

93

Detail of Figure 92 (seated man).

94

Detail of Figure 92 (country road).

xx

95

Detail of Figure 92 (twin oak trees).

96

(Copy) The Harling Gate. Collection the Right Honorable Viscount Mackintosh of Halifax, Barford, Norfolk.

97

Detail of Figure 96 (seated man).

98

Yarmouth Harbor. Tate Gallery, London.

99

Moonlight on the Yare. National Gallery of Art, Paul Mellon Collection, Washington D.C.

100

Yarmouth Jetty. Collection Sir Edmund Bacon, Bart., Raveningham Hall, Norfolk.

101

The Wensum at Thorpe: Boys Bathing. Yale Center for British Art, Paul Mellon Col¬ lection, New Haven, Connecticut.

102

The Glade Cottage. Collection Mr. Ronald A. Vestey, Great Thurlow Hall, Norfolk.

103

A Barge with a Wounded Solder. Paul Mellon Collection, Upperville, Virginia.

104

Willow Tree, with a Horseman and a Woman on a Road. Castle Museum, Nottingham.

105

The Poringland Oak. Tate Gallery, London.

106

Squall off Yarmouth. Collection Mr. Hereward T. Watlington, Bermuda.

107

Yarmouth Beach and Mill, looking North. Collection Mr. David Dugdale, Crathorne Hall, Yorkshire.

108

Norwich River: Afternoon. Collection Mr. Max Michaelis, Rycote Park, Oxfordshire.

109

Mousehold Heath, Norwich. Tate Gallery, London,

no

Yarmouth Water Fro lie. Private Collection.

in

A View of Chapel Fields, Norwich. Tate Gallery, London.

112

Postwick Grove. City of Norwich Museums, Norwich.

113

Grove Scene. City of Norwich Museums, Norwich.

114

The Fishmarket at Boulogne. Collection Mr. R. Q. Gurney, Bawdeswell Hall, Norfolk.

115

Woodland Path. National Gallery of Victoria, Melbourne, Australia.

116

Wood Scene with Pool in Front. Collection Dr. and Mrs. Norman L. Goldberg, St. Petersburg, Florida.

117

Yarmouth Water Frolic. Iveagh Bequest, Kenwood, London.

118

(Copy), On the Wensum, above New Mills. City of Norwich Museums, Norwich.

119

(Copy), The Wensum, Norwich. Yale Center for British Art, Paul Mellon Collection, New Haven, Connecticut.

120

(Copy), The Tannery Yard. Collection the John S. Phipps Foundation, Old Westbury House, Old Westbury, Long Island.

121

(Forgery), Norfolk Homestead. Art Gallery of Ontario, Toronto.

THE PORTRAITS

122

Portrait of Stephen Crome. Collection Mr. Derek G. Turner, Worton, Wiltshire.

123

Portrait of Mrs. Gurney. Collection Mr. Simon Houfe, Ampthill, Bedforshire.

THE INN SIGNS

124

The Three Cranes. City of Norwich Museums, Norwich.

125

The Top Sawyer. Watney Mann (East Anglia), Limited, Norwich.

125a Reverse of Figure 125. 126

The Wherryman. Victoria and Albert Museum (Crown Copyright), London. xxi

THE DRAWINGS AND WATERCOLORS

127

Sketch of Trees. Henry E. Huntington Library and. Art Gallery, San Marino, California.

128

Gainsborough, Wooded Landscape. British Museum, London. Reproduced by kind permission of Trustees of the British Museum.

129

Wooded Landscape with Lane. Simon Carter Gallery, Woodbridge, Suffolk.

130

Cottage and Sheds. British Museum, London. Reproduced by kind permission of Trustees of the British Museum.

131

Study of Trees. Litzwilliam Museum, Cambridge.

132

Two Buildings among Trees. Yale Center for British Art, Paul Mellon Collection, New Haven, Connecticut.

133

Old Cottages. Yale Center for British Art, Paul Mellon Collection, New Haven, Connecticut.

134

Wooded Scene with Pool and Path. Collection Mr. Norman Baker, Colchester, Essex.

135

Cottage in a Wood. Whitworth Art Gallery, University of Manchester, Manchester.

136

Old Trees and a Stile. Collection the Right Honorable Lord Mancroft, London.

137

Landscape with House and Trees. Collection the Right Honorable Viscount Mackintosh of Halifax, Barford, Norfolk.

138

The Edge of a Stream. Whitworth Art Gallery, University of Manchester, Manchester.

139

Landscape

with House and

Trees.

Courtauld Institute of

Art,

Witt Collection,

London. 140

Wooded Landscape with Cottage. Henry E. Huntington Library and Art Gallery, San Marino, California.

141

Landscape. City Art Galleries, Leeds.

142

Sketch of Trees. Henry E. Huntington Library and Art Gallery, San Marino, California.

143

Scene in Patterdale, Cumberland. Collection the Right Honorable Viscount Mackintosh of Halifax, Barford, Norfolk.

144

Cottage and Bridge. British Museum, London. Reproduced by kind permission of Trustees of the British Museum.

145

Mountainous Landscape. Collection Mr. J. F. Wordsworth. London.

146

Dolgelley, North Wales. City of Norwich Museums, Norwich.

147

Palings and Trees by a Pond. British Museum, London. Reproduced by kind permission of Trustees of the British Museum.

148

Woodland Scene. City of Norwich Museums, Norwich.

149

Tintern Abbey. City of Norwich Museums, Norwich.

150

River and Rocks. City of Norwich Museums, Norwich.

151

Interior of Caister Castle, Norjolk. Custody of the Royal Exchange Assurance Company, Ipswich, Suffolk.

152

Cottage in the Trees. Henry E. Huntington Library and Art Gallery, San Marino, California.

153

Wooded Landscape with Stream and Figures. Collection Mr. E. P. Hansell, Cromer, Norfolk.

154

The Hollow Road. British Museum, London. Reproduced by kind permission of Trustees of the British Museum.

155 xxii

Surlingham Ferry. Collection Mr. E. P. Hansell, Cromer, Norfolk.

156

Trees between St. Martins Gate and Hellesdon. British Museum, London. Reproduced by kind permission of Trustees of the British Museum.

157

Trees and Palings. British Museum, London. Reproduced by kind permission of Trustees of the British Museum.

158

Shed and Trees. British Museum, London. Reproduced by kind permission of Trustees of the British Museum.

159

Woodland Scene with Gate. Collection Sir Edmund Bacon, Bart., Raveningham Hall, Norfolk.

160

Farm Buildings. City of Norwich Museums, Norwich.

161

Makings on the Wensum. City of Norwich Museums, Norwich.

162

Whitlingham. City of Norwich Museums, Norwich.

163

Cottage Gable in Ruins. City of Norwich Museums, Norwich.

164

Waiting for the Ferry. British Museum, London, Reproduced by kind permission of Trustees of the British Museum.

165

On the River at Thorpe, near Norwich. British Museum, London. Reproduced by kind permission of Trustees of the British Museum.

166

A View of Drayton, near Norwich. Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge.

167

A Woodman’s Shed. Collection Mr. F. Grundfcld, London.

168

Trees over a Stream. City of Norwich Museums, Norwich.

169

River Scene. Collection the Honorable Lady Courtauld, Umtali, Rhodesia.

170

Gabled End of a House. Collection Mr. R. S. Aiken, London.

171

Back River, Norwich. City of Norwich Museums, Norwich.

172

Thatched Cottage. City of Norwich Museums, Norwich.

173

Near Caister. British Museum, London. Reproduced by kind permission of Trustees of the British Museum.

174

An Entrance to Earlham Park, near Norwich. Yale Center for British Art, Paul Mellon Collection, New Haven, Connecticut.

175

The Blacksmith’s Shop, Hingham. City of Norwich Museums, Norwich.

176

The Blacksmith’s Shop, Hingham. Museum and Art Gallery, Doncaster, Yorkshire.

177

Old Houses at Norwich. Victoria and Albert Museum (Crown copyright), London.

178

Yarmouth Jetty. British Museum, London. Reproduced by kind permission of Trustees of the British Museum.

179

The Shepherd. Collection Mr. Norman Baker, Colchester, Essex.

180

By the Roadside. Whitworth Art Gallery, University of Manchester, Manchester.

181

River through the Trees. Collection Sir Edmund Bacon, Bart., Raveningham Hall, Norfolk.

182

Landscape with Boy Fishing. Metropolitan Museum of Art (The Robert Lehman Collection), New York.

183

The Blasted Oak. Collection Sir Edmund Bacon, Bart., Raveningham Hall, Norfolk.

184

Study of Trees. Collection Mr. Frederick L. Wilder, Woodford Green, Essex.

185

View on the Thames at Battersea. Whitworth Art Gallery, University of Manchester, Manchester.

186

The Blasted Oaks. City of Norwich Museums, Norwich.

187

Group oj Trees overhanging a Pool. City of Norwich Museums, Norwich.

188

A Cow. Yale Center for British Art, Paul Mellon Collection, New Haven, Connecticut. xxiii

189

Sketch of Three Pigs. Courtauld Institute of Art, Witt Collection, London.

190

Two Cart Horses. With Manning Galleries Limited, London.

191

Trees on a Stream. British Museum, London. Reproduced by kind permission of Trustees of the British Museum.

192

The Gnarled Oak. Collection Sir Edmund Bacon, Bart., Raveningham Hall, Norfolk.

193

Houses and Wherries on the Wensum. Whitworth Art Gallery, University of Man¬ chester, Manchester.

194

Thatched Buildings with Figures. City of Norwich Museums, Norwich.

195

Willow Tree near Mr. Weston’s House. Yale Center for British Art, Paul Mellon Collec¬ tion, New Haven, Connecticut.

196

Landscape with Cottages. Victoria and Albert Museum (Crown copyright), London.

197

Woodland Scene, Dunham, Norfolk. British Museum, London. Reproduced by kind permission of Trustees of the British Museum.

198

Hedgerow with Grindstone and Stile. Christchurch Mansion, Ipswich, Suffolk. Repro¬ duced by kind permission of Ipswich Museums Committee.

199

Study of Trees. Collection Mr. Frederick L. Wilder, Woodford Green, Essex.

200

Study of Trees. City Museum and Art Gallery, Birmingham.

201

Trees by a Pond. Yale University Art Gallery, New Haven, Connecticut.

202

Woodland Scene. Victoria and Albert Museum (Crown copyright), London.

203

Lane Scene near Norwich. City of Norwich Museums. Norwich.

204

Plant Study: a Burdock. Courtauld Institute of Art, Witt Collection, London.

205

Study of a Pollard. Christchurch Mansion, Ipswich, Suffolk. Reproduced by kind permission of Ipswich Museums Committee.

206

Near Magdalen Gate, Norwich. Victoria and Albert Museum (Crown copyright), London.

207

King Street, Norwich. Victoria and Albert Museum (Crown copyright), London.

208

Silver Birches. City of Norwich Museums, Norwich.

209

The Glade Cottage. Collection the Right Honorable Viscount Mackintosh of Halifax, Barford, Norfolk.

210

A Boatload. Collection Paul Mellon, Upperville, Virginia.

211

Wroxham Regatta. City of Norwich Museums, Norwich. THE ETCHINGS

212

At Colney. Third state

213

Road Scene, Trowse Hall (near Norwich). Third state

214

Mousehold Heath, Norwich. Second state

215

Back of the New Mills. Second state

216

Front of the New Mills, Norwich. Second state

217

Gravel Pits, Marlingford. Second state

218

Deepham, near Hingham. Fourth state

219

Footbridge at Cringleford. Second state

220

At Woodrising. Third state

221

Rustic Road with Thatched Barns. First state

222

At Scoutton. Second state

223

A Composition: Men and Cows. First state

xxiv

224

At Bawburgh. Second state

225

At Hackford. Fourth state

226

Back of the Mills. Second state

227

The Hall Moor Road near Hingham. Third state

228

A Composition. Second state

229

Road Scene, Hethersett. First state

230

Road with Park Palings. First state

231

Road by Blasted Oak. Second state

232

Composition: Sandy Road through Woodland. Second state

233

At Heigham. First state

234

Farm Buildings by a Pool. First state

235

Landscape with Wooden Bridge and a Horseman. Only state

THE SOFT-GROUND ETCHINGS

237

Tree Trunk and Bushes. Only state

238

Waggon Wheels, Tree Trunk and Beams. Only state

239

Tree Trunks and Lane. Only state

240

Hoveton St. Peter. Only state

241

Three Trees. Only state

242

Colney. Only state

243

Bixley. Only state

xxv

PART I

CHAPTER I

The Artistic Background of Crome

THE EAST ANGLIAN HERITAGE

East Anglian painting reached its apogee during the first half of the nineteenth century. Centering their activities in Norwich, the painters of East Anglia created their own order in response to nature and historical artifact. Among them was an artist of genius and a man of leadership—-John Crome—whose achievements established the fame of the Norwich School. First inspired by paintings in a local collection, his attitude toward visual reality was largely fashioned by the intimate scenes of his environs. He later devoted himself to painting topo¬ graphical views of Wales, picturesque scenes of the English Lake District, and the quiet waters and simple rural scenes of Norwich and its suburbs: in immersing himself in the atmosphere and light and natural beauty of these subjects, he attained aesthetic fulfilment and found emotional release. In his pursuit of the landscape ideal, Crome followed the path from sentimental narrative to perceptive realism and finally to what was later to be known as “plein-air” painting. He stood on the threshold of a new era, one in which nineteenth-century English art was to be¬ come focused on definable realism. This new objectivity had been emerging from the

3

English painting of the preceding century—a tendency toward naturalism at the expense of more poetic qualities; and, conversely, landscapes that are strongest in sentiment tend to be least naturalistic—but had never been brought by great numbers of artists so distinctly to the fore. Painting became, as Crome observed, a ramification of natural philosophy; it involved an honest observation of nature (i.e. landscape) entailing both an aesthetic and a moral obliga¬ tion. Pictorial interest was shifting from man to nature, in accordance with a new sensibility, which required that a painting faithfully represent nature and at the same time liberate the “spirituality” of a natural scene. With the unseating of man as the center of interest, artists sought practical solutions to new technical and formal problems. What was to be painted in nature was inconsequential; the salient question was how it was to be painted. Changes in the attitude toward nature— involving essentially a change in the character of both perception and feeling—also began to demand a more imaginative and a more scientific approach to nature. Indeed perceptions and the treatment of detail became more precise and selective. The handling of natural form, which reveals a more sensitive perception of intangible natural effects than in works of the eighteenth century—of light, air, space, clouds—achieved a new exactness. The extent to which Crome was aware of contemporary artistic attitudes and the effort he made to develop and teach these early nineteenth-century changes have not been generally recognized. Through his personal style and euphoric commitment to experience, Crome dramatized the rhythms of natural form, adhered to perceptual rather than conceptual treatment of detail, handled light and shadow as a naturalistic means of expressing contrast, concentrated on refining perception of form, emphasized focal and reflected luminosity to enhance contrast and pictorial expression, and infused space with light and air. These traits characterize the basic aims in Crome’s pictorial efforts. These changes in perception and feeling were taking place at a time when East Anglian collectors were showing a growing fondness for pictures of agreeable outdoor scenery. Because they appreciated the close imitations of nature and the picturesque, they were adding Dutch and Flemish works as well as native English landscapes to their collections. Landscapes of these particular continental schools were beginning to gain a more secure place in popular affection than other genres. While the popular taste was changing and an enthu¬ siasm for collecting pictures was expanding in all the eastern counties of England, the painters of Norwich were undergoing a transformation in their own attitude toward nature. They were recording visual reality, nonvisual effects, and memorable experiences with a deepening fervor. They were focusing their attention especially on pictorial reminiscences of the views and sights with which they were familiar both inside and outside the ancient walled city of Norwich,1 a city whose gates2 and adjacent parishes retained much of their medieval appear¬ ance. i. The combined population of Norwich including

2. By 1812 the twelve gates surrounding the city

the adjacent parishes was 40,051 in 1786. It dropped

had been taken down, leaving only the remains of

to 37,244 m 1811 and rose to 50,290 in 1821. See John

the flint-stone wall, having forty towers and a ditch.

Stacy, A

Fragments of the wall exist today. See Jane Hales,

Topographical and Historical Account of

Norwich (Norwich and London, 1819), pp. 127-29. An addendum, “The population of the city of Norwich, taken by census, 1821,” is inserted facing p. 129 in the present writer’s copy. 4

“Flashback to Norwich in 1783,” Norfolk News, August 8, 1949, p. 3.

I. Norwich from Mousehold Gravel Pits. Private Collection. No. 3

“AIe) “ON E

9

el ou.L ‘S32AIAADNC) ALA

2

:

Il.

Yarmouth Jetty. City of Norwich Museums, Norwich. Cat. No. 29.

IV.

The Beaters. National Gallery of Scotland. No. 43

The interpretation of local landscape by the burgeoning colony of Norwich painters can be conveniently traced to three interacting factors. The first was the unparalleled and sus¬ tained devotion to their locale by drawing masters, talented pupils, amateurs, and serious artists. The second was the appeal of the regional scenic beauty and architectural antiquity. nd the third factor was the eventual realization by local artists and men of culture—by such men as Thomas Harvey of nearby Catton and Dawson Turner of Yarmouth—that London was a counterinfluence and the acknowledged center of artistic taste and academic learning. But they refused to be overwhelmed by the dominance of London; and instead of dispersing the amateur and professional painters of Norwich and hindering their growth, these counterinfluences contributed to the formulation of a creative center—indeed, to a self¬ generating, unrivaled source of distinctive landscape art.3 With differing intensity, these three factors—somewhat compulsive in nature—exerted a continuous influence on individual members of the Norwich circle. Their impact on Crome was such that it led him into avenues of digression in which realistic naturalism assumed symbolic overtones. The observed fact equated with naturalism, translated by him, was the grandeur, the nobility, the dignity of truth. His expression invariably retains elements of the picturesque that delight the eye. Such examples, with or without what is perceived in an unreal or real way, show a varying but common quality. First, they aim at the revelation, through an emotional response, of local beauty, seeking to attain this end by illusion or realism or both. The soil had been tilled for the seed of these achievements, however, by a few antecedent painters whose reputations, with few exceptions, never spread very far. Norwich was the birthplace of Charles Catton (1728—98),

Prince of Coach Painters,” who is said to have

been the first heraldic painter to design the supporters to the coats of arms naturalistically. He received an appointment as Coach Painter to George III, who nominated him as one of the founder-members of the Royal Academy. An eminent local heraldic painter was John Ninham (1754-1817), whose work as an engraver and topographical draftsman was only of the most modest sort. His son, Henry Ninham (1793—1874), was one of the harbingers of the second generation of the Norwich School. A heterogeneous group of men, whose work for all practical purposes has disappeared and whose names are little known, preceded these men: there was a tradition of painting in Norwich which antedated heraldic painting and led back to the glass painting of the thirteenth century.4 Among these predecessors of the Norwich Society of Artists were William Williams (fl. 1758-95), known as Williams “of Norwich”; Joseph Browne (1720-1801), known as “the Norwich Claude”; William Stevenson and Edward Miles, who were miniature painters; and Thomas Bardwell (1704-67) and Thomas Holloway (1748-1847). Charles Hodgson (fl. 1802-25) and Robert Ladbrooke (1770-1842), who were associated with John Crome in establishing the exhibitions of the Norwich Society of Artists, and James Sillett (1764-1840), an exhibitor in the Royal Academy, who later became an honorary member of the Norwich Society of Artists and its president in 1815, were also forerunners. Norwich artists had been periodic exhibitors at the Royal Academy since its inaugural exhibition on April 26, 1769. The senior Charles Catton’s exhibits at the Academy were 3. For a detailed analysis of the influences on Norwich art and artistic life and a more comprehen-

4. Derek Clifford,

Watercolours of the Norwich

School (London, 1965), p. 5.

sive discussion of their effects, see Chapter VI.

5

chiefly landscapes, with occasional animal pictures and compositions. Thomas Rawlings contributed compositions before 1775; James Sillett, the painter of still-life fruit and flower subjects, exhibited beginning in 1796. B. Sewell sent views of churches in

1797;

and John Sell

Cotman, a Norwich-born artist who lived in London until 1807, began exhibiting there in 1800. Charles Hodgson, the well-known Norwich drawing master, sent his first work in 1802, and Robert Ladbrooke showed his first landscape painting in 1804. Hence, for a generation before the historic foundation of the Norwich Society of Artists in 1803 and before the first of its annual exhibitions two years later, artists from Norwich had been occasional contributors to the Academy exhibitions. Crome did not send any pictures until 1806. Norwich landscape painting reached its zenith between 1803 and 1833, and it was during this period that the Norwich Society of Artists was most active. During this period both the visual and the intangible aspects of nature were being explored in the belief that nature and the immediate environment were an orchestral harmony of forms. These considerations were of unceasing concern to Crome. In both his painting and his teaching he was concerned with rendering the effects of atmosphere and light in nature as seen out of doors rather than in the artificial light of the studio. This led him to broaden composition and chiaroscuro effects to an extent rarely attained by the Dutch seventeenth-century landscape painters. From early in his career he sought to penetrate deeply into atmosphere by fusing light with air in every direction and in every crevice of space. His early successes present strong evidence of his pioneering in the out-of-doors tradition of painting before it became the dominant interest of Paul Huet (1803-69), Jean-Baptiste-Camille Corot (1796-1875), Pierre-EtienneTheodore Rousseau (1812-67), Jean Francois Millet (1814-75), or minor masters of the Barbizon school. While Crome was perfecting the skills of presenting natural light and air effects, John Sell Cotman, a younger Norwich contemporary, was working very much in the tradition of late eighteenth-century watercolorists, featuring compositions that focused largely on architectural shapes and forms. His subjects were mostly topographical; his style, soft and delicate. The vitality of line and form and firmer color in his architectural draftsmanship are evidence of his escape from the bondage of convention in the great bulk of the Normandy drawings made in 1817, 1818, and 1820. One hundred etchings from these drawings illustrate the two monumental volumes of The Architectural Antiquities of Normandy, which were published in 1822 with text by Dawson Turner. Landscape art by subsequent painters of the Norwich School was heir to the teaching principles, technical methods, and style of either Crome or Cotman. (The one important exception was Joseph Stannard, who received instruction from Robert Ladbrooke in Norwich and also from paintings he studied in Holland.) Most of the Norwich artists followed the leadership and naturalistic interest of Crome. Cotman, although the pre-eminent exponent of the watercolor technique, exerted far less influence on the school as a whole. But from the latter part of the eighteenth century, the sensitive East Anglian collectors and patrons bought pictures of Netherlandish, Italian, and French tradition. From the Dutch seventeenth-century school came naturalistic realism; from Italy, draftsmanship and emotion; from France, rhythm, delicacy, and grace. A brief inquiry into the state of artistic taste and enthusiasm of East Anglians immediately preceding these developments may be helpful in tracing the origin of Crome’s domestic 6

touch, his firm principles of design, and his variety and progress to maturity. Crome was active at a time when landscape painting was still embryonic. But the art of landscape in Norwich was inseparable from the direction it was following in the rest of East Anglia, and it was developing on a course somewhat comparable to, but less steady than, that of the Dutch landscape painters of the mid seventeenth century: in East Anglia during the late eighteenth century, seventeenth-century Dutch landscape increasingly appealed to the taste of collectors. Pictures by Dutch painters in the Roman tradition—such as those of Batholomeus Breenbergh, Jan Both, Nicolaes Berchem, Karel Dujardin (noted for his “warmer” qualities), Jacob van Ruisdael, Hobbema, Ostade, Ruysdael, van Goyen, van dcr Neer, van de Velde, Cuyp, and other of their naturalistic fellows—were being added to collections in the area. To these older masters may be given credit for inspiring the Norwich School’s appreciation of the scenery of the surrounding countryside. This changing attitude was paralleled in the growing interest throughout England in both nature and nature poetry. Many English painters were busy translating nature in terms of pictures ol Claude and the Poussins. As early as 1794, the English aesthctician, Sir Uvedale Price, added to his essays on the “Sublime” and the “Beautiful” one on the “Picturesque,” a domain par excellence for the landscape painter.5 And three years later, while living as an emigre in exile with the Reverend Bence Sparrow in Bcccles, Suffolk, near Norwich, Francois Rene Chateaubriand (1768-1848) wrote the Lettre sur l’Art du Dessin (Letters on the Art oj Drawing).6 According to Alice Poirier, the theories of Crome, Cotman, and Constable are referred to in the Lettre.7 Prosper Dorbec remarks that these theories are also to be found in certain descriptions of Chateaubriand s Voyage en Amerique and his Genie du Ghristianisme (1802), which were written at the same time.8 The sentiment and taste of the landed proprietors of Norfolk, like those of other English¬ men of high social position, were also changing. Horace Walpole dominated the tastes and influenced the tendencies of collectors and patrons.9 He was the high priest of picture¬ collecting society of the time, at least that portion of society whose rule of taste prevailed from Saint James s Street to Whitehall. Walpole, who had a love for detail and a passion for the minute and unimportant, was innovator, instructor, and final judge. He enjoyed the most exalted reputation of his day as an art historian and critic. “A Sermon on Painting” at the conclusion of the introduction to his Aedes Walpolianae10 summarizes the fashionable 5. Essay on the Picturesque (London, 1794); see in particular Sublime,

Walker J. &

the

Hippie,

Picturesque

The Beautiful,

literary artist and antiquary. On this subject see W. S.

the

Lewis, Horace Walpole (New York, i960), pp. 9, 83,

in Eighteenth-Century

118-27, 131-94; see also Francis Henry Taylor, The

British Aesthetic Theory (Carbondale, 1957). 6. This work, which contains Chateaubriand’s

Taste of Angels (Boston, 1948), pp. 420-43. 10. Walpole published the Aedes, the first of

seminal principles on landscape painting, was not

several works or art, in 1747. It contains A Descrip¬

published until 1828. See Jean Leymarie, French

tion of the Collection of Pictures at Houghton Hall in

Painting, the Nineteenth Century (Geneva, Switzerland,

Norfolk, the Seat of the Right Honorable Sir Robert

1962), p. 99.

Walpole, Earl of Orford, but it is more a room-by¬

7. Les

Idees Artistique

de

Chateaubriand (Paris,

1930), p. 369.

room catalogue than a description. Walpole origi¬ nally printed one hundred copies, publishing later

8. L’Art du Pasage en France (Paris, 1925), pp. 44-49.

editions in 1752 and 1767. See Allen T. Hazen,

9. Horace Walpole, 4th Earl of Orford (17x7-

Bibliography

95), was the pioneer historian of the fine arts of England, an arbiter of the taste of his age, and a

of Horace

Walpole

(New

Haven,

Connecticut, 1948), p. 28. The original manuscript of the Aedes Walpolianae,

7

taste of the period. Crome was aware of the famed eighteenth-century critic, for he owned a volume of Walpole’s Anecdotes of Painting in England.* 11 Like the Walpoles, who were from old Norfolk stock, other landed gentry in the county had been collecting pictures for generations. But to see these pictures one had to go to the country-houses. During the last half of the eighteenth century, fine examples of northern schools were being assembled, in the same manner as the collection of Sir Robert Walpole,12 in

Holkham,

Raynham,

Didlington,

Wolterton,

Langley,

Narford,

and

Ludham.13

Although less sumptuous than that which Walpole had amassed at Houghton Hall in the 1720s and 1730s,14 these collections—works of Claude, Salvatore Rosa, Cornelius Jannsen, Rubens, Rembrandt, and Holbein—were

assembled

with great perception.

From 1760 to 1792,15 pictures from Northern schools reigned paramount in East Anglian collections, whereas works by the Italian masters, in the tide of fashion fifty years earlier, wavered. In the 1780s, at Catton near Norwich,16 the master weaver Thomas Harvey, a member of a prosperous merchant and banking family, collected pictures with great enthusiasm.

a large folio scrapbook, written in Horace Walpole’s

seats are variously described. At Holkham lived the

own hand, is in the Metropolitan Museum of Art,

Earl of Leicester; at Raynham, Lord Townsend; at

New York.

Didlington, Lord Bernier; at Langley, Sir Thomas

11. The catalogue of the Crome sale is dated

Beauchamp; and at Narford, Sir Andrew Fountain;

“ Tuesday Sept, the twenty-fifth, 1821 and following

and at Ludham two life-size, Rembrandt portraits

days” and is entitled “A Catalogue of the Entire

of the Reverend Johannes Elison and his wife,

Valuable Collection of Paintings, Prints, and Books,

Maria Bockenolle, hung in the house of Mr. Daniel

late the property of Mr. J. Crome, Dec. which will

Dover.

be sold at auction by J. Athow at the large room in

14. The Empress Catherine of Russia purchased

Sir Benjamin Wrenche’s Court, Norwich.” Here

the residuum of the Houghton Gallery collection

Walpole’s Anecdotes of Painters, Vol. IV, appears in

between 1764 and 1779 for the sum of 40,555 English

the “Fifth Day’s Sale, Monday, Oct. 1st, 1821 ” as

pounds. The best items had been sold a long time

Lot No. 156, p. 29; as noted, the book is entitled

before. See Gerald Reitlinger, The Economics of Taste

incorrectly in the catalogue. Hereafter, the catalogue

(London, 1961), p. 21.

will be cited as “Catalogue.” Copies of the “Cata¬

15. The years of the 1760s served as a turning

logue ” are located in the British Museum, the Vic¬

point in the history of English taste. This was the

toria and Albert Museum, and the City of Norwich

decade marked by the inaugural of the Royal

Museums.

Academy of Arts on January 2, 1769, by the Acad¬

12. Sir Robert Walpole was the great prime

emy’s first annual exhibition, and by the origin of

minister to George I and George II, the father of

active competition between the London and Paris

Horace Walpole, and the builder of the great palace

art markets. England was later isolated from France

of Palladian revival, Houghton Hall in Norfolk. It

and the Continent by revolution and war. London,

contained Sir Robert’s picture collection, the greatest

as an art center and market, then became the scene of

since the time of Charles I—a veritable treasure of

extraordinary influence on the history of taste. See

Flemish, Italian, Spanish, Dutch masterpieces, and

Reitlinger, op. cit., pp. 3-25.

scores of lesser works. See Lewis, op. cit., p. 148.

16. A part of the Parish of Catton belonged to the

13. These small villages are all in the county of

county of the city of Norwich, and the village out¬

Norfolk, and they range from fifteen to thirty miles

side the walls of the city some two or three miles

from Norwich. See Nikolaus Pevsner, The Buildings

from its center became a favorite colony for the

of England, North-West and South Norfolk (London

wealthy citizens of Norwich.

and

History of the Parish of Catton, in Rye’s Monographs

Beccles,

1962),

and

also

Dawson

Turner,

Outlines in Lithography from a Small Collection of

of Norwich Hamlets,

Pictures (Yarmouth, 1840), pp. 23, 24, where these

p. 236.

8

No.

5

See Walter Rye,

(Norwich,

1919),

Harvey and his fine examples of Dutch, Flemish, and English paintings exerted the most profound impact on Crome and, through him, on Norwich painting. This assemblage of old masters was the most varied and important in the immediate area.17 Another significant addition to the local scene was made when William Smith (1756-1835), a Member of Parliament from Norwich and a man of developed taste, bought The Mill by Rembrandt in 1793 and, two years later, Mrs. Siddons as the Tragic Muse by Reynolds. Also represented in the Smith collection was the Horsemen and Herdsmen with Cattle by Aelbert Cuyp.18 1 Somewhat later, various Norwich dealers and painters, principally William Freeman, a oca picture-dealer; Robert Ladbrooke, a marchand amateur; and the artists John Crome, Daniel Coppin, and John Sell Cotrnan purchased Dutch and English art for their collections! In the case of the,artists, their works were bought more as aids to their painting than as an artist-connoisseur’s cabinet of pictures. Less well-known collectors, Thomas Brightwell, John Patteson, and William Stevenson, bought important Dutch pictures for their houses! The painters van Goyen, van der Neer, Hobbema, Jacob van Ruisdael, and probably Adriaen van de Velde were the more frequently collected Dutch masters; Gainsborough, Morland, and Beechey most often represented the English school. John Browne, a landscape painter who became a member of the Royal Academy, attained some local fame through his ownership of engravings by Poussin, Rubens, and Claude. Among the paintings in the limited collection of the Reverend John Homfray, who lived at Yarmouth, was a picture by Giacomo Tintoretto and several examples of Crome.1® In the same Norfolk town, John Penrice had come into the possession of two Guido Reni’s, Lot and Daughters quitting the City of Sodom and Susannah and the Elders, both from the Falconieri Palace, Ruben’s Judgment of

17. In the Catton House collection, located at

At the time The Mill was purchased, Smith paid

No. 3, Snail Gate, the galaxy of pictures included

500 guineas for the painting, which in 1911 Lord

such works as The Christening Feast by Jan Steen,

Landsdowne sold to P. A. B. Widener for 103,300

now hanging in the Wallace Collection; Landscape

English pounds. The Rembrandt and the Cuyp are

with Cows and The Cottage Door by Gainsborough;

now in the Washington National Gallery (Widener

A Man Feeding a Horse by Cuyp; View of Tivoli by

Collection), and the Reynolds is presently in The

Gaspard Poussin; The Embarkation of St. Ursula by

Huntington Gallery of Art, San Marino, California

Giacomo Tintoretto; Death of Argantis, after Tasso

See William T. Whitley, Artists and Their Friends in

by Parocel; View on the Coast of Baiae by Richard

England,

Wilson; Landscape by Hobbema, Landscape with a

Vol. II, p. 181.

Dog and Hare by Fyt; pictures by Hondikoster [sic],

1700-1799 (London and Boston,

1928),

19. According to a letter from Sydney D. Kitson

Teniers, van Ruysdael; and a diverse collection of

to C. H. Collins Baker, dated November 11, 1933,

engravings and drawings. For further information on

Dawson

Thomas

W.

Homfray owned at various times five pictures by

Thomas

Crome. The Crome Memorial Exhibition, 1821,

Harvey of Catton,” The Connoisseur, English ed.

lists two pictures lent by the Reverend J. Homfray.

(December,

The Embarkation of St. Ursula by Tintoretto was

Harvey,

Hawcroft,

as

“Crome

collector, and

His

see

Francis

Patron:

1959); American ed. (January i960),

pp. 232-37.

Turner

indicates

that

the

Reverend

formerly in the possession of Charles Le Brun and

18. William Smith (1756-1835) was elected to

lastly appeared in the C. J. Palmer sale at 4 South

Parliament on July 2, 1802, for Norwich and again

Quay, Yarmouth, on February 28, 1867 (Lot No.

selected on May 4, 1807. He was reelected in the four

106). This picture had been owned by Thomas

successive Parliaments of 1812, 1818, 1820, and 1826.

Harvey. See John Stacy, Norfolk Tour (Norwich,

Smith was a patron of Opie and Cotrnan, and Rey¬

1829), Vol. I, p. 305.

nolds sometimes dined at his home.

9

Paris, Teniers’s Players of Trictrac, and. a picture by Ostade, formerly owned by Charles Le Brun, which Dawson Turner thought could nowhere be surpassed.20 Dawson Turner, the successful Yarmouth banker, botanist, and antiquary, represented the typical East Anglian collector in Crome’s day. In 1840, he printed for personal distribution one hundred copies of an illustrated catalogue of pictures he had acquired in the preceding decades.21 According to Dickes, Turner had in his possession eleven paintings by Crome, only seven of which are illustrated in the catalogue.22 A note of interest is contained in a memorandum, written in Dawson Turner’s own hand, calling attention to the prices he paid Crome for certain of the paintings.23 It may be presumed that the pictures of the Norwich collectors and those scattered in nearby East Anglian country-houses had some influence on Crome. Certainly, the collection of fine old masters owned by Thomas Harvey of Catton House24 had decisive effects and proved the most profound source of inspiration to him. Through their common interest in painting, a lifelong friendship developed between the two men, and because of the advice and encouragement Harvey gave to Crome, the collector became the young artist’s most valued patron. It was out of this association that both the direction of Crome’s artistic development and his stylistic framework emerged. 20. Turner, op. cit., p. 24. See also Frank Hermann,

contradict the impressions that have prevailed among

“Collecting Classics: William Buchanan’s Memoirs

earlier writers. Their notion of higher prices received

of Painting,” The Connoisseur, Vol. CLXI, No. 650

by Crome for his work has been derived from the

(April, 1966), p. 249.

promulgation of a statement by a certain Tillett, an

21. The collection of Dawson Turner at Yarmouth

early nineteenth-century Norwich antiquary, who

contained works by Giovanni Bellini, Adrian Brou¬

stated that “though he [Crome] seldom received

wer, Jan Breughel, Agostino and Annibal Carracci,

more than fifty pounds for a finished picture.”

Gasper de Crayer, Gerard Dow, Cuyp, Greuze,

Dawson Turner has since compounded this belief,

Guido Reni, Comelis de Heem, Hobbema, Hol¬

when in his “ Memoir ” he mentioned that “ Crome’s

bein, Hondekooter [sic], Bockhorst (Langenjan), del

pictures during the latter part of his life commonly

Mazo, di Ferrara, Pierre Mignard, Thomas Phillips,

sold for fifteen to fifty guineas, and now [1838]

R.A., Gaspard Poussin, Pierre Prud’hon, Pijnacker,

produce higher prices,” yet his own figures paid to

Rubens, Jan Steen, David Teniers the Younger, Titi-

Crome directly tend to grossly disprove such popular

ano Vecelli, van Dyck, Henry Bone, R.A., Adrian

belief. See R. H. Mottram, John Crome of Norwich

van der Werff, Jean Baptiste Monnoyer, Sir David

(London,

Wilke, Richard Wilson, seven pictures by Crome,

“Memoir of Crome,” in John Wodderspoon, John

and several unattributed works. See Turner, loc. cit.

Crome and His Works, 2nd ed., p. 7.

22. Seven pictures by John Crome are illustrated

1931),

p.

104;

and

Dawson

Turner,

The omission of the price Turner paid for Crome’s

and described by Dawson Turner in his Outlines in

The Wensum at Thorpe: Boys Bathing (plate X, fig.

Lithography: View at Hellesdon, Cottage near Norwich,

101), which Turner commissioned “a year or two

Clay Cottage, View on the River near Yarmouth

before his [Crome’s] death, immediately upon his

(Moonrise on the Yare), View near Norwich, Cottage

return from his midsummer journey to London,” is

at Hunstanton, Scene on the River at Norwich (The

noteworthy. See Turner, op. cit., p. 25. For further

Wensum at Thorpe: Boys Bathing). The whereabouts

information, see Appendix E.

of Clay Cottage and View near Norwich is unknown,

24. The first large house on the left side of the road

if indeed they exist. See Turner, op. cit., pp. 13, 14,

leading north from Norwich in the hamlet of

and 26.

Catton was Catton House. It was occupied in 1797

23. The original letter, owned by Mr. Geoffrey

by Thomas Harvey. See Rye, op. cit., p. 236. Also,

P. Barker, London, was copied by Sydney D. Kitson

on Donald and Milne’s map of Norfolk for William

(Cotman’s biographer), and on November n, 1933,

Fader, 1797, the name of Thomas Harvey, Esq., is

it was mailed to C. H. Collins Baker. The content of

printed alongside Catton House, which was de¬

the letter and the prices paid for Crome pictures

molished in 1959.

10

THE CATTON HOUSE ROLE

The intimate nature of Crome’s art can best be understood by relating it to the social and cultural life to which he was exposed during the formative years at Catton House where he absorbed the flavor of Thomas Harvey’s picture collection. Harvey’s personality and affluence, his passion for collecting and painting, and his benevolent interest in the young painter deserves inquiry. Together, these forces are of central importance in the formation of Crome’s early artistic personality; they are its historic roots. They not only ministered to an un¬ developed imagination and aroused powerful emotions but also, and even more importantly, gave vigorous impetus to the creative process—the actual practice of painting. Had Crome never set foot in Catton House, his talent probably would have moved in another direction, and it is highly questionable that he would have left his stamp on hundreds who continued to paint in Norwich and East Anglia. Although Crome s friendship with Thomas Harvey began in 1790 or shortly before, most students of Crome have been under the erroneous impression that his earliest opportunities were based on Harvey s patronage. But James Reeve25 corrected this view and placed the Crome-Harvey association in its proper perspective when he directed attention, as did Dawson Turner some years before, to earlier patronage Crome received from Messrs. Smith and Jagger, Norwich printsellers on London Street. When he could afford them, Crome had bought prints from their shop, and there he had also exhibited and disposed of some sketches in his obscure beginnings. It was through the printsellers that Crome and his sketches attracted the attention of Thomas Harvey, also an amateur painter.26 Notwithstanding the Smith-Jagger patronage, Harvey’s perceptive kindness was the beginning of Crome’s development in those artistic channels from which his originality springs and upon which his reputation rests. Harvey proved a most valuable friend; he was a painting companion and, as connoisseur and collector, the source of varied privileges extended to Crome. For instance, he may have introduced Crome to Sir William Beechey during one of his visits to Catton. It has been suggested by H. S. Theobald that he may have met John Opie at Catton and here also learned the rudiments of etching.27 Being an experienced amateur painter, Harvey may have given some instruction in painting to Crome, who was free to study and copy from the choice collection hanging at Catton House. Harvey’s intimate friendship and patronage, accompanied by a reciprocal understanding between the two men, was not brought into focus until the analytical writings of W. F. Dickes and C. H. Collins Baker, and more recently by F. W. Hawcroft.28 Although Hawcroft adroitly associates certain 25. James

Reeve

(1833-1920)

was

the

third

curator of the Castle Museum, Norwich. He was notoriously

plainspoken

in

his

opinions

upon

26. W. F. Dickes, The Norwich School of Painting (London and Norwich, 1905), p. 22. 27. For Sir William Beechey see Laurence Binyon,

Portfolio (April,

spurious Crome attributions, as his knowledge of

“Crome

Crome and of other members of the Norwich

pp. 10-12; for John Opie see Henry S. Theobald,

School was profound

and unequaled. A Reeve

comment or attribution among students of the Norwich School has virtually become acceptable and unchallengeable.

He notes the sequence of

Crome’s patrons in his dossier deposited in the

and

Cotman,”

1897),

Crome’s Etchings (London and New York, 1906), pp. 2-3. 28. See Dickes, op. cit., pp. 22-26; C. H. Collins Baker, Crome (London, 1921), pp. 5-8; Francis W. Hawcroft, op. cit., pp. 232-37.

British Museum Print Room (nos. 167-C4, 167-C5, 167-C8, and 167-C9).

II

origins of Crome’s painting from pictures in Harvey’s collection, he seems to ignore the personal values which Crome received from the companionship and hospitality of the polished Harvey, a gentleman of wealth who shared the privileges of the “nobility and higher gentry.”29 Yet we must consider these aspects of their association if we are to appraise fully the benefits which Crome received from Harvey. The Crome of this period was described by Sir William Beechey in a letter written much later: Crome, when I first saw him, must have been about twenty years old, and a very awkward, uninformed country lad, but extremely shrewd in all his remarks upon Art, though he wanted words and terms to express his meaning. As often as he came to town [London] he never failed to call upon me and to get what information I was able to give him upon the subject of that particular branch of Art which he had made his study. His visits were very frequent, and all his time was spent in my painting room when I was not particularly engaged. He improved so rapidly that he delighted and astonished me. He always dined and spent his evenings with me.30 Through his marriage to a Dutch-born girl, Anne Twiss,31 the daughter of an English merchant who settled in Rotterdam, Harvey was provided with the opportunity to purchase a number of Dutch masters’ works. Because of his social position and his status in the worlds of art, of the theater, and of sophisticated society, Harvey was in a position to introduce Crome to other prominent people of Norwich and the county. Besides his acquaintance with Sir William Beechey and John Opie, both members of the Royal Academy, Harvey was an intimate friend of Mrs. Sarah Siddons. In 1838 Dawson Turner, writing of his personal friend, Thomas Harvey, described him as follows: —a gentleman who, to large property, added a nobility of spirit calculated to do honour to any gifts of fortune. Elegance of mind, refinement of manners and pursuits, courteous¬ ness towards his equals, liberality and kindness towards his inferiors, in an eminent degree distinguished Mr. Harvey. These latter qualities he exercised towards Crome at that early age, and continued to do so as long as he lived. . . .32 Such personal qualities, we may surmise, would certainly affect the young Crome. To what specific forces may we attribute the shaping of Crome’s artistry? It has been suggested that the countryside about Norwich was more important than the influence of Catton House.33 In my view, however, the more striking features of Crome’s beginnings

29. John Steegman, Consort of Taste (London, 1950), p.

49-

she is so named in “Notes on the Harvey family compiled by Lieut. Col. John Robert Harvey of

30. Wodderspoon, op. cit., p. 6.

Holmwood, Thorpe, Norwich,” 1912, a manuscript

31. Anne Twiss was a sister of Richard Twiss,

in the possession of the City of Norwich Museums.

author of Travels through Portugal and Spain in 1 yy2

Once more, on the back of a portrait of Thomas

and lyyj (London, 1775) and Tours in Ireland in lyyy,

Harvey, Esq., in the City of Norwich Museums, an

(London, 1776), and of Francis Twiss, who pub¬

old label states that the sitter “married Anne Twiss.”

lished Complete Verbal Index of the Plays of Shake¬

32. Wodderspoon, op. cit., p. 6.

speare, 2 vols. (London, 1805). Often in the literature

33. Mottram, op. cit., pp. 50-51.

she is erroneously referred to as Lydia; for example.

12

grew out of his responsiveness to the paintings he observed in Harvey’s collection. It would not be surprising if a man as perceptive as Crome should develop an exuberant interest in landscape painting as a result of experiencing the landscapes of the old masters. Crome’s earliest work reveals his artistic awareness during these years. Yet the products of the early 1790s are uncertain, and conclusions about them must remain in abeyance. That a number of tentative experiments and confused efforts had been discarded is to be presumed. The pictures he exhibited in the Norwich Society of Artists’ Exhibition of 1806, The Cow Tower on the Swannery Meadow, Norwich (fig. 1) or A Cart Shed at Melton, Norfolk (fig. 6) probably typify Crome s early work in oil. These compositions, in the light of his later style, are barely recognizable to anyone except the historian in search of origins. Harvey’s patronage began shortly before 1790 after Crome had decided to become a serious artist and continued into 1798 when Mrs. John Opie reported having seen him painting at Catton House.34 Dawson Turner stated that Harvey encouraged Crome to copy The Cottage Door, a celebrated landscape of Gainsborough’s London period (1774—85), while the picture was at Catton.35 If this is so, then Crome’s interpretation, The Blacksmith’s Shop, Hingham (fig. 34), must have been painted before 1807, the year Harvey disposed of the Gainsborough (probably only a short time before Crome worked from it). Moreover, this incident of active patronage attributed to Harvey is the most important one recorded after 1798. Even though there is no historical evidence of other instances of assistance from Harvey to Crome, it seems likely that he dispensed advice, various favors, encouragement to become a local drawing master, and probably monetary loans. Harvey, plagued by financial and business reverses between 1807 and 1815, was forced to dispose of a substantial number of pictures; his years as a collector and connoisseur had ended. While he was still living at Catton in 1818, Harvey was a recipient of a grant of alms from the church, and the following year he moved to Norwich, where he died “at his residence in the Close.

By this time Crome had entered the mature period of his artistic development

and was the most popular and busy drawing master in the county. The availability to Crome of a superior art collection was a splendid starting-point for the young artist. The story behind certain of these pictures—especially Richard Wilson’s View on the Coast of Baiae,37 Thomas Gainsborough’s The Cottage Door, and Meindert Hobbema’s Landscape,38—provides us with a sidelight upon a struggling, self-trained artist and his

34. This observation is mentioned in a letter of

sition is known from a direct copy by Crome (fig. 2).

inquiry from Amelia Alderson Opie (Mrs. John

Although the picture left Catton House to become

Opie) of Norwich to Dawson Turner. See Dickes,

a part of the Turner collection at Yarmouth, it would

op. cit., pp. 32-33. 35. Ellis K. Waterhouse, Gainsborough (London,

have been accessible to Crome throughout his career. This is also implied by Dawson Turner’s reference to

1958), pp- 29-30, 117, cat. no. 941, reproduced in

Crome, as “ having been for many years a drawing

plate 203.

master in my family.” Turner’s two eldest daughters

36. The Norfolk Chronicle and Norwich Gazette for

were regular pupils in 1811, and Crome was an

Saturday May 15, 1819, states that Harvey died the

invited

previous Thursday.

January, 1813. See Sydney D. Kitson, The Life of

37. Harvey purchased the Wilson landscape about

guest

in

Turner’s

Yarmouth

house

in

John Sell Cotman (London, 1937), pp. 155-56.

1780 and sold it to Dawson Turner around 1810. The

38. This Landscape by Hobbema was obtained by

picture remained in his possession until 1840 (Turner,

Dawson Turner from Thomas Harvey “about the

op. cit., p. 91). Since this date, clues to its whereabouts

year 1815, and by whom it had been imported into

have been wanting. Nonetheless, the Wilson compo¬

England

a

considerable

time

previously.”

The

13

developing artistic ideas. Both Harvey and his collection changed young Crome’s character: they liberated his mind; they refined and broadened his choice of subjects; they improved his taste and sharpened his aesthetic perception; they spurred his enthusiasm and encouraged self-criticism; and they deepened his sensibilities toward congenial realities of nature sur¬ rounding him. Had Harvey contributed no more than bits of technical knowledge in the use of oils or the encouraging advice which was responsible for helping Crome launch his career as a drawing master, his behavior would have been generous. But because of the untiring sympathy, the ardor for picture collection, and the appetite for painting that highlighted his prosperous years, Thomas Harvey set free the enthusiasm in Crome that provoked his earliest critical attitudes. Crome’s mind absorbed the mysteries and power of a work of art only by confronting it, by examining it, by exposing himself to it directly: in this manner he ac¬ quainted himself with its vocabulary and style. Technique and sentiment were delicately balanced: the illusion of natural form and pictorial richness found a congenial response from the impressions of nature itself; and his sense of direction was enriched when he most needed it. Considerable credit, therefore, must be given Thomas Harvey for nourishing Crome on this compound of pictorial example, critical stylistic analysis, and traditional culture. picture is presently in the Biirhle Collection, Zurich.

Verzeichnis ..., (Esslingen, Paris, London, 1911),

See Turner, op. cit., p. 39; for further information see

vol. IV, p. 445, no. 224. Here the picture is listed

C. Hofstede de Groot, Beschreibendes und Kritisches

under the title Landschaft mit undichten Wald.

14

CHAPTER II

The Aesthetic Theory of Crome: Origin and Application

THEORY OF EXPRESSION

Apart from Crome’s works of art, so symbolic of his personality, few sources exist that reflect his ideas on art or beauty. Crome kept no diaries or memoirs, nor is there any evidence that he wrote essays or notes on art. He left behind only five letters,1 and the conversations he may have had with students, confreres, and friends were never recorded. i. The earliest surviving letter by Crome is dated

able to be with you on Monday.” This letter is

November 29, 1809. It is written to Dawson Turner,

printed in the Royal Academy, Jupp Grangerized

Esq., of Yarmouth, defending Crome’s inability to

Catalogues, Vol. VIII (1806), p. 52. For further

fulfill his teaching obligation in the Turner house¬

comment on this letter, which is here published for

hold, as previously planned: “the most sharp attack

the first time, see John Gage, “ Documents of Crome

of the Rheumatic gout on my right side so as to

and Cotman,” The Burlington Magazine, Vol. CXI,

take away all strength and rest” is the excuse given

No. 793 (April, 1969), pp. 215-16.

by Crome. He tells Turner that “I hope I shall be

The second letter, dated July 3, 1814, is written

15

In contrast, his predecessor, Gainsborough, and his contemporaries, Cotman and Constable, were natural letter-writers. Their voluminous correspondence is a fruitful source for an assessment of their character and their art. When compared with the famous contributions of Reynolds* 2 or with the less renowned teachings of Opie,3 Turner,4 or Constable,5 Crome s scanty commentary on art is negligible. Oddly enough, although he was a drawing master in Norwich and an art teacher in the local grammar school, and in spite of his close association with learned men, and the substantial and scholarly library in his house which may have influenced him,6 Crome apparently had no interest in writing art criticism or in writing of any kind. This negative attitude may be explained by the lack of two basic qualifications: innate literary talent and the acquired facility which comes from exposure to formal schooling. Notwithstanding the scarcity of Crome’s writing, his ideas on painting and his views on beauty emerge from a little-known and inaccurately published letter,7 which touches upon from Norwich to James Stark and tells of a recent

(1807-37). The first lecture was given January 7,

visit to Ipswich where Crome and his eldest son,

1811; the remaining ones, between January 7, 1828

the

and February 11, 1828. The manuscripts for these

beautiful river scenery near Harwich and advises

lectures are in the British Museum (Manuscript

Stark to paint and continue his studies near town

Department,

John Bemey,

made sketches.

He describes

(London). This letter is among “Letters of Artists,”

W. T.

belonging to

Burlington

the late Mr.

Fritz Lugt,

Institut

Neerlandais, Paris.

Additional MSS.

Whitley,

46151).

Also see

“Turner as a Lecturer,”

Magazine,

Vol.

XXII

The

(1912-13),

pp. 205-8.

A third letter, dated October io, 1814, is written

5. John Constable delivered four lectures in 1836

from Paris to “Dear wife” (Phoebe), briefly de¬

at the Royal Institution of Great Britain. The series

scribing his immediate impression of the city. He

was entitled “The History of Landscape Painting”

assures her of his intention of making the journey

and was announced as follows: “Lecture 1st, May

pay,

Crome

26th—The Origin of Landscape,” “Lecture 2nd,

emphasizes the object of his visit: to see the “ Tuiler-

stressing particularly his

frugality.

June 2nd—Establishment of Landscape,” “Lecture

ies.” This letter is in the City of Norwich Museums,

3rd, June 9th—Landscape of the Dutch and Flemish

Colman Collection, no. 235.951. The fourth letter

School,” and “Lecture 4th, June 16th—The Decline

is dated December 28, 1816, and is to his son, John

and Revival of Art.” See C. R. Leslie, Memoirs of

Berney, who is visiting Paris. Other than reminding

the Life of John Constable, Esq., R.A. (London, 1843),

John to buy some oil of carnation, the content

pp. 137-48.

of the letter is folksy and full of banter. The fifth

6. The following is a selected list of books sold at

letter is reproduced in the present chapter (pp.

auction after Crome’s death. They are representative

17-18) and is in the possession of the British Mu¬

samples

seum Additional MSS. No. 43830, 73. This letter

Johnson’s Lines of Poets, Spencer’s Poetical Works,

is also reported in the British Museum Quarterly,

Murphy’s Life of Garrick, Plutarch Lives, Boydell’s

Vol. IX, No. 2 (London, December, 1934), pp.

Shakespeare, and many others of equal erudition. See

39-40.

“A Catalogue of the Entire Valuable Collection of

2. Sir Joshua Reynolds, Discourses on Art, ed. Robert H. Wark (San Marino, California, 1959).

1807:

“Design”

on February

Swift’s Poems,

Paintings, Prints, and Books, late the property of Mr. J. Crome, Dec. which will be sold at auction by

3. John Opie delivered four lectures to the Royal Academy in

of his personal library:

J. Athow at the large room in Sir Benjamin Wrench’s

16,

Court, Norwich.” The library appears in the “Fifth

“Invention’ on February 23, “Chiaroscuro” on

Day’s Sale, Monday, Oct. 1st, 1821, ” as Lot Nos. 1-

March 3, and “Colouring” on March 9. See Ada

188, pp. 23-30.

Earland, John Opie and His Circle (London, 1911), pp. 221-23.

7. This letter is written across the width of white cartridge drawing paper and is folded into twelve-

4. J. M. W. Turner gave a series of six lectures at

and-one-half-inch square leaves. It appeared in print

the Royal Academy as Professor of Perspective

in the memoirs prefacing the “Catalogue of the

16

significant aspects of both his stylistic criticism and his aesthetic creed. When his thoughts are translated into the principles of art that he employed, they remain valid and instructive for artists today. Since this letter is the only written expression of Crome’s thought which deserves to be assessed in relation to his art, it is reproduced here in its entirety and without change:

Jan Norwich,

1816. Friend James I received your kind letter and feel much pleased at your approving of my Picture, I feel you will see too many errors for a Painter of my long practice and at my time in life. However, there are parts in it you like, I have no doubt. I am happy you are likely to visit us (but mum is the order of the day about that concern). I wish it might be so, we should be happy to see you in Norwich. In your letter you wished me to give you my opinion of your picture. I should have liked it better, if you had made it more of a whole, that is, the Trees stronger, the sky running from them in shadow up to the opposite corner, That might have produced what I think it wanted, and have made it much less a too picture effect. I think I hear you say this fellow is very Vain and that nothing is right that does not suit his eye. But be assured what I have said I thought on first sight, it strengthened me in that opinion every time I looked at it. Honesty my Boy. So much for what it wanted. But how pleased I was to see so much improvement in the figures. So unlike our Norwich School—I might say they are good. Your boat was too small for them (you see I am at it again). But to return the water pleases me, and I think it would not want much alteration in the sky. I cannot let your sky go off without some observation. I think the character of your clouds too affected that is, too much of some of our Mordern [sic] Painters who mistake some of our great masters because they sometimes put in some of those round characters of clouds; they must do the same. But if you look at any of their skys [sic] they either assist in the composition or make some figure in the picture (nay sometimes play the first fiddle). I have seen this in Wovermans [sic] and many others I could mention. Breath [sic] must be attended to, if you paint but a muscle give it breath [sic]. Your doing the same by the sky making parts broad and of a good shape that they may come in with your composition forming one grand plan of light and shade. This must always please a good eye, and keep the attention of the Spectator and give delight to everyone. Trifles in nature must be over¬ looked that we may have our feelings raised by seeing the whole picture at a glance, not knowing how or why we are so charmed. I have written you a long rigamarole story about giving dignity to whatever you paint. I fear so long, that I should be scarcely able to understand what I mean myself You will, I hope take the word for the deed and, at the same time forgive all faults in diction, grammar, spelling, &c, &c., &c. . .. Sixth Exhibition of the Norwich Art Circle—Works

incompletely and changed in the text by both Collins

of the Late James Stark,” June, 1886. Later, it was

Baker and LL M. Cundall. See C. H. Collins Baker,

reprinted with grammatical changes by Dickes. See

Crome (London, 1921), pp. 63-64; and also in H. M.

W.

F.

Dickes,

The Norwich School of Painting

Cundall,

“The Norwich School,” ed.

Geoffrey

The Studio (London, Paris, New York,

(London, 1905), pp. n 1-12. Excerpts from the letter,

Holme,

reproduced and altered, appear in Binyon’s text. See

1920), p. 25. The letter, as amended in Dickes, is

Laurence Binyon, “ Crome and Cotman,” Portfolio

reproduced in D.

(London, 1897), p. 46. The letter is also published

(London, 1968), pp. 90-91.

and T. Clifford, John Crome

17

We have heard from John, I believe he is petrified from having seen the French School. He says in his letter something about Tea tray Painters. I believe most of those who visit them whistle the same note, so much for the French Artists. I hope they will arrive safe, our happiness would be more complete if your Tongue would be heard among us. Parlezvous, my boy will be echoed from garrett [s/c] to cellar in my house. I think I hear Vincent say John (Why John what damned French rascal was that, that passed us just now, why Lord look at his whiskers, why he must be a Don Cossack.) They had a charming passage over, Vincent belshing

[he]

as loud as the Steam Packet,

much to the discomforture of some of the other passengers. John did not say how Steel was in the passage but I believe they were all bad alike. Sunday night. I put this letter in my small paper epistle that the boys are by my fireside going to take a glass of wine, quite well and happy. I wish you were with us. I have nothing more to say. Only wishing you health and comfort, believe me Dear James. Yours Sec. See. John Crome Friend James have the goodness to put these note in the post. John will write you in a day or two. We have just heard of the death of Mrs. Sharp.

On the envelope appears the following: “James Stark Esq.[,] 85 Newman Streetf,] London.”8 There is a glimpse here of the kind of instruction James Stark and his fellow pupils received from their master. Moreover, the tone of the letter provides us with an unusual under¬ standing of Crome’s critical ability and presents his modesty more vividly than any bio¬ grapher could do. Though he was neither well read nor a profound thinker, the ideas he expressed contain much common sense, and there is candor in his judgment. The judicious and friendly critique of Stark’s picture suggests the advice of a painter-teacher whose ideas have seasoned and who is experienced in his craft. Aritistic sensibility, sound judgment, and zealous practice at painting were the primary sources of Crome’s critical commentary. His ideas were born of experience and introspection, not of erudition. He expresses himself in lively, unselfconscious, and colloquial diction, conveying warm devotion and enthusiasm. His tone changes from sportive wit to high seriousness from sentence to sentence. Always full of good humor and natural cheer, Crome reveals a happy devotion to his family and a convi¬ vial, warmhearted character. So seldom did Crome express himself in writing that it would seem that his social life did not demand correspondence. Neither the struggle for recognition nor the attempt to obtain payment for infrequent completed commissions, which might have acted as an incentive for correspondence, were factors in inciting him to write. Even the rendering of bills for 8. The letter and envelope, addressed to James

Berney Crome (1794-1842), Crome’s eldest son, and

Stark (1794-1859), with erasures and deleted punc¬

to George Vincent (1796-1831?), longtime artist-

tuation marks from abusive handling, is in the

friend. Both were pupils of the elder Crome and

British Museum, Additional MSS. No. 43830, 73.

notable Norwich School landscape painters. “ Steel”

Stark took drawing lessons from John Crome, but

is B. Steel, Norwich surgeon, who married Hannah

now was enrolled in the Royal Academy Schools.

Crome (1804-47), fifth daughter and seventh child

He became an accomplished member of the Norwich

of John Crome, before her second marriage to John

School.

Bilham.

18

“John”

and

“Vincent”

refer

to John

commercial or tutorial services occasioned no written intercourse beyond simple itemiza¬ tion.9 Nor was he an aggressive artist, fired by academic theories or controversial discussions of aesthetics at the fortnightly meetings of the Norwich Society of Artists. In short, as far as the evidence goes, Crome was a man of few critical words. Yet Crome s criticism of Stark s picture is a valuable compendium of artistic suggestions and reveals the basis of his working practices. It demonstrates that he was a sensitive observer with an unusual understanding of the problems of composition and with an ability to make a trenchant analysis of its complexities. Between the portion of the letter containing the remarks about improving the unity of the design and that concerning the lofty purpose of a picture, we find a statement of his guiding principles of art and the methods he used to apply them. Crome firmly believed that although a painting should possess artistic qualities, it should look like nature and not like a picture; that is, nature should be observed in terms of form, line, and mass and not in terms of derivative characteristics and mannerisms. He cautioned by inference that one should be faithful to nature at all times. Particularly impressed by the improvement in Stark s drawing of figures, he commented on their dramatic contrast with those of term

our Norwich School.” (As far as we know, this is the first written use of the

Norwich School

in the history of art.) Crome also noted the contrast in size between

the boat and the figures, which elicited objections on the grounds of disproportion, observing at the same time the necessity to avoid stylistic affectation in the handling of cloud forms. These, he insisted, as other objects within the composition, should make a specific contribu¬ tion and not be inserted gratuitously. Crome’s comment, “I should have liked it [the composition] better, if you had made it more of a whole” (my italics), is a frank plea for unity in design. This warning against weakness in perspective and artificiality was probably due to Stark’s lack of emphasis on atmospheric luminosity, and it underscores a major stylistic difference between the work of the former pupil and that of the master. Crome set a standard for improving the harmony of the parts so that they formed a consistent whole without resort to technical pretense. His reality was never a caricature of truth nor a dramatization of nature’s changing intangible forms; it was the observation of natural fact, originality born of the search for the faithful reproduction of the actualities of nature. Crome expounded a fundamental of his artistic creed when he pointed out that breadth in composition must receive utmost consideration—for both tangible as well as intangible effects—in order to form an aesthetic arrangement ruled by “one grand plan of light and shade.” The last bit of advice to Stark centers on the judicious omission of that which is unnecessary and distracting to the eye in order that the picture space contain only those elements consecrated to natural and austere nobility. Crome’s working secrets, pithily set forth in his remarks to Stark, are deceptive in their simplicity. Yet the comprehension of these basic principles is as indispensable “as a compass on the journey of the critic of style.”10 9. An undated bill charged to “ Master Sparshall’s

lettering, and painting of certain inn signs. This bill

Account ” for drawing materials and tutorial services

is one of the few undoubted documents bearing the

illustrates the brevity of a Crome transaction. See

signature of John Crome. It is preserved in the

R. H. Mottram, John Crome of Norwich (London,

Department of Prints and Drawings, the British

1931), p. 71. Another handwritten, receipted, and

Museum Print Room Acc. No. 167-C4.

signed bill, dated May 27, 1803, in the amount of two pounds and four shillings, itemizes the gilding,

10. MaxJ. Friedlander, On Art and Connoisseurship (London, 1942), p. 200.

19

FROM THEORY TO METHODS AND STYLE

Crome had changed his attitude toward nature many years before the letter to Stark. His chief concern shifted to a new precision in the treatment of natural phenomena, especially natural effects (air, light, shadow), and equally to a new interest in design fundamentals (composition, tone control, proportion and rhythm, plastic illusion). This shift from less to more spirited realistic trends focused on the fusion of light and air and value contrasts—a change which was the earliest indication of original expression—revealed a new emphasis on subject matter simultaneously with a strengthening of aesthetic emotion. Implicit in this newly liberated expression was a change in the character of Crome’s perceptions. His emotional response drew nurture from the natural world to which he was always bound, and from that world emerged the aesthetic sensitivity and pictorial methods of disciplined sentiment. In this respect, Crome, unlike Turner, was anything but an impulsive artist. He was not only a subjective observer but also a contemplative one. He brought the leisurely manner and tenderness that characterized him as a person, qualities he had in common with Pissarro and Corot, to his work, to which, on weekends and holidays, he devoted many hours in the spring, summer, and fall. The interrelationship of realistic form and that invaluable characteristic of great land¬ scape—the accidental look of nature—in Crome’s painting was probably achieved as early if not before that of either Turner or Constable; indeed, it points to the physiological origin of Impressionism—seeing naturally and painting as simply as the artist sees. Yet the relation between form and content in Crome’s realism differs entirely from the Impressionist inter¬ pretation of the same sort of objects. The details of nature in Impressionism are not restrained by form or bound to it in order to create a unified effect; for Crome, there was no realistic detail in the pictorial scheme of the subject matter or in the portrayal of light. Reality and fidelity to natural form seemed like opposite alternatives to Crome: they had altogether different motivation and values. In the rendering of the same components of nature (the walk, the tremor, the intermingling of passers-by, the trembling of leaves, the shimmering of water, the vibration of light-filled air), relative restraint was prerequisite for eliciting the desired mood acceptable to his temperament and skill. All external evidence points to the conclusion that Crome’s art is rooted quite obviously in an intensely private emotionalism. The fusion of love of the observed natural fact and depth of feeling for inanimate effects (air, light, shadow) furnished the emotional sustenance to nourish his aim of realism. From this unity, the evolution and plurality of his style flowered. From it, his energy and sensuality blended, as can be witnessed in The Beaters (plate IV, fig. 43), Moonrise on the Yare (fig. 33), and Marlingford Grove (plate IX, fig. 77). Whatever the theme from nature, Crome creates the feeling, the affectionate familiarity, and the tranquillity that belong to a time when the world was young. Our understanding of the principles of Crome’s work depends on our realization that, for him, painting objects in nature was the expression of creative pictorial equivalents, sub¬ stitutes for nature, or of the direct interpretation of reality. These representations, because they were uninfluenced by prevailing conventions, appear to be naive and coarse, lacking in the complexities of more sophisticated styles. Unlike Gainsborough’s decorative flourish and nervous vitality or Constable’s constant awareness of style as a prerequisite to sketching originality, Crome evolved a style by devising tonal divisions and by fusing tone and color 20

with exuberant and distinctive brushwork. In technical terms, the painting of Gainsborough is flowing and rhythmic, that of Constable is direct and “ unillusionistic,”11 and that of Crome is down-to-earth and strongly illusionistic. Crome shows mastery over the control of balance and perspective in the treatment of spatial intervals, relationships, and outlines of form without sacrificing interest in color, light and air, and shadow effects. These qualities in the classic ruins of the Composition in the Style of Wilson (fig. 13) affirm this harmony and are easy to recognize. Effective color and the guarded use of light and dark dominate different moods and styles, as typified in Canow Abbey (fig. 21), Ruins, Evening (fig. 42), and The Blacksmith’s Shop, Hingham (fig. 34). Yet these values, with the ambience of atmosphere indicated, are the real vehicles for obtaining unity between the hidden and the observed facts of nature. Crome’s reliance on the expressive power of contrast to put objects in proper relief and to create the illusion of pictorial depth was the method he used to avoid affectation within convention. As much as his skills permitted, he avoids imitation, except in a creative way, as he differentiates and broadens the function of this pictorial device in his steady, but often uneven, growth. But in spite of the periodic use of a bolder palette, the tendency to heighten mood, and the continued search for compositional spaciousness, Crome was disinclined toward the romantic characteristics which later infused English art. Although similar inspiration nour¬ ished both Crome and Constable, it was entirely through the latter artist that these elements influenced French romantic art. Unlike Constable’s powerful feeling for his native country¬ side, which has come to be known as “the Constable country,” Crome expressed his love for the scenery of Norfolk with a euphoric commitment to the dynamic qualities of nature, stripped of romanticism, except for that which remains in the beauty of its self-contained Englishness. This contrast stresses the essential differences between the two artists. All observed evidence suggests that Crome’s art is a fascinating exercise in illusionist representa¬ tion. His explicit sensitivity to the actualities of nature and a faculty for perceiving the aesthetic significance of inanimate effects (atmospheric drift, shifting light, receding cloud forms) furnished the emotional sustenance to nourish his illusionistic approach to natural form. It differed from Constable’s studied precision of the observed fact counter-pointed against his Wordsworthian attitude toward nature. Crome mingled observation and memory to preserve the interpretation of nature. His realism evolved from experience, from setting down what he saw, felt, thought, learned, and even imagined about the realities of nature. He set out to produce scenes naturally which quickened emotion, and he gave allegiance to a style that interpreted the world about him with dignified objectivity and serenity. One of Crome’s statements has become a classic subject of speculation: I should have liked it better, if you had made it more of a whole, that is, the Trees stronger, the sky running from them in shadow up to the opposite corner. That might have pro¬ duced what I think it wanted, and have made it a much less a too picture effect, (my italics) A “too picture effect” was regarded by Laurence Binyon as an effect seen in conventional pictures of Crome but wanting in unity.12 It was interpreted by Sir Charles Holmes to mean 11. Michael Kitson, “John Constable, 1810-1816:

12. Binyon, op. cit., p. 47, n. 1.

A Chronological Study,” Journal of the Warburg and

Courtauld Institute, Vol. XX Nos. 3-4 (1957), p. 352, n. 61.

21

that Crome’s composition is so disconnected as to be separable into two designs.13 Based solely on stylistic comparisons of patterning in Crome’s design, I suggest that in modern idiom the tantalizing phrase actually means much less of a too picture like effect—that is, the picture under consideration was derivative, a product appealing to popular taste, but not an original artistic conception. The belief of Collins Baker that “he [Crome] stands with the four or five greatest painters for the very reason that his best and most representative work is unlike any picture effect, whether by another artist or by Crome himself” is more accurate when the master is compared with other naturalist painters.14 A close look at Crome’s landscape organization suggests that earlier explanations of this much-discussed expression have been unrealistic and that the interpretive analysis of his compositions have been too casual and often inadequate. In truth, Crome combined form, line, mass, and color into deceptively simple patterns with which the motifs are coherently unified into one realistic conception. The obvious tendency of Crome to adhere to traditional methods and style and his rela¬ tive indifference to contemporary artistic trends are not too difficult to correlate with his whole artistic plan. This he achieved by avoiding the contrasting and scientific particularities of Constable or the generalities and extreme vagueries of Turner. Crome’s objective was to give expression to his own delight in the rural scenery of native Norfolk fields, made appealing by the natural stillness of streams and wondrous clouds and by the signs of human occupation—the boats and the jetty, the cottage and the country lane. The more we know about the choice of subjects and materials, and about their use, the more complete will be our understanding of how he applied them to fulfill his aims. These aspects of Crome’s practices furnish the basis for the analysis of any single work. The subject matter is generally painted directly on the canvas: the natural instinct of Crome was to use materials economically. He rarely prepared his pictures through prelimi¬ nary sketches, drawings, or other studies of individual motifs.15 Such a practice was not altogether new in the history of English landscape painting; it was a habit he shared with Wilson, Gainsborough, and Morland. However, when on occasion Crome resorted to preliminary drawings preparatory to a final effort, such practice was never accidental or motivated by pleasurable self-indulgence; it was always premeditated and purposeful. In at least one instance, the etching Deepham, near Hingham (fig. 218), was closely copied in the Tate Gallery’s picture, Hingham Lane Scene, Norfolk (fig. 60). In another instance—the soft pencil sketch of The Yare at Thorpe, Norwich (fig. 25)—he first drew the essentials, the contrast of sunlight and dark form and the movement of atmosphere, which he later developed as full-scale characteristics in a painting. By his command of compressed statement and dramatic 13. Charles J. Holmes, Introduction, in Collins Baker, op. cit., p. xxv.

(b) The Blacksmith’s Shop, Hingham (fig. 175 and fig. 176), watercolors;

14. Collins Baker, op. cit., pp. 67, 68.

(c) By the Roadside (fig. 180), watercolor;

15. The following watercolors and drawings are

(d) Willow Tree near Mr. Weston’s House (fig.

conspicuous examples which show comparatively little revision compared with related motifs or com¬ pleted paintings. Virtually each production tabulated

I95)» pencil drawing; (e) Plant Study: A Burdock (fig. 204), pencil drawing;

here has a counterpart in a painting with a somewhat

(f) A Boatload (fig. 210), watercolor;

related title:

(g) The Glade Cottage (fig. 209), watercolor;

(a) On the River at Thorpe, near Norwich (fig. 165), pencil drawing;

22

(h) Wroxham Regatta (fig. 211), watercolor.

effect in these media, Crome achieved as a draftsman a unique and effective method of expression. When comparing Crome with Constable in his use of the pencil, we must keep in mind that Constable could analyze what was lacking in his predecessors’ work and then would practice drawing in a series of stages, translating instantaneous visions into large canvases with great thought and skill. Indeed, Constable regarded drawings as an integral part of his working process, these led to oil sketches which in turn served as working guides for his big Academy pictures. At no time did Crome show evidence of such an intellectual or analytical approach, nor did he define the subjects he wished to perfect. Tenacity of purpose was the keynote of his artistic integrity, and upon this he based his work. Skill in the use of space composition and spatial combinations of tonal contrast and light— and-shade effects came slow to Crome—no surprise if we reckon with the problem of teaching oneself by adding small bits of knowledge from various sources at uncertain intervals of time. But he remained substantially faithful to an emphasis on deep space such as one observes in Hobbema s painting, which was like Crome’s own. He resorted to the obvious for improving perspective, using a method by which aerial space projects atmosphere, light fuses with air, nd receding cloud forms approach the horizon. Gradually, he modified the pictorial value of individual elements by expanding the use of light and shade, often diluting the latter to vary the scale of tonal contrast, depending less on color values. Tone, color, and the handling of paint were fused to produce such outstanding works as The Glade Cottage (fig. 102), Norwich River: Afternoon (plate XIII, fig. 108), and Yarmouth Water Frolic (plate XV, fig. no), which make subtle use of subdued light and shade. With The Poringland Oak (fig. 105), Marlingford Grove (plate IX, fig. 77), and Mousehold Heath, Norwich (plate XIV, fig. 109), Crome ventured into larger, more ambitious compositions, concentrating on improving the union of air and space with silvery pale blue and ambient light. From about 1806 to 1820, he painted View near Weymouth (fig. 26), Moonrise on the Yare (fig. 33), The Beaters (plate IV, fig. 43), Back of the New Mills, Norwich (fig. 46), New Mills: Men Wading (plate VI, fig. 55), and a number of other pictures of varying importance whose tonal gradations formed the basis for improving the compositional relation between solid objects and atmospheric effects. In general, Crome’s use of space is relatively simple: motifs are arranged, alone or in combination, in easily determined planes. Often he depended upon a receding arrangement of objects, placing them in a gentle curve to gain emphasis in depth perception. Using the up¬ right position of objects, such as trees, natural intervals appear to separate motifs, giving to them the illusion of truth to nature. Special arrangements of foreground silhouettes, as exem¬ plified in the Ruins, Evening (fig. 42) and View on Mousehold Heath (fig. 57), provide a nucleus around which space opens up and out, broadly and obliquely, or extends straight into depth. The repetition of such motifs—a jetty, a strip of beach, a row of boats, a body of water, which appear in a large group of familiar sea and river views under the titles Yarmouth Beach, Yar¬ mouth Jetty, and Yarmouth Water Frolic—provided for Crome an emotional center, a feeling of familiarity bred from his long association with the scenes. The Yarmouth Beach and Yarmouth Jetty pictures of 1808 (plate III, fig. 29), 1812 (fig. 58), and 1817 (fig. 100) are constructed from diverging diagonals: a stretch of beach forms an acute angle with a jetty running from the left of the canvas obliquely into an open sea. The distance of the boats is established by means of proportion and hue. In the Yarmouth Water Frolic (plate XV, fig. no) a T-shaped, central arrangement of ships and their distant water reflections 23

present a frontal motif, which, together with a foreshortened coastal strip, is constructed out of converging orthogonals. A triangular spatial organization is expanded in front by a horizontal moving body of water, which leads straight into depth, narrowed by two im¬ pressions, suggesting small ships whose position depends upon the artist’s admirable use of linear perspective. The contained space extends from the opened-out foreground to the far distance, which is increased in clarity of focus. At times, Crome uses a different system of composition; instead of horizontal movement passing across the surface, a single motif—tree, figure, country lane, or prospect—or the arrangement of space leads straight into depth and opens out into luminous space. The Beaters (fig. 43), for example, is constructed with an accent on the contrast between the rising verticals, the forest, and the placement on the extreme left of the large bending tree-trunk. More than half of the left side of the canvas is partly encircled by a woodland path forming a concave arc away from the viewer. Closed at one end by the dense forest, the curved arrange¬ ment rises at the other end onto a graceful slope which opens out into a distant stretch of horizontal, sunlit meadowland. Again, Crome relates the use of vertical picture space with the horizontal in the patterning of An Old Watermill (fig. 88). The silhouette of the upright mill is juxtaposed with a vertically heightened wooded hillside behind to assert the structural with an emphasis on contrast. The design of the Watermill, I believe, depends on the contrast between the brick red of the millhouse mellowed by wind and weather, the gray white of the fence, the weathered tan brick of the millrace, and the dark foliage, which forms a unified mass against a luminous mid¬ afternoon sky. The downward-sloping hill from the left gently opens out the space into the far distance to reach the small, impressionistic windmill and a body of water. This organic relation between the background, trees, and building, and between the ground and the stream of foreground water, is conveyed by the use of short, rhythmic, curving brushstrokes which flow smoothly and imperceptibly from one object to another, giving unity to the composition. Frontal compositions with corridors of trees, centered to the right, to the left, or obliquely as the case may be, rely for effect on receding organization in depth. Crome rendered this effect by reducing the verticals in size while retaining the clarity of focus. Marlingford Grove (plate IX, fig. 77), Grove Scene (fig. 113), and The Glade Cottage (fig. 102) are compositions based, in fact, on just such contrasts between slightly curved diagonals and diminishing verticals. The distant horizontals in the sunlit meadows are sharply foreshortened, reduced to narrow strips. In these pictures the indebtedness of Crome to the Dutch painters of the seventeenth century is evident: the sandy roadways are like Wijnants’, and the tree arrange¬ ments and their rich foliage appear to derive directly from pictures by Hobbema. The luminous vistas and the sharpness of focus in the distance are embedded in the matrix of the nineteenth-century landscape, in utter contrast to the tradition of the previous century. The human figures and other forms, mostly from his own hand, blend well in design and color scheme. Crome painted them by applying a single layer of pigment at a time, a method called the direct or alia prima method as opposed to the use of multiple opaque layers termed the indirect method, which greatly contributes to the over-all effect of spaciousness, trans¬ parency, and, at times, to a protoimpressionistic sparkle. We can observe the technique in many canvases, especially in the areas of mid- and far-distances and the sky. Crome began to modify his basic approach in technique before 1808, when in a canvas, The Blacksmith's Shop, Hingham (fig. 34), passages of paint were applied over a coating of differing color. A translu24

cent, monochrome undermodeling was carried out in a reddish brown color and allowed to dry before the final colors were superimposed. By means of this innovation he obtained both precision of form in the contrast of texture and color and a unifying effect in the universal presence of the background color. Principal objects and figures, such as those in Ruins, Evening (fig. 42), The Hurling Gate (fig. 92), An Old Watermill (fig. 88), and, most conspicu¬ ously, in the unfinished The Windmill near Norwich (fig. 90), are more easily distinguishable one from another than in his earlier work. The dark grounding enhances the total effect by accenting significant motifs within the ground, the water, and the sky. Gainsborough and Constable also practiced this method, allowing the undercoat to appear as a part of the general effect. Gainsborough had used it to unify the picture surface by brush¬ ing on pigment with a nervous, rotary flourish of the wrist. He thus expressed himself with pictorial zest, imagination, and lyric liberty. Constable, aiming at a similarly fluid style, which was derived from Gainsborough and perhaps also from Rubens, employed a similar ground¬ ing as a fluid wash. Crome, on the other hand, after applying a thin undercoat, employed semicircular brush¬ strokes, laying them on with an oscillating motion of the fingers, the wrist remaining relatively fixed. But as his technique grew more refined he used longer more rhythmic and parallel curved strokes, which occasionally give the impression of meandering. His painting never reaches the impressionistic swagger essential to the rococolike purity of Gainsborough’s rhythmic freedom. Generally, however, Crome, always economical with materials, suggests a greater degree of composure and restraint in treating subject matter. Because Crome cen¬ tered his concern chiefly on finding exact equivalents for impressions, and not mere likenesses or artifices, he acquired a sure control of his medium even in minor and inconsequential passages. There is no indication in the technique or design of such original works as A Barge with a Wounded Soldier (plate XII, fig. 103) and The Wensum at Thorpe: Boys Bathing (plate X, fig. 101) of an attempt to overthrow prevailing conventions. Instead, Crome sustained an interest in the realistic representation of space and natural effects. In order to obtain coherence between a smooth finish on the one hand and consistency of texture on the other, Crome relied on the skillful blending of glazes and impasto. This personalized, encrusted impasto and scumble, loosely placed with nimble touches with a fine sable brush, assume rounded, conical¬ shaped forms, punctated globs, elongated plaques, or confluent streaks. The rich texture of the paint and glazes conveys the impact of light (on selected portions of bark, branch, and foliage, and of luminous cloud, country road, and masonry wall) without obscuring opalescence. Precise observation reveals the sort of microstructure—the execution of flecks and strokes of tiny parts—of which the Impressionists have given us the purest analytical examples. The paintings executed in this manner suggest an outburst of rugged passion on the part of Crome, one both personal and forceful. Unfortunately, however, in striving to maintain surface unity Crome resorted on occasion to bitumen, which caused irreparable damage to the texture and sometimes dulled the visual interplay of light and color and tone. Without placing emphasis on any particular color, Crome preferred oil as a medium, although his work in other media—watercolor alone or combined with body color, pencil, ink, and etching-needle—is more frequent than is generally thought. Throughout his career, he employed sable brushes; if he used a palette-knife, its detection is difficult—nor, in fact, was the knife in common use by other members of the Norwich school. Except for a few paintings on oak and poplar panels, Crome s pictures in oil are painted on 25

supports that consist of moderately coarse- or large-grained canvas, usually woven at right angles. On occasion, however, the grain is finer. According to Collins Baker, “As far as I know Crome never painted on twill canvas... . But I have never seen a genuine work by him on a canvas with a diagonal or ‘twill’ rib.”16 A careful examination of the unquestionably sound works confirms this statement. Although View on the Coast of Baiae (fig. 2) appears to be painted on obliquely ribbed canvas, it is actually woven at right angles, in a weave pattern commonly described as “plain woven,” which gives rise to the misleading look of twill.17 The coarse weave of the canvases upon which Slate Quarries (plate II, fig. 20), The Old Oak (fig. 68), A Windmill near Norwich (fig. 63), and Mousehold Heath, Norwich (plate XIV, fig. 109) are painted has a loose, meshlike quality. Other Norwich School artists—notably, John Berney Crome, James Stark, George Vincent, David Hodgson, Robert Ladbrooke, and other less well-known contemporaries and followers of Crome, as well as members of the London forgery workshop of Joseph Paul—used similarly coarse-woven canvases in their work, a feature to be reckoned with when one studies the art of the Norwich School. Neither Crome’s palette nor its arrangement has been the subject of scientific analysis. The color range consists of a lively golden green, a warm brown, soft grays, and dull reds whose hues are rich, balanced, and harmonious. The juxtaposition of hues and values near each other on the chromatic scale ranges from a solemn austerity and, later in his career, to a brighter boldness and luminosity. The color orchestration of yellow green to green brown to gold brown to darker hues emerges from the development of a skillful concern for balanced gradation. Thus, the silveriness of gray green, of tourquoise, and of milky blue help bring a new clarity in the juxtaposition of space and motif. Crome’s infrequent use of scarlet in Study of a Burdock (fig. 65), canary yellow in Norwich River: Afternoon (plate XIII, fig. 108), royal blue in Pockthorpe: Boat and Boathouse (fig. 89), or beige mixed with the subtlest hues of rose in Boulevard des Italiens, Paris (plate VIII, fig. 75), with the vibrancy and blending of neighboring tones, suggests a mellow sensitivity for subdued color. The gentle nuances in a fuller atmosphere and the subtler tonal relations, essential for painting the receding skies of the broad country of Norfolk, were ultimately realized by gradually modulating tones. 16. Collins Baker, op. cit., p. 61, n. 1.

be pointed out that this illusion is accentuated

17. In Collins Baker’s acceptance of View on the

in any weave in which the weft thread is

Coast of Baiae as an authentic work by Crome, he did

thicker or coarser than the warp thread, as it

not allude to the weave of the canvas upon which it

is in this canvas.

was painted. A summary of the conclusive findings

(d) It is my opinion that this canvas is hand

of my study of the canvas weave of this painting will

woven, which may account for some of the

clarify the issue of other problematic canvases upon which Crome painted: (a) The pattern of weave generally designated

the canvas of View on the Coast of Baiae is

as “plain weave” simply means that the

plain woven, that is, cross woven at right

warp threads and the weft threads interlace

angles and is not woven as a twill or diago¬

each other at right angles.

nally ribbed. This conclusion is in complete

(b) The yam used in weaving the canvas of

accord with all published descriptions of the

View on the Coast of Baiae is irregular in size

canvas Crome used. See Norman L. Gold¬

and thickness, giving it an uneven surface

berg,

effect.

ship: The Present Day Problem,”

(c) Here the plain weave gives the illusion of a twill or diagonal effect, even though it has not been created by a twill weave. It should 26

uneven surface effects. (e) The conclusion I draw is that the weave of

On John Crome and ConnoisseurThe

Connoisseur, Vol. CLIV, No. 621 (November, 1963), p. 196.

Technically, Crome used a pale, silvery-toned transparent wash for the skies through which appears a soft, milky white, pale blue and into which retire cumulous, fleecy, or plaquelike cloud formations. The full and rounded clouds, overhanging the earth, retire gracefully into the distance. They approach, sometimes touch, the horizon, thus showing a splendid union of aerial perspective and atmospheric depth.18 Agglomerations of clouds, when present in gray, heavily clouded skies, are painted predominantly with short, rhythmical, semicircular brush¬ strokes parallel or perpendicular to their contours. A thick, gray white impasto along the perimeter of well-selected clouds diffuses and accents luminosity and gives richness to their texture. Seventeenth-century Dutch landscape painters, particularly Hobbema, van Ruisdael, and Cuyp, impressed Crome in their modeling of clouds. Their works played a major role in the evolution of cloud forms in his design and influenced his conviction that 14 they assist in the composition or make some [substantial] figure in the picture.” Cuyp taught him a good deal in this respect. The conception of the skies in both Yarmouth Harbor (fig. 98) and The Fishmarket at Boulogne (plate XVI, fig. 114) reflects Cuyp as the exemplar; his cloud-burdened, receding skies seem prophetic of Crome’s unity in design. In other instances, the cloud formation in the broad, luminous Crome skies are auxiliary to the landscape in completing the mood, grand or solemn, of the composition, just as are Hobbema’s or van Ruisdael’s thick blanket or sun-scattered clouds.19 Compositional organization and color, dramatic light-shadow-air relationships, and realis¬ tic spatial effects are combined into a serene and orderly whole. Silhouette, tone, and the indication of atmosphere were the means by which Crome attained unity for the reality he represented in such detail. Slate Quarries (plate II, fig. 20) may serve as an example of a combination of these methods. Objects are lightly painted in, excluding detail and completely surrendering to the simplicity of form. Ground and water, sky and distance melt into a unit beneath a thinly modeled, filmy cloud mist. As a result of the brushwork in this picture, which served as a transition between his earlier and his later work, Crome developed a harmonious relationship between the picture plane and the use of space. Equally fundamental was Crome’s actual manipulation of color in developing a technique of tonal gradation for producing the unity essential to his aesthetic theory. He eliminated almost all flat, unmodulated tones for surfaces that reflect light through contrast. Color was delicately modeled and granulated to attract, absorb, and reflect light. He used this technique on larger as well as smaller passages to give a fluttering discontinuity to the smooth finish of Crome went

19. All of the external evidence points to the

through a full experience of concrete form. At a later

conclusion that Crome may either have studied, or

date, he went on to consider light and vapor and

at least was familiar with the treatment of gray,

their prominent place in the ‘everyday’ conception

cloud-laden skies like the ones van Ruisdael painted

of landscape, as we see in Hingham Lane Scene, Norfolk

in his views of Haarlem’s bleaching establishments or

(fig. 60), Vieiv on Mousehold Heath (fig. 57), Yarmouth

with the pattern arrangement of clouds in the

Beach and Mill: Looking North (plate XI, fig. 107),

Hobbema owned by Thomas Harvey of Catton.

Bruges River—Ostend in

Distance—Moonlight

Such patterning as one observes in the Rijksmuseum’s

(fig. 82), which suggests an insatiable need to express

View of Haarlem (no. 2071) or the Montreal Museum

what he actually perceived and felt. Crome’s genius

of Fine Arts’ Bleaching Ground at Haarlem (no. 920),

18. In his

earlier

development,

the

is measured by the extent to which he transcended

or perhaps the cloud arrangement of the left half of

intellectual, rationalized concepts and expressions to

the Hobbema

attain his goal of expressing perceptual acuity.

Museum of Art illustrate these skies.

Watermill in the Toledo, Ohio,

27

the picture surface—a device which jolted contemporary critics. It was so extraordinary that John Boaden, the art critic for the London Oracle, was attracted by the curious surface roughness, the spotty and raised mottling of the upright Landscape in the 1806 Exhibition of the Royal Academy.20 Boaden remarked to a colleague, “There is another in the new manner, it is the scribbling of painting, so much of the trowel—so mortary [sic]—surely a little more finish might be borne.”21 A more modern eye probably would have perceived the picture as the intelligent anticipation of a technique to be practiced in the future, but to the London critic it was an enigma. This “mortary” finish, appearing at a time when the national impulse in fashionable circles favored the exalted manner of Reynolds and West, the lyric immediacy of Gainsborough, and the glacial surfaces of David, was a bold innovation. But Crome’s relish for the oil medium and his devotion to his metier go far to explain, as they do with Rembrandt and Chardin, the striking perfection of a fully charged brush. An observer’s impression of Crome’s landscape unity results from the obvious importance of simple mass and compositional breadth, held together and accented by light and air and, later on, by shadows. Although Crome introduced a considerable amount of detail, the forms and occasional figures are not made overly prominent by insistent detail. Thus the nude boys, the moored boat, the fence, the heavy and extensive ground cover of The Wensum at Thorpe: Boys Bathing (plate X, fig. 101) are perceived by him as nonessentials and are treated as a minor part of the whole scheme. “Trifles in nature,” Crome said, “must be overlooked that we may have our feelings raised by seeing the whole picture at a glance, not knowing how or why we are so charmed.” Embedded in this concept is the clue to the merit of his pictorial achievement, which lies in his success in portraying the harmony he was seeking. In major works, Crome generally uses detail to emphasize the plasticity of form; but the detail is subordinate in its relationship to the principal motif. In lesser works, the detail itself commands attention, thus blurring the visual acuity of the major theme. By making each separate motif appear to be a natural part of the composition and not an artificial addition, realism is built into a compre¬ hensive pictorial concept. The exclusion of “trifles in nature” was determined in the formal structure by the compression of space and by the spontaneity of brushwork and handling, which render extraneous those objects that might interfere with the illusion of natural inter¬ vals between motifs. Paradoxically, had Crome not adhered to this principal after 1806, the stylistic application would have suggested that he was singularly devoid of originality, because he would have demeaned the accidental look of nature. But this possibility was nullified by his constant practice of extending the treatment of light-filled atmosphere into all the crevices of space instead of depending solely upon increasing detail. “Giving dignity to whatever you paint” is a fundamental tenet of Crome’s painting. Even though it is true that certain of his weaker works have been targets of justifiable criticism, these productions never lack aristocratic dignity. The method Crome followed for dignifying motifs originated not from a tendency to abandon artistic tradition and convention but from 20. A more specific title for the picture, which

21. The criticism here referred to occurred at noon

became the target of critical analysis, is unknown.

on May 5, 1806 in a conversation between John

Crome displayed two pictures, both entitled Land¬

Boaden and J. Taylor, an art critic for the London

scape (no. 260 and no. 285), in the London debut

Sun. It took place in the presence of Joseph Farring¬

presentations. Alongside one of the pictures, no. 285

ton,

in the catalogue, is the misspelled name “ Croom ” for

Farrington Diary, ed. James Greig (London, 1924),

“Crome.” In early nineteenth-century East Anglia,

Vol. Ill, September 14, 1804-September 19, 1806.

Croom was the dialect pronunciation of Crome.

28

R.A.,

See Joseph

Farrington,

R.A.,

The

the deliberate adaptation of a somewhat crisp, obvious freshness of nature within the tradition of early nineteenth-century realist landscape painting. Consistent with this viewpoint and the means of incorporating it in compositional unity was a sensitivity to the rendering of spatial and light-and-shade effects. At no time in Crome’s career did deep penetration into the atmosphere equal or supersede in importance the concern for atmospheric breadth. As his style changed, his crucial problem was to find methods for extending the spaciousness and breadth of atmosphere in all directions. In this search, he resorted to placing small areas of brilliant color in the foreground. The Beaters (plate IV, fig. 43), for example, employs this method, which gives immediate emphasis to the luminous animation of the three men who are flushing game. Here the scarlet red coat and royal blue trousers worn by two of the three men, who receive the reflected light and the glowing halfhght, stress the contrast with the rest of the picture, which is bathed in distant bright light veiled in deepest shadow. The pictorial attractiveness of this painting lies primarily in the breadth of tonal range between the highlighted bright colors and the mysterious, dark forested area. A painting done some nine years later, in 1819, illustrates in Norwich River: Afternoon (plate XIII, fig. 108) how Crome continued to exploit the illuminated foreground figure for the purpose of stressing his concept of unity. Here he made use of the canary yellow coloring in the woman’s dress to emphasize plasticity of form against a background of compact, receding houses rather than simply to integrate vivid color with a vibrant atmosphere. Both before and after 1819, he practiced this contrast until in Marlingford Grove (plate IX, fig. 77), The Poringlatid Oak (fig. 105), and Mousehold Heath, Norwich (plate XIV, fig. 109) he conveyed fully and simply the realism of form and mass on the one hand and, on the other, the unprecedented aerial recession by means of plein-air. Thus, the continuing effort to enhance the ambience of light-filled and drifting atmosphere had been a dominant intent and indeed a characteristic of his developing style since 1806. Crome’s experimentation stopped short of allowing light to consume the space composition entirely; never did he understand the union of form with light and air as did the Impressionists. Crome’s use of light was like neither the solar eruption that tends to devour Turner’s work nor the ultrabrilliance of Monet’s subject matter, in which the periodic shifting of light became the ultimate companion, and a universal phenomenon, of nature. Light was interpreted by Crome as a permeating dissolution of matter into subdued mutations of the spectrum, and subtle, occasional accents of bright color were employed to aid in bringing unity to the whole composition. Yet the bold coloring in Study of a Burdock (fig. 65) brings together broad and unified design with the vivid use of color to communicate emotion. The rose gray, large-leafed burdock stands out from the reddish brown ground with an almost tactile quality in contrast to the dazzling floral detail. Considering its aesthetic effectiveness, it is remarkable how in¬ frequently Crome resorted to a brilliant palette to induce emotional response. Although the law of unity was fundamental to Crome, it was not the only principle which interested him. A sense of distance extending to far horizons—spaciousness and breadth—was also of primary concern, as both his letters and his pictures attest. By 1816, his aims had become so clarified that he was prepared to write “brea[d]th must be attended to, if you paint but a muscle give it brea[d]th.”22 Although to critics this homespun expression has become a 22. Early nineteenth-century pocket dictionaries

colloquial misspelling of “brea[d]th.” “Making parts

printed in Norwich show “breath” to be the

broad” was Crome’s means for implementing his 29

guideline to Crome’s design, it must not be considered an ironclad law. The use of breadth in Crome’s composition should be construed as only a part of a general trend, important though it is, and not as an unalterable tenet of his aesthetic creed. During the early stages of his career, objects composed in breadth, as one observes in the companion pictures, A Mill near Lakenham (fig. n) and A Cottage near Laketiham (fig. 12), focus limpid light-and-shade effects to yield space with a dramatic impact. It would be wrong to judge the creative power of Crome at thirty-one or to impose a rigid critical pattern upon his work of earlier years. Even though his stylistic development was irregular, it was consistent. With the relative steadying of his changes in style and a tendency to show progressive versatility in development after 1809, his emphasis and attitude toward nature changed; he became more and more preoccupied with “making parts broad.” The seriousness of his concern can be traced by comparing both motifs and composition from Norwich from Mousehold Gravel Pits (fig. 3) of 1798 through Sheds and Old Houses on the Yare (fig. 10) ofca. 1802-03, View near Weymouth (fig. 26) of 1806, By the Roadside (fig. 32) of ca. 1807-08, Hautbois Common (plate V, fig. 45) of 1810, and Yarmouth Jetty (fig. 58) of ca. 1812-13, to The Harling Gate (fig. 92) ofca. 1817 and Wood Scene with Pool in Front (fig. 116) of 1821 (the last-named painting I believe to be the last picture Crome completed).23 His advances in these works show a progressive tendency toward improvement of the cloud arrangements, of the perspective of aerial recession, and of the perception of compositional breadth and depth: these advances were achieved step-by-step by the gradual fusion of light, air, and shade, which are treated with visible, fluid mobility. Crome focused attention on the breadth of individual motifs and space, not to change his style but to perfect it. How did Crome arrive at this stylistic principle—the use of breadth in composition? He did it in part by perceiving the nature of atmosphere as possessing plastic and mobile charac¬ teristics in the modeling of natural form, in part by effectively using chiaroscuro, and in part by extending both of these qualities accurately in pictorial space. While it is true that atmos¬ pheric plasticity and mobility are subtly discernible in the work of those artists Crome studied —Wilson, Gainsborough, the Dutch naturalists, and possibly Rembrandt—these painters tended to reduce the visibility of atmosphere to an artificial, not a realistic, convention. The result was to remove the illusion of truth and to replace it with an intermingling of decoration

doctrine that “breath must be attended to.” See

tion to Crome; he portrayed them as principal

Mottram, op. cit., p. 166.

subjects in numerous Norwich exhibitions,

23. Each of the two pictures, Wood Scene, in the

and

seven paintings, listed as dating between 1812 and

Crome Memorial Exhibition (no. hi) and Lane

1820, were shown in the 1821 Crome Memorial

Scene in the Norwich Society of Artists’ exhibition

Exhibition. Those listed depict lanes at or near

of 1821 (no. 90), is listed as “ the last picture painted

Hingham,

by the late Mr. Crome, in April.” These listings

Catton, all small villages near Norwich. Lane motifs

suggest that both pictures are one and the same, and

enjoy a significant role in the patterning of a sub¬

Whitlingham,

Blofield,

Beccles,

and

indeed, the final picture Crome completed before he

stantial number of other pictures—The Old Oak

died. I consider both of these pictures to be directly

(fig. 68), The Glade Cottage (fig. 102), Catton Lane

related to the painting which has now come to be

Scene (fig. 78), Road with Pollards (fig. 81), and A

called Wood Scene with Pool in Front, an earlier version

Road near Bury St. Edmunds (fig. 87)—but Wood

of which is in the National Gallery of Victoria,

Scene with Pool in Front (fig. 116) shows the complete

Melbourne.

resolution of Crome’s style.

Throughout his career, lane scenes were an attrac¬

30

and artificial creation. But the attitude of Crome seems consistent: the expression of atmos¬ phere in pictorial space was increasingly less imaginative and more minutely objective. The characteristic upon which he concentrated the more gentle movement of atmosphere is that quality by which air drifts and permeates into the distant recesses of space. The comparison of atmosphere as a vehicle for subject matter in Slate Quarries (plate II, fig. 20) with that in The Glade Cottage (fig. 102) and Mousehold Heath, Norwich (plate XIV, fig. 109), pictures separated by eleven and fourteen years, respectively, illustrates how Crome developed a high level of perception of what had previously been unperceived—the power of space-filled atmosphere to penetrate, to recede, to broaden, and to convey movement. In practice, Crome employed all of these principles and ideas. For him, the concept upon which beauty depended is concisely summed up in the letter to Stark:

This [the design in Stark s picture] must always please a good eye, and keep the attention of the Spectator and [above all else] give delight to everyone.

we may have our feelings raised by seeing the whole picture at a glance, not knowing how or why we are so charmed.

Objects and figures organized into a meaningful whole to convey ineffable joy and harmony of form constitute the crux of his aesthetic creed. His intention was to create this harmony so unobtrusively that the observer would have his emotions stirred spontaneously without knowing the reasons for his exhilaration. Crome’s chief concern was not to create beauty, as one might think, but to discern and reproduce pre-existing beauty in nature. Composing motifs, aside from painting inn signs, first interested Crome in 1790. A compo¬ sition, Sketch in Oil, dated in that year and now lost, was lent by his son, Frederick fames, to the Crome Memorial Exhibition of 1821 and is there listed as Crome’s “first work.” Indeed, subject matter like that of The Cow Tower on the Swannery Meadow, Norwich, (fig. 1), Horse Watering (fig. 4), and A Cart Shed at Melton, Norfolk (fig. 6), all lacking in sufficient sensibility to transform them into a really individual vision, asserted a dominant role in the organization of Crome’s early use of pictorial space in design. At first he chose subjects that were devoid of mystery, selected more for their compositional appeal and simplicity than for their ideas. It was not until Crome had been painting for nearly ten years that he was attracted to the Dutch seventeenth-century naturalist painters, and even then his interest was casual. In actual prac¬ tice, his self-taught, slow progress had not prepared him to attempt the Dutchmen’s methods. A direct appreciation of their design and structure, however, is apparent in 1806, when the space composition of van Goyen or van Ruisdael is suggested in The Yare at Thorpe, Norwich (fig. 25). The style and method of Wilson and Gainsborough landscapes and also, perhaps, The Mill by Rembrandt were his teachers. But these Dutch landscape painters had long been studied and their methods copied by Crome. From the outset, Crome had an intense and persistent interest in aerial space, which was strengthened as he turned to painting in terms of tone. Together, these characteristics suggest his attraction to a wide-angled mode of vision; they may have become familiar to him through the works of George Lambert and the marine paintings of Robert Cleveley exhibited at the Royal Academy. Crome’s knowledge and handling of pigments and his interest in color had their origin in Whisler’s shop, where he was apprenticed for seven years, learning the fundamentals of 31 4

painting houses, signs for inns, and carriage panels.24 Crome’s desire to paint grew from this experience and later was nourished by the friendship of Robert Ladbrooke, a printer’s apprentice. Not until that moment is there any indication of Crome’s experimenting with paint and color to capture the scenes of nature and to reveal her moods. To probe into the life of Crome as it relates to his art between 1790 and 1792 would be an almost impossible task. All we have arc vague references to his relationship with Ladbrooke and to the more important role of Thomas Harvey, which has been discussed. The precise direction of the young painter’s interests following his decision in 1792 to become a drawing master can be determined only by conjecture.25 Unfortunately, there is no record of a critic who might have seen Crome at work. But it is reasonable to deduce from his painting that he studied old masters with enormous fervor, that he worked slowly in the oil medium, and that his pictures are the end results of prolonged experimentation. Differences in the mode of conception between individual pictures were considerable until he began to change his treatment of space, light, and air and began using Gainsborough’s thin and fluid handling. Light, air, and tone were combined to produce a reflective mood in Crome’s thinly painted The Yare at Thorpe, Norwich (1806), a serious early application of a Dutch composition. Perhaps, also, he used Dutch patterning in this picture in the hope that subdued light, spacious air, and realism carried to such detail would acquire obvious emphasis on objects. In this picture, the composition of line and mass, the prudent and austere color, and the rhythmic play of light and shade in the design are restrained by nature itself. Its solemnity of mood is adequately realized in the detail, in the broader rendering of objects themselves, and in the accented levels of luminosity. Hence, the structure of natural form appears more direct and open. The relationship of these characteristics of realism and the constituents of form had to be kept in close and natural proximity if the harmony of content, tone, and mood were not to be imperiled; therefore the visual definition of form, in its illusionistic effect, altered slightly. The colors, the motifs, and the designs selected were appropriately varied in Crome’s pictures to serve aesthetic interests within his working means. Always he seemed to concen¬ trate on the problems at hand—especially those that arose early in his career from the Catton House models from which he chose to learn. The gaiety and natural imagery of Boulevard des Italiens, Paris (plate VIII, fig. 75) is completely unrelated to the breezeswept Squall off Yarmouth (fig. 106) or to the genre-history painting of The Fishmarket at Boulogne (plate XVI, fig. 114), subjects painted between 1815 and 1820 that brilliantly highlight the more atypical Crome compositions. Rarely did Crome consider working principles other than as mere guides. Even on an 24. W. Chase, The Norwich Directory (Norwich,

Norwich from Mousehold Gravel Pits (fig. 3), Cottage

1783), lists “ Francis Whisler, Coach, House and Sign

and Pigsty (fig. 7), Horse Watering (fig. 4), A Cottage

Painter, No. 41, Bethel Street.” Whisler’s name does

near Lakenham (fig. 12), A Mill near Lakpiham (fig.

not appear in Thomas Beck, The Norwich Directory

11), and Back of the New Mills, Looking North (fig. 9)

(Norwich, 1802).

are representations of the period which show a

25. An undetermined number of pictures are

fluctuation of style in advance of developing a more

missing that were painted between 1790 and 1805.

definite orientation and sense of direction. Even in

But valuable additions to our scanty knowledge of

these works, Crome admitted a broad range of

Crome’s stylistic development and artistic personality

perception and mood which served as catalysts for

offer limited assistance to our understanding of this

more skilled performances.

phase of his work. View on the Coast ofBaiae (fig. 2),

32

unambitious scale, a sustained mood or a prolonged feeling for a subject was frequently altered for the sake of an immediate interest in expressing new values of mood or tone. Certain evidence points to an impulsive, subtle, but perceptible change of style as a basic motivation responsible for the recurrent themes of St. Martin s Gate, The Blacksmith’s Shop, and the Yarmouth Beach and Jetty scenes. The relationship of mood and tone in these thematic repeti¬ tions imply a purpose not merely to project emotion but to intensify it. Each successive per¬ formance elicits a more profound sensitivity. Mood and feeling, not precision of form, reflect Crome s inner compulsion to express emotion. Those repetitions which harbor emotional weakness or fall short of evoking a desired mood challenged him to re-create the same sub¬ jects, modifying them to reveal what he thought was aesthetically pleasing and thus more emotionally satisfying. The results in St. Martin’s Gate, Norwich (fig. 54) and in Yarmouth Beach and Mill: Looking North (plate XI, fig. 107) produced alterations which possess great balance and emotional impact. Repetitions of other pictures demonstrate an attempt to reach a perfection of mood which could not possibly have been achieved in mere isolated or transient moments of inspiration. These repetitions were an attempt to close a gap between Crome’s inward feeling and the moods evoked in the pictures—the goal of his creative process. We may observe this objective by comparing the tonality of Yarmouth Beach and Mill: Looking North with that of Squall off Yarmouth (fig. 106) or by comparing the City of Norwich Museums’ St. Martin’s Gate with the picture of the same subject in the Philadelphia Museum of Art (fig. 73). The design, coloring, and tone in these examples were altered through an enriched subtlety of mood— mute austerity surrenders to cheerful reflection. To reproduce variations of mood, Crome relied upon changes in the positioning of motifs and in the delicate color harmonies, but all changes followed the same route of aesthetic emotion leading to the same goal of aesthetic enjoyment.

AESTHETIC SOURCES

The precise origins of Crome’s aesthetic experience remain a mystery. His early personal relationship with Robert Ladbrooke and the generous patronage of Thomas Harvey of Catton cannot be underestimated in this respect. The combined effects of these associations and the later practical assistance of Sir William Beechey and John Opie precipitated and nurtured Crome’s creative and aesthetic abilities. Moreover, he saw great masterpieces on periodic visits to London, and his spirited involvement in the Norwich Society of Artists augmented his interest in beauty. Perhaps even more fundamental to activating his intel¬ lectual understanding of beauty was the enrichment of emotion originating in his own artistic successes. But the initial source remains uncertain. Soon after absorbing the influence of Wilson and Gainsborough, Crome became increas¬ ingly concerned with the problem of expressing emotional qualities to elicit artistic appeal. Through various combinations of duller color, the natural symmetry of light and shade, and line, his energies were focused less on the creation of form and more on that of beauty. The resulting emergence of specific changing emotion is not discernible until 1808-10, when his technical methods achieved the marvel of luminosity by the use of a palette brighter and lighter than he had previously employed. Almost immediately, a deepening interest in the pictorial

33

methods of evoking austerity, gaiety, and tranquility occurred. His theories about unity and the complexities of harmony were also formulated in these years, in spite of a delay of several years in expressing them to Stark. They were to serve as a foundation for his subsequent aesthetic, in which color, values of light and dark, tonal luminosity, and line were manipulated to arouse emotional response. However this may be, Crome’s faith in the inherent beauty of nature was characteristic of the trend in the early part of the nineteenth century: ideas of grandeur, harmony, and order were the premise of the national tradition of English painting. Consistent with this national tendency was the title-page of the 1816 exhibition catalogue of the Norwich Society of Artists, which carried the following pronouncement: “Examine first when Truth and Taste decree, / What Nature is, Painting ought to be.” The belief in this attainable reality had long been infused in Crome’s mind, and we may well assume that he had a hand in selecting this motto. Similar mottoes appeared every year in the catalogue accompanying the society’s annual exhibitions, suggesting that this point of view was the consensus of the membership and signified the local popular trend in painting. This reverential attitude toward nature was the greatest incentive for East Anglian landscape painting during the early decades of the century. To grapple with immense, intractable nature and to mold it to his will, Crome perpetually replenished his imagination with fresh impressions and assembled them into varying moods and styles. He was not content to mirror his own emotions; like any great artist, he tried to make his response to nature not merely receptive and passive but creative and active. The characteristics inherent in his works of art—subtlety of vision, perceptive delicacy, certainty of touch, and serenity of mood—supply the power which provokes emotional response. It is his realistic transmutation of nature’s tranquil moments which makes his work a triumph. His capacity for keeping inviolable the emotional response to the observable beauty of nature was the essence of his aesthetic development. Few indeed are the landscape artists who, in their search for order, truth, and beauty, have risen to such dignity of manner.

34

CHAPTER III

The Style of Crome: Growth and Development

Crome was active as an artist for scarcely more than thirty years. During much of this time he worked as a drawing master and supported a large family. He painted for personal pleasure and played a leading role in the Norwich colony of artists. Once he had mastered the use of oils, he developed with some consistency a succession of styles which show a close affinity to English and Dutch traditions. His work bears little resemblance to the international art currents of the age. To Crome, the only source of aesthetic emotion was the direct experience of the natural world, especially its intangible aspects (light and shade, air and space). The observation of nature in and around Norwich came to be the central activity of his life. It formed the unend¬ ing subject of his contemplation. It converted a detached East Anglian pictorial tradition into one allied with romantic feeling, and that tradition expanded into a freely expressed, spiritual display of the world in which he lived. Crome directed all his energies toward achieving an exact and objective record of what he saw; at the same time, he evolved methods profoundly expressive of his subjective responses. 35

The earliest exhibited painting by Crome was done in the year 1790,1 when he was twentytwo years old, but he had been painting before then. The Cow Tower on the Swannery Meadow, Norwich (fig. 1), the earliest surviving painting in oil, is handled so amateurishly in comparison to the 1796 and 1798 paintings that it must date from before his association with Thomas Harvey. Interestingly enough, this painting depends upon yellowish and blackish brown, light green, gray beige, rose beige, and rose gray patches, a fundamental characteristic, for the most part, of his later palette. But from the time he vowed to become a serious artist, his art depended upon observation of the methods and styles of pictures owned by Harvey at Catton. The compelling local interest in oil painting thrust Crome, who had been deprived by poverty of all but a rudimentary education, into a period of uncertainty and hard struggle. Mystery and conjecture surround the next two years of Crome’s life until his marriage to Phoebe Berney, on October 2,1792, after a long and little-publicized courtship. His career was interrupted by an illness, chronic hydrocoele, which required two periods of hospitalization in the Norfolk and Norwich Hospital, from March 30 tojune 1, 1793, and from September 14 to November 16 of the same year.2 These months away from teaching and painting neces¬ sarily curtailed experimentation. Following his convalescence and recovery, Crome’s marital obligations probably spurred him into the full-time teaching of drawing, leaving him only spare time to practice painting. In this chapter an attempt will be made to describe the evolution of Crome’s stylistic development more comprehensively and accurately than in any previous study of the artist’s working life. For this purpose it is essential to use the least arguable paintings whenever possible—those whose date and authenticity can be established either on grounds of style or by their presence in the exhibitions of the Norwich Society of Artists. Unfortunately, the chronology of the productions of the first half of Crome’s career remains highly speculative. The pictures of the first fifteen years cannot always be placed in chronological position on the basis of their style because a style which Crome abandoned at one point may reveal some degree of kinship to a style of a later date. An understanding of the relatively few surviving pictures of this period requires that each individual problem be considered ad hoc, on its merits, and, whenever possible, on the basis of biographical and stylistic data precisely applied. In view of the present state of Crome studies, it is necessary that—before proposing any general interpretation of the master’s development—a number of significant problems con¬ cerning his method and style must be confronted. Our main objective in what follows will be to supply detailed solutions for the complex problems of chronology. For this purpose, it is convenient to divide Crome’s productive career into five reasonably distinct periods: 1783-90, 1790-92, 1792-1805, 1805-13, and 1813-21. During the first period, lasting from the beginning of an apprenticeship to Francis Whisler in 17833 until its end in 1790, Crome familiarized himself with the physical properties of paint. 1. Sketch in Oil, designated as the “first work”

admission was recommended by the Reverend

and dated 1790, was listed as no. 1 in the Crome

Berney, Mr. T. Maltby, for Edward King, Esq.,

Memorial Loan Exhibition, October 15-20, 1821.

Tombland. See William F. Dickes, The Norwich

The picture was lent by the artist’s son, Frederick

School of Painting (London, 1905), p. 27.

James Crome, and its whereabouts is unknown.

3. Whisler, a painter of inn signs, houses, and

2. Dr. Edward Rigby, for whom Crome worked

coaches, had a workshop located at No. 41, Bethel

as an errand boy at the age of thirteen, recommended

Street, Norwich. Crome was indentured to him from

him for the first hospital admission. The second

October 17,1783, the date ofliis signature and that of

36

Gp ON

‘34Y JO uInosnyy Ur podoNspy oy], “Uowmory sioginvET

*/A

Ral

VI.

New Mills Men

Wading . City of Norwich Museums, Norwich. Cat. No. 55.

9G ‘ON ‘Aourny uyof

py UONdITJOD

‘avy s,auysndny 19 wosf YIIMAONT

“TTA

Mr. R.Q. Gurney, Bawdeswell ie) eS) ASa)

>

—

—

—

== ‘cera

ae

Se

KS

ee a 3 &

eC,

ae

ot

ate!

Sar

OLE)

ection a

It was this experience that gave him the firm grounding on which he built his life’s work as represented by over three hundred oil paintings, watercolors, and etchings.4 During the second period, 1790-92, he maintained a working arrangement with Robert Ladbrooke that continued until its dissolution in the fall of the latter year. This was a time of great uncertainty punctuated by odd jobs and by Crome s adjustment to the impact of Thomas Harvey and his fine collection of pictures. The third period, 1792-1805, spans the years from Crome’s mar¬ riage in October, 1792 until the inaugural exhibition of the Norwich Society of Artists in August, 1805, it may be defined as a time during which Crome found his bearings as a landscapist. Its exceptional length is understandable: Crome was an awkward young man with a limited vocabulary who had been brought up under impoverished circumstances and who was confronted by a number of nearly insoluble problems. He had to earn a livelihood for a growing family while simultaneously providing himself with time for his own painting. He had to learn how to paint by his own efforts, receiving only random assistance from Thomas Harvey, Sir William Beechey, and John Opie. His need to visit London periodically to see pictures was a drain of both time and money—and at this time money was scarce. Finally, he expended a good deal of physical and mental energy on organizational activities; in 1803, he played a leading role in founding the Norwich Society of Artists. These are but a few of the challenges Crome faced. During this period, he was much impressed by the dexterous handling both of light and shade and of the form of natural objects in the paintings of Dutch landscape artists of the seventeenth century. It is also likely that he studied The Mill by Rembrandt.5 Toward 1803, Crome began to abandon an earlier attachment to Richard Wilson, whose method was his earliest inspiration. Wilson’s work helped him to sharpen his perception of the delicate colorings in nature. The fourth period covers the years 1806-13. In this period, Crome combined the principles adopted from Gainsborough with those adopted from the Dutch landscape painters; at the same time, he employed a style that resembled George Morland’s use ofimpasto. His purpose was not to imitate these painters but to develop his own technical arsenal from their styles. His chief concern was to paint familiar outdoor subjects, giving them the effective tonal complexi¬ ties of natural light and shade encompassed by what was later to become known as plein-air. He developed qualities which suggest familiarity with Thomas Girtin and Morland. Subse¬ quently, he shifted from the English masters to the styles of certain seventeenth-century Dutch landscape painters. Although henceforth Crome never abandoned Hobbema and van Ruis¬ dael, his pattern of assimilating them before 1809 was sporadic, and their influence on his painting continued into the ensuing period. It was in this final period, initiated by his visit to the Continent in 1814 and terminated by his death in 1821, that he sought to advance the seventeenth-century Dutch concept of landscape with more picturesque qualities of light and air. Crome mastered the complexities of this concept by flexibly adapting it to the demands of a particular motif or an entire subject: it was this flexibility that enabled him to arrive at solutions. his father, also named John Crome. The contract was

4. Norman L. Goldberg, “ On John Crome and

witnessed by Robert Batey and Thomas Barber, Jr.

Connoisseurship: The Present Day Problem,” The

Young Crome agreed to serve for a term of seven

Connoisseur, Vol. CLIV, No. 621 (November, 1963),

years, “what began on the first day of August,

p. 200.

1783.” The original indenture is in the possession of

5. See Chapter I, p. 9.

the Norwich Public Library, Norwich, England.

37

While it is evident that the relationship of Crome’s work to the general artistic milieu of Norwich must be taken into account, certain external factors (such as the day-to-day problems of a large family with frequent childhood deaths and the general distress and rise in food prices that accompanied the Napoleonic Wars) must be kept in mind when one attempts to divide his career into distinct periods. An over-all view, therefore, is in reality more like a continuous span than the series of time intervals listed above. In the course of Crome’s artistic develop¬ ment, many pauses and gaps indicate wavering and uneven progress as late as the first exhibi¬ tion of the Norwich Society of Artists (1805). Except for paintings executed during a trip to Wales in 1804, the entire first half of Crome’s output shows little inner cohesion in terms of chronology and style. There are periods in his curve of development when hesitancy and difficulty hindered his forward movement. At other times early in his career he seems to have experimented with methods and materials that are unrelated to his inn-sign paintings or to his compositions in the style of Richard Wilson. Within the same period, his styles and modes of painting differed considerably. Certain key pictures in each stage clearly show evidence of all the previous work behind them. For this reason alone, both repetition and progression in development are meaningful. Thus, many obscurities, the paucity of documented works, and much overlapping of style make Crome’s progressive development in each of the several periods difficult to follow.

1783-90

While serving as an apprentice to Francis Whisler, Norwich coach- and sign-painter, Crome ground colors and mixed paints for his master. We may surmise that eventually he was given less monotonous and more instructive tasks. Yet it was from this early experience that he must have acquired his knowledge of varnishes and pigments capable of resisting deterioration from age and exposure; what would and would not resist the buffetings of wind and rain, the winter’s snow, and the summer’s sun on inn signboards and coach panels. We may also sup¬ pose that he learned the valuable lesson of how to apply paint smoothly to a flat surface. It is quite probable that Crome owed much to his dealings with coach painting and signboards. Tradition also credited him with being the inventor of the process of “graining,” which is the method of imitating the veinlike markings of natural woods.6 As this period neared its close, two significant events affected the ambitions and artistic direction of the aspiring young artist. His beginning acquaintance with Thomas Harvey, the collector-connoisseur, had the more profound effect. But his friendship with Robert Ladbrooke—an apprentice to a printer and engraver and later an artist and amateur dealer in paintings

was the catalytic agent in Crome’s decision to become a serious artist.7

1790-92

Industrious young men ambitious for self-advancement, Crome and Ladbrooke became fast friends. Pooling their resources, they agreed to an informal partnership; they then rented a 6. Dickes, op. at., p. 19. 7. Ladbrooke was apprenticed to Stephen White, a printer and engraver, who was located at No. 8,

38

Saint Andrews Bridge Street, Norwich. He was Crome’s junior by two years,

garret and transformed it into a

studio ’ where they spent as much of their leisure time in

pursuing their art as their apprenticeships allowed. We may assume that, when funds per¬ mitted, they bought prints from Messrs. Smith and Jaggers and copied them in order to improve their standards of painting. None of these early efforts have survived. It would appear, however, that Ladbrooke agreed to confine himself to portraiture, charging only five shillings for a small head in pencil, and that Crome, who was to devote himself to landscape, obtained as much as thirty shillings for a painting in oil.8 Carrying his colors in oyster shells, he would enthusiastically wander into the neighboring countryside to sketch on a piece of cardboard. It may be presumed also that such sketches, similar to the motifs in The Cow Tower on the Swannery Meadow, Norwich (fig. i) resembled the Sketch in Oil, which was exhibited posthumously and ascribed to 1790 in the Crome Memorial Loan Exhibition (no. 1). It was there designated as “First work.”9 The arrangement between Crome and Ladbrooke continued until Crome’s marriage,10 when the partnership dissolved and Crome began practicing full-time as a local drawing master. Even after his apprenticeship terminated, Crome continued a free-lance association with Whisler for an undetermined period, probably no longer than his partnership with Ladbrooke. During this time, he may have obtained an occasional commission as a sign painter. At least three signs for Norwich inns are known to have been painted by him, but not one of these can be dated without question. The best known of these is The Top Sawyer (fig. 125), which is painted on both sides. The sawyer, a broad figure, stands astride a pit and is laid in with bold and vigorous strokes; on the reverse side the sawyer appears in profile. Other signboards, less well known, are The Three Cranes (fig. 124) and The Wherryman (fig. 126); the latter landscape design brings to mind Crome’s version of later East Anglian scenic views.11 Of these known inn signs, the childlike style of The Three Cranes suggests that it is probably the earliest effort and may have been painted during Crome’s apprenticeship.12 The other two signs were very likely commissioned when he could not have been more than twenty-three or twenty-four years old, probably during the time of Crome’s partnership with Robert Ladbrooke. As late as his thirty-third year, Crome continued to paint, retouch, and gild inn signs. In this year he accepted one pound and one shilling for painting the Lamh Dog, eighteen shillings for writing and gilding the board of Ye Lamb, and five shillings for painting and gilding the name of Ye Maid’s Head.13 The Jolly Sailor in Yarmouth, The Black Boys in Aylsham, The 8. Dickes, op. cit., p. 174.

12. The inn for which The Three Cranes was

9. See note 1, above.

painted was at No. 34, the Lower Close, Norwich.

10. On October 2, 1792, Crome married Phoebe

It is common legend that Crome copied the three

Bemey, to whom he had long been engaged. The

crane birds, appearing more like crudely drawn

Anglican ceremony took place in Saint Mary’s

ostriches, from the small shield-shaped window on

Church, Coslany, Norwich.

the north side of the east end of the Norwich Guild¬

11. W. J. Philpott, “Inn Sign-Boards,” Apollo,

hall. The entire window is made of oddments of

Vol. L, No. 298 (December, 1949). P- 249- See also

glass from the destroyed Saint Barbara Chapel,

“A Catalogue of the Entire Valuable Collection of

Norwich.

Paintings, Prints, and Books, late the property of

13. A receipted bill for this work, invoiced to “T.

Mr. J. Crome, Dec. which will be sold at auction

Tompson, Esq.” and signed by “John Crome,” is in

by J. Athow at the large room in Sir Benjamin

the possession of the British Museum Additional

Wrenche’s Court, Norwich”; hereafter cited as

MSS. No. 37029-37033. Because of the rarity of

“Catalogue.”

Crome’s signature, it is reproduced. See Appendix E.

39

Labour in Vain in Market Place, Norwich, The Guardian Angel in Saint Stephen’s Parish, and The Two Brewers are other signs alleged to have been painted by him.14 An anecdote, revealing Crome’s jovial nature in this connection, regards an inn-sign commission, which he was pur¬ ported to have received from the proprietor of a public house. It was to be an image of a raw joint for “The Shoulder of Mutton.” But when Crome submitted the sign, the patron angrily refused it, saying he had expected a picture of “a roasted shoulder.”15 Unquestionably during these early years, the friendly association with Thomas Harvey, his inspiring teaching and discussions of art, and the unhampered access to his large collection of original pictures of many schools did much to develop Crome’s own gifts.

1792-1805 The paucity of works that may be ascribed to the first ten years of this period supports the notion that Crome’s was anything but a precocious genius and blurs our view of his early development. Undoubtedly, he spent much time experimenting and perfecting his technical methods. It is reasonable to assume that he discarded a number of early efforts. The fact that to our knowledge so few drawings survive from this time suggests that he may have lacked the confidence to preserve such preparatory work. Or he may not have acknowledged their value as working guides. Despite the lack of drawings and paintings which would define his earliest development, Crome’s aims are sufficiently clear to permit certain observations. From the start, he limited himself to familiar subjects portrayed realistically and with placid intimacy, and he painted nature’s more amiable moods rather than her more brooding and dramatic aspects. At all times Crome demonstrated a vision whose innocence and directness were shaped by intense personal feeling. At first his attitude toward nature was primarily objective, but gradually he showed, in mood and sensitivity, a growing tendency toward subjectivity which was to continue until his death. During the first five years after the turn of the century, his interest in light and shade and atmospheric breadth enriched his paintings, diminishing their chiaroscuro, a characteristic which suggests a Girtinian advance in con¬ ception. He proceeded to develop a relationship between shaded light and air which was at first devoid of out-of-door qualities. Nevertheless, this idiom may safely be considered Crome’s real perceptual goal. His passion for bright sunlight persisted throughout his career, a permeating sunlight that fused with air, so that air took on its sparkle and sunlight took on air’s mobility. The Cow Tower on the Swannery Meadow, Norwich (fig. 1) is the principal extant work painted perhaps before the beginning of this period. It is handled clumsily, dryly painted bit-by-bit, and the laborious brushwork and inhibited coloring gives little promise of his eventual passion for light. The objects are so awkwardly related in space that one is led to the conclusion that Crome, groping for artistic quality and design fundamentals, may have painted this picture before he came under the tutelage of Thomas Harvey, who was only an amateur. Nor does the picture suggest other artists then known to Crome. He withheld this 14. Dickes has suggested that while in the employ¬

names are not listed as inns or public houses in W.

ment of Whisler, Crome also painted signboards for

Chase,

the “Green Dragon,” the “Cherry Tree,” and the

Thomas Peck, Norwich Directory (Norwich, 1802).

“Royal Oak.” See Dickes, op. cit., p. 20. These 40

Norwich

Directory

15. Dickes, ibid., p. 22.

(Norwich,

1783)

or

example, though completed before I792> from the inaugural Norwich exhibition but showed it the following year, 1806 (no. 33). By 1796, Crome s work begins to show his interest in light. Nowhere is diffuse light veiled in varying intensities of shade better demonstrated than in the beginning series of compositions in the style of Richard Wilson. Crome succeeded in developing certain of WJlson’s charac¬ teristics but was somewhat more restrained 111 tone and mood. The quite dark picture, Early Dawn (fig. 16), clearly shows a tonality closely related to View on the Coast of Baiae (fig. 2) with its muted colors. The golden brown, Rembrandtesque tone in the former picture led Collins Baker to speculate that Crome may have seen Rembrandt’s drawings or other works, or that he may have been influenced by Opie,16 whose style was akin to the Dutchman’s. Some tan¬ gible evidence exists in support of the first of Collins Baker’s suggestions. After 1793,17 Rembrandt s The Mill from the Orleans Collection was in England. Its first English owner) William Smith, a member of Parliament from Norwich, lent this picture for public exhibition at the rooms of Mr. Bryan in Pall Mall for six months beginning December 28, 1798.18 From the early 1790s Crome was accustomed to making annual visits to London to enrich his knowledge of the paintings on exhibit there, and it is likely he saw the famous Rembrandt.19 If Crome were not influenced by The Mill, his heavy reliance on graded dark accents to achieve effective chiaroscuro would be difficult to explain at so early a point in his develop¬ ment. Although familiar with the judicious treatment of light-and-dark relationships by other Dutch specialists of marine views (Jan van de Cappelle, Willem van de Velde), of dunes and river scenes (Jan van Goyen, Salomon van Ruysdael), of woody landscapes (Jacob van Ruisdael, Meindert Hobbema), and of moonlight views (Aert van der Neer), Crome may have found the fine chiaroscuro in the Rembrandt painting most inspiring. It could have supplied him with the idea of contrasting the dark shadows of the foreground with the brighter effects of the sunlit areas in both Farmyard (fig. 5) and Horse Watering (fig. 4), pictures which we date between 1798 and 1800. Both are landmarks in Crome’s early style: the bold con¬ trasts shatter the balance of their composition, despite the pictorial and psychological interest of the motifs of the barn and the drinking horse. To dramatize a motif, Crome often resorted to the juxtaposition of shade and bright sunlight. Even though inadequate and imprecise, this device supplies a sound criterion for understanding the artist’s interpretive capabilities in his early period. It was not, ho wever, until after 1798, the year Crome met John Opie and re¬ ceived some instruction from him, that he modeled the device of tonal contrast in composition with breadth of chiaroscuro and structural enhancement.20 View on the Coast of Baiae (fig. 2), a direct copy by Crome of one of Wilson’s Italian scenes, and Norwich from Mousehold Gravel Pits (plate I, fig. 3), a stylized adaptation of another Wilson

16. C. H. Collins Baker, Crome (London, 1921), p. 26.

19. Crome’s close friendship with Thomas Harvey and his friendly acquaintance with the Norwich

17. See Chapter I, p. 9.

Quaker banker, John Gurney of Earlham; with Dr.

18. W. Buchanan, Memoirs of Painting (London,

Edward Rigby, a locally prominent surgeon for

1824), Vol. I, pp. 19, 196. When, in 1815, the

whom Crome worked as a boy; and with Sir William

British Institution inaugurated its loan exhibitions,

Beechey and John Opie, Royal Academicians who

which had an immense effect on the development of

had shown interest in the young artist suggest that

art in England, one of the featured exhibits alongside

Crome would have sought these contacts in order to

Rubens’s Castle of Steen was The Mill (no. 37), again

gain access to the study of the great masterpiece.

lent by Smith.

20. Collins Baker, ibid., p. 11.

41

design, both mark an important midpoint in Crome’s early development. Let us first consider View on the Coast of Baiae, which presents something of a problem concerning identification and dating. Theobald,21 Binyon,22 and Dickes23 exclude this picture from their lists of Crome’s work. The latter two authors did include a reference to Temple of Venus, after a Sketch by Wilson, an exhibit listed by name in the 1811 Norwich Society exhibition (no. 186), which I believe is unrelated. Collins Baker, although aware of View on the Coast of Baiae, assumed it to be identi¬ cal with Temple of Venus.24 (Hawcroft believes the picture exhibited by Crome in 1811 is neither of these pictures, but he does express a preference for a “fairly early date.”)25 It is probable that Collins Baker errs on two counts: first, it is unlikely that Crome would have so long delayed exhibiting a picture after completion; second, it is unlikely that the 1811 exhibit was not in fact a finished painting, like the Coast of Baiae, but rather a drawing or oil sketch. As to date, owing to the lifeless and coarse touch, the character of the muted illumi¬ nation, and the undistinguished aesthetic quality of View on the Coast of Baiae, I believe it is reasonable to assume that these weaknesses are to be expected during Crome’s earliest experi¬ mental phase. The timid draftsmanship, the generally inconsistent handling, and the feeble quality of the work would be consistent with a 1796 dating. Now let us turn to the organization of the picture space in Norwich from Mousehold Gravel Pits, for a number of Crome’s later predilections are anticipated here. Among these are a broad, panoramic view of Norwich taken from a height; the smooth handling and the cop¬ pery, but luminescent, palisades; and the pose of the standing figure with the seated one related vaguely to the rim of a cliff. The panoramic vista is foreshortened to construct a bird’s-eye view rather than one of a broadened space composition. The painting was executed in 1798 when Crome was deeply absorbed in certain characteristics inspired by Wilson, which he was adapting to his own style. In portions of the painting, a certain flaccidity of touch prevails. Some oassages of respectable painting in a relatively free manner in Norwich from Mousehold Gravel Pits also foretell later developments. One may point, for example, to the rendering of swirling, pearly cloud forms in the central portion of the sky or to the vigorous illumination of the gray beige promontories of the palisade on the left. The three Compositions in the Style of Wilson listed as exhibits in the Crome Memorial Loan Exhibition (nos. 2, 8, and 75) are dated 1796, 1798, and 1809, respectively. Our conclusion would make a strong case for assigning Norwich from Mousehold Gravel Pits to 1798, which corresponds to the date also suggested by Collins Baker.26 In both View on the Coast of Baiae and Norwich from Mousehold Gravel Pits, there are the same fledgling boldness and the same weaknesses as in the more juvenile painting of The Cow Tower and the slightly more ambitious A Cart Shed. The hesitant use of contrasting zones of light and dark and the intervening spatial disproportion between carelessly set-down forms in each of these four pictures are inconsistencies prevalent in Crome’s early work. The faint 21. Henry S. Theobald, Crome’s Etchings (London, 1906), pp. 15-40.

22. Laurence Binyon, “John Crome and John Sell Cotman,” Portfolio (London, 1897), p. 20. 23. Dickes, op. cit., p. 69. 24. See the reference to Temple of Venus, Baiae (after Wilson), 1811, in Collins Baker, op. cit., p. 165. 42

25. Francis W.

Hawcroft,

“Crome and His

Patron: Thomas Harvey ofCatton,” The Connoisseur, English ed. (December, (January, i960), p. 233.

1959);

26. Collins Baker, op. cit., p. 171.

American

ed.

su8geshon of light moving gently, casting shadows against a broad, overhead sky, is almost imperceptible. In the slightly later, dark brown Horse Watering (fig. 4) are similar but deeper shadows which may have been derived from Crome’s own perception—an advance in which his originality is first noticeable. With the turn of the century—indeed far into the next succeeding period—the pattern which Crome followed in his development was not a steady one; disparities continue to emerge. Whatever his tenacity of purpose, his visual imagination seemed to falter during the period when he was attempting to imitate the methods and styles which he saw in the pictures at Catton House. At this time, Crome demonstrated few signs of flexibility. Even the day-to-day spectacle of the Norwich scenery failed to inspire his creativity during this derivative period. Cottage and Pigsty (fig. 7), Storm, Mousehold Heath (fig. 8), and Back of the New Mill, Looking North (fig. 9) probably represent a transitional phase in which he returned to experimenting in his own individual way before beginning to absorb a variety of other miscellaneous in¬ fluences—principally those of van Goyen, van der Neer, van de Velde, van Ruisdael, and Hobbema. This creative inertia was not easily overcome. Only by slow mastery of light and shade, form and space was Crome able gradually to free his imagination. He managed to retain what he learned from a single old master, to add a method or technique from another, seldom dis¬ carding what he had gained, and constantly to absorb what was of practical value. Time and again, Crome returned to earlier interests: even as late as 1809, after his advance had been considerable, he returned with fresh vision, to the earlier stylizations of Wilson, as in the Landscape (fig. 36). Prerequisite to the understanding of the development of Crome after the turn of the century is the study in orderly sequence of a substantial core of authentic examples which can be dated, either exactly or approximately. The dating of works on the basis of stylistic com¬ parisons, after carefully establishing standards from pivotal pictures, is the method which will prove most helpful. If irregularities or interruptions in the development of style or variations in the level of accomplishment occur within the same phase, then pure stylistic evidence may not always serve as a reliable guide. Resort must then be had to facts obtained from con¬ temporary sources such as documents; exhibition catalogues; dated work; and biographical data, including travels recorded of the artist in diaries of others. Signed pictures are less dependable; signatures and monograms inscribed on oil paintings are viewed with suspicion.27 For the first five years of the century, the arrangement of Crome’s production in chronological order from tangible dates and documents is at best vague. We are, however, fortunate in possessing a limited number of pictures which can be dated by external events and which illuminate this zigzag course for us, even though other works may not always be placed accurately in sequence. On the morning of August 2, 1802, after completing a summer tour of Matlock and the Lake District with the Gurney family,28 Crome departed from Patterdale for 27. See notes to catalogue numbers 43, 89. Before

The Beaters (plate IV, fig. 43) was cleaned in 1969, a

behind the man’s right knee. In my opinion, neither the signature nor the monogram are autograph.

broad signature of “J. Crome” was clearly visible in

28. In 1796 or early 1797, Crome was employed

the lower middle foreground. Also, Pockthorpe: Boat

as a drawing master to the seven daughters of John

and Boathouse (fig. 89) bears the initials “JC” on the

Gurney, a prominent banker and Quaker of Norwich.

flat piece of wood at the bottom of the steps, on a level

Their admiration for Crome led to an invitation, as

43

Norwich.29 Sometime between this date and the date of the first society exhibition where it was shown, Crome painted Scene in Patterdaie, Cumberland (fig. 143). The mountain scene, a watercolor varying in depths of tone, establishes a level of competence for the period 1802-04. This drawing, together with the painting, Scene in Cumberland (fig. 15), both views of the Lake District, demonstrate a refinement of technical means and style. Probably, painting these pictures suggested to Crome that it was clearly not his destiny to become a painter of mountain scenery. After his return to Norwich, Crome diligently took part in the flourishing artistic activities there. Taking advantage of widespread interest, he set out to form an “Art Society,” gaining the support of Robert Ladbrooke, Charles Hodgson, other drawing masters and their pupils, and devoted patrons. Thus in 1803 the Norwich Society of Artists was formed. While Crome was devoting attention to the newly organized society, he was also making an im¬ portant addition to his style: he introduced gradients of light and shadow to soften the transi¬ tion between form and space. Sheds and Old Houses on the Yare (fig. 10), A Mill near Lakenham (fig. 11), and A Cottage near Lakenham (fig. 12), small, seminal landscapes of this period, eclipse prior work through the use of thin and diffuse chiaroscuro as a contributing pictorial device. Its origin may be traced to Crome’s immature adaptation of work by Rembrandt or to his own innate talent. His use of a wider range of pictorial and psychological expression of shadow as a complement to light broadens the contrasting values in A Cottage on the Yare (fig. 18) and raises them to a dominant role stripped of dramatic implications. The large and simple masses were bathed in luminous and shaded tonalities to emphasize the theme in a new enlargement of compositional scale. We may conclude that his imagination was stirred by the evocative qualities of shaded areas contrasting with luminous ones. Moreover, the golden animation of the intelligent touch, which is almost akin to the surface of unpolished marble on the cottage fa£ade fortifies the impression of Crome’s probable familiarity with Rembrandt. At this time, ca. 1803, Crome did not always depend upon emphatic tonal contrasts. The subtly contrasting muted colors, such as are visible in the Composition in the Style of Wilson (fig. 13) and the chronologically related A Castle in Ruins, Morning (fig. 14), were effectively employed with force and richness. The cool palette closely allied to the subdued, blue re¬ flections in the Wilsonian designs evoke a stimulating vibrancy in space. The Crome of the early nineteenth century was not yet prepared to exploit chiaroscuro for its fullest dramatic effects. Nevertheless, the influence of Wilson together with more intense use of light and shade periodically recurs and flows interchangeably through this and subsequent periods. In the summer of 1804, a search for more exciting ideas induced Crome and Ladbrooke to leave Norwich on a sketching tour of Wales.30 The impetus to explore the well-trodden

a tutor in 1802 and again in 1806, to accompany them

untraced A Sketch in Patterdaie, india ink (no. 50), and

on a holiday tour of the Lake District. See Augustus

Waterfall at St. Michel’s Le Fleming’s, Westmorland,

J. Hare, The Gurneys of Earlham (London, 1895),

colored on the spot (no. 209), along with Scene in

Vol. I, pp. 74, 115, 151. 29. The exact route and sketching circumstances

Patterdaie, Cumberland, a sketch (no. 93), now in the collection

of

the

Right

Honorable

Viscount

of this experience during this tour remain uncertain.

Mackintosh of Halifax, appeared in the first exhibi¬

We may assume that Crome’s return to Norwich

tion of the Norwich Society of Artists.

was leisurely and afforded him an opportunity for some private work. Three Westmorland scenes, the

44

30. R.

H.

Mottram, John

(London, 1931), p. 91.

Crome

of Norwich

sketching ground of the Wye and the Severn rivers may have been prompted by a forth¬ coming exhibition sponsored by the Norwich Society for the following year. Crome, now firmly established as a drawing master, had probably heard from John Sell Cotman of the area s picturesqueness. He may have also wanted to explore the technical use of the new style and coloring” that Girtin, Turner, and Cotman were evolving in London.31 Cotman, also of Norwich, was living in London and regularly returned to Norwich to pay visits to his father. Although he was Crome s junior by fourteen years, Cotman was a lifelong friend and may have stimulated Crome’s enthusiasm and curiosity for the trip. He was an attractice and gifted artist, who, in 1800 and again in 1802, had made tours to Wales in search of the picturesque. The planned expedition followed a well-established romantic route which could fulfill the need for new subject matter and provide an opportunity to try out the new tech¬ nique. The only evidence documenting this tour is suggested in the recorded titles of the pictures Crome displayed in the subsequent Norwich exhibition. In a narrow sense, the productions of this experience were predominantly topographical scenes. Two views each of Chepstow

Castle, Goodrich Castle, and Tintern Abbey (only the Norwich Tintern Abbey [fig. 149] is extant) were exhibited in 1805; one view of Goodrich Castle and one of Tintern Abbey were exhibited in 1806 and 1807, respectively; and another view of Goodrich Castle appeared in the 1809 exhibition. We are fortunate that four watercolors and one oil painting survived to record this stage of Crome’s development. Not all the Welsh subjects were purely topographical, even though topography was popular at the time. Slate Quarries (plate II, fig. 20), a painting of capital importance, illustrates this point. The very nature of its subject required a broader conception, and the style reflects a complete departure from Crome’s then prevailing practice. Slate Quarries demonstrates a concept without a prototype in Crome’s work, a broadening of the limits of his earlier per¬ formances. The general conception and execution produce a feeling of immense spaciousness, of a wider field of vision, and of a deeper penetration into space. The successive diagonal planes of the composition, conspicuously parallel in the design, are like projected screens which, without really being represented, suggest that space and atmosphere are part of the pictorial reality. Descending areas of illusory emptiness with interruptions and submergences of space are separated by a winding river, reminiscent of Hogarth’s serpentine line, from which the reemergence of ascending contours and shapes reaches toward the distant twin summits veiled by encircling fleecy clouds. A similar serpentine curve can be detected in some of Crome’s winding woodland paths, country roads, and marshland rivers. He was well aware of Hogarth’s theories, for he possessed a copy of the Analysis of Beauty.32 Both the way in which space is used and the mood of the picture tend to stimulate reflection and suggest the presence of a romantic understructure. As the picture planes recede, they make substantive use of muted color and form and effectively combine the visual and nonvisual elements. The modeling of form attains a unity which subordinates individual shapes, pro¬ ducing and centralizing the mood of the picture. The entire work is a new kind of design for Crome, exhibiting a new power for the majestic rendition of natural form. On the other hand, what holds empty spaces and suggested objects together is more accentuated than what 31. S. H. Kitson, The Life of John Sell Cotman (London, 1937), pp. 19, 45-

Sale, Monday, Oct. 1, 1821,” as Lot No. 175. This set of Hogarth’s Works may have contained this book.

32. Hogarth's Works appears in the “Fifth Day’s

45

separates them. His improvement in clarity of form, tone control of contrast, and an intimate and sympathetic understanding of pigments achieved a new power of illusion in which light, shade, and atmosphere occupy space as actual physical entities. The tight but flexible handling presages to a considerable degree some of the elements of style that Crome was later to adopt, while the broad-grained canvas upon which Slate Quarries is painted furnishes a textural vehicle for the rich, vibrant quality of the surface. Historical evidence relating to preparatory studies for Slate Quarries is missing. It is hardly conceivable that Crome developed this picture from pure memory. Pencil sketches, we may surmise, were drawn on the spot with revisions made at a later time. The actual painting was probably done in his Norwich studio. By 1805, he had attained a high level of discipline and complete mastery of the technical means and the raw materials in the use of the oil medium. Less likely, and perhaps farfetched, is the possibility that Slate Quarries was based on pre¬ liminary on-the-spot pencil studies of Robert Ladbrooke. This is not to presume that the actual work on the canvas was a collaborative effort; the design, style, colorings, and brushwork in their entirety are by Crome alone. As the inception of the picture has been uncertain, so the failure of Crome to display it in the exhibitions at Norwich has been another mystery. This latter omission is, however, explainable by the early sale of the picture to Denis B. Murphy, an artist friend, or to Dawson Turner, a very important patron throughout most of Crome’s professional life, who may have withheld it from public showing. Not being a member of the Norwich Society of Artists, Dawson Turner would not have been eligible to exhibit it, and Murphy was not, at this early date, exhibiting at Norwich.33 The large Welsh watercolor, Tintern Abbey (fig. 149), with a diminutive solitary figure, is painted in the tradition of the late eighteenth century; this drawing, together with the smaller watercolor, Dolgelly, North Wales (fig. 146), reflect the antiquarian-with-picturesque curiosity of a novice traveler rather than the true inclinations of an artist. Even the fugitive effects of the color schemes tend to be cool and reserved and, together with the other incidental land¬ scape elements, are uncharacteristic of the real nature of Crome. Both of these watercolors may safely be considered contemporary with Slate Quarries and dated confidently to the latter part of 1804 or the first part of 1805, in spite of the fact that another watercolor of Tintern Abbey was not exhibited by Crome until the society exhibition of 1807 (no. 13). Significant in these productions are an individual, but atypical, loose-knit style and freedom, which temporarily outweigh earlier influences. But this individuality was short-lived. Crome was conscious of his limitations, which did not allow him to cast aside past conventions com¬ pletely. He soon fell back upon dependence of other artists. Crome’s maturing vision began a steady growth after 1805; the painting of natural objects took on a new intensity of feeling. Greater determination inspired a new means of pictorial 33. Slate Quarries was not exhibited at Norwich during Crome’s lifetime; evidence to the contrary is

daughter, nor Lady Palgrave, his granddaughter, were able to identify Turner’s

The Cumberland

without foundation. Collins Baker, who agreed with

Sketch by Crome as Slate Quarries. See Dickes, op.

W. F. Dickes, identifies A View of Lakes in Cumber¬

cit., p. 123; Theobald, op. cit., pp. 18-19; and also

land of the 1806 Norwich Society of Artists’ Exhibi¬

Collins Baker, op. cit., pp. 76, 164. For a recapitula¬

tion (no. 145) with Slate Quarries, but there is no

tion of the efforts made to discover the history of

historical proof. I am in complete disagreement with

Slate Quarries see Derek and Timothy Clifford, John

both views. Neither Mrs. Jacobson, Dawson Turner’s

Crome (London, 1968), pp. 103-04, n. 4.

46

organization and expression; his later style is founded upon a fresher, more direct vision. His aim was to broaden and refine, thus diffusing and differentiating the function of contrast values. Paint was applied more thinly and the brush more lightly. Changes in technical methods were initiated by the separation of light and dark zones which Crome had learned from Rembrandt, from Opie, or from one of the examples in Catton House. Completed after Crome s study of these earlier sources, Carrow Abbey (fig. 21) and The Limekiln (fig. 22) stand as definitive products utilizing the techniques, methods, and theories which he had assimilated by the end of this period. These two pictures were probably pro¬ duced in the sequence in which they are discussed but may have been started earlier. For the first time in Crome s development, the changing values of light and dark raise the chiaroscuro device to a substantial role. He exploits the opposition of light and dark areas as a substitute for more elaborate coloristic treatment. Carrow Abbey especially profits from the proximity of the light and dark zones which dramatize a fluctuating borderline but which nevertheless penetrate each other. But in order to gain breadth and the pictorial depth of chiaroscuro, The Limekiln broadens and differentiates the function of contrasting values by means of the radiant diffusion of light, resulting in the loss of much of its austere intensity. Here the beam of sunlight breaks across the middle distance of the composition to cast a strong reflection on the cart and driver, the horse, and the rising prospect on the right of the canvas. Related objects in The Limekiln, like their counterparts in Carrow Abbey, are consistently placed in pictorial space in the interest of compositional breadth. The broad gradients of light and dark dis¬ tinctly dominate the entire composition. Before proceeding to the next phase in Crome’s development, let us pause to emphasize that most of the work up to now typifies the monochromatic brown-and-golden tone of his first canvases. The full-blown characteristic of silvery open air, begun under the influence of Richard Wilson, had not fully appeared. Perfecting silvery tonality with luminous airiness as the nucleus of his subsequent style permitted Crome to assert a freshness of spirit. Although the pictorial organization of repoussoir (forward prominence, foil, set-off, contrast of dark tones) assumed bold exactness, the visual impression of subtle or strong light and dark areas is relatively simple. In the patterning of light and sunlight, the contrast discloses a sensitive feeling for silvery white air which creates a natural ambience for the gradation of luminous shadows. The steadfast adherence to the realist Dutch clarity reflects Crome’s undeviating preference for this tradition as against that of the Gaspard Poussin paintings, then a popular influence of English landscape artists.

1805-13

The paintings prior to the Norwich Society’s first exhibition, which we have discussed, reveal Crome progressing on an irregular, indecisive path, making awkward attempts at a variety of methods and styles. His aims and techniques failed to project the intent of his objective. But during the early part of this period, 1805-13, certain qualities of Gainsborough were exerting a potent influence. Crome’s painting shows little heavy brushwork; it becomes thinner and more fluid and flowing, and delicately graded tones become quite conspicuous. His experiments essentially involved the movement of light and its relation to air, color, and 47

tone. Aerial recession in relation to the planes of the trees diffuses into the atmosphere, giving a transparent and fluid quality to light and air. This was a quality also deeply embedded in the Dutch and English works familiar to him. Above all, Crome attempted to consolidate these qualities into his own concept of atmospheric reality. We shall observe the progress he made to sharpen and deepen the penetration of spatial atmosphere and to enrich the Hobbema-van Ruisdael-Gainsborough ideal. Such atmospheric penetration became plainly evident by 1809-10, exposing freely for the first time the true direction of Crome’s inspiration. Not until then could he organize with facility the Dutch and English inclinations into a stylistic syn¬ thesis consistent with his own realistic concept and temper. As a vehicle for style, Dutch naturalist painters were beginning to supplant Crome’s admiration for Wilson and Gainsborough. Henceforward, Crome’s relationship to external sources of influence can often be conjectured but seldom ascertained. By this time he had had the opportunity to study a great variety of old masters in London. For one so dependent upon his own resources, there can be little doubt that his own collection of paintings, draw¬ ings, and engravings seemed more an adjunct to his painting than merely an artist-connois¬ seur’s cabinet of pictures. All painting, as Henrich Wofflin suggested, owes more to other paintings than they do to direct observation34—an observation which is typified in Crome’s art. Notwithstanding his reliance on the study of other painters, he projected on the canvas methods and styles linked with original perception, even when he was imitating the pictorial ideas of others. In the much earlier, small and somber Storm, Mousehold Heath (fig. 8) and the even darker Old Mill on the Yare (fig. 24), light and dark contrasts and tonal harmonies were essential features of a new concept, reminding one of Rembrandt’s value contrast in The Mill. Com¬ mon to both pictures is a solitary windmill, painted as a bold form, dark in the middle distance, on either side of which relatively wide, lateral strips of landscape are subservient to over¬ powering effects of space and contrast. The boldness of the strong repoussoir elements prevents the receding stormy skies from playing the dominant role. These huge dark accents almost make for imbalance in the pictures, but the pictorial and psychological interest of the central windmills is sustained sufficiently to offset the prominence of the sky. Crome’s use of strong color in these darker zones, like his earlier tendency to the overuse of brownness, had not been completely rectified. In Storm, Mousehold Heath, painted on a wood panel, and Old Mill on the Yare, painted on coarse canvas, Crome had used unusually heavy brushstrokes. He now began to initiate a change in style: a heightened sensitivity to brighter coloristic treatment required softer strokes to evoke gradients between contrasting values; and delineation of light and dark to clarify form replaced broad, brown accents. The adoption of this method produced a greater dependence upon Dutch style as well as a deviation from it. Besides exploiting the juxta¬ position of light and shade for realistic and dramatic effects, Crome integrated them to stimu¬ late aesthetic emotion. Light overrides dark to play over the picture surface with unbroken, subtle gradations of luminosity, to accentuate form and texture, and to expose the breadth and depth of space. In his accomplished work, light permits discordant elements to unify and balance the picture, and the design attains what Crome constantly urged upon his pupils:

34. Heinrich Wofflin,

Kunstgeschictiche Grunde-

begfiffc das Problems der Stilentwick-hmg in der neuen

48

Kunst, 1st ed. (Munich, 1915), p. 249.

I should have liked it better, if you had made it more of a whole . . . making parts broad and of a good shape that they may come in with your composition forming one grand plan of light and shade. . . .3S

Thus, he had a rational objective, attained by using a rational method, and his objective reached a determined effectiveness. If we examine the beautiful panel painting, The Yare at Thorpe, Norwich (fig. 25), we shall immediately find the beginnings of Crome s new outlook. The design is reminiscent of a typical river view by Jan van Goyen or Salomon van Ruysdael, and the composition is the final conception of an inscribed and dated preparatory pencil drawing (fig. 165)—a rare and therefore interesting procedure. The drawing lacks the motifs found in the painting of the two men rowing a boat, the barge with two figures, and the distant sailboat. Since so few of Crome’s preparatory pencil sketches survive, students of his painting will find it interesting to compare the two. There is close affinity between the drawing and the painting in the rendition of the sky and in the treatment of the light and dark effects. Although the penciling of the cloud structures is only sketchy in the drawing, the spontaneity of draftsmanship is readily discernible—a draftsmanship which portends a far-reaching development. The whole of Crome’s intent is carried to completion in the painting. Upon careful examination of this picture, one discovers that the brushwork is looser, thinner, and generally more direct than in any Crome work encountered up to now. What had been considerably heavier brushwork in The Yare at Thorpe, and now obviously thinned from cleaning, is preserved in the silvery gray foliage of the willow tree as well as in the impasto on the faces of the figures. Generally, however, the method of handling paint is more fluid and thinner. Breadth, luminosity, and the direction of movement of the brown gray, silvery cloud mass accentuate the aerial fusion and the receding drift of atmosphere, giving fluency to light and air. With the mastery of technique, Crome draws attention to the com¬ ponents of the sky by reducing repoussoir elements so that details elsewhere in the composition neither clutter the design nor mar the central importance of the atmosphere as a realistic motif. In the middle distance, the sail of the boat gently slopes to the left, thereby indicating the direction of the atmospheric drift in a crucial area of the composition (which, in more mature work, Crome usually placed somewhere near the center of the background). This omnipresence of atmosphere is a direct extention of Wilson’s influence upon Crome, who was at all times aware, as Wilson never was, of the fluid ease with which light shifts and air drifts. To confirm this statement, we need only to compare View on Mousehold Heath (fig. 57) or Norivich River: Afternoon (plate XIII, fig. 108), respectively, with Wilson’s Apollo and the Seasons in the Fitzwilliam Museum or with On Hounslow Heath in the Tate Gallery.36 The Yare at Thorpe follows Crome’s dictum: “brea[d]th must be attended to, if you paint but a muscle give it brea[d]th.”37 The Yare at Thorpe, Norwich was more likely completed before July 16, 1806.38 By this date, Crome was on a tour of the Lake District and Scotland with the Earlham Gurneys and their guests, Samuel Hoare and Thomas Fowell Buxton. How long Crome remained with 35. See Crome’s letter to James Stark, Chapter II, p_ I7. 36. W. G. Constable, Richard Wilson (Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1953), plates 26b and 39b.

37- See Crome letter, p. 17.

38. See Hare, op. cit., Vol. I, pp. 150-51; see also Dickes, op. df.,p. 130, where this picture is incorrectly dated 1819.

49

the Gurneys on the expedition is uncertain. He stayed a short time at Ambleside and returned to Norwich in time to send twenty-nine pictures to the second annual exhibition39 held at Sir Benjamin Wrenche’s Court.40 In the same year recognition came to Crome in London where he first exhibited two pictures (Landscape, no. 260 and Landscape, no. 285) at the Royal Academy.41 Somewhat later in the year after visiting Thomas F. Buxton, who lived at Weymouth, Crome painted View in the Forest in Hampshire, which is not traceable, and View near Wey¬ mouth (fig. 26), formerly incorrectly called View of Solent. This visit to the south of England must have taken place between Crome’s return from the Lake District and the opening of the society’s exhibition in 1806. The View near Weymouth is constructed of slanting lines placed one behind the other and gradually tending to flatten out toward the horizon. In the same plane of the men, horses, and plow is the even stronger vertical feature, the massed dark brown trees, on the extreme left. Together, these motifs accentuate the dip of the horizon on the opposite side and at the same time extend its depth. The effect of such arrangement is Girtinian, resembling his oblong panoramic views with which Crome was undoubtedly familiar. Designs employing such obvious repoussoir are often encountered in his later work. Such patterns are formed by diago¬ nal, horizontal, triangular, or ovoid placement of motifs (alone or in combination and usually to one side) accompanied by a strong horizontal or vertical emphasis of landscape elements in parallel planes. The sky and the land, free ofpalpable heaviness, have an ingenious charm which is absent from all Crome’s previous work, which had been influenced by Wilson or the Dutch. The cool palette of View near Weymouth shows a lightness and freedom of handling unlike that of any painting examined up to now. This pronounced thin handling prompted Pro¬ fessor W. G. Constable, after examining the picture in 1948, to state: “This painting shows plain influence of water-color handling. It must be a man who worked in both media— Cotman? Bonington?”42 The economical use of paint and the light touch was rooted in Crome’s study of Gainsborough’s later work. His methods led Crome to the fundamental technical change of applying a new type of light striation to the transparent dark foreground in View near Weymouth. These markings, together with the receding flatland behind, frame the view into the distance. Crome made clever use of subtle contrast for clarifying the design, but he minimized the dramatic effect. The method of treating the sky is of particular interest. It is painted with a luminous, silvery, pale blue tone and with a contrasting loose impasto in the highlights of the clouds, which is particularly noticeable in the upper right of the canvas.

39. The second annual exhibition opened on

Francis W. Hawcroft, Old Norwich (Norwich, 1961),

August 11, 1806, and continued until August 23,

p. 127, where it is reproduced from a pencil drawing

1806.

by Henry Ninham (1793-1874).

40. Sir Benjamin Wrenche’s Court, a spacious

41. No. 260 is listed in the catalogue of the Royal

Elizabethan mansion, became the residence of Sir

Academy exhibition for 1806 under the name of

Benjamin Wrenche, M.D., an eminent physician

“Mr. Crome.” No. 285 is listed by “Mr. Croom,”

who practiced here for sixty years and died in 1742.

and the name given in the index is also misspelled,

It was in this house that the first exhibition of the

“ Croom, Norwich.”

Norwich Society of Artists was held in 1805. In 1826, the house was taken down, and the Corn Exchange was erected. See Alec M. Cotman and

50

42. This statement is taken from the files of the Detroit Institute of Art.

The method visibly demonstrates that, in a linear broad sky, Crome produced the vaporous recession and luminous aerial quality that he had observed in Wilson. In short, Crome had produced a tour de force. With increased effort he absorbed themes, motifs, and forms created by others, reshaping them according to his own conception. But as his style enlarged, his method and his under¬ standing of the permeation of space with fused light and air became his major concern in composition. His attention to this concern virtually dominated his choice of motifs during these years. How Crome s style and methods were inextricably mixed to achieve the per¬ ceptual reality of penetrating space with atmosphere presents a large problem. A critical analysis centered on the details of his works shows great variations in chronologically close paintings: admittedly, some pictures are so awkwardly painted that they have frequently served as examples of Crome s weaknesses of this period. In fairness, critics might have cited demonstrable qualities that are easily extracted from Crome’s work of the middle portion of the period under consideration rather than questionable ones.43 At this focal point in Crome’s growth—the middle and latter part of this period—there are two ways to chart his progress. He used a time-honored method for instruction and selfhelp : copying themes and styles, adapting motifs, applying the forms of his English and Dutch predecessors, and reshaping them in sketches and watercolors according to his con¬ ception and purpose. Such practice, however valid it seems from our perspective, was sporadic in his future development. A second, more important method which he adopted was to concentrate on grading contrasts of light and shade, adjusting and integrating their values. Manipulating and perfecting these qualities occupied his attention throughout the remainder of his career. As early as 1806, Crome began to copy The Cottage Door by Gainsborough44 as the primary example upon which to base experiments and methods. After he saw an old, tumbledown blacksmith’s shop in or near the small village of Hingham, a few miles from Norwich, the delapidated building became the chief inspiration for two related variations on the theme (fig. 175 and fig. 176), which were probably the two watercolors that appeared in the 1807 Norwich exhibition under the same title of Blacksmith's Shop (from nature). These pictures and another untraced exhibit of the same year, Blacksmith's Shop, Hardingham, plus the lost Sketch from Nature in the Style of Gainsborough, document the importance Crome assigned to copying Gainsborough’s work. Crome’s blacksmith-shop themes became for him a reassuring symbol of rural life much as van Gogh’s old pair of shoes represented to the Dutch painter the emotion he expressed on his deathbed: “there’ll never be an end to human misery.”45 So potent was the influence of Gainsborough on the Norwich artist that the frontal com¬ position of Crome’s watercolor, now in the Doncaster Museum and Gallery of Art (fig. 176), was used by him as a working source to produce the painting, The Blacksmith's Shop, Hingham (fig. 34). The Doncaster watercolor is considerably more finished than its companion in the City of Norwich Museums (fig. 175), a repetition with variations probably made earlier. The 43. Unsubstantiated comments in the press and

45. Maurice Reynal, History of Modem Painting,

literature on works by Crome have led the author

2nd ed. (Geneva, Switzerland, 1949), Vol. I, p. 142.

to this conclusion—observations derived from the

These were van Gogh’s last words, uttered to his

confused state of the chronological development of

brother, Theo, who was at his side at the time of his

Crome’s style.

death, July 29, 1890.

44. See Chapter I, n. 35. 51

splendid complexity and free handling of the scenery in both drawings exemplify a sketching style of originality and expressiveness. According to Dawson Turner, Thomas Harvey was directly responsible for encouraging Cromc to copy The Cottage Door, which was soon followed by the painting of Cottage at Hunstanton, Norfolk, later owned by Turner, who stated that it resembled the Gainsborough.46 In evaluating the benefits Crome received from this experience, Dawson Turner appraised them as follows:

The task he [Crome] performed with credit; and he found it of the greatest advantage; it improved his taste, and it corrected his style; it taught him better to appreciate himself and others. . . . He afterward adopted a lighter and freer tone, and on some occasions even infused into his painting a portion of the magic light ofj. M. W. Turner.47

It is noteworthy that in John Berney Crome’s sale in 1834 there appears the following entry: “ The Blacksmith’s Shop, by the late Mr. Crome, one of his best pictures, in style of Gains¬ borough”; it was sold for six pounds.48 The picture referred to is considered to be, without question, the one now hanging in the Philadelphia Museum of Art (fig. 34). What did Crome see in Gainsborough’s art? To answer this question, we turn to the statement handed down to us by Dawson Turner, which suggests that Crome discovered a number of principles that were later to become a part of his own artistic creed. They provided him with significant milestones in his career: improvement in taste, a spontaneity of handling the brush, a nimbleness of touch, and a lighcness of tone. Crome’s principal concern was never to overthrow prevailing convention or to invent new stylistic principles but instead to effect changes of expression and style within those conventions at his command. Hitherto hesitant and indecisive, now Crome began to handle surface unity, tone, and touch with clarity and confidence. Earlier difficulties in brushwork were minimized, and recognizable changes emerged: paint was applied more thinly and with a softness and delicacy of touch. Within this new framework, the clarity of distance, the improvement of spatial recession, and the gentle nuances of skies are noticeable in Moonrise on the Yare (fig. 33) as well as in View on the Yare (fig. 38). In these works, which reveal his interest in Gainsborough, Crome used a dark palette in the former picture in contrast to a brighter and lighter one in the latter: gray ambers and rich golden browns or tourquoise greens and milky blues brushed in lightly with a tender touch, one melting into another. The colorings and shapely brushstrokes recall methods

46. Cottage at Hunstanton, Norfolk is believed to

is dated “ Wednesday, September 3rd, 1834, and two

have been Lot No. 4, sold at the auction of Knight,

following days,” and is entitled “A Catalogue of

Frank and Rutley, January 18, 1968. See Dawson

the Household Furniture, China, Glass, Plate, an

Turner, Outlines in Lithography (Yarmouth, 1840),

extensive

Illustration facing p. 23.

Engravings and Etchings, Books and Illustrated

and

valuable

collection

of Pictures,

47. John Wodderspoon, John Crome and His

Works, Capital Pony, neat Poney Gig and Harness,

Works, 2nd cd. (Norwich, 1876), which includes

and Miscellaneous Effects of Mr. John Berney

“Memoirs of Crome,” by the late Dawson Turner,

Crome,

Esq., of Yarmouth, p. 7.

Norwich, which will be sold at auction by Mr. Cul-

48. The Blacksmith’s Shop appears in the “Third

Middle

Street,

St.

George’s

Colgate,

ley, (under a Fiat of Bankruptcy) on Wednesday,

Day’s Sale, Friday, September Fifth” as Lot No. 57,

September 3rd, and two following days.” A copy of

p. 17. The catalogue of the John Berney Crome Sale

this catalogue is in the author’s possession.

52

learned earlier from Wilson, but they have been augmented and refined by Crome’s study of Gainsborough. A degree of distinctive heaviness of handling is discernible in passages here and there, a fault Crome was never completely able to overcome. He painted facades of houses, barns, and sheds with a minimum of stylistic alteration from borrowed methods, perhaps realizing the limitations of his brushwork beyond which he was either unprepared or unwilling to venture at this stage. However, Moonrisc on the Yare, painted and exhibited in 1808, is an exception. Here Crome broke with his immediate past; he developed a mature new style utilizing technical refine¬ ments. As in the case of The Blacksmith’s Shop, Hitigham (simultaneously exhibited at the Royal Academy, no. 591), Moonrise on the Yare was painted with greater freedom and with a liberal use of oil on a fully prepared, coarsely woven canvas with the ocher or traditional dark, red brown ground. Admired generally by students because of the loose control and fluid treatment of the serpentine river, wherries, and windmill, the style is one nourished by emotional moods. The Moonrise on the Yare lacks Crome’s usual suggestion of heaviness. The presence of these qualities inspired Dawson Turner, in Outlines in Lithography, to say that this picture bore a close resemblance to a van der Neer but was looser and less finished and, we might add, more spacious and less orderly. The subtly contrived effects of the diffuse beams of the moonlight are treated with utmost delicacy and sensitivity. Few painters of moonlight landscapes have accomplished such mastery of the romantic mood. It is tempting to attribute much of the enormous difference between the Moonrise on the Yare and The Blacksmith’s Shop, Hitigham to the diversity in subject matter, however successful had been their respective themes. But the notable modification of Crome’s basic approach in the latter work—the decided variations in nimbleness and directness with which he used the brush—stresses the essential differences. The painter’s visual perception, the use of tones, and the sensitive delineation of elements are united to provide harmonious linear and slanting contours and a naturally clearer articulation of forms. These pictures represent a decisive landmark in Crome’s maturation-—the development of the scene from mere representation to an enrichment of form beyond realism. They constitute the culmination of a point of view which had been emerging gradually since the completion of The Yare at Thorpe, Norwich (ca. 1806). The result, in terms of subject matter, is demonstrable in either picture by a lessen¬ ing of generalization and by a diminishing awkwardness of form. These forms relate to one another through color harmonies and rhythms, with varying degrees of abruptness, rather than through juxtaposition, as in the early paintings. Such an accord between the use of flowing, thin colors, freer handling, and softer, more dexterous touch enabled Crome to achieve greater clarity of illusion and unity of expression, which produced the distinct charm of The Blacksmith’s Shop and the Moonrise on the Yare. He employs these elements of unity and illusion to reinforce his concept of the ground, the sky, and the atmosphere, and to make a particularly strong vivid appeal to the senses. Thus, by 1808 Crome was adapting not only the methods he borrowed but also the subject matter. He was beginning to translate pasticcio into what may be described as a striking discernment of the enveloping effects of atmosphere suffused with light. His interest lay in rendering the actual presence and physical effect of atmosphere with emotional feeling. He sought to achieve the spontaneous expression of what the eye sees even if only through vague and implied illusion. The rendering of atmosphere in pictorial space consumed much of his attention, as did the accurate delineation of forms. 53

Although the impact of Gainsborough on Crome was profound, the characteristics for which the earlier painter is recognized—mannered elegance, sentimentalized rustic figures, rhythmic design, and the bleak conformity of ideal beauty—were irreconcilable with Crome’s attitude toward nature and his orderly arrangement of realism. Gainsborough’s ease in fusing his aesthetic elements suggests a stylistic viewpoint both decorative and mannered.49 This effect, although greatly admired by Crome, ran counter to his conception of style in naturalis¬ tic painting, which was deeply rooted in his love for the untarnished countryside of Norfolk. Crome rejected Gainsborough’s conscious artifice and rhythmic vitality; he stood firm for avoidance of all “manner.” Even during the dominance of Gainsborough’s influence, Crome painted a number of less important, small pictures which were patently in the manner of the stronger tonal qualities of Hobbema, Wynant, and van Ruisdael. Nevertheless, it is apparent that Crome learned the basic principle of thin painting from Gainsborough, which he used from this time onward. This technical fluency was a significant prelude to the handling of paint in View on the Yare (fig. 38), New Mills: Men Wading (plate VI, fig. 55), and Yarmouth Jetty pictures (plate III, fig. 29 and fig. 58). While Crome was involved in painting The Blacksmith’s Shop, he also became interested in sketching and painting St. Martin’s at Oak. Pictures of both subjects were entered in the 1807 exhibition of the Norwich Society, two of St. Martin’s as pencil sketches. In 1808, he exhibited a painting with a title related to the pencil drawings of the previous year. These exhibits were not Crome’s first experience in reproducing antiquity. Carrow Abbey (fig. 21) had been displayed in Norwich two years before. As in the representation of Norwich land¬ scape, his interpretation of architectural antiquity, though infrequent, was highly personal yet rich in historical problems.50 Crome’s interest in local antiquity seems to have been satis¬ fied by his preoccupation with the St. Martin’s theme, a subject now generally known by the title of St. Martin’s Gate. At least ten pictures by Crome based on this theme are convincingly documented from records of exhibitions of 1807, 1808, 1810, 1811, 1812, 1813, 1815, and 1816. The dating of extant versions has been a source of considerable difference of opinion, as has been the identification of the central building in the pictures. It should be noted that exhibits listed in the exhibition catalogues of the Norwich Society of Artists under the title of View or Scene on or near St. Martin’s at Oak means view or scene on or near the river (river Wensum) in Saint Martin’s Parish, Norwich.51 Collins Baker has confused the issue and chronology by stating that the painting exhibited in the 1808 exhibition is the same version (fig. 41) as is now privately owned by the Honorable James Bruce and by not giving close stylistic comparisons to substantiate its date.52 A careful examination of the Bruce St. Martin’s River and Gate shows a more accomplished conception of the sky, atmosphere, and contrasting forms: thin, light trees are set beside a heavy, ivycovered, high-gabled house. The obviously high quality and skill, the thought behind its execution, and the rendering of the motifs, are superior to the artistic standards of Crome’s 49. These styles arc highly particularized by Gains¬

51. Mottram, op. cit., p. 117.

borough in The Harvest Wagon (ca. 1767) in the

52. Collins Baker, op. cit., pp. 27, 77, and 161.

Barber Institute of Art, Birmingham, England, and

Here Collins Baker contradicts his own text. In the

in The Cottage Door with Peasant Smoking (ca. 1788)

alphabetical list of the artist s work he suggests

in The Galleries, Kennedy Collection, University of

possibly

California, Los Angeles.

[St. Martin s Gate] was exhibited at the Norwich

50. See the discussion accompanying (Cat. 21).

54

St. Martin s-at-Oak: looking down the river

Society of 1808 or 1810.”

work in 1808. In the Bruce painting, the color and the treatment of the houses behind the trees in the left distance, as well as the layout, follow closely, if not exactly, the corresponding background passages of Hautbois Common (plate V, fig. 45), which Crome showed in 1810 at Norwich. Because of these observations, we must reject a date prior to 1810 for the Bruce version of St. Martin s Gate. It is also noteworthy that the conception of the sky in this picture affirms Crome’s earliest affinity to Cuyp. Later, the pictorial content of Crome’s painting of skies, after the manner of Cuyp, is reflected in his highly different Washington University Landscape (fig. 36), Yarmouth Harbor (fig. 98), Yarmouth Water Frolic (plate XV, fig. no), and The Fishmarket at Boulogne (plate XVI, fig. 114). Neither of the other geniune Crome examples of the river Wensum with Saint Martin’s in the title can be dated with precision. I believe the Norwich Museum’s picture (fig. 54) is the later of the two: more delicate colorings, changes in design, and arrangement of detail differ from their counterparts in the Bruce picture. The prominent building, in full frontal pose and directly centered in both versions, is painted with exceptionally perceptive delicacy, especially in the right backgrounds. The John G. Johnson picture at Philadelphia, an almost identical companion to the Norwich version, is less finished and is devoid of numerous details; a brush foreign to that of Crome has touched the surface, repairing here and there the damage of neglect and wear. This picture, generally dated a year or two later, is handled more softly and in a more refined manner; moreover, the colors are distilled, pale, and unnaturally lucid. Perhaps Crome was experimenting to see what varied effects he could achieve with lighter, thinner brushwork. The role of John Opie (1761-1807), who befriended Crome and helped to support his development with technical assistance after 1798, may be introduced here. His relationship to Crome and Norwich was dependent upon Opie’s marriage, in 1798, to Amelia Alderson, the daughter of a Norwich practicing physician. This accounted for his frequent visits to the city. During his life, Opie was hailed as the English Rembrandt,53 a connection which may allude to a source of Crome’s concept of light and shade. Indeed, the primary contribution of Opie to the method of Crome was the broadening of shadows from tangible to intangible matter, which increased the pictorial depth of composition. It is true that during his acquain¬ tance with Opie, light and dark as qualities of pictorial organization and expression were inextricably related to Crome’s developing style. Later Crome raised these qualities to a significant and, at times, dominating role in his painting. His mode of treating light and dark is particularly well revealed in Gibraltar Watering Place, Heigham (fig. 31), a painting produced during the height of Cronies admiration for Gainsborough and long after his association with Opie. This picture registers, therefore, the culmination of Crome’s earlier style and demonstrates his intention of developing a mastery of values of contrast. Relationships of light and dark tones are employed unevenly within the representation of the natural world. The obvious massing of strong color as a major pictorial device creates bold contrasts between the thicket and the spreading sunlight. The middle distance sunlight strikes the opaque objects—the cluster of sturdy oaks, the forested area, the clumsily drawn donkey and mount,54 the wooden fence, and the water’s banks—to reflect 53. Ada Earland, John Opie and His Circle (London, 1911), p. 3854. Crome was, in fact, awkward in drawing

arc, however, neutralized by the stress on their natural setting and correct relationship to adjacent objects; their images remain unlocked in space.

animals and frequently human figures as well. They

55

heavy shadows in all directions and to form diffuse contrasts with the lighter treatment of the other parts of the composition. The pattern of light and dark conveys to the beholder the impression that the atmosphere encircles the figures and forms; one feels clearly that the forms are present in a world so much like our own that one could enter it and walk about in it. When the contrast values of Gibraltar Watering Place, Heigham are collated with those of later works, important conclusions emerge. Crome became increasingly less hesitant to explore subjects saturated with varying amounts of clear light, sunlight, or moonlight. When Crome attempted to achieve a particularly tranquil or pleasant mood, he filled his canvases with subdued or luminescent areas, enlivening them with sparkling sunlight or deep shadows but rarely resorting to gaiety of color or other forms of heroics. After about 1807-08, the date assigned to the painting of Gibraltar Watering Place, Heigham, sharp and dramatic contrasts in Crome’s style are infrequent: transitions between light and dark zones are accomplished with a softer touch, and these areas are more smoothly fused, producing the tranquil mood Crome desired. Crome refused to consider as just simple indications of natural phenomena the shadows cast upon the ground or those reflected against a cottage facade, the scintillating moonbeams on the marshland, the sparkle of sunlight on the tree bark or foliage, or even a sunlit stretch of meadowland or a sun-laden woodland path. Such natural observances were challenges to produce faithfully and sensitively an interplay of light and shadow with appropriate color. For Crome, shadows were universal qualities—magical powers that mystify and reveal, vehicles for communicating nature’s moods with compelling artistic force, and visual effects for transcribing personal responses to the beauty of nature. At first, his interest in employing the contrast device was mostly pictorial; in the end, it was mostly psychological. In this evolution, he studied English and Dutch artists, noting particularly their muted contrasts and their richness of tones and hues, whatever the particular color. His observations account for an amazing variety of subtly changing tonalities in his work. The division of color tones reached its height in Crome’s work after his visit to Paris and the Louvre in 1814; it is less discernible before. Although he began to employ lighter, brighter, and purer color as early as 1809 in View on the Yare (fig. 38), he did not master the clarity of tone and the fusion of light and air—thereby creating a range of luminous neutrals and deli¬ cate shadows of nature—until after the continental trip. Zones of veiled sunlight set one against another achieve dramatic contrasting effects, while shadows interpenetrate and mellow the transitions. When sunlight and shadow and over-all luminescence are compared in View at Hellesdon (fig. 27), Catton Lane Scene (fig. 78), A Road near Bury St. Edmunds (fig. 87), and Marling ford Grove (plate IX, fig. 77), a balanced structure, free of sharply separated areas of light and dark, is observable. But at the same time, luminous areas adjacent to partially or fully shaded areas are often intensified to complement the effects of direct, reflected sunlight on nearby objects. The contrast zones are softened and united by the ambient atmosphere. Crome often accentuated such effects by creating flickers of light, often sun-laden, which filtered through the dense foliage, thereby producing impressionistic effects. Postivick Grove (fig. 112), in which patches of sunlight stream through the tree boughs, illustrates this point. Slanting away from the viewer, parallel bands of semishadows alternating with crossbeams of full sunlight pass across the diagonal road as if to divide the actual atmos¬ phere. A haze drifts along the roadway, lined on one side by stately oaks, to fade away in the distance. Color is subservient throughout the picture in order to emphasize areas of contrast, 56

which are sufficiently varied in Crome s later work. The sun-brightened colors and the soft touch give richness and force to the subject matter, rendering the consistency of forms a vital adjuvant of design. Crome sought to interrelate the components of contrast as a device respon¬ sible for projecting moods, conveying timeless arcadian tranquillity throughout his career. Once confident of his mastery of values of contrast, Crome began to look elsewhere for new sources of inspiration. He deliberately attempted to give the atmosphere of Norwich a Dutch-like character—a touch of Jan van der Heyden—but in softer tones. Gradually he developed a personal interest in interpreting neighboring backwater scenes. Several views of the river Wensum at New Mills and of the river Yare were painted and exhibited with the Norwich Society between 1806 and 1812. The reticent touch of Crome, free and soft and fine, in certain of these productions, such as in the thinly painted Back of the New Mills, Norwich (fig. 46), achieved the subtleties of realistic tones and atmosphere and made possible the striking soft gray, contrasting light effects in other works, such as their emphatic use in the Yarmouth Jetty (fig. 100), owned by Sir Edmund Bacon, Bart. The pictures examined up to this point have revealed Crome as progressing along a rela¬ tively irregular path—toward a compromise between his two rival aims of purifying atmospheric effects and clarifying repoussoir elements. Concurrently, he began to develop new aims and methods, using the technique of etching intermittently from 1809 to 1813. So strik¬ ingly alien to his previous work was this practice that it became a detour on the way to his ultimate development. His true genius was not evident until his work of 1810 demonstrated that he could absorb and organize with consistency the mystery of landscape.55 Crome, like most East Anglian painters, was a fervid student of tradition. His strong in¬ debtedness to English painting was soon supplanted by his interest in the realism of Dutch landscape painting. Earlier in his career, he had copied the Hobbema Landscape in Thomas Harvey’s collection;56 it was not until many years later that shadows cast by large clouds in the spacious, overhanging Norfolk skies in his paintings were inspired by Hobbema or van Ruisdael. Crome studied the visual data of their landscape designs and, without hesitancy, built upon these Dutch precedents which had helped to shape the taste and style of East Anglian collectors for well over a generation. Crome and his progeny subsequently helped to perpetuate this tradition. The admiration for Hobbema is well known. Indeed, Hobbema meant to Crome what Joseph Vernet’s portrayal of nature meant to Diderot,57 what Raphael, Correggio, and the Carracci were to Italy. Yet Crome, said the early nineteenth-century historian Allen Cun¬ ningham, imputed much of his success to that master; he admired his works, and imagined he imitated his manner, when in truth he was imitating the scenes which his native land presented

He conceived justly and clearly, and embodied his imagings with wonder¬

ful truth and force. All about him is sterling English, he had no foreign air or put-on graces: he studied and understood the woody scenery of his own country with the skill of a botanist, and the eye of a poet. . . .s8 55. Slate Quarries (plate II, fig. 20) is an earlier work

57- Gerhard Weber,

which qualifies as a successful performance of the

Critics,”

intricacies of landscape.

(August, 1965)1 P- 23$-

56. Turner, op. cit., pp. 16, 39-

Diderot, First of the Art

The Connoisseur, Vol.

CLIX, No. 642

58- Turner, op. cit., p. 16.

57

Not until after midyear, 1810—the recorded date of The Beaters and Hautbois Common—was Crome able to use light and dark tones to put forms into respectable relief and convincing space. A year before, he had employed luminous distant contrast effects in Washington University’s Landscape (fig. 36) for the same purpose. However, the light and dark zones were transposed to more subtle tones for emphasis in Back of the New Mills, Norwich (fig. 46), where complementary hues in the water reflections serve to quicken the observer’s emotions. Can it be that Crome hoped to stir emotions by the presence of light and dark contrasts, or was it his intent to perfect his craftsmanship in terms of color? The method Crome employed was to proceed from strong to lighter values by gradual degrees: he developed first the design, next the values, and then the relationships of the result¬ ing forms. Color was then imposed.59 Once the procedure was developed and found practical, the transition between intensities of values was softened by instilling (like Vermeer) dim and bright luminous areas. The light effects and atmospheric variations of River Landscape with Barge (fig. 39) and New Mills: Men Wading (plate VI, fig. 55) and the even greater luminist qualities of View on Mousehold Heath (fig. 57) function to regulate the flexibility of atmospheric effect, broaden the composition, and enhance the tone. After Crome grasped the fluidity of these relationships, the harmony in his painting reached its zenith in the illumined, ambertinted atmosphere that delicately permeates The Return of the Flock (fig. 70). Here he per¬ sonified nature as a violent, romantic force. Thus, with passion and conviction, Crome created a contrast between light, shade, and air to elicit mood and express feeling. If, as we believe, the pictorial richness and power of The Mill by Rembrandt provoked a response in Crome which he never forgot, then Dutch influence engaged his attention and flourished during a most impressionistic period. The overriding issue—the real one to those who would disagree that this relationship to Rembrandt was a dynamic source of Crome’s style—is between the opposing concepts of the artist as an innocent pasticheur or as an early, ingenious creator. If this latter contention is true, as we assume, then Crome had been im¬ pressed by the dramatic expressiveness of Rembrandt long before his attention was attracted to Opie or was centered on other Dutchmen, Hobbema in particular. Such early influence might reasonably explain Crome’s pre-1800 period of vacillation, thus enabling one to make a more balanced assessment of his stylistic indebtedness, especially when one considers the other Dutch painters responsible for expanding the tradition Wilson had bequeathed to Crome. Hence, the moment he discovered the painting of Hobbema and van Ruisdael, he amplified his own work with their effects of heightened subtleties of tone and with fluid qualities of light and shade, of air and space. Even as Francis Whisler (the Norwich coach and sign painter) and, in a broader sense, Rembrandt, Wilson, and Gainsborough were Crome’s technical masters, the master of his spirit was Hobbema. Nevertheless, the countryside and woodland landscapes of Hobbema, Jacob van Ruisdael, Pijnacker, Wijnants, Salomon van Ruysdael, and Cuyp; the river and 59. Leonardo da Vinci first advocated this prin¬

mony and Contrast of Colours, trans. Charles Martel

ciple, which was in widespread use among the Dutch

(London, 1872). In Crome’s library, there was a copy

naturalist painters admired by Crome. The principle

of Da Vinci on Painting, 1721. See “Catalogue,”

was placed on a scientific basis by Michel-Eugene

Lot No. 75, Fifth Day’s Sale, Monday, October 1,

Chevrcul who wrote De la loi du contraste simultane

1821; see also William Innes Homer, Seurat and the

des coleurs et de Vassortment des objets colores (Paris,

Science of Painting (Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1964),

1939), which was translated: The Principles of Har¬

pp.128-29.

58

canal scenes of Jacob van Ruisdael and van Goyen; the nocturnal landscapes of Aert van der Neer; and the marine paintings of Adrian van de Velde and Jan van der Cappelle exerted a strong influence upon Crome—an influence more compelling than either the works of contemporary English or continental schools. It is evident that all other works that he saw in London and in East Anglian collections, excluding those at Catton House, elicited a limited enthusiastic response. Even at this time in his development, Crome did not intentionally aim to imitate any of these masters, but he drew upon them for sources of style and for a psycho¬ logical point of view. I would suggest that he catalogued similar impressions from his own environment in his observing mind. If we discount his great esteem for Hobbema and van Ruisdael, all of the other Dutch artists became no more than pawns on Crome’s stylistic chessboard on which, after 1813, the game was influenced by first one and then another. Through the years between 1810 and 1813, which included an unexplained trip to Derby¬ shire,60 Crome painted painstakingly: indeed, as carefully as Hobbema had painted. His affinities to Hobbema play an important part in The Way Through the Woods (fig. 59) and in Grove Scene (fig. 113);61 they significantly increase in frequency from about 1810 onward. More than Hobbema, Crome utilized his perceptual acuity in the creation of aerial perspec¬ tive; he was subtler than Hobbema in his ability to fuse light and shade to create the infinite mutations of tonal harmony. One is impressed by these subtleties and tone changes upon examination of two of Crome’s rare still-life paintings, Study of a Burdock (fig. 65) and Study of Flints (fig. 52). The broad burdock leaves in the former picture typify his mastery of delicate shading, emphasized by the juxtaposed vivid coloring of the wild flowers. It was Crome’s reticence of touch that enriched the ideal of Dutch landscape painting. In his earlier painting an inability to uniformly capture the lyricism and pictorial magic is evident. Not until after Crome had studied his favorite Dutchmen—Hobbema and van Ruisdael—and had produced The Return of the Flock (fig. 70, 1813) was directed emotional tension, in the experience of the observer, an integral part of his approach and vigorously amplified in his style.

1813-21 From 1813 until the time of his death, Crome came to a crucial turning point in his work. This was not so much a change in methods and style as it was a change in perception, selfconfidence, and imagination. The uneven growth and uncertain direction which had pre¬ vailed since 1808 now became more steady. As Crome grew more sanguine, his perception and artistic energy sharpened. Unexpected themes and visible improvement in various ele¬ ments began to appear. Light and air, space and natural forms were more explicitly defined, 60. Three drawings probably made during the

Laurence Binyon also prefer the date of 1820 and

Derbyshire trip were sent to the 1811 exhibition at

assign it to the exhibit (no. 53) of that year. But

Norwich by Crome: A Waterfall and Rock (no. 43),

Hawcroft sees a close similarity of style between

Rocks and Waterfall (no. 102), and Drawing of Rock

Grove Scene (fig. 113) and The Beaters (plate IV, fig.

near Matlock (no. 146), none of which I have been

43) of 1810. However, in a personal communication

able to trace.

as recent as 1968, he has revised the date of this work,

61. I relate the close similarity of brushwork and

dating it 1820. See Collins Baker, op. cit., pp. 34, 86,

style to Crome’s work of 1820 and do not associate

and 137; Binyon, op. cit., p. 37; Hawcroft, op. cit.

it with Grove Scene: painted from nature in the 1812

p. 236.

Norwich exhibition (no.

2).

Collins Baker and

59

yet were painted with looser brushwork. Awareness of light increased; clarity of tone and color improved; and penetration into space deepened with luminous atmosphere. These qualities were strengthened, lifting them above the commonplace. Technique and style matured to weld light, luminous color, and atmosphere into a succession of sensitive ex¬ pressions. However profound the transformation of Crome’s art at this time, earlier achievements forcibly contributed to his maturity. His world now became a world of atmosphere, which perfused all natural forms and filled even the remotest corners of the canvas. In the world of Crome, light strikes objects and encircles them; it creates shadows whose gradient luminosity transforms them into varied hues; and opulent reflections dazzle with a diluted sparkle. Had Crome lived longer we may conjecture that his attention might have been concentrated on the problems of light with more assiduous devotion, perhaps attempting an optical investigation on canvas of resolving the phenomenon of light reflected from nature onto the human retina. The rendering of light in the atmosphere may be designated as Crome’s “classic” expression of realism in his maturity. Although he became highly competent, as The Beaters, 1810, New Mills: Men Wading and View on MousehoU Heath, both 1812, attest, had the experience from his visit to the Continent and the Louvre Museum not changed the expressive qualities of borrowed styles and methods, thereby producing stylistically significant effects upon his development after 1814, Crome probably would have been cast into art-history limbo. With the exception of the Wales trip, the Lake District visits, and the Weymouth and Derbyshire visits, about which we know so little, Crome crossed the Channel on a single holiday trip to Paris.62 This trip, in October, 1814, took place two months after the society exhibition of that year. It was time of national rejoicing—bonfires and all sorts of celebration were occurring in Norwich and nearby Yarmouth—after long years of anxiety, deprivation, and war. A general peace was declared; England and her allies entered Paris; Napoleon was dethroned and sent to exile on the island of Elba; and France saw the subsequent restoration of the Bourbons. Crome was like hundreds of other Englishmen who flocked to Paris to see the accumulated art treasures in an exhibition in the Louvre, called Conquis par la grande Armee, before the works were returned to their rightful owners in Italy, Germany, Flanders, and the Netherlands. Thus, the timing of this visit was of decisive importance, and the impact of the continental holiday affected the future of Crome’s artistic maturity. After three weeks of travel to Boulogne, Saint-Cloud, Versailles, Paris, the vicinity of the Meuse River, Brussels, and Ostend, Crome returned to Norwich. This trip was a gay as well as a profoundly inspiring experience for Crome. As far as work in Paris is concerned, John Berney Crome has indicated that his father busied himself only in sketching and collecting material.63 In the five years following his return from Paris, Crome painted at least three pictures from pencil sketches made on the Continent. Unfortunately, not a single one of the working draw¬ ings is traceable; nor are they related thematically or stylistically. Boulevard des Italiens, Paris (plate VIII, fig. 75) and The Fishmarket at Boulogne (plate XVI, fig. 114), exhibited in 1815 and 1820, respectively, portray the populace engaged in everyday activity—a social commentary 62. William Freeman and Daniel Coppin, Norwich landscape artists of some merit, and fellow members of the society accompanied Crome on this trip. 60

63. Dickes, op. cit., p. 65.

upon the time. The other picture, Bruges River— Ostetid in the Distance — Moonlight (fig. 82), is a pictorial rendering of a scene he found most congenial. This small group of paintings and a letter written from Paris to his wife, dated October 10, 1814, are the only documents that record Crome’s brief European excursion.64 For the Norwich exhibition of 1815, Crome completed the Boulevard des Italiens, Paris, skillfully blending the avenues of trees and houses on either side of the canvas, the open stalls and tables of the marketplace, and the tradesmen and strollers conversing with each other during their afternoon promenade. This picture and the equally un-Crome-like The Fishmarket at Boulogne stand by themselves in Crome’s oeuvre. Both paintings demonstrate the sensitivity of the artist. The former—in an unusual light and gay, misty green key—conveys the bustle of urban life teeming with excitement and motion; the latter—in a Turneresque, sallow haze—abounds with more variety and gaiety of color: canary yellow, rose beige, blue, red, and dark browns in the varied dresses of the fisherfolk of Boulogne. Each picture is notable for its human figures, dispelling the myth of Crome’s inability to paint such objects. Since his skill as a draftsman of the human figure emerges so competently here, we would firmly deny the allegations of critics who suggest that Crome used other hands to add figures to his landscapes. The crudity of earlier figures can be plausibly and simply explained by his lack of experience. The broad and careful draftsmanship, the soft brushwork, and the ease and freedom of the handling of the human figures in the Boulevard and The Fishmarket invite comparison with the handling and coloring by Crome of the figures in The Beaters (plate IV, fig. 43), View near Norwich, Harvesters (fig. 79), Yarmouth Jetty (fig. 58), and A Barge with a Wounded Soldier (plate XII, fig. 103). Special attention is here directed to the strangely placed French officer with his outflung right arm and his lady, followed by two dogs (fig. 76), in the lower left foreground of the Boulevard des Italiens, Paris. Crome has caught his subjects ready to assume their walk after a brief pause. The suggestion of action and the characterizations and the costumes of the couple give added drama to the picture. Besides, these features are beautifully articulated in the artist’s particular style of draftsmanship. This motif represents an early nineteenth-century example of what the late Professor Erwin Panofsky has called “a motif in the promenade tradition.”65 In a recent

64. This letter to “ Dear Wife ” is preserved in the

generation after van Dyck formalized the betrothal

City of Norwich Museums, Colman Collection,

subject, Reynolds, Gainsborough, and Lawrence

no. 235.951. See Chapter II, n. 1.

rendered related and enlarged themes again and

65. Although earlier examples in the promenade

again. As for Crome, we know of no relationship to

tradition probably antedate Diirer’s pen drawing,

any of the aforementioned works. The promenade

Young Couple Taking A Walk, they have never been

inclusion, the spirit, and the costumes, represented in

investigated. The late Professor Panofsky suggested

the Boulevard des Italiens, Paris, are original motifs

that a motif of a man and woman pleasure-walking

derived from the artist’s creative mind. The presence

in an open-air setting is an offspring of the Diirer

of this motif therefore deserves to take its rightful

engraving.

According to Dr. Jakob Rosenberg,

place in this old and established tradition in European

Rembrandt probably borrowed from Diirer the

painting. For further information relating to the

reversed version of a drawing in the Groningen

engravings and pictures referred to above, see Erwin

Museum, which is based on an engraved Diirer

Panofsky, Albrecht Diirer, 2nd ed., rev. (Princeton,

impression by Marcantonio Raimondi. Panofsky has

New Jersey, 1945), Vol. I, pp. 24-25, and Vol. II,

also pointed out that the Rubens sketch in the

Handlist of Works, no. 1245, fig. 28; and Jakob

Wallace Collection, The Marriage, also originated

Rosenberg, Rembrandt, rev. ed. (Greenwich, Con¬

from the same Diirer engraving. More than a

necticut, 1964), pp. 253-54, figs. 216 and 217. The

6l

communication, Professor Albert Elsen has questioned the necessity of this motif in the com¬ position, implying that it is superfluous.66 In view of the general character of the picture, the addition of this part of the subject matter is a testimonial to Crome’s keen awareness of the totality of Parisian sights and sounds. Each element participates in his effort to transmit the all-encompassing lively spirit of city life. Such variety enhances the compositional unity of the artist’s aesthetic appreciation of Paris. Narrow brushstrokes and a comparatively heavy impasto achieve a strong statement, akin to Pissarro’s painting of the same subject, while an undefinable mood of gaiety and harmony relates to the visual experience of the Impressionist painters. In earlier writings, the chronology of Bruges River — Ostend in the Distance — Moonlight appeared in the Norwich Society exhibition of 1816 and subsequently was lent by Frederick James Crome to the Crome Memorial Exhibition of 1821 (60), where it appeared under the title of Scene between Bruges and Ostend. Idcre it was erroneously dated 1818. The mistaken title and the date have been responsible for Binyon’s conjecture that Bruges River — Ostend in the Distance was painted in 1818, which Dickes did not question. We subscribe to the opinion that this picture is identical with Scene between Bruges and Ostend and is datable to 1816, an opinion with which Collins Baker agreed.67 Within the same period that Crome was painting his continental impressions—between 1814 and 1820—he also began adding body color to some of his watercolors. He employed the technique of mixing transparent wash and increasing body color to produce two par¬ ticularly attractive watercolors. Of these, the earlier, Silver Birches (fig. 208) and The Glade Cottage (fig. 209), datable to ca. 1814-15 and ca. 1815-17, respectively, reveal another facet of Crome’s talent.68 Each of these drawings, however, is a thoroughly satisfactory, lovingly observed rendering of a beautiful landscape. In each the sky is a pale blue wash in which the white of the drawing paper is allowed to form the filmy clouds. The clarity of color—silvery gray to chocolate to blackish brown—is handled in a highly cultivated manner. In the brighter lights, the body color produces a chalky, luminant glow, but lacks both the delicacy of transparent colors and the juicy richness of oils; the resulting opacity also tends to obscure the visible brushstrokes of the artist. Moreover, this small group of drawings in body color demonstrates a method used by Crome, previously underemphasized, which may have played a decisive role in his use of brighter colorings. To return briefly to Crome’s life after his visit to Paris, we know that his duties as a drawing master in the Norwich Grammar School (an appointment he held from 1813 to the end of his career), combined with the responsibilities of a busy private practice, did not permit him to wander far from Norwich. With a reputation that spread throughout the county,69 Crome

term “promenade tradition” is the late Professor

68. A close examination of any one of these

Panofsky’s. Concerning the application of the term,

watercolors will demonstrate that the opaque, sil¬

Mr. Daniel Catton Rich has graciously permitted

very, gray white markings are by the same hand and

reference to a letter he received from Professor

overlay the transparent modeling of the tree trunks

Panofsky, dated June 23, 1959.

and larger branches. White pigment has been dis-

66. In reply to an inquiry by the author, this comment of Professor Elsen’s was received on Febru¬ ary ro, 1964. 67. See Binyon, op. cit., p. 33; see also Dickes, op. cit., p. 122; and Collins Baker, op. cit., p. 124.

62

cernibly added to the colors. 69. Some of the better-known pupils taught by Crome in the King Edward VI Grammar School were James Brooke, later rajah of Sarawak; George Borrow, the author of Lavengro (1851) and The

enjoyed the patronage of the well-to-do families of Norfolk and was their favorite drawing master. This status was reached in spite of widespread privation, the inflated prices of food and commodities, and the rioting and potential troubles that were rampant for a year or two after the Battle of Waterloo. By 1817, Crome was assisted in his daily rounds of teaching by his oldest son, John Bcrney Crome. Thus, many activities hindered and interfered with his painting, and may account for his relatively small output at a time when one would expect him to have been somewhat more prolific. Besides the many daily activities, other problems confronted Crome. Within the Norwich Society of Artists, differing policies began to arise in 1815, and in the following year, the society separated into two rival exhibition groups. Crome and his followers, representing the original society, were allied against Robert Ladbrooke and the secessionists, which were met by the Crome faction with larger exhibitions. Because of his loyalty to the society, Crome must have been deeply disturbed by this factionalism. The separate exhibitions continued through 1818, when the Ladbrooke contingent, called the Norfolk and Norwich Society of Artists, dissolved; the old society flourished again. From the beginning of this period (ca. 1815), Crome’s major work featured reorganized formats of a variety of subjects on which he had concentrated in earlier periods—heath and backwater scenes, woodland paths and stately trees, and coastal and grove scenes. Henceforth, light, like atmosphere, was lavishly used throughout the composition with great effect. But toward the end of the period, illumination was not the only potent unifying element: the chiaroscuro device also became a contributing factor. He so successfully blended tones of light and dark that his mature work is rarely rivaled for order, lucidity, and intelligence. In addition to unifying the elements of design by arranging motifs and by depending on a more versatile use of chiaroscuro, Crome focused attention on the luminary aspects of the sky and devoted much attention to the spatial division of the picture plane. At this time, the major exhibits were Marlingford Grove (plate IX, fig. 77), Cotton Lane Scene (fig. 78), Mousehold Heath, Norwich (plate XIV, fig. 109), and Grove Scene (fig. 113), in which light and atmospheric effects were no longer a formidable problem for Crome. In these pictures, he markedly diminished the size of vertical forms, especially of trees, to produce a deepened vista and a sharpening of distant objects. This new composition gave the impression of over-all spacious¬ ness but permitted the viewer’s attention to be drawn to particular forms. This structured patterning of space and fine rhythmic organization was the basis of Crome’s stylistic approach in his handsome oil painting, The Glade Cottage (fig. 102), of 1817. The flexible plein-air style of these pictures convey a freshness and crispness of individual form. Simultaneously, another admirable change in Crome s style occurred. His skillful use of glazes, as in the Wherries on the Yare (fig. 80), contrasted areas of thin, smooth finish with areas of thicker, granulated texture. Romany Rye (1857); the Reverend E. T. Daniels, an

to the society exhibitions as well as to the Royal

etcher and watercolorist; R. W. Bacon, the editor

Academy and the British Institution. While teaching,

and proprietor of the Norwich Mercury, who charac¬

Crome had a habit of taking up pupil’s tools and

terized Crome by referring to him as “ my mirth-

impatiently

loving, kind, and earnest teacher”; John Bcrney

consequently, their productions often show unmis¬

Crome, James Stark, and George Vincent, members

takable signs of the master’s hand.

working

on

their page

or canvas;

of the Norwich Society of Artists and contributors

63

With the enriched atmosphere, Crome demonstrated that an expanding stylistic principle was developing in his work despite differences in earlier individual pictures. After 1815, light and dark, atmosphere and space were dynamically integrated; natural form was enveloped by the atmosphere and melted into it. Light and air became Crome’s world of reality, a world in which visual appearance could be altered—intensified or diminished. Employing a much more complex structural design than was his custom, in Road with Pollards (fig. 81) Crome communicates emotion by purely plastic means, stressing the im¬ portance of empty areas between widely separated pollards. He used broad expanses of subdued light in the foreground and in the distant background to express melancholy loneli¬ ness. The row of pollards and the half dead pollard on the extreme left are seen beneath a silvery blue sky with silver gray clouds and white lights. The confluent air and light expands from the narrow foreground to an ever increasing vista, reaching the heavy clouds in the background. In quest of even stronger out-of-door effects, Crome used the same compositional system in Pockthorpe, Boat and Boathouse (fig. 89) with equal mastery, permeating the atmos¬ phere with variable soft blue hues. Another phase of Crome’s life as a drawing master, which was also to influence his painting from 1817 until the end of his career, was his regular weekly teaching trip to Yarmouth. During these trips, twenty-odd miles from Norwich in a horse-drawn cart, his custom was to remain overnight at the waterfront house of Samuel Paget. Paget was a modest collector who had a small number of canvases by Michael Sharp, George Morland, James Ward, and several paintings by Crome.70 Mrs. Paget and her daughter were pupils of Crome, and during their tutelage—the last four years of Crome’s life—he produced a limited number of paintings of substantial merit. Yarmouth Jetty (fig. 100) with its spiritual setting and beautiful sky, A Barge with a Wounded Soldier (plate XII, fig. 103) with genre detail, the breezy Squall off Yarmouth (fig. 106), the serene and idyllic Yarmouth Beach and Mill, Looking North (plate XI, fig. 107), and the golden luminosity of the Cuyp-like sky of Yarmouth Water Frolic (plate XV, fig. no) were products of Crome’s tutorial visits to the Pagets and were perhaps painted in the order listed above. These pictures compose a compact series of beach and sea scenes, with an emphasis on closeup detail and subordinate motifs which are distant and small, yet clear and precise. This sharp focus grows from the spacious, breezy atmosphere and from the simple modeling of forms, enveloped in subdued sunlight and punctuated by subtly contrasting values. It is interesting to note that Crome selected the horizontal format for this series of pictures, whereas many of his major productions were painted on vertically shaped canvases or panels. As important as the spacious atmosphere became in his prevailing style is Crome’s emphasis of color in an equally important picture, Norwich River: Afternoon (plate XIII, fig. 108). Unlike many of Crome’s late works, this painting is still in remarkably good condition, the colors and texture remaining essentially unchanged. Here muted color serves to modulate sunlight, drowning its opalescence. Particularly striking in this picture is the canary-colored dress worn by the woman seated in the boat, in contrast to the multicolored water reflections. Although the artist relied on subdued color and full sunshine, the composition conveys a powerful feeling of mass and space, especially in the pastel, milky blue sky, which is relatively cloudless

70. Elise Paget, The Magazine of Art (London, Paris, New York, 1882), pp. 221-26.

64

in comparison to most of his previous mature work. There is a clear indication in this picture that the filmy smoke motif, in the mid-center, is employed to reveal the presence of atmos¬ phere, expressing its gentle drift. We have seen how the classic synthesis of light and dark has given way to the more turbu¬ lent feeling for atmosphere and to a striving for pictorial depth, as in The Gate (fig. 83) of 1815-16.71 Such qualities anticipate those characteristics in painting of the romantic era. When the content and style of The Wensum at Thorpe: Boys Bathing (plate X, fig. 101) of the following year are compared with those of The Gate, Crome’s progress in mastering atmos¬ phere, silhouette, and light is apparent. He has successfully handled the conflict between these elements in nature and their representation in painting. The Porlingland Oak (fig. 105),72 a celebrated creation of 1818, welds all of these elements into a fresh whole. Thus, he now had complete confidence that he could paint the Norfolk countryside on a large scale with its full quota of lush, identifiable, emotionally charged detail.73 The Porlingand Oak clearly reveals how sunlight and atmosphere enraptured Crome. The interweaving of these qualities suggests the extent to which he absorbed and improved upon the intermediate silhouettes and internal details of Hobbema, van Ruisdael, Cuyp, and perhaps Anthonie Waterloo. Crome’s experi¬ ence in painting The Poringland Oak had an additional significant effect: the liquidity of air and sunbathed light in a continuous space—which acted as a receptacle for sunshine—took on heightened importance. Crome achieved this effect by manipulating light values, instead of, as in the past, having to depend on line, form, and cool tones. His recognizable symbols— the sturdy oak, the foreground pool of water, the four boys bathing, and the receding vaporous clouds—undergo no significant distortion. Crome was prepared by now to combine these qualities in a painting which was to become his most notable contribution to the whole art of landscape painting—Mousehold Heath, Norwich (plate XIV, fig. 109). In this picture his visual memories from early childhood are united with mature perception of atmosphere and limitless space; it is the perception of the natural world as color and pattern that underlies these qualities. The subject matter is an endless serene panorama whose grandeur and unity of conception are typical of those qualities which represent Crome: broad and deep space suffused with light. He conceived these qualities with powerful emotion not because he was imaginative or inventive but because he was observant. Mousehold Heath represents light-filled atmosphere as something noble in itself: it is the sole expression of beauty that Crome saw. The light values, subtly but vitally expressed as visual texture, multicoloring and softening hues with halftones and fractions of tones, are variable and infinitely adjustable to the mood of the composition. He imposed upon the landscape the light, limitless atmosphere which neither disturbed nor was disturbed by the foreground detail, such as the thistle, foxglove, and burdock. As space is broadened and deepened in the painting, the horizon is lowered, the sky is widened, and the color is softened to dissolve the hovering clouds into vague tints, suggesting great distance.74 His preference for gray green 71. Norman L. Goldberg, op. cit., p. 195.

Michael Sharpe. The author staunchly holds to the

72. Ibid., p. 195.

view that the whole composition is the work of no

73. This statement is based on the assumption that

artist other than John Crome. See Binyon, op. cit.,

the draftsmanship and painting of the four boys bathing in the left foreground pool of water are

P- 3474. From about 1730 onward, van Goyen and

solely the work of Crome. Bmyon has contradicted

Salomon van Ruysdael were the principal landscape

this assumption by stating that the figures are by

painters who introduced and followed this trend,

65

and gray brown tonality explains Crome’s color selection: he softened tints rather than heightened colors. Despite this heightened emphasis on light and atmosphere, certain features of Crome’s earlier design persisted: the central motif (the winding road) set in the middle ground at right angles to the widening vista, the deceptively broad distant view, and the over-all daring simplicity. There is some concern with the choice of the foreground mass, shapes, and perspective, but these elements are now of secondary interest. The hitherto careless draftsman¬ ship is absent. And the serpentine road curving to the left, reappearing over the fold of the heath and mounting to the skyline, is sketched in a manner unlike that of any other road in his work. It demands the viewer’s penetration into the third dimension of perspective of the painting, an achievement made possible by the patterning of light and air and by the repoussoir complex of light and dark in the foreground. Mousehold Heath is not an expression of Crome’s personal response to objects of accepted beauty, nor is it a nostalgic communion with the accidentals of nature. It has a nearly unexplainable internal tension: this tension is conveyed by means of fair and silvery light in the air, but most significantly by means of an out-of-door alliance of artistic power with a true impression of an aspect of nature which saturates the deep, diverging vista. While there can be little doubt that Crome’s maturing vision was mainly responsible for the flowering of this final style, its growth was dependent, in part, upon the recurring influence of Cuyp. In the literature of 1840, Dawson Turner mentioned a picture he had acquired from Thomas Harvey,75 and three weeks after Harvey’s death the name of Cuyp appeared among his pictures sold. These were pictures Crome would have had many opportunities to study. At the time of Crome’s death, his personal cabinet also contained pictures of this master’s works.76 Earlier writers have repeatedly acknowledged Crome’s masterly control of light and aerial perspective, noticing particularly his success in achieving a sense of distance into open space.77 But no one has pointed to the winding road leading straight into depth in the middle of Crome’s large Mousehold Heath as a motif probably inspired by Cuyp, who had used it in two landscapes which were formerly in Berlin.78 Nor has the direct influence of Cuyp been suggested as playing an assertive role in the development of Crome’s spatial forte—the broad composition of forms, separated by appropriate intervals and easily perceived, unassisted by spatial tension. To the author, the sensitive perception of luminous, moist atmosphere in a Cuyp countryside scene appears to be a direct link with the spaciousness and the light-filled with Aert van der Neer coming later. See Wolfgang

effects, Fish Market at Scheveling [sir], Lot No. 60,

Stechow, Dutch Landscape Painting of the Seventeenth

and Camp Scene, Lot No. 85, are listed as by Cuyp.

Century (London, 1966), pp. 54-62.

Both pictures appear in the “First Day’s

75. In Turner, op. cit., facing page 27, A Man Giving Provender to a Horse by Cuyp is illustrated.

Sale,

Tuesday, Sept. 25, 1821.” 77. See C.

H.

Collins Baker, British Painting

See also the Norfolk Chronicle and Norwich Gazette

(Boston, 1933), p. 179; see also Francis W. Hawcroft,

for Saturday, June 5,1819, in which an advertisement

“John Crome and the Yarmouth Water Frolic,”

appeared telling of an auction that was to be held on June 17-19, and on June 21 for the sale of pictures

The Burlington Magazine, Vol. (July-August, 1959),

p.

Cl, Nos. 676-77

291.

which included original paintings by Cuyp. Also,

78. Stechow, op. cit., p. 27; see also Cornelis

Christie’s sale catalogue of January 12-13, 1821,

Hofstede dc Groot, A Catalogue Raisonne of the

contained items of Harvey’s prints and engravings

Works of the most Eminent Dutch Painters of the

by Cuyp.

Seventeenth

76. In the

66

“Catalogue”

of Crome’s personal

Century,

trans.

Edward

G.

Hawkes,

Vols. I—VIII, Nos. 682 and 683 (London, 1908-27).

atmosphere of Crome. The varied moods of nature and the diversity of his style—marked by light-permeated, spacious atmosphere, by softer and clearer tones, and, near the end of Crome’s life, by looser brushwork—so plainly suggest Cuyp they hardly admit of coincidence. The works already cited have largely been concerned with the individual style of Crome in the strictest artistic sense, noting, describing, and correlating tangible changes, and at the same time, relating them to the evolution of his artistic personality. Acknowledgment has been made that on occasion he obviously needed to do preparatory drawings or special preliminary sketches of details, though these practices were perhaps more frequent than preserved records demonstrate.79 During the later part of Crome’s career, he obviously felt free to exercise flexibility and variety in the use of color. Yet, in Wherries on the Yare (fig. 80), he reverted to the somber, blackish greens and darker browns of ten years earlier. A contrasting attitude prevailed, however, in the use of brighter color in the singularly beautiful Yarmouth Water Frolic (plate XV, fig. no). Using a horizontal format, he combined the formal design of a Jan van der Cappelle80 with the aerial breadth and glow of Clump of Trees, near Salhouse (fig. 67), an earlier production, in an interplay of subtle colors. The colors and background passages of The Fishmarket at Boulogne (plate XVI, fig. 114) recall the tonal values of Cuyp, as do the distant sails and figures in Yarmouth Water Frolic, in the misty, pale amber of the former and in the gray green nuances of the latter. Crome combined striking qualities of his own resources with the qualities derivative of the Dutch landscape painters he studied. Natural objects and shapes had always been expressed with accuracy and precision, often too naturalistically during his early years; but he had trained himself to see form as a triumphant and happy dissolution of matter consumed in space by light and air. Mastery of his greatest potential discovery was now imminent: the illuminated tinted atmosphere took on mobility, falling like a transparent glaze, in shadow and in light, over all natural matter. In the process of attaining this mastery, he learned that these aesthetic actualities of visual and nonvisual considerations were almost lost from view without the nuances of light and its poetic value. Crome aspired—at least in the latter half of the second decade—to achieve something solid of his own. At the same time, Crome’s talents were not of the sort that stamp an unmistakable glow upon the haunting qualities of his every product. Tonal values either moved forward or receded in favor of stronger contrasts of light and dark and of more pronounced areas of color. Diagonal arrangements with vigorous structural accents cleared the way for emphasis on more compact forms. Groups of trees, eccentrically placed, were a characteristic means of achieving this effect, but other possibilities were also used. Norwich River: Afternoon (plate XIII, fig. 108) emphasizes the orthogonals—from right to left and left to right—but the effect of these is modified by the strong reflections on the water, by the background treatment of the com¬ pressed, diagonal row of houses, and by the greater emphasis on the central foreground motif, the boat and its four occupants. The grand, formal drama of these motifs dilate on the canvas with aesthetic force. The marine pictures Squall off Yarmouth (fig. 106) and Yarmouth Water Frolic (plate XV, fig. 79. Two

examples

of such

assistance is

that

derived from the elaborate British Museum’s pencil drawing

On the River at

Thorpe,

near Norwich

cursory pencil drawing of Plant Study: A Burdock (fig. 204). 80. Stechow, op. cit., fig. 232.

(fig. 165) and the Courtauld Institute Galleries’ more 67

no) were conceived in terms of lines so applied as to elicit a sense of spatial freedom similar to that of Mousehold Heath, Norwich. Because the subjects of the vertical and horizontal forms arc so varied, their linear significance reduces the complexities of the first two pictures when compared with Mousehold Heath, Norwich. By contrast, the ship motifs in these pictures have no comparable features in the heath scene. The real motive in these pictures is seen in the arrangment of a crescendo of lines capable of eliciting emotion: Crome could finally manipulate lines and space in a coherent system to produce the illusion of depth. Crome attained nuances of mood through an infinite range of tonal complexities expressed by means of light imperceptibly traveling from object to object, often through a veil of atmosphere. Despite adjustment of rhythm, color, and contour, the impact of an original impression is retained, and Crome came closer to perceptual reality than most nineteenthcentury landscape painters. Once this unity was established, he progressed, in the last two or three years of his career, to a reinforcement of accents, while retaining the soft quality. Yarmouth Beach ami Mill: Looking North (plate XI, fig. 107), 1819, and Wood Scene with Pool in Front (fig. 116), painted just before his death, exemplify the enriched and colorful tonal effects of the final period. Austere color values no longer dominated Crome’s palette. Moderated dark tones and filtered, intensified sunlight were vigorously set against each other. The darks acquired a velvety quality, the lights a vibrant impasto; and the tonal dimensions (value, hue, intensity) take on more life through looser touch and greater variation. Cool tones were used to evoke in the viewer the illusion of looking at distant hues as though through a filmy curtain of mist. The interplay of muted contrast areas and the meandering atmosphere could now be handled skillfully, almost by second nature at this time in Crome’s stylistic development. Moreover, the mastery of suggesting aerial recession in three-dimensional space had been an important and ever mindful goal. What had been a barrier between balancing forms and intangible considerations naturalistically, as demonstrated in the last-mentioned two pictures, vanished, and their accomplishment became a positive expectation. A few days before his death, Crome was preparing to paint a festive occasion of the annual “Water Frolic” which took place in the Wroxham Broads, a lake near Norwich. The earlier Yarmouth Water Frolic (fig. no) was presumably a preparatory sketch (and the discrepancy of the place name might easily have been confused). On April 15, 1821, he stretched a canvas six feet long on his easel, sketched in his subject,81 and thereupon was overpowered by high fever. He died a week later, April 22, 1821. Dawson Turner, who had been apprised of Crome’s condition during his final illness, expressed the opinion that his last artistic performance was “a full determination to render this the best picture he [Crome] had ever painted. The sketch which he actually finished is extremely pleasing, and full of the usual bristle and action attendant upon a scene.”82 81. This picture, the Iveagh Bequest enlargement

exhibited by John Berney Crome in the seventeenth

of the Yarmouth Water Frolic (fig. 117), Kenwood,

exhibition of the Norwich Society of Artists as his

was completed by John Bemey Crome after his

own work, no. 38 in the catalogue. See Hawcroft,

father’s death. In August, 1821, the finished version,

op. cit., pp. 288-91.

under the title

Yarmouth

Water Frolic, Evening;

Boats Assembling—previous to the Rowing Match, was

68

82. Wodderspoon, op. cit., p. 9.

IX.

Marlingford Grove. The Lady Lever Gallery. No. 77

X.

The Wensum at Thorpe: Boys Bathing. Upperville, Virginia, Collection Mr. and Mrs. Paul Mellon. No. 101

—

“ON ‘2F7epsnq prarg IP UONdIT[OD

LOL “YyYUoN sulyoo) “TI puv yrvag yInowsvX

“TX

COURS IN ROS SVN Edie VV pure ‘I UONDaT[O_ ‘erursir, ‘oyptaroddyy) vaipjog papunoyy v yjim adivg YW TTX

CHAPTER IV

Crome as a Draftsman

Until recently, the theme of this chapter would scarcely have been an appropriate subject for discussion; there was neither sufficient interest nor material to support such a study. Crome’s drawings, especially his watercolors, were assumed to be very rare and known only to a scattered few collectors and students. They were collected and enjoyed rather than analyzed and correlated with his oils; they were objects of aesthetic pleasure rather than of serious intellectual inquiry. Their serenity and the nostalgia they evoked attracted attention, but admiration was never sufficient to provoke the search for historical validity. Were it not for the concerted efforts of the devoted Norwich Castle Museum curator, James Reeve, and of subsequent collectors and other curators, a substantial number of watercolors and drawings would not have been preserved, and they would not now be attracting renewed attention and critical scholarship. Hardly anything has been published about Crome’s draftsmanship. After devoting less than half a page to his watercolors and two pages to his etchings, Laurence Binyon summarized in a single sentence this aspect of Crome’s art: “It is unfair to judge Crome by his etchings, which was with him quite a secondary pursuit, like his water colors.

1 F. W^. Dickes scattered

some pertinent information about them through several pages of his text,2 and in C. H. i. “John Crome and John Sell Cotman,” Portfolio (London, 1897), pp. 26, 27.

2. The Norwich School of Painting (London, 1905), PP- 14*5-4969

Collins Baker’s otherwise admirable Crowe, the watercolors are dismissed in little more than a page; they are treated more as a footnote than as objects of critical analysis.3 Presuming a deepened and enriched scholarship in the field, a recent monograph on watercolors of the Norwich School reproduced seventeen Crome drawings and watercolors;4 three years later the original author and a collaborator removed eight works and reattributed them.5 It is apparent, therefore, that ascribing a drawing or watercolor to Crome presents a problem at once perplexing and challenging to the critical connoisseur as well as to the student of art history. Anyone who examines the drawings and watercolors of Crome is obliged to admit that he was not a great draftsman, not even a specially talented one. His place in the history of art quite properly is secured through the merit of his oils, and the great majority of these are not based on the conscientious study of drawing. On the other hand, in the history of English watercolor painting the status of Crome is based less on his importance as the founder of the Norwich School—which was mainly a school of watercolorists—than on the strength and nobility of his own surviving work in this medium. Before the end of the eighteenth century, drawing was an integral part of Crome’s teaching practice as a local resident teacher of drawing; it was also natural that he became involved in the contemporary flowering of watercolor painting at Norwich. A reasonable acquaintance with those works which can be safely regarded as his own supports the belief that Crome will attain recognition as a watercolor painter and draftsman. Little is to be gained by connecting the painter and the draftsman in Crome. He could work more easily directly in paint and often did just that. Drawings were only an occasional pre¬ liminary to his oil paintings. He did not resort to drawings as exercises to train his eye. But a few well-known works, such as The Yare at Thorpe, Norwich (fig. 25), The Blacksmith’s Shop, Hingham (fig. 34), River Landscape with Barge (fig. 39), and Yarmouth Water Trolic (fig. no), are based, wholly or in part, on drawings made beforehand. His By the Roadside (fig. 32), for example, would have been immeasurably improved if he had followed the preliminary watercolor sketch in the Whitworth Art Gallery more closely (fig. 180). Toward 1807, the impact ofjohn Sell Cotman’s return to Norwich from London and, to a lesser extent, that ofjohn Thirtle a few years earlier, can be felt on the local scene.6 They introduced new qualities which may have had some relationship to the methods and teaching of Varley, but were different from the art ofj. R. Cozens, Sanby, Dayes, Turner, and Girtin. Cotman, whose influence was greater by far than that of Thirtle, was painting in a decorative manner, extracting from objects a simplification of shapes, working with flat, spaced-out patterning, and paying little attention to shadow except when it contributed to his design. His work, well planned and constructed on a sound framework, rejects all pretense or exces¬ sive detail. Like Cotman in his early period, Thirtle’s career as a draftsman suggests an awareness of subtleties of form: they are rendered in refined, subdued colors; are rich 3. Crome (London, 1921), pp. 145, 146.

eldest son, John Berney Crome, and five others we

4. Derek Clifford,

have felt unable to include in the canon.”

Watercolours of the Norwich

School (London, 1965).

6. Cotman (1782-1842) and Thirtle (1772-1839)

5. Derek Clifford and Timothy Clifford, John

were brothers-in-law by virtue of marrying the

Crome (London, 1968), p. 19. Here the authors state

sisters, Ann and Elizabeth Miles, daughters of Ed¬

that “ three hitherto attributions to Crome accept-

mund Miles, a farmer of Felbrigg, Norfolk.

ble to the authors, we now believe are by Crome’s

70

and clean in quality; and are perfectly related, so that they produce a harmonious unity. Perhaps because of the rarity of his works, Thirtle has been overshadowed by Cotman and Crome. Before he returned to Norwich, Cotman—four years younger than Varley, six years younger than Constable, and seven years younger than Turner and Girtin—had been inclined to use a predominantly gray-wash underpainting. His color consisted mainly of dark, murky tones, and he had not yet learned the value of permitting the white of the paper to show through the transparent wash of the pigment. With the advance in his method—which it seems fair to assume he learned from Varley—he abandoned monochrome underpainting and obtained focal areas of color by superimposing clean washes of pure pigment. Cotman’s early style, when he first practiced it at Norwich, was broad and simple, deriving its freshness from pure tints and washes laid on cleanly and flat—a method he had perfected three or four years earlier. Crome was fourteen years older than Cotman and five years older than Thirtle, and it would seem that their work, quite different from Crome’s, had little meaningful effect on his style or his on theirs—but undoubtedly their spiritual affinity, which one senses, was for¬ tuitous. In certain of Thirtle’s more delicate washes of color, a sensitive and refined effect creates a mood that at times comes close to certain Crome watercolors. Yet other drawings by Thirtle, broader in treatment, richer and more ethereal and clearer in coloring, have some Cotman-like features.7 But in the absence of comparable dated works of the period 18001807, it is difficult to see how much, if at all, these artists may have influenced each other. If, consciously or unconsciously, Crome borrowed watercolor methods from Cotman or Thirtle, he never exploited these methods as they did. Only in rare instances is there a remote resemblance in subject matter, design, or quality. Except for occasional similarities in draftsmanship, Crome, a rustic naturalist, and Cotman, a sophisticated stylist and expressive colorist, had little in common. Crome used the watercolor medium with the restrained ease and pictorial fervor which one associates with his oil painting. In contrast, Cotman reproduced, through a rich assortment of washes in clearly patterned areas of flat color, a strongly defined style which suggests something strangely oriental. It expresses and masters the shortcomings of academic drawing to convey an over-all strength and is attuned to both composition and emotion. Apart from sharing Norwich as their place of birth and practicing there as contemporary drawing masters, Crome and Cotman differed in intellect, temperament, style, and teaching methods. Their differences, intrinsic in their personalities, can be seen chiefly in their methods of teaching; in their reaction to responsi¬ bility; and in their creative activity, especially in their visual appeal. Crome gave his lessons out-of-doors, weather permitting, whereas Cotman relied mainly on having his students copy his own drawings.8 At no time was Crome so prolific a draftsman as Cotman; indeed, few members of the Norwich School were. In Crome’s creations, forests and groves, heaths and meadows, riverbanks and nearby coastal scenes, familiar buildings and

7. For typical examples of these qualities, see Thirtle’s

The River, King Street, Norwich in the

8. Richard Carline, Draw They Must (London, 1968), p. 66.

Victoria and Albert Museum (no. P. 26-1926) and The Old Foundry Bridge, Norwich in the British Museum (no. 1902-5.14.482).

71

folkways of parochial interest are vividly in focus. His eye-catching themes extended north¬ ward to the English Wash, eastward to the Yarmouth coast, southward to the Suffolk County boundary, and west to the hamlets and villages of middle Norfolk, but Norwich was the source of his spiritual force and inspiration. The mainstream of his work creates the affectionate familiarity and the tranquillity that belongs to a rural and bucolic era. Unlike Crome, Cotman indulged in divers subject matter, such as old cathedrals and churches, other architectural remains, and picturesque views of Wales, Yorkshire, Norfolk, Suffolk, and Normandy. He focused his skills on the draining mills of Norfolk and, on occa¬ sions of dramatic outbursts, he painted their silhouettes, shapes, and colors with forcefulness and intensity. Less frequently, the artist concentrated on idealized, clearly drawn figures enacting lofty themes in appropriately noble scenery, simple in composition and almost oriental in patterning. Cotman’s antennas of sensibility were far-reaching and varied, and they were oriented to the past. They yielded exquisite and flawless designs inspired by deep feeling before its dissolution into purest thought. Although the hardness of contour in Crome is abandoned by Cotman for a more extravagant style, local artists in Norwich nevertheless looked to Crome as their impresario and preceptor, who transfused enthusiasm and vitality into their activities and their school. At all times, the burden of responsibility reshaped Crome, so that he was able to measure up to his obligations, whereas Cotman crumbled under the impact of similar pressures, becoming emotionally unstable.9

THE DRAWINGS AND WATERCOLORS

If there is any aspect of Crome’s development likely to remain obscure it is his art in watercolor and black and white, including the role of draftsman as drawing master and painteretcher. The most trustworthy guide to an understanding of his draftsmanship is one basic truth: the only productions he acknowledged as finished work were his paintings in oil, either of “cabinet” size, the larger or smaller ones painted for exhibition or simply for pleasure, or those he made on commission, and perhaps a few watercolor drawings. No matter how much we may today admire the aesthetic value and the variety of his watercolors, we should realize that these works were produced either as preliminary sketches or in response to the fashion for watercolor painting then so popular among his Norwich contemporaries. Those done as finished works, complete in themselves, are rare. The small group of preparatory studies, having an occasional real signature and inscribed, made for identifiable paintings in oil, are those no reasonable person would question for authentication. These drawings naturally form a touchstone by which other attributions are tested. The method for studying Crome’s drawings is in principle the same as that applied in the study of other great draftsmen. In practice, however, it may be somewhat less difficult with Crome; his works reveal fewer variations in style and technique. Since Crome did not use drawings for too many different purposes, the modalities of his style embrace less bewildering problems for distinguishing them. Functional differences and variations in draftsmanship must be kept in mind, especially if an attempt is made to establish drawing chronology. Works

9. Sidney D. Kitson, The Life of John Sell Cotman (London, 1937), pp. 94, 158.

72

which are technically and stylistically similar, along with those which show some variations in talent, may nevertheless have been made at short intervals of time, though for clearly different purposes. Regarding Crome as the polar opposite of the open-air painter, as is often done, is a distortion; he spent much of his time in out-of-door sketching of the Norfolk countryside. From his earliest efforts in 1790, it was Crome’s ambition to perfect his visual perception and to reproduce the silent wonders of nature in painting: this is both the strength and the weak¬ ness of his maturing development from 1808 onward.10 He soon recognized that the medium of watercolor introduced variable factors that interfered with the qualities he sought and presented certain hindrances which were absent in oil painting. In the graphic representation of a scene, Crome aspired to purify the plastic expression of intangible elements (atmosphere, light, cast shadow), striving to coordinate them naturalistically in pictorial space, which reached to the depths of imaginative life. His efforts to achieve the fullest plasticity of expres¬ sion had a loosening effect on his style of painting. Yet the few spirited creations he made in watercolor and in etching trace a path that links Crome in a common heritage with Dutch seventeenth-century naturalist painting to which he became increasingly attached. As drawing master, Crome regularly took his pupils into rural areas and emphasized the direct study of nature; this practice served also to sharpen his own vision. An insight into his practices during inclement weather may be gained from a letter Hannah Gurney wrote to her sister, Elizabeth Gurney Fry:

Ambleside, 1802. Today we could not get out until rather late on account of the weather, which none of us minded, as we were all busy employed in drawing, Kitty reading to us. Chenda [Richenda], Cilia, and Mr. Crome were comfortably seated in a romantic little summer house, painting a beautiful waterfall. ... We generally get up early and draw for the first two or three hours in the morning before we set out on our excursions, which are mostly walking ones, as we like it far better than riding in this delightful country [the Lake and Peak District]. Nothing, I think, have we been so delighted with as Grasmere. . . .n A number of years after the death of Crome, John Burnet recalled: “I remember meeting my old friend, Mr. John Crome, of Norwich, (some of whose landscapes are not surpassed even by those of Gainsborough,) with several of his pupils, on the banks of the Yare. ‘This is our Academy!’ he cried out triumphantly, holding up the brush.” Burnet added, “And certainly, when the beauties of nature can be pointed out and explained under the guidance of scientific taste, they are clearer and more convincing than a whole volume of copies.”12 And on still another occasion, a fellow artist meeting Crome in the open fields, surrounded by a number of young people, remarked: “Why, I thought I left you in the city engaged in

10. At all times, Crome was more involved with perception than with processes and materials. Light and air perceived in space was his constant concern. The carefully controlled perception of light and sunlight are conspicuously present in his drafting of the particularities of trees, burdock, and thistle, the

perception associated with rounded, rolling clouds of animated skies. 11. Augustus J. C. Hare, The Gurneys of Earlham (London, 1895), pp. 115, 116. 12. Landscape Painting (London, 1849), Letter XI, p. 52.

phenomenon of the cast shadow, and in the aerial

73

your school!” “I am in my school,” replied Crome, ‘‘teaching my scholars from the only true examples. Do you think,” pointing to a lovely heath, ‘‘that either you or I can do better than that?”13 Such useful rediscovery of nature, built on the graphic rather than on the pic¬ torial tradition, had flourished in Flanders and Holland in the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries. In England it continued in the work of Alexander and J. R. Cozens, through Wilson and Gainsborough, straight to Crome and simultaneously to Girtin, Constable, and Turner. Crome undoubtedly made many black-and-white sketches, of a detailed nature rather than of general scope; there are few instances in which he depended upon them as specific guides in paintings of later date.14 Authentic sketchbooks or drawing pads have not come to light; such sheets, as vehicles for subsequent executions in watercolor or oil painting, are rare and chronologically unrelated to the painting. But it has been observed that his pencil, pen-andink, and watercolor drawings anticipate discoveries Crome made later on in painting.15 Crome’s drawings fall into four main categories: pencil drawings, including a copy of Gainsborough, which has a certain rustic charm and, as one would expect in the 1790’s, derive in touch and style from its model; pencil, india-ink wash, and watercolor drawings of scenes made during visits to the Lake and Peak District or to Wales and the Severn country; pencil and watercolor drawings (some with body color), chiefly of motifs or scenes in or near Norwich, made in preparation for identifiable paintings and etchings; and, by far the majority, pencil, pen-and-ink, and watercolor drawings, made to satisfy an insatiable urge to record his memories as well as the immediate perception of his outer eye. These drawings are in a bold and personal style. Crome’s copy of the Gainsborough drawing is of sufficient interest to us and should not be summarily dismissed. Within the categories named above, it is exceedingly difficult, if not impossible, on the basis of Crome’s development as a draftsman, to fix the exact date drawings that may have been made within a few months or even a few years of each other, as the chaotic state of Crome connoisseurship shows. Fully aware of the need to improve his competence in painting shortly after he met Thomas Harvey, about 1790, Crome painted side-by-side with him at his residence, Catton House. Conspicuously present there were mature works by Gainsborough that fired his enthusiasm for studying this artist’s method of painting.16 He probably also saw examples of Gainsborough’s early work elsewhere in East Anglian collections. On the basis of historic probability, the Gainsborough pencil drawing, Wooded Landscape (fig. 128), now in the British Museum (no. O.o 2-4), may have been in Harvey’s drawing collection.17 Or it may have

13. Dickes, op. cit., p. 35.

16. See Chapter I, pp. 8-10, 13, and n. 17, also

14. There is no documentary support for this

Chapter III, pp. 52-53.

opinion. However, it is my belief that Crome used

17. After Thomas Harvey’s death, the sale of his

his pencil drawings as working guides for pictorial

effects at Christie’s, January 12 and 13, 1821, in¬

imagery to which he turned for special motifs in oil.

cluded drawings by Gainsborough, Cuyp, Gilpin,

After their purpose was served, he discarded them.

Berghem,

15. An example is a recent discovery, the oil painting By the Roadside (fig.

van de

Velde (probably Adrian

and

William the Younger), as well as landscapes by

32). This picture

Harvey. See Christie’s sales catalogue of these dates

remained unattributed in England and America until

at the British Museum Print Room (no. A. 2.36.1).

1964, when it was correlated with its watercolor counterpart in the Whitworth Art Gallery, Man¬ chester.

74

been in Crome s own cabinet of drawings. His 1812 sale of books, prints, and drawings at Yarmouth in Mr. Noverre’s room did indeed, among other things, include two sketches by Gainsborough in black and white.18 Crome’s own later pencil drawing, Wooded Landscape with Lane (fig. 129), recalls in many respects the original Gainsborough drawing. While the composition and the pencil handling reflect Gainsborough’s reverence for the style of van Ruisdael, Cuyp, and Wijnants, its spirit would have an immediate appeal to Crome. Its dark tonal gradations, placed beside areas of uncolored paper—a distinctive Gainsborough device used by his followers, George Frost, Dr. Thomas Munro, and Crome, and in the black-andwhite chalk drawings of Constable19—make a rhythmical design. But the tentative outlines of the Crome, with crudely penciled, short linear accents, render a rather sketchy adaptation of the much more finished modeling so pictorially handled in the Gainsborough. Although, before 1800, Crome as draftsman showed promise in his borrowing certain conventions straight from Gainsborough, he became increasingly dependent upon this source, at least for the next few years. We are immediately aware of this spiritual debt in the City of Norwich Museum’s Woodland Scene (fig. 148), with its areas of deep contrast of light and shade and the sensitive transitions into the darks without loss of clarity. The design shows a grand sweep and firmer variations, such as the tree trunks, which are clearly delineated with heavier penciling and diagonal strokes. A rather freer line is used in the branches and foliage as well as in the two figures and the burdock leaves in the right foreground; the surrounding hills and detail are more simply indicated. The design and treatment of the foreground and distance bear a close relation to Gainsborough’s treatment, using his characteristic variations. However, this may be fortuitous, for Crome’s work, like Gainsborough’s, was based chiefly on the study of Dutch seventeenth-century paintings, etchings, drawings, and prints. Crome’s travel with the Gurney family on the well-established romantic route to the “beauty spots” of England in 1802 and again in 1806 furnishes a basis for dating, with reasonable accuracy, certain of his drawings and watercolors of the period.20 His Lake District exhibits of 1805 included the watercolors, Scene in Patterdale, Cumberland (fig. 143) with its exquisite rich softness, Waterfall at St. Michel’s Le Fleming s, Westmorland, and the india-ink A Sketch in Patterdale (the present whereabouts of the latter two are unknown), drawings which were made during the first visit and probably as early as 1802 or 1803. The watercolor drawings of Chepstow, Goodrich, and Tintern Abbey-—all themes from south Wales and shown 111 the Norwich Society of Artists’ exhibitions of 1805, 1806, and 1807—typify Crome’s work from the Welch and Wye Valley sketching expeditions with 18. The two Gainsborough sketches are listed as

in the Evening. To be viewed on the two following

Lot No. 91, in “A Catalogue of a splendid collection

days preceding the sale.” The catalogue lists a total

of Paintings, Etchings, and Original Drawings, by

of 556 lots: 40 of paintings, 8 books of prints, and

Engravers and Draftsmen of the first eminence, many

the remainder of prints, drawings, and engravings.

of them proof impressions; together with several

No works by Crome appear in the sale. A copy of

Curious Books of Prints, and a number of Paintings,

the 1812 sales catalogue is in the British Museum

Drawings, and Prints, Framed. The genuine produc¬

Print Room (Reg. No. 1905.1.7.97).

tions of the most esteemed artists of the last and

19. See Graham Reynolds, Catalogue of the Con¬

present Centuries, the property of Mr. Crome, of

stable Collection (London, i960), pp. 35, 51, nos. 38

Norwich: which will be sold by auction at Mr.

and

Noverre’s

Gainsborough and Lucas (London: privately printed,

room,

Yarmouth,

on

Wednesday,

September 23rd, and the Two following Days, at eleven o’cloi k in the Morning, And at seven o’clock

57;

also see Charles J.

Holmes,

Constable,

1921), nos. 2, 4, and 14. 20. See Chapter III, pp. 44, 49- 5 0.

75

Robert Ladbrooke in 1804.21 But whether Crome visited the Lake District and the Peak District of Derbyshire, as tutor to the Gurney girls, or Wales, he invariably turned these trips into sketching tours. He was participating in the popular summer pastime of most late eighteenth-century landscape artists of distinction, as practiced by Gainsborough, Girtin, Cotman, Turner, and Constable in their search for the picturesque. Crome spent the better part of ten weeks on each visit to the Lakes and to the Peak District; the length of time he spent in north and south Wales is unknown, but it was probably no more than two weeks. During these trips, he made the most sustained attempt to broaden his subject matter. Of the surviving works from these sojourns, two drawings from mountainous terrain are noteworthy, even though they are otherwise not helpful in clarifying his later activity, namely, the india-ink drawing, Cottage and Bridge (fig. 144), and the better known watercolor, Dolgelley, North Wales (fig. 146). The latter drawing, a simple, strong composi¬ tion, representing an abbey on high ground; an indistinct church below, near a winding river crossed by a seven-arched bridge; and a background with an extensive view taken from the hillside on the west. These drawings, together with the prosaically dramatic oil painting, Slate Quarries (plate II, fig. 20), are striking evidence of Crome’s intention to move in new directions. Although these works have a quality of romantic power and represent Crome’s most Wordsworthian moment, they are well suited to the respective places and to this period in his artistic development. They also demonstrate a temperament unable to sustain the qualities of a total romanticism—coloring both vision and technique—in the support of an art of the picturesque, a fact that is proved in his later drawings. Among the ten drawings and watercolors by which Crome was represented in the 1805 exhibition of the Norwich Society, two were interior views of Tintern Abbey (fig. 149),22 based on his visit to Wales the previous year. His imagination was powerfully impressed by the gloomy scenery of the country and by the abbey’s romantic ruins, and his efforts to convey his impressions were remarkably successful. For the moment, his powers as architectural draftsman were well subordinated to his genius for rendering the more congenial qualities of the natural world. The avoidance of architectural detail is noticeable; there is a total absence of hatching or other devices to effectively define the texture of stone, but the shading effects of mass have some subtlety, and the whole motif is not without a certain grandeur. The lacy arrangement of vines, hanging loosely from the masonry-like stone arch, is juxtaposed with the larger rhythms of the tree branches and the dense foliage which, while massed, illusory, and deemphasized, are essentially brought out by the clear and soft lighting effect. Thus the unity, the richness, and the integration of this contrast are on a high plane; a sympathetic breadth of composition is attained, with many minor intermediary melodies, each of them interesting and contributing its part within the whole design. A number of miscellaneous drawings—in watercolor, wash, or pencil—may reasonably be attributed to Crome on the authority of paintings with excellent provenances and with unmistakable, if not documentary, evidence. Like other artists, he drew preparatory studies for his paintings and prints, but he did not make many of this type. From those that remain, the true image of the artist can best be deduced as an aid 111 identifying his own work as distinct from that of pupils and followers who made drawings which are sometimes decep21. See

Henry Ladbrooke s Dottings,” Norwich

Eastern Daily Press, April 25, 1921. 22. These exhibits are nos. 159 and 210; another

76

Tintern Abbey (no. 13), without additional description, was exhibited in 1807.

tively similar to their teacher’s. When Crome’s drawing is related to his models, it is closely allied to sensitive interpretation more than it is to mere imitation or faithful reproduction. Drawing in the sense of precise, expressive line was troublesome to Crome; and, although he was a skilled colorist, his use of cheap, perhaps fugitive colors has given to his watercolors a pale and tawny discoloration. One aspect of Crome’s talent is particularly well demonstrated by two pieces that form a coherent group from the same period of his development. The first of these, a pencil drawing, On the River at Thorpe, near Norwich (fig. 165), is inscribed, signed, and dated 1806. In this drawing we are impressed by several features: the compact spatial effect and the quiet anima¬ tion of the composition, the sense of stillness in the trees, the human figures, the moored boats, and the atmosphere itself. From the foreground, the river swings sharply left, into the far distance. Energetic yet graded contrasts of light and dark establish a clear spatial relationship from the right to the left and lend plasticity to the forms, such as the high-gabled thatched house, the masses of tree foliage, and the short black jabs of the pencil that indicate larger branches of the central tree. The composition has both large and small accents that are woven into a harmonious unity. The other, a gray-wash drawing, Back River, Norwich (fig. 171), is separated in time from the first by what I believe to be no more than a few months. Both are certainly products of the same year. Here the expression of form in space is more distinct. The vitality, the range of accents, the dynamic animation of the overcast sky, and, indeed, the intensity of mood are brought together into an even higher unity than are comparable features in the preceding drawing. This drawing differs from On the River at Thorpe, near Norwich in complexity of composition and technique but is similar in atmospheric breadth and simplified treatment of subject matter. The style, in fact, has certain affinities with Cotman’s method of design at that period (for instance, The Ploughed Field in the Leeds City Art Gallery). It is likely that Crome deliberately went to each scene to make these studies ad hoc. As working guides for paintings in oil, these two drawings show a truly marvelous coordi¬ nation between the eye and the hand. Among the many paintings and drawings on the theme of the blacksmith’s shop—a subject obviously influenced by Gainsborough23—Crome exhibited a total of five: three in 1807, one in 1808, and one in i8ir.24 The most renowned of these, the oil painting at Philadelphia (fig. 34), was shown by him at the Royal Academy in 1808. After his death two pictures of the subject were in the Memorial Exhibition, 1821.25 Francis Hawcroft deserves credit for having connected the two watercolors of The Blacksmith’s Shop, Hingham (fig. 175 and fig. 176) with the two pictures, Blacksmith’s Shop, from nature, exhibited with the Norwich Society of Artists, 1807 (nos. 19 and 100).26 The designation “from nature” suggests that they were most likely drawings. Flawcroft has also pointed out that the composition derives from

23. According to Dawson Turner, Crome copied The Cottage Door by Gainsborough when it was in the Thomas Harvey collection. See Outlines in Lithog¬ raphy (privately printed, 1840), p. 23. 24. In the respective Norwich exhibitions, the

picture, Blacksmith’s Shop, near Hingham, Norfolk, was in the Royal Academy exhibition, 1808 (no. 591). 25. One picture, Blacksmith’s Traverse at Harding¬ ham (no. 34), is dated 1808; the other, Blacksmith’s Shop (no. 61), is dated 1814.

pictures are listed as follows: Blacksmith’s Shop, from

26. Francis W. Hawcroft, “John Crome and His

nature (no. 19), Blacksmith’s Shop, Hardingham (no.

Patron, Thomas Harvey of Catton,” The Connoisseur,

81), Blacksmith’s Shop, from nature (no. 100), and The

English ed., Vol. CXLIV (December, I959)> P- 234;

Outside of a Blacksmith’s Shop (no. 83). The fifth

American ed., Vol. CXLIV (January, i960), p. 234.

77

the oil painting, The Cottage Door, by Gainsborough, now in the Huntington Library and Gallery of Art.27 Thematically and compositionally, these watercolors and the Philadelphia painting form a homogeneous group. They demonstrate the source of Crome’s softer touch and his adoption of thinner, more fluid painting. If the style of The Cottage Door was the basis for the austere design, the broad rhythmic flow, and the airy atmosphere of the watercolors, as I believe, then these drawings bring to full fruition the role Gainsborough played in Crome’s development as a draftsman. No other artist equaled the impact of Gainsborough on Crome’s watercolor style. From Gainsborough, too, came the younger artist’s predilection for the poetry of landscape and his special qualities of breadth and airy ambience, distance, and aerial perspective that he so effectively portrayed. At first, his attention centered on the objective rendering of the motif; later it was pictorial and emotional. From this influence, Crome wrought a diversity of moods, achieving the aesthetic quality by means of the flexible handling of value, hue, and intensity contrasts on tone and form. Thus, by introducing body-color painting in the watercolor medium, he created two distinctive portrayals of concrete locations, each with vivid color and tonal contrast. The particularly attractive Silver Birches (fig. 207), a direct copy of the left half of Adam Pijnacker’s oil painting, Landscape with Sportsman and Game, glows with lumi¬ nous brilliance.28 Neither Dr. Miklos Rajnai29 nor Derek and Timothy Clifford30 are pre¬ pared to accept the attribution to Crome. However, both Francis Hawcroft and I relate this watercolor to other Crome watercolors on the basis of color (strong browns, greens, blues, and russets) and of naturalness. A definitive decision on the attribution is dependent upon an examination of the drawing in close proximity to Crome’s other work in the medium (com¬ pare the City of Norwich Museums’ The Blacksmith's Shop, Hingham [fig. 175] and The Glade Cottage [fig. 209]). Although there is no final proof that this attribution is correct, unless new evidence appears Crome authorship of Silver Birches is acceptable on the basis of its undeniable high quality, unequaled by that of his eldest son, to whom the drawing has been attributed.31 But Crome deviated occasionally—and particularly in his later and earlier periods—from the level of concentration of body color by his control of value, hue, and intensity. Except for taking care that the individual forms and indication of space in The Glade Cottage (fig. 209) would maintain a coherent system of depth and plastic illusion as a working model for the painting of the same subject (fig. 102), the problem of draftsmanship does not seem to have bothered Crome. Besides, this watercolor is technically different from the preceding one in body color. Although done with a fine brush, it has been extensively washed with shades of pale blue, orange green, chocolate brown, and yellow of thin density. Crome evidently resorted to these washes in body color in order to make thorough changes—which points

27. This picture was purchased directly from

Crome visiting the gallery, but it is plausible to

Gainsborough in 1786 and was acquired by Daniel

assume, as originally proposed by Derek Clifford,

Coppin, a friend of Crome, by 1807. It left Norwich

that the artist visited there en route to France the year

for Tabley House at the end of 1808 or the beginning

it opened.

of 1809. 28. The Pijnacker was in the founding collection of the Dulwich College Picture Gallery, London, which opened to the public in 1814. It is reproduced in the 1954 catalogue (no. 86). There is no record of

78

29. Personal communication, August 6, 1968.

30. Derek Clifford and Timothy Clifford, op. cit., P- 153Si. Ibid., p. 153.

to a hastier execution—in the foward tree branches and background, with its cottage and sunlit glade, changes we are not accustomed to seeing in his draftsmanship. These objects do not gain sufficient body, nor the details distinct form; the strokes are vague, wavering, and unsub¬ stantial. It was perhaps because of the speed with which he worked that Crome neglected to fuse the tonal contrasts smoothly into homogeneous unities—a fact discernible on close examination. Nonetheless, Crome’s great vitality strikingly manifests itself here. He expresses the visual image with less economy and greater vigor, in spite of an interrupted rhythm of flow in the draftsmanship. Full force is bestowed on forms by means of the body-color device of light— and-dark contrast, as the light flashes over the objects and the tones ease to a harsh brightness through the deprivation of darkened gradations. In the preceding two pictures the artist gathers the force to bring out the volume of the forms and to endow them with vigor and vitality, thus extending the range of accents with only a measure of success. But the full power of Crome as a draftsman was not demonstrated until after 1808, when his devotion to the Dutch naturalists became increasingly apparent in his painting. The rela¬ tionship of his watercolor composition and design is unquestionably related to theirs, but the actual laying of color in carefully superimposed washes shows an affinity with the work of Cotman before his return to Norwich from London. It was the era in which Crome not only did drawings in watercolor but also worked with the etching knife in chalcography. (I shall postpone the discussion of Crome as an etcher until later in this chapter.) Among the interesting watercolors on which historians agree, Landscape with Cottages (fig. 196) is one of the finest. Although badly faded to chiefly reddish, greenish, and gray blue tones, it is superb, simple, and bold; and it is broad and noble in composition. The striking design of shadows, streaking across the road below the beautifully patterned trees, helps to create an atmosphere of unruffled quiet under the receding sky. This stillness is unbroken by the presence of a peasant girl, caught in a moment of pause, as she is immersed in an un¬ naturally bright patch of sunlight. Just beyond and to the right are some thatched cottages which complete the landscape. Another fine watercolor, also at the South Kensington Museum, is Woodland Scene (fig. 202), which shows a characteristic rendering of oak trees. The trees are painted not only very freely and loosely but with a perfect understanding of their form and towering height. The drawing represents a sandy path that winds between tall, upright overshadowing trees to an S-shaped river in the distance, beneath a glimpse of sky. In' its present somewhat faded condition of deep olive green and purplish browns and blues, strong and bold brushpoint touches are on the foliage. But as strong as they are, the effect is majestic and poetic. “It is remarkable,” Iolo Williams has observed,

‘how with

Crome_as often with Girtin—a faded drawing can yet retain and reveal the simple strength of conception which it enshrines.”32 The retention of this quality is also noteworthy in a less finished version of the subject, Lane Scene near Norwich (fig. 203) in the Russell J. Colman Collection at the City of Norwich Museums and in two other closely related examples: River through the Trees (fig. 181) and Trees by a Pond (fig. 201)—much as they have suffered from time and exposure to light. To indicate the substantial importance of tonal accents in Crome’s maturing draftsmanship,

32. Iolo A. Williams, Early English Watercolours (London, 1952), p. 153-

79

we show the watercolor By the Roadside (fig. 180), dated about 1807-1808, beside the penciland-watercolor Houses and Wherries on the Wensum, Norwich (fig.

193),

painted several years

later, and both in the Whitworth Art Gallery. The aqueous quality of the latter drawing is as notable as its stillness and its broad, architectonic character. Yet these watercolors are rhythmi¬ cally composed and show a broad spectrum of contrasting Dutch styles as well as differences in mood and gradations of softness. An enormous richness is present in Houses and Wherries, brought out by means of subtler variations of tonal accents and their interrelationships. These accents are responsible for the clearer delineation of forms in space and for their envelopment of light and air, although in this watercolor they are much more compactly composed. And how much less sharp are forms in By the Roadside, where the finer gradations of line and tone are notably lacking. The same can be said of every other detail and about the over-all relationships in these two watercolors. The drama associated with Crome’s watercolor, Wroxham Regatta (fig. 211), and its role in the painting of two well-known oils—both designed by the artist, but one painted by him about 1818, and the other completed posthumously by his eldest son—has long intrigued students of Crome.33 This watercolor is a late work from his mature years. The grouping of masts, sails, and overcrowded boats represents a fresh and lively rendering of a happy occasion. Although sketchy and unfinished in parts, the drawing reflects a quality of draftsmanship exciting in its crispness and precision and in its compact, incisive, and rhythmic accents. The figures have both tension and poise, and Crome’s ponderous style gives way to a spirited lightness and grace. An impressionistic glitter spreads over the surface and lends a sense of gaiety. In composition it appears to be more closely related to the preparatory oil sketch,

Yarmouth Water Frolic (fig. no), than to the finished Iveagh Bequest version. Although it is not the same scene, the arrangement of the masts and sails and the drawing of the small figures invite comparison with the two oil paintings.

THE ETCHINGS

That the Norwich School was a great school of etching as well as of painting seems never to have received just recognition. It is not known when the Norwich artists first began to etch. Nor is it known when Crome took up the art. His earliest print of record is the soft-ground etching Colney (fig. 242), dated 1809. Other Norwich artists seem to have preceded him, for Cotman’s small soft-ground etching of The Gable of a Cottage is inscribed “J. S. C. 1081” (1801 in reverse).34 Alec Cotman has suggested that Cotman learned the method in London and probably taught it to Crome sometime later.35 Dickes points out that he was indebted to his friend Thomas Harvey for his knowledge of etching, as Harvey was always experi¬ menting in the art and owned a copperplate printing press.36 Of Crome’s etchings thirty-three remain; nine are in soft ground, and, of those dated, 33. For a detailed discussion of the historical link between Crome and the

Yarmouth

Water Frolic

theme, see Francis W. Hawcroft, “John Crome and ‘Yarmouth Water Frolic’,” Burlington Magazine, Vol.

Cl,

288-91.

80

Nos. 676-77 (July-August,

1959), pp.

34. Kitson, op. cit., pp. 26-27; see also Dickes, op. cit., p. 86. 35. Personal

communication

August, i960. 36. Dickes, op. cit., pp. 85, 126.

to

the

author,

three are of 1812 and five of 1813. In his lifetime very few impressions were taken. According to Sir Henry Theobald, Crome’s usual practice appears to have been to bite the plates lightly and then to have impressions taken in order that he might judge his work. The plate was then rebitten, usually with some alterations, and further impressions were taken. A few of these impressions were given to friends, Dawson Turner among them, and possibly also to Thomas Harvey, but there was no issue to the public while Crome lived.37 In style, his soft-ground etching is bold and broad. It is a method that yields the effect of soft-pencil drawing; it was much in vogue in Crome’s day, particularly among the many artists who eked out a living by giving drawing lessons. It should, however, be noted that a number of Crome’s softground etchings are relieved and improved by a judicious admixture of hard line in the foreground and sky. The art of etching began to flourish among other Norwich artists around 1810. Cotman, for example, completed and published his first volume of twenty-six miscellaneous views in 1811 after a number of other plates had already been separately printed.38 In 1810-11, Robert Dixon, a founder-member of the Norwich Society of Artists, issued thirty-eight folio plates, etched in the soft-ground method, in a publication entitled Norfolk Scenery.39 There is no reason to believe that Crome printed his own etchings. Copperplate printing was done by W. C. Edwards of Bungay, by John and Henry Ninham, and by C. Sloman of Yarmouth. It was the latter who printed most of Cotman’s plates; he also did considerable work for the Dawson Turner family. Crome’s printing may have been done by one of these men, but there are reasons to suppose otherwise. In some of his early impressions, portions of the plates are ill-bitten or faintly printed. The lack of etching skill and the scanty use of ink point to the probability that Crome’s friend, Thomas Harvey, did the printing.40 Delight followed delight in this art for Crome. Dawson Turner, at whose house many etchings were executed, recalls the joy: The writer of this . . . well recollects the pleasure he [Crome] felt in the occupation, and will never forget the smile of self-satisfaction which beamed over his brow, when bringing him an impression from a new plate printed on soiled paper [and so ecstatic was he over the outcome that] he called out “What think you of this, Ruysdael?”41 But the true meaning of etching to Crome is more appropriately summarized by Martin Hardie: They were for Crome the idle amusement of an empty day, bits of personal observation, records of rambles through East Anglian land or tangled woods, done solely for pleasure or remembrance, a relaxation after his larger work on canvas.42 37. H. S. Theobald, Crome’s Etchings (London,

Nos. 1859. 5.28.9(2-54]) favors this statement beyond

1906), p. 4738. The corpus of these etchings was finished in

mere hypothesis.

nine months; the first is dated September 20, 1810;

Crome, founder of the Norwich School of Artists,

the last one issued, July 1, 1811. See Kitson, op. cit.,

together with a Biographical Memoir (Norwich,

p. 14339. Dickes, op. cit., p. 200.

1838), p. 1. 42. “A Great Painter-Etcher: Old Crome,” The

40. An examination of the etchings by Thomas

41. Etchings of Views of Norfolk by the late John

Connoisseur, Vol. VIII, No. 29 (January, 1904), p- 6.

Harvey in the British Museum Print Room (Reg.

8l

Crome’s etchings were made to satisfy a pleasurable urge, to record what views he saw around him and had enjoyed, suggestive of bits of Dutch naturalist painting. They were hasty and personal notes, ideas, and aphorisms—like the jottings of a writer—put down to sustain the artist’s delectation and, perhaps, to use as working models at some future date (although incontrovertible evidence is scarce). The great merit in all of Crome’s etchings lies in their breadth of conception and composi¬ tion and their sureness of aerial perspective. However, taken as a whole, those in hard line have less freedom. In each of the etchings the landscape elements (land, water, air, sky, and light) are skillfully interwoven as they are in his developed pictures, but in miniature; and each is a potential painting in oil. Neither architectural remains, which so occupied Cotman, nor picturesque cottages, which consumed Dixon, interested Crome. His etchings enshrine the feeling and the beauty of Norfolk scenery—scenery selected from nature. One observes here, as in his paintings, his intimate knowledge of every curve of a tree trunk, of every twist of a limb or leaf, of the natural course of a narrow stream, of a summer sky with soft, rounded, rolling clouds. The etchings, as left by Crome, vary greatly in quality. He, too, was aware of their imper¬ fections. There are, however, exceptions, as for example, the celebrated etching of Mousehold Heath, Norwich (fig. 214). Neither the painting of Mousehold Heath at the Victoria and Albert Museum, nor the great masterpiece at the Tate Gallery of the same subject—painted for “air and space”—show similar views. There are air and space in the etching too, with its alternating broad masses of sunlight and shadow and its sense of soft coolness in the receding clouds and slanting rain. But the etching’s true brilliance is discovered only in the first state of Mousehold Heath, of which only two or three impressions were taken. Other etchings, such as The Hall Moor Road near Hingham (fig. 227) and Composition: Sandy Road through Woodland (fig. 232), are sensitive and fine, but these are the very ones that have suffered most in their earlier as well as in their later states at the hands of those who sought to improve them by rebiting. Incomparably the best of Crome’s etchings are the small group in soft ground. All are imbued with the freshness and vigor of youth. What makes for good etching is embodied in Crome’s work: the spirit of nature in all its freshness and vitality, its strength and simplicity, its richness with restraint; it is free, frank, and spontaneous. Yet Crome himself had no sustained high regard for his prints. Although he issued a prospectus in 1812, hoping to publish his etchings, and received a favorable response from subscribers, he hesitated to allow the printing to proceed, and nothing came of it. It was not until 1834, thirteen years after Crome’s death, that his widow published sets of thirty-one of his plates, seven of which were on soft ground, in a large portfolio volume. The title page was as shown at the head of page 83. Mrs. Crome had sixty sets printed on indian paper with large mounts (14! x 2if inches in size). These sets contained a large portrait of Crome, engraved by R. W. Sievier, after D. B. Murphy.43 Originally they were published at three guineas a set (the edition now brings, in auction, upward of 500 pounds).44 43. The oil portrait of Crome is presently in the

City of Norwich Museums, the Victoria and Albert

collection of the Right Honorable Viscount Mackin¬

Museum, the Huntington Library and Gallery of

tosh of Halifax.

Art, the Print Room of the British Museum, the

44. Theobald, op. cit., p. 49. Authentic impressions from the original plates, bound in sets of thirty-one etchings, are in the Art Reference libraries of the 82

New York Public Library, and the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston.

NORFOLK PICTURESQUE SCENERY consisting of a series of THIRTY-ONE ETCHINGS by the late JOHN CROME

Founder of the Norwich Society of Artists and PRINTED FROM THE PLATES AS LEFT BY HIMSELF

Published by Mrs. Crome, Saint George’s Street; Mr. J. B. Crome, Saint George’s; Mr. B. Steel, Chapel Field; and Mr. Freeman, Repository of Arts, London Street MDCCCXXXIV

Four years later at Norwich, there were two additional issues, each of altered plates, one consisting of seventeen hard-ground plates, the other of the complete set of thirty-one. They were issued by John Berney Crome, Charles Muskett, W. B. Freeman, and others, with a biographical memoir by Dawson Turner and a portrait in stipple by R. W. Sievier, after D. B. Murphy. Each edition was similarly entitled: ETCHINGS

of VIEWS OF NORFOLK

by the late JOHN CROME

Founder of the Norwich Society of Artists together with a Biographical Memoir by Dawson Turner

At some time between 1834 and 1838, the plates were rebitten. The striking difference between these later editions and the first is in their accretions of bungling changes by successive hands. The artist’s intention is destroyed—the plates lack artistic feeling and are debased travesties of the beautiful work of Crome. Yet it is from these ruinous distortions

empty shams of the

real Crome—that many people have derived their idea of him as etcher.45

45. Theobald, op. cit., p. 52.

83

Considerable alterations were made in the original plates at the suggestion of Dawson Turner, who was disturbed by what he described as “the want of finish observable in these performances.”46 His criticism and his persuasion prompted John Berney Crome to remove the supposed defects, altering the subject matter. The resultant rebiting resulted in the destruction of the etchings as works of art. His responsibility for the changes is explained in a comment attached to a set of earlier proofs in the Reeve Collection at the British Museum Print Room.47 Bearing the date 1838, which was never altered, the series of this state was republished over and over again during the nineteenth century. At some time after 1838 the plates became the property of Henry Ninham. Some sets were issued by Charles Muskett of Norwich in 1850, while the plates were still in the hands of Henry Ninham, from whom they were purchased by John Hutton of Norwich. Hutton added a soft-ground etching, hitherto unpublished, and issued a hundred india-paper sets in a portfolio with the title, Thirty-two Original Etchings of Norfolk, by John Crowe, and containing a frontispiece portrait of the artist. The altered copperplates were subsequently purchased by J. J. Colman, a Member of Parliament of Norwich, who printed twenty-four etchings on twenty sheets and the eight soft-ground etchings on separate sheets. After this printing he bequeathed the plates to the City of Norwich Museums, where they now are. 46. These proofs bear the following note: “The

afterwards sent by Dawson Turner

to W.

C.

etchings which form this set, with the exception of

Edwards, Engraver, Bungay, who added the ruled

two, show the alterations made by John Berney

sky and made the adjustable alterations as seen in the

Crome with the brush and pencil and the names of

later impressions. The Front of the New Mills, and the

the subjects written in ink for Henry Ninham’s

upright with boat and water, were worked over.”

guidance for the rebiting, etc., of the plates previous

See Martin Hardie, op. cit., pp. 6-7; also see Norwich

to being published at a later period with the Memoir

Mercury, December 4, 1854, for Ninham’s reply

by Dawson Turner. The original sky of the Mouse-

defending his role in the alterations.

hold Heath plate was removed by Ninham, and

84

47. Reg. No. i9o.a.$>.

CHAPTER V

Copies, Imitations, and Forgeries

Crome is an artist whose style has met with an appalling lack of understanding and connoisseurship, and his works pose a major problem in identification. He was not a prolific painter, and copies, imitations, and forgeries are widespread. His flexibility in choice of subjects, his concern for the orderly rearrangement of nature, his soundness as a craftsman, his style of handling impasto, and the chronology of his development must all be given due weight in distinguishing true from false works. Careful attention to the small number of surviving drawings and etchings sheds unexpected light on clues that may lead to authentic Crome authorship, and they may at times be the only basis for telling a fake from a genuine Crome painting. Traditionally, the method used to expose copies1 and forgeries has been to provide evidence gained through long experience with the visual qualities of genuine Crome works, using them as standards of style for comparison and criticism. Max J. Fnedliinder has concluded that “perhaps every verdict, formulated on grounds of style criticism, is nothing but a supposition; i. The term “copy,” as used throughout this chapter, means an imitation, version, or forgery, untouched by Crome’s hand. 85

perhaps only a probability may be arrived at along this path.’ 2 Technical examinations (macrophotographs, ultraviolet-ray and X-ray photography, as well as microchemical examination) may be required. But stronger guidelines of criticism may develop through the use of an established canon of Crome pictures. The trained observer searches for visual evi¬ dence based upon stylistic comparisons and critical analysis to judge content, form, color, and brushwork. He looks further for signatures and other data of documentary value, and he must penetrate deeply into the structure of the work under examination. A number of works, which are generally accepted by present-day students of Crome as genuine, have been the object of conflicting opinions in the past,3 and because dealers and collectors have seized upon these ephemeral reactions and exploited them since the middle of the last century, copies and fakes of all sorts have proliferated. Past generations of critics and historians have assessed and reassessed the attribution of a large group of these spurious pictures, with the result that certain generally accepted Crome works have been placed in a doubtful status and as yet are not securely documented. Confronted by this state of confusion over half a century ago, Collins Baker put the prevailing condition of his day even more bluntly: “though many pictures by Crome have been bought on this assumption of being genuine, few justify it.”4 Even today, critical private collectors, dealers, and museums are uncertain about the genuineness of their Crome-labeled pictures. During the latter half of the nineteenth century, when pictures by Crome were in great demand and in short supply, workshop copies and forgeries were produced to meet the popular demand, a condition that continued into the early years of the next century. These fakes have succeeded in entering the darker corners of private and public collections to swamp Crome’s authentic work with a flood of counterfeits and plagiarisms, thereby creating a problem. Genuine works, therefore, are but a fraction of those ascribed to the master. As I have pointed out in an earlier study,5 the factual basis for the dilemma of misattributions is Crome’s actual production. During his active, working life (1790-1821) only a small portion of those pictures alleged to have been produced by him were actually executed. It is my firm belief that Crome probably completed fewer than one-fifth of the works in oil that exist under his name—no more than two hundred paintings. When the artist’s mode of liveli¬ hood is considered—he was a local drawing master whose numerous students were scattered throughout Norfolk County—even this estimate may be excessive. He could devote only his leisure hours to painting. Six months after the artist’s death, and before Crome’s work could have been dispersed beyond the county of Norfolk, a Crome memorial exhibition was held,6 and one hundred 2. On Art and Connoisseurship (London, 1942),

p. 172. 3. See the dossier of James Reeve (Reg. Nos. 167-0-4, 167-C-5, 167-0-6, 167-0-8.), now in the

lowing works: A Mill near Lakenham (fig. n), A

Cottage near Lakenham (fig. 12), Hauthois Common (plate V, fig. 45), Hingham Lane Scene, Norfolk (fig. 60),

Thistle and Water Vole (fig. 72), Marlingford

British Museum Print Room. It contains comments

Grove (plate IX, fig. 77), View near Norwich, Harvesters

which, before 1902, beclouded the authenticity of

(fig. 79), Grove Scene (fig. 113).

certain Crome works. These doubts, which had

4. Crome (London, 1921), p. 47.

come to rest, have been recently raised anew. Com¬

5. “On John Crome and Connoisseurship; The

pare the comments in the catalogue subdivisions of

Present-Day Problem,” The Connoisseur, Vol. CLIV,

C. H. Collins Baker, Crome (London, 1921), with

No. 621 (November, 1963), pp. 199-200.

those in Derek and Timothy Clifford, John Crome (London, 1968), notably with reference to the fol¬ 86

6. October 15-October 20, 1821. See Norwich

Mercury, October 13, 1821.

and ten of his pictures were lent by individual owners. Janies Reeve, with an encyclopedic memory and a knowledge of Norwich both full and precise, was unable to recall more than seventy or eighty genuine Cromc paintings.7 Some works and dates ascribed to Cromc by W. F. Dickes are open to question, as his critical analysis is inconclusive for purposes of calculation.8 H. S. Theobald, after arbitrarily placing the number of Cromc’s unexhibited oil paintings during his life at thirty, first suggested a figure of two hundred paintings, then calculated a higher one.9 The alphabetical catalogue of Collins Baker lists eighty-six attributed works (one of which he questioned) that he had personally examined, and it traces twenty-four additional works which he considered genuine, accepting the opinions of other trained observers. This catalogue includes a list of five hundred and thirteen supposed “Cromes” which he brands as spurious and gives to other authors.10 Both of these books are out of print. A recent, available monograph by Derek and Timothy Clifford11 presents among one hundred and three entries in the catalogue subdivision on paintings twenty-eight items which should he rejected by my count. They are mimicries, imitations, forgeries, or copies ofCrome. Here the question of “Crome” or “non-Crome” becomes crucial, for, if these works are accepted, the whole concept of the artist’s style and development will be in jeopardy. In them are offered stylistic material for highly controversial attributions and grist to the mills of unsophisticated collectors and unscrupulous dealers. According to my tabulations, three hundred and seven works (paintings, watercolors, and drawings) were exhibited at Norwich and at London during the artist’s career and shortly after his death. The catalogues of the Norwich Society of Artists’ membership exhibitions list two hundred and eighty-nine works displayed by Crome between 1805 and 1821.12 Of these, four pictures were shown posthumously in the society exhibition immediately follow¬ ing his death. Thirteen exhibits were in the Royal Academy exhibitions between 1806 and 1813, and six pictures appeared in the British Institution exhibitions between 1818 and 1824. Employing external and visual criteria, documentary evidence, and periodic assistance from technicians, my own direct examination of over 1100 Crome-labeled oil paintings, watercolors, and drawings has yielded 103 oil paintings, 2 oil-painted portraits, 3 oil-painted inn signs, 42 watercolors, 25 pencil-drawings, 14 pen-and-ink (gray-wash) drawings, and 3 sepia wash drawings I have judged to be genuine works by Crome. Two paintings mutilated be¬ yond repair, another one that I consider a joint effort by Crome and his eldest son, John Berney Crome, and one a collaboration with his brother-in-law, Robert Ladbrooke, are not included in these figures. To this aggregate it is perhaps fair to add forty or fifty pictures in oil that represent works as yet untraced; those that have perished through fire, exposure, or neglect of one kind or another; that have been mutilated by improper conservation over the years, or that have suffered from various conditions that cause damage to paintings. With these considerations in mind, it would seem that Crome’s total output of less than two hundred completed paintings in oils is a reasonable and just estimate. 7. H. S. Theobald, Crome s Etchings (London and

12. Counting

New York, 1906), p. 12. 8. The

Norwich

School

11. John Crome (London, 1968).

of Painting

(London,

oil

paintings,

sketches

in

oils,

watercolors, drawings in pen-and-ink, pencil, and

1905), pp. 45-78 and 89-138.

chalk shown by Crome; one picture (no. 56 in the

9. Theobald, op. cit., p. 11.

1808 exhibition) is listed as the work of “Master J.

10. Collins Baker, op. cit., pp.

118 and 120-

Crome’’(John Berney Crome).

178. 87

Among the considerable number of talented Norwich artists working between 1820 and i860, many show a vision, a pictorial organization, a technical skill, and a style strikingly similar to Crome’s. These are but a few of the factors that introduce perplexing problems in distinguishing true Cromes from a large corpus of closely related works. Fortunately, however, the recent increase in photographic material in such research institutions as the Witt Photography Library in the Courtauld Institute of Art, London, and the Frick Art Reference Library, New York, offers substantial assistance in recognizing stylistic variants of Crome employed by his followers of the Norwich School and by his copyists and forgers. But it is necessary to remember that even this extensive material is not complete. A compre¬ hensive study of the less important Norwich School artists has not been attempted in recent times.13 Most of Crome’s oil paintings, watercolors, drawings, and etchings are not signed.14 The frequency with which one encounters false signatures indicate that they have been added by another hand. Just why Crome omitted his signature has not been satisfactorily explained. Perhaps the view expressed by Georges Michel is applicable to Crome. When Michel’s patron, J. L. Demarne, asked the artist to inscribe his name on a picture which he admired, Michel said, “Do as you like; for myself, I do not put my name on my pictures; the painting ought to speak for itself, and the signature is only a wheedling device which seeks to entice and deceive.”15 Dickcs has suggested that the presence of a defoliated, hooked terminal tree branch silhouetted against the sky, as illustrated in the right upper quadrant of Marlingford Grove (fig. 77), may have been intended by Crome as a rebus upon his name—in colloquial Norfolk dialect “Crome,” pronounced “Croom,” means hooked stick.16 From our experi¬ ence, when this motif is present it is displayed in a lumbering and distorted fashion, combined with other un-Crome-like qualities. The appearance of a hooked, terminal leafless branch is therefore untrustworthy as a signature. Usually, when present, it is overelaborated and repre¬ sents the work of an imitator or forger. Pupils and followers of Crome had the same penchant for realism and based it on a genuine feeling for nature. They also were inspired by Crome’s increasingly emotional way of looking at and responding to natural scenery; his dramatization of form with light and shade especially won allegiance among followers. The treatment of these qualities by pupil and teacher is often so similar that differentiation is dependent mainly upon Crome s refined homogeneity of fused light and atmosphere and on his distinctive handling of texture. Indeed, the differentia¬ tion of some Cromes from the work of his most able disciples—painters such as James Stark, George Vincent, John Berney Crome, Robert Ladbrooke, Joseph Stannard, David Hodgson, and Henry Jutsum—is possible only on the basis of vigorous stylistic analysis. The central problem of the art of Crome, which affects all other problems, is the elusive similarity between a painting of genuine authorship and a copy labeled a Crome. A final judgment may be so marginal that emotional convicitions or personal aberrations of per¬ ception, or both, tend to weaken or negate sound stylistic criticism. As in the case of Girtin, 13. James Stark, George Vincent, John Berney Crome, Robert Ladbrooke, Joseph Stannard, David Hodgson, Henry Bright, John Middleton, Thomas Bound, and Alfred Priest are the principal members of the Norwich School in the wake of Crome that have been inadequately studied.

88

14. See Chapter III, n. 27. 15. A. Dubuisson, Richard Parkes Bonington: His Life and Work (London, 1924), p. 125. 16. Dickes, op. cit., p. 57.

Bonington, Corot, and. the Impressionist painters, those who imitated Crome were constantly at work to confuse the collectors and the dealers, who were more often enchanted by the artist’s name than by the true qualities of brushwork, color, and craftsmanship. Before the unprejudiced efforts of Collins Baker in 1921, the interpretation of Crome was either wholly legendary or based on imprecise criteria.17 Even though he raised aesthetic and historical criteria to a higher level, the reconstruction of Crome’s artistic personality and of the spirit of his art has remained haphazard. Using traditional colors in a traditional way and in a low key, Crome interpreted the themes of nature in an unconventional style; critics of the period termed him “another in the new manner.”18 Of the artistic criteria applicable to recognizing Crome, the most valid is a knowledge of the practical aspects of truth in nature—the observed natural facts—how a tree trunk is rooted in the earth from which it grows; how branches and twigs are articulated; what precise tree drawing is; how atmosphere drifts and envelops; what natural fusion of light and air is; how sunlight defines form and shadows suggest movement; how the bulk and edges of cloud formations are shaped; and, of utmost importance, how objects in nature are justly related to one another. From early in his career, Crome sought with conscious determination to advance and sharpen his perception of nature with the ultimate aim of giving realism to out-of-door scenes. The scale of values he attained and the technical means by which he expressed it convey the basic grammar and chief characteristics of his style. To sum up the criteria of style for analysis and comparison, we suggest the following list of qualities as being generally valid for the whole field of Crome’s work throughout his artistic career: (1) The observed facts of natural scenery are painted with the kind of detail that suggests accurate translation, most significantly, of tree trunks, branches, twigs, and foliage. (2) Human figures are poorly drawn, clumsy, and subordinated to the landscape. Their forms are broadly composed and modeled, with outlines blended into immediate surround¬ ings; their postures suggest the heavy stance of rustic folk; their necks are either compressed or absent; their faces are like bloated masks, expressionless, and without modeling. (3) Animals also are awkwardly drawn. When present at all, they are introduced sparingly. (4) Atmosphere has an element of spaciousness, with a recession and fusion of light and air in shadowed as well as in lighter areas. (5) The painting method is characterized by thin, transparent undermodeling, thinner on canvas than on wood panels. Superimposed pigment is applied, except in his earliest works (1790—1803), with small, discrete, jewellike dabs, as slender threadlike skeins, or with soft touches of mosaiclike impasto. Characteristic surface texture is finely pebbled or homo¬ geneously and smoothly granulated. (6) Colors and color combinations in an unfinished “lay-in” (The Windmill near Norwich [fig. 90]) are a source for such information as exists about Crome’s palette.19 The principal hues and pigments are as follows: ground, when present, is brownish red, the red being conspicuous. Raw sienna (ivory white, for sandy surfaces), green (malachite, for grassy 17

Crome, op. cit.

18. Joseph Farrington, R.A., The Farington Diary, ed. James Greig (New York, 1924), Vol. Ill (Septem-

19. A surviving hardwood palette which Crome used is in the City of Norwich Museums; the residual colors have not been chemically analyzed,

ber 14, 1804—September 16, 1806), p. 216. 89

passages), brown and lighter brown, a color he called oil of carnation (flesh tone for masonry and highlights), grayish natural color (dark and light), steel gray, and gray white or pearly gray (for clouds), creamy white (for edges of clouds and their accents), silvery green or gray green, silvery blue, ultramarine, cobalt, yellow ocher, red ocher, brown ocher, and bitumen. The characteristics enumerated above are discernible either alone or in combination in incon¬ trovertible works. But a point to be remembered is that not all aspects of high quality are found in every work of Crome’s. Very often some aspects are more conspicuous than others in a particular work, but a good number of them are included in those works which were done after 1804—the end of what may be considered Crome’s formative period of develop¬ ment. It is important to realize that no single picture will convey more than one state of the artist’s mind. Although Crome did repeat a limited number of themes from time to time, introducing changes in color, composition, and mood (St. Martin s Gate, Norwich [fig. 54], Wood Scene with Pool in Front [fig. 116]), repetition suggests that the original concept remained unchanged. In this regard, the following pictures should be examined as a basis for meaningful standards of style in judging an attribution: Slate Quarries (plate II, fig. 20), The Yare at Thorpe, Norwich (fig. 25), View near Weymouth (fig. 26), The Blacksmith’s Shop, Hingham (fig. 34), The Beaters (plate IV, fig. 43), St. Martin s Gate, Norwich (fig. 54), Marlingford Grove (plate IX, fig. 77), The Poringland Oak (fig. 105), Squall off Yarmouth (fig. 106), Yarmouth Beach and Mill: Looking North (plate XI, fig. 107), Mousehold Heath, Norwich (plate XIV, fig. 109), Yarmouth Water Frolic (plate XV, fig. no), The Fishmarket at Boulogne (plate XVI, fig. 114), and Wood Scene with Pool in Front (fig. 116). Within the framework of different combinations of qualities garnered from the above examples, the real measure of difference between the master’s work and that of his imitators and forgers and of his school will be demonstrated in the section that follows.

DISCERNMENT OF STYLE AND STANDARD OF QUALITY

Let us begin by comparing the oil-painted landscape by Crome, Hingham Lane Scene, Norfolk (fig. 60), with a picture by a copyist (fig. 61), also in oil and representing a similar subject in which twin oaks almost fill the left foreground. A similar oak tree, set within palings, at the right, is separated from the larger trees by a pool of water which reflects accents of its sur¬ roundings : the palings in the right foreground, a dead tree in the center middle distance, and a shoreline of dense thicket. Sunlit slopes in the distance are illuminated by a clear, bright sky with receding cumulus clouds. I doubt that an untrained eye would readily realize the inferior quality of the copyist’s painting. It may appeal at first because of the daring opulence of the foreground landscape and the florid cloud formations, but its appeal is different from that of the Crome painting. A close examination will reveal that it lacks the subtle as well as the fundamental qualities by which the master’s work is distinguished. In Crome’s work, the drawing of trees suggests that he knew by heart the principles of growth and had a keen eye and a sure feel for the individual character of the particular tree he was painting. The trunks are modeled more freely, more sensitively than in the copy, and we perceive a roughened texture more true to natural bark. While Crome’s tree trunks suggest growth, straining against the ground, yet full rooted in the earth, the copyist’s are merely placed on it like weight-supporting columns. Look at the branches, their lifelike charm; 90

the twigs are drawn with the insight of one who knows from concentrated observation how twigs branch out from the limb: both are pliant and have a rhythmic flow of life. The copyist’s trees seem rigid in comparison; the modeling of trunks, branches, and twigs is marked by a stiff and brittle quality. The trunks, in particular, fail to convey a feeling for roundnesss, for surface texture and for organic structure. Furthermore, Crome created a modeling effect of light and shadow which fulfills a complex function. The expressive values of the light-to-shadow scale throughout the picture space adds three-dimensional realism to the form of objects and gives coherence to the design pattern. Whereas the areas of light and shadow in the copyist’s painting are spotty and uncoordinated—almost bizarre—in the Crome landscape they provide a slow, drifting continuity, relating each part to the whole. Crome’s aerial perspective is one of the most admirable aspects of his work, and it is particularly pervasive in this landscape, while its absence is an obvious weakness in the copy. To take a concrete instance, we can compare the treatment of the leaves in both pictures. Crome’s filigreed leafy domes recede into the inseparably fused light and atmosphere. The foliage pattern suggests a continuous edge, though there is a discontinuous touch. This handling tends to produce a clearer distinction of planes throughout the actual field of space, offering an airy vista, with no abrupt transitions from light to dark. By contrast, the foliage in the copy forms a sharp-edged silhouette against the sky. The use of color and brushwork to create aerial perspective was understood by Crome. His acute perception of color changes under sunlight effects is seen in the way the rich gray green of the tree foliage is interblended and graded into the distance through mottled tourquoise passages of the far slopes, ending in a pale, milky blue tone in the vast bowl of the sky. The brushstrokes parallel these modulations. Bold impasto speckles from a loaded brush, varying slightly in size and shape, give the impression of following the leaf lines established by nature. As the landscape recedes into the atmosphere, the brushstrokes become more delicate and thin out to a transparent wash in the sky. In the copy, foliage colors fail to meet the subtleties of the original; each leaf is clogged with thick paint; and the brushstrokes are heavy and with¬ out vitality. Colors and brushwork are no less harsh in the sky, and the blue is more pro¬ nounced. Skies painted by Crome have a special character. No copyist or forger ever captured the tonal qualities, atmospheric depth, and cloud buoyancy that he achieved. The most typical sky of a Crome painting is a wide expanse of silvery-toned, transparent wash through which filters a modulated pastel blue as illustrated in the original Hingham Lane Scene, Norfolk (fig. 60). This expanse is dramatized by luminous clouds whose cumulus, fleecy, or sheetlike forms drift and recede in a style that echoes the art of seventeenth-century Dutch realism. With characteristic meticulous care, Crome rounded the margins of his clouds with short, semicircular strokes, free of the harshness, jaggedness, or scratchiness which is apparent in the work of the copyist. The copyist’s landscape, in comparison with Crome s, is filled with crudely painted areas and passages that have little relationship to each other. A specific detail can be studied at the base of the twin oaks (fig. 62). Here the dazzling sunlight on the ground is exaggerated to such an extent that it throws that area out of balance. The corresponding area of the Crome also has a spotlighted effect, but it is handled with greater subtlety, and there is attention to its values in the composition as a whole. Here also, the softness of Crome s brushwork 9i

contrasts with the copyist’s version, which shows labored encrustations of paint applied in coarse, raised plaquelike whirls. If we compare the palings to the right in both pictures, Crome has given prominence to the section by clearly defining the individual palings, the foliage, and the water reflections; the copyist’s painting is careless, and the entire area is ineffectual. The same can be said of the copyist’s slopes in the far middle distance, which have nothing of the grace, the action of light on color and form, or the textural realism displayed in the Crome. In summary, the copyist’s example illustrates a crudity of handling, a lack of Crome’s artistic effects and economy of means, and a failure to grasp the pulsating life found in the authentic work. Whether this picture was the copyist’s own mimicry of Crome’s style or was an intentional forgery, the quality of the performance is conspicuously inferior to that of the master. In a comparison between the original Crome painting of The Harling Gate (fig. 92) and a remarkably close copy (fig. 96), both on canvas, it may be still more difficult to perceive the difference in handling and quality, at least at first sight. Here v/e need to note finer distinctions as well as more obvious ones. The lone figure in the painting, a seated man holding a stick (fig. 93), shows characteristic Crome modeling: a certain rhythmic awkwardness of the total form, the neck compressed into the shoulders, and a mere impression of the face. The copy displays these characteristics in the broad sense but not in the details (fig. 97). In place of the awkwardness, we note an amorphous kind of modeling, and this gives less of a hunch to the shoulder line and less feeling of organic weight pressing against the grassy knoll. The downy coating material of the original (denuded after cleaning) is animated by realistic modeling, done with short, symmetrical brushtip touches of paint, suggesting the forms of the arm—the bend of the elbow, and the forearm hidden in the sleeve (fig. 93). Crome demonstrates superior mastery over his follower in the elaboration of detail and in the impressionistic clarity of the motif. The handling of the fabric texture in the copy is an aimless reproduction and does not build up an animated design. There is a superficial adaptation of Crome’s brush style but not of his telling variety of detail. The sleeve of the coat is grossly out of proportion; the hint of the elbow is missing; and the foreshortened forearm and hand appear deformed. The whole of the lower part of the figure is weak, failing to mirror the palpable quality of life. Spotted with highlights, the landscape immediately surrounding the figure provides a delightful vignette in both pictures. Varied intensities of sunlight on the country road, on the bordering sandy terrain (fig. 94), on the twin oak trees and their foliage (fig. 95), and playing on and through the fence palings attract the eye. However, the difference in tonal gradations results in two very different moods. Crome has created a feeling of joy, drenching the center of the sandy terrain with dazzling sunlight and spreading sparkles of it over most of the land¬ scape, though contrasts are subtly toned down as they near the outer edges. In comparison the mood of the copy is somber, as the sunlit area is unnaturally subdued considering that the sky is lighter and brighter than in the original, and the rich details picked out with light in Crome’s work remain suppressed. A coloristic oddity sets this copy apart from the authentic Crome and two other imitations of the same picture. It is a glowing, silvery gray green highlight—fresh and pronounced on the tree foliage, on the straggling underbrush at the base of the trees, and on the patches of foreground grass—which imparts a quality alien to Crome. All of the coloring in this copy 92

is affected by the fact that the canvas is of finer grain than the one used in the original. In all points of the composition, a penetrating analysis will reveal the master’s higher regard for balanced coloring, for realistic modeling and for coherent expression; and not least, such analysis will reveal the over-all superior quality of his work. It is evident that there are certain criteria of style that emerge from the comparison of Crome originals with the work of copyists. Now turn to the task of establishing a scale of values for works in which trees, notably oaks, dominate the composition: trees have enlivened the English scene from ancient times with their immense individuality, the sturdiness of their structure, and, under her ever-changing skies, the remarkable play of light and color on their bark and foliage. They were studied by Gainsborough (Cornard Wood, National Gallery, London), Alexander Cozens (Beech Bole, City Art Gallery and Temple Newsam House, Leeds), Paul Sanby (View over a Lake, City Art Gallery, Birmingham, England), John Constable (Trees at Hampstead: The Path to Church, Victoria and Albert Museum, London), John Crome (Marlingford Grove, Lady Lever Gallery, Port Sunlight, England), and numerous other artists of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. As early as 1791, William Gilpin, the advocate of the picturesque, in his “Remarks on Forest Scenery and Other Woodland Views” instructed artists to study lichens, “the green velvet moss” of oaks, and “little rich knots and fringes”.20 These became some of the elements that beguiled succeeding British landscape painters. In the tradition of picturesque vision, the romantic elements in the Crome paintings, The Poringland Oak (fig. 105) and The Old Oak (fig. 68), far transcend those of earlier painters while inheriting their sensibilities. The efflorescence of these romantic delights spurred the copyist and, more prominently, the forger into a flurry of activity. Centering their fake productions on this ancestral tree, they painted variations of the central motif in Crome’s The Old Oak, the massive oak tree, and placed them in different settings. These pictures were produced to satisfy the widespread interest that Crome’s art excited after his death, from the 1830s through the 1850s. Although the forgeries and replicas were spiritless and of uncertain provenance and authorship, they were enthusiastically admired and freely purchased by notable collectors;21 even today, these same pictures find ready buyers in the auction room. In spite of their poor quality, fakes flourished on the free markets of Norwich and London and New York. We still know little about the exact relationship between forgeries produced in that period and the Crome pictures known to us today. The Crome picture, The Old Oak, exerted a strong artistic influence on the copyist-forger, and he frequently depended upon it as the archetypal design for an indeterminate number of hybrids with incongruous titles (fig. 69). Copied variations also show various attractive compositional rearrangements entitled according to fictitious geographical settings. Although there is a small, little-known hamlet near Norwich named Poringland, where the unblighted beauty of an oak tree inspired the celebrated Crome masterpiece, The Poringland Oak, the copyists coined names, such as Porington and Porlington, to denote villages in East Anglia. They also used real locations in their titles, such as Melton and Kimberley, hamlets a few miles from Norwich. Crome’s paintings of landscapes at Melton and Kimberley were of great

20. London, 1791, pp. 1, 10-11.

Sherrington, Louis Huth, William Ranger, John

21. Among the better known collections of the

Sheepshank, and Wynn Ellis contained Cromes of

period,

those

of

Thomas

Churchyard,

James

dubious authorship.

93

rarity, and certain preparatory drawings, which were equally rare, have not yet been located.22 No less disconcerting and equally in need of clarification is the picture entitled Harling Gate, near Norwich (fig. 85), in the National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C.23 A misleading as¬ pect of this picture is that while the content and composition were taken from the Crome painting entitled The Gate (fig. 83), its title seems to have been adopted from an entirely different Crome painting, called The Harling Gate (fig. 92). The only feature common to all three pictures is a horizontal, closed wooden gate across a sunlit country road. In the Washing¬ ton picture, the foreground has been brought closer to the viewer, but the angle of the gate is more frontal than in Crome’s The Gate. W. Roberts, in the catalogue of the Widener Collection, published before the painting entered the National Gallery of Art, does not question the authenticity of the Washington painting as a Crome original, nor does he mention documentation for its acceptance.24 From my own earlier studies (1958), I considered this picture to be a version of The Gate by Crome,25 but I now am convinced that this picture is an adaptation by an imitator, a Norwich School artist other than Crome. Once we are familiar with the style and technique of the genuine Crome landscape of the same subject (fig. 83), we realize that there are qualities in the imita¬ tion which are sufficiently atypical to support this conclusion. To begin with, when it comes to questions of Crome authenticity, it is well to give full consideration to both style and technique. Only if the technique fulfills the stylistic function which it serves in Crome’s genuine work can we be convinced of the authenticity of a painting. For such an examination, appropriately selected details are revealing. Thus, on inspection of the canvas in question we note a thick ground which contributes to a textured coarseness that is unlike the undermodeling in any known Crome work. The resultant rough, unevenly thick cobbled effect is completely dissimilar to the scintillating surface that is an integral part of the master’s style. A comparison of the gate (figs. 84, 86), the focal point of both compositions, shows an attempt to imitate the way Crome manipu¬ lated his strokes, but the imitator has lost control of the modeling function; his gate becomes a much more rigid structure and harsher in its values. The effects of age and weathering on

22. The pictures of scenes from Melton and

before 1877; with Wallis & Sons; bought by P. A. B.

Kimberley which Crome exhibited with the Nor¬

Widener, 1892, who bequeathed it through his son,

wich Society of Artists during his lifetime included

Joseph E. Widener, to the National Gallery of Art,

two oil paintings, A Cart-Shed, at Melton, Norfolk

Washington, D.C. This picture was exhibited at the

(1806, no. 46), and Scene near Lord Wodehouse’s Park

Royal Academy, London, 1877, and at the Fine Arts

(Kimberley Park) (1813, no. 78), and a pencil drawing,

Society of New York, 1893 (no. 48). See Paintings in

Oak Tree, Lord Wodehouse’s Park (1806, no. 229).

the Collection of Joseph Widener at Lynnewood Hall

After his death, two landscapes in oils from these

(Elkins Park, Pennsylvania: privately printed, 1931),

locales

Memorial

p. 198, with notes on Italian paintings by B. Beren-

Exhibition, Sketch of an Oak in Kimberley Park

son; on the early German, Dutch, and Flemish

(no. 72), and Trees at Melton, (no. 85). Apart from A

schools by C. Hofstede de Groot and W. R. Valen-

Cart-Shed, at Melton, Norfolk (fig. 6), the where¬

tiner; and on the British and French schools by W.

abouts of these pictures is unknown.

Roberts.

were

entered

in

the

Crome

23. Oil on canvas, 48^ X 39 in. (123.2 X 99.1 cm.) (Widener Collection, 1942, Acc. No. 610). 24. The Harling Gate, near Norwich was in the collection of the Right Honorable Mrs. Byng since

94

25. See Norman L. Goldberg, “ Old Crome in America,” The Connoisseur, American ed. (December i960), p. 215, repr. fig. 2.

form, which Crome rendered with a certain verve of impasto strokes and brilliant painterly treatment, are ignored by the imitator: he misses a lively quality—the pictorial animation of the gate. The cluster of large trees in the Washington picture also fails to show the natural, pliant quality of a Crome tree. The imitator’s version is stylized and is as dense as a silhouette instead of being animated and airy. Crome characteristically exploits the opposition of sunlight and shade for naturalistic and dramatic purposes. A serpentine arrangement of the sunlight from middle distance to fore¬ ground is present in both pictures, but, in spite of the subtle differential in the black-and-white reproductions, the contrast of light and shade is sharper and more hard edged in the imitation, reflecting a naive vision. In the Crome, sunlit and dark areas interpenetrate and show a thoroughly harmonious and fluctuating borderline. The sunlight plays over the surface with subtle gradations, accentuating the scintillation of textures and forms. Unless one is constantly alert to the fundamental qualities of Crome’s authentic work and tries to realize the full inter¬ relationship of style and technique with his personal observation, one can easily be deceived by the imitator and the forger. On repeated occasions in recent years, we have witnessed dealers, critics, and art historians assigning Crome attributions to copies and spurious variants. In each instance, they have been unacceptable to Crome scholars as genuine works. The artistically sensitive judgment of most observers is at times intuitive, but more often it is partly a matter of personal experience and partly a matter of accepting traditional judgment. The nature of their final judgment eludes analysis because it is a composite of subjective responses and casually observed style elements. Thus, the authorship of a sound Crome or of a fake may be sensed without a cogent analysis, but it cannot be fully justified without these preliminaries and without a thorough and searching effort on the part of the observer. For examples that illustrate this problem, we show from the City of Norwich Museums’ collection a Norwich backwater scene, On the Wensum, above New Mills (fig. 118),26 done in oil on panel, juxtaposed with a landscape of identical components similarly arranged, The Wensum, Norwich (fig. 119), also in oil on panel.27 Both pictures have appeared in exhibitions as autograph works of Crome. Significantly, no validation, documentary or technical, exists for confirming the authenticity of either picture. I should like to state my own opinion 26. The available information concerning this picture is as follows:

to W. C. Atkinson, Liverpool; by descent to Mrs.

W.

C.

Atkinson, his wife; her sale,

Measurements: 15 X 20 in. (38.1 X 50.9 cm.);

Sotheby, April 16, 1961, Lot No. 83, as A

Provenance: Acquired by Sir Henry Holmes

Norwich Backwater; bought by P. & D. Colnaghi

before 1932; bequeathed by him to the City of

& Co., Ltd., for the collection of Mr. and Mrs.

Norwich Museums, 1940;

Paul Mellon, 1961; Yale Center for British Art,

Exhibitions: Kettering, Crome, Cotman and the

Paul Mellon Collection.

Norwich School, 1952 (no. 17); Paris, Le Pay sage

Exhibitions:

Anglais, 1953 (no. 19); London, Messrs. Thos.

Museum, International Art Treasures, 1962 (no.

Agnew & Sons, Ltd., Crome and Cotman, 1958

6), as A Norwich Backwater, repr.; Richmond,

(no. 23); Derby and Nottingham, The Norwich

Virginia Museum of Fine Arts, 1963 (no. 77),

School, 1959 (no. 24). 27. The available information concerning this picture is as follows:

London,

Victoria

and

Albert

repr. pi. 60; London, Royal Academy, 1964-65, (no. 101), repr. pi. 16; New Haven, Connecticut, Yale University Art Gallery, 1965 (no. 58),

Measurements: 14J X 19m.(36.8 x 48.3cm.);

repr. pi. 16, Paintings in England 1700-1850, as

Provenance: S. T. Gooden, March, i9°3> sold

The Wensum, Norwich.

by Thos. Agnew & Sons, Ltd., February., 1904,

95

concerning each work. Whether or not it is justifiable should become clear, and I ask therefore that the reader withhold judgment. In the City of Norwich Museums landscape we are impressed by the congested spatial arrangement; by the animated qualities of the composition; by a sense of motion in the trees, the water, and the boat with a man rowing; by the filmy clouds; and by the atmosphere itself. The river flows slowly in a curve to the left from the foreground into the far middle distance. Vigorous, yet graded, contrasts of light and dark and sharply demarcated objects, dominated by plaster-walled cottages with striking water reflections, establish cluttered spatial relationships obliquely across the riverbanks. There is little atmosphere partitioning to provide effective modeling of forms, such as the house roofs, the chimneys, the tree trunks and foliage, and the palings. Although larger and smaller accents are woven into some unity, it is broken and distorted by the obtrusive prominence of the tall front chimney on the right. A clumsy, uneven surface gives a heavy consistency to the cottages and barn fronts as well as to other painted wooden surfaces. This contrived texture has no parallel in Crome’s style. The dry washes of color in the sky, with sharp blues that lack luminous accents, are equally uncharacteristic. This picture, in my opinion, is incorrectly attributed; it is the performance of a clever brushman but a visionless artist who attempted to mimic the style and composition of a Crome backwater scene at Norwich presumed to be untraced or lost. The Wensum, Norwich, the other picture, has its merits in a modest attractiveness and decep¬ tive delicacy of detail. But its vitality exceeds that of the City of Norwich Museums version; its range of light and dark accents is greater; and its mood is more exuberant. Forms in space are sharper, and the space between forms becomes an inseparable part of the composition. Voids as well as solids are given emphasis by the uneven and brighter values of light which the painter employs to veil and to reveal. We are impressed by these daring qualities from which the picture space gains in expressive life until we examine the sky. The receding cloud forms carry the viewer’s eye to the left, behind the central motifs, into the far-off sunny luminosity. Here the sunlight and dark accents show a smudgy diversity, blurring the outlines of objects; in this area, the painter differs from Crome in his treatment of distant space. Crome’s imagina¬ tion was stirred by the evocative qualities of brightness from sunlight. Rarely, if ever, did he employ sunlight and dark areas of contrast as backdrop accents; he concentrated on the lively rendering of sunlight reflections and on the chiaroscuro device in the foreground and middle distances to create drama and mood.28 Also in the picture under consideration, the tree foliage seems to sway to and fro, not in the expected soft rhythms of Crome, but with a vigor incongruous in the apparent quiet of the atmosphere; note also the absence of ripples on the river surface, which are less evident than in the other copy. At the same time, there is an almost breathtaking alternation of greens in the crisp, yet quickly and brightly painted, tree foliage. The leaves are represented by blotches of color harshly accented, ranging from a fresh, light green (with bluish shimmer) to darker greens of many tones. Crome, in contrast, rendered effects of color and light on foliage by applying flawless brushpoint dabs of silvery green color. Like other copyists, the painter of this picture gives us a mere parody of Crome. To provide the lower portion of the larger tree

28. For illustration and comparison of these

Hautbois Common (plate V, fig. 45), The Poringland

qualities as used characteristically by Crome, see the following paintings: The Beaters (plate IV, fig. 43),

Oak (fig. 105), and River Landscape with Barge (fig. 39).

96

trunk with a rough texture, broad bands of ribbonlike impasto are imbricated, giving to the bark a coarseness that is tricky and unrealistic. So conspicuous is this brushwork that the tangly impasto of the smaller tree trunks and of the underbrush in the lower parts suggest a disparate style—perhaps, in the tree painting of this picture, even that of a second artist. Divers technical methods are common accompaniments of copyists’ methods who attempt to imitate Crome, although it cannot be proved that a second artist added touches. Furthermore, in the cottage plaster walls of The Wensum, Norwich, the copyist employs a pronounced dove gray color with undermodeling, which wanders from faint beige to deep reddish tones, colors that deviate from Crome’s softer and more delicate rose beige of facade masonry painting.29 On the whole, this picture teaches us that when diversified touch and textural nuances are not en¬ riched with accents of color true to Crome’s palette, they result in an aberrant style that lacks his subtle charm and quality. For another comparison of a revealing copy, which we believe also preserves the subject matter of a lost or un traced Crome and is close on all levels of style, design, and mood to the preceding backwater scenes, we illustrate The Tatmary Yard (fig. 120, oil on canvas, I3§ x n|- in. (34 x 29 cm.), the John S. Phipps Foundation, Old Westbury House, Old Westbury, Long Island), of which Crome may have done a variation in a watercolor. From the external and visual evidence of both this picture and the two preceding ones, it does not take long to discover a stylistic similarity and a closely related discipline in all three designs. The aura of brighter luminosity in the picture under consideration works effectively for the articulation of the components and for the expression of their form and balanced relationship. It especially dramatizes the central role played by the sheared wool and by the line of skins hanging in the sun to dry. Light and dark areas are massed to the extreme left of the principal motifs, as they are in the two preceding pictures. The formula adopted for painting tree forms in all three compositions shows little variation, although it is a bit more airy in this one. While the tonal accents in the cottage and barn walls are in a slightly lower key, I believe they are likely to have originated from different brushes, none of them from the brush of Crome. In the master’s work, there is more sensitive modulation of contours and surfaces, and their inter¬ relationships are productive of subtler depictions of form, clearer suggestions of objects in space, more realistic envelopment of fused light and air, and, finally a more coherent designnote particularly these qualities for comparison in Crome’s Norwich River: Afternoon (fig. 108). If we examine the handling of color in a genuine Crome and in the false examples that have been described—representative of the standard of quality encountered in better copies and forgeries—distinguishing characteristics of style will become apparent without much trouble. At the heart of Crome’s method lies a thin and fluid underpainting of monochrome, which he employed throughout much of the unsteady line of his development, deviating only in rare instances. With the undermodeled ground wet, larger or smaller passages of local color were worked in by a scumble or by use of solid paint, and small tear- or pear-shaped dabs of rich impasto were then applied by soft touches from the tip of a sable brush. Trans¬ parent glazes were then laid on as a part of the technique, and occasionally bitumen30 was 29. The variations of tone, intensity of color, and

Mills, Norwich (fig. 46), River Landscape with Barge

the consistency of its application to masonry surfaces

(fig. 39), and Norwich River: Afternoon (plate XIII,

by Crome in the different periods of his development are observable in The Blacksmith s Shop, Hingham

fig. 108). 30. Bitumen (or asphaltum as it is sometimes

(fig. 34), View on the Yare (fig. 38), Back of the New

called) is a tarry brown coal-tar derivative which was

97

used, with the natural result that some of Crome’s pictures have suffered irreversible damage. Generally speaking, however, Crome superimposed layers of paint with such meticulous care that in each layer the medium and pigment were probably mixed in advance of applica¬ tion; so consummately were they blended that they cohere in a rich and substantial surface. He also used this method to attain highlights, which were usually put in with a slender, thread¬ like drag of solid masses of paint, varying in volume to assert contrast with the rest of the surface. When, however, many layers of paint are used to obtain a sparkling crust, for palings or sandy terrain (fig. 84), for tree trunks and foliage (fig. 44), or for masonry surfaces (fig. 35), they are built up with dexterity, assurance, and clarity; this gives to the painted surface an illusion of vibrant bas-relief. Soft brushpoint touches of paint account for texture, which is accented and intricate and dependent on Crome’s persistence in trying to represent all he saw searchingly and, in the end, in trying to reach perfection. By way of contrast, the copyists or forgers of Crome began with a thin underpainting in monochrome, but they rarely had the patience to sustain it. They lacked the skill to build up an orderly and uniformly thickened surface; consequently, in copies and forgeries, we note tree trunks and branches streaky with congealed loading or opaque highlights, flat in texture (fig. 62). The paint stands out from the main ground—the ground is buried beneath thick, clogged paint (more notably in forgeries than in copies, unless by amateurs)—and often resembles a whorllike mosaic of dry, heavy, discordant dabs of varying volumes. When a painting shows heaviness of loading, is extravagantly streaky, or presents dry, plaquelike incrustations, it almost certainly can be dismissed as not the work of Crome. The unique character of the forger s criteria of style is explicit, and, although its qualities can be demonstrated and described, they cannot be depended upon unconditionally. Yet stylistic comparisons with authentic Cromes do yield a scale of values. Thus, the trained observer will be able to recognize and appraise the tangible qualities of a fake Crome with assurance when they are present. Among the recognizable deviations that concern us, the following may help to avoid unnecessary blunders: (1) Cobalt blue distances devoid of silvery tone or a light pastel hue. (2) Smooth tree trunks, or tree bark painted with encrusted, rough-textured impasto which either lacks orderliness or shows an overlaid, geometric network of thick, clogged paint or streaky, dry impasto. (3) Grasses and reeds rendered conspicuous by rigid, insensitive painting. (4) Unaccented, formless, or wispy clouds, or cloud forms 111 a stylized effect; thin and dry washes of color in the sky; or sharp blue azure skies in which cumulus or fleecy clouds may sometimes be present, tinted with pink, yellow, or purple. (5) General impression is of a flat backdrop rather than of a receding atmosphere, indicated by the gradually diminishing intensity of its colors.

within definite outlines and with little modeling; posture and gesture wrought with sharply drawn detail; faces small and expressive though undetailed” (6) Human figures painted

much used as a pigment by Reynolds and the succeeding generation of English artists. It never completely hardens. It develops broad cracks and, in its movements, is likely also to injure paint layers above and below it. 98

31. For a stylistic comparison of the morphology of figures by Crome, note The Beaters (plate IV, fig. 43), A Barge with a Wounded Soldier (plate XII, fig. 103), and The Fishmarket at Boulogne (plate XVI, fig. 114).

In broad summary, certain features which may be compared with genuine Crome painting appear consistently in copies, imitations, and forgeries. Ropy and streaky impasto is not a characteristic of Crome. His impasto is an echo of Chardin, but, in place of clear colors, Crome employed a scale of tones: grays, browns, tans, beiges (soft rose beige predominantly), greens (toned with browns, blacks, or silvery hues), soft royal blues, yellows, and reduced whites. His paint is always full and liquid in texture, even on larger mesh canvases. Criteria in cloud painting offer a strong clue for analysis. When in a cumulus cloud lumps or unwieldy dabs of paint are observed, and they stand away from the main groud, or a cloud is harsh, scratchy, or abrupt at the edges, or excessive in pigment, such work may most certainly be regarded as alien to Crome. If a picture as a whole evokes a sense of freshness—a modern look with a pronounced sky and bright passages of color in houses and figures and boats and sails, eluding the calm color which suggests Dutch old-master landscape painting—-it may be rejected without question. Even if Crome is judged by the standard of mastery usually reserved for his contemporaries of higher rank, notably Constable and Turner, one must recognize that he lavished a great deal of care on a picture. His pictures, confined to the Norwich region with few exceptions, reflect a mind instinctively attracted by natural mass, simplicity, and clean structure; an eye which saw broadly and with a passion for descriptive accuracy, and which ignored or mini¬ mized man-made structures and rejected the artifice of pictorial effect. The mood, tender and robust, of almost every natural object or group of objects, is imbued with the spirit of the artist’s gracious dignity. His was a dignity, majestic and unmannered, possessed by an emotion that was sparked from the world of reality through the perception of forms and formal relations. Nature, as seen by Crome, provided the motivating impulse, the poetic essence of his oil painting. Nature always appears mysterious, infinite, serenely exalted, yet unadorned.

WORKSHOP PRACTICES AND CROME FORGERS

Hiring assistance to produce works of art seriatim to satisfy the demands of patrons was the usual practice of the sixteenth-, seventeenth-, and eighteenth-century painter, who followed the workshop tradition of his Medieval and Renaissance predecessors.32 Much of the painting of these centuries, as well as that of the Middle Ages, was the result of joint production; thus, in the absence of external evidence, such as contracts and documents, there is no certainty that a work which came from a particular painter’s workshop is entirely by his hand. A painting may carry the signature of Giovanni Bellini, Rubens, or van Dyck; but only a certain level of workmanship and uniformity of quality enables the art historian to assume that it is by the particular artist’s brush; and even so, in some instances, were it not for notes, correspondence, drawings, or other documents, opinions would differ from generation to generation. The work of portrait painters presents similar difficulties. Lely, Kneller, Reynolds, and Gainsborough all employed assistants to paint their draperies and other accessories. But the consensus of contemporary evidence is that Gainsborough himself did not employ assistants except on rare occasions; Professor Waterhouse points to two examples which seem to show 32. For a succinct account of the organization, practices, and equipment of the artist’s guilds and workshops, see W. G. Constable,

Workshop (London, New York, Toronto, 1954). pp. 6-27.

The Painter s

99

the intervention of a drapery painter (Mrs. Mary Cutiiffe, ca. 1760, and the Rev. Robert, 4th Earl of Harborongh, ca. 1772).33 In view of the large number of commissions he had during his Bath period (1759-74), and the slightly inferior quality of two replicas, when compared with the original portrait ofJohn, 4th Earl of Bedford, 1764, it seems pretty certain that Gainsborough did, to a limited extent, employ studio assistants.34 In portrait after portrait, one has to ask how much of it is by the master’s own hand; and as often as not, the historian will say he does not know. Quality is no sure guide. The work of a skilled assistant or collaborator may be even more accomplished than the passages put in by the head of the studio, for even the greatest master cannot always perform at peak skill. On the other hand, thorough familiarity with the painter’s style generally will reveal his characteristic stamp and thus enable the master’s hand to be distinguished from that of helpers and collaborators. In the nineteenth century the system of hired studio helpers virtually disappeared. Even the most fashionable portrait painters, such as Sir Thomas Lawrence, and such popular landscape painters as William Collins, Sir Augustus W. Callcott, and Thomas Creswick, usually per¬ formed all the work on a painting themselves. The system of a painter taking pupils into his studio did continue, but the pupils did not form part of a producing team. They came purely for instruction. During the lifetime of Crome, it is known that as a teacher he was generous in his assistance to pupils, but there is no evidence that the fledglings’ hands shared in the work of Crome’s own canvases. Crome’s technical methods had certain distinctive characteristics. For example, even his most loaded surfaces, as far as I am able to detect, result from carefully accumulated brushwork. If he ever used a palette knife to mix paint on the palette, there is no evidence that he applied it to his paintings. However, after the death of Crome, when professional copiers and forgers of his work began to flourish, they systematically tried to obtain accents by the heavy loading of paint in imitation of Crome’s impasto. Failing to achieve his quality, they resorted to the use of a palette knife either to give a virtuoso quality to their impasto or to disguise their incompetence. No research studies of Crome forgers and forgeries have ever been published; little historical information on them is established by documents. From my own experience, whenever the subject is discussed among trained observers, the origins and dates of production are a matter of speculation. Nevertheless, it can be stated with some degree of certainty that the floating number of forged Cromes is smaller today than a generation ago, even though trafficing in spurious pictures by auctioneers and by merchants is common practice even today. My own limited study of the subject has demonstrated that the large number of spurious Cromes in museums and private collections is traceable basically to two sources, but these cannot be justly apportioned. Apart from genuine Starks, Vincents, and John Berney Cromes, the work of Robert Ladbrooke, John Berney Ladbrooke, S. D. Colkett, A. W. Callcott, David Hodgson, and Henry Jutsum has been mistaken for Crome s. There were also forgeries manufactured at Norwich and at London. This latter group included the forger’s adaptations and replicas, with and without variations, of genuine Crome works, principally paintings of woodland, beach, river, and moonlight scenes, and of drawings and etchings. It has been alleged, with what justice I am unable to confirm, that the principal culprits at Norwich were a man named Short and a dealer named “Old Wigger” of Bethel Street.

33.

Gainsborough

(London, 1958), pp. 22, 23.

34-

Ibid., p. 41.

XII.

Norwich

River Afternoon.

Collection Mr. Max Michaelis. No. 108

601 ON

“AdoqypeD 99k OU,

“YyIm4ony ‘YJvaH] pjoyasnopy

“ATX

S —

—_

fo)

Z ¢ ie)

iS O

=

"O 0

oO ~~ a

“le

Lal

a

cS

Water Frol Yarmouth XV.

‘TPH [pMsopmeg

‘Aouinyy “CY

APY UOWI[OD

WALA SUS ROS) SIERO ‘ausnojnog jv jaysvuysi-y ay.

TAX

“ Old Wigger ” is said to have had “ the pleasant habit of buying Crome pictures and cutting them into two or three pieces in order to make them go further as instruments of sale.”35 Alfred G. Stannard (1828-85), a Norwich painter and nephew ofjoseph Stannard, is said to have boasted that he had painted three hundred “Crom.es,”36 a figure probably exaggerated. Collins Baker has declared that Dawson Turner’s well-meant Outlines in Lithography, privately published in 1840, seems to have been fruitful inspiration for forgers; he points to two pictures produced from this source without offering much supporting evidence.37 And finally, when a local painter, James W. Pigg,38 is mentioned in Norwich today, answers to questions about him (and his relationship to copying Cronies) arc evasive, and silence discourages further questioning. During the last quarter of the nineteenth century, it is alleged that he carried on imitative practices in an improvised studio on the premises of a respected Norwich picture dealer, specializing in painting shams of Crome. He became so well known in Norwich for his Crome-like painting and copies of “Old Crome” that he was referred to as “Old Pigg.” Details of Pigg’s activities are not a matter of record, and the fragmentary information we have is not without some elements of doubt. At London, the high priest ot professional copiers and forgers was Joseph Paul. He was born at Norwich in 1804, and in his youth he may have absorbed some of Crome’s teachings as a pupil in the local grammar school where Crome was employed as drawing master. (Unfor¬ tunately, the early Norwich Grammar School records have been destroyed.) Paul exhibited with the Norwich Society of Artists in 1823, two years after Crome’s death, and his name appears as exhibitor again in 1829 and 1832. Thus, he had contact with Norwich artists, studied their work, and learned the style of Norwich School painting. Joseph Paul, a sinister figure, is to be distinguished from the much-abused Robert Paul, a Norfolk gentleman noted for his agricultural inventions and poker-drawing (a pastime among amateurs),39 who exhibited four of his poker works in the Norwich Society of Artists’ exhibitions of 1806 (no. 114), 1820 (nos. 143, 166), and 1824 (no. 158). Robert Paul lived at Starston, some fifteen miles south of Norwich, and died in the neighboring town of Harleston, aged sixty-six, in April, 1827.40

35. R. H. Mottram, John Crome of Norwich (London, 1931). pp- 8, 9-

Norwich artists. Those who knew Pigg described him as quiet, gentle, and somewhat eccentric. He

36. Ibid., p. 9.

was the eldest of a family of three and remained a

37. Collins Baker, op. cit., p. 60.

bachelor. His brother, George, also a house painter,

38. Born at Norwich, Norfolk, England, about

was the youngest and the only one to marry and

1848. Little is known of Pigg’s parents and early

have a family. He lived with a maiden sister, Caro¬

career, but he was a house painter and sign writer by

line, in Rosary Terrace, Rosary Road, Norwich,

occupation. Early in his youth, he was friendly with

where he died about 1908. For additional biographi¬

Obadiah Short (1803-86), a member of the Norwich

cal information, see

School, from whom he received art instruction. He

Johnson, Norwich, October, 1966,” in the Artists’

recorded scenes of Norwich and the local district on

File of the City of Norwich Museums.

“Notes by Winifred W.

the spot; later he lost the use of his right hand. So

39. Poker-drawing (or pyrography) is a process of

intense was his urge for art, he taught himself to

burning designs into a wooden board, leather, and

paint with his left hand, but his work suffered.

other materials with a heated tool. For the most part,

Gradually, he became paralyzed. He worked in both

it was practiced by amateurs in England during the

watercolor and oils, preferring the former medium,

eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.

and rarely signing his works, with the result that

40. See the Norfolk Chronicle, April 28, 1827.

many of his performances are ascribed to other IOI

Because of the Norwich connection of both Joseph Paul and Robert Paul, there has been a natural tendency to confuse the two, substituting the innocent Robert Paul for the forger Joseph Paul. Thus, the name of Robert Paul first appeared in the literature as the Crome copy¬ ist in Collins Baker’s monograph on Crome, published in 1921. In his discussion of innumerable spurious Cromes, there is a reference to “factory works of R. Paul (an exhibitor in the 1805 Norwich Society show . . .),”41 which implies that he was actively engaged in the production of Crome fakes. In the introductory chapter of the same book, while discussing the local group of painters at Norwich who imitated Crome, Sir Charles J. Holmes declares: “this Paul [R. Paul] was naturally one of the most gifted of all the Norwich School, and the broad, manly style of his earliest works may well be confused, by all who do not happen to know it particularly, with that of Crome.”42 Finally, in a study of “Canaletto in England,” Hilda F. Finberg stated that there are many modern fakes of Canaletto which “are known to the dealers of an obscure nineteenth-century painter named R. Paul.” 43 Without a careful analysis of Robert Paul’s background or what he stood for and accomplished, Collins Baker, Holmes, and Finberg have accused him of all those fraudulent activities for which Joseph Paul was responsible when, in fact, Robert Paul was never a manufacturer of fakes nor even a landscape painter.44 In 1832 or shortly thereafter, Joseph Paul presumably got into trouble and fled Norwich; for thirty or forty years, nothing was heard of him.45 Ultimately it was discovered that he had a studio in or near London from which he and his son, and possibly other assistants, copied works of deceased artists: Constables and Cromes were turned out prolifically. Pictures from the

Paul

industry, with true Norwich School character, are neither signed

nor dated. While they were forging works of East Anglian painters, Paul and his assistants began to supply the London trade with copies of old London views. They were attracted to engravings of Samuel Scott, since these were readily available, and numerous forged paintings of this artist have plagued the art market. With the increasing popularity of views of London, other deceased artists, notably Francis Harding and Canaletto, were added to the repertoire of the Paul factory production. These, too, like the Scotts, Constables, and Cromes, burden the market today. Joseph Paul was a painter without deep artistic roots. At times Crome is evident in his work; at other times reference to Hobbema through Crome is noticed; but at all times he is without animation (fig. 121). In his occasional original work, his most attractive qualities are a certain charm, a certain coarseness, a certain wistful lyricism, but they tend to dissipate themselves under the influence of repetitious copying. He lacked originality, invention, and

41. Collins Baker, op. cit., p. 60.

Joseph Paul. Another Paul, Sir John Dean Paul, who

42. Ibid., Introduction, p. xxiii.

resided at 218, the Strand, London, was an exhibitor

43. The Walpole Society, Vol. IX (1921), pp. 53-

at the British Institution, London, showing landscapes from 1802 to 1837.

5444. Miklos Rajnai,

“Robert Paul the Non¬

45. The provocation responsible for Joseph Paul

existent Painter,” Apollo, Vol. LXXXVII, No. 74

leaving Norwich and settling in London is uncertain.

(April, 1968), “Notes on British Art,” no. 10,

According to legend, quoted by Sir Charles Holmes,

pp. 2-3. See also Maurice H. Grant, Old English

he was involved in the murder of a Norwich girl and

Landscape Painters (Leigh-on-Sea, 1959), Vol. V,

fled tlte city. See Collins Baker, op. cit.. Introduction, pp. xxiii, xxiv.

pp. 417, 418, for a completely false discussion of R. Paul, who is mistaken for the London fraud, 102

an artistic personality emphatic enough to transform his borrowed manners into a sophisti¬ cated, forceful style. The harshness of his tone and treatment is so uniformly dull and his style so consistently weak that the combined effect is easily recognized once his tricks are known, and his pictures in the Norwich style should deceive no one. Joseph Pad died suddenly in early May, 1887, at 53 Williams Street, Saint Pancras, London. An account in the Pall Mall Gazette of May 11, 1887, of the inquest made on his body gives his age as eighty-three and the cause of death as syncope. He was said to have married five times. A Mrs. Hunt of Great Yarmouth, who knew him, said of him with the candor of a friend, “He was a great actor, a great singer, a great gambler, and a great fool.”46 Joseph Paul was a British painter whose name has survived mainly through the worst of his things, his fakes. 46. Theobald, op. cit., p. 10.

103

CHAPTER VI

Crome and The Norwich School

The earliest contemporary reference to the Norwich School occurs in the letter dated January, 1816,1 II, written by John Crome to James Stark, then a young art student in the Royal Academy Schools in London. It contains a statement describing figure motifs in a painting which Stark had earlier submitted to Crome for critical analysis. The essential passage from the letter is as follows: “how pleased I was to see so much improvement in the figures. So unlike our Norwich School—I might say they are good. . ..

(my italics). Crome s use of the

adjective “our” with “Norwich School” suggests that by 1816, there was in Norwich an established, active colony of artists with some measure of group loyalty and mutual influence. Since that time, the term “Norwich School” has assumed a considerably more inclusive meaning: for a half century or more—from the last decade of the eighteenth century to shortly after the middle of the nineteenth—there was a succession of artists in Norwich who worked primarily in oils and watercolor to paint landscapes and figures, not merely for personal pleasure or as an intellectual exercise, but in order to produce independent works of 1. See letter, reprinted from the original, Chapter II, pp. 17-18. 105

art for public exhibition and sale. And at the same time, these artists were involved in a broad spectrum of local artistic activity. During this period, there was a steady increase in the number of serious and amateur artists in the area, and painting throughout East Anglia was associated with the teaching of drawing to amateurs. A large proportion of these artists— more than four hundred of them—shared in the same community spirit, drew nurture from the curious microcosm of civilization that grew up around them at Norwich and elsewhere in East Anglia. They adhered to local styles in painting, and a number of them exhibited together in the annual Norwich exhibitions. This efflorescence of artists was neither paralleled nor rivaled by any other of the distinctive English schools of the time—the short-lived ones at Exeter, Bath, and Liverpool, the later ones at Glasgow and Newlyn, or, even, the early twentieth-century progressive group that gathered at Camden Town. Norwich School painting and the era in which it was produced have long intrigued students of the history of art. Norwich art of the period, unlike classical and baroque art, does not imply a style of painting based on a set of formal principles. It was influenced by the near simultaneous development of two style-oriented methods which suggest a relationship only on occasion. One method emphasized traditional composition with poetic overtones, painterly values, limitless penetration into pictorial space, and the observed facts of “un¬ trammelled nature.” The proponents of the other mode of expression leaned toward stylized qualities and experimentation, dynamic composition with a romantic response of the artist to nature, and a suggestion of oriental flatness rather than of natural depth. Between them there was a subtle strain: on the one hand, conformity to the tradition of naturalistic land¬ scape; on the other, a tendency toward abstract creation and empiricism that might jar the status quo. The principal Norwich School artists adhering to tradition were John Crome, James Stark, George Vincent, Robert Ladbrooke, Joseph Stannard, and the sons of both Crome and Ladbrooke. These artists were at nearly the opposite end of the stylistic spectrum from the followers of the more innovative direction, headed by John Sell Cotman and supported by Henry Bright, John Middleton, Thomas Lound, and Cotman’s sons. Other artists of the area, whether intentionally or inadvertently, absorbed elements from both tendencies; but their criteria of values and judgment were not strict or unyielding. The over-all development of the typical Norwich artist can be viewed, in a most general way, in terms of the gradual interweaving of both components, taking few liberties but developing a predominance of one style or the other in his cycle of progress. He had a sense of intimacy with nature and a desire to bestow upon it dignity and innocence so that it would conform to his romantic feelings, which dominated his artistic curiosity. In practicing his art, he endeavored to come into immediate contact with the authentic essence of emotion. In his effort, he did not attempt to conceal his affinity with the robust style of John Crome or with the far-reaching design and invention of John Sell Cotman. However, whenever he tried to incorporate their style, his work was imitative and weak; the moment he had the courage to be self-reliant and detached, he was more poetic and successful. But the real basis of the Norwich School artist’s originality lay in his adherence to, and insights into, his individual aims and the acceptance of his own limitations. Born and reared in Norwich and its environs, the artists of the Norwich School contentedly remained and worked in Norfolk County’s ancient, walled capital. Such a situation would have been unlikely had John Crome, their chief, left his native city for London, as did most 106

regional artists of genius. But the Norwich artists were sufficiently stimulated by the natural scenery of their countryside and nearby coastal areas; the everyday life of the Norwich painter passed into his work. The low banks of the rivers Wensum and Yare, with their rickety boathouses; the densely foliaged lanes near Norwich; the familiar water mills and windmills; the Yarmouth Beach and jetty, sparkling in the sun; the weather-beaten, tan-sailed wherries sailing through the marshland; the historic Mouschold Heath and fertile tracts of meadowland; the “Water Frolics” of Yarmouth, Wroxham, and Thorpe—these were themes as all men saw them, but these native artists excelled in their concept and portrayal. Although the work of the Norwich painters was rooted in very different talents and in very different temperaments, they expressed in paint a romantic hallucinatory vision about the countryside that Wordsworth put into his poetry. This fusion of objective fact and subjective experience is strikingly apparent in their euphoric commitment to nature, which was less affected by out¬ side criticism and aesthetic theory than by the conceptual framework upon which it was based. Moreover, the similarities and differences of their art suggest critical self-awareness, dis¬ tinctiveness, and individuality. Despite the variations in the painterly and expressive skills of John Crome and the creative versatility of John Sell Cotman—their delightful surprises—and because of deceptive similarities in the work of their disciples, students, forgers, and imitators, a hybrid melange emerges from attempts at assorting Norwich School art. Suffice to point out here that its identification is dependent upon a conscientious consideration of form, content, colorings, and style. With few exceptions, in each case the trend was from a dry, neat, local scene to a broad, expressive generally naturalistic landscape. There is no doubt that elements of the style of Crome and Cotman may be detected in the work of other, less well-known figures, such as their own respective sons and pupils. More important, however, was the contagion of a new freedom and a fresh vision for looking at and responding to the same landscape—a freedom and a vision that stresses the increased flexibility of composing subjects, the introduction ol new facets of nature, and the contribution of more varied visual realism—bathed in uneven personal moods. The new generation oscillated between an affinity for Crome’s dramatic system of visual texture (rough, smooth), contrast values (light, dark), and tone relations or Cotman’s idiosyncratic sense of color and design. In the many strange guises that run the gamut from the robustness of Crome to the exuberant vitality of Cotman, their influences permeate the work of nearly all Norwich School artists during the next few decades. Subsequent generations of local artists—members of the Crome, Cotman, Ladbrooke, and Stannard families, talented amateurs, and gifted pupils—never attained the high level of per¬ formance of the two distinguished masters, John Crome and John Sell Cotman. It was gen¬ erally due, however, to their inspiring vision and to the generous enthusiasm of their followers that interest in the arts around Norwich flourished and spread through the county of Norfolk, bringing artists and their creations into contact with a wider public and thereby encouraging patronage and picture collecting.

BIRTH AND DECLINE OF THE NORWICH SOCIETY OF ARTISTS AND ANNUAL EXHIBITIONS

With a growing interest in the arts and with the realization that there had been no organized recognition of native talent, a clubhke group of artists was founded in Norwich on February 107

19, 1803. It was named after the city of which it was a part, the Norwich Society of Artists, described at the time as a “ Society for the Encouragement of the Arts.” Its formation was due principally to the initiative of John Crome, who gained the support of a close friend, Robert Ladbrooke, and another local artist, Charles Hodgson, both founder-members; but it was Crome who gave form and substance to the society. The first meetings were held “in a dingy building in a dingy locality called ‘the Hole in the Wall’ in [the parish ofj St. Andrews, Norwich.”2 At the outset, it was instituted for “The Purpose of an Enquiry into the Rise, Progress, and present state of Painting, Architecture, and Sculpture, with a view to discover and point out the best methods of study to attain greater perfection of these arts,” a preamble which also expressed the goal adopted by the society.3 Membership was free to anyone with an inclination to join and was not confined to those who were artists by profession; tone was provided by the membership of clergymen, journalists, and literati who were amateur artists. Only two prerequisites for admission were required, and these were rigidly enforced; they tended to safeguard the association. The applicant had to submit a sample of his work, and he had to be voted on by members, a three-fourths majority vote of approval was necessary to his election.4 Every two weeks, the members assembled for an evening meeting—local artists, drawing masters, their pupils, and a sprinkling of amateurs and art lovers. The first hour and a half was devoted to study, followed by discussions on subjects of a prearranged program. Each member was called upon to read a paper on a selected art subject before the discussion, and each, in turn, was expected to provide a light supper of cheese and bread. The president was elected to office, and he appointed the vice-president and the secretary. Members were fined one shilling, or sixpence if they lived out of the city, for absences. And finally, each member was expected to contribute a design or drawing annually, which became a part of the society’s common collection. The meeting room displayed casts, drawings, engravings, paintings, and a reference library, so that the Norwich Society provided a bond of union between the artists, the patrons, and the collectors of the county. Far more effective, however, than any other activities in bringing the artist and his creative efforts into contact with a larger audience was the decision of the Norwich Society of Artists to hold public exhibitions. After two years, the society moved its meeting place. It took quarters in Sir Benjamin Wrenche’s Court, an old house near the ancient Guildhall in Norwich. The court occupied a quadrangle in the parish of Saint Andrews, and it was here, in 1805, that the first exhibition of the society was held. The exhibition catalogue for that year set the aims of the new project: “Public Exhibition, uniting public criticism, and the advantage to artists of comparing their productions, has been considered the surest mode of furthering their progress, by giving the spur to emulation: under the idea the Society had thought that an Exhibition would answer this purpose; and should it meet with encourage¬ ment from the Lovers of the Arts and the public, it is proposed to continue it annually.”5 2. W. Dictionary

Cosmo

Monkhouse,

“John

of National Biography,

ed.

Crome,” Sir

catalogue of the exhibition of the Norwich Society

Leslie

of Artists. Original copies of this catalogue are in the

Stephen and Sir Sidney Lee (London, 1921-22),

possession of the City of Norwich Museums, the

Vol. V, p. 141. 3. The reader will encounter this quotation in the Introduction preceding the “Articles of the Society,” dated February 19, 1803, and affixed to the 1805 I08

Victoria

and

Albert

Museum,

and

the

British

Museum, London. 4. Ibid., “Articles” 2-14, pp. 2-8. 5. This quotation appears as the second paragraph

This exhibition, as Dawson Turner stated in his “Memoir of Crome,” accompanying the 1838 publication. Etchings of Views in Norfolk, was at once “a stimulus to the artists, and a stimulus to the public; taste was diffused; art was appreciated; patrons were created; and pictures were sold.”* * 6 So successful was the inaugural exhibition that the number of exhibitors doubled in about six years, and, in 1820, His Royal Highness the Duke of Sussex headed the society’s list of patrons. Encouragement was such that exhibitions under the auspices and name of the Norwich Society of Artists were continued annually until 1839, with interruptions only in the years 1826, 1827, and occasionally after 1833. Among the artists who showed their work in the first exhibition, in addition to John Crome, were Robert Ladbrooke, John Thirtle, Charles Hodgson, and Robert Dixon: John Sell Cotman first exhibited in 1807. The success of the first art exhibition to be attempted in England outside London was due mainly to the pioneering efforts of John Crome and a few other enthusiasts of the society. Crome, a popular and congenial lifelong resident of Norwich, attracted many patrons, pupils, and disciples. He had a mystical quality, creating some indefinable bond between himself and those with whom he came in contact. Those who admired his enthusiasm, who respected his character and his talents, encouraged his spirited and unceasing support of the society exhibitions until his death. But due to the demolition of Sir Benjamin Wrenche’s Court in 1825, the exhibitions were discontinued the following two years. In 1828, Cotman was instrumental in reopening the exhibitions of the Norwich Society of Artists under a new name, The Norfolk and Suffolk Institution for the Promotion of the Fine Arts, which sponsored them until 1834 when Cotman left Norwich to settle in London. The Society disbanded five years after this date, although exhibitions in Norwich continued irregularly in one form or another for a number of years. During a lull in enthusiasm and an accompanying decline in membership in 1826 and 1827, Cotman sought to revive the society by means of a fresh appeal for popular support. Before 1828, the scope of membership and participation had not been brought to public attention. Cotman is believed to have made the following announcement, disclosing some startling figures shortly before the opening of the resumed exhibition in 1828:

Since its establishment

[1803] the Norwich Society has shown 4600 pictures, the work of 323 individuals, and while scarcely a single picture has been bought in the Norwich room [Sir Benjamin Wrenche s Court]—and the receipts at the door have never covered expenses—the works of the very same artists have been readily purchased at the exhibitions at London, Edinburgh, Leeds, Liverpool, Manchester, Newcastle, and Carlisle.”7 It is evident from this plaintive remark that Cotman was searching for ways of giving new life to the society. Thus, to rehabilitate it, he worked with vigor to establish a series of conversaziones, on the principle of those held in London, with the hope that they would advance the fine arts. He formed a committee consisting of six artists and three amateurs, who decided that the number of members would be limited to eighty, elected by ballot—the vote of four-fifths of the members to constitute election.8

of the Preface to the “ Catalogue of the Exhibition of the Norwich Society of Artists,

1805.

6. Turner, “Memoir of Crome,” op. cit., p. 7. 7. H. M. Cundall, “ The Norwich School,” The Studio, ed. Geoffrey Holme (London, Paris, New York, 1920), p. 22. My own research reveals that between the first exhibition of the Norwich Society

of Artists in 1805 and its concluding annual exhibi¬ tion in 1833, 465 artists exhibited 6239 paintings, drawings, engravings, and sculptures. 8. Victor Rienaecker, John Sell Cotman (Lcighon-Sea, 1953), pp. 72, 73, and 74. In a recent analysis of the membership of the Norwich Society of Artists for the period 1803-33, 109

From 1828 onward, the society consisted of a patron (who had been introduced into the structure in 1818), donors and subscribers, in addition to the members with their three officers and honorary members (who appeared beginning in 1809). The programs issued, announcing the “at homes,” were printed on silk and bore the date December 26, 1829, although the first conversazione was held on January 21, 1830, with Cotman and John Berney Cromc acting as hosts.9 A second conversazione was held the following month, two additional ones during that year, and two others in 1831. The meetings were equally well attended, and Cotman was present at all of them. The sixth, however, was the last; for some unknown reason they were discontinued, and the affairs of the society were finally dissolved in April, 1839.

IMPACT OF THE CHANGING ATTITUDE TO NATURE AND LOCAL ART COLLECTIONS

Even before the Middle Ages, Norwich artists were skilled in the crafts of glass-making and manuscript illumination, including the East Anglian Psalters, and Norwich ranked among the great monastic centers of culture.10 By the end of the eighteenth century, landscape painting reached a peak of popularity in the eastern counties of England. The period embracing the life and work of the two major figures of the Norwich School, John Crome and John Sell Cotman, also corresponded to the time when faith in nature became a form of religion preached by the literary high priests of the period—Wordsworth, Coleridge, Scott, and other poets. The personality and artistic style of Crome and, to a lesser degree, the teaching methods of Cotman were basic and crucial influences in transforming the work of nearly all Norwich artists during the next few decades. But to explain the circumstances and origin of the Norwich School is a task which has not been adequately considered, and its problems still beset the student. If historical documentation can establish the probable evolution of the Norwich Society of Artists, its direct outgrowth, the Norwich School of painting, will be placed on a firmer footing. How, then, did the Norwich Society of Artists’ drama unfold? During the latter half of the eighteenth century, the wealthier gentry of East Anglia became enlightened ama¬ teur picture collectors who felt responsible for replenishing the arts in Norfolk. The private galleries in the larger country houses, whose acquisitions were predominantly selected from the continental schools—Italian, Flemish, Dutch—and a scattering of the English school, became the natural meeting ground of the county cognoscenti, the breeding place for the lover of art rather than for the Norwich artist himself. Thus, it was these men of influence and Dr. M. Rajnai has shown that the society had 79

Norwich Society, see M. Rajnai, Norfolk Archaeology,

formal members: 50 full members and 29 honorary

Vol. XXXIV, Part IV (1969), pp. 429-33.

ones. The number of members in 1805, the year of the first annual exhibition, is not known. In 1806 their number was 16, and by 1830 it had increased to 49. In its last year of existence the society had 42 members, and it began to disband over the next several years. For a detailed outline of how the society was constructed, the different types of membership, and an instructive chart that lists each member of the IIO

9. This program, published by the Cummer Gal¬ lery of Art, Jacksonville, Florida, was reproduced for the first time in Landscapes of the Norwich School, No. 38, p. X17, the catalogue accompanying the American debut of a Norwich School exhibition. 10. “The Paintings of the Norwich Cathedral,” Friends of the Cathedral Church of Norwich, Fifth Annual Report, Vol. II (Norwich, 1934), P- 15.

wealth who showed all Norfolk the quality of their taste, and from it arose a widespread enthusiasm for the arts. A salient factor contributing to the formative development of the Norwich School was the attitude of the typical Norwich artist to nature. Centering his reflection on the synthesis of new discoveries in nature and the exigencies of tradition and craft that characterized English landscape painting of this era, the artists’ themes and attitudes contrasted with those of English painting of the preceding century, which was inherently conceptual and governed by conventions, influences, or associations of ideas that assumed various forms but tended to retard the spontaneous expression of what the eye saw. In a deeper sense, the Norwich artist’s perception became more selective; he grasped nature with passion; and he exploited the effect to be gained by contrasting the more precise painting of trees, water, ships, and sky with light, shade, and atmosphere. But more fundamental was the fact that his change in attitude toward nature was accompanied by a new interest in intangible effects (space, atmosphere, light), by a more conscious relation of color to tone, and by divers types of brushwork combined with variations of pictorial design, giving rise to new modes of expression. The Norwich artist was not only extending his knowledge of how the natural countryside looked, but, more important, he was recapturing and expressing childhood emotions with means and capabilities available to maturity. These were the elements that form the understructure of Norwich School art. But equally significant is the fact that the artists’ change in attitude to nature was accom¬ panied by purer intensities of feeling and by more delicate sensibilities. The artist, who first discovered and still justifies the art of unquestioning naturalism, could now be more realistic, imaginative, and poetic simultaneously. These qualities were attainable if he had the intellect to know enough and could feel deeply enough; he could express in paint what

though it is

impalpable—has profound significance for man. These insights tended to persuade the collec¬ tor and the patron that, in the words of Wordsworth, “the passions of men are incorporated with the beautiful and permanent forms of nature.”11 A long tradition of picture collecting had already been established in East Anglia by the time of the Norwich School. In the score of years (1722-45) that Sir Robert Walpole, the great prime minister of George I and George II, poured his wealth into building Houghton Hall in Norfolk, he also accumulated a treasure of masterpieces. His collection, probably the greatest in England, contained twenty van Dycks, nineteen Rubenses, eight Titians, five Murillos, three each of Veronese, Holbein, and Rembrandt, two each of Velazquez and Raphael, a Leonardo, a Michelangelo, a Hals, and many works of lesser hands.12 These wonderful masterpieces aroused a strong artistic consciousness in his son, Horace Walpole, whose dynamic aesthetic influences and prowess of taste enchanted collectors in small hamlets with large country houses, so that they freely purchased works by French and Italian masters.13 It is noteworthy to recall that these collectors were no less interested in naturalistic Dutch landscapes of the seventeenth century, as there had always been a close bond between East Anglia and the Netherlands, both commercial and artistic, from the sixteenth century n. William Wordsworth, Wordsworth’s Preface to

12. W. S. Lewis, Horace Walpole (New York,

Lyrical Ballads (Copenhagen: Rosenkilde and Bagger,

I957), ed. with an introduction and commentary by

i960), p. 14813- See Chapter I, pp. 7-8 and the accompanying

W. J. B. Owen, p. 1x5, lines

footnotes.

95-97-

Reprint of

Preface to 1802 edition. Ill

onward. But notwithstanding the fine examples and variety in these collections, the less numerous but equally distinguished Italian, Flemish, Dutch, and English school pictures at Norwich and Yarmouth were likely to have been more readily accessible to local artists, particularly to Crome and Cotman and their sons.14 Of the many picture collections in the vicinity of Norwich, the most meaningful by far, having an abiding impact on the style of Norwich School art, was the one belonging to Thomas Harvey (1748-1819) of Catton. Catton House, where he lived and kept his pictures, became a rendezvous for cultivated society. In 1840, Dawson Turner described Harvey as a man of the arts: Mr Harvey was a man for whom I entertained a sincere regard ... a man who, to large property, united a nobleness of spirit calculated to do honour to any gifts of fortune; at the same time that he was distinguished by elegance of mind, refinement of manners and pursuits, courteousness towards his equals, and liberality and kindness towards his inferiors; a man, the intimate friend of Mrs. Siddons, of Kemple, of [Sir William] Beechey, and of [John] Opie, passionately fond of the arts, and himself no despicable artist.15 The cabinet of pictures at Catton House epitomizes the ideal of a gentleman’s collection in the late eighteenth century. At this time, Harvey was collecting pictures with great enthusiasm, buying approved old masters from the Continent and works of art from living artists in England. This was a pattern of collecting that anticipated the nineteenth-century practice of collectors in England. Harvey’s collection contained landscapes by Cuyp, Gaspard Poussin, Salvator Rosa, and Fyt; it also had Le Brun’s Tintoretto which was later owned by the Reverend John Homfray and a Jan Steen (The Christening Feast, Wallace Collection, London). One focal decade of the period—the 1790s—saw a related phenomenon that was to be no less important to the inception of the Norwich School. This was the enormous fascination which the works of the English and Dutch masters exerted upon Crome the moment he set foot in Catton House. Hobbema’s Landscape (Biirhle Collection, Zurich), Wilson’s View on the Coast of Baiae (now lost), and Gainsborough’s The Cottage Door (Huntington Library and Gallery of Art, San Marino, California) were primary influences upon him. They affected consciously or unconsciously the predominant styles of future generations of Norwich School artists, who synthesized these varying influences into harmonious themes. Other collections in neighboring country houses contributed more toward the change and expansion of taste elsewhere in East Anglia. With the approach of the nineteenth century, the monopolistic control of prestigious collectors underwent a change; they became less insular and assumed a new attitude toward the artist. John Steegman, a modern student of the period, analyzes the habits of the English collector and explains:

when the arts depended even more than they do today upon the rich patron, that patron considered it a part of the obligation of his rank to have a working knowledge of what he was patronizing. It was much more than the mere desire of him who pays 14. See Chapter I, pp. 8-10 and the accompanying footnotes. 112

15. Dawson Turner, Outlines in Lithography from a Small Collection of Pictures (Yarmouth, 1840), p. 27.

the piper to call the tune; it was the desire of the man to whom actual creation is denied to be associated as closely as possible with the articulate, creative artist.16 Concerning the British collector of the same period, Jonathan Mayne, a more recent critic, comments: Snobbery based on pretensions of intellect and culture is perhaps one of the few varieties of this disagreeable human failing that has fertilizing effects; it would certainly be a mistake not to acknowledge its part in the development of British landscape painting, both in oil and water color in the eighteenth century.17 We may minimize the role of taste-maker played by East Anglian commercial enterprise, especially that related to the Netherlands. It merely provided the money with which mer¬ chants, landowners, and other men of wealth imported pictures from the Continent. This was a generation of collectors whose perception was eventually enlivened by the influence of literature and the arts after they became collectors. Other factors, such as the influence of the nature poets, the growing predilection for the romantic, and the artists’ preoccupation with natural form, tended to cultivate taste and broaden cultural interest. An intense concern for the natural elements was evolving—one in which the attitude toward nature became not less imaginative but more so; perception became more acute; and feeling especially for light, air, trees, sky, and water, became more intense. For several generations, collecting pictures, books, and articles of artistic merit had been the patron’s primary means of expression. With the approach of the nineteenth century, well-to-do gentry who had been unsympathetic to the arts were showing more interest. They began to concentrate their attention, whether creative or crusading, upon Norwich and to enrich the cultural climate of all East Anglia. The theater and literature-—particularly nature poetry—were influences from which neither a public-spirited man nor a cultivated society could escape. Norwich was at this time a mecca for artists, and enthusiasm for art was a part of ordinary life, despite the deprivation caused by the blockades and counterblockades of the Napoleonic Wars. It would certainly lead to a misconception not to recognize the impact of the strengthening bond of friendship and fellowship among the growing number of art enthusiasts both on the Norwich cultural scene and on the local development of landscape painting during the first half of the nineteenth century. Furthermore, there was a steady increase both in the number of local painters who employed oils and watercolors to paint landscapes and in the quantity of work in both media. A new and more spirited movement in the arts was about to begin: the call of the art-oriented community for a gathering place to exchange and share ideas on the arts was developing. The steps leading to the foundation of the Norwich Society of Artists; the change in attitude toward nature at the expense of poetic qualities; the acceptance of a new point of view toward creative genius by the well-to-do gentry who had been unsympathetic to the arts; and the emergence of area artists, amateur painters, and lovers of art, imbued with the preoccupation for recognition, belong in spirit to the tides of fashion and 16 John Steegman, The Rule of Taste (New York and London, 1936), p. 28. 17. Johnathan Mayne, “ English Romantic Water

Colors,” Bulletin of the Metropolitan Museum of Art (April, 1962), pp. 239 and 242.

snobbery of the regency. Alert to the local cultural needs, John Crome and a few interested supporters established a gathering place for those of divers interests in art, architecture, and sculpture to exchange and share ideas. From a clublike, joint-stock association there evolved the Norwich Society of Artists with a strong bond between its members. These members, who worked, matured, and exhibited together in Norwich, became the union of artists since known as the Norwich School—a unique phenomenon in the annals of British art. The appreciation for paintings of natural scenery around Norwich had already been con¬ ditioned by earlier local artists whose achievements rarely had risen above the level of mediocrity.18 Even after the inception of the Norwich School, the imagery of Charles Hodgson, Robert Dixon, Robert Ladbrooke, and Joint Thirtle remained popular for nearly as long as the paintings ofjohn Crome and outstripped those ofjohn Sell Cotman. With the passing of time, however, the genius of Crome and the gifts of Cotman—incomparably greater painters than the other four—were acknowledged to have inspired styles and tech¬ niques of painting which nurtured their own disciples as well as those of most other con¬ temporary and future artist-members of the Norwich School. Of the Norwich artists, Crome is by far the best known figure—the painter upon whose achievements rests the fame of the Norwich School. As its chief architect and ranking master, he entered the history of nineteenth-century landscape art through the gateway of the Norwich School. Although Crome was, in fact, unsophisticated, his perception and honesty, sensitivity and simplicity were strikingly expressive qualities. He used them to create paintings with a unity of harmonious design which evoked aesthetic emotion without resorting to trickery. Once the nature of Crome’s style and design is understood, one can make a clear and logical interpretation of his painting and begin to discover these qualities in both his watercolors and his etchings. By contrast, John Sell Cotman, who tended toward pure pattern-making, rendered with Chinese delicacy in the washes; toward poetic awe; and toward the abstract, as in the grand series of Greta and versions of Durham drawings, is little known outside England. This is equally true of the enchanting, various achievements of other natively influential talents of the Norwich School.19

LACK OF RECOGNITION IN THE HISTORY OF ART

On the grounds of chronology, historians have given credit for the earlier painting of nature in the open air to John Constable rather than to Crome and other lesser masters of the Nor¬ wich School. They usually bracket Crome with Constable and J. M. W. Turner as the originators of modern English and, consequently, of modern European landscape painting. Although the debt that landscape painting owes to these artists’ fresh conquest of nature at the beginning of the nineteenth century is generally acknowledged, Constable’s painting was a major force in the regeneration of the French out-of-door school at Barbizon. It should be 18. See Chapter I, pp. 5-6.

Joseph Stannard (1797-1830), David Hodgson (1798-

19. During Crome’s life and after his death, less

1864), Thomas Lound (1802-61), Miles Edmund

skilled artists but members or exhibitors of the

Cotman (1810-58), Henry Bright (1810-73), John

Norwich School include Robert Ladbrooke (1770-

Joseph Cotman (1814-78), and John Middleton

1842), John Thirtle (1777-1839), Robert Dixon

(1827-56). John Sell Cotman (1782-1842), also an

(1780-1815), James Stark (1794-1859), John Berney

active member of the school, was a painter of great genius.

Crome (1794-1842), George Vincent (i796-?i83i),

conceded that the impact of open-air painting by the artists of the Norwich School was primarily regional, dependent mainly upon Crome’s memorable early light- and air-filled images, which did in fact contribute to the development of natural form in landscape with fused light and air. Throughout his career, his chief concern centered on rendering effects of atmosphere and light in nature as seen out-of-doors rather than as seen in the artificial light of the studio. Earlier pictures completed out-of-doors by the French painters Georges Michel (17631843), Jean-Louis Demarne (1754-1829), and Lazarc Braundet (1755-1804) had been shown in the Paris salons of the 1790s, but these plein-air paintings were labeled “Etude d’apres nature” and hence were exhibited with a kind of apology.20 Among the finished exhibition pictures shown in the first exhibition of the Norwich Society of Artists (1805) were Study, from Nature, North Wales (no. 66) by Robert Ladbrooke and Drawing from Nature (no. 100) by Robert Dixon. The following year, John Crome showed Sketches on the spot, Pig-sties (no. 57) with the society exhibition; and in 1807 he exhibited five pictures labeled “painted on the spot” or “from nature” (nos. 19, 55, 100, 176, 182), which included The Blacksmith's Shop, Hingham (figs 175, 176) in addition to similarly labeled exhibits by John Sell Cotman (no. 27), J. Freeman (no. 37), James Sillett (no. 89), and Robert Dixon (no. 152) in 1808. Such finished exhibition pictures are listed frequently in the Norwich Society of Artists’ catalogue entries, showing that in the renaissance of landscape painting, the feeling for solidarity, the sense of space, the natural qualities of contrast between light and dark, the understanding of natural tonal values, and, above all, the evanescent quality of light and air, were gained from the open-air painting of the unspoiled countryside near Norwich and its environs. There are at least four reasons why out-of-door painting at Norwich should receive historical precedence over Constable’s reputed first open-air painting, Boat-building near Flatford Mill, 1814 (Victoria and Albert Museum),21 and over that which took place in the Fontainebleau Forest and its fringes-—Marlotte, Chailly, and Barbizon. To begin with, it was at Norwich that the shift in subject matter from historical and figure painting to on-the-spot landscape painting in the open air first occurred (ca. 1805). Second, the Norwich countryside scenery radiated a kind of spiritual force, and its painting was given prime importance and new vigor by a dedicated number of East Anglian artists who were concerned not only with rendering the effects of light and air as observed facts of the outdoors but also with capturing their natural, evanescent, and drifting qualities. Third, evidence of open-air painting is apparent in early datable works of Norwich artists long before the occurrence of the society exhibitions which certify that Norwich paintings had been executed in the outdoors. And fourth, by the time the official Prix de Rome for landscape painting in France was established

20. Information in a letter to the author from

mentioned in this letter was one I have heard him

Professor Robert L. Herbert of Yale University,

say he painted entirely in the open air. It was ex¬

December 5, 1966.

hibited the following year at the Academy, with the under

title ‘ Boat-building.’. ..” See Graham Reynolds,

Constable work of 1815, the year it was exhibited at

Catalogue of the Constable Collection (London, i960),

the Royal Academy (no. 215), but it was actually

pp. 103-4; see also Michael Kitson, John Constable,

painted the year before. Referring to this picture,

1810-1816: A Chronological Study,” Journal of the

C. R. Leslie quotes from Constable’s letter of

Warburg and Courtauld Institute, Vol. XX, Nos. 3-4

September 18, 1814, addressed from East Bergholt

(i957), P- 344, n. 37.

21. The

picture

is

usually

catalogued

to Miss Marie Bickncll: “Among the landscapes

in 1817 by Pierre-Henri de Valenciennes (1750-1819), Norwich artists were already practicing a way of painting which later in the century became known as plein-air. They were showing it not only at the Norwich Society of Artists’ exhibitions but also at the Royal Academy and the British Institution in London. In contrast, the first major artist of the Barbizon group, Paul Huet (1803-69), did not ac¬ tually appear until the early 1820s, and Corot (1796-1875), seven years his senior, did not begin to paint out-of-doors until 1822. Rousseau, sixteen years younger than Corot, did not begin outdoor work until 1827, when he was fifteen. Long before any of these French painters, Crome, consumed by the study of this single problem, had engendered a local enthusiasm for achieving the coherence of light and air in the out-of-doors. His leadership would be difficult to question. As early as 1805, 1806, and 1807, Crome fused gently moving light with drifting air to invest mass, forms, and lines in Slate Quaries (plate II, fig. 20) and in The Yare at Thorpe Norwich (fig. 25), and he coherently united these elements to reflect precocious romanticism in Moonrise on the Yare (fig. 33). The liberating effects of outdoor painting are indicated in the radiance of tinted silvery light and air, revealed in the confluent brushwork of Marlingford Grove (plate IX, fig. 77). The same effects are strikingly apparent in The Glade Cottage (fig. 102), Norwich River: Afternoon (plate XIII, fig. 108), and Yarmouth Water Frolic (plate XV, fig. no), as well as in numerous less celebrated examples which are endowed with the quality of freshness we associate with outdoor painting. Most of the artists then working in Norwich adopted or attempted to emulate the tradition of style Crome developed. Because the airy space is a near abstraction, achieved by reducing the objects of nature to a subordinate role, these pictures evoke the feeling spiritually and stylistically of plein-air painting comparable to the best tradition of Barbizon work. Thus, it seems highly appropriate to compare the style of the Norwich artists with that of the Barbizon painters. Did not the Norwich artists look upon light as consuming nature, particularly air, in a triumphant dissolution of matter, using color with controlled passion? Although they were attempting an objective that was beyond their individual talents, striving to approach the intensity attained by the Impressionists in their obsession with effects of light, Norwich artists were aware of, and practiced the fresh painting of, nature; yet they receive meager acknowledgment by historians as forerunners of painting out-of-doors. The approach of the Norwich School artist to landscape painting was to utilize the re¬ sources of art for interpreting a bourgeois sentimental lyricism. Toward this end, two inherent components seem predominant: (1) a spirit of reverence toward nature, governed by a private emotionalism for natural form and observed facts, and a sense of pictorial vision for atmos¬ phere, light, and cast shadow, suggesting humility when faced by its grandeur and solemnity; (2) a veneration for natural and man-made antiquities, which intensified perception and feeling in the artist, making him poetic, naturalistic, and more imaginative, but at no time subordinating air, light, or space. His over-all development can be viewed in terms of the gradual interweaving of both components with the ascendancy of one or the other in his cycle of progress. What does this mean? It means that the typical Norwich artist did not lose himself in nature or in his emotional response to its wonders; that he made no attempt to glorify or deify nature as something beyond man’s grasp, recognition, or control. Few Norwich artists traveled to the Continent beyond France and the Low Countries; it was their particular triumph that they found their restricted experience so satisfying. A horse-drawn cart and driver, a windmill, a man in the 116

woods, a wherry sailing, remnants of things past, and, in coastal scenes, the fishermen and crews of sailing boats or the frolicking boats and people—these are the figures that animate Norwich School landscape of the mature period, when portrait, history, and figure painting had yielded their prominent standing to the commonplace conception of landscape. It is an animation that rarely involves a narrative; if the narrative is important, the figures usually dominate the landscape as they often do in the depiction of water frolics, street scenes, ruins, blacksmith’s shops, and so on. When the Norwich School artist attempted, as he frequently did, to animate his pictorial rendering by incorporating the interpretive style of John Crome and his solid realism or the far-reaching design of John Sell Cotman and his invention, the result was imitative and weakening. The Norwich School artist summed up his leading point of view when he eulogized the infmite complexity and minuteness of nature, with realization that the actual world stretches infinitely beyond the limits of man’s senses or his compre¬ hension. The real basis of the Norwich School artist’s originality is centered on his awareness of and insight into his individual aims and the acceptance of his own limitations. With two exceptions, the years 1826 and 1827, Norwich Society exhibitions continued to take place annually until 1833, and they continued in one form or another to 1839. The better painters exhibited at the Royal Academy, at the British Institution, and at other art and watercolor societies in London for a number of years after the cessation of the exhibitions at Norwich. Having presented some general characteristics of the Norwich School, having recorded some of the principal facts regarding its formation and the role played by leading exponents, and having described some of the derivative attitudes responsible for its art, we must now consider the influence of the Norwich School artists outside the East Anglian circle. Although endowed with natural talent and although an undeniable part of the British landscape school, which began with Girtin and ended with Turner, the Norwich artists were provincial in origin, predominantly amateur in their interests, often self-taught, and too mute and lacking in social influence to extend their fame. In a sense, they were very English; their strict allegiance to Norwich suggests an eccentricity, itself English. They had English modes of expression and English characters, and they concentrated on the English countryside. Not one during his lifetime achieved a great blaze of glory. Yet in the history of British landscape painting, time and events have brought eminence to John Crome and John Sell Cotman; their style and technique, although not interdependent, have only recently been clarified and understood. It is noteworthy that their salutary influence upon their contemporaries and successors has yet to receive its fair share of study by historians of art. Earlier writers have been prone to treat the Norwich School as something nebulous, as a historical anomaly whose existence is accepted but little comprehended. It should be empha¬ sized, however, that two local modes in painting—one naturalistic and based on the precepts of Crome, the other verging on the abstract and expressionistic represented by Cotman—were recognized and popular in East Anglia for longer than a half century. In consequence, much of their painting has a sentimental, if not literary, character. Even when their themes do not illustrate a familiar scene, visual experience and feeling are colored with thoughts and memories of a kind more usually expressed in words, and this self-identification permeates the work of their proteges. But although their work rarely attained the criteria of excellence of their masters, one need never judge a school of painting by the success or failure of its little masters in comparison to that of its leading lights.

The history of the international emergence of the romantic movement in painting—from 1750 to 1850—has been written countless times as if the artists of the Norwich School had never existed. But when the writings of Francois Rene Chateaubriand are culled, his Lettre sur l'art du Dessin reflects influences of East Anglian painters around 1dm,22 as one particular passage will show: The landscapist will learn the influence of various horizons upon the color of the scene; if you can imagine two perfectly identical valleys, one facing south and the other facing north, the tone, appearance and moral expression of the two identical views will cause them to appear dissimilar.23 A restudying of Chateaubriand’s emporium of romantic writings may provide a new meaning to Norwich School themes, styles, and anxieties, which we loosely call romanticism with apology. They should remind us of the generative role played by these artists in the initial formulation of that romantic view of nature which finally came to dominate European nineteenth-century painting. With their choice of visually charming and quaint landscape passages from their immediate environs and their architectural efforts in the encyclopedic re-creation of antiquity appropriate to these scenes, such work helped to inspire throughout East Anglia and England that new romantic faith in, and longing for, the aesthetic and even the moral superiority of their own naturalistic world. This protoromantic attitude to nature— as typified by the Norwich School and sustained by the genius of Turner and Constable— Sir Kenneth Clark rightly insists, is the basis of the new landscape painting, which Ruskin had earlier designated in Modem Painters as the nineteenth century’s great contribution to the history of art.24 The high esteem in which the artist-members of the Norwich School have been held rests on their art alone—an art that emerged from the ingenious flowering of a special confluence of forces at a particular moment in time—and on their attempt to make painting a part of the natural continuum of East Anglian life. In the lengthening perspective of time, their successes permit a second look at the reasons for their popularity. Their works are again being vigorously sought for private collections in both America and England. It is certain that many of the artists categorically included in the Norwich School have not reached the apex of their fame nor attained the appropriate rank their little-studied art merits, but surely the art of John Crome and John Sell Cotman will endure. Among the qualities possessed by the artists of the Norwich School, who numbered more than four hundred in a city rarely exceeding fifty thousand people, was vision; they had the ability to see clearly the future of landscape as art. Their most remarkable achievement arose from self-nourishment which stimulated their talents and fired their creativity. They left their stamp on the minds of hundreds of men who continued to work in Norwich and East Anglian art, and their own painting left its stamp on British culture. 22. See Chapter I, p. 7, also n. 6 above.

24. Introduction, The Romantic Movement, cata¬

23. Thomas C. Walker, Chateaubriand’s Natural

logue of the fifth exhibition to celebrate the tenth

Scenery (Baltimore, Maryland, Johns Hopkins Press,

anniversary of the Council of Europe, July 10-

1946), p. 41.

Septembcr 27, 1959, p. 18.

Il8

APPENDIX A

Biographical Summary

1768

December 22: Birth of John Crome, the painter, in a two-story, thatched-roof, timbered public inn, the Griffin, in old Norwich on Conisford Street, modern King Street. He is baptized December 25. His father, also named John, is a journeyman weaver and publican. His mother is a barmaid at the Griffin. A sister, whose Christian name is unknown, served as cook to Crisp Brown of Eaton, near Norwich. He put her in the Great Hospital in Norwich, a home for the aged and a part of the ancient church of Saint Helen, where she died. Stephen, known only by a portrait, is believed to be a brother.

1781

Young Crome’s education is meager. On the former site of the Duke of Norfolk’s palace, he joins with a group of boys and girls of similar age in an employment area (this is termed “going on the palace”). He is hired as errand boy to an eminent surgeon and medical writer, Dr. Edward Rigby. The boy is lodged in a second-floor garret over the surgery, located at 32 Saint Giles Street, Norwich (Chase’s Directory, 1783). This association continues for two years.

1783

August 1: Crome is hired by FrancisWhisler, a Norwich coach-, house-, and signpainter, doing business at No. 41 Bethel Street, Norwich (Chase s Directory, 1783) 119

October 15: Indentures are signed by his father for an apprenticeship to Whisler for seven years, during which time Crome learns the trade and develops an aptitude for extending his artistic horizon. 1789

An acquaintanceship develops between Crome and Robert Ladbrooke, who is a year younger and works as an apprentice to a printer and engraver. During the next two years, the two apprentices transform a cheap garret into a joint painting studio. Together, Crome and Ladbrooke exhibit at Messrs. Smith and Jagger, printsellers in Norwich. Crome meets Thomas Harvey of Catton, who was to become his most important patron. Toward the end of this year Crome is introduced to Sir William Beechey, who was visiting his former home, Norwich, after having moved to London in 1787.

1790

Crome executes his first sketches in oil. Upon completing his apprenticeship, he continues to work as a journeyman for Whisler.

1790- During the first part of this period he forms an artistic partnership with Robert 1792 Ladbrooke. Together they copy prints and continue to supply sketches to Messrs. Smith and Jagger. Upon invitation, he frequently visits Thomas Harvey at Catton. He makes his first visit to London and Sir William Beechey’s house in Hill Street, Berkeley Square. Before the end of the year 1791, the studio partnership with Ladbrooke is dissolved. 1792

October 2: Following a long courtship, Crome marries Phoebe Berney in the parish church of Saint Mary’s, Coslany (Church of England). October 30: A daughter, Abigail, is born, and on November 4 is baptized at Saint Mary’s, Coslany. By this date or earlier we may presume that Crome had become a drawing master. His place of residence is unknown.

1793

March 30-June 1: He is a patient in the Norfolk and Norwich Hospital; is hospitalized a second time between September 14 and November 16.

1794

August 31: Daughter Abigail, age two, dies; the date of her interment is unknown. December 8: John Berney is born, and is baptized on December 14 at Saint George’s, Colegate. He becomes an artist, drawing master, and assistant to his father. He died at Yarmouth on September 15, 1842.

1796

Crome directs his interest to the work of Richard Wilson and turns out a group of pictures after his style during the next few years; each is called Composition in the Style of Wilson. September 30: A second son, Frederick James, is born and baptized on October 2 at Saint Saviour’s in Magdalen Street. He painted and etched a bit, later becoming a bank clerk at Yarmouth. This year Crome is engaged by John Gurney of Earlham as drawing master to his seven daughters.

1798

Crome meets John Opie during a visit to Norwich with his Norwich-born wife, the former Amelia Alderson.

1800

October 19: Louisa, a daughter, is buried. Her early death does not permit of baptism, and no record of her date of birth is known.

120

1801

The Norwich Directory for this year reveals “John Crome, Drawing Master, 17 Gildengate Street, St. George’s, Colegate.” The family resides here until after Crome’s death. April 8: A third daughter, Emily, is born, and is baptized at Saint George’s, Colegate, on April 19. She was a schoolteacher and painter of flowers and still-lifes; she exhibited as Miss Crome.

1802

Summer: Crome accompanies John Gurney of Earlham and six of his daughters on a tour to Matlock and the Lake District. August 28: Crome departs the party at Patterdale and converts his return to Norwich into a sketching expedition.

1803

January 17: According to the registry of Saint Mary’s Baptist Chapel, Susanna, a fourth daughter, is born and is unbaptized. The date of her burial appears in the registry of Saint Mary’s, Coslany, February 16. February 19: The inaugural meeting of the Norwich Society of Artists is held in a tavern, known as the “Hole in the Wall.” It occupied the site of the desecrated church of Saint Crouch in Saint Andrews, Norwich. Crome is a founding member of the society. May 27: Crome receipts a bill to T. Tompson, Esq., the last-known bill for painting and gilding of signs.

1804

Crome visits Wales, the Wye and Severn country, on a sketching trip with Robert Ladbrooke. September 20: His seventh child and fifth daughter, Hannah, is born. Her birth is registered October 9 at Saint Mary’s Baptist Chapel, and her baptism is withheld. After the death of her first husband, Dr. B. Steel, she married Bilham, master of the Norwich Infirmary. Hannah lived until April 22, 1847.

1805

August 10: The first annual exhibition of the Norwich Society of Artists is held in Sir Benjamin Wrenche’s Court, off Little London Street, Saint Andrews, Norwich. Crome contributes twenty-four paintings, watercolors, and india-ink and pencil sketches to the exhibition.

1806

Summer: Crome accompanies the Gurney family to the Lake District for the second time. Before returning to Norwich, he visits Thomas Fowell Buxton in Weymouth and Hampshire. Crome sends twenty-nine works to the second annual Norwich exhibition and exhibits for the first time at the Royal Academy, London. His name appears in the academy catalogue as “Mr. Croom and Mr. Crome, Norwich. Late in the year Thomas Harvey probably encourages him to copy The Cottage Door by Gainsborough. October 22: A third son and eighth child, William Henry, is born. His baptism takes place at Saint George’s, Colegate, on November 2. He became a painter, married Dr. Steel’s sister, lived and exhibited in London. His son, Vivian, lived in Birmingham. December 24: Crome attends the wedding ceremony of his pupil, Louisa Gurney to Samuel Hoare, at the Friends Meeting Place at Tasborough, near Norwich.

1807

Additional status is given to the Norwich Society of Artists by the new member, John Sell Cotman, a resident and drawing master of Norwich. Crome is represented 121

at the society exhibition by thirty-one works, and he exhibits one painting at the Royal Academy. 1808

Crome is elected president of the Norwich Society of Artists. He appoints his brotherin-law and artist-friend, Robert Ladbrooke, as vice-president. Crome exhibits fifteen oil paintings and one watercolor at the Norwich exhibition and sends one picture to the Royal Academy. He also visits London during the year. December 13: A son, Joseph, is born and baptized five days later at Saint George’s, Colegate. His date of birth is not known, but he is buried on January 30, 1809.

1809

Crome sends twelve pictures to the Norwich exhibition and two to the Royal Academy. A soft-ground etching, signed and dated this year, is the earliest date of an etching by the artist. November 29: In the earliest recorded letter, a three-week attack of “Rheumatic Gout” hinders Crome from teaching at the residence of Dawson Turner, Yarmouth. During the years 1809-13 Crome acquired and practiced the art of etching. None of these works were exhibited in his lifetime.

1810

April 21: A fifth son, christened Joseph, is born and baptized the next day at Saint George’s, Colegate. Crome sends sixteen works to Sir Benjamin Wrenche’s Court for the annual exhibition.

1811

Crome is drawing master to Miss Heazel’s Seminary in Norwich. He makes a sketching trip to Derbyshire He sends twenty-seven items to the society’s exhibition and one picture, along with another by his son, to the Royal Academy.

1812

He contributes twenty pictures to the annual society exhibition and four canvases to the Royal Academy exhibition. September 23 and 24: Crome’s collection of books, prints, drawings, and etchings is sold at auction in Mr. Noverre’s Rooms, Yarmouth. None of his own work is listed in the sales catalogue. It is thought he realized between two and three hundred pounds from the sale of his collection.

1813

He is appointed drawing master to the Free Grammar School of King Edward VI, Norwich. Here, his eldest son, John Berney, receives the honor of being “speech boy” of the year. He sends fifteen pictures to the Norwich Society exhibition. October 27: His eleventh child, christened Michael Sharp, is born, and he is baptized on October 31 at Saint George’s, Colegate. Later he settled in London to become a dancing instructor.

1814

July 3: In a letter Crome tells James Stark of the meager success derived from his sketching trip on which he went with his eldest son to Harwich and Ipswich. He sends ten works to the annual Norwich exhibition, preceding his departure for the Continent. October: Accompanied by William Freeman and Daniel Coppin, Crome visits the Continent. Before departing from London, he probably visits the Dulwich College Gallery. The party travels to Boulogne, Saint-Cloud, Versailles, Paris, the Meuse River, and Ostend. (A visit to the small ports ofLe Portel, Etaples, Berck, or Wissant, near Boulogne, may have been included.) In Paris, Crome lives at 17, rue Vivienne,

122

not far from the Boulevard des Italiens. He observes the pictures accumulated by the victorious French armies in the Louvre Museum before they are returned to their rightful owners During the trip, he makes several pencil sketches for oil paintings, later executed between 1815 and 1820 in Norwich. November: Crome returns to Norwich from his holiday. 1815

Differences in policy lead to a split within the Norwich Society of Artists; a group led by Robert Ladbrooke secedes. Crome remains with the original society and con¬ tributes eleven pictures to this year’s annual exhibition.

1816

January: Crome writes his famous letter to James Stark, disclosing his own basic principles as an oil painter and including his credo for breadth and dignity in landscape painting. An exhibition by the secessionists is reflected in a larger-than-usual number of exhibits from the society membership in their exhibition. Two hundred and sixtynine works are displayed at Sir Benjamin Wrenche’s Court, of which Crome shows nineteen. He also sends a picture to the Royal Academy exhibition.

1817

Crome begins weekly visits to Yarmouth, as drawing master to the wife and children of Samuel Paget, Esq. Following a midsummer visit to London, he paints an important commission, The Wensum at Thorpe: Boys Bathing (plate X, fig. 101), for Dawson Turner, Esq. He sends seventeen pictures to the annual Norwich exhibition.

1818

Thirty-five works represent the Crome family in the Norwich Society annual exhibition; ten pictures are by John Crome He also sends one picture to the Royal Academy and exhibits a painting for the first time at the British Institution. The exhibitions held by the rival group in Theatre Plain close after this year. Crome registers in the poll books of Saint George’s, Colegate, as a freeholder; he states in an added note that he “voted for a Liberal Candidate.”

1819

May 25 and 29: Crome attends auction sale of Italian, Dutch, and English paintings sold at the late residence of John Patteson, Esq., Surrey Street, Norwich, and he purchases twenty lots, costing one hundred and ninety-five pounds. June 17 and 21: Some fifty framed landscapes, many canvases and unfinished sketches, and the library in the collection of Thomas Harvey are sold at auction in Norwich after his death. Crome buys a number of the books from this estate. He sends thirteen land and coastal scenes of Norfolk to the society’s exhibition, and they are all sold.

1820

Crome is appointed vice-president of the society by the president, his old friend, William Freeman. He displays seventeen works in the society exhibition and sends two pictures to the British Institution.

1821

Early in the year Crome exhibits two pictures in the British Institution exhibition. April 14: He sketches the subject for Yarmouth Water Frolic, which is left uncompleted. April 15: He is overcome by his final illness. April 22: Crome dies in his fifty-third year. April 27: Burial services takes place. His funeral is attended by members of the Norwich Society of Artists and by many prominent citizens of Norwich. Michael Sharp and 123

George Vincent travel from London for the funeral, and James Stark is also present. Crome’s body is interred in a vault inside Saint George’s, Colegate, Norwich.

POSTHUMOUS EVENTS, EXHIBITIONS AND CATALOGUES

1821

May 19: The Norfolk Chronicle publishes an advertisement, dated May 3, requesting pictures, sketches, and books in the possession of pupils, friends, and other persons be returned to Crome’s house at the Gildengate Street address. September 25-Octobcr 1: An auction of seven hundred and fifty-one separate lots of paintings, prints, and books, the property of Mr. J. Crome, deceased, was held on five consecutive days at Sir Benjamin Wrenche s Court. No paintings by Crome were in the sale. October 15-October 20: Forty-two individual owners of works by Crome send one hundred and ten pictures to an invitational “Crome Memorial Loan Exhibition

that

is held at Sir Benjamin Wrenche’s Court. A bust and three portraits by fellow artists are displayed. But the portrait by J. T. Wodehouse, M.D. (no. 58) is the only one listed in the exhibition catalogue. November 16: An advertisement appears in the Norwich Mercury, requesting that outstanding bills of indebtedness by the late John Crome be sent to his residence in Saint George’s, Norwich. November 20: Crome’s will is probated and its provisions made known. 1824

Crome’s A Study from Nature: Poringland, Norfolk (66 x 57 inches, frame included) is exhibited at the British Institution (no. 36).

1834

September 3-September 5: John Berney Crome, the eldest son, continues to live in his father’s house. He becomes insolvent and is forced to sell “under a Fiat in Bank¬ ruptcy” the contents of his father’s house in Gildengate Street, Norwich. The auction sale takes place in Middle Street, Saint George’s, Colegate, Norwich. Twenty-four pictures and sketches by the elder Crome were simultaneously sold with works by John Berney Crome. Thus, the works by John Crome and those by his son were confused, resulting in a source of future spurious “Cromes.” Mrs. Crome (John Crome’s widow) issues a compilation of thirty-one etchings from unaltered plates left by Crome at the time of his death. Sixty sets of the etchings are published under the title of Norfolk Picturesque Scenery.

1838

John Berney Crome, Charles Muskett, and William B. Freeman reissue Crome’s etchings from rebitten plates under the title of Etchings of Views of Norfolk, containing a biographical memoir of John Crome, written by Dawson Turner, Esq.

1858

The Norwich Mercury publishes an appreciation of John Crome and his work by John Wodderspoon.

1868

Norwich admirers erect a memorial tablet with a bas-relief profile of John Crome close to his grave.

1876

Publication of a second edition of John Wodderspoon’s appreciation of Crome, to which is added “Memoirs” by Dawson Turner, Esq.

124

1902

James Reeve, curator of the Norwich Castle Museum from 1851 to 1910, makes accessible memoirs, documents, newspaper clippings and notices, and catalogues of John Crome and the circle of Norwich School artists. They are available in the British Museum Print Room.

1921

The Castle Museum, Norwich. “Crome Centenary Exhibition” (Introduction by Laurence Binyon): April i-April 30.

1958

Thomas Agnew & Sons, Ltd., London. “Crome and Cotman,” forty-three paintings by John Crome (Introduction by Francis W. Hawcroft): July i-July 26.

1961

Whitworth Art Gallery, Manchester. “The Norwich School,” thirteen paintings, seven watercolors by John Crome (Introduction by Francis W. Hawcroft): February 10-March 11.

1967

The Cummer Gallery of Art, Jacksonville, Florida. “Landscapes of the Norwich School,” fifteen paintings, six watercolors by John Crome (Introduction by Norman L. Goldberg): February 22-April 2.

1968

The City of Norwich Museums and The Tate Gallery, London. “John Crome” (Introduction by Francis W. Hawcroft): August 3-September 29; October 17December 1.

125

APPENDIX B

Works Exhibited Directly by John Crome or on His Behalf, 1805-1824

THE NORWICH SOCIETY OF ARTISTS EXHIBITS

(The exhibition entries, unaltered in spelling and punctuation, are published as they appear in the original Norwich Society of Artists exhibition catalogues. An asterisk ( ) preceding titles indicates works for sale.) 1805

No. 13

Moon light, a sketch in oil

20

A cottage scene

34

Pigs, a sketch

50

A sketch in Patterdale, India ink

60

View on Barford common, near Norwich

67

Farm yard, a sketch in oil

73

A cottage near Harleston, Norfolk

89

A view near Yarmouth

93

Scene in Patterdale, Cumberland, a sketch

98

Bishop-gate Bridge, Norwich

hi 114

A marie pit Part of the chapel in Chepstow castle, from the

118

Wye The great west tower from the inner bellgium [inner bailey, meaning inner court], Goodrich castle

139

Part of Chepstow castle from the Wye 127

1807

145 *Vicw of Carrow abbey, near Norwich

151

Oulton church, Suffolk

159

An interior view of Tintern abbey

163

The entrance to Goodrich castle, from the inner

5

8

bellgium [inner bailey, meaning inner court]

14

169

A view of Persfield, from the Wye

174

Figures, a sketch in oil

177

A view of the Fellmongers, near Sandling’s

17

Water at St.

19 33

ferry, Norwich, since taken down 209

13

[Sir] Michael’s Le Fleming’s,

[Rydal Park] Westmoreland, coloured on the

39 55

65

spot 210

An interior of Tintern abbey

223

Lowther woods

75

81 90 100

1806

108 125

19

View on the Thorpe road

134

24

Trees, a study

135

26

Rocks and water-fall

27

A

wood-scene

and

138 moat,

at

Hunstanton,

Norfolk 28

155

163

The entrance of Goodrich castle, morning

Martin’s at Oak

Cow-tower, on the Swanery-meadow, Nor¬

164

wich

166

34

Grove-scene, with sheep

167

35

Part of Goodrich castle, evening

170

39

Evening

171

4i

Moonlight

46

A cart-shed, at Melton, Norfolk

47

Blogg’s lime-kiln

180

57

Sketches on the spot, pigsties

181

58

The milk-pot

182 185

33

land, seat of the Duke of Norfolk 176

66

Moonlight, Sprowston

67

A brook in Lord Roseberry’s grounds [Bixley]

70

Rocks

10

75

View on the river at the back of the New Mills,

24

Norwich, evening

43

81

View near Weymouth

44

87

Lime-kiln, out of St. Giles’s gates

62

89

View in the forest in Hampshire

63

93

View on Thorpe [Yare] river

73

96

Sketch in oil, view on Thorpe river

112 114

W

65

The windmill

A view of lakes in Cumberland

156

Breathy [Brathy] bridge, Westmoreland

210

Street-scene,

221

229

St.

Colegate,

126 near

154

Green’s lane

167

Sketch, from nature, in the style of Gains¬

171

borough

197

Oak tree in Lord Wodehouse’s park [Kim¬

200

berley], lead pencil

128

George’s

1808

the River

225

Moon-light Scene on the River [Waveney]

27 *Scene at Blofield

between Beccles and Yarmouth

34 *View in Blunderstone Lane 35 *Trowse Bridge

1809

36 *A Woody Scene, with Public House 38 *A Lane leading to Mr. Unthank’s

14

Landscape, Barford Common

16

A Scene on Yarmouth Quay

19

Landscape, water colours

43 *A Waterfall and Rock 83 *The Outside of a Blacksmith’s Shop 86 ^Public House on a Heath

24 Cromer Beach, below Cliff

90

29

Old Buildings in Norwich

47

A View in Cumberland, looking down from

94 ^Moonlight 97

the King of Patterdales [Mounsey estate], in the distance Ullswater

Scene of St.

Martin’s

[Wensum]

River—

afternoon 99 ^Landscape

48

Drawing in Water Colours, Grove Scene

59

Yarmouth Beach and Jetty, oils

60

Old Cottages, painted on the spot

66

Landscape

84

An Old House in St. Clement’s, Norwich

203

Scene near Bawburgh Mill

102 *Rocks and Waterfall 103 *Cottage on a Common 104 *Road Scene near Heigham 108 * Study of Trees

Chepstow, on the Wye

146 *Drawiflg of Rocks near Matlock 167 * Water-color Drawing 171 *Mulbarton Green

1810

183 *Cottage at Hingham 15

View from Herringfleet

186 *Temple of Venus, after a sketch of Wilson’s

17

Ruins, evening

224

18

A thistle painted on the spot

24

View taken from telegraph-lane, looking to¬

27

1812

wards Gen. Money’s—painted on the spot

2

Grove Scene—painted from Nature

Scene on Hautbois common, near Coltishall,

7

View on the Norwich

in Norfolk 29

View

30 34

View

on

[Wensum]

River,

looking towards White Friars’ Bridge St.

Martin’s

[Wensum]

river,

15

Cottage Scene

Norwich

23

Cattle crossing a River

Patterdale church

24

Scene on St. Martin’s at Oak [Wensum] River,

on

St.

Martin’s

[Wensum]

river,

Norwich 36

River Scene

Norwich 25

Cottage, in oils

Evening, looking down the River [Yare] from Yarmouth Bridge

79

Upright landscape scene of Colney

27

Lane Scene, Hingham

89

View, looking over Heigham marshes towards

45

A Cottage Scene, from Nature

Costessey

100

Boy keeping Sheep—Morning

95

Trees, from nature

103

A Landscape

99

Gravel pit

104

The Blind Pensioner

104

Cottage and road scene, near Blundeston, after

105

View without St. Augustine’s Gates

rain

114

Scene on Heigham [Wensum] River

190

Evening

115

Creek Scene, near the New Mills, Norwich

193

Landscape

123

Landscape Scene at Bawburgh

126

Dutch Boats

196

Cottages in Hingham

1811 2 *Windmill at Trowse—evening

197

Study of Pollards—Water Colors

199

Water-colour Drawing, from Nature—Sheds

205

Cottage Scene

9 ^Broken Ground, back of the Horse Barracks 18 *View, looking towards Mr. Cozen’s House, near Norwich

1813

25 *Sketch in oil—evening; looking up the River from R. Alderson’s, Esq. [, Norwich.] 26 ^Broken Ground, near Norwich

7 10

Foot-bridge, Keswick Scene at Blofield 129

19

Lane Scene—Lord Rosebery, Bixley

27

Landscape

49 Bruges River—Ostend in the distance—moonlight 51

Cottage Scene

28

Scene in Heigham

37

Sketch, in oils

57

Cottage—Haddiscoe

44

Sketch at Marlingford

62

A Lane Scene, near Norwich

47

Docks

65

River Scene

56

Landscape at Hackford

70

Landscape—autumn

57

Cottage at Deepham

71

Cottages at Cromer

73

Boat-builders’ Yard, near the Cow Tower

90

Landscape—composition

78

94

Scene near Lord Wodehouse’s [Kimberley]

97

Solitude

Park

101

Landscape—composition

Scene on St. Martin’s [Wensum] River, near

no

Scene on Heigham [Wensum] River

Morse and Adam’s Brewery 97 190

1817

Landscape, with Sheep—Evening Lane Scene, near Cromer

1814

14

Moon Rising

20

Yarmouth Jetty

28

Scene on Mr. Blake’s Bleaching Ground,

44

Bathing Scene

20

Heath Scene

29

Cottage and Trees

37

Yarmouth Quay

51

Mackarel Shore Boat going off—morning

52

Scene, from Nature

65

Landscape

55

Gravel-pit—Evening

66

Landscape

60

View on the Norwich [Wensum] River

75

Landscape and Cattle

67

Study, from Nature

79

Raven Craig

87

Creek Scene

80

Lane Scene

88

Scene, from Nature—for a large Picture

87

Scene at Bawburgh

Villaee Scene O

88

Hcthel Hall, the seat of Sir T. Beevor, Bart.

92

Landscape

97

Sketch, from nature

hi

Heigham

1815

143 34

Composition

40

Landscape

48

View of Norwich

56

Landscape

58

Landscape

Scene on the Norwich [Wensum] River

177

Sketch, in oil

179

Landscape

1818

88

Scene on Mousehold Heath

90

Lane Scene

30 Twilight

96

Village Scene

46

Sketch, in Oil

98

View in Paris—Italian Boulevard

47

Landscape

Scene in St. Martin’s at Oak

51

Rums

Cottage Scene

59 Scene on the Norwich [Wensum] River

106 112

1816 24

Scene from nature

26

Character of an Oak

67

Moonlight

73

Landscape

77

Yarmouth Beach, from the Pier

97

Landscape

152

Dogs’s Heads

28

Landscape

29

Landscape—a sketch on the spot

40

Sketch in oil

41

Scene from nature

1

Moonlight

43

Scene on St. Martin’s [Wensum] River

9

Landscape

45

Landscape

130

1819

14

Landscape and Cattle

25

Heath Scene—Sun breaking out after a Storm

40

Landscape—Mid-day

48

A Scene on the Norwich River—Afternoon

46

Cottage and Trees

52

Yarmouth Beach; the Jetty in the distance—

53

Grove Scene

Evening

55

Sketch in Oil

54

Landscape

68

Moonlight Sketch

59

Yarmouth Beach, looking North—Morning

69

Landscape

62

36

The Fish-market at Boulogne, from Sketches made on the spot in 1814

Sketch in Oil

7i

Cottages at Heigham

156

The Moon Rising

78

A Sequestered Wood Scene

161

A Lane Scene

80

Scene in Chapel Field, Norwich

207

The Thorn Tree, in Hethel Church-yard;

81

Cottage and Wood Scene

considered an antiquity in the reign of King

86

Evening

John

92

Cottage on the River Wensum

1821

Io20

(John Crome deceased)

14

Composition

40

View, looking from the New Mills towards

15

River Scene

St. Michael’s Bridge

19

Sketch near Bishop Bridge

73

Landscape—Evening

21

Cottage Scene

90

Lane Scene—the last Picture

23

Group of Trees—A Sketch

9i

Wood Scene

THE ROYAL ACADEMY EXHIBITS l8ll

1806 465 260

Landscape

OO

Landscape

1812 1807

527

A cottage from Nature, near Lynn, in Norfolk 1808

591

235

11

Landscape

84

Landscape

132

Landscape

384

Landscape

Blacksmith’s shop, near Hingham, Norfolk

1816 8

1809 36

View in Blofield, near Norwich

View near Norwich 1818

A sketch from Nature 218

Old buildings in Norwich

View near Norwich

THE BRITISH INSTITUTION EXHIBITS

(Measurements include frames) 1821

1818 40 A Blacksmith’s Traverse, 25 X 22

231

Heath Scene near Norwich, 29 X 38 A Scene near Norwich, 23 X 38

1820 1824 View on the Norwich River, 28 X 25 Scene at Wittingham Norwich, 60 X 54

[Whitlingham], near

36

A Study from Nature; Poringland, Norfolk, 66 X 57

Among the authentic work by John Crome presently so considered by the author, the three hundred and nine painting, watercolor, and drawing exhibits, listed with nondescript titles and without measurements or other data, correspond to a numerically small group of examples directly traceable to them. Yet the delineation of nuances and the characteristics inherent in these genuine works provide a critical analytic basis for extending the artist s acceptable oeuvre. But despite the enrichment of our knowledge, the exhibits have introduced a potent deterrent effect: copies, imitations, and forgeries have been crowned with titles taken directly from them to grossly distort the image of Crome. (Both purposes in relation to Crome studies have been supplemented and widened by the additional list of ill-defined pictures in the Crome Memorial Exhibition, 1821.) Since the publication of W. F. Dickes’ The Norwich School of Painting, in 1905, there has been a positive passion for discovering new Cromes. Trained opinion or documentable knowledge have failed to check the uncontrollable desire for attribution which is still running wild. But there is another and, perhaps more significant, reason why myth has often been made to serve in lieu of understanding. Probably the chief sources of difficulty are that, in most cases, knowledge of Crome’s style and technique is fragmentary and that his genius is mis¬ understood. As a result, it has become customary to accept advice lightly from the narrow scientific field (with all due deference to the reputable dealers) and to rely on the criteria of style derived from a superficial inspection of any Crome painting or drawing from any chronological period of stylistic development as the quintessence of style and technique. Furthermore, it has become customary with respect to Crome as well as other artists of the Norwich School to base style criticism on a foundation of photographs which, at best, are misleading. A systematic, firsthand study of all Crome’s work is the only means of establishing a scholarly basis for an understanding of his work, individually or as a whole.

132

APPENDIX C

Catalogue oj Pictures in the Crome Memorial Exhibition, Norwich, 1821

The year painted is approximate; it is an alleged date from memory. Spelling and punctuation are as they appear in the original Crome Memorial Exhibition catalogue. Note: see “Concordance of Paintings in the Crome Memorial Exhibition, Norwich, 1821, and the Present Work,” pp. 291-92.

No.

Year Painted

Owner, 1821

1

Sketch—his first in oil

1790

Mr. F. Crome

2

Composition, in the style of Wilson

1796

Mr. F. Spratt

3

Scene in Cumberland

1817

Study of Broken Ground, near St. Augustine’s Gate, Norwich

1815

Study near Bishop’s Gate, painted on the spot

1820

4 5

6 7

View on the Thames Moonlight Scene on King-street Meadows

1808 1817

133

No.

Year Painted

Owner, 1821

1798

C. Higgins, Esq. Mr. W. Crowe (sic)

8

Composition, in the style of Wilson

9

Road Scene and Cottages near Bury

1818

10

Landscape Composition

1819

ii

View at the back of the New Mills, Norwich

1814

Mrs. Paget

12

Grove Scene near Marlingford

1815

Samuel Paget, Esq.

13

Study at the Duke’s Palace, the site of the New Bridge

1817

14

Study of Ruins

1817

15

View at the back of the New Mills, near the Manufactory of C. Higgins, Esq.

1817

16

View in the Park of Lord Lowther

1807

17

Study of Trees near Earlham

1820

18

Trees and Broken Ground

1815

Mr. W. Spratt

19

View on the River Wensum

1818

J. Brightwen, Esq.

20

Wood and Water Scene near Bawburgh

1821

Miss Burroughes

21

Lane Scene near Hingham

1815

Rev. E. Valpy

22

Landscape

1818

Mr. E. Sparshall

23

Landscape and Cattle

1806

S. Martin, Esq.

24

Scene at the back of the New Mills

1814

25

View near Yarmouth Bridge

1815

Rev. E. Valpy Mr. Wm. Stark

26

Landscape and Cattle

1816

27

Cottage and Wood Scene

1820

28

Scene near Dickleborough

1820

29

Scene at Mulbarton

1817

30

Yarmouth Jetty

1808

31

Moonlight

1818

32

View in Postwick Grove

1816

33

Beach Scene—Morning—Mackarel Boat going off

1818

34

Blacksmith’s Traverse at Hardingham

1814

35

Scene at Wood Rising, painted on the spot

1811

36

Scene at Bawburgh

1816

37

Hautbois Common, Norfolk

1810

38

View, looking from the Pier Head towards Yarmouth Jetty

1817

39

Lane Scene near Hingham

1812

Samuel Paget, Esq.

40

Lane Scene near Whitlingham

1820

Mr. Charles Turner

4i

Yarmouth Jetty

1811

42

Scene near Hardingham

1816

43

Lane Scene

1817

44

Boy and Sheep—Morning

1815

45

View on Mousehold Heath

1816

Mr. Wilson

46

Lane Scene at Blofield

1813

Samuel Paget, Esq.

47

Scene at Heigham

1819

Rev. J. Homfray

48

Scene at Blundeston

1816

Mr. G. Stacey

49

View at Back of the Mills

1815

Rev. J. Homfray

50

Lane Scene near Beccles

1814

Mr. Freeman

5i

Scene in Cumberland

1818

Mr. D. B. Murphy

52

Cottages at Barford

1813

53

Lane Scene at Catton

1816

John Bracey, Esq.

54

Scene at Marlingford

1808

Rev. J. H. Browne

55

Carrow Abbey

1805

P. M. Martineau, Esq.

56

Road scene at Blundeston

1810

T. Brightwell, Esq.

57

Yarmouth Beach

1819

Mr. P. Barnes

134

Mrs. De Rouillon

Mr. F. Crome

Mr. F. Stone

John Bracey, Esq.

No. 58

Year Painted

Owner, 1821

Portrait of the late Mr. Crome, painted by J. T. Wodehouse, Esq. M.D., in 1813

59

Scene at Poringland

1818

60

Scene between Bruges and Ostend

1818

61

Blacksmith’s Shop

1808

62

Yarmouth Jetty

1819

63

View at the Back of the New Mills

1816

Rev. E. Valpy

64

Scene near Lakenham

1820

Mr. Wilson

65 66

Cottage and Wood Scene

1820

M. Bland, Esq.

View on the River Wensum

1819

Mr. Samuel Colman

67

View on Mousehold Heath

1816

Mr. James Stark

68

Mill—Twilight

1813

Samuel Paget, Esq.

69

Cottage Scene near Drayton

1815

Mr. F. Crome

70

Cottage at Whitlingham

1814

Miss Cameron Innes

7i

Landscape—Evening

1821

Mr. J. B. Crome

72

Sketch of an Oak in Kimberley Park

1813

73

Study of Trees at Colney

1814

Mr. F. Crome

74

Moonlight

1819

Mr. G. Stacey

75

Composition in the style of Wilson

1809

76

Grove Scene

1820

J. Geldart, Jun. Esq.

77

View near Scoulton

1815

Mr. F. Crome

78

View on the Paver Yare, painted on the spot

1814

79

View of the Italian Boulevards at Paris

1815

H. Gurney, Esq. M.P.

80

View at North Elmham

1814

Mr. F. Stone

81

View, looking from the New Mills towards St. Michael’s Bridge

1820

Mr. R. De Carle, Jun.

82

View on the River Wensum

1820

Mr. I. H. Wright

83

Scene near Hackford

1813

84

Lane Scene at Whitlingham

1817

Mr. F. Crome

85

Group of Trees near Melton

1820

Mr. B. Steel

86

Scene near Wood Rising

1816

Mr. W. Freeman

87

Fish Market at Boulogne

1820

88

View on the Paver Yare

1819

89

Scene at North Elmham

1814

90

Hethel Hall, the seat of Sir T. Beevor, Bart.

1819

9i

Scene near Keswick

1820

Mr. F. Stone

92

View on the River Yare

1814

R. Bygrave, Esq.

93

Study of an old Thorn Tree standing in Hethel Churchyard

1819

94

Study of Plants, painted on the spot

1814

Mr. Crome

95

View near Wickerwell

1818

Mr. E. Girling, Jun.

96

Sketch of Norwich, painted on the spot

1815

97

View at Fritton

1814

98

Sketch at Marlingford

1812

99

Study of Trees and Broken Ground at Marlingford

1815

J. D. Palmer, Esq.

100

Lane Scene at Mulbarton

1813

Mr. E. Girling, Jun.

101

View near Hellesdon

1819

Lady Jemingham

102

View near Honingham

1813

103

Hackford Church

1817

104

Study of Wood Rising

1815

Miss Paget

105

View at Bawburgh

1818

Mr. F. Crome

106

Cottages at Haddiscoe

1818

107

View at Heigham

1815

Mr. F. Crome

Mr. P. Barnes

Mr. F. Stone

Mr. F. Crome

Miss Paget

135

Year Painted

No. 108

Cottage Scene near Dereham

1817

109

Moonlight Sketch

1819

no

View at the back of New Mills

1806

in

Wood Scene, the last picture painted by the late Mr. Crome, in

1821

April

136

Owner, 1821

Mr. Crome

APPENDIX D

Chronology of the Chief Events of The Norwich School

No respectable account of East Anglian art could give the Norwich School anything but a major role in the one hundred and sixty-eight years, 1747 to 1915, bracketed by this chronol¬ ogy. Yet incident to unfolding the scenario of the period, the interaction of artists and histor¬ ical events—some noncontemporary and unrelated to the regional scene—played a peripheral, minor role in the emergence of personalities and activities of the Norwich School. On the other hand, they were a powerful force behind the emerging movements, for they set the tone and gave direction to artist-participants and events. But only from the language of the Norwich School artist were natural form and objects turned into the palpable qualities of landscape—distinctive, cohesive, and generative—sustaining reverberations across the pages of British art history. 1748

Birth of Thomas Harvey.

1752

Birth of John Robert Cozens. 137

1753

Birth of Sir William Beechey.

1754

Birth of John Ninham.

1761

Birth of John Opie.

1764

Birth of James Sillett.

1768

December 10: The instrument of the foundation of the Royal Academy is signed by King George III. December 22: Birth of John Crome. November: Thomas Gainsborough is invited to be a founder-member of the Royal Academy.

1769

January 2: Sir Joshua Reynolds delivers his first discourse at the opening of the Royal Academy. January 30: Birth of Charles Hodgson.

1770

Birth of Robert Ladbrooke.

1775

February 18: Birth of Thomas Girtin. October 18: Birth of Dawson Turner. April 23: Birth of Joseph Mallord William Turner.

1776

June 11: Birth of John Constable.

1777

Birth of John Thirtle.

1779

August 22: Birth of Joseph Clover.

1780

Birth of Robert Dixon. Thomas Harvey acquires View on the Coast of Baiae by Richard Wilson (probably this year).

1782

May 18: Birth of John Sell Cotman. Richard Wilson dies.

1785- Thomas Harvey acquires Dutch and Flemish masters for Catton House; Landscape by 1788

Hobbema (Biirhle Collection, Zurich) and a Claude are among his purchases.

1786

Thomas Harvey buys The Cottage Door by Gainsborough (Huntington Library and Gallery of Art) from the artist.

1788

August 21: Thomas Gainsborough dies.

1789

John Crome meets Thomas Harvey toward end of year.

1790

John Crome begins painting full-time; sketches from nature; exhibits works at Messrs. Smith and Jaggers, printsellers in Norwich; shares garret-studio with Robert Ladbrooke; begins visits to Thomas Harvey at Catton House; studies Dutch, Flemish, and English pictures at Catton House; is introduced to Sir William Beechey, R.A.; visits him in London studio on trips to the Metropolis. Sketch in Oil is John Crome’s first work. December 10: Sir Joshua Reynolds delivers his fifteenth and last discourse.

138

1792

February 23: Sir Joshua Reynolds dies.

1793

France’s revolutionary attempt to dominate the world begins; it lasts twenty-two years. October 15: Birth of Henry Ninham.

1794

November 19: Birth of James Stark. December 8: Birth of John Berney Crome. John Sell Cotman draws Old House, Mill Lane, his earliest known work.

1796

Royal Academy: James Sillett (first appearance). June 27: Birth of George Vincent. September 30: Birth of Frederick James Crome.

1797

Royal Academy: B. Sewell (first appearance). September 13: Birth of Joseph Stannard. John Robert Cozens dies.

1798

Royal Academy: Robert Dixon (first appearance). John Crome meets John Opie. John Sell Cotman to London; employed by Rudolph Ackermann; colors aquatints. Birth of David Hodgson.

1798- John Thirtle to London. 1799 1799

John Sell Cotman is befriended by Dr. Thomas Monro; works in the Munro Academy; spends summer at Dr. Monro’s country house at Fetcham, Surrey. Birth of Robert Leman.

1800

Royal Academy: John Sell Cotman (first appearance); exhibits each year to 1806. John Sell Cotman to Bristol, Wye Valley, and Wales. June: John Sell Cotman sends drawing of a Mill to the Society for the Encouragement of Arts, Manufactures and Commerce competition; wins large Silver Palette prize. John Thirtle’s earliest work. April 20: Birth of Henry Ladbrooke. Birth of Horace Beevor Love. Birth of Samuel David Colkett.

1801

John Sell Cotman to Devon and Somerset; joins Girtin’s

Sketching Club.

April 8: Birth of Emily Crome. July 13: Birth of Thomas Lound. 1802

Royal Academy: Charles Hodgson (first appearance). Summer: John Crome in Lake District. John Sell Cotman is president of Girtin’s “Drawing Society”; to north Wales. November 9: Thomas Girtin dies.

1803

February 19: John Crome establishes the “Norwich Society of Artists” and is sup¬ ported by Robert Ladbrooke, Charles Hodgson, and John Thirtle; inaugural meeting, 139

W. C. Leeds, president; the Reverend Dr. Forster, vice-president. Meeting dates of the Norwich Society of Artists: March 5, 21; April 4, 18; May 2, 16, 30; June 13, 27; July 11, 25; August 8, 22; September 5, 19; October 3, 17, 31; November 14, 28; December 12, 26. John Sell Cotman in Yorkshire. October 31: Birth of John Berney Ladbrooke. Birth of Emily Coppin. July 26: Birth of Obadiah Short. Birth of William Joy. 1804

Royal Academy: Robert Ladbrooke (first appearance). Summer: John Crome and Robert Ladbrooke in Wales, Wye Valley, and Severn country. John Sell Cotman in Yorkshire, Castle Acre, and Croyland; draws watercolors of Greta series; begins lifelong friendship with Dawson Turner. June 6: Birth of the Reverend Edward Thomas Daniell.

1805

Norwich Society of Artists: president and vice-president are not published. August 10: First exhibition of the Norwich Society of Artists in Sir Benjamin Wrenche’s Court; John Crome, Robert Ladbrooke, Charles Hodgson, John Thirtle, Robert Dixon (first appearances); 26 artists show 223 paintings and drawings; society exhibi¬ tion continues for ten days to two weeks. John Sell Cotman in Yorkshire; paints watercolors of Greta series and of Durham.

1806

Royal Academy: John Crome (first appearance), A Landscape (no. 260) and A Landscape (no. 285). Norwich Society of Artists: president, W. C. Leeds; vice-president, A. Browne. August 11: Second exhibition of the Norwich Society of Artists in Sir Benjamin Wrenche’s Court; 44 artists show 251 paintings and drawings; John Berney Crome (first appearance). Summer: John Crome in Lake District; John Constable also in Lake District; they never meet. John Crome in Hampshire and Dorset; visits Thomas Fowell Buxton; paints View near Weymouth-, also encouraged by Thomas Harvey to copy The Cottage Door by Gainsborough late in this year. John Sell Cotman at Trentham Park (Marquis of Stafford); leaves London and settles in Norwich; first paintings in oil. June: Birth of Alfred Stannard (brother of Joseph). Birth of John Cantiloe Joy. October 22: Birth of William Henry Crome.

1807

Royal Academy: John Crome exhibits A Cottage, from Nature, near Lynn in Norfolk (no. 526). Norwich Society of Artists: president, A. Browne; vice-president, John Crome. August 1: Third exhibition of the Norwich Society of Artists in Sir Benjamin Wrenche’s Court; 36 artists show 189 paintings and drawings; John Sell Cotman (first appearance).

140

John Sell Cotman paints portraits, coast scenes, cottages, and classical landscapes in oils. Thomas Harvey sells The Cottage Door by Gainsborough to Daniel Coppin of Norwich. 1808

Royal Academy: John Crome exhibits Blacksmith’s Shop, Hingham, Norfolk (no. 591); John Thirtle (first appearance). Norwich Society of Artists: president, J. Crome; vice-president, R. Ladbrooke. August 20: Fourth exhibition of the Norwich Society of Artists in Sir Benjamin Wrenche’s Court; 45 artists show 255 paintings and drawings; John Sell Cotman is listed in exhibition catalogue as “Portrait Painter”; James Sillett (first appearance). February 15: Birth of Joseph Geldart.

1809

Royal Academy: John Crome exhibits A Sketch from Nature (no. 36) and Old Buildings in Norwich (no. 235). Norwich Society of Artists: president, R. Ladbrooke; vice-president, R. Dixon. July 31: Fifth exhibition of the Norwich Society of Artists in Sir Benjamin Wrenche’s Court; 48 artists show 210 paintings and drawings; D. B. Murphy is commissioned to paint portrait of John Sell Cotman and one of his wife. July 22: John Sell Cotman advertises in the Norfolk Chronicle “A Circulating Collection of Drawings, consisting of 600 for rental to students.” November 17: Birth of Elizabeth Rigby (Lady Eastlake).

1810

Norwich Society of Artists: president, J. Crome; vice-president, J. S. Cotman. August 25: Sixth exhibition of the Norwich Society of Artists in Sir Benjamin Wrenche’s Court; 46 artists show 207 paintings and drawings. June: Birth of Henry Bright, or 1814. Birth of Alfred Priest.

1810- Robert Dixon publishes Norfolk Scenery, consisting of 38 soft-ground etchings 1811 1811

Royal Academy: John Crome exhibits View of Blofield, near Norwich (no. 465); James Stark, John Berney Crome (first appearances). Norwich Society of Artists: president, J. S. Cotman; vice-president, C Hodgson. August 7: Seventh exhibition of the Norwich Society of Artists in Sir Benjamin Wrenche’s Court; 52 artists show 224 paintings and drawings; George Vincent, Joseph Stannard (first appearances). British Institution: Robert Ladbrooke (first appearance). John Sell Cotman exhibits “Miscellaneous Etchings for Blomefields Norfolk” and sketches for Architectural Antiquities of Norfolk with the Norwich Society of Artists.

1812

Royal Academy: John Crome exhibits 4 paintings, each is entitled Landscape (nos. 11, 84, 132, 384)Norwich Society of Artists: president, F. Stone; vice-president, J. Thirtle. August 1: Eighth exhibition of the Norwich Society of Artists in Sir Benjamin Wrenche’s Court; 47 artists show 205 paintings and drawings. John Sell Cotman moves to Great Yarmouth; remains until 1823; prepares engravings for books on Norfolk brasses and architectural antiquities of Norfolk and Normandy.

1813

Norwich Society of Artists: president, C. Hodgson; vice-president, J. Thirtle. August 21: Ninth exhibition of the Norwich Society of Artists in Sir Benjamin Wrenche’s Court; 44 artists show 207 paintings and drawings; Michael W. Sharpe (first appearance). January: John Crome and John Berney Crome to Great Yarmouth; spend three weeks etching in Dawson Turner’s house. Portrait of John Crome is painted by Michael W. Sharpe. March 13: Birth of William Phillip Barnes Freeman.

1814

All England triumphant: revolutionary dictatorship of Europe overthrown. Royal Academy, George Vincent (first appearance). Norwich Society of Artists: president, J. Thirtle; vice-president, J. Sillett. August 13: Tenth exhibition of the Norwich Society of Artists in Sir Benjamin Wrenche’s Court; 41 artists show 173 paintings and drawings. British Institution: James Stark (first appearance). October: John Crome to London; probably visits Dulwich College Picture Gallery and copies the left half of Landscape with Sportsman and Game by Adam Pijnacker in watercolors (Silver Birches); travels to Boulogne, Paris, Meuse (Maas) River, and Ostend; makes pencil sktches for Boulevard des Italiens, Paris; Bruges River—Ostend in the Distance—Moonlight; The Fishmarket at Boulogne; paintings later executed between 1814 and 1820 in Norwich; observes John Glover at work in the Louvre Museum returns to Norwich, November. John Sell Cotman illustrates A Narrative of the Grand Festival at Great Yarmouth. James Stark to London. May 29: Birth of John Joseph Cotman.

1815

Norwich Society of Artists: president, J. Sillett; vice-president, D. Coppin. July 29: Eleventh exhibition of the Norwich Society of Artists in Sir Benjamin Wrenche’s Court; 45 artists show 201 paintings and drawings; John Thirtle does not exhibit after this year. John Crome and Robert Ladbrooke have bitter quarrel over society policy; a cleavage of the Norwich Society of Artists results; a rival exhibition is planned. October 1: Robert Dixon dies.

1816

Royal Academy: John Crome exhibits View near Norwich (no. 8). Norwich Society of Artists: president, D. Coppin; vice-president, M. W. Sharpe. August 10: Twelfth exhibition of the Norwich Society of Artists in Sir Benjamin Wrenche s Court; 53 artists show 269 paintings and drawings. Rival group exhibits under the name “Twelfth Exhibition of the Norfolk and Norwich Society of Artists’’ at hall adjoining Shakespeare Tavern in Theatre Plain; the principal seccders that exhibit are Robert Ladbrooke, John Thirtle, Joseph Stannard, James Sillett, Joseph Clover, Edwin Cooper, and the Reverend W. Cooper; 26 artists and 14 pupils show 156 paintings and drawings. John Berney Crome and George Vincent to Rouen and Paris; George Vincent moves to London upon return from Continent. James Stark to Lake District; returns to Norwich, 1819-20.

142

1817

Norwich Society of Artists: president, M. W. Sharpe; vice-president, J. Freeman. August 2: Thirteenth exhibition of the Norwich Society of Artists in Sir Benjamin Wrenche’s Court; 52 artists show 204 paintings and drawings. Thirteenth exhibition of the Norfolk and Norwich Society of Artists in Theatre Plain; 27 artists and 7 pupils show 140 paintings and drawings. John Crome paints The Wensum at Thorpe: Boys Bathing, as a commission for Dawson Turner, Esq. John Sell Cotman to Normandy; publishes Specimens of Norman and Gothic Architecture in the County oj Norfolk. James Stark admitted to Royal Academy schools. August 16: John Ninham dies.

1818

Royal Academy: John Crome exhibits View near Norwich (no. 218), the last academy exhibit during his life. Norwich Society of Artists: president, J. Freeman; vice-president, J. B. Crome. August 1: Fourteenth exhibition of the Norwich Society of Artists in Sir Benjamin Wrenche’s Court; 54 artists show 172 paintings and drawings. Fourteenth exhibition of the Norfolk and Norwich Society of Artists in Theatre Plain; 26 artists and 7 pupils show 143 paintings and drawings; rival exhibitions are discontinued after this year; the society composed of the seceders is dissolved; John Thirtle does not exhibit again until 1827. British Institution: John Crome exhibits A Blacksmith’s Traverse (110. 75); George Vincent (first appearance). Society of Painters in Oil and Water Color, London: George Vincent (first appearance). John Sell Cotman in Normandy; paints at Rouen, Caen, Honfleur, Dieppe, Falaise, and Coutances; publishes Architectural Antiquities of Norfolk and also illustrates Excur¬ sions in the County of Norfolk (vol. I). George Vincent to London.

1819

Norwich Society of Artists: president, J. B. Crome; vice-president, W. Freeman. August 7: Fifteenth exhibition of the Norwich Society of Artists in Sir Benjamin Wrenche’s Court; 64 artists show 212 paintings and drawings. John Sell Cotman publishes Antiquities of Saint Mary’s Chapel at Stourbridge, near Cambridge and Engravings of the Most Remarkable of the Sepulchral Brasses of Norfolk and illustrates Excursions in the County of Norfolk (vol. II). Charles Hodgson, David Hodgson, and John Bcrney Crome are appointed “Court Painters” to His Royal Highness, the Duke of Sussex. Joseph Stannard, James Sillett, and Joseph Clover return to the Norwich Society as active members; they exhibit this year. George Vincent to Scotland. May 13: Thomas Harvey dies.

1820

Norwich Society of Artists: president, W. Freeman; vice-president, J. Crome. July 29: Sixteenth exhibition of the Norwich Society of Artists in Sir Benjamin Wrenche’s Court; 80 artists show 225 paintings and drawings; His Royal Highness, the Duke of Sussex, is patron; Phillip Reinagle, R.A., sends 7 landscapes; Alfred Stannard, Thomas Lound (first appearances); the last year John Crome exhibits with the society.

M3

British Institution: John Crome exhibits View on the Norwich River (no. 82) and Scene at Whitlingham, near Norwich (no. 254); John Berney Crome (first appearance). John Sell Cotman to Normandy, final tour; makes sketches and sepia drawings of churches, of Domfront, and of Mortain, which he completed later; sends etchings of Normandy to the Norwich Society exhibition. 1821

Norwich Society of Artists: president (not recorded); vice-president, F. Stone. April 15: John Crome begins work on larger version of Yarmouth Water Frolic (Iveagh Bequest), left unfinished. April 22: John Crome dies. August 18: Seventeenth exhibition of the Norwich Society of Artists in Sir Benjamin Wrenche’s Court; 75 artists show 210 paintings and drawings, including 4 post¬ humous landscapes by John Crome. October 15-20: Crome Memorial Exhibition in Sir Benjamin Wrenche’s Court; hi paintings shown, no paintings are by Crome and a Portrait of John Crome by J. T. Wodehouse, Esq., M.D. (no. 58). British Institution: Heath Scene near Norwich (no. 40) and Scene near Norwich (no. 231) by John Crome are exhibited posthumously. Society of British Artists: Emily Coppin wins gold medal; again in 1828. Joseph Stannard to Holland; makes sketches in the Rijksmuseum; returns to Norwich. David Hodgson succeeds John Crome as drawing master in the Norwich Grammar School.

1822

Norwich Society of Artists: president, F. Stone; vice-president, J. B. Crome. July 27: Eighteenth exhibition of the Norwich Society of Artists in Sir Benjamin Wrenche’s Court; 67 artists show 183 paintings and drawings; Joseph Stannard exhibits The Ferry after Bergham (Musee des Tableaux, Amsterdam) (no. 3). John Sell Cotman publishes Architectural Antiquities of Normandy (2 vols.).

1823

Norwich Society of Artists: president, J. B. Crome; vice-president, D. Hodgson. July 26: Nineteenth exhibition of the Norwich Society of Artists in Sir Benjamin Wrenche’s Court; 74 artists show 217 paintings and drawings; Robert Ladbrooke (first appearance since 1815), exhibits annually until 1833; Miles Edmund Cotman (first appearance), exhibits annually until 1833; John Sell Cotman resumes exhibiting. John Sell Cotman leaves Yarmouth and returns to Norwich; Miles Edmund Cotman and John Joseph Cotman also to Norwich. Joseph Stannard to London; sits for portrait to Sir William Beechey (City of Norwich Museums); receives commission to paint Thorpe Water Frolic from Col. John Harvey.

1824

Norwich Society of Artists: president, D. Hodgson; vice-president, P. Barnes. August 14: Twentieth exhibition of the Norwich Society of Artists in Sir Benjamin Wrenches Court; 83 artists show 219 paintings and drawings; S. D. Colkett (first appearance). British Institution: A Study from Nature, Poringland, Norfolk (no. 36) by John Crome is exhibited; Joseph Stannard (first appearance).

144

Society of British Artists: Joseph Stannard, George Vincent (first appearances). John Sell Cotman establishes a drawing academy in his house, Saint Martin’s-at-Palace Plain, Norwich. Benjamin Robert Haydon is made an honorary member of the Norwich Society of Artists (first appearance). 1825

Norwich Society of Artists: president, P. Barnes; vice-president, W. Pratt, Jr. August 6: Twenty-first exhibition, the last exhibition in Sir Benjamin Wrenche’s Court, which is demolished this year; 69 artists show 190 paintings and drawings; 3 portraits by Sir William Beechey, R A. (first appearance); Joseph Stannard exhibits Thorpe Water Frolic (no. 9). Old Water Color Society, London: John Sell Cotman (first appearance). Society of British Artists: Alfred Stannard (first appearance). Charles Hodgson is appointed architectural draftsman to His Royal Highness, the Duke of Sussex. David Hodgson is appointed painter of domestic architecture to His Royal Highness, the Duke of Sussex.

1826

Norwich Society of Artists: inactive; no exhibition. John Sell Cotman resumes painting in oils; paints The Mishap, The Baggage Wagon. Silver Birches (City of Norwich Museums), The Drop Gate (Tate Gallery, London).

1827

Birth of John Middleton. Birth of Alfred George Stannard (son of Alfred, nephew of Joseph).

1828

Norwich Society of Artists is reorganized; official name becomes “Norfolk and Suffolk Institution for the Promotion of the Fine Arts”; exhibitions under this name resume in the Artists’ Room, Exchange Street, Norwich. Norfolk and Suffolk Institution: president, J. B. Crome; vice-president, J. Stark. Twenty-second exhibition of the Norfolk and Suffolk Institution in Artists’ Room: 98 artists show 279 paintings, drawings, and engravings; John Thirtle exhibits for the first time in thirteen years and continues for the next two years. James Sillett publishes Views of the Churches, Chapels, and Other Public Edifices of the City of Norwich (5 vols.).

1829

Norfolk and Suffolk Institution: president, J. B. Crome; vice-president, J. Stark. Twenty-third exhibition of the Norfolk and Suffolk Institution in Artists’ Room: 69 artists show 237 paintings, drawings, and engravings. December 26: John Sell Cotman organizes “Artists’ Conversaziones”; program announcing the inaugural meeting issued to 80 members; Lieutenant Colonel Harvey, honorary president of the Conversazione', stewards, J. B. Crome and J. S. Cotman; Committee of Amateurs, C. Turner, Esq., president, T. Brightwell, Esq., and P. N. Scott, Esq.; artists, J. B. Crome, J. Stark, J. S. Cotman, H. B. Love, J. P. Davis, and D. Hodgson, secretary. Birth of Eloise Harriett Stannard (daughter of Alfred Stannard).

1830

Norfolk and Suffolk Institution: president, J. Stark; vice-president, D. Hodgson. Twenty-fourth exhibition of the Norfolk and Suffolk Institution in Artists’ Room: 62 artists show 208 paintings, drawings, and engravings. 145

January 21: Inaugural meeting of the Artists’ Conversazione in the Norfolk Hotel, Norwich; five similar meetings are held, three during this year and two in 1831. James Stark moves to London; he continues to send pictures to Norfolk and Suffolk Institution exhibitions. Sir Martin Ancher Shee, president of the Royal Academy, is made an honorary member of the Norwich Society of Artists (first appearance). Sir John Soane is made an honorary member of the Norwich Society of Artists (first appearance). December 7: Joseph Stannard dies. 1831

Norfolk and Suffolk Institution: president, D. Hodgson; vice-president, J. S. Cotman. Twenty-fifth exhibition of the Norfolk and Suffolk Institution in Artists’ Room: 87 artists show 198 paintings, drawings, and engravings; John Joseph Cotman (first appearance). John Sell Cotman and son, Miles Edmund, sail by boat from Norwich to London and the Medway; they sketch, draw, and paint shipping scenes and boats. George Vincent to southern coast of England; disappears and dies. Birth of James William Walker.

1832

Norfolk and Suffolk Institution: president, D. Hodgson; vice-president, J. S. Cotman. Twenty-sixth exhibition of the Norfolk and Suffolk Institution in Artists’ Room: 70 artists show 202 paintings, drawings, and sculptures. Society of British Artists: 6 landscapes by George Vincent are exhibited (the word “deceased” appears alongside Vincent’s name).

1833

Royal Academy: Alfred Priest (first appearance). Norfolk and Suffolk Institution: president, J. S. Cotman; vice-president, J. B. Crome. Twenty-seventh exhibition of the Norfolk and Suffolk Institution in Artists’ Room: 83 artists show 230 paintings and drawings; the last formal exhibition. Since the first exhibition of the Norwich Society of Artists, approximately 465 artists exhibit 6,239 paintings, drawings, engravings, and pieces of sculpture.

1834

John Sell Cotman is appointed Professor of Drawing, King’s College, London; accepts post and moves to London. John Joseph Cotman accompanies his father to London; Miles Edmund Cotman assumes teaching responsibilities at Norwich. September 10, 11, and 12: Auction sale of John Sell Cotman’s paintings, drawings, engravings, etchings, books, household effects, and bibelots from his Norwich residence, Saint Martin’s-at-Palace Plain, Norwich. Mrs. John Crome publishes Norfolk Picturesque Scenery, a series of 31 etchings from unaltered plates left by John Crome. James Stark publishes Scenery of the Rivers of Norfolk. John Berney Crome moves to Yarmouth.

183 5

Miles Edmund Cotman joins father, becomes assistant drawing master, King’s College, London. John Joseph Cotman returns to Norwich; assumes teaching responsibilities of Miles Edmund Cotman.

146

1836

Institute of British Architects: John Sell Cotman elected to honorary membership. John Sell Cotman visits Norwich to celebrate Festival of Saint Blaise. Henry Bright moves to London.

1837

British Institution: Henry Bright (first appearance). Henry Bright to north and south Wales. March 31: John Constable dies.

1838

John Sell Cotman publishes Liber Studiorum: hard- and soft-ground etchings and plates of architectural remains of York, Cambridge, Suffolk, Lincoln, and north Wales; he also issues a complete edition of Engravings of the Sepulchral Brasses of Norfolk and Suffolk. Mrs. John Crome publishes Etchings of Views in Norfolk by John Crome, with a biographical memoir of Crome by Dawson Turner, Esq.: a series of 17 or 31 etchings from altered plates. August 13: Horace Beevor Love dies.

1839

April: Norwich Society of Artists officially disbands. Exhibitions in Norwich resume under the auspices of the Norfolk and Norwich Art Union: John Sell Cotman (prize winner), John Berney Crome, Thomas Lound, Henry Jutsum (first appearances). British Institution: Miles Edmund Cotman (first appearance). New Society of Painters in Water Colors, London: Henry Bright (first appearance). Henry Bright to Rhineland, Holland, and French coast. September 30: John Thirtle dies.

1840

Royal Academy: Miles Edmund Cotman (first appearance). James Stark moves to Windsor. Henry Bright sketches in Devonshire. April 17: Emily Crome dies. May 6: James Sillett dies.

1841

Autumn: John Sell Cotman visits Norfolk for the last time; makes numerous blackand-white chalk drawings on gray paper, all Norfolk scenes; visits Postwick Grove and the Yare River in October; sketches Scene from my Father’s House in November; visits the Reverend James Bulwer at Aylsham; makes many sketches and crayon drawings before returning to London.

1842

July 24: John Sell Cotman dies, leaving unfinished The View from my Father’s House at Thorpe begun 011 January 18. Miles Edmund Cotman succeeds his father as drawing master at King’s College, London. September 15: John Berney Crome dies. September 24: The Reverend Edward Thomas Daniell dies. October n: Robert Ladbrooke dies.

1843

Royal Academy: Henry Bright (first appearance). Views of the Churches of Norfolk, drawn and lithographed by Robert Ladbrooke, is published posthumously (5 vols.).

1845

Royal Academy: Thomas Lound (first appearance). 147

1846

Ten etchings by Miles Edmund Cotman and 8 by John Joseph Cotman are published jointly.

1847

British Institution: Thomas Lound (first appearance).

1847- Royal Academy: John Middleton (first appearance). 1848

British Institution: John Middleton (first appearance). John Middleton moves to London; returns to Norwich the next year.

1850

James Stark moves to London. Birth of Frederick George Cotman (nephew of John Sell Cotman). December 9: Alfred Priest dies.

1851

December 19: Joseph Mallord William Turner dies.

1852

British Institution: John Joseph Cotman (first appearance). John Middleton to Tunbridge in Devonshire and north Wales; publishes 9 etchings.

1853

Royal Academy: John Joseph Cotman (first appearance). John Middleton to Scotland. August 28: Joseph Clover dies.

1855

Miles Edmund Cotman leaves London; moves to Plumstead, Norfolk.

1856

November 5: Charles Hodgson dies. November 11: John Middleton dies.

1858

January 23: Miles Edmund Cotman dies. June 20: Dawson Turner dies.

1859

March 24: James Stark dies.

1861

January 18: Thomas Lound dies.

1863 i January 24: Samuel David Colkett dies. March 18: Robert Leman dies. 1864

April 22: David Hodgson dies.

1866

John Cantiloe Joy dies.

1867

William Joy dies. October 23 : William Henry Crome dies.

1869

November 18: Henry Ladbrooke dies.

1873

September 21: Henry Bright dies.

1874

October 23 : Henry Ninham dies.

1875

John Crome’s Boulevard des Italiens, Paris and The Fishmarket at Boulogne are etched by Edwin Edwards (1823-79) and published.

1878

March 15: John Joseph Cotman dies.

1879

July 11: John Berney Ladbrooke dies.

148

1885

January 6: Mrs. Joseph Stannard, nee Emily Coppin, dies.

July 22:

Alfred George Stannard dies.

1886

July 16: Obadiah Short dies.

1889

Frederick George Cotman is medalist at the Royal Academy and at Paris. January 26: Alfred Stannard dies.

1893

October 2: Elizabeth Rigby dies (Lady Eastlake).

1897

September 13: William Phillip Barnes Freeman dies.

1898

James William Walker dies.

1915

February 26: Eloise Flarriet Stannard dies.

149

APPENDIX E

Documents

I. DOCUMENT RELATING TO PRICES PAID FOR JOHN CROME PICTURES BEFORE l8l9

Contemporary or near-contemporary memoranda on prices paid to John Crome for pictures during his lifetime are rare. The James Reeve notes of Crome works and newspaper clippings or the memorabilia recorded of Norwich School activities in the Print Room of the British Museum make little reference to what buyers paid for his art. In the letter, owned by the author, which follows, Sydney D. Kitson records some transactions that took place between Dawson Turner and the Reverend John Homfray as well as directly between Dawson Turner and the artist. Back of the New Mills is very probably a reference to The Wensum at Thorpe: Boys Bathing (plate X, fig. ioi), a picture painted by Crome for Dawson Turner in 1817. An examination of Dawson Turner, Outlines in Lithography (Yarmouth, 1840), discloses View at Hellesdon (fig. 27), which is illustrated facing page 13. Cottage near Norwich and Clay Cottage are less easily identifiable. They probably are illustrated facing pages 15 and 17, respec¬ tively, but either one or the other of these landscapes may represent the two pictures men¬ tioned in the letter along with View near Norwich, illustrated facing page 21. Which two of

152

these three illustrations are intended is questionable. View on the River near Yarmouth, facing page 19, very likely corresponds to Moonrise on the Yare (fig. 33), while Grasmere, which Kitson surmises is Slate Quarries (plate II, fig. 20), is unlikely, the price seems inconsistent. There is no reference whatsoever to this picture in Turner s Outlines. I am unable to identify Hollyhocks, Green Landscape, or the drawing. 153

2. AN HOLOGRAPHIC INVOICE OF JOHN CROME FOR PICTURES SOLD TO THE REVEREND JOHN HOMFRAY

y &-

4 ,5V

/P

^7/

? (7^ X

1

&

-a

^

-

c

2-0


,