This formerly unidentified view, showing the old bridge at Beddgelert in North Wales, was in all likelihood made at the home of Dr Thomas Monro (1759–1833), where Girtin and his contemporary, Joseph Mallord William Turner (1775–1851), were employed across three winters, probably between 1794 and 1797. Their task, as they recalled to the diarist Joseph Farington (1747–1821), was to copy ‘the outlines or unfinished drawings of’ principally John Robert Cozens (1752–97), but other artists too, including Girtin’s master, Edward Dayes (1763–1804). The ‘finished drawings’ they were commissioned to produce were the result of a strict division of labour: ‘Girtin drew in outlines and Turner washed in the effects’. As the young artists reported, ‘They went at 6 and staid till Ten’ with Turner receiving ‘3s. 6d each night’ whilst ‘Girtin did not say what He had’ (Farington, Diary,12 November 1798).¹ The outcome of their joint labours was substantial, amounting to several hundred drawings, of which ten or so are views in North Wales. The new identification of the settlement shown in this work as Beddgelert on the River Colwyn is confirmed by a number of contemporary views of the picturesque location amongst the mountains of North Wales, including a watercolour by Cornelius Varley (1781–1873) dated 1802 that depicts the same configuration of buildings, bridge and landscape (Victoria and Albert Museum, London (P.53-1924)).

Neither Girtin nor Turner had visited North Wales by the time of the production of this work, so the Monro School views must have been made after compositions by other artists, principally Dayes, who also provided the models for the Lake District scenes. As with the numerous copies that Girtin and Turner created from compositions by Cozens, it was the slight sketches and outlines that Dayes made on his travels that were used as the source for the more finished watercolours. Monro’s posthumous sale, in 1833, contained several hundred of Dayes’ sketches, including a Bedkellert, described as one of a series of ‘blue and Indian ink sketches’ (Christie’s, 2 July 1833, lot 50). Typically, the precise Dayes’ source of this view of the picturesque old bridge at Beddgelert has not been traced, though this does not mean we should look elsewhere for its model. Few of Dayes’ sketches have survived and, arguably, the fact that no source can be found suggests that it was a thoroughly unprepossessing drawing that required considerable transformational skills from the young artists.

The majority of the copies sold at Monro’s posthumous sale were listed as being by Turner working alone, and this generally remained the case until the publication of Andrew Wilton’s pioneering article in 1984, since when the joint attribution of the Monro School works to Turner and Girtin has increasingly become the norm (Wilton, 1984a, pp.8–23). This work was attributed solely to Turner until its sale in 2022 when it was judged that just enough of the pencil work was visible to suggest that Girtin was involved in its production (Bonhams, 12 April 2022, lot 294). The economical use of washes of a limited palette of blues and greys to flesh out the pencil sketch is far from spectacular, but arguably there are indeed sufficient inventive passages to suggest that this is one of the more modest outcomes of the collaboration between Girtin and Turner, comparable to watercolours such as the Dilapidated Cottage (TG0994).

A slightly different view of the bridge and cottage at Beddgelert is in the collection of Harvard Art Museums with an attribution to Turner (1917.201). The watercolour is in very poor condition with the paper discoloured to an alarming degree, but having now seen the work I am minded to think that it too is a collaboration between Girtin and Turner and it may again be a copy of an untraced Dayes Welsh view. Certainly, the pencil work, made more visible by the work’s condition, features many of Girtin’s characteristic and inventive marks and if due allowance is made for the deleterious effect of sunlight on the washes of watercolour there is no reason to doubt Turner’s involvement either. Given that it is likely that the same pigments and paper were used to create both views I have chosen not to give this slightly larger work its own catalogue entry, using instead to the spectacular contrast in their current appearance as an instructive example of the effects of an overexposure to light.²

1794 - 1797

A Dilapidated Cottage

TG0994