This view of boats on the quayside at Dover was bought by Joseph Mallord William Turner (1775–1851) at the posthumous sale of Dr Thomas Monro (1759–1833), one of as many as a hundred views of the town and its environs listed in the catalogue (Exhibitions: Christie’s, 26 June 1833; Christie’s, 1 July 1833). The watercolour was produced at Monro’s home, where Turner and Girtin were employed across three winters, probably between 1794 and 1797, to copy ‘the outlines or unfinished drawings of’ principally John Robert Cozens (1752–97), but other artists too, including the patron’s neighbour, the amateur John Henderson (1764–1843), who lent his ‘outlines for this purpose’ (Farington, Diary, 30 December 1794). Henderson visited Dover in the autumn of 1794 and the ‘outlines of Shipping & Boats’ he made there, described by the diarist Joseph Farington (1747–1821) as ‘Very ingenious & careful’, provided the basis for a substantial number of copies commissioned from Girtin and Turner by Monro (Farington, Diary, 1 December 1795). As with the copies the artists made after the sketches of Cozens, ‘Girtin drew in outlines and Turner washed in the effects’, with Turner receiving ‘3s. 6d each night’ though ‘Girtin did not say what He had’ (Farington, Diary, 12 November 1798).¹

Girtin is not known to have visited Dover and all of his views of the town were copied after other artists, including his master, Edward Dayes (1763–1804). However, whilst Turner travelled to the port in 1793 and executed a series of studio watercolours after his own sketches, the majority of the Dover subjects sold from Monro’s collection were still produced after secondary sources. In this case, the watercolour was copied from a large outline by Henderson that was bequeathed by his son to the British Museum (see the source image above) along with other large views of Dover. Indeed, overlaying images of the watercolour and its source suggests that Girtin actually traced Henderson’s outline, so close is the congruence of forms. The method employed by Girtin is not documented, but it probably involved the use of a strong light source to render the outline translucent so that it could then be traced onto another piece of paper laid on a piece of glass. It was then Turner’s rather more onerous task to add washes of blue and grey to produce a commodity somewhere between an on-the-spot sketch and a finished watercolour, or as close as could be achieved in the few night-time hours available to him at Monro’s house. Such limitations may help to account for the variable quality of the marine views; in this case, the recession of the water into the distance is singularly unconvincing. It is to Girtin’s credit, in contrast, that he was able to transcend a simple mechanical task and render his lines with at least some of the invention and individual character displayed in his on-the-spot sketches.

Henderson’s numerous Dover views are essentially variations on a few themes, with the same vessels, buildings, views and naval operations returning in different guises across the sketches; here, the row of buildings and the adjacent vessels undergoing repairs reappear in Boats in Dover Harbour (TG0804). Henderson’s sketches are further united by the same meticulous attention to detail, which suggests that the amateur employed a mechanical aid such as a camera obscura to fix the forms, meaning that it was the task of the young professional artists to bring a precise record of coastal labours to life. Typically, the focus of attention here is split between the different types of vessel found in the harbour and the myriad operations undertaken on shore to prepare them to return to sea. Henderson may have had his limitations as an artist, but, in combining a careful record of the activities of the seamen with a composition that avoids worn-out picturesque conventions in favour of a more random alignment of vessels and buildings, he provided both Girtin and Turner with a significant challenge.

Image Overlay

1795 - 1796

Boats in Dover Harbour

TG0804