Bushwalk Australia

Head of the Mitta Mitta, eagle's view of the mountains, Eugène von Guérard, 1879.

'This painting, depicting the head of the Mitta Mitta River near Omeo, looks towards Mount Wills, named after the explorer William Wills of the ill-fated Victorian Exploring Expedition. The Austrian-born painter Eugène von Guérard, who was in Australia between 1852 and 1881, is considered one of the most important landscape painters of the 19th century.'
Source Cowan Gallery

A friend of mine would like to find out where the artist stood to see this view, if it exists at all. There may be some artistic licence involved as with many landscape paintings. The Mitta Mitta river is also called Big River and many old accounts of this river call it this from the source near Spione Kopje. Most of the old locals still referred to it this way but old maps also show it to be Big River to the confluence of the Cobungra and then the Mitta Mitta. I had thought this painting could have been done from a position near Anglers Rest but there is no visible water depicted in the painting and views from this area would show the river quite large. It would be easier for someone to access Anglers Rest in 1879 but Spione Kopje would be a little harder.

I suspect it may be this view:


Mt willis is the one on the right, almost cut off. Bogong is in the very centre.

It's not uncommon for such paintings to involve a bit of artistic licence in order to better present a scene in a frame. This is particularly common with foreground details and compression of wider-angle features into the frame.

oyster_07 wrote:It's not uncommon for such paintings to involve a bit of artistic licence in order to better present a scene in a frame. This is particularly common with foreground details and compression of wider-angle features into the frame.

True. Also, many artists of the 1800s came from Europe, and had their own ideas about how Australia should be depicted. There's a print of Hannels spur and Kosciusko from the Geehi River that is not quite right. A von Guerard from Kosciusko towards Jagungal is also not quite right. Both of these and many more are good images but the reality is off a bit. Close scrutiny shows that some trees are native to Europe and are not found in Australia. In the late 1800s an Australian style became more prevalent, and hence more accurate as artists became used to the landscape.

I am tending toward a view north similar to that Icefest proposes. This was my original thought but I feel the view needs to to be skewed a bit more. The artistic licence makes it all that much harder. I also feel the rocks in the foreground are imaginary but they are similar in formation to rocks in that section of the Mitta near Anglers rest. If the painting was about and Eagle's nest then the artist would want to portray some height above the valley so the river would look smaller. I also noticed the Austrian style mountains but did not pick up on the trees. The artist traveled on many expeditions throughout Victoria, a couple with Howitt and made numerous sketches, some of which were later painted. Waiting for the weather to clear enough so we can see Mt Wills again.

Lophophaps wrote:True. Also, many artists of the 1800s came from Europe, and had their own ideas about how Australia should be depicted. There's a print of Hannels spur and Kosciusko from the Geehi River that is not quite right. A von Guerard from Kosciusko towards Jagungal is also not quite right. Both of these and many more are good images but the reality is off a bit. Close scrutiny shows that some trees are native to Europe and are not found in Australia. In the late 1800s an Australian style became more prevalent, and hence more accurate as artists became used to the landscape.

Eugene von Guérard's painting titled North-east view from the northern top of Mt Kosciusko (1863) is actually from Mt Townsend. See Ruth Pullin (2011) Eugene von Guérard: nature revealed, National Gallery of Victoria. Also http://www.jokar.com.au/blog/tag/eugene-von-guerard/

Von Geurards paintings were based on pencil sketches he did in the field and often combined the foregrounds of one sketch with another so I wouldn't rely on them as being totally accurate. My partner (an artist) went to an exhibition of his works in Canberra a few years ago and purchased this excellent book, but it doesn't have any specific info on this painting but does detail his travels along the Mitta Mitta to Kosci.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-04-27/e ... on/3976722

The Kosci one you refer to Lophophaps is north from Townsend.

Edit: ^^^^beat me to it!

Peregrinator, interesting. I have long been aware that Kosciusko was renamed Townsend, but did not draw the connection to the von Guerard painting being on Townsend. The vertical scale is exaggerated. Ruth Pullin's report is fascinating. There a picture from just below the summit of Townsend to Jagungal in June Bushwalk Australia.

GBW, the print NE from Kosci is the one I was referring to. My tree reference was a general one, applying to many paintings and prints of that era. Here's another von Guerard, from the Geehi I think.

I found Geurard's sketch books online but cannot find any specific sketch of this painting which would have been done on his expedition to Kos with Neumayer in 1862. There are 2 sketches however that may have been used as a compilation to create a fictitious landscape. It was painted some 17 years later when in need of money. An exhibition by him in 1880 was for the purpose of selling some works to get some money.

http://acms.sl.nsw.gov.au/album/ItemVie ... mgindex=52
In this the mountain range in the background looks similar to the painting and then
http://acms.sl.nsw.gov.au/album/ItemVie ... mgindex=45
the mountains have some similarity to the those depicted in front of Mt Wills in the painting.

His other sketches can be viewed here
http://acms.sl.nsw.gov.au/item/itemdeta ... mid=824683

I made contact with Ruth Pullin and she kindly responded with the real location of the painting and provided a link to another sketch book which shows the scene clearly. It is inscribed as View of Mt. Feathertop and Valley of the Cobungra creek. There is also a notation of a Hill but neither she or I can make it out. You can view the sketch here
http://acms.sl.nsw.gov.au/album/ItemVie ... mgindex=26

There is no clue as to why the name of the painting has been changed but Ruth will get back to me on that. Now can anyone work out the location of the view it sketched? I have my own thoughts but still working on a more precise point.

That link's no good Xplora.

The link has split or truncated somehow.
I had this happen with a link the other day and had to add "[url]link[/url]" to solve it.

This could be close to the view
I have reset the link and it appears to be working now. Also this link takes you to the sketch book
http://acms.sl.nsw.gov.au/album/albumVi ... mID=932046

and this link gives you a list of what is in the album
http://acms.sl.nsw.gov.au/item/itemdeta ... mid=825496

Yep, must have been right next to the present dinner plain.


In fact, probably from Dead Timber Hill:

Sauce: http://www.panoramio.com/photo_explorer ... er=1544954

Good stuff Icefest.

I was looking through my photos and realised I almost nailed this one by accident...

so much artistic licence.

At least he gets the nearer details right.

I was looking through a thick catalogue book from a John Glover exhibition recently, and the difference between the pencil/ink studies and the finished paintings is quite stark. The sketches are incredibly accurate but so much in the paintings is exaggerated, particularly the peaks.

The peaks do look really good though!

Not in the one where he removes the Organ Pipes from kunanyi/Wellington.

north-north-west wrote:At least he gets the nearer details right.

I was looking through a thick catalogue book from a John Glover exhibition recently, and the difference between the pencil/ink studies and the finished paintings is quite stark. The sketches are incredibly accurate but so much in the paintings is exaggerated, particularly the peaks.

i have a copy of Glover's sketch book and his sketches of the ben lomond plateau are very accurate: very easy to identify landforms. i agree that his paintings tend, like most painters of the period, to compress or exaggerate.