The object is linked, not copied. The Ashmolean’s published terms did not clearly authorize reuse on this public record.
John Constable · 1776–1837
Object secure · exact day unresolved
“31 Sep.r 10-11 o'clock morning looking Eastward a gentle wind to East”
Ashmolean catalogue transcription. The written date cannot exist in the calendar; the museum proposes 1 October 1822. A1
The museum’s correction is plausible. The period records located here do not make it certain.
The Ashmolean identifies the object as one of Constable’s 1822 cloud studies and says his impossible “31 September” can be corrected to 1 October. The catalogue supplies the proposal; Howard’s tables show how much outside support it has. A1
The museum’s correction is reported as catalogue judgment, not presented as a date proved by Nephos.Howard’s September table records a northeast wind and “Fine” on 30 September. His October table records an east wind and “Fine” on 1 October. The second entry is closer to Constable’s “wind to East,” but the two fine days mean this register does not uniquely establish the date. A2 A3
Howard’s observations offer London-area context, not a reading at Constable’s easel. Station attribution is not labelled on the table pages.If the museum’s 1 October correction and Hampstead as the working location are both assumed, the sun rose from 30.6° to 34.4° altitude and moved from azimuth 148° to 165° between 10 and 11 a.m. local mean time. A4
This is a conditional calculation, not evidence for the missing date or location. The online object record does not establish a precise painting site. A1No observation located for this record uniquely distinguishes 30 September from 1 October, measures whether the wind was gentle at Constable’s position, or fixes the easel’s location. Without those facts, the inscription’s direction and time cannot be tested against the painted light with confidence.
No museum capture is reproduced or measured here because reuse on this site was not clearly authorized. A5September has only 30 days, so the inscribed date cannot be literal. A1
Howard recorded an east wind and fine weather that day, but 30 September was also fine with a northeast wind. Weather context supports the correction without proving it. A2 A3
The conditional solar path is calculable, but another source does not establish the exact date or painting location. A4
The object record preserves the words, but the located sources do not establish or test the depicted view direction. A1
Howard’s 1 October register gives east as the wind direction in the London area. It does not report conditions at the easel or establish the word “gentle.” A3
What we know / what we cannot know: the museum, accession, inscription and catalogue correction are identified. Another source does not secure the exact day or location, so the directional and solar tests remain incomplete.
The museum identifies this as the study inscribed with an impossible date: 31 September. It proposes 1 October 1822 instead. Howard’s London-area register records an east wind and fine weather on 1 October, but 30 September was also fine with a northeast wind. The object is secure; the exact day remains unresolved.
