A clear reproduction licence for this painting has not been established. The scholarly catalogue identifies and discusses it.
A study against the weather record
Joseph Henry Sharp
Glacier Park
Can the flowers and a related landscape tell when Sharp painted this view?
Approximate datePainted weather unknown
The Nephos method
How this study was read
The method in fullWhat is written
The scholarly Sharp catalogue dates Yellowstone’s canvas to about 1907 and proposes a relationship to a larger Blackfeet-region landscape. Its description of flowers prompts a broad seasonal comparison, not a painting date.
ca. 1907
Buffalo Bill Center of the West, Sharp catalogue, record 725Picture painted before hotel was built.
Sharp’s retrospective inscription on the separate Eiteljorg canvas, transcribed in catalogue record 560; August 1950
Records of those days
- Columbia Falls 5 SW, USC00241919Western regional context. Three complete May–September precipitation seasons; 40 complete same-station seasons retained for comparison. The scene is not located at this station.
- Browning and Babb 6 NEEastern candidates were checked. Gaps prevent a complete three-year seasonal comparison; their exclusions remain in the linked data.
Not found or not yet searched
- No exact viewpoint, painting day, dated sketch or independent explanation of the circa date has been established.
- The larger canvas’s inscription is retrospective and belongs to another object; the hotel is not identified here.
- No local sky, snow-cover or flower phenology observation is inferred from the western station. Historical instrument exposures are unverified.
Each claim tested
- Does the park’s establishment in 1910 disprove the circa-1907 date? No. The title alone does not date execution. The related canvas carries a later inscription; neither it nor park history proves when the Yellowstone canvas was painted.
- What moisture context survives around the approximate date? 1906: 281.8 mm; 1907: 326.3 mm; 1908: 542.9 mm. These are recorded measurable precipitation sums at Columbia Falls for May–September, with trace amounts unquantified. The three years are examples around the catalogue date.
- Do the flowers identify a wet year or a painted day? No. Seasonal precipitation at a western station cannot establish conditions at an unlocated mountain scene or date the flowers.
Verdict
A possible relationship between two paintings helps frame the place question. Regional records supply context; the painted weather and exact date remain unknown.
- UnknownWeather depicted in the Yellowstone canvas A circa date, broad region and flowers do not connect the picture to a particular observation.
- UnknownWhat Sharp changed between the two views The catalogue proposes a relationship, but no dated sequence or field-to-studio account has been established.
What this cannot tell you. May–September 1906–1908 is an illustrative comparison, not a documented execution interval or the full uncertainty range of ca. 1907. Station distances are to a named modern East Glacier inventory point, not to an identified viewpoint. Across-divide weather can differ substantially. Ranks describe complete archived seasons, not a homogeneous climate normal. Traces are counted but not assigned a measurable amount; missing data stay missing. No image is reproduced because an open licence or written reproduction permission has not been established.
Step 1 · The picture and its date
A small canvas linked to another view
The Buffalo Bill Center of the West’s scholarly Sharp catalogue identifies Yellowstone Art Museum’s Glacier Park, VS1993.124, as an oil on canvas, 12¼ × 18 inches, dated about 1907. It records a signature at lower right, but no dated inscription for this object. The public record does not explain the basis of the approximate date or when the title was assigned. The catalogue describes a road and a field of flowers and proposes that the canvas is a study related to a larger finished landscape. That relationship is a scholarly interpretation, not a dated account of the painting sessions.
The larger work is Glacier Park, Blackfeet Reservation, Montana, Eiteljorg Museum, 1989.3.86. The catalogue transcribes Sharp’s retrospective inscription, dated August 1950, saying that the picture preceded a nearby hotel. That inscription belongs to the Eiteljorg canvas, not the Yellowstone canvas. The hotel and the precise viewpoints have not been established here.
Glacier National Park was established on 11 May 1910, after the approximate catalogue date. The title alone does not settle when the Yellowstone painting was made; the later inscription on the related work does not establish the Yellowstone canvas’s date.
Sharp’s Montana activity also extended beyond Crow Agency. The Couse-Sharp Historic Site places his winters there from 1899; the Sharp catalogue’s signed and dated Powder Bull – Blackfoot documents Blackfeet-region work in 1902. Neither source supplies a 1907 visit for this landscape. Crow Agency weather would not resolve a scene associated with the Glacier region.
The comparison window is Nephos’s choice: May–September in 1906, 1907 and 1908, prompted by the catalogue’s description of flowers. These are illustrative neighbouring years around an approximate date, not the earliest and latest possible years or a documented flowering season. No plant identification, snow condition or cloud type is inferred.
Step 2 · A regional record
The neighbouring years are not interchangeable
At Columbia Falls 5 SW, recorded measurable precipitation for May–September is 1906: 281.8 mm; 1907: 326.3 mm; 1908: 542.9 mm. The last of these is the wettest of the 40 complete seasons retained from this file, which run from 1896 to 1948, with gaps. Choosing a different year around the catalogue date changes the regional comparison substantially. The flowers do not select one of those years.
Each total requires all 153 days to be usable. Trace precipitation is counted separately: the archive records no measurable amount for it, so the sums are not exact totals including traces. A missing value, a quality flag or a presumed-zero flag prevents a complete total. Historical gauge exposures have not been verified; the ranks describe the archived series, not a homogeneous climate normal.
| Year | Recorded measurable precipitation | Wettest rank | Trace days |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1906 | 281.8 mm / 11.09 in. | 11 of 40 | 8 |
| 1907 | 326.3 mm / 12.85 in. | 8 of 40 | 14 |
| 1908 | 542.9 mm / 21.37 in. | 1 of 40 | 5 |
Step 3 · Check the distance and gaps
The usable record is on the western side
Browning and Babb 6 NE are eastern candidates, but their gaps prevent a complete comparison for these three seasons. Columbia Falls is the nearer of the screened western records with complete precipitation coverage in all three years; Kalispell provides another complete western record. A record across the Continental Divide cannot stand in for the unlocated Blackfeet-region scene.
The distances below are straight-line distances from the archive’s station coordinates to its East Glacier station inventory point. This is a geographic reference, not Sharp’s identified viewpoint. Actual station-to-picture distances and historical instrument locations remain unknown. Other screened Glacier-area files start too late; the linked data retain their coverage and rejection reasons.
| Station | To East Glacier reference | 1906 | 1907 | 1908 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Browning | 20.0 km | 0/153 | 1/153 | 121/153 |
| Babb 6 Ne | 55.7 km | 48/153 | 63/153 | 16/153 |
| Columbia Falls 5 Sw | 73.6 km | 153/153 | 153/153 | 153/153 |
| Kalispell Glacier Ap | 78.5 km | 153/153 | 153/153 | 153/153 |
Columbia Falls has a complete May–September temperature mean only for 1907 among the three selected years: 55.7 °F (13.1 °C), averaging each day’s high–low midpoint. Incomplete years receive no seasonal mean. This thermometer context cannot test mountain snow or the painted sky.
Every selected month: precipitation, traces and temperature gaps
| Month | Precipitation, mm | Trace days | Mean temperature |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 1906 | 93.8 | 0 | 49.9 °F / 9.9 °C |
| June 1906 | 79.5 | 5 | Incomplete: 28/30 paired days |
| July 1906 | 29.5 | 2 | 68.5 °F / 20.3 °C |
| August 1906 | 63.8 | 0 | Incomplete: 30/31 paired days |
| September 1906 | 15.2 | 1 | 55.2 °F / 12.9 °C |
| May 1907 | 22.1 | 4 | 50.5 °F / 10.3 °C |
| June 1907 | 83.2 | 4 | 55.1 °F / 12.8 °C |
| July 1907 | 50.3 | 4 | 61.8 °F / 16.6 °C |
| August 1907 | 114.1 | 2 | 57.8 °F / 14.3 °C |
| September 1907 | 56.6 | 0 | 53.0 °F / 11.7 °C |
| May 1908 | 194.4 | 2 | Incomplete: 29/31 paired days |
| June 1908 | 194.9 | 0 | 55.9 °F / 13.3 °C |
| July 1908 | 83.4 | 2 | 64.7 °F / 18.2 °C |
| August 1908 | 20.1 | 1 | 65.1 °F / 18.4 °C |
| September 1908 | 50.1 | 0 | 56.2 °F / 13.5 °C |
Every complete precipitation season used for the ranks
| Year | May–September, mm | Trace days |
|---|---|---|
| 1896 | 231.9 | 8 |
| 1900 | 378.6 | 10 |
| 1902 | 409.5 | 14 |
| 1903 | 285.1 | 13 |
| 1904 | 179.1 | 10 |
| 1905 | 200.7 | 10 |
| 1906 | 281.8 | 8 |
| 1907 | 326.3 | 14 |
| 1908 | 542.9 | 5 |
| 1909 | 295.8 | 7 |
| 1910 | 235.6 | 4 |
| 1911 | 261.1 | 4 |
| 1915 | 349.8 | 5 |
| 1916 | 427.1 | 0 |
| 1918 | 198.3 | 3 |
| 1919 | 173.2 | 1 |
| 1920 | 196.5 | 0 |
| 1923 | 197.2 | 1 |
| 1924 | 229.7 | 0 |
| 1926 | 240.8 | 7 |
| 1927 | 264.8 | 2 |
| 1928 | 220.0 | 2 |
| 1929 | 145.9 | 2 |
| 1930 | 247.7 | 2 |
| 1931 | 206.9 | 3 |
| 1932 | 180.7 | 1 |
| 1933 | 230.7 | 7 |
| 1934 | 137.6 | 5 |
| 1935 | 139.0 | 4 |
| 1936 | 131.1 | 13 |
| 1939 | 175.1 | 17 |
| 1940 | 184.6 | 2 |
| 1941 | 252.9 | 4 |
| 1942 | 366.1 | 2 |
| 1943 | 154.4 | 2 |
| 1944 | 149.3 | 0 |
| 1945 | 164.2 | 14 |
| 1946 | 224.1 | 7 |
| 1947 | 360.8 | 5 |
| 1948 | 273.7 | 7 |
Step 4 · What remains a question
Flowers do not date the weather
The catalogue’s proposed connection between two pictures helps frame the place and making questions. It does not establish an outdoor session, a sequence of revisions or a painted day. The surviving western record shows how much the seasonal context varies between nearby years; it cannot establish moisture at the scene, explain the flowers or prove what Sharp changed.
For a docent conversation, keep three kinds of evidence separate: the catalogue’s approximate date, the artist’s later words on another painting, and the weather station’s measurements. The most useful next evidence would be an object-file inscription, label or dated sketch tying VS1993.124 to a specific place and visit.
Sources
Every source on this page
Weather values and completeness audits use NOAA files checked against sha256 fingerprints. Documentary receipts identify normalized HTML text extractions; their original HTML files are also hash-checked. Short quotations are checked against those texts. These checks preserve the evidence used, not its historical interpretation.
- Buffalo Bill Center of the West, Sharp catalogue, record 725
sha256 751abc8f2424f59b9c98b074fdc08f6a59b3009dce8a66cb5be22d37bd03a0e3 - Buffalo Bill Center of the West, Powder Bull – Blackfoot, record 263
sha256 ce2206a22917ebd99442ce96a88eb43435cd1dce01eeb3019c4c82be0d5c47f3 - Couse-Sharp Historic Site, Joseph Henry Sharp biography
sha256 ae33eec02987bd29af8febc0e0e2114921f26d89105ceda5cc512a15255d5254 - National Park Service, The Rededication of Glacier National Park, 20 April 2010
sha256 421b7509c04eb0b111183d38fb69de969068cdcb3b7efc5f8197e826a74639e3 - Yellowstone Art Museum, Collections
sha256 de089cf76704f3925862126573223ec9e19eddbeca3a33ed25ca4f49cdfa07f6 - Yellowstone Art Museum, Permanent Collections
sha256 af27215a6ace8213a36741988811ed87a1ea873f69ecbd0c0023c024e356faaa - Yellowstone Art Museum, Montana Collection
sha256 4c4df7df9e37f154922620b5067d5410d333239035b9f807376981b75bb8d6eb - Yellowstone Art Museum, Virginia Snook Collection
sha256 39e98c836c29dd33a5d53175f05b17b67c988a7ac36c598aaa6e67161df2d60c - NOAA/NCEI GHCN-Daily station inventory
sha256 428eabc955883187935bce283766d5646e3ed7484b92eb0803874c0e8dd9b342 - NOAA/NCEI GHCN-Daily format and flag documentation
sha256 0e4e6f0e6947cf1add884c328a01760f31c56ef5fb86b85ed57dd5dc4c4aeaa6 - NOAA/NCEI GHCN-Daily, USC00240389
sha256 eadea2a80d3356e60da41f57c74a2d60b8806d9599db1cf7f94b36813f862ae1 - NOAA/NCEI GHCN-Daily, USC00240392
sha256 5af1bb93673833ed07bff1d84738fffa7238c1744c79115a336a9ae32c4eca9d - NOAA/NCEI GHCN-Daily, USC00240662
sha256 6e88e138cd106f010c6168d8f3b60e243e6d524586a06eafff22d722d34812a5 - NOAA/NCEI GHCN-Daily, USC00241202
sha256 18dedbac6e0c45b697fbee56ae6ee20d63030a237a9ef515537548850edcb843 - NOAA/NCEI GHCN-Daily, USC00241217
sha256 105b2708298ef64875a3a7f8eff1e8b8b3996a291277c7e8bb405b459161c55f - NOAA/NCEI GHCN-Daily, USC00241919
sha256 aefb9e9dae32691253ce70f22ec2d8912897c5f89b946c5f06613babef5333ba - NOAA/NCEI GHCN-Daily, USC00242629
sha256 289ad09c83966f1f62e3f323b760460d0845ba96f6081ba28e5b33235fe5bfa6 - NOAA/NCEI GHCN-Daily, USC00243551
sha256 73860fd65e23a696bbbd34e8bc17d2d7b898a6790fc3e4e9d5369495227a7f1b - NOAA/NCEI GHCN-Daily, USC00244558
sha256 ffb4a0112d787efe3d3f38367b5154b2986c15ca1f94dd6d2ecb24880308d69d - NOAA/NCEI GHCN-Daily, USC00244563
sha256 408270dfb47bbce67f99736f365271488ce65e52ece53e5cbce8b449ab95203a - NOAA/NCEI GHCN-Daily, USC00247292
sha256 b2d878edb17327c9cd2e2bb024e0a58663c926db41d22db376094fefd5067cfe