TL;DR
Get art and craft supplies delivered free — and shop member deals
- Fast, free delivery on millions of items
- Access to Prime Big Deal Days deals on October 6–7
- Prime Video, Amazon Music and more included
A Hyperallergic review of Sam Smiles’s 2026 book Turner and the Slave Trade describes a reassessment of J. M. W. Turner’s relationship to slavery and British Romanticism. Smiles argues that The Slave Ship almost certainly does not depict the Zong massacre, while examining Turner’s documented 1805 investment in a Jamaican cattle farm worked by enslaved people.
A new book by art historian Sam Smiles reexamines J. M. W. Turner’s connection to slavery, arguing that the painter’s 1840 work The Slave Ship almost certainly does not refer to the Zong massacre. As described in a Hyperallergic review, Turner and the Slave Trade also scrutinizes Turner’s 1805 investment in a Jamaican cattle farm worked by enslaved Africans, complicating his place in British art history.
In the book, Smiles challenges the now-common association between The Slave Ship and the 1781 Zong massacre, in which 133 enslaved Africans were thrown overboard and killed. The review says Smiles considers the painting’s tableau unlikely to be a direct reference to that event. The work was first exhibited at the Royal Academy in 1840 under the title Slavers Throwing overboard the Dead and the Dying–Typhoon Coming On.
That distinction does not remove the painting from debates about slavery. The reviewer describes how the image has come to be treated as a condemnation of chattel slavery and as synonymous with the Zong, while Smiles instead reads it in relation to Turner’s changing ethical outlook. The painting’s representation of Black people, including a shackled leg in its lower-right area, remains part of how audiences and scholars interpret it.
Smiles also revisits evidence that Turner put £100 into a consortium in 1805 to fund a Jamaican cattle farm operated by enslaved people. The review notes that Smiles first made this discovery in 2007. His book, according to the reviewer, argues that Turner’s investment was not an isolated inconsistency but reflected the way slavery and colonial wealth were embedded in Britain’s economy.
Turner’s Art and Colonial Wealth
The reassessment matters because Turner remains a central figure in British art, while his work is often discussed as a landmark of Romantic landscape painting. Smiles’s account connects that artistic reputation to the financial and imperial systems of Turner’s time, including his own documented investment. It asks readers to examine not only what a painting depicts, but also the economic structures that helped shape the artist’s world.
The book also bears on how museums and scholars present works associated with racial violence. The review situates Smiles’s study alongside continuing debate about colonial history, museum interpretation and reparations. It notes that Jamaicans petitioned King Charles for reparations in London on September 7, although the supplied review does not specify the year. That contemporary reference underscores why arguments about Turner’s legacy reach beyond art attribution or the identity of a painting’s subject.
art history books on J.M.W. Turner
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
From Zong to Turner’s Investment
The Zong massacre took place in 1781, when the British slave ship Zong arrived at Black River in Jamaica after 133 enslaved Africans had been killed by being thrown overboard. Turner’s painting appeared nearly six decades later, in 1840. Its original title described enslavers throwing people overboard as a typhoon approached, but the review says Smiles disputes the assumption that the scene specifically represents the Zong.
Turner’s connection to Jamaican slavery is also financial. The review identifies his £100 investment in a cattle-farming venture in 1805, a sum the source equates to about £11,200 or $14,800 today. Smiles, an emeritus art historian at the University of Plymouth, previously co-curated the Tate’s 2014 traveling exhibition Late Turner: Painting Set Free, according to the review.
The review further says Smiles discusses the global Black Lives Matter movement and the risks of reproducing racist violence in scholarship. He states in the book’s preface that he chose to omit offensive terminology and gratuitous images except where they were necessary to the analysis. The reviewer presents that editorial approach as part of the book’s method, rather than as a substitute for examining the historical record.
“He intentionally omitted offensive terms or gratuitous images that reproduce the violent grammar of racism, except where absolutely necessary for the analysis.”
— Sam Smiles, as quoted in the book’s preface and described by Hyperallergic
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
The Painting’s Exact Subject
The book’s position, as summarized in the review, is that The Slave Ship almost certainly is not a depiction of the Zong massacre; it does not establish what specific event, if any, Turner intended to portray. The supplied material also does not include the full evidence or argument behind Smiles’s conclusion, so readers cannot assess that case from the review excerpt alone.
The review describes Turner’s investment and Smiles’s interpretation of its broader meaning, but it does not provide further financial records or explain the investment’s outcomes. Nor does the source report how museums, other scholars or the Turner estate have responded to the book. Those responses, and the extent to which the study changes established interpretations, remain unclear.
museum-quality art reproduction of The Slave Ship
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Further Debate Over Turner’s Record
The immediate development is the publication of Turner and the Slave Trade in 2026 and the discussion prompted by the Hyperallergic review. The source provides no announced exhibition, institutional review or formal response tied to the book. Readers seeking the full argument will need to consult Smiles’s study, which the review presents as an examination of both Turner’s art and his material ties to slavery.
Further discussion is likely to turn on the evidence for the painting’s intended subject, how Turner’s investment should inform interpretation of his work, and how museums communicate that history. The supplied material does not identify a next publication, event or decision date, so no specific follow-up milestone has been confirmed.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Key Questions
What does Sam Smiles argue about The Slave Ship?
According to the Hyperallergic review, Smiles argues that the 1840 painting almost certainly does not refer to the Zong massacre. The review does not identify a different specific event as its subject.
What was Turner’s connection to Jamaican slavery?
The review says Turner invested £100 in a consortium in 1805 to fund a Jamaican cattle farm operated by enslaved Africans. It says Smiles discovered this investment in 2007.
Why is the painting commonly linked to the Zong?
The painting shows enslaved people being thrown overboard, and its original 1840 title explicitly described that scene. The review says it has since become synonymous with the 1781 massacre, while noting that Smiles questions whether it depicts that event.
What remains unresolved about the book’s claims?
The supplied review does not lay out the full evidence for Smiles’s conclusion about the painting’s subject or report responses from museums and other scholars. Turner’s precise intended reference remains unclear in the material provided.
Source: rss
Halloween Picks
halloween
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
