The Collection has commented: ‘We have checked the sculpture and can see no evidence of signatures on the accessible areas. We are unable to check the base of the work as it is secured to a plinth ... We’d be happy for you to run a public discussion to try and identify the sculptor.'

Dimensions are 70 x 30 x 47 cm.

One possible line of investigation is to check relevant newspapers for mention of this 1841 statuette.

It is known that John Steell made a marble bust of this sitter in 1839.

It's possible it was done at much the same time, and by the same artist as a bust commissioned by Dundee subscribers in or a little before 1840 from 'Steell of Edinburgh' - presumably [Sir] John Steell Junr, though his father was also a scuptor - see attached. That bust could be this one, now in The Highlanders' Museum: https://bit.ly/3KPDPYV

The bust in question is listed in Gunnis, the standard reference for British sculpture of the period:

https://bit.ly/34ikTRH

It is not, however, at the National Library of Scotland (which was confirmed to me by NLS staff). It may indeed be the one Osmund linked at Montrose Museum, which is unfortunately not signed (I have also been in contact with staff there, which is in progress). The sculptor of the 1839 bust was Sir John Steell (1804-1891)

Steell made some seated portrait statues, notably the public monuments to Robert Burns and Sir Walter Scott:

https://victorianweb.org/sculpture/steell/4.html

https://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/2248180

https://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/2248168

According to an 1881 book by John Carrie (‘Ancient Things in Angus: A Series of Articles on Ancient Things, Manners and Customs in Forfarshire’), a bust of Panmure by Steell was in the ‘Live and Let Live Testimonial’. https://tinyurl.com/bdj3krcj

According to the ‘Dundee Courier’ of May 29, 1890, it was indeed in the basement.

An article in the ‘Montrose, Arbroath and Brechin review; and Forfar and Kincardineshire advertiser’ of July 29, 1904, stated that there was no bust at the monument and “that part of the plan does not appear to have been carried out”.

Sorry, a careless error in my post of yesterday (28/01/2022 16:51): the bust of Panmure is of course at Montrose Museum, not the Highlanders'.

Interesting, Marcie. That implies the Steell bust was there in 1890 but had been removed by 1904. The Montrose Museum, like the monument to Panmure, is in Angus, and its staff is currently trying to find out when and how their bust came to that collection. It is obviously quite possible that it is the same bust.

Here is a photo of the Panmure Testimonial monument:

https://bit.ly/3L57AoW

Given the notice in the Fife Herald of 5 March 1840 linked by Osmund above, as well as the mention in Gunnis of the Steell bust being initially at Dundee Town Hall, I suspect Steell may have made two versions of the same bust, one for Dundee and one for the Panmure monument (which was erected in 1839), unless the bust was transferred from Dundee to the monument.

Is there, perhaps, some expert on Steell's work one could consult?

I agree with you, Jacinto. It was most likely at the Panmure Testimonial.

While it doesn’t look like something that would have been in a house, there is always the possibility that the statue was at Panmure House, which was demolished in 1955. I have attached an article from the ‘Dundee Courier’ of March 14, 1955.

This seated statuette could have been in a house, Marcie (see dimensions above).

Can the collection say when it acquired this work and from whom?

If this statuette was made for a private residence like Panmure House, it would not have been noted in the press at the time, unless it was first exhibited publicly at a venue like the Royal Scottish Academy. Thus, provenance information is definitely of interest.

Here is an extract from an article (1942) about a bust of Lord Panmure at the Brechin Mechanics’ Institute. Unfortunately, there is no image of the bust on Art UK and it is by an unknown sculptor. Is it possible to obtain an image of that bust? https://tinyurl.com/3jr95a88

An article from 1842 noted that Panmure supported Patrick MacDowell with orders. Here are two links to his work: https://tinyurl.com/4ecf9jv3 and https://tinyurl.com/ycxfumwp.

I was aware of the bust at Brechin Mechanics' Institute (which was founded by Panmure), but have been unable to get an image of it. However, I found what I believe is a sideways image of it online (first photo; the bust is in a niche at left):

https://bit.ly/34nFIeQ

It is hard to say for certain, but it could be another version of the Montrose bust, meaning by the same sculptor.

Brechin, like Montrose, Dundee and the Panmure Testimonial monument, is also in Angus.

Thanks for the image and info, Jacinto.

The sitter (whose full name was Wlliam Ramsay Maule) has an entry in the ODNB. Someone with access to that should check to see if any sculpted likenesses are mentioned therein.

Note this reference to a statue of Lord Panmure in the memoir 'Circuit Journeys' by Henry Thomas Cockburn of Bonaly, Lord Cockburn (1779-1854). In the section for April 22, 1852, the author discusses a statue by Steell in the Town Hall (because of the death of Lord Panmure) that is more likely to be the work we are discussing than a simple bust.

https://tinyurl.com/35vnta64

A check of the RSA Exhibitor Listings 1826-1990 throws up nothing of assistance checking under Maule, Panmure, or Dalhousie.

The closest was a marble bust by Sir John Steell exhibited at the RSA Annual Exhibition in 1855 (779) The Marquis of Dalhousie.

The pose of the sculpture in question is very similar to Colvin Smith's full length portrait of the same sitter
https://artuk.org/discover/artworks/the-honourable-william-maule-of-panmure-mp-128293/search/actor:smith-colvin-17951875/page/1/view_as/grid


I believe there is a copy of a Phd from Edinburgh University on Steell, a copy of which is held in the RSA Library. I will endeavour to investigate this further when on site next week.

The short ODNB entry on Panmure expands on his character, as damned by Lord Cockburn, and only identifies one likeness (an oil portrait by I.C. Smith in the Scottish NPG) so that also needs updating.

Here's the (slightly cut) ODNB text:

'Maule, William Ramsay, first Baron Panmure (1771–1852), aristocrat, second son of George Ramsay, eighth earl of Dalhousie (d. 1787), and his wife, Elizabeth, daughter of Andrew Glen, and niece and heir of James Glen of Longcroft, Stirlingshire, was born on 27 October 1771. His father's maternal uncle, William Maule, earl of Panmure of Forth, died unmarried in 1782, and left his property to the eighth earl of Dalhousie, with remainder to Dalhousie's second son, William. Dalhousie died in 1787, when William succeeded to the valuable Panmure estates and adopted the name of Maule. He was twice married: first, on 1 December 1794, to Patricia Heron (d. 1821), daughter of Gilbert Gordon of Halleaths; they had three sons and seven daughters. On learning of his dissolute activities in London, his wife left him and returned to her family in Ireland. When his eldest son, Fox Maule (later eleventh earl of Dalhousie), took his mother's part, Maule cut him off with only £100 a year and never saw him again. Maule's second wife, whom he married on 4 June 1822, was Elizabeth Barton (d. 1867), daughter of John William Barton of Hospitalfield, Forfarshire; they had no children.

......He was MP for Forfar, in April–May 1796, and in 1803–31. He joined the Whig Club in 1798 and was a steady adherent of Fox, after whom his eldest son was named. He virtually never spoke in the Commons, but supported the whigs on most major divisions until 1813......

On 9 September 1831 Maule was raised to the peerage as Baron Panmure. As a young man he was one of the most dissipated and extravagant, even of the Scottish gentry of his younger days, and survived them, thanks to a constitution of extraordinary strength and a fortune of vast resources. He did not alter his manner or morals as he grew older, and scandalized Victorian observers. He was devoted to his friends so long as they remained complaisant, and violent and implacable to all who thwarted him. His uncontrollable temper eventually alienated him from nearly all his family in his latter years, yet he performed many unostentatious acts of charity. In politics he was a liberal, and his views were invariably humane; in private life he was an immovable despot. He died at Brechin Castle, Forfarshire, on 13 April 1852.'

Marcie, the extract you refer to clearly talks about a bust. The dimensions of the bust at Montrose are H 79 x W 55 x D 34 cm.

Yes, you’re correct, Jacinto. I should have caught that. I wonder if that bust was the one in Dundee Town Hall.

I did not see any references to sculptures but struggled greatly with the text. Reference: PROB 11/2156/72 (“Will of The Right Honorable William Baron Panmure”).

As far as I'm aware there was never a bust of Panmure in Dundee Town Hall. I think you must mean the one by Steell that a meeting of subscribers in Feb or Mar 1840 agreed should be placed in the city's 1828 Exchange Coffeeroom (alias 'Coffee House') - a quite separate building that stands to this day (see, for example, https://bit.ly/3ge0PTp & https://bit.ly/3ojPyWd).

The bust was evidently still there circa 1860 - https://bit.ly/3uofdAZ - but was presumably removed later in the century when the building found many other uses (e.g. Music Hall, Assembly Rooms, Masonic Temple), its prime original function having been superseded by the new Royal Exchange in the 1850s.

It is most unlikely you would find references to individual works of art in a mid-C19th aristocrat's Will. Barring a few great connoisseurs, it was considered poor taste even to know about, let alone to discuss publicly paintings, etc, that one owned, especially family portraits. An aristocrat was assumed to own such things, and they were assumed to be of good quality, but only a parvenu would care about the details; indeed a healthy philistinism was widely considered the mark of a real gentleman - and the richer you were (and the longer your family had been so), the more true that was.

I had assumed, Osmund, that the Exchange Coffee House was part of the Dundee Town Hall. If that was not the case, then Gunnis might be in error regarding a Steell bust of Panmure at the latter, unless it was initially meant to go there and wound up at the Coffee House.

The National Library of Scotland has 4 volumes of scrapbooks relating to Sir John Steell in the rare book collections (FB.m.55):

https://bit.ly/3glXSQA

The volume of interest would be Vol. 1 (which covers 1833-1850), which might have relevant press cuttings or some image of the Panmure work(s) by Steell. If someone in Edinburgh could look it over, it could prove to be useful.

Thanks for the information, Osmund. I had not thought of researching the Coffee House.

An article from 1872, attached, reports a speech that Steell made in which he discussed the bust of Lord Panmure that he had prepared for Dundee.

In fact, the second codicil to Lord Panmure’s will does mention a specific work of art. His wife’s “portrait by Joy” was to remain with her (see attachment). “Joy” might be the artist Thomas Musgrave Joy (1812–1866) who had painted a portrait of Lord Panmure https://tinyurl.com/rszpcxtb.

In a lengthy “sketch” about the recently deceased Fox Maule-Ramsay, 11th Earl of Dalhousie (1801-1874), the ‘Dundee Courier’ of July 7, 1874, reported that a bust of Lord Dalhousie had been placed beside a bust of his father. I need a chart to keep track of the sculptures, dates and locations!

The bust of the 11th Earl of Dalhousie was probably an 1873 work by John Hutchison (1832-1910). See first paragraph of the section "Increasing Reputation" below:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Hutchison_{LPARENTHESES} sculptor)

Thanks for the info, Jacinto.

Here is some additional information from 1846 about the location of the bust at the Coffee House.

I have attached an article from ‘The Scotsman’ of April 18, 1838, that states that a sculpture by Chantrey owned by Lord Panmure was to be included in the Panmure Testimonial.

Francis Leggatt Chantrey (1781–1841) https://tinyurl.com/t67fh8zy

I have also attached an article from the ‘Morning Advertiser’ of January 3, 1838, that reports the genesis of the Panmure Testimonial.

In a section about the ‘Live and Let Live Testimonial’, ‘The Topographical, Statistical, and Historical Gazetteer of Scotland’ of 1847 reported: “A marble bust of Lord Panmure by Chantrey, stands in a niche in the visiter’s [sic] room." https://tinyurl.com/ydy44hhc

In the book 'Forfarshire Illustrated: Being Views of Gentlemen's Seats, Antiquities, and Scenery in Forfarshire, with Descriptive and Historical Notes', by G. Cumming, 1843, the author states that the bust at the Panmure Testimonial is by "Mr. John Steele [sic] of Edinburgh". https://tinyurl.com/2p88epk7

I have included this comment because I wanted to show that the bust at the Panmure Testimonial was associated with two different sculptors from the earliest days of that monument.

Steell, being Scottish and Edinburgh-based, seems rather more likely than Chantrey as the sculptor of a bust of Panmure, but it is not out of the question that busts were made by both.

The ‘Dundee Courier’ of July 23, 1874, detailed the will and codicil of Fox Maule-Ramsay, 11th Earl of Dalhousie (1801-1874), but only a few artworks were mentioned. I’m attaching an extract in case it helps with the identification of other artworks.

Anything known by Chantrey should be in his ledger, for which see Walpole Society, vol. 56 (1994), ed. Malcolm Baker.

I could not find mention of a bust of Lord Panmure in Chantrey’s ledger. https://tinyurl.com/2p8wpjdn

The bust in Dundee was still there in 1856, according to a report (attached) in the ‘Dundee, Perth, and Cupar Advertiser’ of May 27, 1856. It might later have been moved to the Dundee Royal Infirmary. The article about the June 1856 meeting did not mention the bust. Are there records of Infirmary meetings from 1856?

David, can the collection be asked about the provenance of this statuette, and when it came to them?

The first attachment is an article in the ‘Dundee, Perth, and Cupar Advertiser’ of March 12, 1861, that mentions a “massive bust of the late Lord Panmure" in a recess of the hall at the Exchange Coffeeroom (alias ‘Coffee House’), on Castle Street.

The second attachment, an article in the ‘Dundee, Perth, and Cupar Advertiser’ of April 19, 1861, shows that there was a discussion about moving the Dundee bust of Lord Panmure from the Exchange Coffeeroom to the Royal Exchange Reading Room, Panmure Street, in 1860.

The third attachment, from the ‘Dundee Courier’ of April 26, 1861, reports that the bust was to be moved instead to the Dundee Town Hall.

The fourth attachment, from the 'Montrose Standard' of February 20, 1885, discusses a bust of Lord Panmure at the Mechanics' Institute – it had been placed there in the Institute’s early days.

To sum up: there were busts of Lord Panmure at three locations:
1. The Exchange Coffeeroom. It was discussed in a meeting of subscribers in 1840 but this could have still been unfinished. It was described as "massive" and in a recess in 1861. It was moved to the Dundee Town Hall in April 1861. I think this was the statuette and that it was the work of Steell (based on his speech in Dundee).;
2. The Mechanics’ Institute (since at least 1840, bust still there); and,
3. The Panmure Testimonial. It was seen there in 1843 and 1890 but no longer there in 1904).

That's all excellent stuff, Marcie, inasmuch as it helps inform Montrose Museum's (and our) conclusions about their bust, though not yet definitively. But I am baffled as to why you think the Exchange Coffeeroom "massive" bust (later moved to the Town Hall) is our statuette - surely its description throughout, even by the sculptor himself, as a bust rules it out completely?

I was wrong to be so adamant about aristocrats' Wills, sorry - I am suitably chastened. And though no mention of sculpture was forthcoming, thank you for persevering with the tricky handwriting.

Marcie, again, a bust, clearly described as such, is not a full-length statue or statuette, regardless of size. All references found in the press to a bust of Panmure, by any sculptor, are therefore not the statuette at the Highlanders' Museum.

I do realize that all these works are called busts but I have found very few references to statuettes by any sculptor, in any year, on the BNA. Possibly they are called statues. If someone can let me know of another term to search, I’ll do so.

Please take a look at the second extract from the ‘Montrose Standard’ of Friday, February 5, 1937. A statuette of Lord Panmure was donated!

Perhaps Mrs. Collier was related to the successful Dundee merchant William Collier, Esquire (circa 1812-1870). His father Thomas Collier had been Lord Panmure’s factor. https://tinyurl.com/yckw4ufh

That's great, Marcie: we have the provenance. It may be harder, though, to identify the right Mrs Collier - presumably she died c.1935/6.

As far as I can see (though I may have missed it), we have so far found reference to only one artwork that even *might* be our statuette - and that is the "statue of his lordship by Chantrey, in his lordship's possession" that the second plan for the Panmure Testimonial (as reported in the Scotsman in April 1838) intended to be placed in the apartment in its base - see Marcie's post of 02/02/2022 04:10. It seems quite likely to me that this was indeed our statuette - few people have full-sized statues of themselves in their houses - and that when plans changed again and a bust was decided upon instead, Steell was commissioned to carve it - probably because Chantrey couldn't do it. He was both declining in strength and heavily engaged on other major projects at the time - he was "daunted" by the commission of a marble bust of Queen Victoria from the Queen herself in 1838, and the following year (when he was still working on Victoria) accepted one for a massive equestrian statue in bronze of the Duke of Wellington, unfinished at the sculptor's death.

The description of the (Testimonial) bust as by Chantrey in the 1847 'Topographical, Statistical, and Historical Gazetteer of Scotland’ Vol. 2 (in fact a later edition - also thus in 1842 https://bit.ly/3sdJ10g) was, I suspect, an error based on confusion with the previous plan.

Very good work, Marcie, but our statuette is not in Montrose but in another museum near Inverness. No statuette of Panmure is listed on Art UK at the Montrose Museum, only a bust of him. It is not, of course, impossible that the statuette given to Montrose somehow wound up at the Highlanders' Museum, but we need provenance information and date of acquisition from the latter.

Osmund, our work is not a full-sized statue. It measures 70 x 30 x 47 cm. However, the inscription seems more appropriate for a work meant for public display than private use.

Let me know if you are researching Katharine Collier (née Anderson) of Orford Lodge, Montrose, who passed away on March 29, 1936, Osmund. I don’t want to waste your time by posting details.

The Montrose Natural History and Antiquarian Society which received the statuette in 1937, founded Montrose Museum which:

[...]was housed at first in a vacant room at the Old English School, but soon outgrew its space, and with some help from Lord Panmure, the present Museum was built on the same site. The impressive building, designed by John Henderson, Architect, of Edinburgh, was opened on 27th October 1843, Lord Panmure's birthday.

http://montrosehistory.com/origins.html

Could this relate to the 1841 date on the statuette, this being the year the "Society started a fund to expand its space" (Wiki). It's possible that this was a sort of maquette for a full-sized commemorative statue that never materialised. A more conventional, classically draped, bust might be though more suitable, as Montrose Museum now possesses.

Of course it doesn't explain how this most nonmilitary-looking object ended up where it is now.

Yes, Mark, it could well be a maquette for a larger work which never materialised. The current Highlanders' Museum opened in 1965 (I do not know if it existed in a different location before that). This piece is designated as a gift. We really need the collection to tell us more about the provenance and date of the gift.

The husband of Katharine Collier (née Anderson)(1860-1936) was Thomas Edward Collier (1854-1904). His grandfather, Thomas Collier (1777-1863), was the factor of Lord Panmure (as noted in the article linked above 03/02/2022 22:43). I have attached Katharine Collier’s probate entry, her husband's obituary and a screenshot from a tree on Ancestry (“S_B762”). Her estate was valued at £37,963 13s 10d according to a newspaper article, attached.

Not really, Marcie - do please go ahead. I'd only got as far as finding that eight women called Collier, and of reasonable maturity, died in Scotland in 1935-6. Only one of those deaths (Mary Collier, aged 83) was registered anywhere near Montrose (at Arbroath in 1935), and I didn't think she looked, prima facie, too likely...so I was bracing myself for some long and detailed research work! Your candidate sounds more promising - is she the Katherine [sic] Collier on my list who death was recorded at Aberdeen South in 1936?

Thanks, Jacinto - yes, I was also guilty of leaping to the wrong conclusion there. So much - in fact until three hours ago almost all - of the information found so far is mainly relevant to the bust at Montrose, not to the the Highlanders' statuette (at least directly), that not for the first time I got confused. A curious coincidence, though - or perhaps not - that a statuette of Panmure was presented to Montrose - what happened to it?

I think, though, you've misunderstood my point about the statue said to have been owned by Panmure himself in 1838, and to be by Chantrey. I am very aware that our statuette is only 70 cm high - I was suggesting that a larger, perhaps life-sized full-length statue (even a seated one) was most unlikely to be found in the home of the sitter, for reasons of both taste (too ostentatious and self-regarding) and practicality (it would have been immensely weighty and unwieldy, needing heavy equipment and many workmen to transport and manoeuvre). Not impossible, but unlikely. My conclusion was and is that the statue described is much more likely to have been a smaller one like this, which is actually pretty close to the normal height of a standard marble bust, and eminently suitable for placement in a great man's house.

I might add that the very first use of the word 'statuette' I can find in the British Newspaper Archive was not until 1837 (and then in a London paper, in italics, with an explanation that it meant 'small statue'); so it would be no surprise to me if a Scottish newspaper had used the word 'statue' to describe a work such as ours early in 1838.

I suggest the Montrose Museum be officially asked (meaning by Art UK/Art Detective) if it still has the statuette of Lord Panmure donated by Mrs. Collier and what relationship, if any, it bears to the one at the Highlanders' Museum (which they can obviously see on Art UK).

Sorry, Marcie, my first para was made irrelevant before I'd had a chance to post it. Thank you for thinking of me when asking your question at 11.46 p.m...even though you didn't feel able to wait for a reply. I must say I find the quantity and frequency of your posts quite daunting! By the time I've read, digested, researched and thought about one of your information-rich contributions, and carefully composed a response to it, like as not there'll be two or three more posts to tackle before I get my reply to the first in - and that's even when I'm not busy dealing with the rest of my life. I think I'm getting too old for this game - I find it quite exhausting!

I had nearly finished my research about Katharine Collier by the time I thought to check with you, Osmund. I somehow lucked into quickly finding the notice of her death in the BNA. I wasn’t sure what part of the mystery you were exploring and would have been fine with you posting results.

There are still so many unknowns.

A comparable 1839 statuette by William Scoular:

https://bit.ly/3LctW7N

Further to Jacinto's post of a William Scoular statuette, Scoular is now thought to have created this one of Walter Scott in the Lady Lever Art Gallery, even though it's inscribed 'F. CHANTREY. SC': https://artuk.org/discover/artworks/sir-walter-scott-17711832-291243

If you read the text underneath the image on Art UK, it explains that the Chantrey inscription is apparently spurious. Does that link in with other Chantrey evidence as stated above? Does it help with suggesting Scoular as the sculptor of this piece?

I think Scoular was Scottish, and the piece I linked above is in Glasgow. I tend to think our statuette is not fine enough to be by Chantrey, though it is not out of the question.

My 2000-word Scoular history is due to go live on the NPG website next month or soon thereafter. In the postmortem inventory of his stock (National Archives, PROB 26/586), I did not find mention of Panmure.

Jacob, was Scoular working under Chantrey c. 1838?

No

William Scoular (1796-1854) studied under John Graham at the Trustees’ School of Design in Edinburgh and from 1814 under Sir Richard Westmacott in London.

I can't recall a case with so many pieces and so much poor recording of various sorts in play but the attached list (I think) sorts out what we know of the three items (A, B and C) that are on Art UK and the four of which there are (so far) reports but are as yet unsure how they match up with any of them.

Only 'A' - that primarily under discussion here - could be considered a 'statue' that Panmure might have personally owned (though not by Chantrey, who did not sculpt him at all) and which might also initially have been considered in 1838 for placing in the Panmure Monument/Memorial of 1839. That, of course, could only have been with Panmure's agreement since it was well within his lifetime.

If it did go there until some point before 1904 (when there was fairly clearly nothing 'in situ' but the related inscribed tablet), then it is certainly very strange that all references after 1838 are to the monument holding a 'bust', with Steele more reliably identified as maker.

The fact that Panmure was a founding benefactor of the Montrose Museum around 1840 and that Katharine Collier's antecedents by marriage had connections with Panmure is at least an interesting coincidence. If it turns out that Montrose bust (B) has a connection with the Colliers (even though the piece reported as coming from her in 1937 was a 'statuette'), then it's at least possible that it was the one 'rescued' at some point from the Panmure Monument by their agency - entirely speculative as that currently is.

That still leaves quite a lot of things -notably the 1839/40Steele bust at Dundee and the post-Panmure provenance of the statue now with the Highlanders Museum - unaccountably missing.

The other minor clarification worth pointing out is that the 'Montrose Standard' report of 20 February 1885 (Marcie's 4th attachment on 03/02/2022 13:28) fairly clearly relates the Mechanics Institute at Brechin, rather than Montrose.

Scoular seems also to have studied in Rome from 1825, on a three-year Royal Academy scholarship (though their website does not mention this): https://bit.ly/3gtCoBm

Document attachment to my comment next but one above re-attached: the original seems to have disappeared

For what it's worth, the statuette of Scott linked by Andrew, which is signed as by Chantrey but now attributed to Scoular, may indeed be by Chantrey or his studio. Not only is it signed, but Chantrey greatly admired Scott and asked him to sit for a bust, which was made in 1820 and subsequently much reproduced:

https://www.npg.org.uk/collections/search/portrait/mw05669

The statuette at the Lever gallery is relatively similar to the statue by Steell https://bit.ly/3L7zgtc for the Scott monument in Edinburgh (1840-1844), so it is possible that Chantrey submitted a maquette for consideration for that monument c. 1838.

I tend to think that our statuette is not fine enough for Chantrey, but it could be by Scoular.

Pieter, the Panmure bust at Brechin is listed as being marble on Art UK and looks like marble in the photo I was able to find online.

The Hutchison bust of his son Fox is listed as 1872 rather than 1873 by the NPG list if all known portraits of him:

https://bit.ly/3slbtx9

I meant "...list *of* all known portraits..."

Thanks Jacinto: I've also clarified an overlooked confusion of sequence re: the Dundee one in the corrected draft below.

Jacob, I take it that the fact Panmure does not appear in the postmortem inventory of Scoular's stock does not exclude Scoular as the maker of our statuette in 1841, over a decade before he died.

Does not exclude but most unlikely. Here is an edited excerpt fom my biography.

Not much is known of Scoular’s work in the years following his return to London in 1835 or later. He went into partnership with James Loft, perhaps late in 1839, as sculptors, figure makers and moulders at 92 Dean St. Scoular was listed in the 1843 Post Office Directory separately from J. Loft & Co at 92 Dean St. Scoular’s partnership with Loft was dissolved in November 1844. Scoular tried unsuccesfully to sell his business in his last years. In court proceedings following his death a sign was produced (and still survives), ‘The BUSINESS of these PREMISES To be Disposed of’ (National Archives, PROB 37/1753). There had been two identical signs, one displayed in the window, the other tied round a figure of Venus.

Scoular continued in business at 92 Dean St until his death in July 1854 (Survey of London, vol.33, St Anne Soho, 1966, p.140). His activities as a sculptor had diminished to such an extent in his last eight or nine years that his friend, Edgar George Papworth, thought that he got his living by selling plaster casts (Proceedings at the Old Bailey. Papworth claimed that Scoular was never a man of business, while Scoular’s solicitor, Andrew van Sandau, described him as ‘a man of slow habits and mind’..

Only a few works in plaster from these years are known. A bust of James Hope, 1841, is signed on the reverse: WM SCOULAR FT 1841 (St George's, University of London, see Art UK). In 1843 he advertised from 92 Dean St that he was selling casts for one guinea of his medallion portrait of John Hampden on the monument at Chalgrove Field (Oxford Chronicle and Reading Gazette, 24 June 1843). In 1848 Scoular was paid for supplying new casts of hands and arms and a quiver for repairs to casts after the antique at the University Galleries, Oxford. He supplied four large casts, now lost, of ancient statues for the Entrance Hall at Buckingham Palace in 1852, representing Isis, Flora, Diana and Pomona (National Archives, LC 11/135, account dated 31 December 1852).

Thank you, Jacob. It would appear that his purported authorship of the Scott statuette at Lever is equally unlikely.

A further edited excerpt from my Scoular history, since you ask re Scott:

"We can gain a good idea of the sheer volume of casts and moulds in Scoular’s possession at the time of his death from his postmortem inventory (National Archives, PROB 26/586)......

There were a few works in marble, including a statue of John [James?] Watt, a small bust of the Duke of Wellington, a statuette of Sir Walter Scott seated with his dog, a bust of Queen Victoria and a group of Adam and Eve......

Elsewhere, Scoular had other works in plaster, valued at £75. At the Colosseum, figures of Sir Walter Scott seated with his dog and James Watt. At the Royal Polytechnic Institution in Regent Street, a model, ‘gilt and black lettered’, of the Egyptian obelisk of Heliopolis, another of the great obelisk at Karnak and an oval plaster medallion of John Hampden."

Interesting. That means it could be the Lever piece, albeit not necessarily. However, if that piece is by him, the Chantrey signature is a problem. I can't imagine he would have forged it, though a seller might have, such as to get a better price from Lever.

I just wanted to thank you for the very useful write-up, Pieter.

Sir John Steell was the main figure in Robin Lee Woodward Phd '19th century Scottish Sculpture', 1977 University of Edinburgh; Edinburgh College of Art thesis and dissertation collection, URI http://hdl.handle.net/1842/10608.

Rocco Llieuallan thesis 'A Sculptor for Scotland: the Life and Work of Sir John Robert Steell, RSA (1804-1892)', University of Edinburgh 2003 (2 vols); Edinburgh College of Art thesis and dissertation collection, URI http://hdl.handle.net/1842/4048

See also Fiona Pearson, 'Sir John Steell and the Idea of a Native School of Sculpture', in Pearson, Fiona (ed.), Virtue and Vision, Sculpture and Scotland 1540-1990, Edinburgh, National Galleries of Scotland 1991, pp.72-83.

Dr Helen Smailes is the curator at National Galleries of Scotland
responsible for 19th century sculpture in Scotland, among other things.

As promised, I had a quick look through the copy of Rocco Llieuallan's 2003 Phd thesis on Steell held in the RSA Library (Vol 2 only) but no mention of Panmue/Maule in the list of illustrations - a much later standing fig of a later Lord Dalhousie being the only apparent connection to the family featured. It is not indexed however so I may have overlooked a text reference but time was seriously against me - sorry.

The excerpt from Lord Cockburn's Circuit Journeys that Marcie supplied above:

https://d3d00swyhr67nd.cloudfront.net/_source/lord-panmure-2.jpg

mentions that Panmure "is understood to have left a considerable personal residue to a domestic captain". The later might well be Thomas Collier, the grandfather-in-law of the 1937 donor of a statuette.

Most of the family estates must have been entailed to his estranged elder son. The latter (Fox Maule) had till recently been in the Cabinet, but lost his position with the fall of the Russell administration two months before his father's death. He returning as Secretary of State for War in the last part of the Crimean War and the Panmure papers, which mainly cover that period say that in 1852 "the care of the vast and long-neglected estates which he had just inherited supplied him with ample occupation" (https://bit.ly/3Huba9R). But, though it would need to be checked with the Will, personal goods, including artworks acquired during Panmure's lifetime, could have gone to his factor.

You get the impression that Panmure may have spent his latter years trying to prevent as much money going to his son as he could and instead spending it on local benefactions and self-promotion. Whatever the official version, it may be that not all of the funding for the Panmure Testimonial came from grateful tenants. And bequeathing things such as statues outside the family might be seen as a way of protecting his legacy.

A possible link between this figure and the Highlanders' Museum where it now resides, is Panmure's second son, Lauderdale Maule (https://bit.ly/3rtyf72), who tried to remain on good terms with both father and brother. He was the Lieutenant-Colonel in charge of the 79th Regiment of Foot (Cameron Highlanders) from 1842 to 1852 and this is one of the regiments the Museum is dedicated to. Lauderdale retired from the post at the time of his father's death in 1852 and became MP for the family seat of Forfarshire. But he was recall to service the following year as Surveyor-General of the Ordnance and died from that most Crimean War of deaths - cholera at a hospital in Constantinople in August 1854.

The Highlanders' Museum doesn't seem to have any images of him and indeed I could only find a later copy of a 1854 photograph in the Royal Collection (https://bit.ly/3GvlblL) and a miniature painted when he was in Australia according to this essay (https://bit.ly/3J9xeXF), which also discusses his main claim to fame, as the man who proved that the duck-billed platypus was a mammal.

So I wonder if the Highlanders'(or an earlier collection that they were made up from) had contacted Montrose Museum looking to see if they had anything relating to Lauderdale. And either from misunderstanding or because it was the best they could do, were sent a spare statue of his father, if this is the Collier donation of 1937. It's a bit tenuous, but it's the only link I can think of.

With regard to the sculptor of the Panmure figure, I wonder if one possibility might be Patric Parc (Wiki: https://bit.ly/3uCwg2j, ArtUK: https://bit.ly/3ssPZyD). I was particularly struck by the similarity between this and Parc's Charles Tennant Memorial in Glasgow Necropolis (https://bit.ly/3Jc9QJ6). Like this figure it shows the subject in modern dress, seated in an informal, indeed casual, pose. This is highly unusual in contemporary sculpture, even Francis Chantrey's seated statue of James Watt (https://bit.ly/3B95P5q), on which the Parc is supposed to be based, shows the figure draped and engaged in appropriate activity.

Both date from 1841, though Tennant died in 1838 and presumably there were earlier models. There seems to be a related plaster (though unillustrated) in Glasgow Museums Resource Centre (https://bit.ly/3HD69M8) and it's possible that Panmure was inspired to ask Parc for something similar, perhaps for the recently built Testimonial. Panmure and the Tennants would have moved in similar politically progressive circles in Scotland, so it's possible Panmure had some knowledge of what was planned for Tennant's memorial "Erected by a few of his friends in a tribute of respect". The realism of the Tennant Memorial was controversial at the time but could have appealed to Panmure.

Jacinto, sorry for following up late on this. I will email the Collection now and ask about the provenance of this statuette, and when it came to them. Regards, David

Regarding item 1 on Pieter’s list (04/02/2022 18:59), the attached article notes that there was a “small gallery of marble sculpture” at the Royal Exchange in 1874.

An article from 1936 mentions the upcoming centenary of the Panmure Testimonial in 1939 and states that the bust "by John Steele" is at the site.

I downloaded the will and probate records for Lauderdale from Scotlandspeople and they do not mention any specific items.

Lord Panmure’s will specified that some items were to remain in the House of Panmure, either at Panmure House or Brechin Castle. Both estates were later rented out and I would assume that small valuable items would have been removed.

Marcie: Your 1874 'Dundee Courier' extract demonstrates that the Panmure bust originally in the old Exchange building there was moved to the new Exchange of 1859 in or after 1861, oined there by that of his son Dalhousie in that year. If they went to the town hall it must have been later, though still TBC.

The 'Nollekins' bust also then in the new Exchange there would certainly have been one of his workshop's many replication from his original of Charles James Fox, the 'Steelle' of Panmure and the Hutchison of Dalhousie. The busts of Peel and Prince Albert were presumably by either Steell or Hutchison.

The 'Broughty Ferry Guide...' text looks like a re-parroting of Cumming's text of 1843 as repeated by Carrie in 1881 about the Panmure Monument bust, not evidence that it was still there in 1936.

Pieter, perhaps there never was a bust at the Panmure Testimonial. A footnote in the book 'The History and Traditions of the Land of the Lindsays in Angus and Mearns, with Notices of Alyth and Meigle' by Andrew Jervise, 1853, states the following with respect to the Panmure Testimonial: "... but, contrary to most descriptions, contains neither a bust of Lord Panmure, nor any inscription setting forth the object of its erection”. https://tinyurl.com/bdhkm4ad. However, the article from 1904 that I posted on 29/01/2022 06:16 indicated that an “inscribed marble tablet” was at the Testimonial. I don’t know who to believe.

Thanks: the early date of that reference - only 14 years after the monument was built - certainly throws the matter of a bust (or inscription) ever being there into greater doubt. It seems astonishing no-one has more recently checked. The whole thing is a listed structure and rated 'at risk' (albeit low) by Historic Scotland, but their online information about it is superficial (literally outside appearances only), devoid of useful references and they don't even seem to know who owns it. There is no hint that anyone concerned with listed structures has ever looked inside, even through the ground-level windows.

I agree that it is very possible, perhaps even likely that a bust of Panmure was never installed in the Testimonial at all. But I feel we have allowed ourselves to be too distracted by the matter of busts, and focused insufficiently on the Highlanders’ statuette itself. I originally raised the bust at Montrose in the belief that it was of roughly the same date (and thus perhaps the same authorship) as our work; but the more I look at ours, the more convinced I am that it was made long before the 1841 date on its plinth (a term I prefer over the Collection’s “socle” in this context) – perhaps as much as 20 years earlier, and certainly no later than 1830. If correct, this would mean that we should be looking for a sculpture of (The Hon.) William Maule, not one of Lord Panmure.

The Royal Scottish Academy noted some time ago that our statuette’s pose is very similar to that seen in Colvin Smith’s 1822 or earlier portrait of Maule at the Brechin Mechanics’ Institute (https://bit.ly/3uAqC0x) – but the similarity extends much further than that. The clothing worn by him is virtually identical, down to the (by 1822) eccentric tight breeches and buttoned gaiters – in 1841 breeches would have been unthinkable for anything but the most formal court and evening wear, and gaiters positively archaic (except of course for clergymen). In the 1840s gentlemen did still wear breeches for riding, but with boots – gaiters were the mark of the rather lower orders, at least in England...a farm bailiff, for example. I suppose it’s possible things were very different in Scotland, or that the great bulk of Maule’s legs made boots an impossibility; but with trousers long accepted as the fashionable norm, I feel he’d have chosen them instead. And in fact in the two portraits we have of him in the late 1830s, that is exactly what he *is* wearing, certainly in one and probably the other: see https://bit.ly/3gBu8iV & https://bit.ly/3GFmqij. Note, too, that the coat has changed from single to slightly double-breasted, and the collar shape is very different. And does our sitter (despite having no hair colour to help) look like a man of 70...or more like one of 50, give or take?

The attached article in the ‘Dundee Courier’ of March 27, 1862, unfortunately adds to the mystery of the various sculptures of Lord Panmure. I have also attached an article from the ‘Dundee, Perth, and Cupar Advertiser’ of March 28, 1856, about the Peel bust.

So why the 1841 date? Well, looking at the statue and plinth together (https://bit.ly/3HFcTJj - image 3), the carving of the name and date seems coarse and somehow out of scale with the finely-carved detail of the artwork – to my eye they just don’t sit well together. And a close examination suggests, too, that the marble used for the plinth is slightly paler (or at least cleaner), and – most significantly – of a matt finish, while the statue is polished. These were not made at the same time.

I now think this was a work of, say, the early 1820s or a bit before, that was probably in the possession of Lord Panmure; and that when in 1841 one of the many organisations with which he was associated felt the need for a bit of toadying-by-art, Panmure was happy to oblige with a statue he no longer wanted, and they had a plinth made to mount it on. And of course The Scotsman had reported in April 1838 (https://bit.ly/3LrBUua) that the original plan for the Testimonial column involved exactly the same idea with a “statue of his lordship by Chantrey, in his lordship’s possession”.

Unfortunately, though, I can find absolutely no evidence for this hypothesis! But I do think we should be looking for it two decades earlier than we thought. Marcie, when you looked up the Chantrey ledger on JSTOR, did you search for ‘Maule’ as well as ‘Panmure’, and as early as 1822 (and perhaps even before)? I think Chantrey is unlikely for a number of reasons, but obviously we should check. Steell (if I’m right about the date) is not possible. As for Scoular, he was certainly capable of such finely-detailed work on a marble of this smaller scale in the early 1820s – see his c.1821 monument to Princess Elizabeth of Clarence in the Royal Collection, which measures 38 x 78 x 33 cm: https://bit.ly/3oF7MS5

Here is the website for the Chantrey ledger on JSTOR. https://tinyurl.com/5e7cs73v

After creating an account, it is possible to access the document at no charge. I reviewed the ledger again today and saw no mention of 'Maule', 'Ramsay' or 'Panmure'. There are some photos at the end of the ledger, including some seated figures.

Works dealing in depth with Steell's oeuvre, linked above, only mention a c. 1839 bust of our sitter, which Steell definitely made (perhaps in more than one copy) but which is officially untraced. Our statuette is very unlikely to be by either Steell or Chantrey.

Thanks, Marcie. I knew where it was on JSTOR, and have had an account there for many years. Unfortunately recent updates to their website mean my very out-of-date browsers no longer work there, and I cannot update them as the operating system on my geriatric laptop is no longer supported. Time to get a new computer, I think, though it annoys me that I'm forced to replace it while it still works fine for most purposes.

Can we get Lou Taylor to date this more precisely based on the sitter's dress?

A hypothesis combining Mark and Osmund's thoughts, together with the 1838 'Scotsman' report that Panmure already owned a 'statue' then being considered to go in the 'Testimonial', is that this might be it - albeit not by Chantrey and that neither it, nor any bust, may ever have in fact been placed there. (You certainly wouldn't get a standing life-size statue into the building to all exterior appearances, let alone into a 'niche' inside it.) We know there is (or at least was and probably still is, somewhere in Dundee) a Dundee-commissioned Steell bust but with no connection to the Testimonial or Panmure ownership: ditto (apparently) that at Brechin. If any bust went into the Testimonial, the only one we now know that could have done is the one at Montrose. If neither it nor the statue in fact did so, then barring something we have not found at all, both are most likely to have been 'ex-Panmure', whoever did them among the various names in play. 'Family or retainer's family gift by descent', or otherwise, is the matter to resolve for both this item and the Montrose bust.

I would welcome input from Lou Taylor, albeit with some apprehension that she may poke large holes in my dating theories. In partial support of them, though, here is an image of George Horsnail, the steward of a substantial estate in southern England (Essex) wearing similar gaiters in the late 1840s/early '50s. He was in his 80s at the time, and amazingly had held the same position since 1789. He died in post aged 89. He was of course almost by definition old-fashioned, as well as coming from pretty humble roots.

If anyone can find images of (non-clerical) gentry / nobility wearing gaiters at *any* period, but especially in the 1830s/40s, that would be most helpful.

Here is a comparison between an 1823 print of our man (NPG) and our statuette. Not easy to get the two matched up.

I'm surprised and sorry to see on checking that this platform does not accept docx, only doc. Odd?

The dress is very similar, Jacob, though our man looks older.

That NPG print (1823) suggests the undated oil in the Scottish NPG, which appears to be its source, or another version of its source, should be dated '1822 or before'. The print date must also be the reason the full-length version now in Brechin is already dated that way.(Note that it shows only one chair-back finial, not both as in SNPG version and print, but Maule's age and dress look the same.)

Maule was 50 in 1821 but it's the age of the painter, Colvin Smith, who was 26 that year, which suggests an earliest 'terminus post quem' for both oils, since he's at least unlikely to have painted them before he was about 20: i.e. in 1815 (when Maule was 44).

It is possible, of course, that the statuette was indeed made in 1841 based on some pre-existing image(s) of a younger Panmure.

I very much doubt it - it just wouldn't make sense, and seldom, if ever happens when the subject is still living and active.

Yes, the print was clearly taken from the Scottish NPG half-length version (https://bit.ly/3HHHHcp) of Colvin Smith’s portrait, or just possibly from the central part of the Brechin Mechanics' Institute full-length one (https://bit.ly/3rFlOVE) – either way the original image has been reduced. And yes, Lupton’s print was published on 1st Jan 1823, which is why the SNPG actually *do* date theirs on their own website (https://bit.ly/3GFlUAX) to ‘about 1822’ (and Brechin to ‘1822 or earlier’).

He does perhaps look a little older in our statuette, Jacinto, though being in marble (and dirty marble at that) it’s hard to be sure. And I wonder if Colvin Smith’s portraits weren’t a bit flattering – he looks rather youthful for a dissolute 50 year-old. Anyway the equally, or more important comparison for me is between the full-length figure in the Brechin version of the portrait and the statuette seen as a whole. See attached. As I discussed at perhaps excessive length above (10/02/2022 05:25), the clothing in both is indeed very similar, and most distinctive in the gaitered leg wear. That’s a large part of why I think they are of much the same date, give or take a few years.

Have we run an RSA or other Scottish exhibition check. I've juct checked Graves' RA and BI lists which only shows that Samuel Drummond also painted an oil of 'The Hon William Maule' in 1832.

There is also the intriguing sidelight that the last veteran of the Battle of Culloden in 1746, Patrick Grant, formerly a sergeant-major in the Highland Army in 1745, and by 1823 in receipt of a recently granted £50 p.a pension from George IV was then still in good health and living 'in a cottage on the estate of the Hon. William Maule, of Panmure, M.P.' Grant was then 109 and his portrait by Charles Smith (exh. RA, 1789-1829) was shown at the RA in 1823.

The SNPG have a portrait of Grant which they say is by Colvin Smith, dated 1822:

https://artuk.org/discover/artworks/patrick-grant-171317141824-213219

(If it is its a strange coincidence that a Charles Smith -certainly an older man - also painted him in 1822 to show at the RA in 1823. Also intriguing is that the SNPG web pages say that Colvin Smith began by training -presumably as a sculptor -under Nollekens, only then becoming a painter..... ????)

Joseph Nollekens (1737-1823) has come up a few times in Dundee articles. Recall that Fox Maule-Ramsay left his bust of Charles James Fox to his friend Andrew Rutherford Clark Esq. in his will (02/02/2022 18:58).

There is a bust of Charles James Fox by Nollekens on Art UK that looks a lot like Lord Panmure. https://tinyurl.com/5x6zvsh6

An article about the ‘Old Dundee’ Exhibition in the ‘Dundee Courier’ of December 23, 1892, mentions the Charles James Fox bust and the Panmure painting.

I'd spotted that 1832 exhib portrait of the Hon. William Maule by Samuel Drummond, Pieter, but concluded it was probably of our William Maule's youngest son William (1809-1859). WM senr was created Baron Panmure (and his sons became 'Hon.') in Sept 1831, and though he might have been painted by Drummond before that, I can't imagine he'd have let his pre-elevation name be used publicly seven or eight months later.

Another connection for you, though: Panmure's protégé Thomas Musgrave Joy (who painted his patron's portrait in 1837 or 38) had studied under Samuel Drummond in the late 1820s / early 30s.

Most interesting that Colvin Smith studied for a while under Nollekens. It would have been at just about the time we're looking at, too, around 1819-1821. By July 1822 he was in Paris (after a period in Antwerp), which suggests his two oil portraits of Maule may have been a year or two earlier.

Pieter, one of the first things I did was check the RSA exhibiting, and there's nothing directly relevant to William Maule there. However it only began, as far as contemporary art was concerned, in 1826 - and in fact one of Colvin Smith's first batch of nine portraits exhibited that year was his one of Patrick Grant, the veteran of Culloden.

We have not (I think) so far seen this 1838 likeness of Maule by T.M. Joy: presumably a version of the one Marcie's 23. 12. 1892 clipping mentions as dated 1837 and on loan from the family at Brechin Castle. It also shows the statue must be earlier than 1841.

https://artuk.org/discover/artworks/the-right-honourable-william-ramsay-maule-17711852-lord-panmure-91044/search/actor:joy-thomas-musgrave-18121866/page/1/view_as/grid

....and this

https://artuk.org/discover/artworks/william-maule-17711852-1st-lord-panmure-128509/view_as/grid/search/works_auto:william-maule-panmure/page/1

Yes we have, Pieter - see my post of 10/02/2022 05:25, where I linked to both ("two portraits we have of him in the late 1830s"), and discussed aspects of the clothing as part of my earlier-date hypothesis. Hmmm...if I write at too great a length even for you, then I really must learn the art of doing short and shallow tweet-style posts if I want anyone actually to read them!

Apologies: missed that. The underlying issue is in the Art UK search system: every related image should come up if you enter any single key search-term from its title such as 'Maule' or 'Panmure'. In this case 'Maule' just produces the statue and the Montrose bust; only 'Panmure' produces all six items (plus a portrait of his son Fox and three other things that include the name). The Brechin bust -unillustrated- only comes up that way since 'Maule' is not there, just 'Lord Panmure'

Colvin Smith does not appear as a sculptor in Gunnis, the standard reference for British sculptors 1660-1851.

Pieter re your 11/02/2022 enquiry as to whether a check had been run on RSA Exhibitors - YES - we carried this out - as stated in our post of 01/02/2022 above- checking under Maule, Panmure and Dalhousie.

Thanks, noted: what seems so far absent is what's in the collection records both at the Highlanders and Montrose re: the bust there : 'gift' is no use unless you know who from and when and there must be a reason it has an '1841' date attached, albeit showing him up to about 20 years earlier.

The object itself is worth a check: its a very individualistic piece and sufficiently odd no one claimed it even by just initials somewhere.

Pieter, they list an 1841 date because that is what's on the plinth. The question is whether or not I am right to believe that the plinth is a much later addition - see my post at 10/02/2022 05:40.

Sorry, Pieter, I misunderstood your point. You mean why is the 1841 physically attached to the bust, not why is it attached to the Art UK listing.

Perhaps it is related to the Montrose Museum.

We need provenance information from the Highlanders' Museum.

I had not 'clocked' the other photos showing that 1841 (and the man's name) was on the plinth , but even if that is the date of making the statue (despite the dress argument contra), it wouldn't be unusual to see slight differences in the stone between the two. The one is necessarily by a sculptor but the other probably by a monumental mason working to a drawing/dimensions and not necessarily from a closely related block.

The 'ensemble' however, certainly suggests it was 'for something' albeit what (if not the 1839 'Panmure Testimonial' monument) remains a puzzle.

Marcie's latest clipping, two above, might more understandably explain the origin of the bust still at Montrose.

More on the provenance of both required....

Attached is an updated note on the Panmure statuary, both located and as so far only reported to exist (or to have existed). Oil paintings have been briefly added for parallel reference.

Until/unless current holders of the located items (A to C) can produce provenance and/or maker information on them it seems unlikely that we will get further.

Though the present discussion only concerns the statue at the Highlanders Museum, perhaps Art UK could also ask about the other two busts (Brechin and Montrose), the reported additional 'statuette' at Montrose (item 4) and the other reported busts of Panmure and others at Dundee listed under item 1.

The Dundee group are presumably in 'public ownership' under Art UK's broad definition of that, which suggests they have so far eluded its capture.

Even current ownership of the 'Panmure Testimonial' column (re: item 3) at Monikie is a puzzle. Historic Scotland (or at least their buildings at risk section) don't seem to know and say only the Scottish land registry could supply. There appear to be no readily discoverable interior images of the old keeper's and visitor rooms in its basement, the latter with the bust 'niche' and 'inscribed tablet' reported in 19th-c. sources. The sight-size of the former might at least indicate what was intended for it, even if never placed.

Pieter's listing is most helpful. As he says, until/unless current holders of the located items (A to C) can produce provenance and/or maker information on them it seems unlikely that we will get further.

We clearly need input from the collections which own the three known works. It would be of great interest to have a frontal image of the bust at Brechin to compare it with the bust at Montrose, and I suggest Art UK contact Brechin to that effect (a simple cell phone photo would suffice).

Jacinto, I have asked if a frontal image of the bust at Brechin can be provided, by our contact in the ANGUSAlive team. Regards, David

Jacob, I have also asked ANGUSalive about the Panmure in Montrose Museum in terms of provenance. Regards, David

At last, some progress. Allan Ewart of the Brechin Mechanics' Institute kindly directed me to an image of the Brechin marble bust of Panmure in the BMI's website https://tinyurl.com/bdz9ud9z (scroll down a bit and click on images to enlarge; the wall plaque next to the bust is not related to it). It is very close to the Montrose bust https://tinyurl.com/2s3dtf85 , with nearly identical drapery (albeit more of it) and essentially the same handling of the face (though the head position is slightly different). I have no doubt they could be by the same sculptor, presumably Steell, who may have made them at about the same time for different sites. I trust someone can make a composite of the two and post it here.

Art UK should ask Adeline Kinsella at the Montrose Museum what has been found, if anything, about the provenance of the Montrose bust and the date it entered that collection.

That’s good news, Jacinto. I've attached the composite.

Thanks, Marcie. The drapery is clearly about the same in both. I expect they are by the same sculptor, even if one of them was perhaps more of a studio work.

You should ask Helen Smailes of the National Galleries of Scotland for her views on an attribution to Steell

There were a couple of requests last year for Lou Taylor (Group Leader, Dress and Textiles) to comment, but the discussion is not linked to her group, so it is unlikely that she would be following it. I will write to Helen Smailes first.

Helen has replied by return that she cannot look at this immediately, since the Scottish National Gallery curatorial team is heavily committed to imminent delivery of the NG redevelopment, after which she is going on leave to project manage a major and essential domestic refurbishment up to late July. I have said I will contact her again next month.

Freya Samuel, curator for the collection, has kindly informed me that both of Panmure's sons, Fox Maule Ramsay and Lauderdale Ramsay, were Captain and Lieutenant Colonel of the 79th Cameron Highlanders, respectively. This is the regimental association of the sculpture. However, this item is currently part of the collection's documentation review, so she does not have access to accurate acquisition information, but when that becomes available she will get in touch.

Marion, any further contact with or word from Helen Smailes at NGS?