The Collection has commented: ‘We have looked through the accession folder for any information on the Thomas Wood portrait but unfortunately there is none. The artwork was part of the transfer of some of the contents of the Shire Hall in Brecon (mainly the courtroom furniture and other portraits) when the building became the home of Brecknock Museum in 1974. There is very little documentation from that time on any of the artwork that came with the transfer. William Gibbs makes a very persuasive argument for George Hayter as the artist of the portrait of Colonel Thomas Wood but we think it would be very useful to have an Art Detective public discussion as more information may come forward’

[Second submission, presenting an alternative view]
Robert Thorburn exhibited a 'Colonel Thomas Wood' at the Royal Academy in 1849 as no 710. Could the Brecknock portrait … been exhibited to mark his retirement as a MP in 1847.? Lieutenant Colonel Wood (1804-72) was between 1837 and 1847 the Tory and Conservative MP for Middlesex. He was a Colonel in the Grenadier Guards. His father (1777-1860) had been MP for Breconshire from 1806 to 1847. Thorburn was best known as a miniaturist, however.

Alistair Brown, Art UK, added at the time: ‘If this is the MP for Brecknockshire (1806-1847), as in the current description, as Thomas Wood (1777–1860), he would have been around 72 at the time of Thorburn's portrait at the RA in 1849. His son, Thomas Wood (1804–1872), does seem to have been a colonel, as well as MP for Middlesex (1837-1847) and looks a more likely candidate.’

The Collection commented: ‘We checked our conservation reports for the back of this picture and no details were recorded concerning other exhibitions - once we can get back in the Museum proper we will check the accession details, however, both the Wood portraits were recorded as from the Shire Hall (our building) [- the other Thomas Wood portrait is here - https://bit.ly/3GN7H4R ] so we don't hold much hope that we will discover much more – we will ask one of our local researchers in case they have come across any other portraits and may identify they are father and son’.

A local researcher commented: ‘The pictures of Colonel Thomas Wood were researched by one of our team but we also looked at the pictures, wondering at the lack of likeness between the two. I think that there is quite a distinct possibility that the picture of the younger man is of the son. The style is less formal more of a later 19th style, but how would that fit into the Thorburn oeuvre?’. His connections with Breconshire were however nowhere near as deep as those of his father.
[Group leader: Melanie Polledri]

Is someone able to order the will of Thomas Wood from 1860 (see attached entry)? It has many codicils so it might mention art. There was an update to the wills site recently and I can no longer access it.

If we are to be gathering likenesses of Thomas Wood and artists who depicted him, please add John Lilley (active 1832-1853) to the list. The attached article mentions a portrait by Lilley that included Wood at the 1842 Exhibition of the Royal Academy (see entry attached).

Another portrait mentioned in the article depicted Lord Bloomfield. That might be the portrait on the Invaluable website ('1st Lord Bloomfield, 1768-1846') at this link. https://tinyurl.com/mspzw6uu.

I have attached a composite that includes the two portraits of Wood (unknown artist and circle of William Owen) and the portrait of Bloomfield.

The measurements for the portrait, 126.6 x 111.5 cm, do not agree with the proportions of the onscreen image.

They frequently don't, Jacob; it's very odd, and explanations are seldom forthcoming.

The reason for the apparent anomalies of portrait and lithograph is fairly straightforward (and not one of those suggested by Mr Gibbs). Yes, this is the George Hayter portrait of Col. Wood, probably the only one, which was painted by him during 1832 (also the date on the print - see https://bit.ly/3gDp1yD) as a result of a subscription raised in mid-January, and completed by early Nov. See attached clippings from the Carmarthen Journal. The lithograph was made at the same time, and shows the portrait as it originally was, and as described in the 1834 'Palomino' letter (though he misread the glove held in one hand as a manuscript - a sign that he had only seen it up on the wall). To keep this short and digestible I'll get on to why it's now different in the next post.

I think that at some later stage, perhaps many years later, as a result of damage or just changing tastes/opinions, the painting was substantially altered by another artist or restorer. The new arm extending out to hold the hat looks rather clunky and lacking in painterly detail to me, the bottom two pairs of buttons look different to those above, and I suspect a close examination will show that that whole area has been over-painted. At the same time the fashionable early 1830s details of the sitter's coat - puffed shoulders, narrow waist, the sharp and angular line of the cut-away front - have (rather sadly) been made noticeably less of their original time: they have become more, well...ordinary mid-C19th, and are the poorer for it.

I don't see the glove question as too worrying. So closely do fine kid gloves follow the contours of the hand, it can be hard to tell without colour (as in the lithograph) what was intended. It may well be that in the oil *both* hands were originally ungloved, and that what was/is shown being held in the sitter's right hand was/is a pair of gloves, not a single one. I think the later, altering artist decided to put a glove on the extended hand holding the hat, either because he thought it looked better, and/or because damage to the painting or darkened varnish made it unclear what it should be...and thinking there was only one glove held in the other hand, he logically (but wrongly) thought the extended hand should be gloved. And to be honest the current glove arrangement doesn't make sense: if you take off only one glove (as you sometimes do), it is to free that hand completely for shaking with someone else or some other polite or sensitive purpose - you then hold the removed glove in the other *gloved* hand, leaving the gloveless one to do what it needs to do, naked as nature intended. To take only one glove off, but continue to hold it in the same hand would be pointless.

This Painting appears unfinished to me. Like someone changed it and stopped in the middle. The brown background behind the upper body and left side of the painting is a mess. The left arm and hand are anatomically incorrect, the whole thing feels slightly disjointed. The Hat under the arm work looks complete and well done. The order which these works were completed in is hard to tell. Though on this Page https://d3d00swyhr67nd.cloudfront.net/_file/art_detective/y-gaer-thomas-wood-1.pdf a fellow named Palomino Claims to have scene our painting looking exactly like the Hat under the arm lithograph. As our Painting looks like its been fiddled with I'm gonna say maybe he was right. We Might need an X-ray to clear this up.

As to the other portrait, it cannot be the work exhibited by Thorburn at the RA in 1849: attached is the catalogue page, from which it is clear that the portrait was indeed a miniature, or possibly a drawing. It certainly wasn't an oil.

For the first time ever, Whaley, I more or less agree with you! The link you give us, though, is in fact in the introduction to the discussion - it was written by the person who started it.

Re the other portrait (https://bit.ly/3GN7H4R) , are we supposed to talk about it in detail here, or will it get its own discussion? If here, could we please see the highest-res detail easily available of the unusual (?)illuminated document that the sitter is holding? It seems likely to have some particular significance for him, and might hold a clue - could the first word (inverted for us) be 'William', perhaps?

Could that possibly illuminated document be related to the Militia A.D.C. bestowed on him by William IV?

Back to the primary painting under discussion, attached is a composite of the lithograph and our portrait side-by-side - the latter brightened and tweaked to show more detail. The tweaking reveals many odd-looking patches coming up in a different colour, especially the sitter's left (our right) arm which looks like a real dog's dinner. Part of this is just due to the low-resolution digitisation of the image...but far from all, I think.

A document of William IV's was exactly what I was wondering about, Marcie, and I think the ADC commission is a very good idea (and an excellent find). I was thoroughly confused when I read that that he received it in his 80th year - that would take us to 1856 when the King had been dead for nearly 20 years! I suppose it's a typo for 60th, which would be a much more plausible age for the sitter. We need to check when he got it...and get a closer view of the document.

Ah, no - it seems to have been on King William's accession in the summer of 1830. See attached. Wood (senior) was then 52 or 53, which looks even better as far as the sitter's apparent age is concerned. I think you may have cracked it!

And here's the official announcement of the appointment on 22nd July by the War Office, as given in the London Gazette.

And here is a Wood family archive that will likely show paintings and the name of artists.

https://search.lma.gov.uk/scripts/mwimain.dll/144/LMA_OPAC/web_detail/REFD+ACC~2F1302?SESSIONSEARCH

Thanks to everyone for very interesting contributions. The Newspaper Reports which Osmund has discovered and I find are repeated in the Cambrian Newspaper of a subscription raised by his supporters give a context for the painting of the picture and for the engraving and along with Palomino's testimony firmly suggestthat the painting is by Hayter. (By the way has anyone come across Palomino in any other context?)

A word of caution about the other paintings of "Thomas Wood" because there were at least five geneartaions of Thomas Wood!
1 Thomas Wood (25 September 1708 – 25 June 1799), was a British politician. A member of the British Whig Party, he was Member of Parliament for Middlesex from 1779 to 1780. He was from Littleton (then in Middlesex, now Surrey) from the later military Wood family. He married Elizabeth Jones and was grandfather of Thomas Wood (1777–1860). He was a barrister, later made Treasurer of the Inner Temple. He was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society in February 1761.

2 Thomas Wood (1748-1835)

In 1806 High Sheriff Brecknockshire (Subject of Portrait No in Art Uk) Wood commanded the Royal East Middlesex Regiment of Militia for fifty six years. Wood and his wife enjoyed the friendship of members of the royal family. George IV visited the Woods at Gwernyfed and other royals visited them at Littleton. William IV nominated Wood to be one of his executors

4 Thomas Wood (1804 - 1872) Son of Thomas Wood (1777-1860)
High Sheriff for Breconshire 1858 , Major - General in the army . He commanded the 3rd Battalion Grenadier Guards in the early stages of the Crimean War (1853–56) and reached the rank of Lieutenant-General. and formerly M.P. for Middlesex (1837- 47) In 1841 he was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society.

5 Thomas Wood (1853- ) High Sheriff 1886, Builder of New Gwernefed. Followed his father into the Grenadiers and saw action in the Sudan. Upon leaving the regular army he became a colonel in the Brecknockshire Rifle Volunteers and entered local government.

It is possible that the second portrait in y Gaer of the seated Thomas Wood holding the document is either Thomas Wood 1 or 2.

I will go into y Gaer next week and take a closer look at the picture and document and post an image.

I agree with Osmund's suggestion about the repainting. It seems to me the most likely explanation and I am asking around to see if anyone can take an x-ay but I think it is still a riddle. Why was it repainted?

Here is an extract from an article in the ‘Brecon County Times’ of November 25, 1882, that mentions the family paintings.

Here are two extracts from the ‘Hereford Journal’ of Wednesday, April 4, 1832, that are related to the subscription for a portrait of Colonel Wood. See Osmund’s comment of 11/02/2022 17:10 and my comment of 13/02/2022 14:58.

Take a UV torch with you William! Much cheaper and more accessible than an X-Ray. The new paint will show up darker under the UV light.

Definitely looks repainted to me.

Marcie, I managed to order Col. Wood's Will (proved 1860) using my not-very-smartphone (my laptop no longer works there), albeit with considerable difficulty. I don't know what they've done to the website, searching for a probate is now a nightmare. I had to search through 29 pages of names, both of people called 'Wood' and those whose names merely began with 'Wood' (e.g. Woodison), and all of them arranged in a seemingly quite random, non-alphabetical order. And you *have* to find it in their database before they allow you to access the order page - even if you already know the details!

I doubt there'll be anything about the Hayter portrait, as it looks like Wood had presented that to the County for hanging in the Shire Hall in Oct 1846 - see attached. But there might be something about the other one with the illuminated document (which I think is of the Colonel too, rather than his son). I may be able to get to the London Metropolitan Archive at some stage to follow up on your excellent find there of the 1864 list of paintings at Littleton.

Thank you, Osmund. Yes, that will website is now indeed a nightmare. I had ordered two wills for another discussion (Carmen) and cannot access the links that I was sent in January. I’m amazed that you found that reference to the portrait being hung in the Shire Hall. I located all three of Palomino’s articles (January 25, February 15, and February 22, 1834) but there is no additional information in them.

Is it possible to find out which portrait was used in the book about Brecknockshire noted in the ‘Brecon County Times’ of March 20, 1885? Note the two references that I have highlighted in the attachment. The second reference indicates that the portrait of the late Colonel Wood, M.P., was “taken specially from a portrait lent by Thomas Wood, Esq. of Gwernyfed Park”.

The Parliamentary website states that the family moved from Littleton to Gwernyfed in 1874.
http://www.histparl.ac.uk/volume/1820-1832/member/wood-thomas-1777-1860
“He died at Littleton in January 1860 and was succeeded there by Tom. His will, proved in 1860 and 1861, honoured and extended family settlements made in favour of his wife and descendents [sic], who, after Littleton was destroyed by fire in 1874, settled at Gwernyfed.(footnote 74).”

The book refered to is The Illustrated History and Biography of Brecknockshire from the Earliest Times to the Present Day by Edwin Poole published by the author in 1886 which incudes the image of Thomas Wood (available online) on page 71 (see attached) which is clearly a slightly ammended copy of the engraving by James Richard Lane after George Hayter with background removed.

Thank you, William. I have attached a composite.

Here is another image of Colonel Wood which appeared in the Illustrated London News for March 30th 1844 which was reproduced in Brycheiniog 1995 in Edward Parry's fine article on the 1818 election.

https://journals.library.wales/view/1380216/1384723/94#?cv=94&m=26&h=Colonel+OR+Thomas+OR+Wood+OR+Portrait&c=&s=&manifest=https://damsssl.llgc.org.uk/iiif/2.0/1380216/manifest.json&xywh=764,180,1701,1122

A search turned up a letter from Colonel Thomas Wood about the Hayter work at the National Library of Wales.

“File 6602. - Letter from Col. Thomas Wood to John Jones. Sending receipt for £80 paid to Hayter for his picture and stating ...,”

https://tinyurl.com/mr222chv

Here are three additional entries related to the Hayter portrait/prints of Colonel Thomas Wood from the website of the National Library of Wales.

Osmund, when you are at the London Metropolitan Archives, could you also please examine the mysterious record ACC/1302/178? Were the works at the RA?

That's a surprise, Marcie - another brilliant find, but a confusing one. It would appear that either (a) Wood *did* pay for another version or duplicate of Hayter's portrait, or (b) there was only one but he initially paid for it, later being reimbursed by the portrait subscription's committee.

I think (b) is the right explanation: the committee's Hon. Secretary was Henry Maybery of Breconshire (https://bit.ly/3uP46ks) , also a solictor and treasurer of the county, and the letter is found in the Maybery papers. John Jones may have been one of Maybery's partners in the law firm. See also https://bit.ly/3sI5fI7.

Why else would Wood have sent them the receipt if it was not for reimbursement? And why would Wood in 1846 have given the County the (or at least a) portrait of himself if they already had one?

Marcie, what a fascinating find raising all sorts of new questions.

So were there two portraits painted in 1832-33 one Hat under arm
and used for the engraving paid for by subsciption and one
one hat in hand for family?? But then why isnt it the subscribed portrait which is in the Museum?
And then a later one with illustrated manuscript in hand of about 1845?

There are of course two paintings of Colonel Wood in y Gaer, now in the court room. We need to follow up attribuiion and acession details for the second.( It seems impossible that it was painted by William Owen as suggested) I have doubted in the past that it was actually of Colonel Wood MP but the Illustrated News sketch has a similarity. I think the chair might be importaht...we know of visits to Gwernyfed by two kings ..it certainly isnt the chair that King Charles sat in but did it have a connection to George IV?

The amount raised by subscripton was at least £256, (the figures in the right hand column which I cant read I have taken as 1 guinea so it was probably closer to £280)

Is any one able to get into National Library to see the letters? I went not long ago but is quite a way from Llangynidr especially if its dark.

Ask the National Library if they will send copies or scans (for a fee). I used this service at another Welsh archive recently.

I think your maths is a bit dodgy, William. First, note that every person in the LH column, be they Duke or commoner, subscribes either 1 or 2 guineas. The RH column is a bit clearer when magnified on the BNA website (see attached detail), and once again every amount begins either 1 or 2 - almost certainly guineas again, and the limited subscription amount must have been how they wanted it. The LH column has 60 names - 43 at 2 gns, 17 at 1 gn; the RH has 57 names - 37 at 2 gns, 20 at 1 gn. This makes a total of 197 gns.

197 x £1-1s (£1.05) = £206-17s...which looks to be the exact amount shown as the total at the bottom of the RH column.

What the £80 paid by Wood represents is less clear. The catalogue wording, "Letter from Col. Thomas Wood to John Jones. Sending receipt for £80 paid to Hayter for his picture and stating that £20 was still due for the frame" could certainly interpreted as meaning £80 was the whole cost of the painting excluding frame, but could possibly also have been an instalment (the last?) of a larger amount - the letter is dated January 1833, a couple of months after the portrait was reported as complete. It may be that the wording of the letter itself will clarify this.

Jacob, do you know what sort of price a pretty successful (but no super-star) London artist could command for a portrait in the 1830s? The size is a little uncertain: 50" x c.44" is an odd measurement for a canvas, and I'm wondering if it's the size with frame - without one it could be close to a kit-cat.

And there's a further complication. 'British and Irish Paintings in Public Collections' (Wright & Gordon 2006) lists a portrait of Thomas Wood, said to be "after Hayter", in the collection of St David's School, Ashford (Middlesex - now Surrey) in 2003. See attached.

Usually known for much of the C19th as the Welsh Charity School, this was from 1857 situated just a couple of miles from Littleton House, and the Wood family - notably both Col. Thomas Wood (d.1860) and his son Maj-General Thos Wood - were, both before and after its move from London to Ashford, much involved in the school's affairs and financial support. At the Colonel's funeral at Littleton, both staff and pupils were prominent participants in the large cortege.

Unfortunately the school closed down permanently in 2009, and the building is now occupied by a completely different independent school with no connection to the Charity, Wales or the Wood family - see https://bit.ly/3sJDgrx. It seems unlikely that the painting is still in the building today, but I suppose it's worth emailing them to see if they know anything.

Osmund asks what sort of price a pretty successful (but no super-star) London artist could command for a portrait in the 1830s (15/02/2022 05:36). Price relates to the size of the portrait and Osmund notes the odd size given on Art UK, 126.6 x 111.5 cm. I’m certain as can be, working remotely, that this is a typo for 126.6 x 101.5 cm, i.e. 50 x 40 ins, which is a standard canvas size for this sort of portrait.

The price charged is more than Northcote was asking in the late 1820s but less than Lawrence. £80 could be the full charge but might be one of two payments since it was not unusual for artists to charge half upfront and the remainder on completion. Not that I think that this question is critical in this case. A surplus on a subscription, if this is the reason for asking about the price of the portrait, could be used in some other way as we know from other cases.

Thank you Osmund for the correction! My conversion from guineas was woefully inaccurate! This amount would also have to cover the cost of making and delivery of the engravings to each subscriber.

If the portrait was paid for by public subscription and was destined for " some public place in Brecon" why was it in the Priory when seen by Palomino in 1834? The Shire Hall where it finished up was not built until 1843 but the Guildhall was available.

Well done for finding the Ashford link! I will contact the school . They have been very helpful in supplying pictures of the sculptures by John Evan Thomas which are still in situ from the time it was supported by the London Welsh community,

I am afraid the Ashford School has not been able to find any records of the Hayter portrait
Dear William,
I’ve checked, and I’m afraid that we do not have a portrait of Col Wood here, and the records that have been retained from St David’s do not list the sale or movement of artworks, sadly.
Sorry to be not much help in this instance.
All the best,
Chris King​ Bursar

can the mountain in the background be identified? Is it in the Black Mountains on the Rhos Dirion - Chwarel y Fan ridge?

The mountains are the Brecon Beacons which you can see from the family home at Gwernyfed and are the classic symbols for his constituency, Brecknockshire.
Thanks to the curator at y Gaer, Nigel Blackamore, I attach a higher resolution image of the document being held in the second portrait. The word "William" is clear and I think I can see "the Fourth"? This supports what Marcie has suggested!

Three Gloves- in the etching it is clear there are two gloves in the right hand.Close inspection of the painting confirms this.
In the NPG there is a picture of the house of commons-1833. Wood is there at the back.From what I can deduce from enlarging on screen-he looks quite an old man. ! ?

Indeed, Louis - re the gloves see my post of 11/02/2022 18:53 above.

The available image of Wood in Hayter's 'The House of Commons, 1833' is so small that I'm not sure you can tell anything useful from it - see attached for the best tweak I can make. He does look as if he might - *might* - have greyer hair than he does in our portrait (which seems all but certain to be Hayter's of 1832), but that is not a problem: Hayter's monumental work took him nearly a decade to complete (1833-43). One of the preliminary portrait sketches held by the NPG is dated Sep 1837, and others may have been even later; so if Wood sat for him again for the H of P painting, it could well have been five or more years after he'd done so for his own portrait.

Oh, and the Will I'd ordered of our sitter Col. Thomas Wood (1777-1860) came through, and as expected there's no mention of specific chattels, only of generalized "effects" plus the more important money and real estate. As I've often said, this is the norm, especially during the C19th - I doubt that more than one in ten or even twenty contains any reference to artworks.

PS I should have made clear in my post above that in the detail attached of the 1833-43 H of C painting, Wood is the central standing figure.

Thank you for checking the will, Osmund.

Last month, I sent an email to a high school that was once the Wood family home in Gwernyfed. I am hoping that there is portrait at that location as per the document in my comment of 14/02/2022 16:43. https://www.gwernyfed-hs.powys.sch.uk/About/History/

I'd be delighted to be proved wrong; but after such a chequered history since its sale by the Woods in 1922, encompassing at least four different private owners, the MOD and occupation by the military, purchase by the local authority and over 70 years as two different schools, I'd say the chances of a family portrait still being there are about 1000-1 against! Note that the school history says that the oak staircase is "probably the only unchanged item today".

Though the syntax is not wholly clear, I strongly suspect that the archive reference to "the portrait [of Col. Thos Wood, MP] now at Gwernyfed Park" is part of the note by (a later) Thomas Wood**, not something added by the cataloguer. i.e. the portrait was at Gwernyfed when the Wood family were living there, not more recently.

(**Probably the one who built the house in 1877)

I agree with you, Osmund. I’ve been trying to figure out when a second portrait of Colonel Wood went to Shire Hall.

In 1882, as reported in the ‘Brecon County Times’ of April 1, 1882, only one of the portraits of Colonel Wood was in the “grand jury room” of the Shire Hall. The second portrait of Colonel Wood was at Gwernyfed mansion in November 1882 (13/02/2022 14:58). Perhaps it was the subscribed portrait by Hayter that was initially retained by the family. The portrait with the document could have been the one that was donated in 1846 (14/02/2022 03:20).

Osmund, Louis - when I worked at the National Portrait Gallery my Digitisation team photographed a large number of details from the House of Commons painting, so I will ask one of my old colleagues if they might be able to provide a better image. Regards, David

David, this would be helpful. I have managed to get a detail from the NPG but with instructions not to share it on line in this discussion! Colonel Wood appears much as in the portrait and seems to be holding a walking stick in his left hand.

William, my former colleague is going to try to supply so that the detail can be officially posted here. I can see of no reason why a single detail would be a problem for a painting out of copyright. Regards, David

Detail attached of Wood, from The House of Commons, 1833, by Sir George Hayter, oil on canvas, 1833-1843, © National Portrait Gallery, London

Osmund, apologies for the delay in not getting back to you in reply to your 12 February 2022 question about the other portrait of Thomas Wood. A separate discussion was discussed and put back for a while, but a decision on this will be taken very soon. In the meantime here is the detail of that document, and additionally rotated 180 degrees so that it can be read more easily. Regards, David

One image failed to attach, trying again.

A portrait of Colonel Wood, reportedly by William Salter (1804–1875), was in the Grand Jury Room at the County Hall, Brecon, in August 1872 (see attached). https://tinyurl.com/34c6sthj. Two other attachments are for the record.

To catch up a little. I have been able to visit the National Library of Wales and look at the letters in the Mayberry Archive . A first transcription;
Fulham ?? 17 1832
From Col Wood to Jones his Brecon Agent
My Dear Jones
I yesterday went tp London and called on Hayter. The picture is now finished and will be dry enough in 10 days to set out for Brecon. The long??? is in a very handsome frame Price £20 and which is less considerable some ???? Pressed me on a frame maker.
The picture is realy ???? as good a use as I ever saw executed. Hayter will send it by the wagon

6596 Oct 20 1832 Fulham
My dear Jones
I yesterday went up and visited Mr Lane? He had ???made an admirable drawing of Hayter picture.150 prints of it will be sent to you in a case carefully packed next week and when you have seen them if approved will you send up especially to me payable of an order for Mr Jones £35 -the sum to Lane for the lithographs had it been an engraving which must have been at … superior it would have been £200 at 150 copies ??? More than the number of subscribers though when the print is seen I think some additional subscriptions who may wish ….? Copies Mr Lane has succeded so well I am going to employ him to make a lithograph of Sir H…. L… Pic…..

Of gretaer interest perhaps is the discovery of the true identity of the other picture where "Wood" is holding the scroll with the nmae of William on it.

Following the chair, its style and tassels led to the artist William Pickersgill who used it or a very similar one in many portraits. This led to the British Museum website there is an engraving of the supposed "Wood" portrait in y Gaer but with the name of Penry Williams of Penpont below. He was made Lord Lt of Breconshire in 1836-47 and William the IV was on the throne in 1836 so would have signed the letter appointing Penry Wiliiams to this post.

Held in NLW is a letter of April 13.1846, from John Jones to Penry Williams enclosing a Resolution of a body of Gentlemen subscribers, determined to perpetuate a good likeness of one who has for many years has held the highest office in the county with distinguished honour and the strictest impartiality and a further communication from Edward Williams, Honorary Secretary for the subscribers asks Penry Williams to have the goodness to sit for his portrait to Mr Pickersgill or such painter of eminence as he may select.

Marcie The portait of Camden , also now in the Court Room at y Gaer is indeed by W Salter. The other portraits do not have inscriptions attached so at the time it may be that the artists had aleady been forgotten and so the space in the catalogue left blank. I think we can safely now say they are Penry Williams by William Henry Pickersgill and Col Thomas Wood by George Hayter

I’m very impressed with your research, William. Here is an article about the Pickersgill portraiit of Penry Williams.

Testing: second attempt to rotate image from linked portrait discussion yesterday

Osmund, Marion alerted me to the image not appearing rotated yesterday. I have tried again and this now works for me, hope it does too for you and others contributing to this discussions. Regards, David

William, very many thanks. We will update your separate 'Thomas Wood' submission to Penry Williams by Pickersgill. A very good find. Regards, David