Global Routes and Imperial Spaces: Burnfoot, Eskdale and the Creation of East India Company Servants, c. 1790-1850 Ellen Filor, University of Warwick [email protected]

Few ken to whom this muckle monument stands, Some general or admiral I’ve nae doot, On the hill-top whaur weather lang syne Has blotted its inscribed palaver oot.1

Hugh MacDirmuid’s 1929 description of the nineteenth-century monument to Sir John Malcolm that stands on a hill above Langholm demonstrates ably the physical effacing of Scotland’s imperial past over the past century. But another, less explored point adumbrated in his verse is the effect on the landscape that imperial service could have in making and remaking the physicality of the Scottish Borders themselves. Scottish landscape has often been defined in terms of a romantic and antiquarian past and this necessarily static reading of the landscape ignores the imperial aspect of this geography. The landscape of Scotland is a reference point that repeatedly resurfaces both in the letters and poetry of those in India and those at home.

But to shift the focus to the frontiers of India in Scotland is to seek to disrupt this static, parochial reading of the landscape. Using the ‘collage’ of letters, diaries, poetry and sketch books in the Malcolm of Burnfoot archive held at the National Library of Scotland this paper will map the geographies of the Malcolm clan.

By drawing heavily on James Clifford’s insight that the meanings of place are not rooted in place but rather formed through the routes through them, the impact of the global on these relatively provincial areas will be illuminated. Further, Clifford’s insight allows a far more fluid understanding of space than previous scholarly studies of the Scottish Borders have acknowledged.

Clifford has argued for a reconfiguration of anthropology, which has previously been based on studying (fictionalised) rooted, bounded localities. Using the figure of the traveller, Clifford points to the

‘practices of crossing and interaction that troubled the localism of many common assumptions about culture’.2 Looking at the routes that pass through a locality challenges how space is conceived by scholars and the implications for how the ‘natives’ who live within such localities are conceived. While Clifford’s focus is on the twentieth century, his conclusions merit wider attention from historians of other periods.

They are particularly valuable in relation to the imperial sphere, challenging the conception of a ‘native’

1 Hugh MacDiarmid, ‘The Monument’, Stony Limits and Other Poems (London, 1934), p. 13. 2 James Clifford, Routes: Travel and Translation in the Late Twentieth Century (London, 1997), p. 3.

1 both in the metropole and the colonies. This is not to blindly follow Clifford’s conclusions: his nods to gender are somewhat abortive and the implications of routes on those who do not travel are never fully explored in his text. Indeed, this will be a main contribution of this paper: resituating those who did not travel as active agents in the colonial sphere and creators of imperial space.

Anthropologists of the Scottish Borders have largely been part of the localised approach that sees space as bounded — precisely the approach against which Clifford has argued against. James Littlejohn’s study of the antagonism of social class and the lack of kinship networks in his 1963 work on Westrigg saw him question ‘how far the parish is a “rural community”: the term normally implies some sort of unit with a social life of its own, an “area of common life.”’3 But the impact of interactions with outside communities is limited in Littlejohn’s study to a discussion of ‘The Parish and the Town.’ More recently, John Gray has argued against the academic marginalisation of the farms of the Borders and utilised the post-colonial theories of Bhabha and Appadurai to craft an impressive sense of how Borderers are ‘at home in the hills’.4

But it is an argument that is based on the exclusion of movements, with little consideration of the fifty per cent of those born in the Borders who leave the area. There are, however, hints that this bounded, localised approach is inadequate. Gwen Kennedy Neville notes of an abandoned graveyard in Colmonell, Ayrshire:

‘This pattern of gathering and dispersal is further attested to in the gravemarkers … for example, one might read “Stuart Henderson/Born at Colmonell 1905/Died at Colmonell 1970/Sometimes of Bombay.”’5 The reference to ‘Bombay’ on the gravestone offers a tantalising, fragmentary glimpse of the role imperial service could have on an individual’s life. In the above anthropologic accounts, the traditions and celebrations of the Borders are situated historically in the frontier conflict between England and Scotland of the sixteenth century.6 This paper seeks to unsettle this comfortable narrative, opening up instead the now forgotten and overlooked spaces forged by imperial service during the nineteenth century. It therefore stands as an attempt to answer Doreen Massey’s question ‘What if we open up the imagination of the single

3 James Littlejohn, Westrigg: the Sociology of a Cheviot Parish (London, 1963), p. 63. 4 John N. Gray, At Home in the Hills: Sense of Place in the Scottish Borders (Oxford, 2000). 5 Gwen Kennedy Neville, ‘Community Form and Ceremonial Life in Three Regions of Scotland’, American Ethnologist, 6 (1979), pp. 93-109, p. 100. 6 Gray, At Home in the Hills, pp. 22-45. Neville, Gwen Kennedy, The Mother Town: Civic Ritual, Symbol, and Experience in the Borders of Scotland (Oxford, 1994). For an exception to this approach, see geographer Susan J. Smith’s work on the Beltane festival at Peebles that highlighted the practice of wearing golliwog costumes and the charge of racism in 1991. She wrote in conclusion ‘the very inclusion of a golliwog image is testimony to the extent to which the Beltane is inseparable from a colonial history in which Scotland is implicated, and from a global Geography to which Scotland is linked.’ Susan J. Smith, ‘Bounding the Borders: Claiming Space and Making Place in Rural Scotland’, Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 18 (1993), pp. 291-308, p. 303.

2 narrative to give space (literally) for a multiplicity of trajectories?’7

Historians have scarcely been more responsive to this construction of a localised conception of

Scotland. Tom Nairn, reviewing Tom Devine’s To the Ends of the Earth, wrote only last year of the

‘outward-looking mind-set’ of Scottish traders and that ‘the obverse of that mentality was an equally remarkable parochialism at home.’8 Where historians have engaged with the impact return from empire had on the landscape, it has largely been configured in terms of the meta-narratives of industrial revolution or agricultural improvement.9 Rosalind Mitchison has written that ‘the carved elephant on the gate-post of the

Dundas house of Arniston is a reminder of how much the big houses of south-east Scotland relied on the

East India Company for careers and wealth. It was from England that the fashionable enthusiasm for better farming and higher profits got its inspiration.’10 While Mitchison acknowledges the economic impact of

India, the shifts in the landscape are configured exclusively in terms of the relationship with England.

However, beyond these more traditional economic approaches, there remains a need to look at the impact on the Scottish landscape of the cultural and imagined frontiers of India.11 Through acknowledging these routes that service in India forged through Scotland, the parochial, static reading of the Borders landscape and its ‘natives’ can be disrupted.

Burnfoot estate and farm was relatively isolated and rural with the nearest large town being Langholm some four miles away (see figure one). Described as a ‘cottage’ (see image one), the large farmhouse nestled in the hillside and fits within the conventions of the picturesque as it was conceived of during this period.12 The most successful of the imperial Malcolms raised at Burnfoot were Sirs John, Pulteney,

Charles and James Malcolm. However, rather than focus solely on the ‘great men’ that have traditionally dominated Scottish imperial historiography, these figures will be placed within their wider kinship and

7 Doreen Massey, For Space (London, 2005), p. 5. 8 Tom Nairn, ‘Why Did They Go?’, Scottish Review of Books, 7 (2011), p. 8. 9 An illustrative example is M.H Beals recent work on the impact of emigration to America on the Scottish Borders, opening with a chapter that discusses ‘Agricultural Improvement’ and ‘Industrial Development.’ M.H. Beals, Coin, Kirk, Class and Kin: Emigration, Social Change and Identity in Southern Scotland (Oxford, 2011), pp. 17-54. See also, George McGilvary, East India Patronage and the British State (London, 2008), pp. 184-202. 10 Rosalind Mitchison, A History of Scotland (London, 2002), p. 347. 11 On the frontier and Scotland see John M. Mackenzie, ‘Scots and Imperial Frontiers’, Journal of Irish and Scottish Studies, 3 (2009), pp. 1-17. 12 As A.A. Tait has written on the influence of the picturesque in Scotland ‘It was, after all, the home of much that was to be admired in this way from the time of Gray and Gilpin … the picturesque in Scotland was, as elsewhere, associated with a variety of architectural forms … This combination of building and setting constituted the real achievement of the picturesque.’ In terms of its physical position, Burnfoot fits within his description. A.A. Tait, The Landscape Garden in Scotland, 1735-1835 (Edinburgh, 1980), p. 93.

3

Figure one: Burnfoot located on map

Figure two: Drawing of Burnfoot Cottage, pre-1850. Copy held National Library of Scotland, Acc. 11757

4 friendship networks.13 Brothers of the Malcolms, their sons and nephews were likewise born or sent to

India, and the family home and landscape of Burnfoot looms large in all of their letters from India. The extent of this family’s involvement in the East India Company can be seen in the family tree that is affixed to the end of this paper. However, the impact of the imperial was by no means limited to these men with

East India Company careers. The four maiden sisters who remained at the family farm in Burnfoot were implicated in empire through the routes of material culture and letters that connected them to their relatives.

This facet is evident too in the friends of the families. Walter Scott, one such acquaintance, wrote excitedly in 1811:

I mean General John Malcolm -the Persian envoy the Delhi Resident, the poet the warrior the politician and the borderer. He is really a fine fellow. I met him at Dalkeith and we returnd together he has just left me after drinking his coffee. A fine time we had of it talking of Troy town and Babel and Persepolis and Delhi and Langholm and Burnfoot with all manner of episodes about Iskendiar Rustan and Johnie Armstrong.14

This meeting with John Malcolm and the list of place names, both exotic and known to Scott, is symptomatic of what Clifford has described as ‘dwelling-in-travel’.15 Scott, who has often stood in as a scapegoat for the development of a Scottish identity based on ‘Highlandism’, in this understanding instead becomes a more complex figure.16 This approach raises the question of who exactly can be conceived of unproblematically as ‘Scottish’ and a ‘native’ of Scotland. To question this premise of localised understandings of Scotland is to query how conceptions of local and global geography could overlay each other. It is a starting point that allows an interrogation of those who were not famous, whether in literature or in empire, an approach with implications for nineteenth-century conceptions of the Scottish landscape.

A common theme running through the Malcolm letters from India is their concern for Burnfoot and the lived aspect of its landscape. The act of wishing to return to Burnfoot after the end of their Indian career

13 For recent works on the ‘great’ Malcolms see Martha McLaren, British India & British Scotland, 1780-1830: Career Building, Empire Building, and a Scottish School of Thought on Indian Governance (Akron, 2001). Jack Harrington, ‘“No longer Merchants, but Sovereigns of a vast Empire”: the writings of Sir John Malcolm and British India, 1810 to 1833’, PhD thesis, 25 November 2009, University of Edinburgh. 14 Walter Scott to John B.S. Morritt, 11 October 1811, in Sir Herbert Grierson (ed.), The Letters of Sir Walter Scott, vol. 3 (London, 1932), p. 170. 15 Clifford, Routes, p. 2. 16 See, Tom Devine, Scotland’s Empire, 1600-1815 (London, 2003), p. 355. John Gray, ‘Ironic Images: Landscape and History in the Local Poetry of the Scottish Borders’ in A. Strathern and P. Steward (eds), Landscape, Memory, and History: Anthropological Perspectives (London: 2003), pp 16-46. Fiona Stafford, ‘Writing on the Borders’, in C. Lamont and M. Rossington (eds), Romanticism's Debatable Lands (Basingstoke, 2007), pp. 13-26, p. 13.This is in contrast to the recent increase in articles drawing out the Orientalism in Scott’s writings, most obviously in the discussions surrounding his novella The Surgeon’s Daughter. The construction of these two distinct Scotts, one producing Romantic, localised constructions of the Borders geography and the other Orientalist fictions of India, need to be resituated and ultimately integrated.

5 similarly infiltrates the letters. Sir John wrote to his invalided brother Robert in 1811 ‘I am half mad at the early prospect of seeing my Mother and all at Burnfoot … I shall give you a long Walk over the Hills’.17

This lived aspect of the Scottish landscape is not simply formed through boyhood activity but through longings from India. The lived quality of this landscape is also used by his nephew Duncan in India to his aunt in Eskdale to describe the nature of an upcoming march: ‘it is in the depths of the Monsoon and the distance is up wards of 300 miles across a very heavy country with roads little better than the track leading across Peat hill wh is bad enough’.18 This description points both to a colonisation and domestication of the

Indian landscape long noted by scholars,19 but also to a personal reading, grounded in the domestic, nostalgic space of home and the physical act of walking through it. It brings a different meaning to Gray’s phrase ‘at home in the hills’, suggesting that these natural spaces were not simply formed by internal conceptions of the picturesque but also through a fetishism from abroad.

Not all of Eskdale’s frontiers in Empire were purely imagined and metaphorical, however. Arriving at a ruined temple outside Persepolis in 1837, George Pulteney Malcolm wrote in his diary ‘the names of several friends and relations of mine are carved on the walls Sir John Malcolm Colonel Stewart George

Malcolm Lady Macdonald Charles Pasley Colonel Monteith’.20 These physical inscriptions and the litany of names Malcolm picked out suggest the imperial spread and power of Eskdale and its occupants.

Malcolm’s coming across this bit of ‘home’ in the midst of the desert can thus be viewed as the creeping frontiers of Scotland driven by its imperial agents. But these carved names also have their mirror in the obelisk and its inscription at Langholm with which this paper started. Just as MacDirmuid failed, wilfully or not, to ‘read’ the monument in the twentieth century so too does the present day reader of Malcolm’s diary struggle to isolate the unpunctuated names he lists. This deeply personal reading of landscape and the means by which it overwrites the ancient (in the case of the ‘graffiti’ inscribed over the Persian ruins) and is in turn overridden by the later generations, points to the malleable nature of frontiers between Eskdale and Empire.

This is not to argue that the maiden sisters at Burnfoot were merely receivers of an imperial geography

17 Sir John Malcolm to Robert Malcolm, August 18, 1811, National Library of Scotland (hereafter NLS), Acc. 6684/37. 18 Duncan Malcolm to Stephana Malcolm, July 28 1834, NLS, Acc. 6990/12. 19 See, for example David Arnold’s acerbic comment 'To believe travel writers of the time, there was hardly a Maratha or Sikh encampment or an upland vista that was unworthy of Scott’s pen.' Arnold, ‘Deathscapes: India in an age of Romanticism and empire, 1800–1856’, Nineteenth-Century Contexts, 26 (2004), pp.339-353, p. 344. 20 Diary of William P Malcolm [actually George Pulteney Malcolm] of a journey from India to Constantinople by way of Persia, 1837, NLS, Acc. 6684/38.

6 through the letters of their brothers and nephews in Company service. Rather they actively constructed and propagated their own unique approach in relation to their interactions with the global. Especially evident is their role in encouraging and nurturing the second generation of Malcolms who served in India in large numbers. This education appears to have included an imbuing of the superiority of Scotland. Pulteney

Malcolm’s wife Clementina wrote to her sister-in-law Nancy of her son in 1813 ‘Tell Aunt Helen George has not forgotten her lesson, I was showing him on a map this morning that England is larger than Scotland to wch he replied “But Scotchmen fight better than Englishmen”’.21 This quote demonstrates the maiden aunts’ conception of British geography was one on which Scottish superiority was based on the country’s ability to produce better imperial agents. The aunts circulating this to the second generation renders them not only the protectors of the domestic sphere but also the sustainers of imperial service. Nor did this end once their nephews left Britain for the East. Just before George Alexander Malcolm left for India his aunts sent him a box of books, prints and portraits, cautioning ‘open the box with care that it may carry

“Burnfoot” safe to Bombay’.22 Thus they actively propagated the imaginative frontiers of Burnfoot in India as displayed not only in their education of the nephews sent there but also the global goods that accompanied them.

Beyond educating the second generation of Malcolms, another project made possible by connections to the imperial was Wilhelmina Malcolm’s museum. I have been able to uncover much about the museum and no catalogue exists. It was likely created during the 1790s and letters to Wilhelmina suggest that she continued receiving objects for it until her death in 1832. It was described by Sarah Hutchison in 1814 as ‘a many chambered cottage in the woods, a beautiful thatched building containing curiosities, most valuable and tastefully arranged, from every part of the globe brought by her Brothers & Friends.’23 The rurality of the situation is described in still greater detail by poet William Parks: ‘it is built on the steep bank of a small rivulet which runs into the Esk.’24 But contemporary readings were more complex than this, with the imperial objects that decorated the interior serving to disrupt a purely ‘picturesque’ understanding.

Here, Park’s long poem of 1833 deserves detailed analysis for his use of landscape and geography in

21 Clementina Malcolm to Nancy Malcolm, 15 December 1813, Acc. 6684/24. 22 Wilhelmina Malcolm to George Alexander Malcolm, June 25, 1824, NLS, Acc. 6684/13. 23 Sara Hutchison to Mary Hutchison, 3 August 1814, in Kathleen Cockburn (ed.), The Letters of Sara Hutchinson from 1800-1835 (London, 1954), p. 73. 24 William Park, The Vale of Esk, and Other Poems (Edinburgh, 1833), p. 22.

7 conveying his understandings of the museum. He contrasts the outside landscape of Scotland as ‘When

Nature’s varied beauties bloom around, / And thy banks, fair Esk ! Seem fairy ground. / The frowning mountain rising high and hoar’25 to the interior where Park ‘travels’ ‘From high Imaus, where glacier gleams, / To Andes, gilt by morning beams; / From cliffs of Thule, winter’s throne of gloom, / To Lybian wilds, swept by the fell Simoon.’26 These geographical leaps, from the physical to the imaginative, are made possible by the objects contained in the museum such as inscribed bricks from Babylon, Mexican hieroglyphics written on tree bark, and inscriptions on the leaves of a Palmyra tree from Burma. Mobile goods are here conceived of as not simply objects from a country but objects that can become a country, allowing even those who have not travelled to understand and possess knowledge of such lands.

The museum was therefore a form of collaboration, the active colonial endeavour of Wilhelmina’s brothers and male friends as described by Park as a mix ‘Of manly enterprise, and female taste!’27 This collaboration is evident in a correspondence over exotic animal skins. A letter from Clementina Malcolm in

1810 informed the sisters at Burnfoot that John sent ‘a Tiger skin for your Grotto and as he has not time to write himself, he begs me to tell you he is going to Persia on purpose to hunt Lions that your beautiful

Mama may be adorned with their skins!’28 This extract demonstrates how imperial endeavour was configured as an intensely personal act to ‘adorn’ John Malcolm’s mother rather than for purely national gain. By 1815 Clementina wrote ‘I am happy to tell you I have got your Tigers (which looks like a

Leopards) skin safe’.29 The masculine act of hunting has in the imperial sphere been described by historian

Elizabeth Collingham as enabling the colonial agent to ‘demonstrate his possession of some of the essential qualities which made Englishmen [sic] racially superior.’30 However, within the space of Wilhelmina’s museum the tiger (or leopard) skin renders the spoils of hunting a feminine object, a peculiar means of asserting her feminine ‘superiority’ in the imperial context.

The objects the museum contained were not limited to Indian artefacts and immediate family members.

Sir Charles Pasley, an illegitimate cousin of the Malcolm sisters, wrote in 1805 that he was sending

Wilhelmina ‘two pieces of the Pyramids and a piece of Granite of Cleopatra’s Needle, which though ugly

25 Park, Vale of Esk, p. 22. 26 Ibid., p. 23. 27 Park, Vale of Esk, p. 23. 28 Clementina Malcolm to Wilhelmina Malcolm, 13 July 1810, Acc. 6684/24. 29 Clementina Malcolm to Wilhelmina Malcolm, dated only 1815, Acc. 6684/24. 30 Elizabeth M. Collingham, Imperial Bodies: The Physical Experience of the Raj, c.1800-1947 (Oxford, 2001), p. 125.

8 in themselves may from their venerable titles obtain a place in your Grotto’.31 This physical act of touristic

‘vandalism’ can be perceived as a minor example of Western control over Egypt’s Pharoanic past. But alongside this more obvious act of violent colonialism, this gift was a way of solidifying Pasley’s insecure familial links to the family and integrating himself more fully into the Malcolm’s Scottish home, stating in the same letter that he had ‘always looked forward to Burnfoot as a home’.32 This is a means of asserting his imperial ownership over Egypt while simultaneously maintaining his precarious position within the space of ‘home’ in Scotland.

This act of intended return is present in Park’s poetry. He himself had returned to Langholm from

Florida where he had served as Governor Johnstone’s secretary and after had taken over the running of

Johnstone’s Grenada plantation. He wrote of the museum’s intended audience:

And they, whose names are graved on honour’s pale, The brothers who have left Esk’s fairy dale, When from the toils of field and flood remov’d To rural ease, and scenes in youth belov’d, Oft shall some token, while they ponder here, Recall the doings of their past career.33 The museum is thus configured as a space of colonial nostalgia, a memorial to imperial service that while less ostentatious and dominating than that of Sir John Malcolm’s obelisk nonetheless is likewise meant to

‘recall the doings of their past career.’ While created by ‘female taste’, this aspect is subordinated to the

‘manly enterprise’ of those abroad. But to reduce the museum to a celebration of imperial service is to reassert the masculine in the analysis of collecting. Rather, the museum stands as a space where

Wilhelmina Malcolm can enact a feminine form of colonisation at ‘home’, radically different from that of the more physically violent form enacted by her male counterparts in empire. Thus the sisters’ own

‘empowerment’ is based on a subjugation of foreign lands whose imaginative frontiers could be found within the space of the Scottish museum.

The collective lifetime of these sisters spanned a century from the early 1760s to the beginning of the

1860s. They lived through massive shifts in imperial service, outliving all of their brothers and many nephews who had careers in Empire. This span extends from the small scale to the popular interactions

31 Charles Pasley to Mina Malcolm, 30 April 1805, NLS, Acc. 6684/23. 32 Ibid. 33 Park, Vale of Esk, p. 33.

9 with empire that emerged far more fully from the mid-point of the nineteenth century. This is exemplified in the shift from Wilhelmina’s (amateur) museum and Stephana’s trip to the Crystal Palace with Sir Charles

Pasley in the Summer of 1855. She described it in her diary as ‘a magnificent place & it is a wonderful collection of all that is interesting in nature & art’.34 Peter Hoffenberg has argued that ‘exhibition mania was ignited by England’s Crystal Palace, or Great Exhibition, and soon spread throughout Europe, North

America, and the British Empire.’35 Hoffenberg, however, in seeing the Great Exhibition of 1851 as a beginning point overlooks it antecedents such the parochial example explored above. Without denying that the Great Exhibition ushered in an era of far more popular exhibitions and on a greater scale than

Wilhelmina’s museum, similarities can be perceived in the objects at Burnfoot that came to represent the countries of their origin and the later transplanting of entire villages and their ‘natives’ to the Empire

Exhibitions in the second half of the nineteenth century. Thus, the overlapping geography of Wilhelmina’s museum can be viewed as an imperial appropriation of foreign lands, made possible by the routes that connected Burnfoot to the global in a way that is anything but parochial.

This paper has argued that during the late eighteenth and most of the nineteenth century the impact of imperial service among elites was one of the principal means by which the Scottish landscape was both physically remade and imagined. Whether wilfully forgotten, dismissed or simply neglected by scholars, the impact of the imperial during this period disrupts the construction of the Scottish Borders as a parochial, provincial backwater. The spaces that the Malcolms inhabited thus cannot be defined solely in terms of bounded and localised ‘Scottish’ ones. Rather, even for those who did not travel, the conception of space was formed by the global routes that passed through their localities, whether populated by people, literature, letters, material culture or money. Like India, Scotland was a space on which to project imperial imaginings. This emerges most clearly in the example of Wilhelmina’s museum in Burnfoot, a space and project that complemented the physical and violent imperialism of her brothers. These acts of

‘improvement’, however, were more than purely physical. They also included the intellectual improvement of the next generation of Malcolms for imperial service. The unmarried sisters thus imbued the second generation of Malcolms with both a love of the Scottish landscape and also an imperial geography that

34 Diary of Stephana Malcolm, 6 July 1855, Acc. 6684/43. 35 Peter H. Hoffenberg, An Empire on Display: English, Indian, and Australian Exhibitions from the Crystal Palace to the Great War (London, 2001), p. xiii.

10 stressed the superiority of Scots as warriors. Thus, the sustained contact multiple generations of the

Malcolms had with India created an imperial landscape that physically and imaginatively colonised the

Scottish Borders.

11 Magdelene Malcolm Birth 21/01/1762 Death 23/09/1779

Agnes (or Nancy) Malcolm Birth 28/07/1763 Death 20/04/1836

Robert Malcolm Malcolm of Burnfoot Robert Malcolm Birth 14/07/1764 Charles Malcolm Family Tree Death 02/10/1813 John Malcolm Indian Woman Family members who Robert Malcolm travelled to or were born in India are Two Daughters coloured red, those Nancy Moor Norman Ann Malcolm mentioned in the text outlined in blue. Wilhelmina Malcolm Birth 16/12/1765 Death 03/08/1832

Colonel Sir James Malcolm Birth 23/07/1767 Death (Y)

Sir Pulteney Malcolm Birth 21/02/1768 George Pulteney Malcolm Death 20/07/1838 Birth 14/02/1814 Death 21/07/1837 Clementina Elphinstone

William Elphinstone Malcolm Birth 27/12/1817

Margaret Malcolm Birth 17/05/1808 Death 06/02/1841 Major-General Sir John Malcolm Birth 02/05/1769 George Alexander Malcolm Death (Y) 30/05/1833 Birth 21/01/1810 Death 02/06/1888 Isabella Charlotte Campbell Marriage 07/07/1807 Olympia Charlotte Malcolm Birth 10/12/1811 Death October 1886

George Malcolm Anne Amelia Malcolm Birth 11/09/1722 Death 13/05/1803 Birth 30/04/1814 Death 25/07/1873

Margaret Pasley of Craig Catherine Wellesley Malcolm Birth (Y) 1742 Death (Y) Nov 1811 Birth 30/10/1815 Marriage (Y) Thomas Malcolm Death 24/05/1891 Birth (Di…fore Rob) 27/04/1770 Death 01/09/1809 George Alexander Malcolm Birth 01/09/1805 Frances Dean Death ( 15/07/1826 Yesdekaust)Yesdekaust, Persia Birth 31/10/1786 Death 03/11/1852 Duncan Archibald Malcolm Marriage 09/09/1804 Bimilipatam, India Birth 09/10/1807 Bombay, India Death Oct 1855 Helen Elphilstone Malcolm Baroda, India Birth 14/06/1771 Death 29/12/1858

Margaret Malcolm Birth 31/10/1772 Death 10/03/1838

John Briggs Birth 27/03/1774 Death 25/03/1810

Stephana Malcolm Birth 01/02/1774 Death 26/11/1861 Helen Malcolm Birth 27/07/1807 Rev Gilbert Malcolm Birth 14/12/1775 George Malcolm Birth 09/01/1810 Helen Little Death 16/12/1841 Birth 24/09/1775 Bombay Scotland Death 21/07/1863 Matthew Malcolm Marriage 14/08/1806 Birth 06/02/1811

George Malcolm Grace Malcolm Birth 14/05/1777 Death 29/01/1794 Birth 11/08/1815 Death 08/06/1877

David Malcolm Birth 01/06/1778 Death 21/01/1826

Charlotte Malcolm Birth 10/08/1779 Death 19/09/1779

William Malcolm Birth 21/06/1781 Death 19/03/1802

Sir Charles Malcolm Birth 05/09/1782 Death (B…Brighton)14/06/1851

Magdalene Pasley Jean Malcolm

George John Malcolm Birth 14/01/1830

Pulteney Malcolm Elmira Riddell Shaw Pulteney Malcolm Birth 10/08/1831 Birth 11/04/1829 India Death 23/08/1835 Death 09/09/1852 Marriage 1829

John Shaw Malcolm Birth 10/08/1835 Death 31/05/1841