Reviewing Committee on the Export of Works of Art and Objects of Cultural Interest: Note of case hearing on 3 March 2010: Portrait of Ayuba Suleiman Diallo, called Job ben Solomon , by William Hoare of Bath (Case 22, 2009-10)

Application

1. The Reviewing Committee on the Export of Works of Art and Objects of Cultural Interest (RCEWA) met on 3 March 2010 to consider an application to export a painting by William Hoare of Bath, Portrait of Ayuba Suleiman Diallo, called Job ben Solomon . The value shown on the export licence application was £554,937.50, which represented a hammer price at auction plus buyer’s premium and VAT on the buyer’s premium. The expert adviser had objected to the export of the portrait under the first and third Waverley criteria, i.e. on the grounds that it was so closely connected with our history and national life that its departure would be a misfortune, and that it was of outstanding significance for study.

2. The eight regular RCEWA members present were joined by three independent assessors, acting as temporary members of the Reviewing Committee.

3. The applicant confirmed that the value included VAT and that no further VAT would be payable in the event of a UK sale. The applicant also confirmed that the owner understood the circumstances under which an export licence might be refused and that, if the decision on the licence was deferred, the owner would allow the portrait to be displayed for fundraising.

Expert’s submission

4. The expert had provided a written submission stating that the portrait was closely connected with our history and national life because the subject, Ayuba Suleiman Diallo, had been an important figure in the history of the early eighteenth-century transatlantic slave trade, and of Britain’s engagement in that trade. Ayuba’s visit to Britain in 1733 had had a profound impact on Britain’s understanding of West African culture, identity and religion, and he had figured prominently in abolitionist arguments at the time. The expert adviser stated that the portrait met the third Waverley criterion because it was the first British painting of a freed slave so far identified, and was also the earliest portrait so far uncovered of a named West African visitor to Britain, presented as an individual and as an equal. It was therefore of outstanding significance for the study of the development of non-European portraiture in Britain, and the study of evolving responses within Britain to other cultures.

5. At the hearing, the expert adviser said that although Diallo had only been in Britain for a short time, written accounts of his visit had sustained his influence for longer. When asked why she had not objected to the painting’s export under the second Waverley criterion, she replied that William Hoare was not an artist of the first rank so she did not think that any of his works would qualify as “outstanding”. In her view, it was the identity of the sitter that made this painting important.

Applicant’s submission

6. The applicant had stated in a written submission that the portrait’s connection with British history and national life was tenuous. Diallo had been in for only a brief period from 1733 to1734, and does not merit an entry in the Dictionary of National Biography. In the applicant’s view, the portrait’s historical significance lay in its , which was linked with and America, rather than Britain. It could not be described as being of outstanding aesthetic importance because the artist, William Hoare of Bath, was of secondary, regional significance. This portrait was unusual within his oeuvre, which consisted mostly of official portraits of politicians, but was not superior in quality to those other works. Finally, the applicant stated that although the portrait was significant for the study of , this was in an African-American rather than a British context. It was also significant for the study of the depiction of native black Africans in art, but there were already plenty of other examples in UK public collections. In the applicant’s view, neither of these branches of study would be compromised by the painting leaving the country.

Discussion by the Committee

7. The expert adviser and applicant retired and the Committee discussed the case. Most of the members did not accept the expert adviser’s argument that the painting was closely connected to UK history and national life. It was noted that Diallo had only been in Britain for a short period, and there seemed to be little evidence to suggest that he had made much of an impact at that time. Also, he did not merit an entry in the Dictionary of National Biography. Although the expert adviser had not argued that the painting was of outstanding aesthetic importance, the Committee discussed whether or not it met the required standard. There was general agreement that, although William Hoare of Bath was not an artist of the first rank, this was an exceptional work within his oeuvre; a beautiful and sensitive portrait of an engaging personality. The majority of Committee members felt that it did in fact meet the second Waverley criterion. All agreed that the painting was also of outstanding significance for the study of both the development of non-European portraiture in Britain, and of the history of the slave trade, not least because Diallo himself had been a slave owner. It was the earliest British portrait of a freed slave that had so far been identified, and illustrated the complexities of the issues surrounding the slave trade and Britain’s role in it.

Waverley Criteria

8. The Committee voted on whether the portrait met the Waverley criteria. One member voted that it met the first Waverley criterion with ten voting against. Eight members voted that it met the second Waverley criterion with three voting against. All eleven members voted that it met the third Waverley criterion with none voting against. The painting was therefore found to meet the second and third Waverley criteria. It met the third criterion because of its significance for the study of both the development of non-European portraiture in Britain, and the history of the slave trade.

Matching offer

9. The Committee recommended the sum of £554,937.50 as a fair matching price.

Deferral period

10. The Committee agreed to recommend to the Secretary of State that the decision on the export licence should be deferred for an initial period of two months. If, within that period, MLA received notification of a serious intention to raise funds with a view to making an offer to purchase the portrait, the Committee recommended that there should be a further deferral period of three months.

Communication of findings

11. The expert adviser and the applicant returned. The Chairman notified them of the Committee’s decision on its recommendations to the Secretary of State. When asked by the Chairman if the owner would accept a matching offer at the price recommended by the Committee if the decision on the licence was deferred by the Secretary of State, the owner’s representative replied that he would need to consult with the owner on this question.

Subsequent developments

12. Subsequent to the hearing, the owner’s representative confirmed that the owner would, in principle, be willing to accept a matching offer at the price recommended by the Committee of £554,937.50.