Little is known about general Sir William Maxwell, apart from his participation in the American War of Independence, from 1776-1777 to 1781. In 1782, he returns to Great Britain for good (Bardi 1963). Apparently the absence of available biographical references about the sitter made Camesasca (1987, p. 150) accept, without further questioning, the tradition according to which the portrait probably belongs in the beginning of the 90s. This is, however, highly controversial. It cannot be denied that, as regards the kneeheight position of the figure – with an obvious military connotation, and the basic chromatic harmony between creamy-brown hues in contrast with the red –, the portrait in question is very close to the Portrait of Captain David Birrel painted, according to Thomson (1997, p. 80), in the beginning of the 90s. Furthermore, it is likely that Raeburn might have been inspired, in both cases, by the Portrait of Lord Heathfield, of the National Gallery in London, displayed in the Royal Academy in 1788, exactly when Raeburn, at the time of his return to Italy, makes a stopover in London (Thomson 1997, p. 60). But these analogies are obviously generic. Far more conclusive is the comparison of Masp’s portrait with the Portrait of Sir Duncan Campbell of Barcaldine (The Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco), dated by Thomson (1997, p. 140) to c. 1812. In both sitters everything is virtually identical. The pose, the precise rotation of the head in relation to the torso, the position of both hands, the distance of the sitter in relation to the level surface of the canvas, the sotto in su angle obtained by the pose of both sitters, the neutral dark chestnut-brown background, the technique used to shape the drapery system of the red jackets and, finally, the deliberately heroic gaze of both officers, are but a few of the coincidences that strongly suggest that Masp painting – General Sir William Maxwell – should be dated at about 1812. An additional reason for the convenience of a later dating is the probable age of the subject (around 60), which seems to indicate that his participation in the American War of Independence took place at an early age, between 25 and 30, and not as a general, which explains his discreet presence in the historical records of those wars.

— Unknown authorship, 1998

---