A "functionally plumbed" eye-catching statue, recently unveiled at the Maritime Museum of Tasmania, is thought to be the earliest known free-standing full length sculpture in Australia.
The 1.3-metre tall statue presents the striking spectacle of a man, respectably clothed, urinating.
Maritime Museum of Tasmania president Chris Tassell said little was confirmed about the "extraordinary" sculpture, but he believed it had been created as political commentary attacking "reviled" colonial administrator George Arthur.
It is believed to have been sculpted by artist and stonemason Daniel Herbert, whose work can also be found at the Royal Botanical Gardens in Hobart and on the Ross Bridge in Ross.
In acquiring the statue, the museum hopes to uncover more of its story.
Political commentary sculpted from stone
The almost 200-year-old mystery is now on display at the museum, with answers sought to its creation.
"We know fundamentally that it was carved from Tasmanian sandstone," Mr Tassell said.
Little is confirmed beyond the type of stone, but research by the museum suggests it came into existence because of a deep dislike of colonial administrator George Arthur.
"If we look at Tasmanian history in the first half of the 19th century, we know it was fairly volatile," Mr Tassell said.
"Particularly during the later administration of George Arthur.
"There were very few figures as reviled by part of the community as he was."
Arthur was disliked by wealthy Tasmanians for his unmalleable approach to managing the colony.
With a passion for reform and a thorough approach, Arthur was not one to be thwarted by people in positions of power seeking to game the system.
He made a perfect candidate for an expensive and laborious approach to deriding a political leader.
"You have to start to wonder, who so disliked this person they would actually commission someone not just to do a pen and ink sketch in a contemptible pose, but rather sculpt out of sandstone," Mr Tassell said.
"And sculpted in remarkable detail, this figure in this pose – it is literally unbelievable.
"We can't find a comparable example before the 20th century."
Handiwork of well-known sculptor
The statue is thought to have been carved by well-known 19th century stonemason Daniel Herbert, for its similarity to other examples of his work in Tasmania and the artist's connection to Arthur.
Herbert is known to have worked in Tasmania at the time, alongside another stonemason named James Colbeck.
As convicts, the two worked on the Ross Bridge in the northern midlands of Tasmania and received free pardons following the completion of the bridge in 1836.
When compared to known works by Herbert, Mr Tassell said there were similarities that aligned the statue with Herbert's work over Colbeck.
"There's a sundial base in the [Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens] … stylistically that is quite similar to our figure in terms of the detail and the costume and just the way it's been carved," he said.
"We're fairly comfortable that this was a work by Daniel Herbert."
Prominent landowner of the time, William Kermode, is believed to have commissioned the satirical piece.
His property, Mona Vale, was known for its sophisticated irrigation systems in the 19th century, making it a suitable location for a statue functionally plumbed to appear to urinate.
"To be effective it needed a pressurised supply of water," Mr Tassell said.
"Daniel Herbert worked for William Kermode at various times and Lieutenant Governor Arthur.
"There's a lot of assumptions there and hopefully by the figure becoming public knowledge now … we can refine our understanding of who did it, who paid for it and why."
'Unsavoury' nature helped preserve history
Mostly indoors from the 1860s until the 1990s, Mr Tassell said the statue's indoor life had made it arguably the best preserved Tasmanian colonial sculpture.
In the late 1860s the statue was relocated to a property called Runnymede, where it is said to have been kept under the stairs because of its "unsavoury" nature.
Moved outside in the 1990s, the statue then deteriorated slightly due to weather.
Nevertheless, Mr Tassell is enamoured with its condition.
"It's still extraordinarily well preserved," he said.
"If you look at the detail, you can see the creases in the clothing, you can see the seams in the shirt, the buttons, just amazing detail."
There is little damage, the most obvious being a missing arm and chip to the statue's nose.
The museum hopes to reattach the hand and forearm if funding allows.
Mr Tassell is not sure whether an extra digit on the broken hand was a purposeful gesture made by the artist, which is another facet of information that may be gleaned through public sharing of the sculpture.
"We've spent 12 months researching it so that the story we have so far has some foundations," he said.
"There's a long way to go. It's just a wonderful piece of work, someone really enjoyed doing the sculpture."