Analysis of forms of exchange involved in acquisition events has revealed that regular sources of English material at the Pitt Rivers Museum were less likely to be straightforward donors and more likely to engage in sales, exchanges and loans. Table 4 below shows all sources of material on 6 or more occasions and the form these exchanges took.
One might suggest that this difference could be accounted for by dealers, since if they stood to gain financially from the transactions, it might encourage them to be regularly involved in acquisition events with the museum. By examining a list of sources involved in more than five acquisition events (Table below) we can see that this makes up part of the story. The percentage of purchases rises from 17% to between 22% and 28% of events for this group, which includes seven known dealers for whom purchase is the form of the majority of their acquisition events.
Two institutions, the Ashmolean and University Museum account for the increase in transfers, since they were involved when responsibility changed for different aspects of the collections of the University of Oxford. However there are also significant increases in loans with smaller increases in the percentage of exchanges. Henry Balfour, Beatrice Blackwood and Harold St. George Gray, all at one time employed at the Pitt Rivers loaned, as well as gave, material to the museum.
As well as dealers, University museums and staff members, this list of the 36 most regular sources of English material for the Pitt Rivers, who were each involved in six of more acquisition events, includes another significant sub-group. This is made up of ‘amateur antiquarians’, all individuals who frequently had another source of income, such as teaching or the church. These seventeen individuals appear to have been in regular contact with the museum, and active in adding to its collections, but the acquisition events in which they were involved seem to have been fairly varied.
Sydney Hewlett, a schoolmaster is unusual in that over half the acquistion events he was involved in were purchases (62%) but he also loaned and gave material to the museum. Edward Lovett, a bank clerk and folklorist sold material to the museum on four occasions, exchanged on three and donated once. This seems to fit with the range of Lovett’s activity in relation to a range of collections such as the Wellcome Collection (Hill, 2007). Francis Knowles, a member of the aristocracy and former student at the museum as well as a long-term volunteer sold material on 9 occasions, exchanged material twice, loaned once and donated on 24 occasions.
This range of forms of exchange seems to suggest the complexity of the relationships between these figures and the museum, as well as the large number of acquisition events in which they were involved over a period of time. Noteworthy among these amateurs are a number of women; Estella Canziani, Margaret Irvine, Patience Watters and Anna Barrett-Lennard who were all predominantly donors, but also tended to be active in the middle part of the twentieth century. Both these areas of interest, having been identified by this method of interrogating the museum’s database are now forming the basis of further archival and historical research, which it is hoped will come to fruition in a book length publication.
Hill, Jude (2007) 'The Story of the Amulet: Locating the Enchantment of Collections', Journal of Material Culture 12: 65-87.
|
Name |
Acquisition Events |
Purchase |
% |
Exchange |
% |
Loan |
% |
Transf. |
% |
Gift |
% |
|
Totals |
494 |
109 |
22% |
5 |
1% |
41 |
8% |
16 |
3% |
323 |
65% |
|
Henry Balfour |
104 |
|
|
|
|
14 |
13% |
|
|
90 |
87% |
|
Francis Howe Seymour Knowles |
36 |
9 |
25% |
2 |
6% |
1 |
3% |
|
|
24 |
67% |
|
Alexander J.M. Bell |
27 |
16 |
59% |
|
|
9 |
33% |
|
|
2 |
7% |
|
Sydney Gerald Hewlett |
27 |
1 |
4% |
|
|
1 |
4% |
|
|
25 |
93% |
|
Alfred Schwartz Barnes |
24 |
|
|
|
|
1 |
4% |
|
|
23 |
96% |
|
Stevens Auction Rooms |
23 |
23 |
100% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beatrice Mary Blackwood |
18 |
|
|
|
|
1 |
6% |
|
|
17 |
94% |
|
T.J. Carter |
13 |
12 |
92% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
8% |
|
Kenneth Page Oakley |
13 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13 |
100% |
|
Edward Burnett Tylor |
12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
12 |
100% |
|
|
|
Oxford University Museum of Natural History |
12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12 |
100% |
|
Estella Louisa Michaela Canziani |
11 |
|
|
|
|
9 |
82% |
|
|
2 |
18% |
|
George Fabian Lawrence |
11 |
8 |
73% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
27% |
|
J. Bateman |
11 |
11 |
100% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Margaret F. Irvine |
10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10 |
100% |
|
Edward Lovett |
8 |
4 |
50% |
3 |
38% |
|
|
|
|
1 |
13% |
|
Cecil Vincent Goddard |
8 |
2 |
25% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
6 |
75% |
|
Oliver H. Wild |
8 |
1 |
13% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 |
88% |
|
Harold St. George Gray |
8 |
|
|
|
|
1 |
13% |
|
|
7 |
88% |
|
James Reid Moir |
7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 |
100% |
|
Edward Bagnall Poulton |
7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 |
100% |
|
Ashmolean Museum |
7 |
|
|
|
|
3 |
43% |
4 |
57% |
|
|
|
Robert William Theodore Gunther |
7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 |
100% |
|
Patience Watters |
7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 |
100% |
|
Henry George Ommaney Kendall |
7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 |
100% |
|
William H. Parker / Parker of Oxford |
7 |
7 |
100% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jenny Peck |
7 |
4 |
57% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
43% |
|
Bruce Morton Goldie |
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6 |
100% |
|
Samuel Hazzledine Warren |
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6 |
100% |
|
James Edge Partington |
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6 |
100% |
|
Amabel Nevill Sollas (previously Moseley) |
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6 |
100% |
|
Charles Taphouse and Son Ltd |
6 |
5 |
83% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
17% |
|
William Downing Webster |
6 |
5 |
83% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
17% |
|
Anna Meredith Barrett-Lennard |
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6 |
100% |
|
Thomas William Taphouse |
6 |
1 |
17% |
|
|
1 |
17% |
|
|
4 |
67% |
|
Hélène La Rue |
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6 |
100% |