Charles Seligman Beatrice Blackwood PRM Museum John Hutton Henry Balfour Edward Tylor Augustus Fox

ESRC 'Relational Museum'

Hutton and / or Mills as named collectors

[article ID:435]

What type of things did they collect?

Where did they collect from?

Note that these statistics were prepared when we were not sure whether to choose John Henry Hutton or James Phillip Mills as our sixth named collector. In the event Hutton was chosen but these statistics are given anyway.

Classes

Hutton field collector

%

Hutton donor

%

Mills field collector

%

Mills donor

%

Global %

Agriculture

97

3

97

-

87

3

88

3

0.7

Animalia

97

3

97

-

19

1

19

-

1.7

Animal Gear

4

0

4

0

4

0

4

0

0.7

Bag

24

1

24

-

27

1

27

-

0.9

Barkcloth

3

0

3

0

20

1

20

-

0.4

Basketry

253

8

251

7

211

7

211

-

2.3

Body Art

28

1

28

-

13

0

13

-

0.7

Box

67

2

63

2

43

1

43

-

2.5

Carving

1

0

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

Ceremonial

88

3

85

2

65

2

64

2

1.5

Children

19

1

19

-

96

3

96

-

0.8

Clothing

438

13

442

13

656

23

655

23

3.8

Commemoration

64

2

64

-

32

1

32

-

0.1

Cordage

6

0

6

0

6

0

6

0

0.6

Currency

383

11

383

-

144

5

145

5

2.2

Dance

33

1

33

-

55

2

55

-

0.6

Death

117

3

119

3

30

1

30

-

2.6

Dwelling

57

2

57

-

90

3

90

-

0.3

Fan

5

0

5

0

2

0

2

0

0.1

Figure

159

5

167

5

206

7

206

-

5.3

Fire

115

3

99

3

61

2

61

-

1.6

Fishing

39

1

41

1

27

1

42

1

1.4

Food

107

3

107

-

158

5

158

-

2.7

Furniture Dwelling

5

0

7

0

8

0

8

-

0.5

Geology

3

0

5

0

1

0

1

0

1.6

Headhunting

98

3

99

3

107

4

106

4

0.1

Hunting

66

2

66

-

74

3

74

-

0.9

Insignia

9

0

9

0

3

0

3

0

0.4

Lighting

1

0

1

0

0

0

0

0

1.3

Lock

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0.1

Marriage

6

0

6

0

18

1

18

-

0.1

Mask

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0.2

Measurement

20

1

20

-

20

1

20

-

1.8

Medicine

28

1

73

2

17

1

17

-

0.9

Metallurgy

25

1

25

-

21

1

21

-

0.3

Model

65

2

65

-

91

3

91

-

1.2

Music

137

4

144

4

150

5

145

5

3.3

Narcotic

192

6

192

-

88

3

89

3

2.0

Navigation

1

0

1

0

3

0

3

0

0.7

Ornament & bead

511

15

562

16

508

18

506

17

11.8

Photograph

0

0

7

0

0

0

0

0

1.4

Physical Anthropology

88

3

89

3

11

0

11

-

0.7

Picture

2

0

2

0

0

0

0

0

1.3

Plant

45

1

40

1

30

1

30

-

1.3

Pottery

85

3

85

-

57

2

57

-

7.0

Punishment & Torture

1

0

1

0

5

0

5

-

0.1

Religion

218

6

261

7

136

5

136

-

8.4

Reproduction

8

0

13

0

11

0

11

-

1.2

Scientific Apparatus

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Specimen

156

5

152

4

40

1

40

-

3.7

Sport

13

0

13

-

11

0

11

-

0.1

Status

406

12

407

12

719

25

718

25

1.6

Technique

24

1

24

-

39

1

39

-

1.6

Textile

211

6

211

-

509

18

509

18

3.2

Theatre

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0.2

Time

3

0

3

-

2

0

2

0

0.1

Toilet

14

0

14

-

35

1

35

-

1.1

Tool [definite]

185

5

187

5

163

6

165

6

32.1

Tool or weapon

275

8

330

9

244

8

245

8

5.9

Toy & Game

34

1

34

-

78

3

78

-

3.1

Trade

86

3

86

-

105

4

105

-

1.5

Transport

89

3

89

-

103

4

104

4

0.8

Vessel

167

6

176

5

125

4

125

-

4.1

Weapon [definite]

824

24

847

24

511

18

519

18

15.7

Writing

23

1

23

-

30

1

30

-

2.0

Total number of objects donated by the named collectors

3,369

3,520

2,883

2,902

Hutton field collector

Hutton donor

Mills

field collector

Mills donor

Because Hutton and Mills field collected such a large proportion of their donations (Hutton collected all but 177 of the objects in his donation (95 per cent), Mills collected all but 26 object from his donation (more than 99 per cent)) there is very little variation between the totals for each class depending on whether they collected it themselves or not we have therefore not bothered to calculate the percentages for th eunchanged classes (even though we accept the proportions would be slightly different as the total number of objects is different), the only percentages we have worked out for the donor column is those marked in blue which are different from the field collector totals. In instances where the total for the class has gone DOWN between field collector and donor columns this means the object came to us via another donor.

Significant collections (those over 10 per cent of the total number of objects) as with other named collectors, are marked in red. If a class name is highlighted in red it means both Hutton and Mills collected significant number s of that class

Summary

Hutton - the classes which have most objects represented in the Hutton collection are weapons (nearly a aquarter of the entire Hutton collection), ornament and bead, status and clothing.

Mills - the same types of objects were priorities in the Mills collection except that he has a great number of textiles (unlike Hutton)

Neither collector has a significant collection of stone tools unlike the global collections.

Where did the collections come from?

A very high percentage of Hutton and Mills material was collected or donated and provenanced to India (or 'British India']:

India

%

British India

Bangladesh

% India as total

Other

%

Hutton as field collector

3,290

97.6

15

3

98.2

61

1.8

Hutton as donor

3,346

95

109

3

98

62

1.8

Mills as field collector

2,751

95.4

0

121

99.6

11

0.4

Mills as donor

2,747

94.6

0

119

98.7

36

1.2

Hutton's other consists of items from Burma, Nepal, Sri Lanka (Burma is source of most).

Mills' is more mixed with items also coming from Micronesia, Africa, UK and Australia as well as Asia

The domination of Indian objects from both collectors is of course because of their Nagaland collections.

Discussion of Mills and Hutton

We did not think we should have both Hutton and Mills as their collections are very similar (see above) with exactly the same classes not represented in their collections and exactly the same typological strengths (with the exception of textiles that Mills collected much more vociferously than Hutton). Mills also collected more in one other specific place - Bangladesh. However both their collections are very similar taken at a macro level, they were collected principally in the same very small geographical area (Nagaland, in NE India) and at about the same time (Hutton started collecting slightly earlier, and Mills collected later - but broadly they collected in the early twentieth century). Both Hutton and Mills were career civil servants working for the Indian Civil Service, and both of them, after retirement from that service, worked as academic anthropologists in this country (Hutton at Cambridge and Mills at London). Their careers are also very similar therefore. Both of them published monographs about the Naga peoples, We believe that Hutton published more than Mills. We also have both their photographic collections though we have much more of Hutton than Mills (whose main photographic collections are elsewhere). A fair amount has been published about the Naga collections.

ESRC Relational Museum

23.10.03

ERSC logo

The financial support of this project by the ESRC is gratefully acknowledged.