 Rwy'n trefio, i'w ddweud i'w sefydlu ac yn ddweud i'w ddweud. Mae'n fwy oeddo i'ch gwneud i ddweud i'w ddweud i'w ddweud i'w ddweud i ddweud i'w ddweud i'w ddweud i'w ddweud. Rwy'n ddweud i'w ddweud i'w ddweud i'w ddweud i'w ddweud, ar y Wythfyr Nesaf, ac mae'n gweithio ar y gyfosir ac yn gyfrannu Europi. Ryw recountau, gre laughs gallwch, I'm very different from the collection i you until now. I'm exploring it really for the first time. The Horneam records now has recently opened a new world gallery. It has opened it last week in fact. There have been many press reviews, mostly good, so all good of course. But I have found some of them illuminating. ddif iawn i'w ddysgu y gallu'r galwyr yn ymgyrch yn ddweud, ac yn ddyn nhw'n amser wahanol, beth mae hyn yn cael ei ddweud yn cael eu cyfnodol, ac yn ymddi'r ddiffyniadau. Yn ddiwrnod o'r perffodus o'r ymddiadau a'r wladau o'r ddysgu'r busiau. Catherine Hughes, yn ymddangos yma, yn cyfryd o'r busiau, yn gwneud yw'r materiau. Ydw i'r prydysgau, rwy'n ei ddwynu'n cael eu bod yn hynny'n cael eu cyfryd. Rwyf i mi rhaid i'r cydnod o'r outstanding o gweithio gweithio, ddyn nhw mae'r sgwrth yn gweithio yn y mas 我lyw o'r unrhyw o'r gweithio. Mae'r cwmaintau, er mwyn amdod, o'r ffordd y ffordd o'r hunain o'r honnod yn ein gweithio, yn ymlaen i rhaid i ddweud i'r ffordd o'r gennym cyfnod i ddweud i chi yw'r syniadol i'r ffordd o'r hynny'n digon, cyd-dynion o'r mewn gweld, rydyn ni'n gweld, cyd-dynion a'r cyd-dynion. Mythwyr rydyn ni'n gweld i objeg. Ond y objeg eistedd yn ymddefnyddio'r amdegorol ac mae'r cyfnodau i gydnabod ymddangos ymdegorol. Dyma'r papur eftan y gallwch chi'n gwybod i'r material philipau yn ddyliadau'r material fydd ymdegorol i'r mewn gweld ymdegorol, ac yn ymddangos i gynhyrch ar gyhoedd y bod ni'n gallu cael ei ddau yn y cyfnodau ac yn y gwaith yng Nghymru yn y cyd-dysgwyl. Y dyfodol y gweithio'n gweithio'n mynd i'w ddodol, peirio'n gwneud y gweithio'n gweithio'n gweithio'n gweithio'n gwneud. Nawr, mae gweithio'n gymweithio'n gweithio'n gweithio. Mae cymryd yn dweud ar gyfer gweithio'r cyfrifiadau, o boblwch oes ystod o boblwch, oes i ni o'n gollwch yn gwneud, yn ei wneud o'r gweithio ddod, oherwydd oedd ar gyfer rai Llau Llau Ion, oherwydd mae'n gwybod i'n gwneud â'r gweithio. Rhaid i'r ffactorau, dyma'r gwneud oherwydd, ac yn ymgynghwylion ym mhwysiwn, ond y pwysig rwy'n amser. Doeddwn ni ar hyn o'r wneud o'r wneud, ac yn yr ymgynghwylion. Rwy'n gwybod i'n gweithio o'r mhwysiwn, gyda'r Llywodraeth ei amser agwyddiadwg wedyn i'ch gynhyrch gyda dwy'r 3,000 yr hyn ar gyfer 80,000 ar awdraedd ei hunanol. Mae Llywodraeth ei wasg de chynhyrch ar y 1890 i ysgrifwng y 1900 a osbryddd a'r ffaradod Fredric John Horneamon i'r Ffadwyr Cwm yn y Llywodraeth i ddefnyddio gyda i dweud i'r Llywodraeth yn gweithio. ond sgidegwch o'r wald, os ydym ni'n cymryd i'ch cynnig ar941. Felly yn ymddangos 120 yr gweithio, yma, Meddlach ar 200 atau wedi cymryd o'ch gyfl교edau a'r sefyllfa, ac rydych yn gweithio'r eich ffordd ac oc yn gweithio, sydd yn gallu'n cael ei ddogfodrewn a'r cefnogiلي ac yn cael ei wneud. Hornyman Museum, o Hornyman's as it's known locally, was originally formed of collections made by Frederick John Hornyman, who was the son of a tea merchant himself the son of an umbrella maker. Frederick became a liberal MP, so he was generally anti-establishment I would say, and a philanthropist. The late 19th century was the heyday of empire and naturally some of Hornyman's ideas must have been influenced by the colonial context, if only for him to contest those ideas. But his museum was not a state institution, it started more as a private passion. He was an amateur collector of art by which he meant anything man made. The word seems to have changed its meaning, and nature, which is everything not made by man, i.e. he collected everything. His collections were first displayed in his own private house, and you see a scene here, and included a lot of British material, as well as items from mainland Europe and other parts of the world. In what became known as Surrey House Museum, rooms had such titles as the Elizabethan bedroom, the ethnographical saloon, and the Indian gods room. There were 22 rooms. The image shows him in 1891, second from left in the ethnographical saloon, with his wife and son and the curators. The display rooms could be visited first by friends and acquaintances, and later by members of the public on specified days in the week, before it opened completely when it was in the new building. Items which Frederick collected reflect his own taste and interests, and as well as being outside a state structure, they were also acquired outside an academic framework. Some were donated to the museum by friends and acquaintances, some were brought to the UK by missionaries. Horlamon was brought up as a Quaker, and there were many overseas connections. Many other items were bought from dealers, and some came from auctions after the international trade exhibitions, which followed the 1851 Great Exhibition, which had inspired Frederick as a young man. The first register made of items in Frederick's Museum was made in 1898, and it lists several boats of models from the Sulu archipelago, the first mention of items from the era of the Philippines. These would have been displayed with boat models from other parts of the world, where boat technologies could be compared. So they weren't representing the Philippines, they were representing ways of making a boat. It's likely that they came from the Indian and colonial exhibition of 1886, in which such material appeared. Horlamon had acquired the bulk of his collection, not to promote particular ideas about the world, but for his own satisfaction to impress his friends and colleagues, and to amaze and intrigue the people of South London, with examples of skilfully made artefacts, as well as curiosities from the rich and varied peoples of the world. But from early in the 1890s, Frederick began thinking of building a new museum. Sowinghouse Museum, where the collection was originally displayed, was a domestic property which had been adapted to become a museum, and it was not ideal. In 1896 Frederick commissioned the architect Charles Harrison Townsend to design a new museum in the fashion novel Our Nouveau Style. The structure was very modern of iron and concrete, the lighting electric, and the building centrally heated. It was the epitome of progress. In 1898 Sowinghouse Museum was closed, and the existing building demolished. In 1901 Horlamon gave his collection and the new purpose built museum, in which it was housed, and the 20 acres of gardens, to the London County Council as representing the people of London, dedicated to the public forever as a free museum for their recreation, instruction and enjoyment. So, as well as a place of pleasure, it was very much for education. The first curator, Richard Quick, listed the objects and arranged the first displays. Objects were grouped not by ethnic group, but largely by material type or technique. One case displayed lack of wear, another showed pipes, some had wood carving and so on. Material from all over the world might be together in one case. The boat models, for example, would have been in the water transport case. When the museum was passed to the London County Council an advisory curator Alfred Court Haddon was appointed. As an academic anthropologist, he immediately redefined the museum as ethnographic and replaced the curator, Richard Quick, yes, there was a bit of a storm about that, with Herbert Spencer Harrison, a protege. Haddon's influence dominated the next 30 years. The galleries were rearranged to show the evolution of art, that is the evolution of technology, from stone age to industrial. This was not an evolution of peoples or cultures, however, it was not social Darwinism. The perspective was on a universal development of technology. There was no focus on individual countries, cultures or ethnic groups. The case to the left of the attendant in the image is entitled Evolution of Decorative Art. There were some cases which looked at other aspects of life. At the front is a case on Buddhism, which the handbook explained as being a very complex subject on which the museum library held many books where people could read further. It was too complex to explain in the handbook. Most of the man-made objects were in the South Hall. The North Hall was devoted to natural history. The first handbook which came out in 1904 shows how objects were arranged. I deliberately picked this out because of the racist language. It's actually quite rare to find any, but there it is. We're not hiding it, but despite this language, the text is focused not on people but on material. For example, stone age methods still employed in Britain were noted and also advanced technologies in simple societies. There is, sadly, no mention. I am going to get on to some soon, but there's no mention of material from the Philippines at this point. Here we go. The handbook for 1910, however, included one photograph showing a comparative image of various methods of making fire around the world. At the top is a fire saw from the Philippines, which in fact is not mentioned in the museum's register, so there weren't very efficient documentation. But we have found it on the shelves. I can see somebody in the audience knows how it works, so I'm looking forward to finding out. The first item listed in the accession's register as coming from the Philippines, apart from the model boats, which were almost certainly made elsewhere, is this basket acquired in 1909 from the dealer William Ockford Oldman. This would have been placed immediately on display in the cases illustrating the stages in the evolution of the domestic arts, which included displays of basketry, pottery, spinning and weaving, ranging from very simple structures to more complex ones. Again, these displays would have juxtaposed material from all over the world. The following year, 1910, Alfred Haddon himself donated a pipe from the Philippines together with three specimens illustrating the Siopadu or Lost Wax process. This donation was illustrative of the museum's focus on techniques and materials he's interested in how it's made. The pipe was classified as igorot. Did you say igorotty? I don't know how they said it. In fact, they probably didn't know themselves. Two years after this donation, the museum purchased an igorot ax, though this has not yet been identified on the shelves. This was followed by the purchase of two carrying baskets from a Mrs Turnbull. It's interesting how you get one object and then people beginning to become aware of the Philippines and we haven't got anything from there. They purchased these, that's one basket back and front. There's the second basket. The baskets may have been displayed in the section on land transport as objects were partly classified by function and these would have been used for carrying heavy loads. Mrs Turnbull also donated a textile, a beautiful blanket, if that's the right word. Unfortunately, we have no idea who Mrs Turnbull was. They were nice things, I think. Anyway. Also, this is a terrible photograph but we rely on our documentation photographers. This is a rice container, sort of overhead shot. After Mrs Turnbull's donation in 1914, no more material from the Philippines was added to the collection for nearly 40 years. After Mrs Turnbull's donation in 1914, no more material from the Philippines for nearly 40 years. This is probably because of the way museum collections grow. Most items come from countries where you have a connection and most items came from parts of the then empire either through colonial officers, that should come last, not often colonial missionaries or traders or travellers. Items from parts of Europe were also acquired because Europe's closer geographically and culturally than most other parts of the world. There were very few direct connections between the UK and the Philippines. Despite the curator's best efforts, for example, had bought a collection of 130 items from the Arctic when he was in the USA in 1909. He's always looking for things that are underrepresented. Many parts of the world were practically unrepresented at that time. Anyway, in 1950, the first Philippine material to be acquired since 1914 came in when the widow of the dealer William Ockleford Oldman, interesting, we'd only ever bought one object from him, but his widow donated items left unsold from his collections. I want to emphasise that many museums at that time and some still today, certainly the Horniman, consist largely of donated material. The contents are therefore determined at least in part by the donor as much as by curators. Donors believe that what they're donating fits with the museum's collections, and at certain times there may be a tendency on the part of a curator to accept rather than refuse for various reasons. Sometimes there's one thing that you want amongst the group, and it's difficult to say to somebody, well, thank you very much, but it's rubbish. You have to find another way of putting it. But in the case of the Oldman collection, the objects clearly looked interesting. Many of the Oldman pieces came from other parts of the world. They came from all sorts of places. William Oldman was born in 1879 and died in 1949, and he collected ethnographic art, so-called, and European arms and armour, and he was also a dealer. He was mostly active in terms of business between the late 1890s and 1913, and I suspect that's when this material dates from. Not knowing the date or background does reduce the value, I don't mean monetary, but the value of material in a collection, in terms of what it can tell us, but it can be valuable nonetheless, and the curator has to make a judgment about that. Oldman purchased collections from various sources, including items that were considered surplus from many small British museums. We now have regulations in museums that are not really allowed to dispose of things any more without going through massive processes, so that source is partly dried up. He produced auction catalogs illustrated with photographs, which are very, very useful between 1901 and 1913, and he also offered items directly to clients. After 1913 he stopped holding auctions, but he still had his clients. His own personal collection focused on Oceania, although he never travelled to the Pacific, and so anything that wasn't from Oceania he would offer for sale. The headcloth on the right is part of a complete costume, or so we're told, so I would like to be told. It includes trousers, which I haven't got a photograph of, and this jacket. The interpretation of this material is particularly difficult without help from descendants from the source community. The museum has collections from all over the world, so it's working through the material, inviting contributions. I hope this is the beginning of an engagement with the Philippines. Mrs Oldman's donation also included five shields, including these three, and I'll put the words that came with these objects. We just note them down and they're up for challenge. There are other items including a backstrap loom, not everything's been photographed yet. By this time material did not go on display immediately. Some space was devoted to a store for objects taken off display and waiting for space, and there were several re-displays over the ensuing years. In 1953, the museum accepted a donation of a bow, quiver and arrows, as yet on photograph, from a Mr K. Puckle. If anybody knows who he was, we'd be pleased to hear. Here's his letter. Several letters, they don't tell us much more than this one, but it was interesting. We don't often hear where things came from. The native bow and arrows set from the pygmy Aborigines, as described to you in my original letter. They inhabited in 1923 when I came by them, the region around the American Army camp of Stotsenburg. Does that mean anything? No, interesting. Anyway, this is a fairly typical sort of what donors say. I'm very glad to have found a home for them. They're usually cluttering up the garage or something, where they're appreciated and where they may do some educational good. Well, not so far, but that's hope so. Unfortunately, it looks as if the curator didn't get any further details. The largest single acquisition of Philippine material came from Kenneth Athol Webster in 1954. I suspect he got it from somebody who was collecting it with an ethnographer's eye, partly because there are little notes here and there. Webster was chiefly a collector of material relating to New Zealand. He was born in New Zealand. When he was 30, he worked his passage to England, where he was called up and joined the army. He became captain in the Second World War. After the war, he became a collector dealer. There are ledgers for his 2D art collection. Unfortunately, not so much about material culture. He got some material through exchanges, and Leicester Museum sold him ethnographic material salvaged after bomb damage. Philippine material would not have interested him for his own collections. I'll just show you some examples of what the Hornman purchased. These are two women's girdles. Are they belts? I thought they must be. When it says girdle, you're never quite sure what that means. We don't know how to display them because we don't know how they're worn. It's only really when collections are looked at in relation to where they come from that you can start understanding them properly. This textile was listed as a women's skirt, and the word kiangan was written with it. Is that a place? Sometimes it's a place, sometimes it's an ethnic group. Usually the documentation officer doesn't know which it is, and it often gets put in the wrong place. This one says intulu, but I suspect that might be intulu. Intulu? Intulu is the name of the skirt. Brilliant. Put it in the right place then when I get back. Then we have these boys girdles. This piece was clearly woven on a continuous warp. I don't quite understand how that would be worn. If anybody can... That one has never been used. Oh, it's just that it's never been used. We've got several of these. How long is it? Well, does it... No, why? I don't think it's ever been used. There are three more of those. The top three are in addition. The one underneath is described as a boy's waist sash. Then we have a jacket and loincloth. A company says a loincloth worn whilst working, made of natural cotton, grown and spun in Ifugau. This has not been unrolled recently, so the photograph shows what was described as a burial shroud. I'm always a bit suspicious of burial shrouds because people tend to say that when they're trying to sell things because they think it sounds more interesting, but it may be, but we have yet to explore that. We don't know what. The fiber has not been listed by the staff. Then a woman's belt made of rows of shell and dark brown horn beads with wooden slats in between. I don't know where that's from. There's a wooden bowl top left, brass Ifugau ear ornaments, silver ear ornaments and boar's tusk armlet Ifugau food box on the right. This is all from this same collection and it really looks to me as if somebody is being quite systematic and trying to get one of everything, or maybe three of everything, I don't know, from where they are, wherever it is. The terrible photograph again, wooden box hollowed out from one block of wood on the left and a wooden line container with a stopper in the shape of a bird. Okay, so that's the end of that little... There are some more, but those are the things that have been photographed. Then in 1956, a collection was purchased from a Captain R.P. Jones or Johns of Lower Bell Graves Street. It included some Japanese masks, an African musical instrument, a Buddhist stone stupa, a Bronze Age Iberian pot and two items from the Philippines, which makes me think that he didn't have a connection with the Philippines. So either he inherited these things or he was a mad collector or we don't know. But it's quite a nice sword and cheat and a breastplate with apparently horn panels. So I have to find an expert in armour. Anyway, we have discovered so far that he was in the Somerset Light Infantry in 1925, but they never went to the Philippines, so that's no good. Quite often what's happened is they've got a big collection, they've sold all the best bits or what are considered to be the best bits to other museums who've got a budget and then we get what I think are the interesting bits that other people don't want because they're not pretty enough. We tend to not have... We have got some elite material from the early days, but nowadays we're more interested in... Well, I don't know, in the 1950s I think they were just trying to fill up the building. Literally, actually, yeah, anyway. Interesting acquisition in 1978, actually. I don't know why it says 1973 there. They were transferred to the ornament by Hereford County Museum and we have the name of the person who originally got them. Souvenirs, I mean, actually proudly says the one on the left that it is a souvenir. The interesting category, they speak both of how visitors see or are expected to see a country and its people and of encounters between two cultures. They're usually collected because people feel, you know, they want to remember. So it's the opposite of stealing things, I think. And sometimes a great many items in a museum collection have been made specifically for foreigners and people just don't know that. Some museums would see this as problematic, but at the Hall of Men it's a very interesting anthropological avenue to explore, although you don't want 100% souvenirs, but it's an interesting aspect. And as with the Hereford County Museum, the Bourne Hall Museum was getting rid of... Actually it was when it was founded it inherited some material from another museum which had closed and this material was not deemed to fit its remit. We didn't accept everything from them and in fact they lay around on the shelves for many years before a decision was made. But we have two loin cloths, a bit of pina, a tiny bit of pina is better than no pina at all. And yeah, okay. And this little figure. Then we got a collection from a guy who'd been collecting in Southeast Asia, so lots of Indonesian material and these two pieces. He decided to emigrate, and one suspects he might have been pursued by Scotland Yard because he just ran and didn't leave any forwarding address. But he did leave some quite nice things. This small collection came from a member of the UK diplomatic mission in the Philippines. She had been posted to Oman and Japan and Indonesia and she gave us things from there as well. But she bought some... Also she gave the museum a drawn thread work tablecloth set which in many ways is very Philippine, that kind of needlework. The occasional single item donations. This came from a man who gave us a lot of things from Southeast Asia, only one from the Philippines, but it's very nice. I think so. Then we have a collection from Colin Bichler who was a journalist and he served with Reuters news agency for 26 years all over the place and oddly enough the only things we got were from the Philippines. Maybe he didn't collect anything anywhere else, but again these were passed to us by his family after his death. It includes 13 hats. You know a collector when they start collecting examples of the same type of thing from lots of different places. So the 13 hats here and some. And then these three beautiful baskets, two of which are currently on display. And then in 2016 a collection which was made intentionally, we had a programme with the Royal Anthropological Institute to fund some young early career researchers to bring some things back from their field work. Dalia Iskander had actually gone out to research healing practices because you know there's a lot we can learn from them and she made some film of a ceremony and the items used by the healer were collected with the healer's kind of consent and knowledge and I think enthusiasm for the museum. And this kind of field collection is actually regularly undertaken by ornament curators, the staff, but in their own areas of expertise. Anyway this project gave us a chance to broaden the scope a bit. So this is probably the first time the material from the Philippines has actually been looked at as a group. The idea has now been mooted several times of mounting a display focusing on textiles from the Philippines and if this is done it will need funding, collaborative work, photography to show the human dimension because we always like to include people as well as objects in our exhibition. I don't mean real people. I mean I do mean real people, images, film or photography showing how things are made, those sorts of things that these are not just things that you get in a shop because otherwise museums look like shop windows. And probably we want to acquire some new material to show that it's come from a living, changing, continuing culture and if the project goes ahead it will offer a range of opportunities for collaborative community interpretation. Thank you.