The Collected Collections A Collections Survey for the North West Federation of Museums & Art Galleries Objectives The aim of this survey is to bring together and arrange data on the collections held by museums in the area covered by the North West Museums Service. Each section has an overview of the data presented, but detailed analysis is left for future researchers. The purpose in collecting this data is to inform people, particularly curators, about which collections are where. In this way it is hoped to facilitate co-operation between the region’s museums in their collecting activities and in their use of and access to collections. Through the data collected it is also hoped that curators will have a starting point to begin identifying - • Overlaps and gaps in the geographical collecting areas • Overlaps and gaps in the subject fields being collected in the region • Centres of curatorial expertise (possibly where major collections are held) • Collections or items of regional, national or international significance. This report can also be used in association with other collection reports which have been carried out in the region such as: • The Conservation of Industrial Collections - A Survey by JD Storer. Pub. The Science Museum and The Conservation Unit of the Museums & Galleries Commission, 1989 • Skeletons in the Cupboard - A report on the condition of institutionally held natural science collections in the North West of England, with suggestions for their care and use. Compiled and published by North West Collections Research Unit, 1998 (compiled 1994) • First Steps towards a National Inventory of Historic Textile Machinery. Ed. Simon Chaplin. Pub. The Northern Textile Industry Curators’ Group in conjunction with the Science and Industry Collections Group and The Science Museum, 1998 • University Collections by Kate Arnold Foster The Collected Collections Page 1 September 1998 Timescale A major problem in conducting this survey has been the difficulty in getting museums to provide the necessary data. The first requests for information were sent out in January 1996. At this point it was hoped that some kind of document would be produced in the same year. A patchy and generally slow response rate has meant that repeated requests for information have been sent out from time to time over the last two years. In some cases this has been due to vacant posts, staff changes or reviews of collecting policies, which have made it difficult to send the required information. Notwithstanding a two year gap since the first information was received, a broad base of information has now been compiled, which forms a useful starting point for further collection discussion and co-operation in the region. Many thanks to those people who did provide the information on which this report is based. Feedback The North West Federation of Museums and Art Galleries is keen to have feedback about this report - its usefulness, relevance, content and the way forward in light of the collection information which it provides. If you have any comments please contact the Honorary Secretary, North West Federation of Museums & Art Galleries. Methodology Data Collection Data for the survey was collected in three ways 1. By standard letter requesting a copy of each museums collecting policy or similar document. 2. By sending a summary of their collections and collecting activities, to each museum who provided a collecting policy. 3. By sending a questionnaire to each museum see Appendix I . The Collected Collections Page 2 September 1998 Museums Surveyed Requests for collecting policies and questionnaires were sent to all Registered museums in the North West Museums Service. Full details of which museums provided collecting policies, returned survey summaries of their policies and returned questionnaires are provided in Appendix II . Data and statistics in this survey are based only on those museums which provided information through any of the data collection methods listed under Data Collection . 71 of the 88 Museum Services contacted provided at least one of the items of information requested. These Museum Services run some 145 museums and galleries. The way in which data was supplied varied from museum to museum. In some cases a service-wide response was sent, in others individual museums or even departments provided information separately. This is indicated where possible. In general most of the region’s larger museums or more significant collections are represented. No information at all was provided by 16 Museum Services who run 16 museums and galleries. All data analysis within the survey is based on the 71 Museum Services who did provide the necessary information. Data Analysis Museums and galleries are analysed according to their Museum Service or Governing Body e.g. Fleetwood Museum appears under Lancashire County Museum Service. Collections were analysed by eighteen collection field headings. These were arrived at by listing all the collection field categories used by the respondent museums in their individual collecting policies. From this extensive list the categories were analysed and the headings which most simply and accurately described the range of collections within the region were selected. Collections were allocated to the subject field heading which seemed the most appropriate according to the way in which the museums themselves list or use their collections. The headings used are as follows - Archaeology / Antiquities Industrial History Egyptology Transport History Ethnography Maritime History Natural History Science Geology Military History Fine Art Numismatics Decorative Art Ephemera Costume & Textiles Photographic Social History Archives The Collected Collections Page 3 September 1998 It is important when using the collection tables to remember that collections have in general been allocated to the most appropriate heading. This does not mean that this is the only relevant heading. For instance a military collection may equally hold items relating to decorative art, such as silver or ceramics, fine art paintings, costume & textiles (uniform and colours), ethnography (collected from campaigns) and other survey headings. The way in which collections have been listed is guided by the way in which they are presented in collecting policies and by any comments or amendments received with returned summaries. In some cases cross-referencing is used. Again this is dependent on how policies were set out and on the summaries which were returned. The amount of detail provided about collections and the way in which they are divided up varies enormously from one collecting policy to the next. For instance some policies list collections by date period e.g. prehistoric, mesolithic etc.; others list by material e.g. bone, pottery, organic materials; while others use a combination e.g. oil painting, Flemish School, 17th century. Some collections give a detailed listing of every subject sub-heading, where others give very broad subject headings with no detail whatsoever. The tables do, as far as possible, include the level of detail set down in each museum’s collecting policy. Having gone through so many collecting policies, which present information in so many different ways we are acutely aware of how difficult it is to gain an impression from collecting policies alone of the region’s existing collections and current collecting activities. The wide variety of ways in which they are set out makes it quite difficult to quickly and easily compare collection information. The creation of a standard format for presenting collecting policies, and the collection details within them, would certainly seem a sensible long-term goal if curators genuinely wish to share information about collections, both from the professional and the public’s point of view. Although collecting policies are generally public documents very few of the documents received could be considered user-friendly from an ordinary member of the public’s point of view. To change the public perception of what museums collect, so that future collecting is better focused and more relevant to their objectives and the communities they serve, museums need to do more work in making this information more easily accessible. The Collected Collections Page 4 September 1998 What has been collected? - Existing Collections One of the main intentions of this project has been to provide curators with information about existing collections in the region and where they are. The following table and chart are based on collection management policies, collecting policies or similar documents provided by 74 museums and galleries. More detailed information of where these collections are held is given in Appendix III . The tables give full details of all collecting categories. Ref. Collection Field Museums with Relevant % Collections 1 Archaeology/Antiquities 41 (inc 1 loan coll) 55.4 2 Egyptology 18(inc 1 loan coll) 24.3 3 Ethnography 18 24.3 4 Natural History 36 (inc 1 loan coll) 48.6 5 Geology 30 40.5 6 Fine Art 54 73 7 Decorative Art 46 62.2 8 Costume & Textiles 46 62.2 9 Social History 61 82.4 10 Industrial History 43 58.1 11 Transport History 32 43.2 12 Maritime 17 23 13 Science 7 9.5 14 Military History 30 40.5 15 Numismatics 35 47.3 16 Ephemera 35 47.3 17 Photographic 46 62.2 18 Archives 45 60.8 The Collected Collections Page 5 September 1998 Breakdown of Collection Fields 90 80 70 60 50 %age 40 30 20 10 0 Sc Num IndH Geol Cost NatH MilitH SocH Photo Egypt Ethno DecA FineA TranH MaritH Ephem Archvs Archgy Collection Fields The information in the table gives a good indication of the distribution of collection subject fields within the region’s museums and galleries. It is important to note however that some museums do not supply a full list of their existing collections in their policies. In the case of museums that have returned the survey collections summary with confirmation or amendments this should not prove a problem.