Fig. 1
Military Investigations and Trophies: top left, Bengal Sappers & Miners’ 1878/79 photograph of unearthed sculptural fragments, Jalalabad (Royal Engineers Museum Archive RE034) and, below, as engraving-rendered in The Graphic in 1880/1; top right, frontispiece for Douglas’ Nenia Britannica (1793) and, below, assisted by a Sapper (left), C. T. Newton’s removal of the Lion of Cnidus in 1857 for Royal Navy transportation back to the British Museum (from Cook 1998: fig. 32). Apparently engraved after a photograph by Corporal B. Spackman, the latter well testifies to the ‘past as trophy’ as Newton had obtained from the Foreign Secretary the services of four Royal Engineers (including two trained in photography), the use of HM Gorgon for six months (crew 150) and £2,000 to collect sculptures (Cook 1998: 141–152): ‘this practice of collecting on a grand scale was wholly dependent on the co-operation of the Royal Navy’ (Cook 1998: 150; see Hoock 2010: 230–231 on the Navy’s role in the collection of the Elgin Marbles).
Table 1
Pitt Rivers – A Selective Career Chronology: grey-tone indicating respective army service- and personal pursuit-phases, the crucial point being just how much archaeology he undertook while in the army.
 |
Fig. 2
The Man at War: left, a uniformed Pitt Rivers as photographed in Notman’s Montreal studio, 1862 (McCord Museum); top right, The Grand Charge of the Guards on the Heights of Alma (National Army Museum, London; Keller 2001: pl. VI) and, below, the Trent Affair of 1861–1862, ‘Armstrong Guns packed on sleighs in the Ordnance Yard, St. John, New Brunswick’ (Campbell 1999: fig. 3).
Fig. 3
Savage Weapons: top left, instructors at the Hythe School of Musketry, 1860; below, ‘Lines of Fire and Sight’ from Instruction of Musketry 1855: right, illustration of Pitt Rivers 1861a ‘Parabolic Theory’ model. The 1862 RUSI journal indicates that Pitt Rivers had bequeathed his actual model to the Institution’s museum (listed, absurdly, beside a stuffed ‘Bob the Dog’, belonging to the Scots Fusiliers and who apparently had been run over by a cart in Crimea). Not appearing in the 1914 catalogue, it can only be presumed that, like so much of their collections, his model was also somehow disposed of beforehand and its whereabouts are unknown.
Fig. 4
Model Landscapes and Curios: left top, Wyld’s ‘Siege of Sebastopol’ model that was displayed in London’s ‘Great Globe’ 1855 (Keller 2001: fig. 45) and, below, Irish and Australian troops view a large-scale trench/terrain model of Messines Ridge, 1917; right, Pitt Rivers’ medallion (top), his Cissbury model (middle; Salisbury and South Wiltshire Museum) and, bottom, the South Lodge ‘average’ ditch and bank section (Pitt Rivers 1898 and Bowden 1991: 127–128).
Fig. 5
Staged Photography/Iconic Imagery: left, Evans and Prestwich’s Abbeville flint-in-gravels ‘adjudication’ shot (Gamble and Kruszynski 2009: fig. 2); top right, Fenton’s Crimean War, ‘Valley of the Shadow Death’ image (1855); lower right, Wor Barrow excavations, with Pitt Rivers’ assistant, Herbert Toms, right, and prominently beside him the level (note that the poised shovel-in-hand labourers have no spoil to remove, the ditch-top being cleaned already and the entire scene is clearly arranged; Bowden 1991: fig. 42).
Fig. 6
Arranged Weaponry: Within a number of military museums (here, top, the Royal Museum of the Army and of Military History, Brussels), as well as in historical private-house collections, the manner in which weaponry is decoratively displayed upon their walls are oddly evocative of Pitt Rivers’ weapons’ evolution illustrations, as in his ‘Primitive Warfare ...’ stick-to-boomerang figure below.
Fig. 7
The Royal United Service Institution’s Museum: top, interior 1878 (from Old and New London III: 344) and, below, Lemere’s 1896 photograph of its then new Whitehall Banqueting House displays (note many of the museum’s much-evident ship models were later acquired by the National Maritime Museum, Greenwich).