Ogilvie Fergus Mentieth (1861-1918)

Ogilvie Fergus Menteith (1861-1918)
-
Virtually all the birds collected were obtained between 1879-1914, from Suffolk and Scotland. Suffolk being part of the family home and surrounding area and also the family home located in Barcaldine, near Loch Ceran. The cases represent collecting at it finest. The birds were taken and their exact location noted, and the dioramas recreated to represent the scene.
This is not dis-similar to the undertakings by E.T.Booth of Brighton, who had already completed his won collection, housed in a purpose built museum. The fact that both collections are so similar as both men knew Thomas Gunn, if fact Gunn had made several visits to Brighton to review the collection and how they were presented. It is fair to say though that the cases in the Ogilvie collection have fared better in terms of preservation and also the quality of the taxidermy being somewhat more competently executed by perhaps one of the finest taxidermists of his day.

The Ogilvie bird collection was being assembled shortly after the completion of the Booth Collection in Brighton, so it should come as no surprise that both collections are often compared. Edward Booth, was a frequent visitor to Breydon Water in Norfolk and it is well documented that both Gunn and Booth knew each other well. It is also clear if Booth and Ogilvie had any relationship, often shooting together at Ogilvies estate in Suffolk.

Ogilvie, perhaps unlike Edward Booth did employ people to collect specimens for the collection. Ogilvie employed a marsh "gunner" named Alfred Alexander to collect wading and seabirds at Thorpe Mere, which it is understood formed part of the Sizewell estate owned and managed by the Ogilvie family. This area of land, somewhat altered from its original aspect is now controlled by the RSPB and is know as the Minsmere bird reserve.

From the recent book written on the subject of the collection it is suggested that TE.Gunn and the then widow of FM Ogilvie disputed the ownership of several cases from the collection and it appears that there was somewhat of an acrimonious exchange of letters that certain cases were returned to the collection to ensure the collections completeness. This in our mind is a little tragic given that the collection would be less significant had indeed it had been compiled by a lesser taxidermist than Thomas Gunn. We feel that Ogilvie was fortunate enough to be located in the region where Gunn practiced taxidermy. The collection in our view is more of a tribute to him.

It has also to be remember and considered that bird / specimen collecting for scientific research did involve the shooting of birds and collecting of eggs. This has to be considered in the time it was undertaken. Limited access to Photographic equipment, limited cinematography, as seen today necessitated the collecting of birds by shooting them, often at the time of breeding to collect the specimen in its best breeding plumage. Nowadays there is less requirement to do so.

The collection is housed again typically in the Gunn (Norfolk) style of flat fronted cased, subtle duck egg blue backgrounds and groundwork which in the whole is fairly generic. Gunn, like the work of others, Hutchings by example are almost universally recognized, without the requirement to examine a trade label. Each of the Ogilvie cases contain data that states the place, date of capture of each bird and who collected the specimens. The reverse of the cases are hand written, presumable by Gunn himself. The Ipswich Museum houses most of the collection, which comprises some 235 cases, containing well over 700 specimens, that does not include the cabinet skins that were donated to the British Museum.
Upon his death in 1918, the collection was presented to the County of Suffolk by Ogilvie’s widow and the collection has remained in-situ ever since. It appears that some of the collection is missing and never made it to Ipswich. One case in particular (Red Crested Pochards) that was requested by Ogilvie to be included, but he never got his wish. This case remains in private hands to this day.

Partly the reason for the collection being in such fantastic condition was the attention to detail given by the taxidermist. The flat front style lends itself to preserving the specimens from direct sunlight and also reduces the number of entry points for insects. Gunn cases within the Ogilvie collection also were lined with canvas rather than just paper. This allowed for the case to "flex" under normal conditions within tearing this lining, thus increasing the insect proofing of the cases. The canvas was painted in the same style and even after 100 plus years of application it still looks in reasonable condition with limited tearing. This in contrast to more traditionally lined cases with plain paper most likely would have faired less well. One can only imagine the results had TE Gunn undertaken the creation of watercolours to each case?. That said the simplicity of the cases have a charm of their own.

Perhaps one of the finest taxidermist Gunn employed was George Herd (1876-1926), a diligent man was an artistic eye. Perhaps less artistic was the output of Fred Ashton, whose work sadly lacks the same attention to detail. We have seen some of his cases and they are of lesser quality. It has been reported that Gunn won medals for his company's work at the 1881 National Fisheries Exhibition in Norwich where he displayed some 250 specimens of locally collected fish, birds and mammals.

For more detailed and accurate information recently created on the subject of this collection, you may wish to acquire the work of Christopher Frost. This now scarce book, entitled "The Ogilvie Bird Collection" dated 1989, was limited to precisely 250 copies. It is an in depth review of the collection, FM Ogilvie himself and of course TE Gunn. It is recommended but hard to come by.

It is worth noting too that when a taxidermist was asked to mount a particular bird or mammal, that the specimen would have been fresh and not frozen. TE Gunn by specific examples would have dealt with fresh birds in summer plumage which meant due to temperature alone that those who were employed to skin and then fix those skins would have had to work quickly to ensure that the skins were tanned and did not slip. The term slip refers to the degradation of the tissue that held the hair and feather follicles in place. Slipped skin would not have held the feathers in place and they would have simply fallen out.

One can only image the shear number of birds that would have arrive daily and would have therefore required immediate attention in terms of skinning and recording the weight, sex and colours of feet and bills before decay and time faded both. It is not known whether the process was undertaken in stages or each bird was attended and completed in one continuous process. We suspect that the taxidermied species was completed in one continuous process and then left to dry. Groups of birds with young were then assembled with the resultant groundwork at a later date. The displays therefore with the number of birds and an appreciation of the work involved should be viewed in that context. The number of man hours required for each specific grouping would have been significant.

da
Victorian Taxidermy

Cronologia Ornitologica