The Early Egyptian and Sudanese Collections of Sir Henry Wellcome

Sir Henry Wellcome is particularly well-known for his contributions to medical research (Larson 2009; Rhodes James 1994). Wellcome was a multifaceted figure: a shrewd businessman who revolutionized pharmaceuticals, a generous philanthropist whose Trust continues to shape medical research, and a passionate collector who preserved valuable pieces of medical history. In his business and personal pursuits, Wellcome was driven by a dual interest in medicine and history. However, it is also important to acknowledge that Wellcome was a product of his time, and his business practices benefited from the colonial era.¹ His primary interest was in objects related to the history of medicine, aiming to create a vast “Museum of Man” (Arnold and Olsen 2003; Russell 1987: 21). This included medical instruments, pharmaceuticals, and even so-called curiosities (like Napoleon's toothbrush). Wellcome's museum was not restricted by geography. While medical items were his core interest, he also collected archaeological artifacts, particularly during his excavations in Sudan. He even collected fine art and historical documents. While it is difficult to say exactly when Wellcome decided to start amassing a large collection of objects, he himself noted that he developed an interest at the age of just four (Larson 2009: 24). He and his staff, as well as many contract employees, travelled the world to purchase objects for Wellcome's collection. This resulted in a collection of over a million items by the end of his life.

Wellcome had a long-standing interest in Egypt. It is therefore no surprise to find Egyptian symbols and gods appearing on Wellcome stationery, including the main logo for the Wellcome Historical Medical Museum (WHMM) where Imhotep, the Egyptian god of medicine, appeared on the letterhead (Fig. 1). A winged sun disk containing an Egyptian wedjat-eye, associated with healing, was located above the entrance to the Wellcome Building (Wellcome Trust 2021: 1). At the 17th International Congress of Medicine, held at the WHMM in 1913, Wellcome even delivered a paper on Graeco-Roman surgical instruments represented in Egyptian sculpture (Wellcome 1914).

Wellcome formed his Egyptian and Sudanese collection over a period of more than thirty years. He purchased Egyptian items from at least 1905 (Stevens’, July 4) until 1936, a month before his death, when he secured Egyptian objects as part of lot 46 at Sotheby's, June 9-10. The Egyptian and Sudanese objects came from four main sources:

Items that were purchased at auction. Egyptian objects, in particular, were readily available at auction for lower prices compared to classical art and Western objets d’art (Hardwick 2011: 186-90). Wellcome's agents were regularly sent to the London/British auction houses of Christie's, Foster's, Glendining's, Knight, Frank & Rutley, Phillips, Puttick & Simpson, Sotheby's, Stevens’, and others.

Material that originated from controlled/formal/archaeological excavations. This category includes objects from Wellcome's own excavations at Jebel Moya, Abu Geili, Saqadi, and Dar el-Mek in the Sudan (1911-1914; Addison 1949). Wellcome also sponsored the work of several excavations in Egypt and Sudan, which resulted in the WHMM receiving a portion of the finds. This included the Sudan Excavations Committee of the Institute of Archaeology, Liverpool University (1909-1914), the Egypt Exploration Society (1928-1936), and the Royal Anthropological Institute's Prehistoric Research Expedition to Kharga Oasis, Egypt (1928-1936). The WHMM received objects in 1927 and 1929 from the excavations of the British School of Archaeology in Egypt, in exchange for a donation and membership fees. Wellcome also directly funded excavators in exchange for objects to furnish his museum. This includes Francis Llewellyn Griffith (whose Oxford Excavations in Nubia conducted work between 1910-1913), who supplied Wellcome with objects from the site of Sanam (Griffith 1921; Lohwasser 2010), and Guy Brunton, for others from the Egyptian site of Mostagedda in 1928 (Brunton 1937).

Private purchases. Wellcome is known to have directly purchased objects during his travels in Egypt and Sudan or via private collectors. For example, Wellcome purchased 248 objects in Cairo in July 1911, 39 from a Luxor dealer in November 1911, and 20 objects in Cairo in 1912. In 1928 and 1930, Wellcome authorized the purchase of two collections of objects belonging to Robert Grenville Gayer-Anderson (Foxcroft 2016). Among the objects purchased in 1928 was a double wedjat-eye plaque made of silver, which would have been used for covering the incision made during the mummification process (Fig. 2). It was associated with healing and thus became a desirable object for the WHMM. Of the forty objects sold by Gayer-Anderson at this time, the plaque was given the highest value: £6.² To this can be added approximately 4,000 modern “amulets” collected by the British ethnographer Winifred Blackman (Stevenson 2013). Wellcome funded Blackman to continue her research on the Fellahin of Egypt in exchange for the collection becoming part of the WHMM (Blackman 1927). In the late 1920s, Peter Johnston-Saint became the Museum's Foreign Secretary and one of objects sold by Gayer-Anderson at this time, the plaque was given the highest value: £6.² To this can be added approximately 4,000 modern “amulets” collected by the British ethnographer Winifred Blackman (Stevenson 2013). Wellcome funded Blackman to continue her research on the Fellahin of Egypt in exchange for the collection becoming part of the WHMM (Blackman 1927). In the late 1920s, Peter Johnston-Saint became the Museum's Foreign Secretary and one of Wellcome's chief collectors (Larson 2009: 228-29). During several tours to Egypt in the early 1930s, Johnston-Saint purchased items from dealers in Cairo and Luxor.

Donations. The WHMM's collection was further expanded upon by donations from institutions, such as the British Museum, and private individuals. As noted previously, Gayer-Anderson sold two collections to the Museum in 1928 and 1930. Prior to this, in 1917, he gifted forty-one “charms” from Kordofan (Sudan), which had previously been on loan to the WHMM since 1914. Other examples include four wooden coffin faces presented to the Museum by Egyptologist and bibliographer Warren Royal Dawson (Bierbrier 2019: 123) in 1927.

Wellcome also commissioned hundreds of casts of temple and tomb reliefs, and objects, particularly those that had a medical association (Larson 2010: 98). An example of this is the statue of Djedher the Savior, the original of which has been on display in the Egyptian Museum in Cairo (JE 46341) since it was discovered in 1918 (Jelínkova-Reymond 1956). The entire statue and base are covered with magical texts that protect or heal against snakes, scorpions, and other malicious creatures, making this an object Wellcome coveted for display. While acquiring the original statue was impossible, obtaining a cast from the Egyptian Museum was not. The trade in casts of Egyptian monuments was particularly prevalent at this time (Frederiksen and Marchand 2010).

Much has been written in recent years about Wellcome's buying power. Larson, and others, have calculated the amount of money being spent annually over a period of thirty years, noting that he was investing millions in his collection (Larson 2009: 86; Church and Tansey 2007: 432). While Wellcome was willing to purchase single items for large sums of money, he would usually favor quantity over quality (Larson 2009: 85). It is difficult to know exactly when Wellcome first acquired Egyptian and Sudanese objects at auction, as the archival records are more limited for his earliest period of collecting. One of his earliest recorded purchases was from Stevens’ auction house on July 4, 1905 (Stevens 1905). This was eight years before the Wellcome Historical Medical Exhibition, later the WHMM, opened in 1913 (Larson 2009: 143; Symons 1987: 7). The annotated auction catalogue in Wellcome Collection indicates that seventy lots were purchased from the 1905 sale. The majority of the items consisted of glass bottles, unguent pots, mortars, and other vessels, all of which had a loose medical connection.

The first large-scale sale of Egyptian antiquities in the twentieth century was that of Robert de Rustafjaell (18591943), which took place over three days in December 1906 (Sotheby, Wilkinson, and Hodge 1906). Rustafjaell was a collector, dealer, and author. He lived in Egypt for some time as a geologist, mining engineer, and the owner of the Luxor Trading Co., which sold antiquities (Bierbrier 2019: 405-406). Up until this 1906 sale, Wellcome's collecting of Egyptian and Sudanese antiquities was limited. This changed considerably with the 1906 Rustafjaell sale, as Wellcome sent four of his agents (Llewellyn, Read, Harry Stow, and Charles J.S. Thompson) to purchase as much as they could. Wellcome's annotated copy of the auction catalogue includes several pages or groups of objects he was particularly keen on obtaining, as is clear from his instructions to “get all” (Fig. 3).³ Of course, this was only if the price was right. Limits, set by Thompson and approved or adjusted by Wellcome, are written just next to the lot numbers and were usually strictly followed. All in all, Wellcome's four agents bought 224 lots containing over 2,000 objects for a combined total of £644/11s, which was 40% of the lots for 36% of the total auction sale. This purchase formed the nucleus of Wellcome's early Egyptian collection, acting as a launch pad for his ambitious project.

The vast majority of the objects purchased by Wellcome at the 1906 sale consisted of material from Egypt. This included pottery, stone vessels, statues, stelae, relief fragments, shabti figures, copper alloy weapons, ostraca, jewelry, textiles, amulets, and many other object types. More than 500 of these objects are now housed in the Egypt Centre collection at Swansea University, and many more in the collection could have originated from the sale, but over time they have been detached from the corroborating documentation. Highlights include two fragments of the inner coffin of Amenhotep son of Hapu, the foremost official during the reign of Amenhotep III (ca. 1386-1349 bce). Early Egyptian pottery is well represented, including a rare, decorated vessel (D-ware) depicting four animals (W415; Fig. 4). Yet many of the Egyptian objects purchased at the sale are undoubtably not ancient, particularly the sculpture and reliefs. This is not too surprising, since Rustafjaell was well known at the time for selling fakes (Hagen and Ryholt 2016: 259).

Wellcome's acquisition of Sudanese martial artifacts underscores the museum's deep entanglement with colonial power structures. In addition to the Egyptian material, the auction includes a section under the heading “Arab and Persian armour; relics of the Mahdi, Khalifa, &c. From the Soudan and Kordofan.” Wellcome's agents strategically purchased twenty-eight of the forty-seven lots in this category, acquiring objects such as the “djibba,” a long coat worn by Muslim men (lot 514), a “fighting standard” (lot 515) allegedly belonging to Osman Digna, and the “ceremonial standard” of the Emir Mahmoud (lot 516). Osman Digna was one of the best-known military commanders during the Mahdist War (1881-1899), who played a role in the death of General Charles Gordon during the siege of Khartoum in 1885. The Emir Mahmoud Ahmad led the Mahdist forces defeated by Herbert Kitchener at the Battle of Atbara in 1898. Both individuals would have been well known to potential buyers, with Winston Churchill (1902: 47) describing Osman Digna as “the celebrated, and perhaps immortal.” Whether these items really belonged to either individual remains uncertain, particularly as Rustafjaell commonly fabricated the importance of the objects in his collection (Hagen and Ryholt 2016: 160). Wellcome was obviously convinced, with Larson (2009: 46) noting that he was particularly interested in the events that took place in Sudan in the late nineteenth century and even contributed 100 guineas to the founding of the Gordon Memorial College in Khartoum. Furthermore, during a visit to Sudan in 1901, Wellcome collected skulls from the battlefield at Omdurman, the site of Kitchener's brutal victory over the Mahdist army in 1898. These purchases reveal Wellcome's keen interest in collecting objects associated with military conflict and colonial conquest.

Also purchased for Wellcome at this auction was lot 518, which is described as “the regalia of a Soudanese Sultana, consisting of a rope of large beads of amber and silver separated by smaller beads of stone and paste; various pendants, etc. attached.” This was the most expensive item in the category, fetching a price of £8/5s. The current whereabouts of the items in this section are largely unknown, although part of lot 535 can now be found in the Fowler Museum (X65.8687) (Fig. 5). This item is described in the auction catalogue as “a broad-bladed scimitar, the wooden sheath heavily mounted; three sets of knives [each set (of three) fitted into a single case covered with crocodile or animals’ skin]”.

Wellcome's Egyptian and Sudanese collection continued to grow apace in the years leading up to World War I. Two further sales of Rustafjaell's collection took place in 1907 and 1913. Wellcome purchased far fewer objects at these sales, perhaps because he had become aware of the dubious nature of the objects acquired at the 1906 sale. Higher quality Egyptian and Sudanese antiquities, with good provenances, were available at other sales prior to the outbreak of the War. The most notable of these was the remarkable collection of Frederick George Hilton Price (1842-1909), consisting of more than 5,000 Egyptian artifacts, that was sold at auction at Sotheby's over eight days in July 1911 (Price 1897-1908; Sotheby, Wilkinson, and Hodge 1911). Hilton Price was a British banker, amateur archaeologist, and collector of antiquities (Bierbrier 2019: 376). Wellcome's agent, Henry Charles Bourne (1858-1936), was entrusted with the role of purchasing items. Once again, via Bourne, Wellcome was the largest purchaser of objects at the sale by a considerable margin. In total, he acquired 81 lots containing at least 641 objects for £282/4s. The vast majority of the objects were amulets and statues of deities, which were soon to be displayed in the new museum.

Just two months before the Hilton Price sale, the estate of Lady Valerie Meux (1852-1910) of Theobald's Park was auctioned off by Waring & Gillow Limited. Lady Meux was a British collector and the wife of Sir Henry Meux, heir of a wealthy brewing family (Bierbrier 2019: 314-15). The Egyptian section of more than 1,700 items had been previously published by Sir E.A. Wallis Budge (Bierbrier 2019: 76-77) in 1896 (Budge 1896). During the auction, Wellcome's agent purchased only nine lots (about seventy objects), although the combined price of £54/15s was a considerable outlay and quite unusual for Wellcome.⁴ One of the lots was a stelophorous statue of Amenemopet (Fig. 6), purchased for £26. This was one of the most expensive Egyptian objects ever purchased by Wellcome. His interest in this object lay with the fact that he believed that Amenemopet was the “Chief of Physicians of the College of Thebes.” This erroneous reading of the title was made in a report of the Meux collection sent to Wellcome shortly before the sale.⁵ The statue is now in the collection of the Petrie Museum (UC8446; Page 1976: 67-68). The following year, the collection of Martyn Kennard appeared at auction. Among the objects acquired by Wellcome at this sale were six figures of Imhotep (Fig. 7), sold in five lots. Wellcome had a particular interest in Imhotep, an Egyptian official who lived around 2600 bce and who was later deified and worshipped as the patron god of medicine (Hurry 1928). The combined price of £37/15s for these six figures highlights how Wellcome was willing to pay generously for objects that had a direct association with the history of medicine.

With the WHMM opening in 1913, efforts were made to catalogue the collection (Bywaters 1987). This formal process seems to have commenced in December 1913, with the first entries appearing in the museum registers and objects receiving “R” (registration) numbers, written directly on the objects. (For more on the Wellcome numbering systems, see Eveleigh and Horry, this issue.) These museum registers focused on objects housed in the WHMM itself rather than those in storage. Thus, only a small percentage of Wellcome's Egyptian and Sudanese collection was catalogued in this way.

Yet an even earlier method of cataloguing Wellcome's Egyptian and Sudanese collection was introduced prior to the Museum's official opening. Between 1907 and his death in 1913, William St Chad Boscawen (1855-1913; Horry 2015) was tasked with cataloguing this material. Boscawen was an Assyriologist who was employed briefly at the British Museum, had a basic knowledge of hieroglyphs, and even published Egyptological articles. During this time, he produced five handwritten manuscripts titled Catalogue of Egyptian Antiquities, recently rediscovered within the archives of the Petrie Museum. While many of the entries are brief, Boscawen often includes details that do not appear in the auction catalogues, such as transcriptions or translations of the ancient texts, the latter often inaccurate. Very few of these objects were ever formally catalogued by the WHMM, thus making these manuscripts an invaluable source for Wellcome's early collecting habits. The five volumes include objects from auctions, excavations, and Wellcome's private purchasing while in Egypt. All in all, Boscawen catalogued more than 6,000 objects during this time (Table 1).

Among the auctions catalogued by Boscawen are the 1906 and 1907 Rustafjaell sales, the 1911 auctions of the Hilton Price and Lady Meux collections, the 1912 Kennard sale, and miscellaneous purchases at Stevens’ Auction House. The July 4, 1905 Stevens’ sale is referred to in the first volume as “collection no 1,” which marks the beginning of Wellcome's rampant collecting of antiquities. In the regular reports written by Thompson, he informs Wellcome of Boscawen's progress. In January 1907, Thompson wrote that Boscawen had remarked that some of the textiles from the 1906 Rustafjaell sale were “better than the British Museum and South Kensington” or “the best I have seen” (Horry 2015: 117). These remarks, while evidently an exaggeration, would certainly have captured Wellcome's attention and thus further secured Boscawen much-needed employment.

During the 1906 Rustafjaell sale, fourteen of twenty-three lots of textiles were purchased by Wellcome's agents, most of which contained multiple objects. Thanks to Boscawen's catalogue, we know that this amounted to over 230 individual pieces. For example, lot 368 contained nineteen objects affixed to six thick pieces of card, while lot 371 consisted of forty-six objects on six cards. Some of the items are depicted on plates 21 and 24 of the sale catalogue (Fig. 8). The descriptions in the auction catalogue for most of the lots use the rather unhelpful description of “a similar lot.” The majority of these textiles can now be found in the Egypt Centre collection. This includes inscribed mummy bandages—some with chapters from the Book of the Dead—fragments of painted shrouds, Coptic textiles, patches, caps, and many other items. Boscawen's descriptions have been fundamental in identifying textiles in the collection as coming from the 1906 sale, including listing the lots that they originate from.

Boscawen's transcriptions of the objects are particularly valuable, especially as the locations of some of the objects he catalogued are now unknown. Additionally, the condition of some objects has changed over the past century as a result of carelessness, object deterioration, or damage. An example of this is a stela in the Egypt Centre collection (EC1848) that arrived at Swansea in 1971 in many fragments and without any object history. Thanks to Boscawen's four-page catalogue entry (vol. 2, nr. 1360), it has been possible to ascertain a wealth of information about the stela. We now know that it was almost completely preserved at the time it was recorded and that it comes from the 1907 Rustafjaell sale. The name of the owner is recorded by Boscawen as Dedusobek, with his parents being Horemkhauef and Bebi. The names of several of their children are also recorded, thus allowing for the family tree of Dedusobek to be reconstructed. It is unknown when the stela of Dedusobek was broken into many fragments, but as around 50% of it is now missing, it is likely to have been before the 1971 arrival of the collection in Swansea. This example highlights the enormous value of Boscawen's manuscripts in understanding Wellcome's early Egyptian and Sudanese collection of antiquities. Boscawen did not, however, catalogue the Jebel Moya material, as it only arrived in England around the time of his death in 1913.

Wellcome's continued acquisition of Egyptian and Sudanese material post-World War I was extensive. Due to space limitations, we cannot delve into all the significant sales. However, one notable acquisition was the remarkable collection of the Reverend William MacGregor (Bierbrier 2019: 296). This sale took place over nine days (June 26-July 6, 1922) and comprised 1,800 lots. While the highest-priced item reached £10,000, Wellcome's focus was on acquiring bargains. He sent five agents to the auction and even attended himself, under the pseudonym “Wilton.” During this sale, Wellcome spent a total of £1,649/17s, purchasing 402 lots, or approximately 2,309 objects. This spending represented 4.8% of the total sale price, 22.1% of the total lots, and 26.5% of the total objects sold (Hardwick 2011: 183).

The original WHMM was opened at 54a Wigmore Street in 1913 and consisted of several showcases containing objects from Egypt. The museum was divided into a number of rooms, with the collection arranged thematically. The first room upon entry was the “Hall of Primitive Medicine.” Items in this room were mainly sourced from countries in the Global South and displayed religious sculpture, ancestral remains, masks, and figurines from Africa, South America, New Guinea, and the Solomon Islands. Cases 20-23 contained “a collection of human remains of prehistoric races, excavated by Mr. Henry S. Wellcome at a primitive African site at Jebel Moya, between the Blue and White Niles, A[nglo]. E[gyptian]. Sudan” (Anonymous 1927: 24). The terminology used in displaying the history of medicine expressed late nineteenth century racist ideas of White European cultures as being “evolved” while others were “primitive.” This room also had several cases containing Egyptian amulets, including those associated with the “evil eye.” Egyptian items could also be found in the “Alchemy Room” and the “Pharmaceutical Section,” such as drugs attributed to a tomb dating to 1500 BCE.

The “Hall of Statuary” was the largest and most impressive of the displays, including sculpture from across the globe. Among the large statues were modern replicas of Imhotep and Thoth, two Egyptian deities closely associated with medicine and healing, which were produced by Hibbert Charles Binney. Smaller cases in this hall included a display on Egyptian medicine (Fig. 9), with statues of deities such as Imhotep and Thoth, but also Taweret, Bes, Ptah, and others. It also contained instruments believed to have been used during the mummification process, such as knives, hooks, and tweezers. Other items associated with mummification included canopic jars, used to hold the internal organs of the deceased. Also on display in this case was the stelophorous statue of Amenemopet, the alleged “Chief of Physicians of the College of Thebes.”

In 1932, the museum at Wigmore Street was closed and the objects were moved to a new building at 183-193 Euston Road. The larger space allowed for a greater number of Egyptological objects to be displayed. The Egyptian objects were kept together rather than being scattered throughout the museum. They were also better arranged, although the focus remained on medicine and healing. The “Hall of Statuary” was maintained and now contained numerous plaster casts of temple reliefs and statues, which were recently commissioned in Cairo (Fig. 10). Additionally, cases were devoted to the themes of mummification, deformities and diseases, toilet and hygiene, Imhotep, amulets and scarabs, surgical instruments, medicine, and others. Sadly, Wellcome would never see the new museum fully opened, as he insisted that it remain closed until the rearrangement was complete (Symons 1993: 26-27).

Wellcome's death resulted in the Museum losing its status as the flagship enterprise of Wellcome Foundation Ltd. Between 1936 and 1983, the vast majority of Wellcome's nonmedical material was either destroyed, sold, repatriated, or loaned/gifted to other institutions (Russell 1987).

In 1959, David Dixon (1930-2005) was appointed as a Research Fellow at the Wellcome Institute to classify the Egyptian and Sudanese material. The collection, consisting of around 350 crates, was ultimately transferred to University College London (UCL) in November 1964 (Russell 1987: 33-34; Symons 1993: 41). At the time, it was agreed that the material would eventually be incorporated into the Petrie Museum collection. However, while a considerable part of the collection was subsequently unpacked and sorted, lack of space prevented the completion of the task and the bulk of the material remained in storage in 1969. In November 1970, the Wellcome Trustees accepted the proposal put forward by the Petrie Museum that the collection be dispersed to several institutions within the UK. This was only after the Petrie Museum had first pick of the collection (about 1,200 objects), focusing on items excavated by Petrie and material coming from Garstang's excavations at Meroë (Garstang 1911).

In 1971, the remainder of the Wellcome material held at UCL was distributed on long-term loan to the Birmingham Museum and Art Gallery, the Oriental Art Museum (University of Durham), the World Museum (Liverpool), and the Egypt Centre (Swansea University). Further distributions of Egyptian antiquities took place at other times, with the British Museum receiving approximately 600 objects between 1946-1982. This includes material from Wellcome's excavations at Jebel Moya and Abu Geili in the Sudan. Following the historic 1977 ruling by Justice Foster—designating all nonmedical material as “surplus objects” that could be disposed of—the remaining Egyptian and Sudanese material was gifted to additional museums (Bourriau 1983, 1984, 1985, 1986, 1988). Items that were deemed to be medical in nature, such as tools possibly used during the mummification process, were transferred to the Science Museum (Table 2). Of course, the criteria for classifying “medical” objects often differed between Wellcome and his heirs.

When the Egyptian and Sudanese antiquities were being dispersed in 1971, Birmingham and Durham museums were able to select objects from material that had been unpacked for viewing at UCL. Due to limited space at UCL, cases assigned to Liverpool and Swansea were never unboxed or seen by their impending owners until they arrived at their respective institutions (Fig. 11). This often resulted in associated objects, or even parts of the same object, being separated from each other. While the Petrie Museum tried to keep all objects originating from Petrie's excavations, some items were overlooked. For example, in 1927 Petrie presented objects from an intact female burial from Qau (tomb 734) in Upper Egypt to the WHMM. This consisted of three necklaces, three waist girdles, three bracelets found on the right arm, a bracelet on the left arm, and a copper mirror (Brunton 1930: 1; Grajetzki 2020: 166-67, 203). Six of the ten items of jewelry were retained by the Petrie Museum (UC25980-UC25986) while the other four can now be found in Swansea (Fig. 12). The whereabouts of the mirror is currently unknown.

In 1924, Wellcome purchased two lots from the collection of the Reverend William Frankland Hood (Bierbrier 2019: 223; Sotheby, Wilkinson, and Hodge 1924: lots 157-58), which consisted of two shabti boxes and twenty shabtis belonging to a man called Ptahhotep. While all twenty shabtis made their way to Swansea (W378-W397), the two shabti boxes were selected for Birmingham Museum (1969W3635 and 1969W4739). Archival photos of an Egyptian exhibit in the WHMM show the two shabti boxes on display (Fig. 13) and indicates that the shabtis had already become disassociated from their containers at this early point. This would certainly explain why they were not kept together during their distribution.

Several Wellcome objects in Liverpool are known to directly join with others in Swansea. This includes fragments of the inner coffin of Amenhotep son of Hapu (W1367a and 1973.3.319; Dodson and Griffin 2024), relief fragments depicting the Nile god Hapi (W359 and 1973.4.217), and a Ptah-Sokar-Osiris figure (W2062 and 1973.1.686). For the latter object, the figure of Ptah-Sokar-Osiris and its base were sent to Liverpool while the crown went to Swansea. The complete figure is depicted on plate 8 of the 1907 auction catalogue of the collection of Robert de Rustafjaell (Sotheby, Wilkinson, and Hodge 1907: pl. VIII). However, by the time it was catalogued by the WHMM in 1927, the crown was no longer part of the object, presumably having broken off in the intervening years.

A further object separated into two parts is the plaster cast of Djedher the Savior. As noted previously, Wellcome coveted this cast because of its association with magic and healing. Archival photos show the cast on display in the WHMM prior to its transfer to the Petrie Museum in 1964. During the dispersal of the collection in 1971, the statue was retained by the Petrie Museum (perhaps because of its aesthetic appeal) while the base was sent to Swansea. In 2022, the statue of Djedher was transferred to the Egypt Centre to be reunited with its base. It is now on display in the museum, where it can be viewed by the public for the first time in almost sixty years (Fig. 14). This success story highlights the potential for future collaboration between the museums with dispersed Wellcome material.

Sir Henry Wellcome's collecting took place on an overwhelming scale. While the Egyptian and Sudanese artifacts represent only a small part of his overall collection, it is evident that they were of considerable personal interest to him and to his conception of “medicine.” Wellcome spent significant time in Sudan, including his self-funded excavations at Jebel Moya. He believed that the site had the potential to be seen as “the veritable birthplace of human civilisation itself” (Larson 2009: 58). With Egypt, Wellcome's interest lay with the renowned medical knowledge of the ancient Egyptians. It is no surprise that the Egyptian god Imhotep featured heavily on Wellcome stationery and in the WHMM.

Although this paper primarily examines Wellcome's acquisition of Egyptian and Sudanese artifacts before World War I, it is important to note that his collecting activities remained undiminished in the subsequent decades. The war exerted a multifaceted influence on the UK auction market, with economic hardship and the loss of life among collectors contributing to an increase in auctions. The resulting market saturation enabled the acquisition of artifacts at exceptionally low prices, a circumstance that aligned well with Wellcome's preference for quantity over quality.

Wellcome's wealth meant that few things were beyond his reach. Despite this, it is clear that he was not prepared to overpay for objects. Instead, his many agents would scour the auction houses for bargain material to furnish his museum. This resulted in a collection reportedly five times larger than the Louvre at the time of Wellcome's death in 1936 (Skinner 1986: 383). It is important to note that Wellcome's collecting practices reflected the colonial era he lived in. Some of the methods used to acquire objects raise questions about ethics and exploitation, something Wellcome Collection itself has acknowledged (Wellcome Collection 2021). The purchase of Sudanese artifacts, including those linked to the Mahdist War, must be understood within this context. These objects, while offering valuable insights into the past, also serve as reminders of the complex and often problematic histories embedded within museum collections.

Egypt's place within African history has been a contentious issue for many years. While geographically distinct from much of sub-Saharan Africa due to the Mediterranean Sea and land bridge with West Asia, Egypt interacted with surrounding regions through trade routes and periods of conquest. Its legacy extends far beyond its borders, influencing neighboring cultures and inspiring later civilizations across the continent. For early scholars, such as Wellcome, Egypt was considered distinct from the rest of Africa, a view also implicitly held by the people who distributed the collections after his death. Many held the view that Egypt had its origins in Europe and Asia (Manzo 2022: 2), a racist view to explain Egypt's cultural achievement. Auction catalogues of the early twentieth century sold Egyptian objects as “antiquities” and “works of art,” whereas African objects were commonly described as “primitive,” “savage,” and “curiosities” (Fig. 15).

While such views have largely been rejected in more recent years (see, for example, Celenko 1996; Exell 2011; Manzo 2022), Egypt is still separated from Africa in most museum curation (Purdy and Arico 2024). An exception to this is the new exhibition at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York, The African Origin of Civilization, which presents twenty-one pairings of artwork from Egypt and other African cultures and eras (Fig. 16). The curators of the exhibit noted that “compared with the foundational place occupied by ancient Egypt in The Met's history, the absence of works from sub-Saharan Africa in the Museum until 1982 reflected a profound bias in the Western art world” (Patch and LaGamma 2022: 9). Exhibitions such as this one come some way to re-place Egypt within its broader African context.

The legacy of Wellcome's collection extends far beyond its historical value. It has sparked public interest in these ancient cultures and continues to be a resource for researchers studying Egypt and Sudan. Though now dispersed among multiple locations, it still contains medical instruments used by ancient physicians, maintaining Wellcome's passionate interest in healthcare practices from thousands of years ago. There are also everyday objects like pottery and tools, providing a tangible connection to the lives of ordinary people. The artifacts, alongside written records like papyri, paint a fascinating picture of these civilizations, allowing visitors to grasp the complexities and richness of their cultures.

Sadly, following Wellcome's death, most objects from Africa—including those from Egypt and Sudan—were no longer seen by his inheritors as desirable or of “medical interest.” This clash between Wellcome's own vision and those of the trustees was one that played out in the decades that followed, with the Museum's Foreign Secretary Peter Johnston-Saint lamenting the break-up of the collection (Larson 2009: 274-75). What would Wellcome have thought if he could have foreseen the eventual dissolution of the collection? While the answer will never be known, the distribution has resulted in many of his objects being better understood, appreciated, and displayed in ways that would not have been possible had they remained within the Wellcome collections. This is the legacy Wellcome could never have predicted!