History of Restoration.pdf (2025)

Authenticity: Interpreting Damage and Restoration in Medieval Sculpture

Burlington Magazine, 2013

History of the restoration of ancient stone sculptures

2003

The practice of restoration is so out of fashion nowadays that we are liable to dismiss it as a harmful error of the past that has further separated us from the accurate experience of antiquities. That may be true, but it is also the case that we cannot fully understand the status of fragmentary antiquities in the Renaissance if we do not appreciate how changeable these material conditions were.. .. Changes wrought upon sculptural objects represent attempts to fix their shape and identity.

Restoration or de-restoration? Two different concepts of presenting the authentic condition of ancient sculptures in the Collection of Classical Antiquities in nineteenth century Berlin, in: Hermens, Erma – Fiske, Tina (Hrsg), Art, Conservation and Authenticities. Material, Concept, Context. Proceedings of the International Conference held at the University of Glasgow, 12.–14.9.2007 (London 2009) 41–49

Looking at the past from a contemporary point of view. Three cases in Italy, in 1° International Congress of Restorers, Moscow, Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation, Moskow 25-26 September 2013

The work of preservation requires a special attitude, moving constantly from a humanistic sphere to a technical and scientific approach, and from technical problems to critical decisions. The role of interpretation is always important: in apparently simple operations, such as the cleaning of architectonic surfaces or the consolidation of structures, it may be less visible, but choosing the right solution is never merely the product of the correct use of technology. The more we move towards figurative problems (reconstruction of gaps, removal of additions, and integration) the more important our vision of the architecture's past becomes.

The Restoration of Ancient Marble Free-Standing Sculpture in Rome in the 17th Century

Each age constructs its own view of antiquity. Baroque sculptors, including masters such as Gian Lorenzo Bernini and Alessandro Algardi, were employed in the restoration of antiquities for both secular and ecclesiastical patrons. 17th century tastes dictated that ancient statuary needed to be “complete” rather than in various fragments to be displayed. While 17th century treatises on sculpture, such as Orfeo Boselli’s Observations Concerning Ancient Sculpture advised conservatism and careful study of ancient materials, some Baroque sculptors were bolder than others in their restorations. This paper considers the restoration industry in Rome in the later 16th and 17th centuries by examining the ways in which artists of this time interacted with ancient statuary, the philosophy and technology behind restoration, and a consideration of the restorations carried out by the major Baroque sculptors: Nicolas Cordier, Pietro Bernini, Gian Lorenzo Bernini, Francesco Mochi, Francois Duquesnoy, and Alessandro Algardi. The works of each of these sculptors exhibit interest in different aspects of classical art. Many of these works present a final product that is neither entirely ancient, nor entirely early modern. These restored works must be seen in the light of the tastes of Baroque patrons, artistic innovation, and an acceptance or rejection of the classical model.

Eighteenth-Century Restoration of Ancient Sculptures : Questions of Authenticity in the Collection of Charles Townley

2020

Since antiquity, damaged marble sculptures have been repaired and restored, but in Rome, for a relatively short period between about 1750 and 1816, restoration became pervasive to meet the demands of a burgeoning market for antiquities. Driven by the excitement of the excavation of Pompeii and Herculaneum, Grand Tourists wanted to possess their own piece of antiquity, resulting in an industry devoted to the excavation, restoration, and sale of marble sculptures to these sometimes-undiscerning purchasers. At this time, restoration practices ranged from simple cleaning to scouring with abrasives and tools, cutting away ancient stone, the replacement of missing limbs and heads, or the fabrication of new sculptures from disparate fragments of marble. With so many ancient marble sculptures irrevocably altered by eighteenth-century restoration practices, they could be considered inauthentic, no longer the product of an original artist and time period. Such a position, however, is an oversimplification of the complicated and multifaceted concept of authenticity. Using the ancient sculpture collection of Englishman Charles Townley (1737-1805), amassed at the height of the period, this thesis considers how definitions of authenticity can be applied to restored ancient marbles, and how they are subverted by the actions of restorers and dealers, the attitudes of eighteenth-century collectors, and the modern preoccupation with displaying authentic objects in museums. Townley’s collection has been largely unstudied and consigned to storage since the British Museum’s subsequent acquisition of unrestored and presumed-superior ancient Greek sculptures. However, through study of both Townley’s sculptures and his correspondence, this thesis analyses eighteenth-century attitudes towards authenticity and how closely those philosophies align with the restored artworks themselves. While most restored ancient sculptures are no longer representative of the time period they were carved and are not the product of an original artist, I argue that authenticity is a flawed definition by which to evaluate restored artworks, undermined by a myriad of factors. Instead this thesis demonstrates that collections such as Townley’s are more valuable for the significant insights they provide into the changing nature of collecting, aesthetics, restoration, and conservation, during and since the eighteenth century.

Restoration Revisited: Ancient and Modern Repairs Encountered in the Conservation of an Ancient Egyptian Collection

2015

The acquisition of the Niagara Falls Museum collection of Ancient Egyptian objects launched a two-year conservation project which has involved the cooperative efforts of numerou s museum staff, scholars, scientists, curators , and conservators. This paper is a reflection of that ongoing collaboration. Conservatio n of the mummies and coffins in preparatio n for their installation in the renovated galleries has provided an opportunit y to consider the variety of repair s and restoration s seen among the collection. Some of these restoration s are clearl y modern, probabl y dating to the nineteent h or early 20 th centuries. Other modifications, however, appear to be ancient, indicating damage that was repaired , material s that were re-used, or construction s that were recycled for continued use in antiquity. Technology of construction , ancient alterations , modern repairs , and subsequent damage all had to be interprete d and reconciled with curren t treatmen t and aestheti c goals. The primar y objective has been the stabilization and long-term preservatio n of the coffins and mummies. Visual compensation and integratio n are intended to aid the interpretatio n of these objects as part of a major permanen t gallery installation .

Keeping Alive the History of Restoration: Nineteenth Century Repairs on Greek Ceramics from the National Museum of Antiquities in Leiden

Many archaeological ceramics from the collection of the National Museum of Antiquities in Leiden have been restored at some time during their lifespan. Since a large part of the museum’s collection was established during the nineteenth century, we have come across many examples of repairs dating from this period. In this paper a number of these old repairs on Greek ceramics will be described briefly. Using these repairs as a reference, I will discuss certain issues that are of importance in our understanding of the past. These restorations can provide important information concerning restoration practices and ethical considerations in earlier times. In how far is it possible to identify specific ‘restoration styles’? Why is it important to keep a record of the techniques and materials that were used for these old repairs, and to what extent should they be kept?

“The Development of Principles in Paintings Conservation: Case Studies from the Restoration of Raphael’s Art,” from: Conservation: Principles, dilemmas, and uncomfortable truths (London, 2009)

This chapter will investigate the gradual establishment of restoration principles during the Early Modern period in Europe by focusing on the treatment of paintings by Raphael. The High Renaissance artist Raphael (1483 -1520), who flourished under the patronage of Popes Julius II and Leo X in Rome, became even more famous after death than he had been during his lifetime. Influential theorists championed Raphael as the modern painter who had captured the spirit of the ancients most fully and whose art, therefore, should be emulated. The great value attached to Raphael's art meant that his works were typically owned by the wealthiest individuals and institutions. When they required restoration, exceptional trouble was taken. Sometimes this led to overly-ambitious treatments, while at other times new and improved standards were set. Often the treatments were documented with unusual care. The most notable advances in principled and ethical restoration occurred in institutional contexts and less so when Raphael's paintings were controlled by private patrons.

Introduction: Cabinet, elaboratory, gallery 1500–1800. The preservation of art and material culture in Europe

Notes and Records: the Royal Society Journal of the History of Science

Conservation practice, material exploration and their respective 'scientific' rationales were not confined to the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. They also existed in the early modern and modern periods. The papers in this special issue seek to challenge the idea that these types of physical and intellectual interactions with collected objects only emerged in the Industrial Age. Great scientific advances in conservation and related materials analysis were made in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries by various museum directors, conservators and chemists, and with them the evolution of prominent conservation theories. But these achievements have become disproportionately represented in the growing literature on the history of conservation and have served to dominate the narrative. 1 The idea for this special issue developed from a one-day online conference held in 2021, organized by Morwenna Blewett at the Ashmolean Museum. Lucy Wrapson chaired a panel session and made closing remarks, drawing together the interrelationships between seven diverse papers, which tackled the preservation of art and material culture at a wide range of places and dates. The papers highlight the themes that were right at the heart of the early development of the Ashmolean Museum in the seventeenth century, and were so very clearly in train the century before. Among them are: material investigation; preservation; debates around damage; deterioration; loss compensation; documentation; and the very function and purpose of conservation and preservation. All these considerations motivated interpositions that were certainly not 'unscientific'. The shadow of achievements in the history of conservation history, stemming from the nineteenth century, serves to cement and provide a compelling origin story, particularly for those who played a traceable and autobiographical part in those events. And, if we look closely, we can see this tendency emerging in the comments of some of the indisputably accomplished figures of the twentieth century. A typical example comes as late as 1978, when Harold Plenderleith, the chemist, archaeologist and conservator who had worked at