Materials Issues in Art and Archaeology III - Assetsassets.cambridge.org/97811074/06827/frontmatter/9781107406827... · Materials Issues in Art and Archaeology III ... George Segan

Materials Issues in Art and Archaeology III

www.cambridge.org© in this web service Cambridge University Press

Cambridge University Press978-1-107-40682-7 - Materials Research Society Symposium Proceedings: Volume 267:Materials Issues in Art and Archaeology IIIEditors: Pamela B. Vandiver, James R. Druzik, George Segan Wheeler and Ian C. FreestoneFrontmatterMore information

http://www.cambridge.org/9781107406827

http://www.cambridge.org







MATERIALS RESEARCH SOCIETY SYMPOSIUM PROCEEDINGS VOLUME 267

Materials Issues inArt and Archaeology III

Symposium held April 27-May 1, 1992, San Francisco, California, U.S.A.

EDITORS:

Pamela B. VandiverSmithsonian Institution

Washington, D.C., U.S.A.

James R. DruzikThe Getty Conservation Institute

Marina Del Rey, California, U.S.A.

George Segan WheelerMetropolitan Museum of Art

New York, New York, U.S.A.

Ian C. FreestoneThe British Museum

London, United Kindom

MATERIALS RESEARCH SOCIETYPittsburgh, Pennsylvania






cambridge university press Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town, Singapore, São Paulo, Delhi, Mexico City

Cambridge University Press32 Avenue of the Americas, New York ny 10013-2473, USA

Published in the United States of America by Cambridge University Press, New York

www.cambridge.orgInformation on this title: www.cambridge.org/9781107406827

Materials Research Society506 Keystone Drive, Warrendale, pa 15086http://www.mrs.org

© Materials Research Society 1992

This publication is in copyright. Subject to statutory exceptionand to the provisions of relevant collective licensing agreements, no reproduction of any part may take place without the written permission of Cambridge University Press.

This publication has been registered with Copyright Clearance Center, Inc.For further information please contact the Copyright Clearance Center,Salem, Massachusetts.

First published 1992 First paperback edition 2012

Single article reprints from this publication are available throughUniversity Microfilms Inc., 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, mi 48106

CODEN: MRSPDH

isbn 978-1-558-99162-0 Hardbackisbn 978-1-107-40682-7 Paperback

Cambridge University Press has no responsibility for the persistence oraccuracy of URLs for external or third-party internet websites referred to inthis publication, and does not guarantee that any content on such websites is,or will remain, accurate or appropriate.






Plate 1

See Figure 2 on page 522.






Plate 2

i*£22^^t

MS^S^

See Figure 8 on page 841.

vi






Plate IA

Plate IB

viiSee page 892.






Plate IIA

Plate IIB

See page 893.






Contents

PREFACE xvii

INTRODUCTION xix

Pamela Vandiver

CYRIL STANLEY SMITH—IN MEMORIAM xxxi

DEDICATION TO GEORGE L. STOUT xxxviiJames R. Druzik

•NOTES FOR A HISTORY OF MUSEUM SCIENCE IN THE UNITED STATES xliMartha Goodway

•EXAMINATION AND ANALYSIS OF OBJECTS IN THE MUSEUMLABORATORY xlv

Edward V. Sayre

UNIVERSITY LABORATORIES AND ANCIENT MATERIALS SCIENCE xlixPamela Vandiver

MATERIALS RESEARCH SOCIETY SYMPOSIUM PROCEEDINGS lv

PART I: CULTURAL HERITAGE IN CONFLICT

A. HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVES

T H E HAGUE CONVENTION OF 1954: HISTORY, SIGNIFICANCE ANDCOMPLIANCES 5

Miguel Angel Corzo

•CATASTROPHES AND ENTROPY OF CULTURAL PROPERTIES 17Michel Benarie and James R. Druzik

T H E PROTECTION OF NATIONAL TREASURES AT THE BRITISH MUSEUMDURING THE FIRST AND SECOND WORLD WARS 29

Marjorie L. CaygillAPPENDIX: AIR RAID PRECAUTIONS IN MUSEUMS, PICTUREGALLERIES AND LIBRARIES

T H E NATIONAL GALLERY AT WAR 101David Saunders

B. CONTEMPORARY PERSPECTIVES

*STATUS REPORT: ASSESSMENT OF CULTURAL LOSSES SUFFERED BYAMERICAN ALEUTS DURING WORLD WAR II 113

Barbara Sweetland Smith

T H E GULF WAR AND ITS AFTERMATH ON THE CULTURAL HERITAGEOF IRAQ 121

Selma M.S. Al-Radi

•MONUMENTS AS TARGETS 125Zelimir Koscevic

•CROATIAN MONUMENTS AS TARGETS, 1991/92 127JoSko Belamarid

•Invited Paper

IX






SAVING GRACE: CAN CAMBODIA'S ANCIENT SITE OF ANGKORBE PRESERVED? 141

Donald Garfield

*A STRATEGY FOR PLANNING AND PROTECTING IMMOVABLEHERITAGE: LESSONS FROM NATURAL DISASTER PLANNING 149

Charles C. Thiel Jr.

PART II: EXAMINATION, TECHNICAL ANALYSESAND DISCOVERY

A. THE GEOLOGICAL, GEOCHEMICALAND BIOGEOCHEMICAL CONTEXT

ROCK VARNISH CATION-RATIOS MAY NOT BE A RELIABLE METHODFOR DATING LITHIC ARTIFACTS 165

Paul Bierman and Karen Harry

*A HOLISTIC APPROACH TO THE ANALYSIS OF ARCHAEOLOGICALDEPOSITS, ILLUSTRATED USING A LATE ROMAN URBAN SEQUENCEFROM NORTHWEST EUROPE 179

Orpah S. Farrington and Richard M. Bateman

B. CHARACTERIZATION OF COMPOSITION ANDSTRUCTURE OF ART OBJECTS AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL ARTIFACTS

*UNDERSTANDING ART THROUGH TECHNICAL ANALYSIS INFERENCESFROM PIGMENT IDENTIFICATION 195

Barbara H. Berrie

CHINESE BUDDHIST BRONZES IN THE FREER GALLERY OF ART:PHYSICAL FEATURES AND ELEMENTAL COMPOSITION 205

Paul Jett and Janet G. Douglas

A TECHNICAL EXAMINATION OF THE CHINESE BUDDHIST BRONZESIN THE FREER GALLERY OF ART, PART B: STABLE LEAD ISOTOPEANALYSIS 225

Edward V. Say re, Paul Jett, and Emile C. Joel

ANALYSIS OF MATERIALS CONTAINED IN MID-4th TO EARLY 7thCENTURY A.D. PALESTINIAN KOHL TUBES 239

William D. Blanchard, E. Marianne Stern, and Leon P. Stodulski

*NON-DESTRUCTIVE X-RAY DIFFRACTION WITH 30-MICRON SPATIALRESOLUTION: SOME EXAMPLES 255

M. Inaba, J. Miyata, and R. Sugisita

NON-DESTRUCTIVE SPECTROSCOPIC INVESTIGATIONS ON PAINTINGSUSING OPTICAL FIBERS 265

M. Bacci, S. Baronti, A. Casini, F. Lotti, M. Picollo, and O. Casazza

APPLICATION OF SURFACE AND BULK ANALYTICAL TECHNIQUESFOR THE STUDY OF IRON METALLURGY SLAGS AT TELL AFIS(N-W SYRIA) 285

G.M. Ingo, L. Scoppio, S. Mazzoni, G. Mattogno, and A. Scandurra

INVESTIGATION OF DECORATIVE COATING ON KONGO CERAMICSUSING U.V. LIGHT AND FTIR ANALYSIS 291

Madeleine R. Hexter and Walter R. Hopwood

*Invited Paper






EXAMINATION OF METAL THREADS FROM SOME XV/XVI CENTURYITALIAN TEXTILES BY SCANNING ELECTRON MICROSCOPY-ENERGYDISPERSIVE X-RAY SPECTROMETRY 309

D. Montegut, C. Adelson, R.J. Koestler, and N. Indictor

NEUTRON INDUCED AUTORADIOGRAPHY AND PIXE ANALYSIS 319W. Stanley Taft, James W. Mayer, Howard C. Aderhold, Matt Keller,and Gia Rizzo

FORGERY DETERMINATION BY FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS 325Leonard Gorelick and A.J. Gwinnett

C. PROPERTIES OF MATERIALS USED BY THEARTIST, ARTISAN AND CONSERVATOR

*A GENERAL METHOD FOR DETERMINING THE MECHANICALPROPERTIES NEEDED FOR THE COMPUTER ANALYSIS OF POLYMERICSTRUCTURES SUBJECTED TO CHANGES IN TEMPERATURE ANDRELATIVE HUMIDITY 337

Marion F. Mecklenburg, Charles S. Tumosa, andMark H. McCormick-Goodhart

THE EFFECTS OF TEMPERATURE AND RELATIVE HUMIDITY ON THEMECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF MODERN PAINTING MATERIALS 359

Jonah D. Erlebacher, Eric Brown, Marion F. Mecklenburg,and Charles S. Tumosa

DETECTION OF DELAMINATIONS IN ART OBJECTS USING AIR-COUPLEDULTRASOUND 371

Alison Murray, C M . Fortunko, Marion F. Mecklenburg, andRobert E. Green, Jr.

MODERN TRANSPARENT PAPERS: MATERIALS, DEGRADATION, ANDTHE EFFECTS OF SOME CONSERVATION TREATMENTS 379

Dianne van der Reyden, Christa Hofmann, Mary Baker, andMarion Mecklenburg

EFFECTS OF WATER ON THE MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF PAPER ANDTHEIR RELATIONSHIP TO THE TREATMENT OF PAPER 397

Timothy Vitale

EFFECTS OF DRYING ON THE MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF PAPER ANDTHEIR RELATIONSHIP TO THE TREATMENT OF PAPER 429

Timothy Vitale

PROTECTION OF ARCHIVAL RECORD FROM POLLUTANTS: THEDIFFUSION OF SO2 THROUGH ARCHIVAL BOXBOARD 447

Charles M. Guttman and Kenneth L. Jewett

THE MOISTURE BUFFERING CAPABILITY OF MUSEUM CASES 453Vinod Daniel and Shin Maekawa

CHANGES IN THE INFRARED ABSORBANCE AND COLOR OF AGEDCELLULOSE FILM 459

Frances Whitaker Mayhew and Ira Block

*Invited Paper

xi






PART III: ANCIENT TECHNOLOGY, CRAFT AND THE ROLEOF TECHNOLOGY IN MATERIAL CULTURE

A. CRAFT RECONSTRUCTION FROM EVIDENCE OFWORKSHOPS, INDUSTRIAL DEBRIS AND ARTIFACTS

1. Production Events, Tools and Techniques

ANALYSIS OF USE WEAR ON CERAMIC POTTER'S TOOLS 475Robert C. Henrickson

*A NEW LOOK AT STONE DRILLS OF THE INDUS VALLEY TRADITION 495J. Mark Kenoyer and Massimo Vidale

A THIRD MILLENNIUM B.C. GLAZED QUARTZ BEAD FROM TELLES-SWEYHAT, SYRIA 519

Pamela B. Vandiver, Mark Fenn, and T.A. Holland

2. Production Sites and Process Reconstruction

THE WORK OF THE POTTER IN ANCIENT MESOPOTAMIA DURINGTHE SECOND MILLENNIUM B.C. 529

Abraham Van As and Loe Jacobs

THIRD MILLENNIUM B.C. TIN PROCESSING DEBRIS FROM GOLTEPE(ANATOLIA) 545

Pamela Vandiver, K. Aslihan Yener, and Leopold May

•FURTHER STUDY OF THE PROCESS OF TECHNOLOGICAL EVOLUTIONOF ANCIENT CHINESE POTTERY AND PORCELAIN 571

Li Jiazhi, Luo Hongjie, and Gao Liming

THERMAL ANALYSIS OF EARLY NEOLITHIC POTTERY FROM TEPEGANJ DAREH, IRAN 591

A. Yelon, A. Saucier, J.-P. Larocque, P.E.L. Smith, and P. Vandiver

THE TECHNICAL EXAMINATION OF SOME NEOLITHIC CHINESE LIANGZHUCERAMICS IN THE HARVARD UNIVERSITY ART MUSEUMS COLLECTION 609

Andrzej Dajnowski, Eugene Farrell, and Pamela Vandiver

TERRACOTTAS AROUND CLODION: CHEMICAL AND MINERALOGICALSTUDIES AND THERMOLUMINESCENCE ANALYSIS 621

Fre*d6ric Saltron, Anne Bouquillon, and Guirec Querre*

THE ROMAN CERAMICS OF SALOBRENA (GRANADA-SPAIN) AND THEIRRAW MATERIALS 627

Ana M. De Andres and Isabel Munoz

A PRELIMINARY SCIENTIFIC STUDY OF TRADITIONAL KOREANCELADONS AND THEIR MODERN DEVELOPMENTS 633

C.K. Koh Choo

WHITE INCRUSTATION ON POTTERY FROM NEOLITHIC TELLSAMOVODENE, BULGARIA 639

Julia Gencheva

METALWORKING AT HENGISTBURY HEAD, DORSET AND THEDUROTRIGAN COINAGE: A REINTERPRETATION OF AN IRON AGEAND ROMAN INDUSTRIAL SITE 651

Chris J. Salter and J. Peter Northover

•Invited Paper

xii






B. PATTERN OF PRODUCTION, RAW MATERIALCONSTRAINTS AND STYLE OF TECHNOLOGY

*A TECHNOLOGICAL MARKER OF THE PENETRATION INTO NORTHAMERICA: PRESSURE MICROBLADE DEBITAGE, ITS ORIGIN INTHE PALEOLITHIC OF NORTH ASIA AND ITS DIFFUSION 661

M-L. Inizan, M. Lechevallier, and P. Plumet

* ARCHAEOLOGICAL BITUMIN: IDENTIFICATION, ORIGINS ANDUSES OF AN ANCIENT NEAR EASTERN MATERIAL 683

Jacques Connan and Odile Deschesne

PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS OF THE MASONRY OF THE HAGIA SOPHIABASILICA, ISTANBUL 721

Richard A. Livingston, P.E. Stutzman, R. Mark, and M. Erdik

C. TECHNICAL ANALYSIS, ETHNOGRAPHYAND THE WRITTEN RECORD

*THEOPHILUS AND THE COMPOSITION OF MEDIEVAL GLASS 739Ian C. Freestone

*PHYSICAL AND CULTURAL CONSTRAINT OF INNOVATION IN THE LATEPREHISTORIC METALLURGY OF CERRO HUARINGA, PERU 747

Stephen M. Epstein

*FROM THEOPHILUS TO C.S. SMITH: DISCOVERY OF AN ELEVENTHCENTURY A.D. BELL-CASTING MOLD FROM VENOSA (SOUTHERN ITALY) 757

M. Vidale, A. Melucco Vaccaro, M.R. Salvatore, M. Micheli, and C. Balista

RESTORATION OF ANTIQUE CHURCH BELLS: A CASE STUDY 781G. Ramos, M.C. Castro, I. Amadevilla, C. Gonzalez-Tirado, andV.M. Castano

D: THE USE OF ARTIFACTS AND THEIR REUSE

^PORCELAIN ON DISPLAY: DECORATIVE AND OTHER USES OF ORIENTALPORCELAIN IN EUROPE 789

Oliver R. Impey

*A BASIC STUDY OF USE-WEAR "POLISH" ON EARLY RICE PADDYFARMING TOOLS 805

Shoh Yamada

PRELIMINARY TECHNICAL STUDY OF MEDIEVAL LIMOGES ENAMELS 817Pete Dandridge and Mark T. Wypyski

PART IV: CONSERVATION SCIENCE AND PRESERVATION

A. IDENTIFICATION AND PHYSICAL CHEMISTRYOF POST-DEPOSITIONAL PROCESSES

*THE DIVERSITY OF NEWLY DISCOVERED DETERIORATION PATTERNSIN ANCIENT EGYPTIAN PIGMENTS: CONSEQUENCES TO ENTIRELYNEW RESTORATION STRATEGIES AND TO THE EGYPTOLOGICALCOLOUR SYMBOLISM 831

Solveig Schiegl, Karl L. Weiner, and Ahmed El Goresy

*Invited Paper

xiii






LOSS OF INFRARED LINEAR DICHROISM IN COLLAGEN FIBERS ASA MEASURE OF DETERIORATION IN SKIN AND SEMI-TANNED LEATHERARTIFACTS 859

Gregory S. Young

*SOME APPLICATIONS OF ION CHROMATOGRAPHY TO THE STUDY OFTHE DETERIORATION OF MUSEUM ARTIFACTS 869

Norman H. Tennent, Brian G. Cooksey, David Littlejohn, andBarbara J. Ottaway

UNDERSTANDING POST-DEPOSITIONAL PROCESSES THROUGH ELECTRONMICROBEAM ANALYSIS OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL BONE FROM SE MISSOURI 883

Diana M. Greenlee and Robert C. Dunnell

ANALYSIS OF MEDIEVAL FRESCO PIGMENTS FROM THE GEORGIANREPUBLIC 889

Marie Dneprovskaya

ROCK VARNISH ON A PRE-COLUMBIAN GREEN JASPER FROM THETROPICAL RAIN FOREST (THE AHAW PECTORAL) 891

Leoncio A. Garza-Valdes and Brian Stross

B. DETERIORATION, TREATMENT AND STRUCTUREIN ARCHITECTURAL AND BUILDING MATERIALS

RECENT ECO-ARCHAEOMETRIC STUDIES OF SALINIZATION ANDDESALINIZATION OF KARNAK TEMPLES, EGYPT 903

George Burns, K.M. Matsui, R.M. Potter, and T.C. Billard

HYDRIC PROPERTIES OF SOME SPANISH BUILDING STONES: APETROPHYSICAL INTERPRETATION 911

Luis Valdeon, Rosa M. Esbert, and Carlota M. Grossi

PORE POTENTIAL AND DURABILITY OF LIMESTONE AT THE SPHINX 917K.L. Gauri and Srinivas S. Yerrapragada

THE USE OF EPOXY RESINS IN FIELD PROJECTS FOR STONESTABILIZATION 925

Charles M. Selwitz

SILICONIC AND ACRYLIC RESINS DISPERSED IN WATER ASPROTECTIVES FOR STONE SURFACE 935

Guido Biscontin, P. Maravelaki, E. Zendri, and A. Glisenti

INVESTIGATIONS OF THE SURFACE PROCESSES ON EXPOSEDLIMESTONES 943

Pagona Maravelaki, R. Bertoncello, G. Biscontin, G. Battaglin, E. Zendri,and E. Tondello

CLEANING WITH LASER RADIATION ON ISTRIA STONE 955Pagona Maravelaki, G. Biscontin, E. Zendri, R. Polloni, and W. Cecchetti

*MICROSTRUCTURES OF B72 ACRYLIC RESIN/MTMOS COMPOSITES 963George Segan Wheeler, Eugene Wolkow, and Harry Gafney

*INTERCALATED TWO-DIMENSIONAL CERAMIC NANOCOMPOSITES 969E.P. Giannelis, V. Mehrotra, O. Tse, R.A. Vaia, and T.-C. Sung

*Invited Paper






EVALUATION OF PROTECTIVE COATINGS FOR THE 'IN SITU'PRESERVATION OF HISTORIC TIMBER BUILDINGS IN A HARSHANTARCTIC ENVIRONMENT 981

Janet Hughes

TECHNICAL EVIDENCE FOR TEMPORAL PLACEMENT: SCULPTED ADOBEFRIEZES OF CHAN CHAN, PERU 989

Joanne Pillsbury

ELECTRON MICROSCOPY STUDIES OF THE CHRONOLOGICALSEQUENCES OF TEOTIHUACAN PLASTER TECHNIQUE 997

Diana Magaloni, T. Falcon, J. Cama, R.W. Siegel, R. Lee, R. Pancella,L. Banos, and V. Castano

COMPARATIVE STUDIES OF ANCIENT MORTARS FROM GIZA, EGYPT,AND NEVALI CORI, TURKEY 1007

A. Reller, P.-M. Wilde, H.G. Wiedemann, H. Hauptmann, and G. Bonani

C. GLASS CORROSION AND PRESERVATION

THEORIES OF CORROSION AS APPLIED TO PRESERVATION OFARCHAEOLOGICAL CERAMICS 1015

R.L. Schulz, D.E. Clark, and D.C. Folz

INVESTIGATIONS BY GLASS SENSORS ON THE CORROSIVEENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS AT STAINED GLASS WINDOWS WITHPROTECTIVE GLAZINGS IN EUROPE 1031

Johanna Leissner and Dieter R. Fuchs

EVALUATION OF THE EFFECTIVENESS AND THE POTENTIAL DAMAGEOF CLEANING METHODS FOR THE RESTORATION OF STAINED GLASSWINDOWS 1039

Hannelore Romich and Dieter R. Fuchs

D. CORROSION OF METALS AND CORROSION PROTECTION

SULFATE FORMATION DURING CORROSION OF COPPER ALLOYOBJECTS 1047

Michael B. McNeil and D.W. Mohr

INTERPRETATION OF BRONZE DISEASE AND RELATED COPPERCORROSION MECHANISMS IN TERMS OF LOG-ACTIVITY DIAGRAMS 1055

Michael B. McNeil and D.W. Mohr

A NEW CORROSION-PROTECTIVE POLYMER FOR ARTIFACT DISPLAYAND STORAGE APPLICATIONS 1065

J.P. Franey and Keith Donaldson

THE CONSOLIDATION AND DESALINATION OF CERAMICIMPREGNATED WITH SODIUM SULPHATE 1071

Alice B. Paterakis

PART V: EXPERIMENTS IN ARTIFACT STUDY AND EDUCATION

EVALUATION OF RAPID PROTOTYPING TECHNOLOGIES FOR USE INTHE PRODUCTION OF ART AND ARTIFACT STUDY COPIES 1079

Jerry C. Podany

xv






SCIENCE OF ART AND ANALYSIS: A MIXTURE FOR UNDERGRADUATENON-SPECIALISTS 1089

W. Stanley Taft and James W. Mayer

AUTHOR INDEX 1095

SUBJECT INDEX 1097

xvi






Preface

This symposium, Materials Issues in Art and Archaeology, is the third in a seriesin which the goal is to present recent work on (1) ancient materials, (2) the technologiesof selection, production and usage by which they are transformed into the objects andartifacts we find today, (3) the science underlying their deterioration, preservation andconservation, and hopefully, although this goal is achieved infrequently, (4) socio-cultural interpretation based on an empirical methodology of observation andmeasurement.

Our call for papers read: "This symposium will provide a multidisciplinary forumfor reporting and interpreting new developments in technical studies of material cultureand in the conservation science required to preserve that heritage. In order to promotea dialogue among empiricists who examine the materials science and cognitive andcultural behavior underlying art, archaeology and technology, those who develop thematerials science and technology underlying modern artifacts, and those who attemptto elucidate the underlying mechanisms of deterioration and means of stabilization, wesolicit contributions in the following areas:

THE ROLE OF TECHNOLOGY IN MATERIAL CULTURE:

Processing evidence from workshops and industrial debris.Bone, ivory and stone technologies.Lead-based processes, arsenical copper, wootz.Innovation and technology transfer vs. conservativism and craft tradition in ceramics.Analysis of properties to interpret function.Cultural, historical and technological reconstruction through artifact analysis.

CONSERVATION SCIENCE:

Mechanisms of deterioration.Assessment and monitoring of condition.Evaluation of methods of cleaning and consolidation.Model tests of accelerated aging procedures.

CHARACTERIZATION THROUGH COMPOSITIONAL AND STRUCTURALANALYSIS:

New methods and applications including case studies using surface and/or bulk analysis,isotope analysis, nondestructive evaluation or techniques applicable in archaeologicalfieldwork.Comparison of empirical data with textual or ethnographic accounts.

MECHANICAL AND PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF MATERIALS AND/ORARTIFACTS:

Optical properties and visual appearance.Strength, wear and fracture.Interfacial phenomena in composites, especially treated objects.Replication studies.

Papers should report completed case studies and new applications, rather than potentiallyuseful methods or work in progress. Our intent is to promote research in ancienttechnology, archaeology, art and conservation which shares the knowledge, methods andtools of materials science and engineering."

xvii






Each of the papers was reviewed by three peers, some by more, according to thefollowing criteria.

Significance: The research should be of strong interest to those interested in ancientmaterials, reconstruction of their technologies, and conservation of artifacts made fromthem.

Originality: Results reported should stem from a new line of research or a newapproach or present original results and should not be merely an extension of previouslypublished material. What original thought does this paper contribute, or how does thispaper extend current knowledge in the fields of conservation science, ancient materialsanalysis or interpretation of material culture?

Technical Validity: Data and analytical methods should clearly support theconclusions drawn. Does the paper "over-interpret" the results? Is there a clearseparation between strict interpretation of experimental data and results and the moreconjectural, less substantive interpretation? Are there flaws in the experimental part ofthe paper?

Conciseness: Invited papers are supposed to be 14 pages; contributed papers areto be about seven. If the authors have expanded their papers in order to explain results,rather than just announce them, is the length justified? If the paper exceeds the limits,what in your opinion might be shortened or cut?

We wish to thank the conveners of the sessions for their contributions, especiallyE.V. Sayre, Charles Selwitz and J. Peter Northover. The Materials Research Societystaff and the organizers of this conference are also thanked for making the symposiumand proceedings volume possible. We gratefully acknowledge the assistance of themany unnamed reviewers who gave their time and invested this manuscript with theirenergy and expertise. Our special thanks to members of each of our several labs whoserved as reviewers; we are sure they are glad this proceedings is finally complete.Lastly, since volume II was published Cyril Smith has passed away; we here includefurther information on his accomplishments.

We welcome the participation of each of you who reads this book or part of it inplanning for and attending the next conference, which will be held in San Francisco inApril of 1994. Most especially we welcome people who would be interested inorganizing a session of this symposium which would focus on a particular topic.

Pamela B. VandiverJames R. DruzikGeorge S. WheelerIan C. Freestone

September 1992

xviii






INTRODUCTION

by Pamela Vandiver

That the purpose of this symposium is more than anything an interdisciplinarydialogue has been stated, but the work of organizing this symposium has been rewardedamply by recent reviews of the previous proceedings. Four reviews were publishedin three separate fields: conservation, archaeology and history of science—they are proofthat we are earning an interdisciplinary label for our intentions and activities. Theyeach point out the shortcomings of the proceedings, but also the potential of using themethodology and instrumentation of modern materials science to investigate questionsof materials, technology, preservation and conservation by observing, measuring andanalyzing artifacts and their contexts. The paradigmatic example of results obtained byinvestigation of structure, processing, properties, performance and their interrelation-ships is shared by most of the eighty-one papers in this proceedings which represent theefforts of 171 authors. The four reviews of the previous proceedings are reprintedbelow with the permission of the journals in which they appeared and in the spirit ofhope that we may learn and grow from such criticism.

A CONSERVATION PERSPECTIVE

A review by Dr. Hisao Mabuchi of the Tokyo National Institute for Research onCultural Properties, Tokyo, Japan, of Materials Issues in Art and Archaeology, editedby E.V. Sayre, P.B. Vandiver, J. Druzik and C. Stevenson, Materials Research SocietyProceedings Vol. 123 (1988), xii + 321 pp., illus., price $45.00, ISBN 0-931837-93-6,as published in Studies in Conservation. Vol. 36 (1991) 121-126.

A new trend of looking at ancient objects in the context of materials science hasdeveloped among American scientists, probably having its roots more than 10 years agobut becoming visible over the past five years. The publication of the journalArcheomaterials in 1986 may be taken as a symbolic event in this development. Sucha trend will, I expect, give a new perspective on interdisciplinary study between naturalsciences and art history/archaeology, just as Archaeometry, published from the ResearchLaboratory for Archaeology and this History of Art, Oxford University, gave rise tothat new field some 30 years ago.

Materials Issues in Art and Archaeology is the 123rd volume of the MaterialsResearch Society Symposium Proceedings. The symposium, which well reflects theabove-mentioned new trend, was held on 6-8 April 1988 in Reno, Nevada, USA.Forty-one articles were presented, of which 39 were published in this volume. Theeditors set up three main sections each divided into two subgroups:

Part I. Structural and Compositional AnalysesA. Studies of StructureB. Compositional Analyses

Part II. Ancient Materials TechnologyA. Technology of SilicatesB. Technology of Ancient Metals

Part III. Processes of Deterioration and ConservationA. Glasses: Natural, Ancient and Modern ReplicasB. Evaluation of Processes in Art and Architecture

In the paper entitled "Tapping the Memory in Archaeological Materials" (Part IIB),Michael R. Notis el al. mention that "In the areas of archaeology, archaeometry,museum management and conservation science conflict often exists between the desire

xix






to preserve, and the desire to understand an artifact." From the content of this volume,it can be said that the organizers (editors) of the symposium intended to reconcile sucha conflict on the ground of materials science. I feel personally that the study tounderstand an artifact is as important for conservators as the study of deterioration,since both approaches are closely related and information from academic curiosity mightbe fed back to the studies for conservation and enrich the scope of conservation science.Notis et al. are quite right to mention that "conservation can best be done when thematerials and techniques that were used for making the object originally are under-stood."

In this sense, most of the papers included in this volume are useful for conservatorsand conservation scientists. Particularly instructive are those review papers which aregenerally put at the head of each section.

Pieter Meyers surveys the various methods which may make clear, mainly throughimages, the macro- and microstructures of works of art and historic artifacts, whileEdward V. Sayre discusses compositional analyses, both elemental and isotopic, asapplied to glass, pottery, bronze, human bones, cloth, pigments and manuscripts. Onreading these papers, one understands how structural and compositional analyses can becarried out in more or less nondestructive ways as well as why the two kinds ofanalyses have to go hand in hand.

Pamela B. Vandiver's paper "Reconstructing and Interpreting the Technologies ofAncient Ceramics" is a unique presentation of the author's philosophy and strategy tomake a breakthrough into archaeology from the side of materials science, with examplesranging from the neolithic potteries up to modern high-tech ceramics. W. DavidKingery's paper, "A Role for Ceramic Materials Science in Art, History andArchaeology," treats the subject in nearly the same spirit as Vandiver but in a morepedagogic way, stressing plaster technology in the pre-pottery neolithic Near East.

R. Maddin's paper "Technical Studies—Early Use of Metals" reviews many of themethods which provided insight into early metallurgical technology. However, theuninitiated may regret the lack of a table of technological development and a mapshowing the important sites, like those which appear in Vandiver's and Kingery'spapers, in order to understand the historical background of this interesting paper.

Apart from the review papers and other contributions dealing with methodology,there are several papers in Part I and Part II which report experimental studies ofvarious artifacts from regional cultures: Greek marble sculpture by Stanley V. Margoliset al., Roman ceramics in Britain by Ian C. Freestone and Val Rigby, Greek roof tilesby Vassilis Kilikoglou et al., Maya blue pigment by Luis M. Torres, terracotta warriorsof the Qin dynasty by Hans G. Wiedemann et al., early Christian Irish glass and secondmillennium B.C. glass beads from Britain by Julian Henderson, and medieval window-glass by Helen I. Alten. It is interesting to read these papers as topics, but for theconservation scientist the greatest interest would lie in knowing whether or not theapparent conflict about the firing temperature of the Qin terracotta between the presentauthors (who concluded that they had not been fired) and Chinese scientists (who saidthat they had been fired at 800-1000 °C) came from improper sampling of a degradedpart in the case of the former.

Six papers out of eight grouped in Part IIIA concern obsidian hydration dating.This already classic method, first proposed by Friedman and Smith in 1960, aims atdating implements from the stone age. Since the hydration rate is dependent onenvironmental variables, the method requires various kinds of theoretical andexperimental investigations, as explained in two review papers by Jonathon E. Ericsonand William B. White. Here conservation scientists will find a field in common witharchaeological scientists in studying the causes and processes of deterioration.

Part IIIB is, notwithstanding its attractive heading, rather miscellaneous, with sucharticles as "The Fading of Some Traditional Pigments," "Recent Salinization of Ancient

xx






Egyptian Temples" and "Physicochemistry of the Tomb of Nefertari." Conservatorswill find more of interest in the last two papers, by Mary W. Colby et al., on"Protective Coating for Stained Glass" and J.P. Jackson et al. on "A New Tool forCellulose Degradation Studies".

In future, not only conservators but restorers will become more and more involvedin materials science, because they are in a field where "archaeomaterials" and newmaterials overlap. This book is an attempt to introduce a new area of materials science.

Unfortunately there are technical drawbacks, due to the photo-offset printing of theauthors' manuscripts, that make it difficult to read and understand very interestingacademic papers. First, several misspelled words and incorrect figures were found insome papers, mistakes which could have been prevented by a careful rereading.Second, use of color photographs would have allowed a better understanding of suchpapers as that by Wiedemann et al., since the authors specifically discuss differencesin color. Third, the proceedings as a whole would have been much easier to read ifsome of the papers had been typographically less crowded.

AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

A review by David Killick, newly appointed Professor of Anthropology andMaterials Science at the University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, who is known for hisinsightful studies of African ironworking, of Materials Issues in Art and ArchaeologyII, edited by P.B. Vandiver, J. Druzik and G.S. Wheeler, Materials Research SocietySymposium Proceedings Vol. 185 (1991), xxviii + 844, illus., price $52.00, ISBN1-55899-074-7. This review was published in American Antiquity. Vol. 57, No. 3(1992) 560-561.

This leviathan among symposium proceedings (70 papers, 853 pages) is the productof a meeting held in April 1990 on the application of materials science to theinterpretation and conservation of prehistoric and historic artifacts. The editors andpublisher of this volume are to be congratulated for bringing the product to market sopromptly from camera-ready copy, although at some cost of editorial control. The typein some chapters is tiny, others are in barely legible dot-matrix, and several are muchtoo long (37 pages in one case) or have errors such as a missing page, figures withoutscales, or unformatted tables.

The papers in this volume range over a very wide field indeed. Twenty-six of thesereport research on the conservation of masonry, adobe, glass, oil paintings, paper andmetals. Since most readers of this review will be archaeologists, I will not considerthese papers further except to note that the scientific standards on display areconsistently high. An excellent section on the conservation of stone and adobe should,however, be read by any archaeologist who is charged with the stabilization of standingstructures.

The remaining papers fall into several loose groups. There is a short section onnew techniques, two of which promise to be exceptionally useful. These are theindustrial CAT scanner, which can provide digital radiographs and computedtomographic sections of metal, wooden and ceramic artifacts. This technique willbecome indispensable for the study of complex objects that cannot be disassembled orphysically sectioned. There are also two papers on the environmental scanning electronmicroscope (ESEM). This modification of the conventional SEM dispenses with highvacuum in the sample chamber; samples need not be dried or coated. It shouldtherefore prove particularly useful for examination of botanical and zoologicalspecimens.

Most of the papers in this volume are case studies of metals, ceramics or glasses.There are also three papers on textiles and one wildly speculative essay on the

xxi






environmental effects of lime plaster production in the Neolithic of Jordan. Interspersedamong these are five papers on provenience analysis (one each on bricks, copper alloys,obsidian, marble and pottery), and two papers on the detection of fake ceramics andjades by analysis of the surface patina. Finally, all of this heavy but nourishingtechnical matter is leavened by several non-technical chapters. These include a shortbut incisive review of the history of archaeometallurgy, a summary of the earlydevelopment of systems of weights and measures, and a delightful essay on ceramicsas metaphor in the literatures of the ancient Near East.

The case studies in this volume range from the pedestrian to the truly remarkable.The best provide a clear demonstration of the ability of materials science, when closelyintegrated with history and archaeology, to reveal aspects of past social knowledge andbehavior. The study of single objects brings to light the technical knowledge and thelevel of skill of its maker—the artisan behind the artifact. When studies of manyartifacts and their manufacturing debris are combined with field studies of workshops,kilns, quarries, mines and other such loci, a great deal may be inferred about theorganization of production. When many such studies have been done, it becomespossible to detect regional technological traditions and their mutual interaction. Thisvolume contains some excellent papers at each of the hierarchical levels of analysis, butthere is unfortunately not space to list them here.

The range of institutions represented at this symposium indicates that there is nowwidespread appreciation among archaeologists of the value of materials analysis. Whatis equally clear from this volume is that only a fortunate few have access to appropriatetechnical expertise and advanced analytical equipment. The dominant players in thisfield are the well-funded public and private research laboratories, such as theConservation Analytical Laboratory of the Smithsonian Institution, the British MuseumResearch Laboratory, and the Getty Conservation Institute. Archaeologists who canarrange collaborative projects with these centers reap the benefits of a wide range ofspecialist expertise and equipment, often at highly subsidized rates. Other archae-ologists are blessed with sympathetic colleagues in science or engineering, who arewilling not only to undertake the analyses but also (to judge from the acknowledgments)to absorb the cost as well. These saintly individuals are still rare, though their numbersare increasing.

These formal and informal arrangements fall a long way short of meeting the risingdemand for materials analysis of archaeological materials. Many other archaeologistslack access to appropriate expertise and equipment and do not have adequate fundingto contract out the work. Under these adverse circumstances they do the best they canwith whatever they have at hand. There are several such studies in this volume.Rather than criticizing these papers for their relative lack of sophistication, it is moreappropriate to view them as symptomatic of a major problem in American archaeologytoday. Enormous advances have been made in archaeometry in the last fifteen yearswhile research funding in archaeology has remained essentially flat. Thus while mostarchaeologists are aware of the potential benefits of new archaeometric techniques, fewcan afford to use them in their own research. Unless there is marked improvement inthe funding of archaeology in the U.S.A., many of the valuable but expensivetechniques exhibited in this volume will never be widely used in archaeologicalinterpretation.

A PERSPECTIVE FROM THE HISTORY OF TECHNOLOGY

A review by Robert B. Gordon, professor of geophysics and applied mechanics atYale University, who is well-known for his study of colonial American iron technology,of Materials Issues in Art and Archaeology II. which appeared in Technology andCulture. Vol. 33, No. 3 (July 1992), pp. 602-603.






Archaeologists and museum conservators are enthusiastically using new instrumentsfor microscopy and chemical analysis that have been developed by applied physicists formaterials scientists to probe and measure artifacts. For several decades now,archaeometric methods, such as radiometric dating, dendrochronology, and microprobeanalyses, have given archaeologists information to use in revising older interpretationsof, for example, the peopling of the American continents, the development of coppermetallurgy in southeastern Europe, or the technological capabilities of ancient SouthAmericans. Art historians have also found archaeometric methods useful in discoveringaspects of the techniques used by individual artists, in detecting fakes, and establishingdates. Many practitioners of archaeometry attended a symposium at a meeting of theMaterials Research Society in 1990 to present the results of their instrumentalexaminations of stones, ceramics, alloys, paints, and fibers in prehistoric, ancient, anda few historical artifacts. The editors of the symposium proceedings managed theremarkable feat of publishing sixty-nine of the articles within a year of the meeting.They are a guide to current research in archaeometric materials analysis, and theydemonstrate the range of techniques that can be brought to bear in the study of materialevidence from the past.

The articles in this volume (with only a few exceptions) are four pages long, standalone, and report work in progress. Many of the authors have emphasized thesophisticated instrumentation and methods they used; the introductory comments for thedifferent sections of the proceedings bristle with adjectives like stunning, advanced,cutting edge, high-tech, tour de force modern technology, or high-tech understanding.The stated objective of the conference was assessment of premodern behavior andcognition based on technical studies. In their summary of the proceedings, the editorsdescribe some of the problems that arise in interpreting archaeometric data this way.In the brief space allotted them, however, most authors were unable to go beyond thepresentation of their observations. There are some exceptions. Karen Foster's extendedessay on ceramic imagery in ancient Near Eastern literature makes no use ofarchaeometry. Jack Ogden's article questioning the commonly held view that ancientgold jewelry was cast rather than hand-wrought shows that important research can stillbe done with the aid of a hand lens alone. Nevertheless, a nonspecialist reader of thisvolume may gain the impression that the capacity of modern analytical technologists toproduce data is outrunning the capacity of scholars to use and digest the results. In partthis is because of the increasingly common preference of funding agency and museumadministrators in the United States for novelty over reflection. It is a paradox, then,that this volume is dedicated to Cyril S. Smith, the scholar who has done so much tointerpret the wider context of materials in art and technology.

Most historians of technology have used material evidence sparingly, while curatorsat museums of technology often display items in their collections to illustrateconclusions drawn from documents rather than as sources of information. In the cultureof archaeometry, artifacts identified as "ancient" or "fine art" are accorded higher statusthan recent or vernacular ones; something that is "earliest" or "first" commands thehighest respect. Only one of the sixty-nine articles in this proceedings volume dealswith a North American industrial material. There are opportunities for a convergenceof interest between historians of technology and practitioners of archaeometry that couldbe mutually beneficial.

A SECOND CONSERVATION PERSPECTIVE

A review by Andreas Burmester of Materials Issues in Art and Archaeology IIwhich appeared in Studies in Conservation, vol. 37 (1992) pp. 211-213.

A book review may be associated with the homely atmosphere of long winterevenings, a fireplace, a pot of tea, a warm sweater and a nicely laid out and illustratedbook that grips the reviewer from the first page to the last. The reviewing of MaterialsIssues in Art and Archaeology II was in sharp contrast with this scenario, because its

xxiii






perusal began in a copy shop. Here the reviewer tried to enlarge individual articleswhose deciphered titles showed promise. Without this, the tiny print of most parts ofthe book would have made reading a real torture. First point: I do not think that a copyshop is the right introduction to a book.

Browsing through the thick volume, all sorts of fonts, font sizes, formatting and lay-outs can be found, as well as handwritten alterations and even subsequent editorialchanges in fonts other than that of the original paper. This may reflect the colourfulvariety of our world or the simple fact that many different printers are on the marketand the editors have given no guidelines to establish uniformity. Second point: Nothinghas been done to make Materials Issues in Art and Archaeology II easy to read. Thisis not a new observation: these technical drawbacks were reported by Hisao Mabuchiin respect of the first volume of Materials Issues in Art and Archaeology [Studies inConservation 36 (1991) 122-124].

An introductory note by Pamela Vandiver and George Wheeler presents the goalsof the symposium, held on 17-21 April 1990 in San Francisco. The symposium askedfor contributions related to ancient technology, materials degradation and conservationscience, characterization through compositional and structural analysis, and physicalproperties of art materials. The note mentions "communication" problems betweenpeople around the world and among the disciplines involved in the investigation,preservation and conservation of works of art. The object is seen to be surrounded byarchaeologists, art historians, materials and conservation scientists and conservators.They all speak different languages, their mother-tongues as well as the languages oftheir disciplines, and unfortunately only a few of them have received an interdisciplinaryeducation. Therefore they all have different ways of approaching the object. This isnot a new observation, and has led in the past to the staking of various claims such as"archaeometry" and "conservation science". Both areas have their own journals,symposia, heroes, gurus and fan clubs, as well as their characteristic topics with,unfortunately, little overlap. Third point: It is a good thing to overcome this divisionbetween our curiosity about ancient materials on the one hand and our task ofpreserving or conserving objects of cultural importance on the other. Symposia andpublications such as Materials Issues in Art and Archaeology II aim to bring these twoartificially separated areas together again. Unfortunately a number of authors did notfollow this wise philosophy. They have produced papers with (sometimes) goodscientific results which have lost any relationship they may once have had to the objectsunder consideration. Fourth point: It is arguable whether papers obviously written byscientists for scientists in the field should be excluded, or should be left as possibleseeds for future fruitful feedback.

To review symposia proceedings of this kind is unpleasant because of the widerange of topics, including those with which the reviewer is unfamiliar. Thus this reviewcannot hope to cover all the more than 800 pages. In practice, the enlarged anddeciphered contributions were skimmed through and some were finally studied in detail.In other words, I decided to skip many, many pages and I how have to live with theknowledge that most authors who contributed to this volume may say that I skipped thewrong pages. Sorry for this! The decision will be more comprehensible if onerecognizes that Materials Issues in Art and Archaeology II covers New Methods andNew Applications of Technical Analyses, Painting, A Problem in Composite Materials,Substrates, Binding Media and Pigments; New Approaches from the Mechanics ofMaterials; New Methods of Non-Destructive Analysis Compared with Analyses ofMicrosamples; Stone, Adobe and Architectural Glass: Monitoring and Stabilization;Characterization of Stone Sculpture and Stone Tools; The Role of Technical Studies inEstablishing Cultural Functions of Ceramics; The Cultural Uses of Ceramics; Ceramicsas Cultural Indicators which Reveal Exchange Patterns of Goods and Technologies;Reconstruction of Ceramic Technology; Alteration during Use, Burial and Testing ofTreatment in the Field; Refractories and Glasses: Materials Choices, Workshops andIndustrial Debris; Metals: The Unnatural Indicators of Cultural Differences; Innovation,

xxiv






Cultural Differentiation and Properties; Theoretical and Practical Approaches to theStudy of Metals; Textiles, Paper and Polymers; Characterization, Technology,Conservation and Maintenance of Fragile Materials, a summary, an author index and(very useful) a subject index. Phew! Each of the parts is introduced by a short andwell-written overview of the papers within the section. This is particularly usefulbecause it guides one through the jungle of these thousands of papers and it allows theeditors (mainly Pamela Vandiver) to explain their philosophy; to link areas so farseparated, such as conservation science, ancient materials science and engineering.Luckily, the unfortunate term "archaeometry" is exorcised!

In Part I on new methods and new applications of technical analysis F.H. Seguingives an excellent introduction to the disadvantages and benefits of classic and digitalX-ray imaging techniques. The paper is followed by a short section on applications.One would have enjoyed seeing more relevant applications to works of art, which wouldhave forced a critical evaluation of image processing techniques applied in the field ofX-ray techniques.

Two of the most fascinating papers deal with the use of environmental electronmicroscopy, a new technique presented by D. Stulik et al. and applied to actualconservation problems such as dissolution and crystallization processes in stone andother porous materials; this technique is also applied by E. Doehne et al. to humiditycycling in adobe and dynamic lead corrosion. The outstanding advantage overconventional SEM is that wet or outgassing samples can be observed directly under veryhigh magnification, without the limiting sample preparation procedure necessary forSEM where such samples cannot be investigated at all. However, the method is limitedto liquids with low volatility because there is still a partial vacuum. The new techniqueopens the large "dark" area of liquid-solid or gaseous-solid interactions for future"close" observation by conservation scientists. Congratulations!

It is not easy to see why a paper on cation-selective reagents is included in part I.These molecules are indeed a fascinating topic and it can certainly be expected thatsome of these compounds will one day serve in conservation campaigns. Thus far onefully agrees with the author, who gives a review of the former use of chelating agents(such as EDTA) as well as an introduction (or rather, a compendium of facts which canbe found in any university textbook), the paper lacks any practical case histories ofcleaning or solid experimental results (what about residues left on the surface?). Thepaper simply seeps away. This type of preliminary contribution can have disastrousresults when used by fascinated but inexperienced readers. Fifth point: Today, why dowe read more preliminary than final papers?

Another maddening example: in a paper on "Ion beam analysis of pigments"conducted with proton-induced X-ray emission (PIXE), one might expect results basedon the investigation of at least two pigments. One might even expect a few criticalcomments about the benefits or disadvantages of the method, based on applications toreal works of art. Something like "there are not too many sites where you may findPIXE but, in any case, you have to bring your object to the equipment." No, the paperreports the investigation of a single pigment, cadmium red, "mixed with lithopone(BaSO4)". Do the authors mean baryte (BaSO4) or lithopone (BaSO4 + ZnS)? Sixthpoint: this type of limited paper based on a dummy sample or samples considerablyinflates the number of pages in the volume and suggests the timid question whethereverything written is worth printing.

In Part II the valuable input from materials science to all the dynamic processes tobe observed on paintings is obvious. This is true of the work of Gustav A. Berger, wellknown to readers of this journal, as well as the contributions of Marion F. Mecklen-burg. Mecklenburg's computer-aided application of engineering principles to paintingsyields surprising results which contribute definitive new aspects to the problem of arttransit. One of the conclusions is that "vibration may not be a serious problem for

XXV






stretched canvas paintings" and vibration is therefore not seen to be a major cause ofcracking. This solid paper, with its language of materials science and its coolobjectivity, does not, however, banish my personal concern that scientific approacheslike this will one day be abused to increase the number of paintings and objects that gowhoring around the world from one exhibition to another.

The luminescence of painting materials, most of them used as media, has againattracted the scientist's attention. With the kind of laser spectroscopy presented byLonda J. Larson et al., very small samples can be investigated. The authors describethe method as being "nondestructive for the sample", which is not what we mean bynon-destructive testing in our field. It is, however, an advantage to have a method thatis non-destructive of the sample since the sample may then be reused for furtherinvestigations. The emission spectra shown do not fully convince me that laserspectroscopy may serve one day to identify, or even differentiate, organic mixtures ofvarying composition which, in addition, are altered by aging. Any of the very sensitiveseparation techniques available nowadays will finally yield more reliable results. Aslong as the study includes only a few samples, as in this case, the conclusion that the"emission peak maxima and shape can be used to differentiate between samples" maybe correct. But as soon as more and aged samples of this complexity are investigated,or simply those (mis)treated by several cleaning cycles, reliable differentiation willbecome extremely difficult. A second paper by A. Larson and I. Zink, has obviouslybeen submitted to the wrong publication. This contribution does not show the slightesteffort on the part of the authors to make a connection between their work on the"Luminescence of alizarin and its metal complexes" and Materials Issues in Art andArchaeology II. One can only hope that this paper will one day serve as one of theseeds mentioned above (my fourth point).

The paper by D. Scott on two silver plates in the collection of the J. Paul GettyMuseum impressed by the way in which the analytical work is integrated into theinformation about other Byzantine silver objects so far investigated (and by the choiceof a readable font size). The discussion shows how valuable scientific results can be,but also that they can never provide absolute proof of the authenticity of an object.

H.G. Wiedemann et al. journey into the world of forgotten weights and money, andmake the reader feel like one small part in an endless series of human generations. Theauthors point out that they are using thermoanalysis as an important experimentaltechnique. However, it is not made all that clear what this technique has been used foror what the experimental results have been. The only application described is theidentification of PbCO3 as a corrosion product on a Roman lead ounce. X-raydiffraction has also been used, and this, in fact, is the only method of choice.

Prudent closing remarks by Pamela Vandiver and George Wheeler summarizeMaterials Issues in Art and Archaeology II. To learn from the past and to prevent afurther loss of cultural heritage and technological knowledge is a key task for scientists.It is unimportant whether they are materials or conservation scientists. In their neglectof traditional boundaries, books like Materials Issues in Art and Archaeology II. whichare based on very recent results and on the philosophy expressed by the editorsthroughout this thick volume, are valuable tools for the fulfillment of our dailyobligations. Bearing this in mind, the very heterogeneous quality of the papers and themaddening make-up of the book are of minor relevance.

A VIEWPOINT OF THIS PROCEEDINGS

The editors thank these reviewers for their incisive comments and their thorough-ness. Our response is to endeavor to do a better job with this volume and the next one,and we have made several changes. In an effort to focus on larger issues of culturalsignificance which pose both physical and philosophical problems, Druzik assembleddata on management of buildings and collections during times of risk due to armed

xxvi






conflict. From presentations in the session, Cultural Heritage in Conflict, we learnedof the necessity of detailed planning and preparedness. With the hope that moreplanning will take place, we reproduce a model publication from the British Museum,Air Raid Precautions in Museums. Picture Galleries and Libraries. The overwhelmingconclusion is that behavior based on strong emotional dislike will cause the mostdamage to cultural heritage because that heritage is symbolic of the control of the "otherside." Such destructive behavior can come from raiding by the "authoritarian" side ina conflict or looting by the "weaker" side. Protection afforded by the HagueConvention seems to be minimal.

Some of the problem may reside in the five-sided figure on a white backgroundwhich is supposed to be a protective insignia. The green color is difficult to read froma distance. The figure which consists of a square motif with a point on the lower isperhaps not as effective a shape as might have been designed. The lower side seemsto be pointing downward, almost as if to point to the structure like an arrow to a target.In a test which asked 50 high school juniors to associate seven symbols (cross, star with5 points, hexagon, octagon, circle, pointed square, arrow) with protection or directionto a target and to order them from one extreme to the other, 88 % of the students placedthe Hague pentagon next to the arrow as indicating direction to a target.

We would like to present more interpretive and reflective articles on the widercontext of materials issues in art and archaeology. While this proceedings is not assuccessful as we would wish, there are several other recent attempts which should becited to provide a wider context for this proceedings. The January issue of the MRSBulletin concentrated on the theme of "Art and Technology" with articles spanningmodern technologies for art production by Otto Piene of M.I.T. to Northern andSouthern European styles of painting during the Renaissance, Old World and NewWorld styles of majolica production, the connection between the metallurgy ofharpsichord wire and Columb's pendulum, new approaches to silk preservation, toproduction of Neolithic period plaster sculpture from Jericho, and to refinements in theinterpretation of paintings which accelerator radiocarbon dating of very small sampleswill make possible. Steven Lubar and W. David Kingery are publishing a proceedingsof a conference held at the Smithsonian Institution, entitled Learning from History(Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C., expected 1993) in which interpreta-tion of the social context of technology is stressed. Another such conference is to beheld next spring. David Scott of the Getty Conservation Institute is editing thesymposium on New World archaeometry as presented at the 1992 ArchaeometryConference in Los Angeles. The American Ceramics Society will continue its biennialsymposia on the history of ceramics next April and the publications in the series entitledCeramics and Civilization (American Ceramics Society, Westerville, OH) which nownumbers six. Archeomaterials. under the new management of Robert M. Ehrenreichand J. Emlen Myers, will continue publication of articles of both a technical andinterpretive nature which are too long for many other archeometric or conservationscience journals. The same excellent quality of illustration will continue. The neweditors welcome submissions (P.O. Box 4190, Rockville, MD 20849, Tel. (301) 294-3430).

In the second part of this proceedings, "Examination, Technical Analyses andDiscovery," we have grouped papers into three sections: (1) the geological andgeochemical context in which materials are found, manipulated and degrade, (2) thecharacterization of composition and structure of art objects and archaeological artifacts,and (3) properties of materials used by the artist, artisan and conservator. We hope thatthe section on geological context will grow in future volumes, as we become moreaware of the environmental constraints on production and use. A recent book, Life asa Geological Force: Dynamics of the Earth by Peter Westbroek (Norton, New York,1991) sets forth the perspective of biogeochemistry in a popular style.

xxvii






With time, fewer studies of artifacts can be divided purely into either a composi-tional or a structural category, as many questions depend on combining analyticaltechniques of both types, so we have discontinued this division, perhaps ifl-advisedly.However, one special book on compositional analysis will undoubtedly be acknowledgedin future contributions to this symposium as promoting both accuracy and precision ofmeasurement as well as interpretation, Chemical Characterization of Ceramic Pastes inArchaeology, edited by Hector Neff (Prehistory Press, Madison, WI, 1992). Anothervolume has been published which may further similar studies of stone, Ancient Stones:Quarrying. Trade and Provenance, edited by M. Waelkens, N. Herz and L. Moens(Leuven University Press, Leuven, Belgium, 1992). Another book on structuralanalysis should have a similar effect in its particular area of specialty, PhytolithSystematics: Emerging Issues, edited by George Rapp, Jr. and Susan C. Mulholland(Plenum, New York, 1992). This effort is the first publication in a new seriespromoted by the Society of Archaeological Sciences.

A relatively new area in museum studies which is yielding significant results is themeasurement of mechanical properties. This area has grown considerably with eachsymposium, as participants have investigated more varied materials. The presentationsin this proceedings are just a part of the increase in recent studies of the mechanicalproperties of art objects and archaeological artifacts. Another conference proceedingshas added to the growing literature, Art in Transit, edited by Marion Mecklenburg(National Gallery of Washington, 1991).

In the third part, "Ancient Technology and Craft: The Role of Technology inMaterial Culture," we group studies according to craft reconstruction from evidenceprovided by workshops, industrial debris or the artifacts themselves. Production events,tools and techniques, production processes and sites, or styles of production and use arethree areas where most papers are individual case studies. This is the first time that wehave not had to group papers in the style of objects studied in the last century, that isby material. Instead mere are themes of inquiry clearly independent of material. Mostof these papers depend on "deconstruction" of particular artifacts into minuteobservations and data, and then arguments are made on the basis of "structuralism" tocompare and contrast particular artifacts or groups of artifacts within an all-importanthistorical or archaeological context.

Another group of papers expresses a range of perspectives on the interaction amongtechnical analyses, ethnographic evidence and the written record. This is an old queryand theme in the study of artifacts, but one which is being revitalized by books such asCeramic Ethnoarchaeology. edited by William A. Longacre (University of ArizonaPress, Tucson, 1992), The Ceramic Legacy of Anna O. Shepard. edited by Ronald L.Bishop and Frederick W. Lange (University Press of Colorado, Niwot, CO, 1991), andThe Historic City of Nara: An Archaeological Approach by Tsuboi Kiyotari andTanaka Migaku and translated into English by David Hughes and Gina Barnes (TheCenter for East Asian Cultural Studies, Tokyo, and U.N.E.S.C.O., Paris, 1991).Another group of papers question limits to technological change provided by constraintsof raw materials and past ways of working with materials. One symposium dedicatedto Donald Harden (Roman Glass: Two Centuries of Art and Invention), edited by M.Newby and K. Painter, Society on Antiquaries of London, 1991) has this same themeimplicit in many of the papers. Other papers in this volume investigate the use ofartifacts as visual objects of display or as tools, and in so doing discuss cross-culturalinteractions and cultural diversity which is reflected in the making and use of artifacts.One study by Lechevallier, Inizan and Plumet postulates cultural contact andcommunication based on similarities and differences in technology and technologicalstyle, or patterns of activities recognizable by study of residual material culture.

The fourth part of the proceedings consists of "Conservation Science andPreservation," and is divided into three parts. The identification and physical chemistryof post-depositional processes is the foundation upon which conservation treatment

xxviii






relies. Identification of weathered and degraded products is also necessary before anystudies of technology or materials identification can take place. Treatment, deteriorationand structure in architectural and building materials is a concern which has been a focusof many participants, particularly during the second meeting. Corrosion of metals andceramics and their protection is also featured as a section. One of the participants,David E. Clark, with his colleague, Bruce K. Zoitos, has edited a significantcontribution to the conservation science literature, Corrosion of Glass. Ceramics andCeramic Superconductors: Principles. Testing. Characterization and Applications(Noyes Publications, Park Ridge, NJ, 1992). In the interest of promoting furtherunderstanding among scientists of the field of conservation, a book which presents casestudies and is edited by Andrew Oddy, keeper of conservation at the British Museum,is recommended (The Art of the Conservator. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washing-ton, D.C., 1992).

The last section, "Experiments in Education and Artifact Study," is new this year.Several researchers see the study of artifacts as a way to promote interdisciplinaryeducation or as a means of intriguing more students with materials science and otherscience and engineering disciplines as careers or simply for their knowledge andenjoyment. In addition, replications of artifacts are a way of understanding the processof making objects and gaining firsthand knowledge of craft processes as well as makingstudy copies widely available.

The quality of this book still is somewhat lacking, but again it is being publishedin a timely fashion being available within months of the conference. The articles maynot be as deep, or as wide, or as long, or as tall as the possible dimensions of ourfield which many can envision, but this is the best the editors and participants can do.As you, the readers, criticize this proceedings, as you try to find something of use init, please consider the possibility of contributing to the next proceedings for which themeeting will be held in April-May of 1994.

xxix






Documents

Materials Issues in Art and Archaeology III - Assetsassets.cambridge.org/97811074/06827/frontmatter/9781107406827... · Materials Issues in Art and Archaeology III ... George Segan