85

24 METROPOLITAN MUSEUM OF ART, New York. Hatshepsut gallery with large sculptures placed virtually at floor level, restoration clearly marked or removed, heads on wall at height where viewed in ancient times.

The instaZZation of the Egyptzbn CoZZection Christine Lilyquist

Born in 1960 in California. B.A. in English Literature from Pomona College, 1962; M.A. (1965) and P1i.D. (1971) from the Institute of Fine Arts, New York University, in Art and Ar- chaeology of Ancient Egypt. Assistant Curator at the Metropolitan Museum of Art from 1970; ap- pointed Curator in 1974. Consulting Curator for the Treasures of TutanLm"n exhibition in the United States. Published dissertation: Ancietit Egyptihz M m r s (Münchner Ägyptologische Studien, No. 27).

The new Lila Acheson Wallace Galleries of Egyptian Art are perhaps the larg- est project ever undertaken by the Metropolitan Museum of Art. Certainly they are the most ambitious installation of ancient Egyptian objects in the world. Every object is on display; each more or less reviewed for date, condition and presentation, and 6,500 square metres of gallery space is used as the foil for a chronological arrangement.

Theoretically, the project began in 1959 when the curator, William C. Hayes, reported to the trustees that the collection was essentially complete: now that the days of museum excavations and acquisitions were over, and the time of analysis and publication had arrived, some adjustment in display were re- quired, such as new lighting, and the rearrangement of large objects to give a

more unified concept. The galleries had generally been established chronologi- cally in a giant horseshoe-shaped path, which included special rooms for specific subjects - jewellery, daily life, funerary coffins, monumental sculpture and ar- chitecture. In the early days of the Department of Egyptian Art, rooms had occasionally been given over to recent finds from the Museum's Expedition, or material from private collections.

Unfortunately, Dr Hayes died in 1963. In 1964 his successor. Henry G. Fischer, began a new programme, somewhat more ambitious; he, however, resigned in 1970, and was succeeded by Nora Scott, who was in charge until her retirement in 1972. From 1972 to 1974 Hans Wolfgang Müller acted as consul- tative chairman to the department, spe- cifically working with me on installation,

2s Old Kingdom gallery with windows at right letting in diffused light. Cases built of cantilevered steel beams, tempered glass lights channelled into granite, stippled acrylic roof sheets; there is an access corridor at back. Gallery has green carpet set flush with granite; illuminated tables with educational information are on left.

following his successful installation pro- ject at the Staatliche Sammlung Ägyp- tischen Kunst in Munich. And from 1974 to 1983 I developed a plan which reached completion almost entirely through the patient, supportive and generous resources of Lila Acheson Wallace. The project realized was in fact a joint effort of the Department of Egyp- tian Art, the Departments of Objects and Textile Conservation, the architec- tural firm Kevin Roche, John Dinkeloo and Associates, the Museum’s Office of Architecture and Planning, and of course, many other museum depart- ments.

In 1967 the museum was approaching its hundredth birthday and a review of its status and future was appropriate. The trustees asked the firm of Roche/ Dinkeloo to develop a master plan of the museum. Among the items advocated by the latter, for each curatorial depart- ment, was an orientation area, special ex- hibition gallery and collection accessibility.

Imperatìves of access

In fact, the last point coincided with a movement in the early 1970s towards public accessibility in many areas, and coupled with the fact that much of the Metropolitan’s Egyptian collection had not been on view then since 1962. I myself, arriving in New York in 1962, had never seen the basic collection in- stalled, and as a peripatetic student had found that a good deal of the time a scholar spends in museums is spent get-

ting into and working through storerooms to determine whether there is anything germane to one’s research or not. Fur- thermore, by 1970 the Egyptian Depar- ment at the Metropolitan had lost all but three poor storage areas to other depart- ments; the space then allocated on the main floor to the Egyptian department had to provide gallery and storage space, however it was done.

Yet another reason that led me to make all material visually accessible was my interest in objects that were rarely if ever displayed (an estimated one-third): much of this came from the museum’s excavations not published in final reports. Some of my own training had been in archaeology, and I was in- terested not only in publishing the museum’s excavated material, but in displaying objects in context, such as I had seen done on a limited scale at the Ashmolean Museum in Oxford. Some of my dissertation work had been directed towards analysing sites and tomb groups: it seemed to me that the Metropolitan’s collection offered an excellent oppor- tunity to particularize people and places in specific periods of time, as well as to highlight the strong holdings from El Lisht and Thebes in the Middle Kingdom to Late Period - holdings that are only equalled or surpassed in the Egyptian Museum in Cairo but not made intelligi- ble there in a comparable manner. One final factor was that the excavated material in the museum - starting from the work of the Egypt Exploration Fund in 1896 - had become more valuable in

mai tc Detail

:rial. Ba show se on

26 ring Fourth-to-Fifth Dynasty right is sand-blasted acrylic.

The install&on of the Egyptilzn Collection ut the Aletropohtan ICluseum ofArt 87

the intervening decades. In about 1974 Egypt stopped issuing permits for the ex- port of objects, and art-market prices had risen dramatically. Excavated material that had been on loan for many years was recalled not only for publishing, but for more direct supervi- sion and appreciation by students at every level.

A ”&e chaZZenge

The challenge was to put everything on view and to make it comprehensible without being overwhelming; to let the ‘star’ objects from the collection of Lord Carnarvon shine, for instance, but also to let the bits and pieces which had been brought back by the Expedition for study before publishing (rather than for display) tell their story. Mr Roche and I chose the horsehoe-shaped path again, but adhered to it more strictly, with side rooms for special groups and study material. Fortunately, beautiful objects are often excavated with plain ones, and in ‘archaeological galleries’ fine objects could be used to brighten up a mass. The museum’s famous blue faience hip- popotamus, for instance, ended up in a gallery devoted to objects from Khashaba Pasha’s excavations at Meir, next to a Canopic box from the same tomb, and surrounded by sober but subt- ly painted and gilded funerary equip- ment from Middle Egypt, c. 1800 B.C.

Having made the decision to attempt to display all objects, and simultaneous- ly to place them in chronological order,

the principal parties in the project confronted various ramifications. The curatorial staff had to review each object for date and importance in the light of modern scholarship. This meant research- ing objects that came from the market or from private collections, and studying expedition records in order to refine information for objects that had been displayed or to identify, group or recon- struct objects that had generally been in storage.

For the conservation departments, the decision meant examination of objects to reveal the technology and materials of objects and assist in their authenti- cation - the latter particularly with gold objects. It also meant experimenting to reverse previous treatments which had damaged objects or produced unpleas- ing results (e.g. drying oils on stone and wax on wood); proposing treatments for abjects that needed it; working with the curatorial staff to remove and replace old restorations in line with a modern wish to de-emphasize restoration (one of the most difficult aesthetic problems); designing with the curatorial staff new mounts for objects, some extremely fragile (such as papyrus, which went into acrylic frames with rag-paper supports, or textiles for acrylic frames with polyester fibre felt and muslin or linen); and, last but not least, considering and planning for the long-range effects of displaying objects ‘permanently’ - of mixing objects of different environmen- tal requirements (like textiles and bronzes), and of mixing light-sensitive

27 Display of funerary equipment belonging to the estate manager Wah, G. 2000 B.C. Sheets are piled at left and rear, and lie on a base with sloping top where technical data is given. Lighting is from low-voltage incandescent fuctures maintained frdm a walkway above hung ceiling. Absence of barrier below lights allows more aesthetic possibilities but is a potential danger to objects.

28 Senwosret I gallery of Phase 3 with monumental stone sculpture, architecture and relief. Presence of wooden objects in gallery opposite windows required solar screen and window blinds.

objects (such as ivory seals) with objects that aesthetically need strong light (such as stone reliefs).

For the Registrar and the Catalogue and Photo Studio Departments the ap- proach meant assigning new accession numbers or repainting old ones; taking record photographs or redoing old ones - procedures designed to document items more carefully now that they were to be removed from storage and placed in public galleries. For the Office of Archi- tecture and Planning the concept meant major staging problems: the depart- ments often needed to work on objects before design schemes could be pro- duced; the collection could not be moved out of the space to be rebuilt (except for a non-climate-controlled garage storeroom) because it was needed by the staff for conservation, mounts or study; other building projects were going on in the museum; and the pool of contractors available for custom work was not great. In fact, many of the parties involved did not realize what they were in for. If I myself had known, I would never have begun. And as one might expect with a project that ultimately took eleven years of intensive work to complete, involved an attempt to rethink and modernize the display of an estimated 40,000 ob- jects, used an architectural firm lacking extensive museum experience, a cura- torial staff young and inexperienced in installation as well as bureaucracy, and a rapidly developing conservation staff, there were many trials and some errors.

From des& to ckilnnte controZ

Mr Roche and I had wanted to achieve a unity in the design despite the fact that the galleries had to be installed in stages. We both visited museum of Egyptian material and new installations before beginning. I decided that I wanted to emphasize the liveliness of Egyptian art, and consequently wanted to have a light rather than funereal atmosphere. I was impressed by visiting the Fundaçã0 Calouste Gulbenkian Museum in Lisbon, with its views outside to greenery and daylight, and by the rich use of stone and glass at the Museo Nacional de las Culturas in Mexico City. Mr Roche wish- ed to use permanent natural materials (glass, stone, wood, linen and wool) to emphasize the endurance of the culture. We thus chose beige (evocative of desert sand) for linen and painted walls, dark green (for the verdant cultivation), pink granite like that from Aswan for the

floor, grey limestone for bases and wall supports, and a fairly dark unpolished wood for bases. A sand-blasted acrylic was used- to make bases for more delicate objects, and an occasional acrylic vitrine was used to cover reliefs. Mr Roche wanted simple designs, I a focus on the objects. I wanted to remove casts or add- ed parts and to use unobtrusive mounts, like those at the Glyptothek in Munich.

I had also been impressed with the ethnographic display in the Museum f i r Volkerkunde in Berlin-Dahlem, and thus Mr Roche began to design large cases for us that would allow for the grouping of objects of different scales. He decided on a linear arrangement for the Predynastic to Old Kingdom material to emphasize chronology at the start, using along the front lights of tempered glass (about 2.5 metres square) with an occasional glass door, and a corridor of access at the back (Fig. 25). In Munich, Müller had used small sheets of glass to prevent touching, and Roche took this approach further, using the large lights of unframed glass with air space between. Daylight came into these galleries, and so the 'roofs' of the cases were cantilevered steel beams sup- porting a stippled acrylic sheet manufac- tured by Rohm and Haas which diffused the light and screened ultraviolet rays (Fig. 26). In one side gallery, daylight was allowed for a study area on a raised level, and lowered ceiling with walkway above it for the main material (Fig. 27). In four of the galleries there was no natural light, and so the ceiling was brought down to about three metres for a more intimate effect, fluorescents were added to the incandescent lighting, and an illuminated deck for cases of small objects (Fig. 29). These cases had front access, and proved tedious to open because of the size and fragility of the unframed lights, and the sequence re- quired for opening.

Because there were more dust, dirt and visitors foreseeable in New York than in Munich, the architects and their engineers proposed a climate-control system inside these cases at a slightly greater pressure than the air of the gallery system: the case air was to be purer and more sensitively controlled than gallery air. All eleven galleries that opened in October 1976 (the first of three phases) were constructed on this principle. However, the technology was not up to the concept. Part of the failure may have been because existing equip- ment was used (four new fan coils were

The installatìon of the Egyptian Collection at the Metropolitan Museum ofArt 89

added to existing fans, and existing riser ducts were employed). The biggest prob- lem, however, came from the steam- humidification system designed for these cases: malfunctioning of this system during winter periods caused so much trouble that between 1978 and 1983, when some of these galleries had to be closed to serve as staging areas for the third set of galleries, extensive work was done on the system to rectify prob- lems. A final step of sealing the cases was not attempted, however, since suc- cess would have been predictably low and the major problems were thought to be solved. But the cases always need mo- nitoring closely, requiring department- al personnel to man hygrothermographs and alert the museum's Buildings Department to problems, even though there is sensing equipment within the cases.

The eight galleries that comprised Phase 2 were built within a space having no natural light. And while formulae had been developed in Phase 1 for this situation, Phase 2 lacked a realistic assessment of objects-to-space ratio, and it became necessary to design cases with front access and visible structural pillars. Narrower panes of glass were used for case fronts (1 - 1.3 m wide), with metal 'shoes' at top and bottom. The height for access panels was thus decreased; and because new duct-work was installed for these galleries (above the cases), a walk space there was not practical. Ceilings therefore were created of formica panels (about 1 x 1.25 m) hinged for access to lamps (Fig. 29).

In my view there are a number of problems with these galleries. Study material for the Amarna and Ramesside Periods is grouped into one small gallery, while additional Ramesside Periods and all Late Period material are some distance away from the main galleries. The narrower pieces of glass with metal bars at top and bottom tend to break up the space and emphasize the barrier between visitor and object. The space between doors became a security problem which required vertical metal strips in certain locations; and a good number of ceiling panels are not operable, due to the duct-work above the cases (thus some cleaning and maintenance is carried out by waking on the cable-suspended case structure not designed for such use). Finally, while the funerary gallery turned out to be very ef- fective because of a generous use of green carpet and the rich colours of the

objects, the galleries where stone is the 29 buildinn material as well as the material Case of small Ptolemaic objects in gallery of most-objects feel cold, a sensation not without natural light. Access to case lights

above acrylic roof and below glass deck is particularly the lighting through hinged formica panels along front. system (egg-crate louvre and stippled Labels are silk-screened onto inside surface acrvlic sheets below low-voltage lamps of glas; background of case is linen. Air

these galleries is convenient, and generally allows for easier glass cleaning than in the Phase 1 galleries. Further- more, the air-conditioning system here (a second attempt at conditioning cases) never caused as many problems as the Phase 1 system did. This system has humidity added through a fogging mechanism controlled by dew-point hygrometers. The air is heated by electric duct heaters (as opposed to steam re- heats in Phase 1). New fans as well as ductwork were installed, and generally the 50 per cent RJ3 and 22 "C that we aimed for is achieved.

The Phase 3 galleries (Fig. 28) took the longest time to complete (five years as opposed to three and four for Phases 1 and 2); they have the largest amount of material; there was determination to learn from previous mistakes; and there was less pressure to finish within a prescribed period of time. The curatorial staff had had time to develop a strong aesthetic sense, and experience with practical details; the architectural f rm felt more sanguine about their demand- ing customers. An elaborate series of meetings was set up for personnel from the essential departments to keep track of budget, construction, conservation, installation, remedial work, and a myriad of miscellaneous matters throughout the

" Y

30 Phase gold c Tuthn Eightr

3 case with limestone pier in centre, ibjects of queens to right, faience of nosis IV in foreground, objects of :enth Dynasty private officials on left.

project. A representative of the architec- tural firm was in attendance daily throughout construction, and an ex- cellent contractor got the bid. Col- leagues from the Building and Security Departments as well as the lighting designer were given a chance to approve contract drawings; mounts were sim- plified still more, and bent acrylic sheet used for study shelving rather than the greenish tempered glass of Phases 1 and 2. The idea of air-conditioned cases was fmally abandoned because of high maintenance costs and the potential for mechanical failure, and a sealed case was designed for front access using pivot doors as well as sliding doors with mechanically operated neoprene gaskets. A full-scale prototype case was built before contract drawings were approved, and when the cases were in fact built, an elaborate system of sealant testing was undertaken with helium and carbon dioxide to detect air leakage: the goal was an air exchange of one and a half times a day, which was thought impor- tant not only for maintaining a proper temperature / relative humidity environ- ment in the event of mechanical failure of the W A C system, but also for allow- ing the cases to be retro-fitted with silica gel as an RH buffer, should a special en- vironment be required. In fact ex- perience since the opening in June 1983 has shown that the system is effective, even for a case as large as 60 m3.

Education, nesthetics and practìcnLty

Some general remarks should be made about the project’s educational aspects.

Free floor plans illustrated with famous objects are available at the entrance to the wing. There is an orientation area as visitors enter, with an illuminated timeline (which is also published) and a continuous map of Egypt. All the objects are of course arranged chrono- logically, those considered most impor- tant on the main ‘track’. The labels (silk-screened on glass for major objects on individual plaques in study cases) give as much precise information as possible concerning date, provenance and material. There are ‘light tables’ throughout the galleries to give the visitor a chance to read about the period from which the nearby objects come (this material will eventually be printed in book form). Among other things, they provide a way to describe objects without having to use reproductions, casts or illustrative items with- in the cases. There are two lounges where people may sit, the walls hung with the department’s collection of fascimile paintings. There is also a Special Exhibitions Gallery reserved for the department to create shows on sub- jects or themes, since the permanent arrangement is chronological. Visitors coming as groups are scheduled so that they will nor converge in the smaller galleries; strollers are not permitted, and sketching and tripods are only allowed in off hours. In general, the galleries work well as teaching spaces.

Some remarks should also be made about aesthetics. Few objects in the wing can be approached from all sides, and many, uncovered in the past, are now behind glass. The latter is the result of the wish to mix items of the same

The ihtdlation of the Egsypti@n Collection r l t the Metropolitm MtGsezim of Art 91

period, but also of the increased atten- dance, shortage of guards, and more popular audiences that museums all over the world now receive. Secondly, some items do not get the special treatment they did before (for instance Senebtisy’s jewellery), but this does not mean that special areas do not exist (the Mekutra models, Hatshepsut sculpture (Fig. 24), Eighteenth Dynasty gold, Nineteenth- to Twenty-sixth Dynasty coffins, for exam- ple). Thirdly, major objects may not have the luxurious space they had heretofore, and study areas are generally crowded. This does not mean that visitors cannot see the highlights or dwell among the minor objects if they so choose: in fact, the latter are some of the most popular. And the different densities throughout perhaps have their uses: variety for the viewer, and an indication (as in the spacious Old Kingdom gallery) of the character of the period. Fourthly, light levels have to be adjusted for the most photo-sensitive objects, sometimes going against the aesthetic requirements of nearby objects. The department aims for an 8- to 10-foot-candle level, sometimes achieving less and occasionally settling for up to 20-foot candles for organic materials. In general it is a low-keyed, sober installation, discreet even in the placement of labels (too discreet for some visitors, especially those wearing bifocals, since the label height on glass cases is low to prevent interference with object viewing, and to allow access for children and the handicapped).

As for flexibility of arrangement in these galleries, permanent galleries are not as easy as temporary exhibitions, but we have learned how to make ad- justments when we acquire new objects or unexpectedly receive one of our cof- fins back from long-term loan (a certain percentage of the collection will always be out on loan). In installing the objects we have tried to refrain from building

them into a wall or inserting their mounts into a display surface: ideally every object is movable. When we do make changes, however, they are not un- complicated or inexpensive: the installa- tion was done with a certain quality (silk-screened labels, stone bases, for in- stance), and one wants to maintain that. As for general maintenance, the Depart- ment has three technicians and we are developing a programme this year using them and the museum’s cleaning staff to maintain the galleries during regular hours. There is a staff of engineers to maintain the climate-control system, working with a restorer on our staff, and there are also outside service contracts. Whether the existing resources are ad- equate, however, remains to be seen.

While the staff were inexperienced, no doubt, their energy and flexibility were usefully channelled. Compromises were needed everywhere; there were few escapes from the programme if the pro- duct was to be reasonably consistent (dealing with the mass of study material was especially trying). It was absolutely essential for the curatorial staff to take the lead, from planning through con- struction to installation; to my mind, the succesful completion of the project was due primarily to that.l For I do believe the project was a success. No pro- ject will satisfy every wish and false moves are inevitable. In our case, the biggest gain is that this great collection is on view, and that corresponds fully with the needs of our times.

1. I wish to give great credit to Kevin Roche, for the quality of architecture and detail; credit also to my conservation colleagues, especially J. H. Frantz and Nobuko Kajitani; and thanks to Arthur Rosenblatt, Vice President for Architecture and Planning, particularly for managing contractors and budget. Our benefactor, Lila Acheson Wallace, bore the costs not only of design and construction but of personnel and of allocations in the museum, so that the project could be completed as rapidly as it was.