the online magazine   No. 20, July 2011
REVERSIBILITY AND MINIMAL INTERVENTION IN THE GAP‐FILLINGPROCESS OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL GLASS    By Betlem Martínez, Trinidad P...
REVERSIBILITY AND MINIMAL INTERVENTION IN ARCHAEOLOGICAL GLASSIn recent research at the Museo de Prehistoria of Valencia (...
BETLEM MARTÍNEZ, TRINIDAD PASÍES & M. AMPARO PEIRÓprovement in the understanding of a piece, is              have tried to...
REVERSIBILITY AND MINIMAL INTERVENTION IN ARCHAEOLOGICAL GLASSFigure 2. A piece without casting of missing areas. Casa Rom...
BETLEM MARTÍNEZ, TRINIDAD PASÍES & M. AMPARO PEIRÓFigure 4 (above). The original artifact rests on an internal     Figure ...
REVERSIBILITY AND MINIMAL INTERVENTION IN ARCHAEOLOGICAL GLASSFigure 8. Casting of the missing glass made of plaster. Arch...
BETLEM MARTÍNEZ, TRINIDAD PASÍES & M. AMPARO PEIRÓducts have been used in the fill‐in process. For                   taine...
REVERSIBILITY AND MINIMAL INTERVENTION IN ARCHAEOLOGICAL GLASSFigure 11. Polishing coloured epoxy resin made at the Instit...
BETLEM MARTÍNEZ, TRINIDAD PASÍES & M. AMPARO PEIRÓBut there are other less technical aspects that,       In some areas of ...
REVERSIBILITY AND MINIMAL INTERVENTION IN ARCHAEOLOGICAL GLASSselection of the laminated products that we have      know. ...
BETLEM MARTÍNEZ, TRINIDAD PASÍES & M. AMPARO PEIRÓThe sheet is made without having any contactwhatsoever with the piece. T...
REVERSIBILITY AND MINIMAL INTERVENTION IN ARCHAEOLOGICAL GLASSFigure 17. Selection of the PP detachable film and its colou...
BETLEM MARTÍNEZ, TRINIDAD PASÍES & M. AMPARO PEIRÓuse of PET and PP sheets for the integration of gaps   Referencesin arch...
REVERSIBILITY AND MINIMAL INTERVENTION IN ARCHAEOLOGICAL GLASSent PVC mould used in the process of replacing         suppo...
BETLEM MARTÍNEZ, TRINIDAD PASÍES & M. AMPARO PEIRÓ                                                       gical material tr...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

"REVERSIBILITY AND MINIMAL INTERVENTION IN THE GAP FILLING PROCESS OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL GLASS", por Betlem Martínez, Trinidad Pasíes y Mª Amparo Peiró, en e-conservation, nº 20, 2011, pp. 40-54

730 views

Published on

Alternativas no invasivas de reintegración de vidrio arqueológico

Published in: Technology, Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
730
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
3
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
12
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

"REVERSIBILITY AND MINIMAL INTERVENTION IN THE GAP FILLING PROCESS OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL GLASS", por Betlem Martínez, Trinidad Pasíes y Mª Amparo Peiró, en e-conservation, nº 20, 2011, pp. 40-54

  1. 1. the online magazine No. 20, July 2011
  2. 2. REVERSIBILITY AND MINIMAL INTERVENTION IN THE GAP‐FILLINGPROCESS OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL GLASS By Betlem Martínez, Trinidad Pasíes and Maria Amparo Peiró
  3. 3. REVERSIBILITY AND MINIMAL INTERVENTION IN ARCHAEOLOGICAL GLASSIn recent research at the Museo de Prehistoria of Valencia (Prehistory Museum of Valencia) and theInstitut Valencià de Conservació i Restauració (Valencian Institute for Conservation and Restoration),we have developed different methods of reversible filling based on the use of synthetic films such aspolyethylene terephthalate and polypropylene, materials commonly used in the field of documentconservation. These methods have now been applied to a variety of archaeological glass collections. Theresults of this research project are set out in detail in this article.IntroductionArchaeological glass is an extremely delicate ma‐terial that requires particular ability and care whentreated by the conservator‐restorer. Glass objectsfrom archaeological origin are fragile, often veryfragmented, and have very thin walls. Besides, theyhave undergone singular alteration processes whenpreserved in unsuitable environments (figure 1).In this article we put forward new proposals that Figure 1. Group of archaeological glass objects. Cycladicconcern one of the most controversial processes Museum (Athens, Greece).carried out by conservator‐restorers: the treat‐ment of the missing areas. We have developed an that sort of direct action do not only arise fromalternative that, while being coherent with re‐ lack of manual ability and experience of conser‐versibility and minimal intervention criteria, a vator‐restorers themselves, they can also benecessary prerequisite to any restoration inter‐ caused by the historical moment when actionsvention, does not prevent a reconstruction pro‐ take place: applied criteria, protocols, and ma‐cess that facilitates form legibility of the object. terials used have varied with time.Putting the concepts of reversibility and minimal If there is one thing we can currently learn fromintervention into practice: a question of criteria our recent past, that is the frequent mistakes made when, without awareness of negative effects, ex‐Traditionally, the gap‐filling has been understood cessive intervention on cultural heritage objectsas a process carried out in order to return form is applied without absolute respect for the minimalunity to a piece. The ICOM 2008 resolution defines intervention criteria. The damage done by profes‐it as a regular treatment in a restoration process sional conservator‐restorer, when they justifiedthat includes “all actions directly applied to a single excessive intervention to achieve a supposed im‐and stable item aimed at facilitating its appreci‐ation, understanding and use. These actions areonly carried out when the item has lost part of its 1 Terminology to characterize the conservation of tangiblesignificance or function through past alteration cultural heritage, Resolution adopted by the ICOM‐CC mem‐ bership at the 15th Triennial Conference, New Delhi, 22‐or deterioration and are based on respect for the 26 September 2008, available at URL (accessed 20th Apriloriginal material”1. But the dangers involved in 2011)e‐conser vation 41
  4. 4. BETLEM MARTÍNEZ, TRINIDAD PASÍES & M. AMPARO PEIRÓprovement in the understanding of a piece, is have tried to make both concepts compatible inprecisely the reason why we should make the cri‐ our research.teria of minimal intervention a priority, and con‐sider it not only viable but also the alternative Applied alternatives to the casting of missingthat is most coherent with strict respect for the areas in archaeological glassoriginal material conserved. Reconstruction of missing areas is often justifiedThe Ministry of Culture, through the Instituto del as a consolidation process of the piece. Its purposePatrimonio Cultural de España (Cultural Heritage is to improve the reading of the forms and theInstitute of Spain) published ten criteria for res‐ understanding of the piece as a historical docu‐toration2. In relation to minimal intervention, the ment, where a gap is considered an interruptiondocument says that “the principle of minimal in‐ in the continuity of the form. Intervention mighttervention is crucial. Any manipulation of a piece be necessary or advisable in some cases, especiallyinvolves risks, therefore we should limit ourselves when the stability of the piece is at stake. But weto that which is strictly necessary and accept natu‐ know that this is not always the case and that con‐ral decay caused by time. Over interventionist servator‐restorers are often subject to impositionstreatments that can damage an object integrity or wrong criteria that find justification in consi‐should be rejected”. These recommendations also dering that an incomplete piece cannot be under‐refer to the gap‐filling process that according to stood or lacks aesthetic quality.the document should only take place “when it isnecessary for the stability of the piece or for some It is important to define certain areas before aof the materials that form part of it”. The contro‐ process of conservation‐restoration is carriedversial but indispensable reversibility criterion is out. We must know what the final destination ofalso mentioned. Any report or publication regard‐ the piece is: storage, research, temporal or per‐ing restoration must include it, even though its manent exhibition. Once this has been established,meaning can often create some misunderstand‐ a decision could be made regarding whether treat‐ings [1]. Products used for the fill‐in process must ment should be preventive or if there is a need forbe reversible but reversibility should not be a a remedial approach. Other fundamental factorstraumatic moment for the piece nor for the con‐ are the preservation state of the material andservator‐restorers themselves [2, pp. 60‐61]. some of its characteristics, like glass thickness, and the size, shape and localization of gaps. InNowadays, we have sufficient resources to make any case, there comes a moment when the profes‐reversibility and minimal intervention criteria fit sional will have to face the problem of a possibleperfectly into the fill‐in process. Acting with this reconstruction of missing areas. What alternativesin mind does not mean no intervention or that it are there for that challenge?is not possible to find alternatives that combineboth respect for and legibility of the piece [3]. We Unanimity of criteria is hard to achieve, above all regarding the process that conditions the piece appearance when it is eventually presented. When we make a diagnosis for an object and establish2 Free translation from Spanish from Decálogo de la Res‐tauración ‐ Criterios de Intervención en Bienes Muebles, the percentage that has been lost, we have to actavailable at URL [pdf] (accessed on 20 April 2011) responsibly and decide among different proposals42 e‐conser vation
  5. 5. REVERSIBILITY AND MINIMAL INTERVENTION IN ARCHAEOLOGICAL GLASSFigure 2. A piece without casting of missing areas. Casa Romei (Ferrara, Italy).that could be considered. The first thing to be Figure 3. New support to reconstruct the missing base of the glass. Casa Romei (Ferrara, Italy).ascertained is whether a casting of the gaps isreally necessary. No intervention could, in fact,be a good option, especially in those cases wherethe piece can be easily read (figure 2).We may also decide that only a partial interven‐tion is necessary, with occasional fillings thatstrengthen strategic areas to give stability to thepiece. Or we may opt for a no integration proposaland use other means of supporting the piece in‐stead (figures 3‐5). There are different types ofsupports used for glass made of synthetic resins[4] or with blown glass [5; 6, p. 160]. In somecases, instead of completing the object form, sup‐port is minimized and its presence is reduced tosome elements that not only hold the piece butin some way help to imagine the area of the ob‐ject that has been lost (figure 6‐7).e‐conser vation 43
  6. 6. BETLEM MARTÍNEZ, TRINIDAD PASÍES & M. AMPARO PEIRÓFigure 4 (above). The original artifact rests on an internal Figure 5. Support system made of moulding resin which bearssupport system. Corinto (Greece). original fragments. Museo de Valladolid (Spain).This approach requires a radical change of attitude as a complement for a better understanding ofnot only in the case of conservator‐restorers, who pieces, avoiding thus the need of acting directlyare the first to be convinced of the many advan‐ on them.tages of that decision, but also on the part of ar‐cheologists, museum directors and the general But among traditional options there is also thepublic who must learn to really value this alterna‐ total intervention, the complete reconstructiontive and be aware that nowadays it is possible to of gaps in the object for conservation, aestheticcreate 3D digital reconstructions that can be used or exhibition related reasons. Many different pro‐Figure 6. External support to hold a glass artifact. Hadrians Figure 7. An internal support with a re‐creation of the baseLibrary (Athens, Greece). made in the Institut Valencià de Conservació i Restauració (Valencia, Spain). Photography Pascual Mercé.44 e‐conser vation
  7. 7. REVERSIBILITY AND MINIMAL INTERVENTION IN ARCHAEOLOGICAL GLASSFigure 8. Casting of the missing glass made of plaster. Archaeological Museum of Haniá (Crete, Greece).e‐conser vation 45
  8. 8. BETLEM MARTÍNEZ, TRINIDAD PASÍES & M. AMPARO PEIRÓducts have been used in the fill‐in process. For tained, worked on and then adhered to the pieceinstance, glass from other objects reused for this [14]. S. Koob experimented with detachable fills aspurpose, materials traditionally used for ceramics, well: “[…] the making an intermediate fill or cast‐such as plaster (figure 8), acrylic resins (Technovit ing with plaster of Paris. The plaster will be re‐4000, Plastogen G), polyester (GTS from Vossche‐ moved from the object and then molded in siliconemie, C‐32 from Canuts), polyurethane (Crystal rubber, from which an epoxy fill or replacementClear 200) or epoxy resins (Ablebond 342‐1, Fyne‐ fragment will then be made. This can be joined tobond, Araldite 2020, Hxtal NYL‐1, Epotek 301) [6, the original object with B‐72” [8, pp. 95‐104].pp. 153‐159; 7, pp. 286‐304; 8, pp. 76‐95; 9‐11](figures 9‐10). In recent years epoxy resins havebeen, without a doubt, the products most fre‐quently used and research has focused on analyz‐ing their long term aging [12, 13]. This processinvolves making models (generally silicones,modeling clays, dental waxes or clays) and fur‐ther work on the resin finishing in contact withthe piece (figures 11‐12). Proposal for recon‐struction of large gaps with resin by means ofmolds made from the piece have been occasion‐ally put forward. A replica of the lost area is ob‐ Figure 9 (above). Fill in resin in archaeological glass. Museu de Conimbriga (Portugal).Figure 10. Yellowing process of filling resin. Museo Arqueológico de Santa Pola (Alicante, Spain).46 e‐conser vation
  9. 9. REVERSIBILITY AND MINIMAL INTERVENTION IN ARCHAEOLOGICAL GLASSFigure 11. Polishing coloured epoxy resin made at the Institut Valencià de Conservació i Restauració (Valencia, Spain).Figure 12. A casting with coloured epoxy resin made at the Institut Valencià de Conservació i Restauració (Valencia, Spain).e‐conser vation 47
  10. 10. BETLEM MARTÍNEZ, TRINIDAD PASÍES & M. AMPARO PEIRÓBut there are other less technical aspects that, In some areas of conservation, acrylic resin sheetsunfortunately, are sometimes forgotten such as have been made using products such as Paraloidthe high financial cost of many of those products, B‐72, Technovit 4004A [15, 16] or slow harden‐their short life, toxicity and questionable rever‐ ing epoxies (AY 103, Araldite 2020, Hxtal NYL‐1,sibility. In general, these products are not rever‐ Epotek 301) [17‐ 19]. These can be modeled whilesible; therefore we believe that the use of a primer they are becoming hard, in order to give them thebetween the original piece and the new material, shape of the gap and then stick them to the piecein order to make removal easier, should be not as if they were fragments [7, pp. 304‐306; 8, pp.just necessary but compulsory. 104‐106].Besides, we should not forget the technical com‐ There are publications that have mentioned theplexity of the fill‐in process; mistakes can easily much less researched alternative of making de‐occur. The process requires extreme precision, not tachable films with acrylic sheet precast (Perspex,just for the preparation stages (making the mold) Plexiglass). Some authors define these materialsbut also when pouring the resin and in the polish‐ as less manageable than others and not very suit‐ing that later takes place. These are all risky ac‐ able for aesthetic reasons [6, p. 161; 7, p. 304; 8,tions when they are performed on an archaeo‐ p. 104; 20]. Although it is true that the use oflogical object of extreme fragility. detachable films has its limitations, we have in‐ vestigated it as a proposal in relation to reversi‐Conscious of the problems involved in the applica‐ bility and minimal intervention requisites. Wetion of these reconstruction methods, which use have used particular materials and methods andtraditional materials, we are researching in our we outline the results we have obtained below.laboratories, a proposal that might solve the ques‐tion of reconstruction and conform to reversib‐ There are many comparative studies for the gap‐ility and minimal technical difficulty requisites. filling resins used for interventions on glass, for their virtues and qualities. But we cannot findA reversible fill‐in method: detachable films contrasted analyses for different type of sheets, results, possibilities, or the limitations in theirThe market offers a great deal of synthetic com‐ use, even in the cases when they are presentedpounds made for industries whose activities dif‐ as an alternative. Therefore, we have based ourfer a lot from those normally carried out in thearea of cultural heritage. Conservators have gradu‐ Figure 13. A detachable film solution. British Museumally been getting materials that had originally been (London, UK).created for other purposes. Therefore, each newproduct incorporated to our resources requires anumber of studies that make sure that is not dam‐aging for the materials it might be in contact with,and to judge the suitability of new ideas.The use of detachable films in this proposal is notnew (figure 13), but it has not been sufficientlystudied to be considered a generalized practice.48 e‐conser vation
  11. 11. REVERSIBILITY AND MINIMAL INTERVENTION IN ARCHAEOLOGICAL GLASSselection of the laminated products that we have know. This is, to a great extent, due to the absenceused on analyses focused on other applications of plasticizing elements in its manufacturingand materials within the field of conservation. process which avoids later emissions because “the semicrystalline nature is the basis for theResearch on the causes for glass deterioration excellent resistance to chemicals” [24, p. 68].has found evidence of an acceleration processrelated to environment acidity [21, pp 79‐80; 22]. We have found that PET made in an uncoated, bi‐Other objects of a different nature such as paper axially oriented, and polished form presents theand metal, share that sensibility but with some best and more secure results within the differentdifferences concerning direct effects. We have varieties. This is the case of Melinex, the productfound detachable films of various types that have we use. Melinex shape and surface does not alterbeen used, and analyzed, for application in those at least until 120 ºC and does not change its tacki‐specializations for more than fifty years. In our ness for forty days at 37’7º C [25, Tables 1‐2].proposal, we are putting forward incorporatingsome of the results obtained in analyses origin‐ PP responded to tasting in a less conclusive wayally focused on, among other things, applications than PET. Therefore, it is considered an acceptableof lamination treatment for paper or for storage compound to be used in conservation but thatsystems for metals, to the area of glass materials. should be tested further in order to confirm the results. It is a chemically inert material and it isSome compounds, for instance, those derived not toxic, but it is vulnerable to sun light effects.from polyvinyl acetate (PVA), polyvinyl chloride(PVC) and cellulose acetate (CA), turned out to PP is considered acceptable, provided that isbe suitable from the aesthetic and morphologic manufactured, as in the case of PET, withoutpoint of view, and for their malleability and the plasticizing additives. PP is easy to manipulatefact that they are easy to handle. But they have and to work with and can have a hazy and mattall been rejected because of the damage they can finish, characteristics that in some cases turncause to glass surfaces. Plasticizing elements out to be an advantage for gap‐filling in archae‐used in the manufacturing process are the main ological glass that has partly lost transparency.agents for acid vapor emissions that make thembrittle and tacky [23, p. 15]. We have carried out tests with these two mate‐ rials, both at the Institut Valencià de ConservacióEventually we considered two compounds as the i Restauració and the Museo de Prehistoria ofmost tested and verified as harmless for our work: Valencia. The tests concern the application of thepolyethylene terephthalate (PET) and polypropy‐ materials as sheets in the fill‐in process of glasslene (PP). PET has been used since the mid‐20th from archaeological origin. We have opted forcentury and has been the object of several studies PET (Melinex) in the case of an islamic lamprelated to the multiple applications it has had, (figure 14). We have placed the sheet to supportdue to its optimal results. In the conservation a group of fragments that were poorly supportedworld, the use of PET is fundamentally associated by the base. PP (Plakene) was used for the losswith archival work and graphic document treat‐ compensation of a medieval chalice that had partlyment. Acceptance of this product in these fields lost its transparency and that had several smallshows it is the most suitable amongst those we gaps (figure 15).e‐conser vation 49
  12. 12. BETLEM MARTÍNEZ, TRINIDAD PASÍES & M. AMPARO PEIRÓThe sheet is made without having any contactwhatsoever with the piece. This avoids excessivemanipulation. Besides, it means that we do nothave to be over concerned with the possibility ofmistakes and with the possibility of having torepeat the process. In the first place, we shouldchoose the material best suited to the piece (fig‐ure 16), and then decide about the sheet thick‐ness (figure 17). There are different options foreach of the products: 75 to 175 microns for PETand 300 to 1,200 microns for PP. We have also Figure 14 (above). PET detachable film as a support in anmade colour tests for these materials. It might islamic lamp. Institut Valencià de Conservació i Restauració (Valencia, Spain). Photography Pascual Mercé.be interesting to colour them slightly in order toharmonize the materials with the treated piece.The application of a mix of pigments and ParaloidB‐72 in ethyl acetate has been successful and wecan give the material an aesthetic finish closer tothe original if we wish to do so. This might dependon characteristics of the piece and the differenti‐ation criterion we choose to apply. But being atotally reversible system, we can eliminate theapplication with no complication if we decide todo so. In fact, the main advantages of these sys‐tems are the possibility of changing and elimina‐ting sheets and the reduction to a minimum ofthe risks involved in changes.The first step in the process of making a sheet forgap‐filling is to obtain the gap profile. We placea thin acetate sheet on the original piece andfaithfully mark on it the gap contour with a per‐manent marker. This acetate sheet will be usedas a pattern to cut the PET or PP sheet later asaccurately as possible; but mistakes can alwaysbe rectified. In order to adapt the material to thecurve shape of a gap, we can heat the sheet byFigure 15 (above right). Chalice with PP detachable film. SIPArchive of the Museo de Prehistoria of Valencia (Spain).Figure 16 (right). Preparations to make detachable films.SIP Archive of the Museo de Prehistoria of Valencia (Spain).50 e‐conser vation
  13. 13. REVERSIBILITY AND MINIMAL INTERVENTION IN ARCHAEOLOGICAL GLASSFigure 17. Selection of the PP detachable film and its colour in connection with the original. SIP Archive of the Museo dePrehistoria of Valencia (Spain).means of a hot air blower at low temperature. Thiswill work provided that the curvature is not toopronounced.Once we have checked that the fitting of the sheetis optimal, we only have to fix it in the gap, ad‐hering the fragment to the glass walls with resin(figures 18‐19). Following our reversible materialcriterion we chose to use as adhesives ParaloidB‐72 or Mowital B60HH at 20 %; we have obtained Figures 18 and 19. Above: Adhesion of one PP detachable filmexcellent results with both of them. once coloured and cut. Below: The scalpel indicates one of the missing areas made with PP detachable film. SIP Archive of the Museo de Prehistoria of Valencia (Spain).ConclusionNowadays we have sufficient resources to makereversibility and minimal intervention criteria fitperfectly into the fill‐in process. This can be doneusing materials that are harmless and stable inthe long term. Acting with this in mind does notmean no intervention or that it is not possible tofind alternatives that combine respect for andlegibility of the piece. In our research into thee‐conser vation 51
  14. 14. BETLEM MARTÍNEZ, TRINIDAD PASÍES & M. AMPARO PEIRÓuse of PET and PP sheets for the integration of gaps Referencesin archaeological glass, we have tried to make theconcepts mentioned above compatible, and we [1] B. Appelbaum, “Criteria for treatment: reversi‐believe to have obtained satisfactory results. bility”, Journal of the American Institute for Con‐ servation 26(2), 1987, pp. 65‐73, available at URLHowever, in spite of the success in adapting flatsheets to small curvature of gaps, we are aware [2] J. Barrio, “Evaluación crítica de los principiosthat it is there where the limitation of our pro‐ en arqueometría, conservación y restauración deposals lies. PET and PP sheets modify their plas‐ los vidrios arqueológicos”, Patina 12, 2003, pp.ticity with the application of heat and can be 53‐64slightly modelled to adjust their flat shape to atridimensional object. But we cannot say that this [3] M. Favre‐Félix, “ Ambiguïtés, erreurs et con‐is possible when the volumes to be reintegrated séquences: «Rendre l’œuvre lisible»”, Ceroart 3,have more complicated shapes, or are rather large, 2009, pp. 2‐16, available at URLangular or have pronounced curves. In those caseswhere sheets cannot follow the voluptuousness [4] M. Quiñones López, and J. García Sandoval,of the piece shape, we will have to put forward “Restauración de vidrio arqueológico. Montajeother alternatives for partial reintegration as a de vidrio arqueológico sobre resina en las lám‐means of support or an adaptation of the resin paras de la sinagoga de Lorca para su exposición”,sheet approach suitable for those shapes. Our XX Jornadas de Patrimonio Cultural de la Regiónsystem also finds limitations in objects or areas de Murcia, 2009, pp. 267‐275, available at URLwhere glass is rather thick. We might not be able [pdf]to get that thickness with this type of materialunless we join several sheets. [5] M. E. Ortiz Palomar, “Tratamiento para la con‐ servación, restauración y exposición de vidriosHowever, we are committed to interventions that antiguos: la reintegración de vidrio con vidrio”,follow the line of research described above, whose Boletín del Museo Zaragoza 13, 1994, pp. 303‐312main objective is to develop gap‐filling systemswhich are easily reversible and that do not rep‐ [6] M. Bailly, “Le verre”, in La conservation enresent a risk for the conservation of the pieces. archéologie. Méthodes et pratique de la conserva‐ tion‐restauration des vestiges archéologiques, M. C. Beducou (coord.), Paris, 1990, pp. 120‐162Acknowledgments [7] S. Davison, Conservation and Restoration ofWe would particularly like to thank Carmen Pérez Glass, Butterworth‐Heinemann, Oxford, 2003,and Helena Bonet, directors of the Institut Valen‐ pp. 284‐307cià de Conservació i Restauració and the Museode Prehistoria of Valencia, respectively, for their [8] S. P. Koob, Conservation and Care of Glasssupport for this research project and their under‐ Objects, Archetype Publications, London, 2006,standing when it comes to value the criterion of pp. 75‐110respect for the original piece in the interventionon heritage. [9] G. Lemajič, “Advantages of using a transpar‐52 e‐conser vation
  15. 15. REVERSIBILITY AND MINIMAL INTERVENTION IN ARCHAEOLOGICAL GLASSent PVC mould used in the process of replacing supportive resin fills for glass”, Conservationmissing pieces on hollow glass objects”, Diana 10, News 50, London, 1993, pp. 29‐30Department for Preventive Conservation, NationalMuseum Belgrade, 2004‐2005, pp. 154‐159 [18] D. Ling, “Conservación de vidrio hueco en el British Museum de Londres”, Jornadas Nacionales[10] L. Fernández, L. Schönherr, M. Pugès, “Pro‐ sobre Restauración y Conservación de Vidrios,ductes i tècniques per la reconstrucció de vidre Fundación Centro Nacional del Vidrio, 2000, pp.arqueològic”, Quaderns tècnics de l’MHCB: Con‐ 135‐143servació i Restauració 2, 2007, pp. 63‐79 [19] S. Davison, “Reversible fills for transparent[11] B. Martínez Pla, “Restauración de alzata de and translucent materials”, Journal of the Amer‐vidrio y cobre dorado perteneciente a un juego ican Institute for Conservation 37 (1), 1998, pp.litúrgico del Real Colegio Seminario del Corpus 35‐47, available at URLChristi del Patriarca (Valencia)”, Preprints of the17th International Meeting on Heritage Conservation, [20] I. Gedye, “Pottery and glass: the conserva‐Fundación La Llum de les Imatges, Conselleria de tion of cultural property”, Museums and Monu‐Cultura i Esport, 2008, pp. 501‐504 ments 11, UNESCO, Paris, 1968, pp. 109‐113[12] N. Tennent, “Clear and pigmented epoxy res‐ [21] L. Osete, Estudios de procesos de corrosiónins for stained glass conservation: light ageing de vidrio y vidriados arqueológicos y caracteriza‐studies”, Studies in Conservation 24(1), 1979, pp. ción de sustancias filmógenas tradicionalmente153‐164 utilizadas en su restauración, Facultad de Quím‐ icas, Universidad de Valencia, 2005[13] J. L. Down, “The Yellowing of Epoxy ResinAdhesives: Report on High‐Intensity Light Aging”, [22] J. M. Fernández Navarro, El vidrio, ConsejoStudies in Conservation 31(4), 1986, pp. 159‐170 Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, Madrid, 2003[14] E. Risser, “A new technique for the castingof missing areas in glass restoration”, Journal of [23] B. Cope, “Transparent plastic film materialsConservation & Museum Studies 3, 1997, DOI:10. for document conservation”, Paper Conservation5334/jcms.3973, URL News 93, Institute of Paper Conservation, 2000, pp. 14‐15[15] R. F. Erret, “The repair and restoration ofglass objects”, IIC Bulletin of the American Group [24] L. Bottenbruch (ed.), Engineering Thermo‐12, International Institute for Conservation, 1972, plastics. Polycarbonates, polyacetals, polyesters,pp. 48‐49 cellulose esters, Hanser Gardner Publications, Munich, Vienna, New York, 1996[16] P. Jackson, “Restoration of an Italic glassoinchoe with Technovit 4004A”, Conservator 7, [25] T. O. Taylor, “The use and identification of1983, pp. 44‐47 plastic packaging films for conservation”, The Book and Paper Group Annual 4, The American In‐[17] L. Hogan, “An improved method of making stitute for Conservation, 1985, available at URLe‐conser vation 53
  16. 16. BETLEM MARTÍNEZ, TRINIDAD PASÍES & M. AMPARO PEIRÓ gical material treatment doing research and work‐ ing at different international centres such as the Atelier de restauration de mosaiques (France); Opificio Delle Pietre Dure and ICCROM (Italy); Parque de Tikal (Guatemala); Ministry of Culture (Greece). She has directed a large number of ar‐ chaeological conservation and restoration inter‐BETLEM MARTÍNEZ ventions at national level. She has been workingConservator‐restorer as a teacher since 1996. In 2007 Dr. Pasíes com‐Contact: bmpla@ivcr.es pleted the Máster Oficial en Conservación y Res‐ tauración de Bienes Culturales at the UniversidadBetlem Martínez graduated from the Department of Politécnica de Valencia. She has participated as aFine Arts, Universidad Politécnica de Valencia, spe‐ researcher in Research, Development and Innova‐cializing in conservation in 1997. She has expanded tion projects and her work has appeared in severalher knowledge through a number of courses since national and international publications.1995; she has taken the Máster Oficial en Conser‐vación y Restauración de Bienes Culturales ‐ at theUniversidad Politécnica de Valencia specializingin archaeological materials in 2010. She has beenworking in public and private projects related toher specialization since 1998 both as part of aprivate enterprise working in restoration of ar‐chaeological materials and, since 2006, at theConservation and Restoration Service of Diputa‐ MARIA AMPARO PEIRÓción de Castellón and the Institut Valencià de Con‐ Conservator‐restorerservació i Restauració de Bens Culturals. Contact: mara2113@yahoo.es M. Amparo Peiró graduated from the Department of Fine Arts, Universidad Politécnica de Valencia in 1999, specializing in restoration. Since then she has expanded her knowledge and experience in the field by means of grants and projects in Italy. Since 2002 her work is mostly focused on archae‐ ology. She collaborates in projects with Museo deTRINIDAD PASÍES Prehistoria of Valencia. In 2010 she continued herConservator‐restorer professional trainning with the Máster Oficial enContact: trini.pasies@dival.es Conservación y Restauración de Bienes Culturales, with a final project on archaeological lead. SheTrinidad Pasíes (PhD) is a restorer at the Museo de currently combines her work at Museo Arqueoló‐Prehistoria of Valencia. She graduated in Fine Arts gico of Burriana and teaching activity with variousin 1992, specializing in restoration. Since then she restoration projects of archaeological material forhas been expanding her knowledge of archaeolo‐ private and public enterprises.54 e‐conser vation

×