Museum Conservation: Object Categories, Historical Development, and Environmental Influences Dr Aman Kumar Singh

Museum Conservation: Object Categories, Historical Development, and Environmental Influences
Aman Kumar Singh

1. Museum Conservation: Object Categories, Historical
Development, and Environmental Influences
Study material for PG students of Museology
September 19, 2019
1 Categorizing Artifacts for Preservation
Artifacts in museums—encompassing cultural relics, artworks, and historical items—earn their status
through their role in storytelling and heritage. These pieces differ widely in composition, characteristics,
and fragility, necessitating tailored protection strategies. Based on the specific interventions required,
they fall into four primary groups:
1.Metallic Items
2.Biological Materials
3.Non-Biological Materials
4.Artistic Renderings
1.1 Metallic Items
Alloys and pure metals dominate many collections, including statues, chimes, containers, armaments,
ornaments,Coins and currency. Corrosion poses the primary threat, manifesting as surface degradation.
Mitigation involves meticulously extracting these byproducts and applying stabilizers to halt progression.
1.2 Biological Materials
Derived from flora and fauna, these encompass timber-based relics such as ceremonial chariots, portals,
processional mounts, fabrics, inscribed fronds, and hides. They are highly susceptible to fluctuations
in climate and biological invaders like pests. Safeguarding demands a consistent ambient setting and
vigilant oversight to deter infestations.
1.3 Non-Biological Materials
These endure with remarkable resilience yet exhibit intricate structures, such as lithic columns, carved
figures, engraved slabs, fired clay figures, vitreous wares, and earthenware. Often situated in open-air
settings, they endure precipitation and erosive forces. Proactive measures, including surface treatments
and enclosures, are essential for longevity.
1.4 Artistic Renderings
Irrespective of substrate or technique, these compositions layer pigments, binders, and supports, de-
manding in-depth analysis and bespoke restoration. Examples span wall frescoes, canvas oils, aqueous
hues, framed panels, vitreous overlays, and petite illustrations on vellum.
1

2. Museum Conservation
Figure 1: Conservation lab in India
2 The Legacy of Preservation Science and Facilities
2.1 Origins of Preservation Techniques
The fusion of chemical principles with artifact analysis predates modern times. By the mid-1800s, pio-
neers likeMichael Faradayprobed the breakdown of portable canvases, while contemporaries dissected
metallic formulations viaspectrometry. The inaugural institutional role for such an expert wasFriedrich
Rathgen’s tenure at Berlin’s Imperial collections (1888–1927), where he chronicled protocols in a semi-
nal volume later rendered in English. Concurrently, Copenhagen’s national repository tackled submerged
timber relics from marsh deposits, appointingY.F. Steffensenin 1867 andGustav Rosenbergin
1896—both chronicling their methodologies in print. A successor facility honoringRathgenreopened
in Berlin during 1975.
The Great War catalyzed formalized approaches in Britain: Post-1919 repatriation from subterranean
vaults revealed accelerated decay in London’s British Museum holdings. This spurred the Scientific and
Industrial Research Bureau to enlist Alexander Scott (F.R.S.) as advisor, followed byHarold Plender-
leith(M.Sc.) in 1926 as resident expert—a trajectory that birthed Rome’s global conservation hub.
2.2 Professional Maturation
Conservation solidified as a discipline with the 1950 inception of the International Institute for Historic
Artifact Care (IIC) and the 1952 debut of its periodical,Conservation Research. Distinctions from mere
repair or pure inquiry crystallized in the 1930s, spotlighted by Harvard’s Fogg Gallery and its antecedent
bulletin,Fine Arts Technical Bulletin(1932–1942). Global bodies amplified momentum: UNESCO’s
Heritage arm fostered the Rome-basedInternational Core for Cultural Property Safeguard and
Renewal (ICCROM) in 1959, prioritizing counsel, synchronization, benchmarks, and skill-building.
A pivotal merger in New York (1966) unified theInternational Museum Council’s (ICOM) curato-
rial (1940) and analytical (1950) panels into a singular Conservation Division. From the 1960s, symposia
by IIC, ICOM, ICOMOS, and ICCROM propelled niche advancements while underscoring the field’s
collaborative essence. Exemplary centers include London’s British and V&A (diverse artifacts), Wash-
ington’s Freer (canvases), the Getty (U.S.), Paris’ Louvre, and Berlin’s Rathgen. Despite a tripling of
experts over three decades, global demands eclipse supply in safeguarding humanity’s legacy.
Aman Kumar Singh
2

3. Museum Conservation
Figure 2: Harrapan Seal
3 Preservation Progress in the Subcontinent
India’s Archaeological Survey formalized its safeguarding arm in Dehradun (1917) to shield relics and
edifices, marking the dawn of chemical interventions.R.K. Sharmadirects scientific efforts today.
Chennai’s State Museum pioneered a dedicated lab in 1930 underS. Paramasivan, refined byN.
Harinarayana. Delhi’s National Repository followed in 1950, bolstered by luminariesT.R. Gairola,
O.P. Agrawal, andA.S. Bisht. Kolkata’s Indian Museum and Hyderabad’s Salar Jung launched
concurrently in 1960.
Awareness surged post-independence, guided by UNESCO and ICOM, yielding over 50 specialized labs
nationwide. The National RD Hub for Cultural Safeguard debuted in Delhi (1979) underO.P. Agrawal,
relocating to Lucknow for broader outreach and inquiry; Tejsingh now leads, with a Mysore outpost
since 1987. The Heritage Trust (INTACH) founded its Conservation Center via Agrawal’s vision, with
outposts in Bengaluru, Bhubaneswar, Delhi, Rampur, and Thrissur. Delhi’s National Museum Institute
integrates preservation underI.K. Bhatnagar.The Cultural Property Conservation Society champions
practitioners, authored by its president with secretariat at the National Museum under S.P. Singh.Now a
Say it is shifted to NRLC Lucknow underDr. Sanjay Gupta. The Leading Conservation practitioner
in India ,Dr. Sanjay Dhar, Dr Savita, Prof. K. K. Jain, MS. Vandana Punde, Ms. Asha K.
Krishnaswamy , Ms. Tejaswini Niranjana , Sh. Elias Ahmad, Prof. Satish Pandey, Prof.
Achal Pandya, Sh. Anupam Shah S. Girikumar, Amiteh Kumar, Sanjeev Kumar and Shree
Kumar Menon etc.
Aman Kumar Singh
3

4. Museum Conservation
4 Ambient Threats to Holdings
Preservation encompasses oversight and remediation for portable and fixed treasures, blending environ-
mental mastery to curb entropy with interventions to pause and fortify against relapse. Guardians must
grasp perils from radiance, moisture, contaminants, acoustics, and tremors—plus countermeasures.
4.1 Radiance
Electromagnetic waves alter hues, erode exteriors (vital for canvases, sketches, weaves), and erode in-
tegrity in organics (cellulosic/protein-based), sparing inorganics like lithics or vitreous. More insidious
than thermal flux, it spans UV (300–400 nm, photo-degradative to 500 nm), visible (400–700 nm), and
IR (¿700 nm). Direct exposure risks photochemical havoc; instead, bounce illumination off zinc/titanium
oxide coatings that sequester UV. Weaves, aqueous pigments, paper arts, and specimens falter swiftly;
oils and binders (lipid, ovum, resin, adhesive) succumb too. Daylight brims with UV (filter mandatory),
fluorescents less so (still advisable), incandescents negligible. Quantify via lux (digital gauge); track with
hue-shifting indicators like Rhodamine-B (visible) or litharge (UV). Harm scales with dose (intensity
Öduration); cap at 50 lux, blending directed/diffused beams. European halls employ fiber conduits;
Chennai’s gallery spotlights Ravi Varma oils sans heat/UV. Daylight dilemmas persist—mitigate via:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
4.2 Thermal Flux
Minor shifts ripple widely, though secondary to moisture unless desiccating. Chilled vaults aid parch-
ments/weaves; shun excess IR at 50–200 lux, as warmth accelerates photonic wear.
4.3 Moisture Dynamics
Aerial vapor levels dictate; bio-sourced items (timber, dentine, keratin) desiccate (crack/warp) or hydrate
(bloat/distort), stressing composites. Gauge via relative humidity (RH):
RH=
`
Vapor in sample at T
Saturation at T
´
×100%
Tools: whirling psychrometers, capillary gauges, loggers, digital sensors (calibrate via wet-bulb or auto-
check). Responses span mechanical (swell/shrink in hygroscopics like timber, hide, fiber—yielding
cracks/fatigue at low RH), reactive (accelerated pests above 60%), and bio-assaults. Subzero desiccation
(-20°C to -30°C) rescues saturates.
4.3.1 Mastery Tactics
HVAC excels, purging particulates/gases too. Separate humidify/dehumidify units with thermostats
cycle via heaters. Opt evaporative adders, refrigerant drawers (tropics), or absorptive (temperate).
Vitrines deploy equilibrants like preconditioned silica (2 kg/m³). Sealed salts yield targets (20°C:
Mg(NO
3)
250%, NaBr 58%). Monsoon/flood spikes from leaks/visitors? Ventilate, deploy coils/fans, or
water pans/cusped screens in arid spells.
4.4 Contaminant Influx
A prime hazard, blending solids, vapors, saline mists, noise, and quakes.
Aman Kumar Singh
4

5. Museum Conservation
4.4.1 Solids
Emissions from industry, combustion, transit, or brine average 0.9–1.5 g/m³(fog/industry: 5); fresh
concrete sheds bases. Counter: sealed vitrines/poly bags, mesh screens, entry mats, vacuums, full
HVAC filtration. Shun open burns onsite.
4.4.2 Vapors
Fossil combustion yields SOx (to H
2SO
4, etching carbonates/cellulosics/proteins/metals), NO HNO
3,
fiercer, Co
2(to H
2CO
3, organic scourge), O
3(from photolysis/gear, hastens fades/oxidations on unsatu-
rates, tarnishes Ag/Fe/Cu).
4.4.3 Saline Mists
Aerial dusts Cl
–
, silicates, carbonates, (NH
4)
2SO
4corrode metallics/lithics/clays; marine aerosols inlan-
dize via evaporation/wind (up to 5µg ubiquitous, coasts worst).
4.4.4 Internal Sources
Enclosures emit from elastomers/composites/timbers (acids/sulfides harming Ag/Pb/photos); adhe-
sives/nitrates/PVC offgas Nox/HCl. Vet via Oddy assay (Cu strip mass gain in H
2s).
4.4.5 Depuration
Isolate via water cascades (trap solubles, miss O) or charcoal sieves (replace quarterly; Cu-doped quin-
quennially). Avoid incineration.
4.5 Acoustics and Tremors
Fragiles quiver under din/quakes from transit/works/ducts. Cap ambient at thresholds; insulate mounts
with elastomers under vitrine feet.
Aman Kumar Singh
5

6. Museum Conservation
Aman Kumar Singh
6

7. Museum Conservation
Figure 3:
Aman Kumar Singh
7

8. Museum Conservation
Aman Kumar Singh
8

9. Museum Conservation
Aman Kumar Singh
9

10. Museum Conservation
Figure 4: Conservation lab in India
Aman Kumar Singh
10