|
Introduction
The importance of cultural heritage for the identity of a nation is unquestionable. Despite this, the protection of some monuments and of their artistic components is far from being a suitable conservation model. Through out our experience and activity of mural paintings conservation, we encountered severely damaged monuments imperatively needing safeguarding interventions. Among those that may be considered of a remarkable historical and aesthetic value, two churches from Târgovişte, former capital of Wallachia1, are presented herein: The Royal Church which is part of the Museal Complex “The Royal Court” of Târgovişte and The Holy Emperors Constantine and Helen Church. Although their historical evolution was different, at present both monuments are in advanced state of decay and are worth being presented as case studies of endangered monuments. We chose to start with the presentation of the actual state of The Royal Church, due to its historical and patrimonial importance. The Royal Church of Târgovişte is currently affected by massive meteoric water infiltration due to the damaged roof. The effect is visible on the outside in the form of dark stains slashed by salts efflorescence and gaps where elements of masonry disappeared. From the inside, particularly aggressive evolution of salts can be seen which has led to brittleness of the support layer, paint layer detachment and a rapid development of biological agents, including algae. Basically, moisture infiltration has joined with the capillarity in some areas being almost impossible to distinguish how much from the original painting still survived underneath. Beside salts weathering problems, some fragments of the murals that were detached some years ago and remounted appear now as folded into ridges such as a moistened cellulose material. The Holy Emperors Constantine and Helen Church was for a long period of time abandoned while the roof totally vanished leaving free space for vegetation development. The nave tower also collapsed and thus the paintings from that area were lost. Presently the church is covered with a temporary tin roof partially rusted and is still in a grave state of preservation: the church structure is weakened due to the degradation of the bricks which left holes in the masonry while the mural paintings are detaching from the walls, on the edge of collapsing. The entire site is in desolate state of dismantle, with vegetation reaching the walls and masonry fragments laying around the monument, everything giving the impression of a deserted space.
Figures 1 and 2. The Royal Church from Târgovişte, west and south-east elevations. Figure 3. Naos, iconographic representation. Figure 4. Naos, image from the intrados of the entrance door. Figure 5. Meteoric water infiltrates through the damaged roof on the level of the masonry structure, causing visible effects on the exterior brick and interior mural surface. On these areas the loss of consistency of the materials, white veils due to the salt migration and dark sports can be observed. Persistent humidity provoked the appearance of algae in the window jamb.
The Royal Church2 having as patron The Assumption of the Holy Virgin is part of a monument ensemble which centuries before (1395-1803) had civil, military or ecclesiastic functions. Therefore they suffered in time structural and spatial changes according to the rulers’ necessities. Nowadays, the church is the most valuable part of the complex due to both its dimensions (30m length and 14m width) and the fact that the rest of the royal buildings are in a sever ruin state. Founded by the boyar Petru Cercel in 1584, the church suffered several important interventions, among which some were made during Constantine Brancoveanu reign: the wall paintings were redone, the church floor was remade in stone, an access staircase was built from nave towards the loft and four windows were opened on the south side of the nave. The church plan is the one used in Wallachia, derived from Byzantine type known as Greek-cross plan: without lateral apses, divided in altar, nave and narthex and followed on the west side by an open exonarthex - a local characteristic porch. The researches confirmed that the facades were initially covered by a thin layer of lime plaster ornamented with bricks imitations which was later decorated with vegetal motifs following the Brâncovenesc style. The interior wall paintings were done during different subsequent stages3 which are not yet exactly known. The only certainty is that most of the mural ensemble was completed during Constantine Brâncoveanu reign. The date and the authors of the mural paintings are known from the painted inscription placed on the gable of west nave door and from the church narthex - they were done in 1698 by Constantinos4, Ioan, Ioachim and Ştefan. The monument was affected during time by earthquakes, fires or wars5 and thus demanded several emergency interventions. The archives documents prove that most of the interventions were made at structure level for tower and vaulting consolidation but also for the repairing or total remaking of the roof. We have noticed that the damages were analyzed and treated independently and lacked the overall view or strategy. The first significant project comprising the whole monument as an ensemble was conceived only between 1961 and 1966. The researches from that time highlighted, on the contrary, grave structural problems. The intervention strategy and materials, such as cement, were adapted from the constructions field and are well known today for being incompatible with the original structure. All those repairs had a direct or indirect negative consequence on the wall paintings. Thus, some parts of the murals had to be extracted on the areas where structural consolidation was done and remounted afterwards. Furthermore, the construction materials used caused in time salt weathering problems. During our conservation assessment we observed that in fact the previous intervention didn’t solved properly the grave structural problems which are still present on both the exterior and interior of the monument. Displacement of the masonry, the effects of the infiltration humidity still active and the new fissures occurred in the intervention mortars are proving our assertions. In our opinion the main cause of degradation of the monument is the improper roof that caused water infiltration. At present, this is still a severe problem as in some areas the infiltration moisture is reaching the floor level. The effects of the structural degradation and of the infiltration humidity are visible on the interior as well, where the wall paintings present different specific degradation processes. Fissures and cracks are visible all over the walls, reaching half a meter width in the altar. Most of the cracks were previous filled with mortars which are actually hiding the real extent of the damage.
Figure 6. Altar, diaconicon vault. The state of the mural painting and even its presence is difficult to assess due to evolution of biological agents and salt development on areas of moisture infiltration. Figures 7 and 8. Damages of the masonry structure are visible on the mural painting as cracks, fissures, displacements, support detachment and surface loss.
In what concerns the aesthetic presentation, the fillings of the support were generally treated in gray tones but mortars covered by red tones or chromatically integrated by repaintings in colours resembling the original are also present. Figures 9 and 10. Persistent infiltration moisture led to the erosion and disintegration of the support layer through a continuous process of salts migration and recrystallisation. Figure 11. Nave, decay of the mural painting due to cracks and displacements of the support. Figure 12. Altar semi-vault, deformations and displacements of the mural painting support.
Concerning the conservation state of the paint layer we must mention that there are two main aspects which led to different degradations: the influence of the diverse phenomenon mentioned above as the causes of the damages for the whole monument and the previous interventions, such as the detachment by strappo and remounting of some fragments. The paint layer is not covered by thick dirt deposits as the religious function of the church was replaced by the museum6 one, reducing in this way the consumption of candles, and due to the interventions from the last century which comprised the cleaning of paintings.
The infiltration humidity also played an important role in the paint layer degradation, the advanced salt weathering producing both efflorescence and cryptoflorescence. As a result, salts veils and different types of flaking appeared on the paint layer. The water leakage directly on the painting caused the migration of the colour in some areas. The continuous water infiltrations led to very “expressive”7 degradations of the paint layer; important parts of the representations have now an embossed aspect (faces, hands or other details of characters or ornaments detached from the paint layer level). There are areas where the paint layer is completly lost, detached or just hanging on spiders nets or fibres from the support layer. The humid environment with low ventilation and lightening was a perfect medium for biologic attack development, which now affects the surface of the paintings in the form of whitish veils or back spots. Moreover, the large quantity of water accumulated in some areas has been the ideal medium for algae growth. Chemical alterations of pigments (minium red, azurite, yellow or red ochre) are visible in isolated areas, altering the original chromatic aspect of the paintings. The previously retouched fillings have now a glossy aspect due to the binder used which provoked flaking of the paint layer when it was carelessly applied over the original. Figure 13-17. Salts evolution resulted in the loss of cohesion of the colour layer and of its adherence to the support. The layer of colour is powdery or detached in fragments with size up to several square centimetres. Nave and altar images. Figure 18. Altar vault, north. Loss of cohesion and detachment of the colour layer due to salts development. Figures 19 and 20. Nave, north wall. Biologic attack and salts development on the areas affected by humidity infiltration. After the structural consolidation of the architecture, the wall painting fragments were mounted in their original places. The damages produced during the intervention increased in time due to the characteristics of the material used, their behaviour on long term and also the new support proprieties. The instability of the microclimate and the rise of the dampness played also a negative role in all this setting. Presently, the remounted painting fragments changed dramatically their original aspect. Various deformations occurred either since the painting was replaced on the walls, due to the stiffness of the materials used or during the removal of the glue and textile layers from the facing. There are also remains of glue9 on the original painted surface that are inducing chromatic alterations. All these aspects are raising complex issues for the future conservation of those areas. The glue stains left on the original surface will be very difficult to remove; aqueous solutions can produce deformations of the materials which were used for strappo and also can reactivate salts from the masonry that has been consolidated with cement. The deformations of the paintings will be impossible to correct due to the stiffness of the paint layer which occur as a consequence of the improper materials used during the extraction. The paint layer is also very damaged, either detached from the fabric used in the relining or flaking due to the improper binder used in previous repaintings.
Figures 22 and 23. Due to the detachment and remounting of the mural painting the original aspect of the surface and part of the colour layer consistency were lost. Nave, tower. Figures 24 and 25. Microclimate variations and ulterior alteration of materials used in the detachment process, under the influence of a new support, have led to the appearance of contractions, colour detachment and losses. Details of painting from the nave, tower.
Presently The Royal Church from Târgovişte, valuable monument from the 16th century, is in a poor conservation state fighting for its survival. Looking on the whole at the conservation problem of this church, what emerges is the necessity of adoption of uniform and effective measures to conserve all the elements that this architectural ensemble holds. In the first place, measures to eliminate sources of dampness, namely the infiltration and capillarity humidity. Subsequently it should be proceeded to the structural stability, without affecting the mural paintings. Ultimately, it is necessary to conserve the artistic components represented by the sculpted stone elements and the mural paintings, aiming to the preservation of all the historical stages10. The case of The Royal Church from Târgovişte is one that requires immediate attention. The monument is in a critical situation but at least it is now included in a conservation project which hopefully will recover its authentic value.
Bibliography
[1] G. Mihãescu, E. Fruchter, Curtea Domneascã din Târgovişte, Ed. Sport-Turism, Bucharest, 1986 [2] C. Pavelescu, Th. Barbu, Soluţii constructive aplicate la restaurarea monumentelor istorice, Sesiunea Ştiinţificã a Direcţiei Monumentelor Istorice, Direcţia pentru Construcţii Arhitecturã şi Sistematizare, 1963 [3] D. Moraru, I. Istudor, Cercetãri în legãturã cu extragerea şi reaşezarea frescei sub forma peliculei de picturã, Sesiunea Ştiinţificã a Direcţiei Monumentelor Istorice, 1963 [4] C. Moisescu, Târgovişte.Monumente de istorie şi artã, Ed. Meridiane, Bucharest, 1979 [5] C. Popa, M. Georgescu, Particularitãţi stilistice şi iconografice ale ansamblului de picturi din Biserica Domneasca din Târgovişte [6] N. Gika-Budeşti, Biserica Domneasca din Târgovişte, Buletinul Comisiunii Monumentelor Istorice în anul III, Ed. Administraţiei Bisericii, Bucharest, 1910 Notes 1. Wallachia is the southern geographical region which since 1859 is part of Romania. For approximately three centuries, Târgovişte had periodically shared the state primacy with Curtea de Argeş and Bucharest. 2. The present research was done by Professor Oliviu Boldura, PhD in collaboration with conservators Anca Dina and Magda Drobotã as part of a conservation project proposal intended to safeguard the mural paintings ensemble. 3. The most recent study was done by Prof. Dr. Corina Popa and Dr. Maria Georgescu [5], dating the mural paintings as follows: the murals recovered after the restoration intervention from 1962-1963 (the south room of the altar) is probably contemporary with the church construction in 1583. Approximately 90% from the mural ensemble (altar, nave and narthex) is part of the Brâncovenesc style and was built in 1698. The semi-vault and semi cylinder of the altar, a part of the tower base and the four semi cylindrical vaults of the nave were repainted in 1752 and 1785 due to damages caused by earthquake, according to the church inscriptions. 4. Constantinos was a Greek painter settled in Wallachia who painted important murals ensembles during the 18th century. 5. Traces and fragments of war munitions were documented during the conservation interventions of the monument facades. 6. On the initiative of Grigore Tocilescu and Take Ionescu, the ruins from Targovişte were transformed into the Royal Court Museal Complex in 1892. 7. The differential loss of the adhesion of the colour layer to the support can be observed in areas where this is composed of white pigments mixed with lime and used in pure form. The colours that were applied thicker detached in the form of scales or have a fractured aspect, giving the impression of a stiff material; the colours applied diluted or without addition of white pigment detach in the form of small scales, being fragmented in small particles. 8. Information on the extraction moment - materials used and methodology - can be read in the publication of the authors of the intervention [3]. 9. The adhesive used in the detachment was skin glue (35%) dissolved in water and alcohol, glycerin, calcium chloride -crystals and salicylic acid. 10. Recently the conservation works for the architecture and structure were started, under the coordination of Arch. Doina Petrescu assisted for part of mural painting by the conservator-restorer Geanina Roşu. OLIVIU BOLDURA Contact: oliviu_boldura@zappmobile.ro Oliviu Boldura is professor at the Conservation-Restoration Department from the Art University in Bucharest and holds a PhD in Aesthetics of Visual Arts. Since 35 years he has been working in the field of conservation of mural paintings of important monuments in northern Romania, some of them being part of UNESCO World Heritage: Voroneţ, Arbore, Moldoviţa, Probota, Suceviţa, "Sf. Gheorghe" from Suceava and Bãlineşti. On the on-site conservation projects that he coordinates, he is the promoter of experimental applications of laser and nanotechnologies in the mural painting conservation and documentation. Oliviu Boldura is member in the speciality commissions from the Ministry of Culture and Cults of Romania. ANCA DINÃ Contact: anca@zappmobile.ro Anca Dinã is a conservator-restorer specialised in mural paintings. She graduated in Conservation from the Art University in Bucharest where she also completed a Master in Visual Arts, with specialisation in Conservation. She works for the enterprise CERECS ART S.R.L., having coordinated several intervention areas from on-site conservation projects, such as St. George Church from the “Sf. Ioan cel Nou” Monastery in Suceava (2003), “The Beheading of St. John the Baptist” Church from Arbore (2004–2006) and the Church of Suceviţa Monastery (2007). She has been working as assistant editor at e-conservation magazine from 2007.
To save this article please
Download this article
Permanent link to this resource: http://www.e-conservationline.com/content/view/746 |
||||
