|
Abstract
The “CSI Lab” (Conservation Science Investigations) was developed to meet the needs of archaeological conservation and studies. In May 2008, during the development of “The Meads”, Sittingbourne, Kent, England, a large early Anglo-Saxon cemetery site in Kent was found. The site was excavated by Canterbury Archaeological Trust and was found to compose of 227 inhumations, plus 2 cremations with hundereds of artefacts made from various materials. Conservation treatment was essential to reveal potential information to better understand this important period in history; when the Kentish kingdom was at its height. However, professional conservation treatment was estimated to far exceed the archaeological budget, which was minimal due to the find being unexpected. An innovative low-cost approach was proposed by Dana Goodburn-Brown, an independent archaeological conservator. The “CSI Lab” is located in the main shopping centre of Sittingbourne (across from the archaeological exhibition) and is overseen by conservators, interns and volunteers and is open to the public to come in and look around. I had the opportunity to participate in this activity for one week as an intern. Through this experience I am able to introduce you to the “CSI Lab” and share with you my reflections and feelings about the conservation practice and community partnership. Introduction In May 2008 archaeologists from Canterbury Archaeological Trust discovered a large Anglo-Saxon cemetery at “The Meads”, Sittingbourne, Kent. In total they excavated 229 graves and found hundreds of archaeological artefacts made from various materials including a range of metals, glass and mineral preserved organics. As an intern with Dana Goodburn-Brown during July 2009 I followed the preparation of this exciting project. In September I decided to re-visit for one week, just after the opening of the “CSI Lab” on September 16th 2009, allowing me to report on the impact it has on the different active participants (conservators, interns, volunteers and the general public) and how heritage is brought to light from archaeological objects and their conservation treatments. The creation of the “CSI Lab” Archaeological Needs In May 2008 the archaeologists from Canterbury Archaeological Trust excavated 229 graves containing a vast amount of burial goods. Very few skeletal remains were found in the graves with the burial goods due to the acidic soil. This site offers archaeologists the chance to uncover more of the history of the local area. The site dates to the 6th and 7th centuries, when the Kentish kingdom was at the height of its power and very influential – with access to trade goods from the Frankish near continent, the Baltic and the Eastern Mediterranean. The study of these archaeological objects could possibly reveal information about this society and its cosmopolitan nature that is not currently known. The archaeological objects mainly come to the laboratory covered in soil and corrosion products (figures 1, 2) which hold potential information such as on the manufacturing processes, decoration, wear, and evidence for organic materials which may have been associated with the find. These elements can help the archaeologists to interpret the use of an object and the relationship between the buried person, the object and the larger society. Consequently, investigative conservation is essential to fully understand this society. For the work to be carried out by a professional conservator alone would require a very large budget, which is not available in such an unstable economic climate. In addition to this, the large number of artefacts found was unexpected and so had not been budgeted for. One option would be to store the objects until money was available for their treatment, however, during this time the objects would continue to deteriorate potentially leading to the loss of important information. An answer had to be found which would allow the objects to be treated with minimal costs. Figure 1. Iron sword block-lifted on excavations, before treatment. Figure 2a and 2b. Buckle and brooches during treatment. An answer to the lack of funding The idea to bring conservation to the general public came from Dana Goodburn-Brown, an independent archaeological conservator, director of AMTec Co-op Ltd and a member of the local community, in response to the large number of unexpected finds which were uncovered during “The Meads” excavation. The proposed solution was to build a temporary conservation laboratory which would be open to the public to look around. In order to treat the objects with minimal costs volunteers from the local community were brought in to work on the objects while under supervision. This project would allow the general public to see the route an object takes from excavation to display in a museum. The term “CSI Lab” refers to the well-known television show, Crime Scene Investigation, about detectives working in the CSI bureau. This theme is used as a comparison to highlight the work done during the investigative stages of conservation work. In addition to this, the project aims to bring conservation to the surrounding community through watching active conservation and through the involvement of the volunteers. For this project to succeed it was essential to generate interest from the local community. In order to do this, two exhibitions were developed, one which would tell the public about the excavation site and background to the historic era and the other where the public could watch the objects being treated. It was essential that the two exhibitions be in Sittingbourne to make it more relevant to the public and to teach them about their heritage since the excavation took place there. In the end two empty shops were donated by Tescos within the main shopping centre in Sittingbourne (figures 3-5). Figure 3: The CSI Lab on the left and the Archaeological Exhibition on the right in the main shopping centre in Sittingbourne. Figure 4a and 4b: Outside and inside the CSI Lab. Figure 5: Inside the archaeological exhibition: a dedicated educational collection of archaeological objects in the yellow “CAT KITS” boxes can be handled by visitors. Support networks This project has three main support networks: Canterbury Archaeological Trust (CAT), Sittingbourne Heritage Museum (SHM) and AMTeC Co-op Ltd. Canterbury Archaeological Trust is the archaeological unit who ran the excavation. They gave their consent for the objects to be displayed and to allow volunteers, under the supervision of a professional conservator, to work on the objects. The Trust acts as overall project manager of CSI: Sittingbourne. Sittingbourne Heritage Museum is a local museum managed by volunteers, that shows and celebrates the town’s history. The museum organised the venue and running costs, as well as helped to recruit over 35 local volunteers to help both in the exhibition space and in the laboratory. AMTeC (Ancient Materials, Technologies and Conservation) is an archaeological conservation cooperative headed by Dana Goodburn-Brown and is based in Chatham, near Sittingbourne. The project also received some funding from Kent County council and one of the developers, Marston’s Brewery. Much of the equipment was donated by the Museum of London, the Institute of Archaeology, UCL and various local organisations. The Barbara Piasecka Johnson Foundation donated ex-exhibition materials and Rapiscan Systems Company donated a security X-ray machine to have on-site. To be an intern (at the “CSI Lab”) or not to be: volunteers and public Working Methods The “CSI Lab” is open to the public Monday to Saturday from 10am to 5:30pm. One grave is worked on at a time, although as the treatment progresses there is sometimes an overlap as one grave ends and another is started. The grave plans are hung around the walls for the visitors to see and for the volunteers to use to help interpret what they are seeing on their object. The volunteers are asked to commit to a regular time slot and shifts run from 10am to 2pm. The afternoon session runs from 1:30pm to 5:30pm. The morning and afternoon sessions overlap to allow the volunteers to ‘hand over’ their objects to the next volunteers. During the hand over session the volunteers discuss the object they have been working on, what they have found, where in the grave it was found and any possible interpretations of the object. Not all of the volunteers are able to work on archaeological pieces for a variety of reasons, e.g. scalpel skills or the persons’ character may not be suited to the task. If, however, the person is still motivated there are other essential tasks which they can undertake including sorting pictures, entering information into the database, updating the public display and monitoring and changing the silica gel. Teaching The training offered to the volunteers comprises of two main elements. The first introduces them to what it is that we are trying to achieve with this project. Volunteers are shown the grave plans along with some finds which may or may not have been treated. They are informed about the various things which they may encounter during the investigative cleaning process and how our finds can be interpreted within the archaeological record. The processes which are involved during the investigative cleaning process are explained so that the volunteers know exactly what is expected of them. During this first stage of training, objects from one grave are laid out on a drawing of a body to give people a visual record of the archaeological information found within a grave (figure 6). It is important for the volunteers to look at the objects as a whole within one grave as their location within the grave and the other objects around it can help us to know what to look for during the investigative cleaning process. Showing volunteers all the finds within one grave also allows them to see how different the levels of deterioration can be within this one small area; volunteers can also see examples of mineral preserved organics such as wood, leather, textiles and the remains of insect activities. However, we insist that there are no set rules as the preservation depends upon the properties of the soil and the surrounding elements. During this first session we also introduce volunteers to two essential elements required for the archaeological conservator; the x-radiograph and the binocular microscope which are used at all times during archaeological investigative cleaning. Some of the volunteers do struggle to work with the microscope; however, with a bit of practice most are able to master the technique within a relatively short period of time (figure 7). In the second part of the training, volunteers are given practical experience of the conservation methodology. The object labels are explained with particular emphasis on the object number - this being the piece of information used most during the conservation treatment as it allows us to locate the object on the grave plan. After this, volunteers are shown where to find the x-rays and how to use the table to look up the x-ray corresponding to their object. They are also shown how to fill in the conservation record sheet. It is essential that volunteers fill this in fully and in detail so the next person to work on the object will know exactly what has been found on the object and where. At this point we also talk about health and safety within the laboratory space including looking at the Control of Substances Hazardous to Health (COSHH) sheets and discussing the protective equipment that they will need to use during treatment. All of the volunteers begin by learning to use the scalpel under the microscope (figure 8). They are shown how to hold the scalpel correctly before giving them a test piece of deaccessioned archaeological metal (donated by the Museum of London) to practice the technique on. At all times the volunteers are supervised and advice on improving their technique is offered. They are encouraged to look for changes in the surface of the objects, any potential mineral preserved organics or anything else of interest. They are also encouraged to ask questions on anything which they are unsure about. Volunteers are then taken to the air abrasion machine on an individual basis. Here they read the instruction poster and how the machine works along with the technique for using it is explained to them (figure 9). Figure 6. Volunteers during the first stage of training. Figure 7. Volunteers familiarising themselves with the microscopes and x-rays. Figure 8. Volunteers practicing the scalpel technique under the microscope. Figure 9. Volunteers practising using the air abrasion machine. Supervision and advice All of the volunteers, once trained, start with a piece requiring scalpel work, this allowing them to get acquainted with the objects and the different surface effects. When they are first given an object they are closely supervised and encouraged to ask questions about what they are seeing, allowing conservators to advise them if their technique has to be adjusted. This support network is in place at all times, regardless of how long the person has been volunteering. Asking questions and talking to conservators and other volunteers about their object helps them to better understand it. Visitor and volunteer studies Visitor and volunteer studies of the “CSI Lab” were carried out by UCL student Natalie Mitchell. This was done by a series of questionnaires and feedback sources. These have allowed for the local communities' attitudes towards conservation to be understood and their responses to the “CSI Lab” to be analysed. The visitor studies were completed by pre-visit and post-visit questionnaires, comment forms and observations. Volunteers have also played a pivotal role in making the “CSI Lab” a community project as well as helping to complete the conservation work. Volunteer studies were completed by pre-training and post-training surveys, feedback forms and observations. Both the visitor and volunteer studies results showed that there was an overwhelming appreciation for the accessibility to the conservation work being done on local finds. Visitor results show that the open lab environment has allowed them to understand how investigative conservation can be done and has given them an insight to a profession they would not usually encounter. The volunteer results show that they have taken on their conservation assistant roles in a very professional manner. However, they also share enough common ground with visitors that they are able to communicate the conservation work both accurately and in an understandable way to visitors. Both visitors and volunteers expressed hope that the success of the project will reflect beneficially back into the community. The results aid in demonstrating how successful the project has been for those involved and could be used to contribute to the cementation of the CSI Lab’s potential long-term establishment. This will be useful in pursuing future support for the project, its networking into other communities and the establishment of other conservation projects in the future. Reflections and feelings from a Satisfied Conservation Intern Exchange with the public: a permanent re-evaluation When presenting conservation to the visitors only a short period of time is available to explain what the profession, in this context, entails. In the majority of cases visitors are very interested in the work which is performed because they have never been exposed to it before. When talking with the public it is important to adapt our speech to ensure each member of the public leaves feeling well informed instead of confused. With conservation mainly being a field hidden behind closed doors in the back rooms of museums, a lot of the public is not aware that the profession even exists! In order to explain our roles to the public we have to break down our working processes so they can understand why we do something in a particular way. This can be applied to something as simple as how to hold your scalpel during cleaning. For different conservation practices the scalpel will be used in different ways requiring to be held differently. Along with talking to the general public we also have posters of information about the treatment process, which were pinned to the walls. The posters allow the public to follow our progress as we complete the graves. In addition to this we have an airport x-ray scanner, which generates a lot of interest from the public when in use and allows us to explain further what it is we are seeing beneath the soil and corrosion products (figure 10). To increase the public engagement we also have a “mystery object”, that is an unidentified find on which we ask the public’s ideas and opinions. A profession which feels alive As mentioned above the general public is not really aware of what we, as conservators, do. The profession is often confused with craftsmen, artists, or even archaeologists. Those who are aware of the profession tend to think of it as a closed profession. On a personal note, as a conservator I find it frustrating that although the majority of objects displayed within heritage settings were treated by conservators, this is not evident to the general public, feeling almost like the profession would not exist! Therefore, it is essential that conservation is taken out into the wider community to give the general public a better idea of the whole process involved with displaying artefacts. There are between 70 and 130 people (including visitors and volunteers) coming in the “CSI Lab” everyday – just by talking to them alone we are helping to demystify our work. A common heritage place This project has been a large success, in part, due to the location of the “CSI Lab” to the excavation site. People from the surrounding areas come to visit the exhibition and laboratory to help them better understand the society that lived in this same area over a thousand years ago. Through opening our doors to allow the public in we share the local people’s heritage with them at a very raw level. It helps to create a direct link between conservators and the general public through our work. All of the volunteers who are involved in this project are hugely privileged to be able to work on these objects and as such they take their enthusiasm out into the community which, in turn, allows us to share conservation work with yet more people. Less (time for conservation work) is more Allowing the general public to come in to observe our work and ask some questions does mean that the work may not progress as quickly as if it was carried on in a studio away from the public. However, talking to the public and answering their questions helps us to continually evaluate the treatment we are undertaking (why is one method better than another?, etc.). Being in the public domain and sharing our thoughts and findings with the public also allows us to reach what should be our main goal as conservators, that is to help understand the past and ensure this knowledge is passed on to others. Conclusion and future objectives The “CSI Lab” is an innovative idea brought to reality by Dana Goodburn-Brown, CAT and SHM to fill in a lack of resources to undertake conservation treatment on objects found at “The Meads”, Sittingbourne, Kent. It is thanks to the partnership between the archaeologists, scientists, conservations and members of the community that this project works. With the Archaeological Exhibition and the “CSI Lab” being located in a shopping centre, the project has allowed direct accessibility and exchange to occur between residents and conservation professionals. Based on the research of the postgraduate dissertation it is hoped that this concept can be further refined to continue to generate the public’s interest. It is hoped that it can be extended to other towns and cities to further promote the conservation profession and to facilitate the access of the public to their local heritage. Besides, we are currently trying to raise funds for the second half of the site. It is a 'rescue archaeology' situation, with different developers for each half of the site and only one of the developers has contributed funds, so we hope to continue beyond the end of January. Visitors have been steadily contributing to our collection box, and the organising team is preparing grant applications. Acknowledgements I would like to thank Dana Goodburn-Brown, my English supervisor for giving me the agreement to write this article about the ”CSI Lab”, and for her support, advice, sharing of experience and her professional lifestyle, always in good mood. I would also like to thank the conservation team: the interns (Marie Le Saux, Courtney Buxey-Brown and Katrina Redman), the volunteers, the public; the archaeological team who works in the opposite shop and all of the supporters from Kent especially Andrew Richardson, the CAT finds manager and others. I also thank Dana, Andrew, Katrina and Natalie for their translation advice. References [1] E. Pye, Caring for the past, issues in conservation for archaeology and museums, James & James, London, 2007, pp. 232 [2] “CSI lab”, www.anglosaxoncsi.wordpress.com , Address: East Street, Sittingbourne, ME10 3HT, Monday-Saturday 10am-5.30pm, until 30 January 2010 [3] CSI lab project, www.kenttv.com (go to History and then select Early Kent) [4] Dana Goodburn-Brown, independent archaeological conservator, email: danagb@msn.com; tel: 07973856311 [5] Nathalie P. Mitchell, postgraduate student, email: n.p.mitchell@ucl.ac.uk [6] CAT: www.canterburytrust.co.uk [7] SHM: www.sittingbourne-museum.co.uk [8] AMTeC: www.amtec.org.uk
About the author
Virginie Ternisien
Conservator
Contact: virginie.ternisien@malix.univ-paris1.fr I am a postgraduate conservation student involved in the fourth-year of the program “Master Conservation-restauration des biens-culturels” ( Master in Conservation of Cultural Properties), at the Paris 1 Pantheon-Sorbonne University. It is a 5-year program which trains students to be conservators in different specialties (painting, sculpture, graphic art, ethnographic objects, archaeological objects, stained glass and art objects). I am specializing in archaeological objects with a preference for metal objects both archaeological and historical. As a requirement for graduation, the fifth year (2010-2011) is devoted to internships in specialized institutions and the dissertation is based on it. I am accepted at the British Museum, Metal Conservation Department (England, 3 months) and then at the Clemson Conservation Center (Charlestown, United States, 6 months) and maybe after within the Karnak excavation site (Egypt, 3 months). I am looking for funding from a private foundation or a sponsor to succeed comfortably in following these quite interesting internships.
This html version does not include all features of the article.
To read this article with images at full quality please Download this article
Permanent link to this resource: http://www.e-conservationline.com/content/view/837 |
||||
