Preparing and packing artifacts for shipment

"Have artifacts. . . will travel"

By Gwen Spicer

Any time an artifact travels, there is a great deal of risk.  However, travel they must.  Especially since part of the mission for a museum is education and displaying the artifacts to the public, and sometimes the public is far away, perhaps even on another continent.  Such is the case with collections from several New York State institutions that are traveling to Germany for the exhibit: On the Trail of the Iroquois, to open in Bonn, Germany later this year. This is an opportunity for a broader audience to see these amazing artifacts.

Spicer Art Conservation has been fortunate to be part of this great exhibition.  Several former posts have discussed some of the artifacts that are included in this exhibit.  But this particular post is less about the content of the exhibit, and more about the logistics of getting rare, unique and exceptionally delicate artifacts packed up, put on an airplane, and ultimately delivered to the other side of the world.  And then of course displayed before being packed up and flown back home.

The important part of such an endeavor is for all of the artifacts to safely arrive and then return. That is where the experience of Professional Art Packers and craters come into place.

First the individual artifacts need to be carefully supported. Then they and their supports need to be boxed and placed into sturdy creates.  It is a mathematical and geometrical problem that needs to be worked out in three-dimensions.  It also must be performed so that all the parts can be easily understood.  Standard systems have been worked out over the years by specialized Art Packing companies.  However, since each artifact is so individual, there is also a lot of custom work that is necessary.

Below are a few examples of such packing techniques that were designed by professional art packers.

One type of packing is called cavity packing.  It consists of foam that is carved slightly larger than the size of the artifact, the cavity is lined with polyester batting and covered with a layer of soft Tyvek.  The foam fills the inside of a box, and several boxes fill a create.  The individual artifacts are arranged to fit a specific area.

The small artifacts were kept in place with small pillows attached to twill tape.

Cavity packing of a larger artifact.

Larger three dimensional artifacts are boxed.  Below are several stages of a support for a basket.  The box is made of Gatorboard.  Both the base that the basket sits upon, and the support mid-way up, slide out.

Basket being fitted.

Internal support for the basket.

Below is the inside of a box for a ceramic pot.  The pot is secured and surrounded with the same materials and methods as Cavity packing.

The pots rests on a cushion and is secured with two halves that surround the neck
of the pot. The front sides pulls out, using the tabs. The pot can be safely removed.

The smaller boxes fit inside of this create.  The larger box is for the basket and the two smaller boxes are for two ceramic pots.

Create with the boxes installed.

The vertical box behind is only to fill the space.

As you can begin to see, the artifacts are grouped by their needs, shapes and sizes.  For this group of artifacts, size was a determining factor, as well as weight.  One long crate was created for all of the long artifacts that included javelins, arrows, and a pestle.  The storage trays for each of these artifacts were incorporated into the packing.  Some additional supports were added.  The heaviest item, in this case the pestle, was positioned as the bottom tray.  The vertical Ethafoam sides of the tray supported the tray to be placed on top.

Detail of buckle support.

Each tray's height was pre-determined.  So, when all of the trays were placed inside the crate and the lid is closed, all of the inside layers are precisely stacked and supported without too much pressure, but also not loose, for that would cause additional vibrations.

The Cane and Blow gun.

Another crate was sized for two larger artifacts, one being an overdress.  Other mid-sized artifacts were groups to fill additional trays.

The Ethafoam frame work is incorporated in the design to
support the upper trays when placed in the crate.

Individual bumpers were secured to the underside of the straps
that secured the mounted Snowshoes.

Straps were not used with this artifact, instead an Ethafoam
beam was  used to provided overall gentle pressure. 

A Volara layer was secured to outer surfaces of the Ethafoam bumpers.

Archival packing and crating is a geometric three-dimensional puzzle.  The individual packing occurs on site, but before the professional art packers arrive, there is extensive work that is done first.  A full plan is mapped out where all of the artifacts are to go.  Each tray and the amount of space is predetermined and pre-cut Ethafoam pieces are provided that are pre-sized.

It is critical that an institution provides as many accurate dimensions as possible. The dimensions must include not just the standard, height and width, but also depth.  If storage trays or other supports are present, these too need to be disclosed.  No company that is being asked to perform this task can know the size of these, and communicating as much as possible is necessary.

So many steps exist prior to an exhibit opening.  The orchestration of borrowing artifacts from several institutions, and then conserving, conditioning and packing these artifacts will be for nothing if they are not transported with the utmost care by the experts.

_____________________________
Gwen Spicer is a textile conservator in private practice.  Spicer Art Conservation specializes in textile conservation, object conservation, and the conservation of works on paper.  Gwen's innovative treatment and mounting of flags and textiles is unrivaled.   To contact her, please visit her website.

The conservation of a McClellan Saddle, and a custom mount

by Gwen Spicer

Recently a Civil War era saddle came into the studio. A McClellan saddle, in fact.

Designed by George B McClellan (1826-1885) a career Army officer in the US Army. It remained in continuous use from 1859 to WWII, and is still in use by ceremonial mounted US Army units today.

There is some conflicting understanding of where the design originated, but many historians feel that it was based on the Spanish tree saddles, used in Mexico and in some parts of the US.  McClellan proposed the design after he spent one year with a military commission studying European tactics, weaponry and logistics.  Upon his return he produced a manual for the American cavalry, in this manual he proposed the design for his saddle.  Its importantance was that it was simple, less expensive to make than the current saddles of the times, it was lightweight so as not to further burden the horse, and well-made so the rider and gear were supported.  Simple meant less parts, which meant the saddle would be easier to fix in the field.  The light weight meant not only less for the horse to carry, but also easier on the horse so as not to cause saddle sores.

The original design had a rawhide-covered, open seat, leather skirt and wooden stirrups.  Our example is below.

McClellan saddle c. 1860 on custom mount

Saddles are complex artifacts with a mixture of sturdy parts and attached, more vulnerable, elements. It is this mixture of elements that complicate their display and storage.  They are also very heavy and quite awkward to handle, really requiring more than one set of hands.

As artifacts, they seem sturdy and robust upon first inspection, but in reality saddles can be awkward and vulnerable to damage.  The saddles that SAC sees have some historic significance.  They were used in battle and they saw hard, extensive use.  Of these saddles, the leather is usually quite warn from their heavy use, and it is distorted and weakened with age. These leather elements, which are the weakest, are often also the elements that are the most vulnerable, yet are still responsible for supporting heavier elements like stirrups or buckles.  It is no surprise that these often need to be reinforced.  

Over the years SAC has treated several saddles from a range of time periods and styles. The supports created for these saddles were based on a range of solutions directed by the institutions needs, and what could be adapted. 

For this particular saddle (that is quite complete and includes a leather girth strap), a commercially produced  metal saddle stand was purchased and adapted to meet the needs of the museum.  

Metal stand with strapping added.

Detailed image of the custom strapping created for the saddle stand.

The webbing was then covered with  polyester batting and cotton muslin. Polyethylene foam was secure below to widen the width of the stand slightly. A decorative saddle blanket could be placed under the saddle for display aesthetic and interpretation.

Ethafoam tied on with twill tape to make the stand wider.

The webbing supports the stirrups and fenders.  

Storage of this type of collection is a challenge. I must confess that I am a storage junkie, and I love to see the way storage of objects like saddles is approached.  The difficult task is to accommodate not only their size, but shape and weight.  Below are a few solutions that I have seen in museums during my travels. I include them as ideas for others.  Especially those who might be tackling the storage of complex artifacts. 

A simple solution is a fixed rod that is padded and supports the saddle with sufficient space below. The leather straps are relaxed as that the stirrups rest on the shelf below.  

A pair of padded metal rods span the length of the storage unit.

The height of the rods are so that the stirrups
can rest on the shelf below.

Another solution are the use of wall mounted supports with the saddles stacked on the wall.

Notice however with some of the above storage/display, the saddle is supported, however the stirrups and girth (the "belt" that goes under the horse and attaches on both sides of the saddle) are often left to hang free, causing some form of stress on the straps or buckles.  The Smithsonian has a McClellan saddle at the National Museum of American History and the Museum of the Confederacy has one in their vaults.  These saddles are not currently on display.  I don't know about you, but I cannot help but wonder how they are being stored.

Interestingly, some McClellan saddles on display at various museums are "new in box".  How is this possible?  Apparently the McClellan's that were manufactured circa 1904 were over ordered, this resulting in several that remained in storage in Army warehouses completely unused.

If you want to know more about the prolific use of the McClellan saddle read Wikipedia's article here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McClellan_saddle.  Or simply look up "McClellan Saddle" on your favorite search engine.

_____________________________
Gwen Spicer is a textile conservator in private practice.  Spicer Art Conservation specializes in textile conservation, object conservation, and the conservation of works on paper.  Gwen's innovative treatment and mounting of flags and textiles is unrivaled.   To contact her, please visit her website.

Supporting textile artifacts without tissue paper - Save a tree!

by Gwen Spicer

Over the years SAC has had many museum clients. Each Museum, whether they are about history, art, music, culture, science, you name it - EVERYONE has storage needs. While each museum is different, one thing is always the same in our treatments: in all cases we have incorporated the proper rehousing of each artifact in the treatment. Why is rehousing so crucial to treatment?  Because the method of treatment or the display choice, is directly affected by storage situations or constraints.

The "unexhibited" collections of a museum can far exceed what is visible to the public on a daily basis.  And many items in storage are "unexhibitable" because of the way they have been stored or housed.  A common factor in the storage of textiles is the standard sized garment box. At just 18 inches wide and various lengths, a regular sized garment, whether it be a jacket, dress, or trousers, is simply too wide to fit inside without getting scrunched. (Scrunching = wrinkles, distortion and stress on already fragile fabric). So why not just get a bigger box?  Because this is the standard-size commercially produced archival box, and the chance that boxes everywhere will be reconfigured is pretty slim. Moreover, making custom boxes is very costly.

The next factor in contributing to "unexhibitable" artifacts is acid-free tissue paper. It helps to soften creases in textiles, and is almost universally used in all museums. Quite frankly, I wish it was not. Not only is it not as effective as it needs to be, but it is almost not-reusable, it shifts, it settles, it is not reliable for support. See the photos of two similar caps below.

A cap before treatment with acid-free tissue as support

A cap with ethafoam/stockinette batting support.  Fully supported, acid-free and no trees harmed.

Let me give you the best example I have: A museum with a huge collection of textiles, a limited amount of storage, and a huge need for stable storage of these textiles.

Such a museum is the Harness Racing Museum and Hall of Fame.  SAC has treated many of their historic silk jackets and caps.  Their textiles are somewhat unique in that many were heavily worn and used excessively. In fact, one jacket had soil and rocks from the race track embedded within the hem of the jacket. So much was present, and it was so tightly packed, that the museum decided to keep the dirt in place to demonstrate the closeness of the rider to the horse and track.  Some jackets however had suffered from exposure of light damage during previous museum display.  And many simply had the combination of both modes of deterioration.

Harness racer in his racing silks.

The treatment of the silks have required the stabilization of the silk fabric itself.  For caps, the brim boards are at times broken with the silk wrapping fragmented (see image below).

Cap before treatment.

Due to the fragility of the artifacts, they need to be fully supported.  In garments, SAC does this by creating an internal pillow which is made of needle-punch batting and stockinette for the body and each of the arms.  In this way the form of the body is created, which significantly reduces creases.  In addition, a smooth polyester fabric sling is created that wraps around the jacket while it is in the acid-free box (see photos of jacket below).  Hats receive a similar treatment, detailed below.

Cap after treatment with internal support

Silk Jacket before treatment.

Treated jacket with internal support inside its
new storage box with polyester fabric sling.

By using fabric materials, the shape and support is maintained for an extended time.  This is not the case with acid-free tissue.  The tissue looses its shape over time due to gravity and the weight of the artifact.  The nice loose folds become crushed.  In addition, if the artifact is placed on display, the tissue does not return in the same configuration.  Fabric materials relieve each of these problems and they are reusable materials that are not just "green", but they also create a system that is understandable for the entire collection in that it takes a somewhat flat item and returns it to the three-dimensional object it was meant to be.

Full support is not just beneficial for garments.  Hats and caps are perfectly suited for the same kind of treatment, and perhaps even more so.  The internal structure for the caps are made with a disc of Ethafoam and polyester batting covered with stockinette.  Below left, the unsupported hat is shown next to its custom made internal support.  The image is clear, without proper support, the treatment is not complete.

Cap, without internal support (left), is flat and without structure. Its custom made internal support (right) provides the internal support to the fragile silk.

The storage of two caps, "double-decker" style,
using a standard size archival box.

Finding a balance between overall support of the individual artifacts, and the constraint of the storage room, is a critical issue.  And any improvement in storage is a huge leap forward.  For the Harness Museum, the collection manager had placed the jackets into acid-free boxes.  And even though the boxes were not jacket sized (and so the jackets had to be folded) they were now housed in an acid-free environment.  It may not seem like a "major leap forward", but any time storage is improved, even in ways that seem small, they are actually huge.  Think about storage and the length of time an object spends in its housing.  It is essentially where the artifact "lives" and any improvement is extending that "life".

In an earlier post, we discussed the custom storage and display with the treatment of a unique artifact.  But this is a little different; in this case, many of the artifacts are quite similar.  So, a systematic solution needs to be determined that both works with the full range within the genre, but also is similarly able to adapt to small variations while also being supportive and similar to researchers or those who are accessing the collection.  A solution from SAC is the "double decker" hat storage (see image above).  Two hats are fully supported in an acid-free environment.  It takes up less space and you do not have to disturb one to access the other.  They are however paired together because they are likely to be accessed together.

So we can change the way things are stored, but changing storage space is more difficult.  Museums are limited by their physical space.  Shelving is standard and objects and their boxes are not.  But some items need to be stored together simply because they belong together.

This is a common feature with any specialty collection, whether it be an isolated collection among others in a museum, or a focused museum like the Harness Museum, all museums have large groups of similar artifacts that are best stored in a similar manner that assists with everyone who accesses the collection.  Determining what system to put in place is based on several factors. To begin, several questions must be asked: what is the size of the actual artifact in the group, the amount of use by researchers or others, fragility or sensitivity of the material(s), how are other collections stored, and what space is available for the actual storage.


Visit the Spicer Art Conservation website to see more about the treated items at the Harness Racing Museum.  Visit the Harness Racing Museums website here: www.harness.org and go see them if you can. They were awarded the AIC/Heritage Preservation Ross Merrill award for outstanding commitment to the preservation and care of collections for 2012.
_____________________________
Gwen Spicer is a textile conservator in private practice.  Spicer Art Conservation specializes in textile conservation, object conservation, and the conservation of works on paper.  Gwen's innovative treatment and mounting of flags and textiles is unrivaled.   To contact her, please visit her website.

Cleaning the textile wall coverings of Wilderstein, home of Ms. Margaret "Daisy" Suckley

by Gwen Spicer

I have known Wilderstein for many years now, mostly as a pleasantly preserved home of a woman, who happened to give a scottie dog to a former president.  Over the years it has gone through some drastic changes, like a coat of paint (it hadn't been painted since 1910), or a new roof that is actually water proof.  These improvements have all occurred under the loving attention of several devoted people, but especially Duane and Linda Watson, who are just two of the dedicated volunteers who keep Wilderstein going.

This house is not just another estate that over looks the Hudson River, but behind the once weathered clapp boards is an interior that was attentively detailed by some of this country's most important fashion decorators of the later nineteenth century.

Ms. Suckley's (pronounced "sooklee") family spared no expense when building and selecting how their home was to be decorated, and of course only the best artisans of the time were contracted.  

Spicer Art Conservation has been helping Wilderstein for several years with bringing the fragile and dirty wall coverings of the home back to their former glory. The first room was the dining room, which due to water leaks was in great need of conservation. Then later the front parlor.

Hard at work in the Dining Room

Panel of Dining Room fabric

The two rooms feature original panels of weft-face woven fabric which covered the walls.  The parlor has 10 fabric panels made from silk and cotton.  The dining room has 15 panels of wool, silk and cotton or linen fabric.  In each room the panels were quite fragile and showed varying degrees of fading with layers of soiling and soot deposits as well as signs of general deterioration.  A note to this is, these panels were placed on the walls nearly 125 years earlier and for that kind of lifespan, the deterioration actually could have been much worse.  Perhaps that is a testament to using such incredibly well made fabric.  For the first generation Suckley's, it appears to be money well spent.

The dining room had suffered the most damage.  The floral print fabric was dirty, but had also been affected by webbing cloth moths, who had left their casings

behind.  The room had also suffered water damage from a long term leak.  This room also had many decorative features: wainscoting, intricate wood work, embossed and painted plaster, each which contributed to the detailed cleaning that would need to be done.  See the photo below: the left side shows the condition of the room prior to beginning the treatment, and the right shows the area that had, up to that point, already been cleaned.

Detail of dining room ceiling and upper wall during treatment.  

Notice the color of the parlor ceiling, seems like it could have blended very well with the "hidden" fabric.

The parlor, which could be referred to as a gold-colored room revealed some surprises about the true original color, which was (as you may have guessed) not gold.  The images below reveal small hidden sections of the fabric.  The closeup below is of the fabric hidden behind the gimp (aka the edging trim). Here you can see cream, mauve, pink and some blues.  When you view the ceiling in this room (see photo immediately above), the color of the hidden fabric "makes sense".

While still very faded, glimpses of the original colors in the wall covering fabric is evident where a frame once covered this section of wall (see images left and below).

The Suckley house has unique issue which contributed to the condition of the wall  coverings.  Any house built before gas and oil fired furnaces, used coal.  The coal dust went everywhere and attached to  everything.  You see, it is the oily nature of the coal dust which allows it to adhere especially well to all types of surfaces, but especially textiles.  It is a gradual build up that is not noticeable at first, but after years of buildup, it becomes impossible to miss.  To add to the issue, the coal dust can also be trapped in duct work.  Which means long after a system has been transferred or changed to another fuel source, the oily coal dust is still being sent throughout the house (this would be especially damaging if the system was switched to forced air heat).

When this project was completed, we had treated 444 square feet of fabric in the parlor, and another 144 square feet of fabric in the dining room.  To get a sense of the magnificence of this house as it once was truly was an amazing experience.  It is a wonderful place and one can easily see how it was a beloved home to generations of Suckley's.

True, historic homes dot the landscape all across the Hudson Valley.  And until recently, Wilderstein was just one of those many homes.  However, Wilderstein got a recognition boost recently with the awareness of it's former owner and her relationship to FDR in the movie, "Hyde Park on Hudson" where the relationship between Ms. Suckley and President Roosevelt was fictionalized.  Nonetheless, spending time at Wilderstein, getting to "know" the house, and knowing how important it was to Daisy Suckley, it was so wonderful to see Ms. Suckley "come to life" in this film, as I never had the privilege to meet her.

If you would more information about Wilderstein, visit their website here:  www.wilderstein.org.  If you would like to read more about Wilderstein, check out the story written about Daisy Suckley in the New York Times here: http://tmagazine.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/19/ghosts-of-the-hudson-valley/ .  And if you have the chance to get to Wilderstein when it opens in the Spring, I recommend it highly.

_____________________________
Gwen Spicer is a textile conservator in private practice.  Spicer Art Conservation specializes in textile conservation, object conservation, and the conservation of works on paper.  Gwen's innovative treatment and mounting of flags and textiles is unrivaled.   To contact her, please visit her website.

Creating mounts with magnets for the exhibit "Uncommon Threads"

by Gwen Spicer

I LOVE MAGNETS! There, I said it.  Magnets are perhaps the most amazing and versatile tool in a conservator's toolbox. The more I work with them, the more I am amazed at their possible uses for mount-making, display, transportation, treatment, etcetera. I am sure my love of magnets was solidified  a few years ago while working on the exhibit, "Uncommon Threads", at the Maine State Museum in 2006. A group of us came up with a mounting system to secure artifacts by using rare earth magnets and "attach" them to moveable mounts that were not able to accommodate sewing. This group of individuals included Linda Carroll, Ron Harvey, Judy Mayer, Toosie Scharoun, Dona Smith, and myself. And while this was not a new idea, it was used exclusively throughout the exhibition, which might have been a first.

The exhibit was to travel. So the concept proposed by the conservators and curators was for each artifact, or group, to be mounted to a panel that could be lifted from the travel box, placed in a display case, and then put back in the travel box. In this way, the artifacts themselves would not be touched, just the panels, therefore lowering the handling and potential damage of the artifacts.

Each mount was supported with a layer of DiBond, on top of which were two layers of 1/4" thick Volara. For artifacts that required an additional recess, 1" thick Ethafoam was placed below the Volara layer. The mount size was determined by the grouping of artifacts as some would be alone, and others would be in a small grouping. Once positioned, the upper 1/4" layer of Volara was removed in the outline of the base of artifact. (see photo below).

Cutting out the recesses of the upper layer of Volara.

Each artifact required a different selection and arrangement of magnets due to the artifact's weight and size. We used Rare Earth Magnets (K&J Magnetics), grade N42, nickel plated, in a range of sizes: 1” x 1/8”,  ¾” x 1/8”,  5/16” x 1/16 “,  ¾” x 1/32” and we used galvanized fender washers. Also in a range of sizes.

Washers of various sizes to accommodate various
sized magnets

various sized magnets, separated with containers or bumpers

To create the mount, a paper template of the artifact's interior was made first and then transferred to a blue board. The desired locations of the washers were cut into the top layers, leaving the lower most paper layer intact. Hot melt was used to secure the washer in place, then twill tape ties were created for ease of removal of the boards.  

Internal support with fender washers

The magnets were secured to the mount panels. A hole was cut out for the magnet and hot
melted in place* (please see note about hot melt below). Mylar was used as a separator for positioning.



The edges of the foam were cut slightly larger than needed, they were then adhered together, and lastly a scalpel was used against the DiBond to make the final trim.

A 1” wide Beva strip is applied to the back side of the panels. A strip of ¼”, double-sided, tape is also applied to the inside edge of the Beva strip to give initial hold to the fabric, as well as room for adjustment before the final securing with the Beva. 

The cut out recesses for the each band box before the display
fabric was attached. The magnets are fitted into the lower layer.

The finished mount with the band boxes in position.

Notice the placement of the magnets above. They are in the base of the mount, not left with the artifact.  This is important because the magnets can be recycled and used in a different mount, not left in storage.  Rare Earth Magnets are no longer as cheap as they once were and using them is more efficient than storing them.
For moccasins, a blue board was fitted with a fender washer: one for heel, one for toe. The bottom of the heel muslin support was filled with resin-free polyester fill. The viewing side of the muslin was machine-stitched in a U-shape. The toe was supported with a separate pillow of folded muslin and fill. 

The construction of the internal moccasin
supports with lower supports for the washers.

For the silver gorgets (see image below), the internal shape was created with layers of needle-punch batting. Each layer tapered out from the next. A Magnet/washer was positioned at the center and was fabric covered and secured to the reverse with double-sided tape and hot melt glue*. The Gorget was secured to the mount with Skala thread.

Preparing mounts for the Gorgets with domed batting layers

*An important point needs to be made about hot melt. Rare Earth Magnets have a "Curie Temperature" which means that exposure to heat at (or above) a certain temperature will demagnetize the magnet, therefore rendering it completely "powerless". In our testing, hot melt, when placed directly on these magnets, did in fact demagnetize them. So, to circumvent this, we would place the hot glue on the surface the magnet would be adhered to, wait for it to cool to a temperature where we could put our finger to it, and then place the magnet on it. This worked great, the temperature posed no danger to the magnet and the strength of the bond was not compromised.

Another important point to make about this type of mount is that the magnets were meant to hold the objects in a horizontal position. Therefore, this is very different from using magnets in a vertical mount.  Supporting the weight of an object poses very different demands from the magnets where its full pull force is needed. To support the weight of an object one must evaluate the size and strength of the magnet, the object to be supported, and the angle at which it would be displayed, to name a few.

Since my time in Maine, I've successfully used magnets in several other projects and I've learned enough about magnets to fill a book! If you are a conservator who is not using magnets, you should.
And once you start, I bet you'll love magnets as much as I do...well maybe as much.

The AIC Annual meeting in Indianapolis, IN was a great time to learn more, at the hands-on session: "Ferrous Attraction: The science behind the magic" permanent magnets were discussed and rare earth magnets were tested in small groups.  

_____________________________
Gwen Spicer is a textile conservator in private practice.  Spicer Art Conservation specializes in textile conservation, object conservation, and the conservation of works on paper.  Gwen's innovative treatment and mounting of flags and textiles is unrivaled.   To contact her, please visit her website.

Look for Gwen's book, "Magnetic Mounting for Art Conservators and Museums",  available in 2018.

Conserving and then displaying large textiles in a limited space

"Too Big, No space"

by Gwen Spicer

What does one do when they want to display a large textile but have no space?  This is a dilemma that many face, whether it is one large artifact or a group of artifacts.  Conservators will always suggest that an artifact be fully supported.  However, full support can be tricky, particularly when space is a premium in many museums and especially historic sites.  Historic sites were not designed to display artifacts, and flag display can be especially problematic.  Flags are often large, and some flags can be gigantic (for example, garrison flags that can be as large as  20 or 30 feet in any one direction, and so called "mammoth flags" whose hoist edge exceeds 50 feet).  But coverlets or quilts might also be considered large.  Think of the "Aids Quilt" that is literally endless in size.

The Garrison Flag from Fort Niagara, ca. 1812 (that's me on the right)

Many times, mammoth flags are displayed outdoors, over long periods of time, and their sheer weight causes incredible weakness and so tearing is inevitable.  To add to the demise of these huge flags is the storage of such an object.  They are enormous, they weigh a ton, and they beg the question: where could you put me?  The Utah Statehood Flag of 1896 comes to mind (see below) when pondering these obstacles.  That flag measured 74 x 132 feet and was displayed during various occasions from 1896 to 1903.  When hung, it eventually tore under it's own weight, and when stored was in damp locations (the basement or greenhouse) causing it to mold.  The flag was respectfully destroyed, but had it not been, where would it be today?  It's sheer size, coupled with the weight (smaller mammoth flags weigh in excess of 500 pounds!), and its increasing fragility would make it a display nightmare for any museum.  Showing a portion of these flags could be the answer, but how would you support the not-shown portion?  While patches were cut from some of history's giant flags, it appears no one cut a souvenir from the Utah flag.

The Utah Statehood Flag hanging from the Salt Lake Temple, ca. 1900

Vertical display of the Star
Spangled Banner, ca. 1964

Of the great flags in history that were "super-sized", only a few have survived, and the display of these flags is space consuming.  The Star Spangled Banner (see image at right) comes to mind.  The flag hung vertically for years before it became so fragile it required substantial conservation, including a complete change to the way it was displayed.  This particular flag is unique in that it has iconic status and the Smithsonian has ample room to house the 30 x 42 foot flag at a 10 degree angle in a temperature and humidity controlled custom made display room.  But for the average historical society, housing and displaying large artifacts is simply not possible.

Some historic sites have developed ingenious ways to display their flags.  The Pike County Historical Society in Milford, Pennsylvania has mounted their large National flag, the "Lincoln Flag" with two large rollers that displays the flag like a large scroll with the full height of the flag exposed (see image below left).  The smaller area of exposure is displayed in a deep frame with glazing. Only the most important feature of a narrow section of the flag is actually seen.

Jeannie Gourley, an actress in the play performed
in the Ford Theater the night Lincoln was
assassinated, brought home to Milford a large
flag stained with his blood.  It is now known as
the Lincoln Flag.

At the Old Dutch Church in Kingston, New York, they have a group of four Civil War flags from one Regiment.  These silk flags had been on display for many years in a wall cavity (see image below).  They approached SAC about their conservation and preservation.  Their small museum was up on the second floor, accessed by a long winding route.  It was not possible to display the flags there, even if they could be safely transported.

The view of the original wall case with the National,
National with honors, Regimental, and Marker flags

The solution was to encapsulate the flag between sheer Stabilitex.  The stable flag was then wrapped around a three-dimensional mount that was sized to fit inside the cavity in the orientation of its original mounting.  Now the flag is fully supported, historically interpreted, and perhaps better seen by the viewer (see images below).  The other three flags were humidified and rolled for storage.

Re-enactors pose with the flag.

The National flag with honors
returned to its wall case.

Neither of these two flag examples are displayed with conventional methods, however, they balance the support and preservation of the flags, while also allowing the visitors to view them.  In either of these cases, if they were displayed conventionally, this would not have been possible due to space limitations.

Other large artifacts are quilts and coverlets.  To the left and below are a few images of such an exhibition at the Shelburn Museum in Shelburn, Vermont a few years ago, where they successfully balanced preservation and visitor enjoyment of their vast textile collection.

With some thoughtful consideration, large artifacts can be beautifully and purposefully displayed in an abbreviated method, and most importantly, displayed without losing the effect of the object.  Certainly, the majority of large objects cannot be displayed in their entirety, but my assertion is that only a very few large objects MUST be displayed in their entirety.  What do you think?

-More on the Star Spangled Banner and the painstaking conservation efforts taken by the Smithsonian can be found at http://amhistory.si.edu/starspangledbanner/default.aspx

-More on Large Flags, especially an article about the mammoth Utah State Flag written by John Hartvigsen, can be found in the most recent edition of Raven: a Journal of Vexillology, Volume 19.

also check out NAVA's website at www.nava.org

-More on the Old Dutch Church project can be read in an article "'Mounts Altered; Mounting Textiles to Meet the Needs of Clients" presented at AIC's annual meeting.

_____________________________

Gwen Spicer is a textile conservator in private practice.  Spicer Art Conservation specializes in textile conservation, object conservation, and the conservation of works on paper.  Gwen's innovative treatment and mounting of flags and textiles is unrivaled.   To contact her, please visit her website.