The conservation and stabilization of a 19th century collection of children's leather shoes

by Barbara Owens, SAC staff

Recently, a large group of children's shoes (and one very small leather glove), many from the late 1800's, arrived at the studio to be conserved and prepared for archival storage or display.  The shoes had been stored in an area where they were exposed to water.  Many of them, constructed entirely of leather, or featuring leather components, showed liquid tide lines. In addition, the shoes were misshapen and several had evidence of insect activity.

The collection as it arrived at the studio. 

The private collection represented shoes for the very small child or toddler to a child of perhaps six or seven years old.  Several of the shoes had been padded or filled with old newspaper or other material that had compressed, yellowed, and ultimately provided a filling of acidic materials to the shoes in which they were placed.

Newspaper as a filling is a common material used to give shape to leather shoes and boots. Leather shoes that show signs of use and wear are more pliable, making the area at the ankle, or above it, more weak. This is particularly an issue for boot style shoes with laces or straps; and especially for shoes with a taller height, which are prone to slouching under their own weight.

The stabilization of these small shoes therefore required the construction of some very small inserts.  The inserts are each custom made for the individual shoe or boot. Each insert is made from archival materials and is intended to give stability and support of the entire shoe, but especially for the weak and vulnerable components.

The shoe outline and the ethafoam to be covered
in needle punched cotton batting and cotton fabric. 

The two-piece shoe insert, custom created for an individual shoe

The foot outlines and heal outlines with conservators double-sided tape to provide
conservation approved adhesion of the ethafoam foot support

A custom made insert and the very small leather boot it was created for.

When a collection is to be displayed, the artifacts require the best possible support to allow them to be seen fully. When possible, we design mounts or internal structural supports to also be used for storage of the object. This dual purpose allows for the best possible care of the artifact, while minimizing any handling of the object as the inserts never need to be removed for storage.

Many times we are asked about constructing supports and mounts and what materials are best. Conservators only use archival materials, which are supplies that have been tested and proven to be inert and to not cause harm to an artifact.

For a list of materials and to better understand what exactly is meant by "Acid Free", please see our blog entry, "What is Acid Free". For a list of archival materials, see our blog entry,  "Glossary for Safe Storage Materials" - here you can review a lengthy list of materials that are used for artifact storage and mount making.

_____________________________
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.

Creepy, crawly, and hidden in your collection?

Recently SAC posted a couple of images of a moccasin that got some attention. Mainly because many were interested in what was found in the "out of sight" parts of this artifact. The moccasin (pictured below) was purchased ca. 1923 and was believed to be made by the Onondaga for trade purposes. Is is one of a pair that are made of semi-tanned leather and elaborately embellished with glass beads.

The beaded vamp of the moccasin before treatment.

The underside of the vamp before treatment. Here you can see that the wool layer (which should be between the leather and the vamp) is missing. The small dark regions are the moth casings. 

Traditionally, when a moccasin like this was being made, the glass beads were sewn to sandwiched pieces of paper and leather that would make up the decorative pieces of the vamp and cuff. These parts of a moccasin were typically embellished separately before being attached to the moccasin. To cover the backside of the stitching of the beads, a wool layer was commonly used to line these sections. In the case of this moccasin, the wool layer is missing, because it had been breakfast, lunch, and dinner for some hungry webbing clothes moths. Delicious!

These little, but incredibly voracious bugs have long departed from this moccasin, leaving behind the remnants of their stay: the casings in which they morphed from larvae to moth. Like most infestations, there is no simple way to know when this infestation occurred.  What is important now is that the infestation is inactive. However, as evidenced from the amount of casings found, these moths certainly were very happy when they were here.

The lifecycle of a moth.

You may wonder what it was about this location (i.e. under the vamp) that made the moths so content to stay. Webbing clothes moths (and other pests) prefer to be left alone and undisturbed. They also really like dark locations, and if the location is slightly damp and warm, it is even that much better! The fascinating part here is that webbing cloths moths also like to graze the surface of semi-tanned leather, but in this case there is no evidence of this type of damage. Therefore they were content with the wool alone.

From the exterior of this particular pair of moccasins, you would not be able to detect what was within the layers below the surface. However, being aware of the placement of the wool layer both under the vamp and cuff, and knowing that it provided a paradise location for pests, helps to understand safe storage/collection management for this particular artifact in the future.

So how do you prevent this type of damage from occurring with your artifacts? You need to practice IPM, otherwise known as Integrated Pest Management. The basic philosophy of IPM is to make your environment as inhospitable to pests as possible and to avoid the use of chemicals (read our recent post on moth balls). An inhospitable environment can be accomplished with these simple steps:

1. Inspect and "disturb" your artifacts regularly, particularly those that might be enjoyed most by pests.
2. Treat your vacuum as your best friend and use it often.
3. A cold and dry location is the best location to store your artifacts.

It is always best to avoid pest problems rather than reacting to infestation.  Remember the motto of IPM:       

"Prevention is better than cure"

If you want to know more about museum pest management check out this website: http://museumpests.net

And if you cannot help but find humor in museum pest management, you must see Historic Cherry Hill's youtube video to better understand the insect's point of view!

_____________________________
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.

Conserving, then mounting a pair of Leather Gloves with magnets

It has been a while since we at SAC have blogged about magnets. But that is not because magnets have not been on our mind! In fact, we have been quite busy working with them. So we thought that we would share a magnetic mount that we have recently designed. And with it, discuss the idea of using a Universal Standard Language to discuss magnetic mounts, so that they can be understood and replicated by other conservators and mount makers.

The pair of gloves to be mounted had been worn to Abraham Lincoln's funeral on April 19, 1865 in Washington, DC by Robert Van Valkenburgh, a United States Congressman from New York and a Union Army officer.

The gloves are Paris made, as indicated from a stamp that appears inside one glove. They have been owned by the New York State Military Museum for many years and had been in a museum display in the early half of last century. For their upcoming exhibition, the New York State Millitary Museum wanted them again to be included in a short-term display. These 150+ year old gloves are made of fine thin leather, and both gloves together are quite light in weight.

After some humidification, a mount was created where one glove was palm down and the other was palm up. The gloves were quite stiff and misshaped from being wrapped and stored flat. Holes were present from a previous mounting method. The once black color of the outside of the leather had begun to powder and flake, mainly along the fold lines. Due to their fragility, a mount using magnets was created.

Once the shape of the gloves were determined, an internal form using Nomex was created for the fingers and palm for each glove. The thumb was supported separately. Attached to the Nomex were stitched two "L" brackets. They were positioned to support two of the fingers (image below).

The "L" brackets were selected to also support the fingers, as well as the palm of the glove

Nomex layer with the attached steel brackets, also covered with foiled-paper tape.

The brackets were both stitched with button hole thread (top photo above) and covered with foiled paper tape (directly above). The edges of the brackets were outlined with Volara framing tape in order to cushion the hard edges of the steel bracket. This was to be the side that faced the mount. The visible side of either glove was carefully padded out with layers of 1/4" Volara foam.

Internal support and the Glove

Much can be discussed about the nuances of the internal support and the creation of the mount. Both of which are also important, but for this blog, it is the magnet system that we are focusing on.

Block shaped, 1/2"x3/8"x1/8", N42 Neodynimium rare earth magnets were used and secured to the mount. I have begun to think that magnets should be secured to the mount rather than incorporated with the artifact.  For one, the mount can be reused, and having the magnet positioned in place could potentially be useful. Where as if installed in the artifact's internal structure, the magnet might stay there. With the cost of rare earth magnets increasing, and also with the unknown long-term effects, magnets kept within artifacts might be ill advised. Also, keeping an "active device" such as a magnet inside the artifact may cause inadvertent harm. What I mean is that we at SAC often speak of the "one-mindedness" of magnets. Magnets are always "on", and they will jump to a receiving metal as quickly as possible. If you did not know that an artifact had a magnet inside of it you could place it on or near something you actually do not want it to magnetically attach to.

Magnets glued to the Plexiglas and covered with foiled-paper tape.

Positioned magnets with the Volara layer. Thin Volara
was added over the magnets to fill the recess. 

Before the show fabric has been placed on the volara, but here is how the gloves will be positioned when they are displayed.

In each of the papers I have published, or any of the presentations I have given, I talk about magnetic systems as being a three part system; 1) the strength of the magnet, 2) the ferromagnetic material and 3) the gap. As a means to begin to clearly illustrate my system to others, a form of language to describe the system is necessary. How do we begin to think about and write the three parts of a system? Below is my attempt to begin a discussion. The mount description is in brackets and begins with the bottom most layer first. The artifact is listed in italics and the internal structure within the artifact follows within the braces (aka squiggly brackets).

1. The position of the magnet is indicated by an asterisk. The grade and size of the magnet is in parentheses and follows the asterisk: *(grade, shape, size)
2. The ferromagnetic material, is underlined, it's gauge and/or thickness follows in parentheses.
3. The gap layers are in bold.

[Plexiglas, *(N42, block-1/2"x3/8"x1/8"), foil paper tape, Volara tape, show cover fabric] artifact (thin calf leather), {foil paper tape, steel bracket (1/16" thickness), Nomex}

Is this word diagram of mount layers (illustrated below) sufficiently explained so that another conservator or preparator can recreate this magnetic mount? What part of it is not understandable? How does this need to be changed?

Cross section of magnetic mount for gloves.

_____________________________
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.   Her current research focuses on the use of rare earth magnets in conservation treatments.  To contact her, please visit her website.

Learn more about magnets and their many uses in the new publications Magnetic Mounting Systems for Museums and Cultural Institutions. Available for purchase at www.spicerart.com/magnetbook.

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.