Art Conservation and Restoration: History, Theory, and Practice
Conservation and Restoration Unit 5 Cesare Brandi (notional restoration in Italy). Real art worthy of being preserved and restored to be evidence of cultural values, to be transmitted to future generations
1. The Restoration of Cultural Property: Origin and Evolution of a Concept
Each generation changes its meaning, value, and perception of property from the past. This influences the conservation of works, potentially altering their valuation through additions, deletions, or changes in use. Additionally, disruptions caused by time and damaging agents (biological, physical, chemical) play a significant role.
The concept of restoration is of modern origin (late eighteenth – early XIX centuries). It is understood in two aspects:
- Keeping a human product with historical and artistic values, regardless of chronology and culture.
- Intervention to restore its effectiveness.
It is difficult to pinpoint when humans first showed a desire to preserve cultural assets (primarily for political and religious motivations, but also for enjoyment and aesthetic pleasure). Example: Ancient Egypt (II millennium BC, Temple of Abu Simbel, Pharaoh Seti II).
Time Classic
There are numerous accounts from the classical period about individuals dedicated to conservation and maintenance (e.g., Damofonte of Messinia). Preventive conservation was practiced. Robbery prompted the desire to restore original appearance. In Rome, there was a desire to collect Greek works, leading to restoration as a profound innovation. For example, old buildings were demolished and replaced with grander structures (e.g., Hadrian’s Pantheon).
Medieval Period
Destruction of many works from preceding periods (Pagan, Islamic) or re-use with new functions and meanings (Christian). Spoliation of ancient monuments and reuse of materials for new works were common.
Renaissance Italy
Papal bulls authorized the destruction of ancient Roman and medieval monuments. Transformations occurred based on aesthetic preferences (new tastes). Classical sculptures were transformed, often being completed. The most famous case is the Laocoön. The Counter-Reformation and the Council of Trent (1545-1563) significantly impacted the conservation of visual arts. Concerns about images as objects of worship led to interventions on pre-existing representations to avoid controversy. For centuries, it was common to crop or enlarge pictures for decorative reasons.
In the seventeenth century, the tradition of completing old sculptures continued, often with unrestrained additions.
2. Theories on the First Monument Restoration
Archaeological Restoration – Eighteenth Century
Interest in Enlightenment ideas spurred knowledge and scientific studies (Archaeology). Training and establishment of large museums for collecting and studying ancient remains. The Grand Tour (focusing on Italy, Greece, etc.) became popular. Main Focus: Rome – Pope Pius VII issued the Edict of 1802, the first operational instrument for protecting fine arts, leading to the first Roman archaeological monument restorations. These were carried out by architects and archaeologists influenced by Neoclassicism (deep knowledge of ancient works). Archaeological restoration aimed to supplement or reconstruct monuments by recovering original parts through archaeological excavations, elevating them to their true image, and filling gaps with substantially different materials to distinguish original and reproduction. The Colosseum was among the restored monuments. In 1826, some brick arches were rebuilt (differentiating old and new). Between 1818 and 1822, the Arch of Titus was restored (Stern, Valadier), completing missing parts with less scientific rigor than the original marble (focusing on volumetry and correct reading).
This marked a milestone in restoration history. The modern concept of restoration emerged from the French Revolution of 1789. The destruction of Church, monarchy, and nobility patrimony aimed to eliminate symbols of the ‘Old Regime,’ leading to the principle of conservation of monuments (1794). In 1801, Napoleon signed the Concordat with the Holy See, restoring Catholic worship in French churches. These became state property, making the state responsible for conservation and restoration. However, lack of financial means led to the demolition and sale of many ruined temples. After the restoration of the monarchy, there was renewed interest in recovering monuments representing this power (castles and Gothic cathedrals as expressions of French art and national identity). Neoclassical architects’ lack of understanding of Gothic architecture led to arbitrary demolitions.
Viollet-le-Duc and Stylistic Restoration
A monumental figure in restoration history (1814-1879), Viollet-le-Duc rejected academic Neoclassicism. He studied not only classical but also medieval architecture. He believed that “Restoring a building means restoring it to a degree of integrity that it may never have had.” The restorer should embody the original architect-creator to understand the work’s spirit and rebuild accordingly. He advocated freedom in bringing works of art to an alleged formal unity, the unity of style (seeking stylistic purity), which legitimized reconstructions, additions, or deletions (e.g., interventions at Notre Dame de Paris: spire, sculptures). Critics accused him of producing inauthentic works and creating false history. However, his strengths included saving numerous works, extensive theoretical and practical training, and profound knowledge of monuments.
John Ruskin and Romantic Restoration
In England, there was less urgency for monument restoration than in France. John Ruskin (1819-1900), a sociologist, writer, art critic, and a leading figure of Romanticism, was not an architect or restorer, but his theoretical thinking powerfully influenced restoration culture. Ruskin’s approach to works of art was one of almost mystical contemplation of nature. He proclaimed absolute respect for artworks as they are, forming the basis for “Romantic Restoration” (non-intervention). He emphasized the exceptional value of past works, belonging solely to their creators, advocating contemplation and admiration of their decadence and ruin without intervention. This shifted from the decisive action of “stylistic restoration” to contemplation and hope for the monuments’ life cycle. Ruskin’s concept of restoration: “Let us not talk then of restoration. The thing is a Lie from beginning to end. You may make a model of a building as you may of a corpse, and your model may have the shell of the old walls within it as your cast might have the skeleton, though I do not see what advantage there can be in either case; but the old building is destroyed, and that more totally and mercilessly than if it had sunk into a heap of dust.”
3. Modern School of Architectural Restoration
-After the unification of Italy, opens the debate on the restoration of its architectural past: monuments which identified national glories. – Special art sensitivity. (Facade of the Duomo) in the eighties of the nineteenth century, two streams emerge in Italy for the restoration of monuments: A) Historic Restoration: Based on documentation: graphic sources, data file …) theoretically correct posture B) Restoration modern scientific restoration. Camillo Boito (1836-1914). Important theoretical work in the field of restoration. To Boito: – The monuments should preferably be consolidated and repaired rather than restored, while avoiding additions. In the event that these additions be made to be made on documented data, and distinctive materials. The different phases of the monuments must be respected. – Need to post jobs. Thanks to the followers of Boito (Gustavo Giovannoni), his ideas spread and were adopted internationally in the Athens Charter (1931) – Gustavo Giovannoni also promoted the drafting of an important document: the Charter Italiana del Restauro (1932) – Creation: Istituto Centrale del Restauro (1938). One of its developers: Cesare Brandi, a leading expert in art restoration. Cesare Brandi, decades + trde contribute to the drafting of: Letter from the Restoration of 1972. The letter was addressed to those responsible for the restoration centers and restaurateurs, with consideration of mandatory provision throughout the Italian territory; recommended in other countries. Structure of the “Carta del Restauro” of 1972: 1 .- . Presentation and explanation of its purpose. 2 .- 12 items on protection and restoration. 3 .- 4 annexes. 4.-prohibited actions (eg add stylistic). 5 .- Actions permitted 1987: new “Charter of Restoration” (it actually has a broader title: “Letter from 1987 Conservation and Restoration of works of art and culture”) .- It shows a great concern for defining clearly the terms “maintenance, prevention, preservation, conservation and restoration” .- Stresses the need to address environmental conditions and the need to obtain an ideal microclimate for the conservation of the property. Preventive Conservation: – It is the most effective for the preservation of cultural heritage .- Goal: Minimize the interventionsa posteriori (restorative). It seeks to reverse the procedure “emergency”, the timely intervention, restorative work for periodic review, continuous maintenance and prevention (better and cheaper). -To implement these ideas, once Italy was the country an important step, producing the so-called RISK LETTER OF CULTURAL HERITAGE (1987) .- Territorial Information System to determine the causal and probability between the cultural heritage their condition and the risk factors that cause their deterioration. Tool for administration of cultural heritage. – Risk is defined as the possibility of an undesired event that causes damage to something which is attributed a value. – The risk derives from the combination of three elements: – The value of the works that constitute the cultural heritage. – Their vulnerability is, their performance against damage .- The presence or likelihood of harmful events .- hazard factors are grouped into 3 categories: – Static-structural (seismic hazards, volcanoes …) – Air (climate , pollution …) – Anthropic, linked to man (theft, vandalism, tourist pressure …) .- Measures of preventive conservation, environmental control (temperature, humidity), lighting. Control the number of visitors.