Contents:

Where Does Conservation Meet Conservation?   David Watt and Belinda Colston

Movable:Immovable – A Historic Distinction and its Consequences  Nicholas Stanley-Price

Beyond the Divide – Experiences from Scottish Conservation  Carol Brown

‘Places’ and ‘Stuff’: Is it Only the Language of Conservation that is Changing? 
May Cassar

Working Buildings: The Effect of Building Use on the Conservation of Wall Paintings and Polychrome Surfaces  Tobit Curteis

When Conservator meets Architect and Engineer  Sarah Staniforth and Katy Lithgow

Conserving Cardiff Castle – Planning for Success   John Edwards

Management of the Historic Environment – The Broad Nature of the Process 
Donald Hankey

Discussion Session

Delegate list

Abstracts of the papers:
(Note that all biographies are for the date of original publication)

DAVID WATT AND BELINDA COLSTON

The eight papers and discussion sessions of a conference entitled ‘Where Conservation Meets Conservation’: The Interface between Historic Buildings and their Contents, held at De Montfort University on 9 September 2002, form the basis of these published proceedings. The papers, in themselves, provide an important commentary on the development and practice of conservation, both of historic buildings and their contents. Taken together, the value that comes from the shared knowledge and experience of the authors is immeasurable.

David Watt BSc (Hons), Dip Arch Cons (Leic), PhD, MSc, FRICS, IHBC
Dr David Watt is a Chartered Building Surveyor and Senior Research Fellow at De Montfort University, Leicester. He promotes, conducts, and publishes research on various aspects of architectural conservation and building pathology, and is particularly interested in the use of traditional building materials and the influence of people and environmental conditions on buildings and monuments.

Belinda Colston BSc (Hons), PhD, CChem, MRSC
Dr Belinda Colston is a Senior Lecturer in the School of Molecular Sciences at De Montfort University, Leicester. She is engaged in a range of research and consultancy projects concerning aspects of stone decay and environmental impact on sensitive collections. Dr Belinda Colston is Programme Leader for the MSc Conservation Science course at De Montfort University and adviser to the ICCROM ‘CURRIC’ programme.

NICHOLAS STANLEY-PRICE

The challenge to preserve both a historic building and its contents is but one example of the need to overcome traditional distinctions between immovable and movable property conservation. Nevertheless, historically they have been considered different fields of specialization, each with its own educational programmes, practitioners, and professional organizations.

The paper reviews the movable:immovable distinction in the light of the origins of the international organizations ICCROM (The International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Property), ICOM (International Council of Museums), ICOMOS (International Council on Monuments and Sites), and IIC (International Institute for the Conservation of Historic and Artistic Works). It advocates greater integration of the two fields in conservation policies.

Nicholas Stanley-Price MA, DPhil
Dr Nicholas Stanley-Price has been Director-General of ICCROM in Rome since August 2000. He carried out archaeological research and administration in the Middle East for 12 years before specializing in conservation and professional education. He has held positions at ICCROM (1982–86), the Getty Conservation Institute (1987–95), and the Institute of Archaeology, University College London (1998–2000). He has edited various books, including Conservation on Archaeological Excavations (ICCROM, 1984; reprinted 1995), Preventive Measures During Excavation and Site Protection (ICCROM, 1986), and (with K. Talley and A. Melucco Vaccaro) Historical and Philosophical Issues in Conservation of Cultural Heritage (Getty Conservation Institute, 1996). He founded and edits the journal Conservation and Management of Archaeological Sites.

CAROL E. BROWN

Scotland’s distinctive integrated approach to conservation stems from the work of a few key individuals in the field from the 1960s onwards, who applied a single standard across artefacts and buildings conservation. The inspiration for a single centre for conservation research, practical work, training, information, and advice spanning private and public sectors came from this tradition. The work of the Technical Conservation Research and Education Division (TCRE) of Historic Scotland and the Scottish Conservation Bureau are outlined in this paper.

The Bureau’s Conservation Internship scheme has been transferred successfully from artefacts to the buildings sector in training building repair specialists as sole practitioners. Attempting to transfer conservation skills and knowledge into existing building crafts and trades is not easy. Current schemes for accrediting conservation professionals and practitioners in Scotland should aim to achieve a parallel approach rather than developing in isolation.

Case studies from the Bureau and TCRE illustrate the need for more integrated skills training and professional development across the building–objects ‘divide’. The role of a Scottish Conservation Forum in Training and Education is promoted as a means of contact and a forum for finding common ground.

Carol E. Brown BA, Dip Arch Cons
Carol Brown trained in archaeology and later in archaeological conservation at Durham University before working as a conservator at museums in Salisbury, Cardiff, and Bristol. She worked in the south west, specializing in training and advisory work with curators and volunteers, before moving to Scotland in 1992. Carol Brown currently heads a team supporting conservation of buildings and objects across Scotland and providing a conservation advice service for enquirers. During the 1990s, she served on the MTI/MGC Training Panel devising conservation standards and S/NVQ qualifications in conservation and also the UKIC Accreditation Working Group relating to the UKIC’s ‘fast-track’ accreditation system.

MAY CASSAR

Taking the three thematic areas of sustainability – social, economic, and environmental – as the starting point, the author considers the wider context within which conservation of the material heritage is practised. In this, it is argued that similar influences and pressures affect society, the natural environment, and the material heritage, yet nature conservation has both ‘natural’ and ‘man-made’ protection. Nature can renew itself if well managed, while material heritage cannot, and organizations supporting nature conservation have managed to raise public and political awareness in a way that conservation of the material heritage has not. The author argues the merits of conservation of the material heritage as being the management of a non-renewable resource, and that aligning material conservation with the ethical principles of sustainability will provide the societal context for wider recognition. It is also argued that achieving a balance between conservation and access, as a cornerstone of heritage sustainability, will become a more realistic goal if conservation practitioners identify more closely with society’s interests. One way in which this can be done is by involving communities in conservation decisions. The paper uses examples of work undertaken by University College London’s Centre for Sustainable Heritage to illustrate certain points.

May Cassar MSc, FIIC, AMUKIC, FRSA
May Cassar is Director of University College London’s Centre for Sustainable Heritage, working on the sustainable use of historic buildings, collections, and sites through research, teaching, advice, and consultancy. Her personal research interests include heritage sustainability, climate change and its impact on the historic environment, and predicting damage to historic collections. She was formerly Environmental Adviser at Resource: The Council for Museums, Archives and Libraries and the Museums & Galleries Commission, and is author and editor of six books relating to the interdisciplinary field of preventive conservation.

The Effect of Building Use on the Conservation of Wall Paintings and Polychrome Surfaces

TOBIT CURTEIS

Although our medieval churches and cathedrals are primarily working buildings, their ancient fabric is highly vulnerable to deterioration, as are the historic artefacts contained within them. Often, the requirements of those using historic buildings are significantly different from those whose role it is to maintain and conserve them.

The expectations of modern congregations and visitors are very different from those of only a generation ago, and often place an enormous strain on both the building fabric and its historic contents. In particular, the impact of heating and ventilation on sensitive surfaces, such as wall paintings, is little understood by many charged with the care of such buildings and, as a result, damage can often be caused by actions intended to alleviate it.

In order for church buildings to maintain their proper function, it is essential that the historic fabric remains in good condition. Equally, for the building to remain relevant, visited, and funded, it is important that the conditions within it are conducive to its working nature. It is the role of the conservator to advise on the ways in which conditions can be achieved that are acceptable to the people using the building, as well as being suitable for the conservation of the building fabric and the objects displayed within it.

Tobit Curteis BA (Hons), Dip Conservation (Courtauld Institute)
Tobit Curteis holds a BA in history of art (University of Warwick, 1988), a postgraduate diploma in the conservation of wall paintings, Courtauld Institute of Art/Getty Conservation Institute (1991), a post-diploma internship in Rome and Florence for the Courtauld Institute of Art (1992), and has been a private conservator in the United Kingdom since 1992.

Sarah Staniforth and Katy Lithgow

Environmental monitoring in historic buildings has shown that the summer climate of the United Kingdom is usually benign for the collections housed within them. Solar gain is sufficient to reduce the naturally high relative humidity of our maritime climate below the level at which damp-related problems are triggered. Internally, however, comfort-heating levels for human occupants can produce relative humidity levels that are disastrously low or dangerously fluctuating, not only for collections but also for fixtures and the building structure. Conversely, unheated buildings suffer from mould, rot, insect attack, and metal corrosion. The National Trust creates constant humidity at levels below the threshold for mould growth (65 per cent) by installing conservation heating systems controlled by humidistats.

To ensure a holistic approach to preventive conservation, other services are often upgraded when conservation-heating systems are installed, along with maintenance of the building fabric. The associated building work threatens collections and historic interiors through physical damage, dust, and theft. These risks are controlled through planning by a multidisciplinary team underpinned by good project management. Planning minimizes physical disruption, and programming ensures sufficient time for storage and protection as well as installing and commissioning new systems. Risks are controlled by specifying working methods, providing storage, designing protection, and employing specialist staff to ensure these measures are implemented.

Sarah Staniforth BA, Diploma in Paintings Conservation, FIIC, PACR

Sarah Staniforth read chemistry at St Hilda’s College, Oxford, and then studied for the Diploma in Easel Paintings Conservation at the Courtauld Institute of Art, London University. From 1980 to 1985 she worked in the Scientific Department of the National Gallery and since 1985 has worked for The National Trust, advising on paintings conservation and environmental control in houses. In June 2002 she was appointed Head Conservator. She is Vice President of IIC (International Institute for the Conservation of Historic and Artistic Works) and is Chair of the UKIC PACR (Professional Accreditation of Conservator Restorers) Committee.

After graduating from Cambridge University in History of Art, Katy Lithgow trained in wall-painting conservation at the Courtauld Institute of Art, and undertook an internship at the Victoria & Albert Museum, before returning to the Courtauld to teach. She joined The National Trust in 1991 where she has worked as a conservator in preventive conservation with a particular emphasis on storage and protection, participating in over sixteen projects, and as Adviser for Wall Painting Conservation. In July 2002 she was appointed Conservation Advisers Manager.

JOHN EDWARDS

Finding out about problems and their causes is obviously the starting point in progressing with the repair of any building or structure. The House at Cardiff Castle – of fifteenth-century origin, but including Roman and Norman elements and re-modelling by William Burges in the nineteenth century – will be used to describe why it is important to consider not just the building itself, but also the internal decorations, use, furniture, and artefacts. The Cardiff Castle conservation plan and the integration of both technical and philosophical issues will be highlighted. The need for a multi-disciplined approach via a number of distinct processes will be discussed. The challenge of getting all consultants to work together and the means of ensuring that their work culminates in satisfactory conclusions will also be described.

John Edwards DipBldgCons(RICS), MCIOB, MRICS, IHBC
John Edwards is Cardiff Castle Surveyor to the Fabric and the client for the £8 million Cardiff Castle project, on the behalf of Cardiff Castle and Cardiff County Council. He has worked in the building industry for over 25 years, in both the public and private sectors, including building surveying, project management, and facilities management. For over half his career, John Edwards has worked with historic buildings, and has been involved with Cardiff Castle for more than ten years.

The process of managing the conservation of the historic environment applies to artefacts as well as to their context and the lessons learned are common to all scales of conservation challenge. Indeed, the ethical nature of the process requires the building of consensus amongst all stakeholders involved. This can only be achieved by promoting the best scientific, social, and cultural understanding.

This paper examines how conservation can be sustainable only if all threats and weaknesses have been accounted for. While the body of scientific knowledge and technology has greatly increased, social, economic, and cultural factors remain a necessary and integral part of the equation for achieving sustainability and the support of stakeholders. The paper will try to set the scientific and technical challenges into the context of the management process.

In an age of increasing educational and professional specialization, there is a danger that policy and practice may suffer as a result of myopic perspectives and the lack of a common language to define the values and significance that must be defended. Sustainable solutions essentially involve multi-sectoral interests. This paper examines the common nature of the management processes that must be followed by all participants in any conservation project.

Donald Hankey RIBA
Lord Hankey is Founder of Gilmore Hankey Kirke Limited, Architects Planners and Engineers, now the GHK Group of Companies, which take account also of economics, management and sociology. He is architect to the Dioceses of Southwark, Oxfordshire, and Bath and Wells, and to English Heritage. Lord Hankey is also consultant for international agencies for conservation architecture and conservation planning, urban upgrading, and institutional and administrative strengthening in Pakistan, Barbados, Yemen, Tunisia, India, Russia, Nepal. and China. He is Vice-President of ICOMOS-UK and Chairman of the Research and Recording Committee; Vice-Chairman of the Historic Buildings Advisory Group for the Ministry of Defence; and founder of the All Party Group on Architecture and Planning in Parliament.