Conserve or leave as is?

[major bill]

What is your opinion of hiring a conservation specialist to work on moth holes and such? My society owns several Civil War uniforms and some are to the point that they could use some work. We are thinking of having conservation work done on the damage. I went to the Richmond Museum of the Confederacy and saw a uniform on display that had had work done on it. In my opinion from the before and after conservation work photographs, I can see marked improvements in appearance.

In your opinion should a uniform be left in its current condition or have conservation work done? Basically it comes down to would you rather look at a uniform with moth holes or one that has had conversation work?

 

[huskerblitz]

Personally speaking as a museum-goer......both honestly. Keep some in original as-is condition and repair some to give viewers a as-it-would-have-been. But that's my opinion.

 

[major bill]

Our uniforms are not normally on display. We have a 13th Virginia frock coat that would require only a bit of work, mostly re hydration, cleaning and fixing just a few moth moles. We could start there and see how we feel after the work is completed.

 

[FrankN]

Personally speaking as a museum-goer......both honestly. Keep some in original as-is condition and repair some to give viewers a as-it-would-have-been. But that's my opinion.

Huskerblitz makes a good suggestion. I think it's considered acceptable to correctly and carefully Restore ACW clothing. I own a forage cap that has some nasty moth damage. It still displays well (I like it). It's been suggested that it's a good candidate for restoration but I don't think I'll do it. It's possible that in the future I could change my mind but for now I feel I'll leave it as is. You may have seen this on YouTube, but here is a link to an interesting CW uniform conservation webcast.

It would be cool to see some photos of your society uniforms!

Regards,
Frank

 

[major bill]

I do believe the Company of Military Historians web site will allow you to see some of the uniforms. We usually bring a few and put them out tables so our members can look them over. Some are very dry and should not be handled too much. If a uniform is very dry the threads holding the uniform together can break during handling and the uniform will thus suffer structural damage.

 

[major bill]

Frank that is a great webcast. Thank you for posting.

 

[gunny]

What is your opinion of hiring a conversation specialist to work on moth holes and such? My society owns several Civil War uniforms and some are to the point that they could use some work. We are thinking of having conservation work done on the damage. I went to the Richmond Museum of the Confederacy and saw a uniform on display that had had work done on it. In my opinion from the before and after conservation work photographs, I can see marked improvements in appearance.

In your opinion should a uniform be left in its current condition or have conversation work done? Basically it comes down to would you rather look at a uniform with moth holes or one that has had conversation work?

All moth holes please. If you want to create an authentic reproduction of the original using period type cloth - go for it, but don't mess with the originals.

In fact, that might be cool. Have the original displayed next to an authentic reproduction made of same type materials with closest matching colors?

 

[Cumpston1862]

Sometime ago I read an article about a conservator making the argument that it is a difficult line to cross. And his point was once you "conserve" or alter an item is it considered an original? He further related the example of an axe. Saying, "Well the handle was broken so we replaced it and the blade was bent so we remolded it". So than he asked the question. "Are you looking at an original piece than"?

Opinions on the matter will vary. I personally was in a similar dilemma as I have in my possession a Civil War era civilian musket that was in poor shape. I was hesitant to do anything to it but at the end of the day the wood was getting so bad that in a couple of years it would have been a pile of splinters. So when I had the opportunity to have it worked on by a professional gunsmith who restored vintage guns with original period parts I decided to do it. The result has been very satisfying in that now it can be displayed and serve as a learning tool. Whereas before you could not even pick it up with out it going to pieces.

So I guess in conclusion I am of the mindset that conservation work should be done when the item is in need of it before it deteriorates to the point where it is of no use to anyone. If the items have minor damage I would leave them "as is" until such time as work "needs" to be done.

 

[Mark F. Jenkins]

"Well the handle was broken so we replaced it and the blade was bent so we remolded it". So than he asked the question. "Are you looking at an original piece than"?

That's the classic "ship of Theseus" paradox... if Theseus's ship has all its parts replaced, is it still the same ship? And what would happen if you'd saved all the old parts and built a ship out of them? Which one is the original?

 

[major bill]

I recently looked at some of my State's Civil War flags. They are giving some though to having a couple of them conserved. They are currently being stabilized. Some of the flags are probably to the point where there is much that can be done for them. Some other states have had conservation work done on some of their flags. A few of the flags are little more that a few threads with colored confetti.

 

[Mark F. Jenkins]

I recently looked at some of my State's Civil War flags.

Which state is that?

I know Ohio's been going through a round of flag conservation; our Round Table "adopted" a flag to help pay for the conservation costs (which can be pretty steep).

 

[FrankN]

I also agree with Cumpston. If an article is falling apart so bad that you could lose it forever it may be good to consider a correct/professional way to conserve it. In these webcasts they talk about conserving something but keeping detailed instructions as to how and what was done so that all will know what's original. They also do it in such a way to be able to improve their efforts as new and better methods are discovered or possibly return it back to as original as possible.

If something survives and displays decently the effect of time adds another element of interest/beauty to the item. You know it's the real deal. I enjoy the beat up pieces in my collection. Also, the fact that they're beat up made them more affordable for me !!!!

Here is another link to the same conservators and ACW flags. I enjoyed both of their webcasts.

Frank

 

[Mark F. Jenkins]

I think there's an important difference between conservation and restoration... conservation, you're trying to stabilize the condition of the object and prevent further deterioration, whereas in restoration, you're trying to return it to its original condition. I'm not a big fan of the restoration in most cases, because of potential information loss-- better to construct a facsimile/replica, generally.

 

[major bill]

Which state is that?

I know Ohio's been going through a round of flag conservation; our Round Table "adopted" a flag to help pay for the conservation costs (which can be pretty steep).

I was part of a small group that was allowed to tour the flag storage room at the Michigan Historical Museum. They showed us some flags and then we could ask to view a certain flag. Custer flags were the most common request. I do not think that the State of Michigan will provide any funds for conservation work. Our State Historical Preservation Office still exists but the State does not provide any funds for SHPO. The funds for the Michigan Historical Museum are not available to the Save the Flags Group. Budget cuts can be hard on some programs.

 

[CW Watch & Sword Guy]

Preservation versus conservation, versus restoration is a complicated issue, about which I have written in other venues with reference to antiquarian timepieces. The issues are especially knotty when it comes to objects like watches or fire arms, etc. whose original purpose was as functioning machines, because preserving functionality then becomes part of the "preservation" debate. (That aspect of the issue becomes most acute when the working life of the historical artifact continues into the present day, as it does with various historically important church organs, or with Stradivarius violins. Concert A was only 400 Hz when those violins were made, not 440 Hz as it is today, so most of the necks have been replaced.) Even in the case of uniforms, the issue of preserving functionality may not be entirely irrelevant.

At one extreme, you have those who quite reasonably argue that all the environmental degradation that has occurred since an item originally was created is now an essential part of its history and should be left alone, lest one risk further confounding the historical record. Coin collectors certainly feel that way. However, coins served their purpose simply by being. They didn't have to function as machines. Similarly, a watch and clock conservator I knew observed that, "No one would congratulate me for having taken the Shroud of Turin to the Dry Cleaner." On the other hand, I am reminded of the controversy which once raged concerning whether to remove the several centuries worth of candle residue that had accumulated on top of (or actually, below, strictly speaking) Michelangelo's artwork on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel. The subsequent removal of said residue embarrassed the then prevailing expert wisdom concerning Michelangelo's alleged preference for "subtle," "muted" colors. So in that instance, it was necessary to erase a part of the subsequent history of the object in question in order to recover a more important aspect of its history. Then too, as others have noted, certain restorative operations also have preservative attributes, because they arrest environmental attack.

Conservators and restorers not infrequently must prioritize what aspects of an artifact's history are most important to them, and sometimes priorities may conflict.

More later.

 

[bankerpapaw]

Personally speaking as a museum-goer......both honestly. Keep some in original as-is condition and repair some to give viewers a as-it-would-have-been. But that's my opinion.

I agree with huskerblitz.

 

[ole]

I want them preserved. Better than having them disappear.

 

[CW3O]

Fix em up so that they might be around 150 years from now for history lovers to admire and research.

 

[kepi]

Can you take the items to the Museum of the Confederacy or the state historical society for a detailed review? I say they should be in the care of a professionally trained and licensed conservator. Either way, you want to use the least intrusive conservation method.

 

[major bill]

The uniforms can be move around, but are currently in storage. We had colleen Callahan study some of them for us. You can see Callahan's work at places like the Confederate Museum in Richmond. If we decide to conserve any uniforms she will probably do the work for us. It all depends on the cost and if we want to try to raise the money. for example:

1. Frank A Wake's uniform coat of the 13th Virginia only needs 35 hours of work
2. The coat of Col J.Q.A. Nadenboush of the the 2nd Virginia is in worse shape and would need 60 hours of conservation work.