- Preservation Home
- About
- Collections Care
- Conservation
- Digital Preservation
- Emergency Management
- En Español
- FAQ
- Preservation Science
- Resources
- Outreach & Training Opportunities
- Have a preservation question?
Ask-a-Librarian
Related Links
Treatment of Rare Historic Wall Plaque
Wall Plaque, Certificate of Incorporation and Associated Document (ca. 1900)
{
subscribe_url: '/share/sites/Bapu4ruC/preservation.php'
}
Conservation Challenges
Conservation decisions regarding treatment of the plaque were complicated by competing claims of wholeness and authenticity. Where the acidic and brittle paperboard frame had split an original manuscript was revealed below a more recently adhered, printed list. In another area of the plaque a printed text had apparently been removed at some point to reveal manuscript text so there was historic precedent for such intervention. Potentially, it was possible to remove the printed list, preserve it separately, and return the plaque to a state closer to its original construction. This possibility was rejected because the adhesives used to adhere the paper strips could not be identified without destructive sampling; the impact of removal of unknown adhesives on the manuscript ink (which may have been permeated by the adhesive) could not be predicted; the reaction of the ink and brittle board to further introduction of moisture (necessary to swell the adhesive) could be damaging; and due to concerns as to whether the amount of time it might take to perform the treatment was a prudent use of limited conservation resources.
Treatment of this complex object presented additional conservation challenges concerning questions of stabilizing the object and improving its appearance while respecting material evidence of the object’s history. In the case of the plaque, only some of the damaging and disfiguring material evidence of environmental and historical impact could be mitigated. The surface of the object could be cleaned but not all embedded grime could be removed. Some accretions could be removed mechanically and some staining could be reduced through use of a mild enzymatic solution but other accretions and discoloration could not be removed without damaging the fragile surface of the paper. This was also true of prior mending; on the back of the plaque pressure sensitive adhesive tape and gummed kraft paper mends could be removed and replaced with new (more effective and stable) mends. However, on the front, prior mends applied with a tenacious compound adhesive could not be removed. In areas of manuscript, text paper remnants and adhesive residues of previously removed printed text could be removed but in the one instance where a letter of printed text remained the remnant was retained.
The certificate of incorporation was detached, the acidic backing was removed and the certificate was cleaned, washed, mended, relined, and re-attached, although not all discoloration could be removed. Conservation ethics demand balancing all these concerns in a scientifically sound and culturally sensitive fashion.