If the Shoe Fits: Public Archaeological Conservation with London Mudlark
- Kimberly Roche
- Oct 4, 2017
- 4 min read
Editor's Note: This blog is the second in a two-part series on a case-study of archaeological conservation and public engagement with amateur archaeology groups. The first post discussed the conservation of the leather shoe in question, and this follow-up will discuss public engagement between Cardiff University Conservation and London Mudlark.
Recently, I had the opportunity to conserve a 16th century waterlogged leather shoe for London Mudlark Lara Maiklem. I accepted this project to gain experience on the material in question and as a case-study for public engagement with amateur archaeologists. In this instance, the owner had a legal permit to excavate, followed the finds guidelines in the UK, and reported the find to the Portable Antiquities Scheme (PAS). The owner was willing to pay for a private conservator. However, the process for finding a private conservator is not transparent to individuals outside the field. She began by contacting various institutions, willing to donate the item to their collection. Eventually, Lara contacted Cardiff University Conservation Department, because she believed the artefact’s historical value and unique preservation would be better suited as a teaching instrument. In this setting, the artefact could be studied, conserved, and used to engage with other amateur archaeologists.
A division often exists between academics and amateur archaeologists, because the two approaches are fundamentally different. Although there is no specific data to point to on the relationship between conservators and amateurs, these frustrations are often expressed verbally. Prior to starting this project, I engaged in such discussions with archaeological conservators. However, I never spoke to amateurs to understand their point of view prior to beginning this project. Thus, a crucial element of this project was to engage with Lara and her followers, as well as conservators, to better understand the motivations and expectations in place. Ultimately, it was my goal to build a successful working relationship and open dialogue between archaeological conservators and amateurs more generally.
To gain a better understanding of the two sides, I asked each side to complete a survey. The results are summarized in Figure 1.
Figure 1: Survey Responses from Archaeological Conservators and Amateur Archaeologists
Most of the responding hobbyists report their finds via the PAS and do not excavate artefacts that require in-depth treatment. Furthermore, most believe that conservation is a specialist skill that requires extensive training. The clear majority of these individuals, most of whom are employed full-time and possess university degrees or higher, participate in this activity as a way of engaging with history. Generally speaking, these individuals only engage in this activity monthly or a few times per annum. The results of the survey indicate that many of the amateurs are educated and primarily motivated by their love of history and as a way of engaging with the past.
All eleven UK-based conservators surveyed are willing to conserve artefacts excavated by amateurs as long as the artefact was reported through the appropriate scheme, excavated lawfully, and provenience was provided. Half of these conservators would not conserve the item if there was an intention to sell the artefact for profit. While Icon (the UK accrediting body for conservators) and AIC (the US accrediting body for conservation) offer little guidance on this topic, the AIC Code of Ethics states that, “The conservation professional should not provide recommendations without direct knowledge of a colleague’s competence and experience.” Indeed, most conservators agree that it is ethical to make limited treatment recommendations for first-aid and storage of archaeological materials. Furthermore, most conservators are open to the possibility of offering local workshops on first-aid for finds or participating in a monitored online forum.
Accredited conservators are held to the ethical standards of our accrediting body and our own conscience to determine what is ethical and what is not. What can conservators and amateurs do to bridge the gap between us?
Figure 2: Lara Maiklem (London Mudlark) and Kimberly Roche at Cardiff University Conservation Laboratory
Generally speaking, the survey results were mostly positive and indicate openness for future working relationship between the two groups. As conservators in the age of social media, I believe we can do more to share our profession with the amateurs and emphasise the importance of first-aid for finds in the field. We should be aware of the public resources online and in publications, from legitimate and illegitimate organisations. Since the amateurs often excavate low-value finds, it is not always economical to hire a conservator for such a find. In most cases, the amateurs will treat the artefacts themselves after consulting online or other resources.
At present, the largest obstacle faced by amateur archaeologists is merely locating a conservator. The amateurs I spoke with commonly reach out to institutions for help, the only conservators they know of. Public conservation has proven effective at opening up this tiny niche of a field to individuals who have never heard of us. With amateur archaeologists, I believe the responsibility is on us to explain the sometimes-exclusive world of archaeological conservation. The amateurs I spoke with were not aware of the distinction between public and private sector conservators or how to locate one. Before we can hope to build relationships or organise workshops, it is vital that amateurs first know who we are and how to find us.
Resources on Archaeological Conservation:
Treasure Trove (Finds in Scotland)
Advice for Finders of Archaeological Objects and Treasure (British Museum)
Thank you all for sticking with me through this one!
Comments