Kovács Petronella (szerk.): Isis - Erdélyi magyar restaurátor füzetek 14. (Székelyudvarhely, 2014)
Mester Éva: Nagyméretű üvegfestmények "in situ" vagy műtermi restaurálása
6, 8, and 10. The assemblage also contains a fragment of a cornice. There is another very interesting fragment, too, namely a small piece which dates the stove-tile to the 17th century, and which allows us to reconstruct the decoration of the entire artefact. Fragments of two distinct pots were also found in the assemblage. The refuse pits of old castles and manor houses are often rich from the archaeological point of view, as in the case of the Fodor house above. Olimpia Coman-Sipeanu Safeguarding the national heritage in a time of crisis. The camp for the restoration of icons, Ohaba, 2010 Ohaba village lies in beautiful landscape at the foot of the Fagaras Mountains. This Orthodox parish is home to around 200 people and boasts a church from the 17th century, as well as a church built in the third decade of the 19th century. Many good things have been done in this small parish since Lucian Tilvar became its priest in 2007. Major repairs and changes have been made by him, including transformation of the look of the later church, whose unpainted walls were decorated with glass icons in an advanced state of decay. Fr. Tilvar, who studied at the Faculty of Theology in Sibiu and whose specialisation was Theology and Conservation, decided to ask his former restoration and conservation teachers for their advice and help. In view of the poor economic circumstances, the only simple and cheap solution was to organise a restoration camp. This convened on 16 August 2010 and came to an end on 30 August 2010. The participants were the members of parish which held the collection of glass icons, students from the Lucian Blaga University in Sibiu, teachers at that university working in the ASTRA Museum, and a number of specialists present in a private capacity. For two weeks, this team worked intensively in the auditorium of the village’s Cultural Centre. This was turned into a genuine restoration laboratory. When the collection had been studied and the condition of each icon assessed, 11 such artefacts were selected for conservation. The passage of almost two centuries, the poor technique employed in their making, and improper preservation had all caused much damage to the icons: detachment or even loss of the paint layer, extremely fragility in the frame and cover, and sometimes broken glass. The first steps focused on the study of iconography and style. Study of the techniques came next: measurement of the objects, including their component parts, and identification of the materials used. All this helped the dating of the icons, as well as their attribution to particular icon painters and centres of icon painting. During the course of the activity, the co-ordinators delivered lectures on the restoration of glass icons. Because of the decay of the icons, treatment consisted of the mechanical removal of the surface soiling, consolidation of the extremely fragile paint layers, cleaning of the paint, and the making good of gaps in the paint layer. The frames and covers regained their strength and wholeness during the process of consolidation. The final stage was the fixing of the glass icons in their frames. This used a method which avoided strain on the glass and damage to the colour layer. After restoration, the icons were displayed in an exhibition which opened on 21 November 2010. The festive opening celebrated the re-consecration of the new church. The project experiment was successful in that it restored cultural assets of the Ohaba community. Most importantly, it proved that even at a time of deep economical crisis, heritage that was otherwise doomed to perish could be saved with minimum financial effort, hard work, and the involvement of the community. Éva Mester The conservation of large glass paintings ‘in situ' and in the studio When stained glass windows are to be conserved, the practice in Hungary is to lift the different fields out of their settings without deliberation and, for reasons of convenience, to perform interventions in the studio. This is not a problem when the degree of damage - surface buckling, cracks in the glass, missing glass, out-of shape and missing lead cames, loose framework, etc. - justifies it. Nor is there any issue with this method when fields can be lifted out of their stone surrounds or wooden frames simply and without suffering damage. Even in the case of windows several hundred years old, this may not cause problems - given caution and expert removal - where small fields consist of small pieces of glass and where the method of fastening is simple. The problems begin when we wish to remove large window-fields made at the turn of the 20th century and consisting of large pieces of glass where the edges of these fields have been set in a bed of plaster, often containing cement. At such times, losses are great, because as a result of the corroding of the lead cames, which are often more than a century old, the fields are not able to tolerate the movements which accompany lifting out, namely changes in the centre of gravity and extra loading, since when they are cut away from the plaster, the edges of the fields break and there is nothing to hold the heavy, non-rigid surface together. Since corroded cames cannot be soldered together, the original cames should be discarded: the entire surface needs to be re-leaded with new cames. This goes against the international recommendations, which propose that all the original parts be kept, not just the glass pieces. As a result of bending, glass pieces, too, can break or fall out. In cases such as these, the statics of individual panels can decide the issue of removal to the studio or conservation in situ. Around the turn of the 20th century, many glass-painting studios operated on the territory of the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy. The aesthetic value and technical condition of the stained glass windows made there was rather various. For in situ conservation, only those works are suitable 146
