Theoretical Aspects of the Conservation of a Chasuble from the Parish Church of St. Stephen in Motovun

Rezultati konzervatorsko-restauratorskih radova koji su se 2009. godine provodili u Odjelu za tekstil HRZ-a na misnici iz Motovuna ukrašenoj renesansnim figuralnim vezom podloženim ulomcima izrezanog ispisanog i neispisanog papira, rezultirali su određenim dvojbama o njihovoj prezentaciji i daljnjem čuvanju. U otvorenim pitanjima o restauriranju autentičnih vrijednosti naspram restauriranju značenja, otvorila se i rasprava u kojoj su se sučelile tradicionalna – tzv „klasična“ i suvremene teorije restauriranja. „Klasična teorija restauriranja” oslonjena na objektivnost, istinitost i autentičnost potvrđene znanstvenim istraživanjima i danas je dominantna u konzerviranju-restauriranju, ali se sve više razvijaju i alternativne suvremene teorije koje su nastale na kritici baš tih postavki.In the development of conservation thought, the theories that have been developed throughout the 19th and the first half of the 20th century are considered “classic”, as they share an important common principle: it is the em-phasis which is laid on authenticity, i.e. the Truth which is transmitted to the future. The value of each theory is measured by the number of problems it solves. The “classic theory of conservation” is based upon objectivity, truthfulness and authenticity, and is nowadays dominant, with an ever-increasing influence of science in the field. Its conclusions, that conserva-tion must be dominated by the truth, which is further determined and confirmed by scientific methods, are considered to be the cannon. However, a series of younger authors have developed some alternative contemporary theories. Contrary to the “classic”, the “contemporary theory of conservation” does not insist on truthfulness or authenticity of an artefact. It postulates that each conservation effort necessarily alters the artefact, as the conserva-tors change or even impair authenticity. Contemporary theorists argue that conservation modifies the pre-existingauthentic reality of an artefact. Therefore, the process of conservation cannot be objective, as it is the conservators who choose the artefact to be presented in the condition that they are able to give it. A good example for examining the tenets of classic and contemporary theories of conservation, in other words for illustrating the changes taking place in the contemporary theories of conservation, is the chasuble marked as “C035 from the parish church in Motovun”, which has already been discussed in professional and scientific publications. The conservation treatment was performed in 2009 at the Department for Textiles, Paper and Leather of the Croatian Conservation Institute in Zagreb. The chasuble’s conservation procedure was conducted through exemplary specialist treatments which have already been presented and published. According to the comprehensive documentation of the treatments, it is clear that within the textile layers of the chasuble, there have been detected and identified the traces of lining the Renaissance embroidery with paper, which is a well-known procedure in the technology of embroidery production. In the course of the conservation treatment, the chasuble was physically partitioned, which made it necessary to distinguish two artefacts. One of these was analyzed in detail and valorized; it is the textile portion of the chasuble, which was the primary point of interest and the motive for the strategically planned treatment. The other object was to an extent a complete surprise, although it is not uncommon in conservation practice to encounter similar cases of paper inlays in between the historical layers of textile. It is precisely these paper inlays that have changed their function and “value”, embedded as a different/support material into the textile backing for the embroidery. Here we have two types of material and two semantic levels of identifying-recognizing: a decorative piece of liturgical vestment, designed in a recognizable way from a specific type of textile, which is at the same time adorned with artistically designed embroidery and by way of cutting the written fragments that are shaped to fit the format and the form of the embroidery. These pieces of paper had long ago, when they were inlayed into the chasuble, lost their original material and non-material (communicational) traits and functions, so it is indeed not possible to restore the former unity of the presumed pieces of paper. What has, in terms of the theory of conservation, been achieved by returning the conserved paper inlays into the interior of the chasuble as a conserved liturgical textile artefact? This kind of presentation has, not without dilemmas, been motivated by the ECCO Professional Guidelines. What has been gained is the integrity of the authentic historical layering and the documentary character of the treatment. What has been lost? Most probably the possibility to subsequently analyze and investigate the written fragments, which could lead to a better understanding of the context, in addition to uncovering potential, to us yet unfamiliar values. Was it possible in the first place to rehabilitate the authentic historical function of the paper as the embroidery backing? And can those fragments, due to the damage to the paper, be appropriate for the conserved textile? What about the condition of the 16th-century paper – can a re-contamination be predicted? What has remained authentic after the conservation and what is an addition? The complex issue of presenting the Motovun chasuble has clearly introduced us to new conservation assignments. The ECCO Professional Guidelines have been selected as starting point for the conservation treatment proposal. With respect to the Guidelines, a question can be raised, of whether the return of the paper fragments to the chasuble has really interfered with its historical value? To put it simply, it is impossible to return to the historical condition prior to the conservation treatment, by re-utilizing the conserved paper fragments and using them as starting point, as the original, authentic condition has indeed been altered. Has the conserved chasuble become redesigned with the use of the existing old elements that have been re-inlayed, but at the same time with the new elements (the thread and other materials used)