Preserving Archaeological Mosaic Pavements: A Discussion of Context and Access Preserving Archaeological Mosaic Pavements: A Discussion of Context and Access Katherine Becker This article explores if and how the conservation of archaeological mosaics can be managed so that neither context nor public access is sacrificed. First, the subjects are introduced to give the reader an understanding of the role of artifacts and sites within heritage management. Then, the first of two case studies derived from the study of archaeological mosaics in Turkey discusses the potentially negative impact of time-sensitive decisions in the field on the preservation of mosaics, while the second explores the impact of dispersed mosaics from one parent site. The discussion and conclusions urge for movements towards open communication and additional guidelines from the heritage management sector, as well as a potential digital solution.* Institute for European and Mediterranean Archaeology 51 Katherine Becker Introduction As opus tessellatum are pavements, they Mosaics are designs or images made up of embody both decoration and function and smaller pieces, traditionally tesserae. Though are omnipresent to residents and visitors of they can occur as pavements (opus tessellatum) the space. The art form was known as an or adorn walls and vaults (opus musivum), this extravagant and desirable addition to noble article focuses on opus tessellatum. The Ancient homes and public spaces, giving “an impression Greeks first developed mosaics into their true of plenty, luxury, and hedonistic living … every form as pebbled pavements. Later, the Romans visitor who stepped over [the mosaics] would 3 introduced opus musivum and glass tesserae. By know he was a man of culture.” Mosaics were the fifth century C.E., mosaics had been largely chosen to directly enhance the specific space appropriated by the Christian Church, which and décor in question, so that contemporary remained true until the eventual decline of viewers were immersed in a total environment 4 mosaics during the Renaissance. of decoration and opulence. Each aspect of the motif – style, materials, design, and location Today, mosaics face both physical and – communicated specific people, places, conceptual challenges. Physically, many events, and beliefs. In this way, mosaics are a mosaics are deteriorating in situ or within kind of visual language in which contemporary museum stores. Conceptually, mosaics tend to viewers were literate and current scholars are be presented without much explanation as to still deciphering. It is with all of the above in where they came from, why they are significant, mind that the modern viewer must experience and how the designs and images should be mosaics, appreciating each phase of their life interpreted. This lack of context, whether the from patronage to quarrying, production, and mosaic is in situ or in an institution, prohibits decades of use. visitor understanding and contributes to a general devaluation of the medium. This article Archaeological Mosaics has been developed from research in response to these issues, focusing on how context is (or As mosaics first began to be rediscovered and is not) provided for mosaics and the extent interest in the arts of antiquity grew within to which the public is allowed access to the collections and early museums, methods were material, physically or virtually. developed for lifting and transporting the mosaics, as well as for caring for and displaying Context and access are issues that have received them once they arrived. Various techniques th significant attention in recent years. In this developed from the late 19 century through th paper, context can be defined as the geographic, the 20 century. Because mosaics require a cultural, material, and archaeological setting of large investment of resources in terms of the artifact, both originally and as it survives conservation, storage, and display, many lifted today.1 Access is understood to be the mosaics were never treated, resulting in their 5 inherent right of the public to be provided deterioration within stores. For those that with opportunities to interact with and were treated, it was common up through experience material culture from within the the 1970s to re-lay the mosaics in reinforced heritage realm.2 The meanings of the terms are concrete, which has caused unintentional 6 entirely dependent upon numerous parameters damage. For the treated mosaics that were individual to each situation. Thus, it is difficult actually displayed within museums, it tended to to determine the role of context and the be as art rather than as archaeological material possibility of access preemptively in regards culture, contorting the constructed context 7 to conservation management. Any attempt at and public perception. Concurrently, those making recommendations regarding the literal mosaics that were encountered but left in situ and figurative space of mosaics then requires were not treated according to a set protocol, 8 diverse discussion and consideration. nor were reburial practices governed. 52 Chronika Preserving Archaeological Mosaic Pavements: A Discussion of Context and Access By the early 1980s, conservation theory One of the primary goals of contemporary began to support preservation in situ.9 The conservation is ‘minimum intervention,’ by International Committee for the Conservation which one should only choose those treatments of Mosaics (ICCM), other organizations, and required by the object’s needs and with the least various individuals have helped the field of possible effect on the object itself.16 Another is mosaics conservation advance significantly the idea that conservators must “respect the by devoting numerous publications and cultural context” and “clarify the artistic and conferences to ethical and practical guidelines.10 historical messages therein without the loss The contemporary western approach to of authenticity and meaning.”17 These tasks mosaics conservation advocates in situ necessitate the use of personal judgement. preservation with minimum intervention and However, modern conservators are trained to a focus on stabilization, documentation, and evaluate situations while considering the many environmental monitoring. In situ preservation values and stakeholders involved in order to occurs most commonly via reburial or determine the best possible outcome without protective shelter, though also through lifting sacrifice to the object or site in question. and then re-laying on a new foundation in situ.11 While lifting and relocation still occur, In heritage management, the term it is ideally only when the mosaic would be ‘stakeholders’ refers to “the many individuals, damaged or destroyed if left in situ.12 There is groups, and institutions with an interest in no single, supported method of preservation the outcome of heritage and conservation because of the number of situational decisions issues.”18 Identifying and involving as many that must be made during the process of stakeholders as possible in conservation managing and conserving archaeological issues is a way of increasing participation mosaics. and access. The term ‘the public’ can be interpreted many ways.19 The public represent Mosaics discovered on active excavations the motivation of heritage professions as the are further at risk in that “archaeological users, consumers, and overall beneficiaries. activities are one of the main causes of decay Furthermore, the public is not a unanimous of archaeological sites.”13 This is one of collective.20 Understanding the public in their the primary reasons that archaeological and role as stakeholders requires accounting for conservation management plans are considered the diversity as well as prioritizing the various essential to contemporary responsible practice. needs in order to benefit the majority, where It also indicates the important role that possible.21 archaeological conservators have to play. Also indispensible to effective conservation Archaeological Conservation management plans is the discussion of the significance and values of the site or object Though conservation is variously defined in question. Mason and Avrami propose the according to the situation, locations, and who following typology of values: historical and is involved, there are uniting principles. The artistic, social or civic, spiritual or religious, fundamental underpinnings of the term can be symbolic or identity, research, natural, and described as “the preservation, protection, care economic.22 While these categories are not and restoration of our [sic] cultural heritage,”14 definitive or exhaustive, they provide a making a conservator someone who pursues framework for discussion. That values vary these aims, even if not formally trained.15 by culture and time adds complexity, allowing However, the guiding principles for how to conservation to continually evolve and enhance achieve ‘the preservation, protection, care and cultural values by preserving the heritage in restoration’ are still evolving. which they are founded and thus derive.23 Institute for European and Mediterranean Archaeology 53 Katherine Becker As is the case in many aspects of conservation, Case Study One: The Decision Making Process there is not yet a consensus as to the ideal Behind Reburial physical or conceptual treatment of mosaic pavements. Despite dedicated conferences The topic of mosaic conservation came to and publications, the excavation of mosaics be of particular interest to