Upload
nationalgallery-uk
View
1
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
25
The Noli me Tangere: study and conservation of a Cretan icon
Lynne Harrison, Janet Ambers, Rebecca Stacey, Caroline
Cartwright and Angeliki Lymberopoulou
Summary A seventeenth-century icon of the Noli me Tangere (1994,0501.3), in the collections of the Depart-
ment of Prehistory and Europe at the British Museum, has been the subject of detailed technical examination
from scientific, conservation and historical perspectives. The aims were to investigate its original materials
and manufacture, its treatment history and, if possible, to look for indications of function and use in Orthodox
practice, with the ultimate purpose of informing the conservation required to stabilize the icon’s structure and
address the damaged condition of the image. Research into the icon’s original context was also undertaken
to strengthen its provenance. The wooden panel was identified as cypress and the original palette was found
to comprise lead white, gypsum, carbon-based black, red and yellow earths, a basic copper carbonate green,
verdigris, indigo, azurite, vermilion, red lead and a red lake. The painting was found to have been originally
coated with an oil and resin varnish and two campaigns of restoration were also identified. The results of
the study enabled a suitable conservation protocol to be devised and applied. This involved removal of the
degraded restoration varnish and the unstable restoration from the early twentieth century to reveal the fine
original painted surface. Those areas of restoration thought to date from the painting’s early history, including
repairs to the edges and the complete regilding of the background, were left in place. The results of the study
also support a Cretan origin for the icon.
INTRODUCTION
A seventeenth-century icon of the Noli me Tangere(1994,0501.3), currently held by the Department of Prehis-
tory and Europe at the British Museum, was purchased
in Chania, Crete (probably in 1894) and donated to the
National Gallery, London in 1924, before being transferred
to the British Museum in 1994 [1; Note 3]. Painted on a
wooden panel measuring 606 × 472 mm and coated with
a glossy and darkened varnish (Figure 1), the image shows
the announcement of Christ’s resurrection organized in six
successive scenes accompanied by Greek inscriptions.
A detailed technical examination of the icon was carried
out, the aims of which were to investigate the original mate-
rials and manufacture, the treatment history and, if possible,
to look for indications of function and use in Orthodox
practice, while informing the conservation needed to stabi-
lize the icon’s structure and address the damaged condition
of the image. Research was also undertaken into the icon’s
original context in an attempt to strengthen its provenance
and to investigate a possible link to the post-Byzantine
Cretan artist Michael Damaskinos (1530/35–1592/93)
[2; p. 458 No. 100].
TECHNICAL EXAMINATION
Technical examination was carried out using X-radiog-
raphy, emission radiography, ultraviolet (UV) and infrared
(IR) examination and photography, optical microscopy,
Raman spectroscopy, scanning electron microscopy with
energy dispersive X-ray analysis (SEM-EDX) and gas
chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS), see the
experimental appendix for details. Layer structures were
investigated and the materials used in the original produc-
tion and later interventions were identified. Unfortunately
it was not possible to sample all areas of the painting so
the results given below, while as comprehensive as possible,
cannot be viewed as exhaustive.
Large quantities of data were generated in the process
of this study and it is not possible to include them all here.
LYNNE HARRISON, JANET AMBERS, REBECCA STACEY ET AL.
26
Instead, the most significant results have been selected for
inclusion in Tables 1 and 2, and for discussion and inter-
pretation below. Full details from the study are contained
in a British Museum internal report that can be accessed
through the online catalogue of British Museum icons [3].
Original materials
A single wooden panel of Cupressus sempervirens L.,
cypress (sometimes called Mediterranean or Italian
cypress) was cut in the radial longitudinal axis and
prepared so that it was smooth on the front surface, with
a rougher finish (with traces of adze work visible) on the
reverse [4; p. 33]. Two well-fitting wooden battens, also
of cypress, were then attached horizontally to the reverse
of the panel, at equal distances from the top and bottom
edges. No nails are visible on the reverse, but X-radi-
ography revealed that short, flat-headed nails had been
inserted from the front of the panel, equally spaced along
the length of the battens.
A layer of plain (tabby) weave cloth was glued onto
the smoothed front surface of the panel. While it was not
possible to sample or identify either the cloth or glue used,
linen soaked in animal glue was usually employed for this
purpose [5; p. 28]. A white ground of gypsum bound in a
proteinaceous medium was then applied to the whole front
surface of the panel and burnished smooth. No ground was
applied on the reverse of the icon.1
Evidence from the IR reflectograms, which reveal
elements of the underdrawing, suggests that the layout of
the image, including the positions of the figures, drapery
figure 1. Icon of the Noli me Tangere (1994,0501.3) before conservation. Note the highly glossy varnish seen clearly at the bottom edge
THE NOLI ME TANGERE: STUDY AND CONSERVATION OF A CRETAN ICON
27
Mat
eria
lA
nal
ytic
al m
eth
od
Res
ult
s
Late
r res
tora
tion
mat
eria
ls
Var
nis
hG
C-M
SPi
stacia
resi
n;d
ryin
go
il; a
nd
co
nif
er r
esin
(tr
)
Pai
nt
(pig
men
ts)
Pai
nt
(bin
der
)R
aman
+ o
pti
cal
mic
rosc
op
yG
C-M
SC
adm
ium
yel
low
; ver
mil
ion
;aP
russ
ian
blu
e; a
nd
car
bo
n-b
ased
bla
ckC
on
ifer
res
in; d
ryin
g o
il; a
nd
Pist
acia
resi
n
Gro
un
d (
bin
der
)P
hys
ical
tes
tsW
ater
so
lub
le
Early
resto
ratio
n m
ater
ials
Var
nis
hG
C-M
SC
on
ifer
res
in; d
ryin
g o
il; a
nd
Pist
acia
res
in (
tr)
Pig
men
tsP
ain
t (b
ind
er)
Ind
igo
ove
rpai
nt
(bin
der
)
Ram
an +
op
tica
l m
icro
sco
py
GC
-MS
GC
-MS
Red
lea
d; h
emat
ite;
go
eth
ite;
car
bo
n-b
ased
bla
ck; v
erm
ilio
n; i
nd
igo
; gyp
sum
; an
d r
ed l
ake
Fat
(eg
g?)/
oil
; co
nif
er r
esin
; an
d s
uga
rs (
gum
?)b
Co
nif
er r
esin
an
d o
il
Gro
un
d (
bin
der
)G
C-M
SA
nim
al g
lue
(gel
atin
e)
Orig
inal
laye
rs
Var
nis
hG
C-M
SC
on
ifer
res
in a
nd
dry
ing
oil
Go
ldB
ole
SEM
Ram
anG
old
all
oy
(c.9
3%
Au
, 4%
Ag,
3%
Cu
; c.2
2.4
car
at e
qu
ival
ent)
Go
eth
ite-
an
d h
emat
ite-
con
tain
ing
red
ear
th
Mo
rdan
tO
pti
cal
mic
rosc
op
yTh
ick
, pig
men
ted
an
d o
rgan
ic-r
ich
(p
igm
ents
an
d m
ediu
m n
ot
iden
tifi
ed)
Pai
nt
(pig
men
ts)
Pai
nt
(bin
der
)
Ram
an +
op
tica
l m
icro
sco
py
GC
-MS
Ver
mil
ion
; lea
d w
hit
e; c
arb
on
-bas
ed b
lack
; azu
rite
; in
dig
o; c
op
per
car
bo
nat
e gr
een
(ve
rdit
er?)
;c red
lea
d; g
oet
hit
e, h
emat
ite;
an
d g
ypsu
mV
erd
igri
s; e
arth
pig
men
ts; a
nd
red
lak
ed
Co
nif
er r
esin
; dry
ing
oil
Gro
un
dG
rou
nd
(b
ind
er)
Ram
an +
op
tica
l m
icro
sco
py
Stai
nin
g te
sts
Gyp
sum
Pro
tein
Clo
thV
isu
al a
sses
smen
tP
lain
/tab
by
wea
ve
Wo
od
Op
tica
l m
icro
sco
py
Cupr
essu
s sem
perv
irens
L.,
cyp
ress
No
tes
‘tr’
in
dic
ates
a t
race
am
ou
nt
was
fo
un
d.
a The
smal
l p
arti
cle
size
s su
gges
ted
th
at t
he
verm
ilio
n w
as p
rod
uce
d u
sin
g th
e w
et p
roce
ss.
b Th
e p
rese
nce
of
suga
rs i
s n
ot
un
der
sto
od
at
this
tim
e.c Th
is m
ay b
e n
atu
ral
mal
ach
ite,
bu
t th
e re
gula
r, s
mal
l an
d s
ph
eric
al p
arti
cles
mak
e th
e u
se o
f ar
tifi
cial
gre
en v
erd
iter
mo
re l
ikel
y.d G
iven
th
e te
chn
iqu
es a
vail
able
it
was
no
t p
oss
ible
to
det
erm
ine
the
org
anic
co
lora
nt
in t
he
red
lak
e.
tab
le 1
. Su
mm
ary
of
the
mai
n a
nal
ytic
al r
esu
lts
LYNNE HARRISON, JANET AMBERS, REBECCA STACEY ET AL.
28
Sam
ple
R
esu
lts
(lay
er s
tru
ctu
re f
rom
su
rfac
e d
ow
n)
CS2
Ch
rist
’s l
eft a
nk
le, a
rea
of
gild
ed d
eco
rati
on
. Sam
ple
in
clu
des
all
lay
ers
of
varn
ish
an
d p
oss
ibly
rec
ent
ove
rpai
nt
Res
tora
tio
n1
0. V
arn
ish
, wh
ich
sh
ow
s w
hit
e lu
min
esce
nce
un
der
UV
ill
um
inat
ion
; to
th
e le
ft i
t is
ove
r la
yer
8 a
nd
pen
etra
tes
thro
ugh
a c
rack
to
th
e le
vel
of
the
ori
gin
al p
ain
t la
yers
; 9
.P
ain
t la
yer
com
pri
sin
g fi
nel
y gr
ou
nd
pig
men
ts (
ove
r o
rigi
nal
lay
ers
at r
igh
t) –
ear
ths,
red
lak
e, c
arb
on
-bas
ed b
lack
(R
aman
);
8.
Pai
nt
laye
r b
etw
een
tw
o t
hin
UV
-lu
min
esce
nt
coat
ings
(at
th
e le
ft o
f th
e sa
mp
le);
an
d
7.
Thic
k v
arn
ish
sh
ow
ing
crea
m lu
min
esce
nce
un
der
UV
ill
um
inat
ion
Ori
gin
al6
.M
etal
lea
f –
go
ld (
SEM
-ED
X);
5.
Thic
k, p
igm
ente
d o
rgan
ic-r
ich
mo
rdan
t;4
. G
reen
ish
-yel
low
lay
er o
f fl
esh
pai
nt
– e
arth
pig
men
ts a
nd
ver
dig
ris
(op
tica
l ex
amin
atio
n o
nly
) to
pp
ed w
ith
th
in p
ink
ish
-red
lay
er o
f fl
esh
pai
nt
– v
erm
ilio
n a
nd
lea
d w
hit
e (R
aman
);3
.W
arm
wh
ite
pai
nt
– l
ead
wh
ite,
car
bo
n b
lack
an
d y
ello
w o
chre
(R
aman
);2
.D
ark
lay
er; a
nd
1.G
esso
– g
ypsu
m (
Ram
an)
[pro
tein
]
CS7
Ove
rgil
din
g an
d o
verp
ain
t o
ver
ori
gin
al p
ain
t fr
om
ed
ge o
f cl
iff t
o l
eftR
esto
rati
on
10
.Tw
o u
pp
er v
arn
ish
lay
ers
sho
win
g w
hit
e lu
min
esce
nce
un
der
UV
ill
um
inat
ion
;9
.G
old
lea
f;8
.R
ed ‘b
ole
’ typ
e la
yer;
7.
Dar
k o
verp
ain
t, m
ediu
m s
ho
win
g lu
min
esce
nce
un
der
UV
ill
um
inat
ion
; an
d6.
Lo
wer
th
ick
var
nis
h t
hat
sh
ow
s cr
eam
lum
ines
cen
ce u
nd
er U
V i
llu
min
atio
n a
nd
pen
etra
tes
into
cra
ck i
n o
rigi
nal
pai
nt
Ori
gin
al5
.D
ark
lay
er –
dir
t(?)
;4
.Th
in v
arn
ish
lay
er s
ho
win
g lu
min
esce
nce
un
der
UV
ill
um
inat
ion
;3
.O
rigi
nal
dar
k g
reen
pai
nt
– a
zuri
te, l
ead
wh
ite
and
car
bo
n-b
ased
bla
ck (
all
by
Ram
an)
and
yel
low
(u
nid
enti
fied
);2
.O
rigi
nal
lig
ht
yell
ow
-gre
en p
ain
t (u
nid
enti
fied
); a
nd
1.
Wh
ite
pai
nt
– l
ead
wh
ite
(Ram
an)
plu
s fr
agm
ent
of
gold
lea
f
CS9
Gre
en o
f an
gel’s
win
g w
ith
red
un
der
pai
nt.
Up
per
var
nis
hes
rem
ove
dR
esto
rati
on
6.
Rem
ain
s o
f tw
o s
urf
ace
coat
ings
to
th
e ri
ght.
So
me
par
ticl
es s
ho
w lu
min
esce
nce
un
der
UV
ill
um
inat
ion
; an
d5
.D
ark
lay
er p
enet
rati
ng
into
cra
ck
Ori
gin
al4.
Var
nis
h, p
oss
ibly
ori
gin
al, s
ho
win
g fa
int
wh
ite
lum
ines
cen
ce u
nd
er U
V i
llu
min
atio
n;
3.
Wh
ite
hig
hli
ght
pai
nt
– l
ead
wh
ite
(Ram
an);
2.
Gre
en p
ain
t –
man
ufa
ctu
red
gre
en c
op
per
car
bo
nat
e an
d a
zuri
te (
bo
th b
y R
aman
); a
nd
1.
Red
pai
nt
– v
erm
ilio
n, l
ead
wh
ite
(bo
th b
y R
aman
) an
d r
ed l
ake
CS1
0 A
nge
l’s g
rey
rob
e, w
ith
old
var
nis
h r
esid
ues
. Gro
un
d l
ayer
mis
sin
gR
esto
rati
on
5.
So
me
frag
men
tary
par
ticl
es o
n s
urf
ace,
po
ssib
ly o
verp
ain
t;4
.N
on
-lu
min
esce
nt
surf
ace
laye
r –
po
ssib
ly c
alci
um
oxa
late
(vi
sual
exa
min
atio
n, u
nab
le t
o c
on
firm
by
Ram
an);
3.
Rem
ain
s o
f va
rnis
h l
ayer
ab
ove
an
d b
elo
w t
he
oxa
late
lay
er s
ho
win
g cr
eam
lum
ines
cen
ce u
nd
er U
V i
llu
min
atio
n;
Ori
gin
al2
.D
ark
gre
y th
in p
ain
t la
yer
– c
arb
on
-bas
ed b
lack
, lea
d w
hit
e (b
oth
by
Ram
an);
an
d1
.L
igh
t gr
ey t
hic
ker
pai
nt
laye
r –
car
bo
n-b
ased
bla
ck, l
ead
wh
ite
and
azu
rite
(al
l b
y R
aman
)
tab
le 2
. Sel
ecte
d p
ain
t cr
oss
-sec
tio
ns
sho
win
g st
rati
grap
hy
THE NOLI ME TANGERE: STUDY AND CONSERVATION OF A CRETAN ICON
29
CS1
2 D
amag
ed r
ed p
ain
t fr
om
kn
eeli
ng
figu
re t
o l
eft. R
esto
rati
on
var
nis
h
rem
ove
dO
rigi
nal
4.
Cru
st –
deg
rad
atio
n v
isib
le o
n s
urf
ace;
pro
bab
ly a
cal
ciu
m o
xala
te c
rust
(u
nab
le t
o c
on
firm
by
Ram
an);
3.
Red
gla
ze –
red
lak
e;
2.
Red
pai
nt
– v
erm
ilio
n (
Ram
an)
and
red
lak
e; a
nd
1.
Bro
wn
ish
pai
nt
– e
arth
pig
men
ts (
goet
hit
e an
d h
emat
ite)
an
d c
arb
on
-bas
ed b
lack
(al
l b
y R
aman
)
CS1
3 G
old
ove
rpai
nt
laye
rs f
rom
are
a o
f d
amag
e, t
op
cen
tre
of
gild
ed
bac
kgr
ou
nd
an
d i
ncl
ud
ing
ori
gin
al l
ayer
s b
enea
thR
esto
rati
on
6.
Up
per
var
nis
h s
ho
win
g w
hit
e lu
min
esce
nce
un
der
UV
ill
um
inat
ion
;5
.P
igm
ent
and
go
ld o
verp
ain
t –
bla
ck a
nd
red
par
ticl
es (
un
iden
tifi
ed);
an
d4
.Th
ick
bri
ttle
var
nis
h s
ho
win
g cr
eam
lum
ines
cen
ce u
nd
er U
V i
llu
min
atio
n
Ori
gin
al3
.G
old
lea
f;
2.
Red
‘bo
le’ l
ayer
– h
emat
ite
(Ram
an);
an
d1.
Ges
so
No
te
Pig
men
t id
enti
fica
tio
ns
give
n a
re b
ased
on
th
e m
eth
od
giv
en i
n b
rack
ets
and
nat
ure
of
the
org
anic
med
ium
/ v
arn
ish
is
bas
ed o
n m
icro
chem
ical
sta
inin
g te
sts.
LYNNE HARRISON, JANET AMBERS, REBECCA STACEY ET AL.
30
and architecture, was transferred to the ground layer from
an anthibolon (a cartoon or pattern used for tracing the basic
designs of works) by pricking and pouncing through the
pinholes with a carbon-containing material. The resulting
dots were then joined by drawn lines, Figure 2 [6; pp. 56–60
and 76–79, 7; pp. 169–170, 8]. From the X-radiographs it
is clear that some of the lines were then further incised
into the ground with a sharp implement so that they
could be seen throughout the painting process, Figure
3. Interestingly, the trees and rocks of the background,
the angels’ wings and the faces of the figures were not
incised, Figure 4. Further evidence of underdrawing,
without accompanying incised lines, can be seen in the IR
reflectogram, for example in the branches of the trees and
in the complete drapery of the left figure and folds of the
sleeve of the middle figure in the scene to the upper right
showing the Myrrophoroi (unguent bearers), Figure 5 [1;
p. 191]. Only slight changes in design (pentimenti)between the underdrawing and the finished image are
evident, as in the hem of the drapery of the middle figure
in the Myrrophoroi scene, Figure 5.
A dark, patchy wash of colour on the faces and hands is
also apparent in the IR reflectograms and is interpreted as
an underpainting or proplasmos [9; p. 234].
Following the production of the underdrawing, the areas
to be gilded (the background and halos) were first coated
with a bole based on red earth, burnished and then covered
with thin metal leaf of soft, high-purity gold (see Table 1),
which was further burnished.
Examination of the layer structure revealed details of the
composition of the original paint layer and two additional
restoration layers; in some places the ground preparations
were also present, see below. The original painting tech-
nique was distinct from that used in the restoration layers in
pigment choice, preparation and colour mix, making it easy
to distinguish original workmanship from later additions.
As is common in icons, the use of restoration to maintain
a complete and functional image for worship has produced
a complex and confused layer structure with penetration
of solvents and media from layer to layer making it impos-
sible to identify the original paint medium with certainty [3;
Section 4.1]. Conifer resin and drying oil were found in the
original paint layers but no proteins or fats were identified,
although their presence, perhaps only in small quantities,
may have been masked by other materials.
The original palette consisted of lead white, gypsum,
carbon-based black, red and yellow earths (coloured by
goethite and hematite), a basic copper carbonate green,
verdigris, indigo, azurite, vermilion, red lead and a red lake,
see Table 1. The image was built up in layers, with simple
paint mixtures of two or three pigments.
Selected passages of the painting have been studied in
greater detail; see Table 2 for details of the cross-sections
taken from these areas. The flesh tone of the large figure
of Christ was painted with a yellow-green paint containing
a mixture of yellow earth, verdigris and an unidentified
white pigment, CS2: Table 2. Highlights of lead white were
applied over this layer with the addition of small amounts of
vermilion for areas of warm flesh tones. A similar yellowish-
green paint mixture was used for some of the background
figure 2. Details from the IR reflectogram in the area of Christ’s drapery showing carbon-based spots from pouncing of an original anthibolon. The image to the right is an enlargement of the region bounded by the rectangle in the image to the left
figure 3. Details from the X-radiograph in the area of Christ’s drapery showing incised lines. The image to the right is an enlargement of the region bounded by the rectangle in the image to the left
figure 4. Diagram indicating the positions of incised lines as deduced from the X-radiographs
THE NOLI ME TANGERE: STUDY AND CONSERVATION OF A CRETAN ICON
31
cliffs (CS7: Table 2), where a lighter layer was laid down first
and then darker passages applied on top, with the addition of
azurite and carbon-based black to the paint mixture. A frag-
ment of gold leaf was found within the lowest paint layers.
The grey robe of the angel to the left of the empty tomb
was painted using a mixture of a carbon-based black, lead
white and azurite with the darker folds added on top using
a mixture comprising only lead white and carbon-based
black, CS10: Table 2. The angel’s wings were first painted
with red (a mixture of vermilion, lead white and a red
lake) and then edged with greenish wing tips of a mixture
of malachite (or perhaps its artificial analogue green verd-
iter) and azurite, with white highlights on top, CS9: Table
2. To the lower left, in the scene of the Chairete (‘All Hail’),
the red drapery of the kneeling figure of the Virgin Mary is
quite distinct from the other reds used in the image. This
effect was produced using three paint layers, CS12: Table 2.
The first brownish-red layer was coloured with earths and
carbon-based black and this was coated with a second thin
layer of semi-opaque red (a mixture of vermilion and red
lake) to which a comparatively thick third layer of a trans-
lucent red lake was finally applied.
After painting, mordant gilding was used to deco-
rate Christ’s cloak and sandals, and the angels’ wings. The
mordant from an area of Christ’s sandal, visually identified
as an organic binder bulked out with inorganic pigment,
was applied to the painted surface and then coated with gold
leaf that was left unburnished, CS2: Table 2.2 The surface
of the painting was then coated with a varnish containing
a mixture of drying oil and conifer resin, the remains of
which were located in the paint cross-sections during anal-
ysis and confirmed during conservation.
Later changes (damage and restoration)
At some point, possibly relatively soon after completion,
the icon suffered extensive damage to the wood panel and
painted surface by wood-boring insects, probably attracted
to the glue-impregnated cloth layer as a potential food
source. In general the damage was restricted to the upper-
most surface of the panel, with only few areas of activity
visible on the reverse, which are discussed below. As a
result, original paint and ground were damaged or lost and
restoration was clearly undertaken. The painted surface was
cleaned to remove the original varnish, resulting in some
damage to the paint (particularly the Virgin’s red robe in
the Chairete scene) and etching of the surface of the gilded
halos and mordant gilding, Figure 6. The lost areas – partic-
ularly at the edges – were replaced with a white ground
layer bound in animal glue and an attempt was made to
complete the detail of the lost image using pigments that
were probably bound in egg or an egg/oil mixture, Table
1. An exception to this was the indigo paint used to cover
areas of loss in the trees, which was oil-based. Curiously,
the restoration layer was not built up to the same level
as the original surface, but sat just below, forming a step
around the edges of the damages. Some of the insect flight
holes were also plugged with white fill and overpainted.
The early restoration palette included red lead, vermilion,
indigo, ochres, a red lake and gypsum, and differs from
the original palette both in pigment mixtures and the size
of the pigment particles. For example, restoration of the
red coffin in the Myrrophoroi scene, originally painted in
vermilion, was carried out in a mixture of red lead and
a red lake. Larger areas of loss of original ground in the
gold background were also replaced and the whole of the
background was regilded. Of the original gilding, only the
halos and traces in the background remain (see below). The
profiles of the mountains and architecture were repainted
and a black inscription added on top of the gold back-
ground between the mountains to the right. The original
crosses were completely overpainted. A comparatively thick
coating of an oil and conifer resin varnish was then applied
across the whole surface including the restorations and the
original paint.
figure 6. Photomicrograph of the mordant gilding on Christ’s sandal strap showing loss of original mordant gilding beneath the cracked and brittle restoration varnish. Image size 12 × 9 mm
figure 5. Detail from the IR reflectogram showing underdrawing in: (a) the tree branches; and (b) the scene of the Myrrophoroi
LYNNE HARRISON, JANET AMBERS, REBECCA STACEY ET AL.
32
A later, probably early twentieth century, restoration
campaign has also been identified, which concentrated on
the lower left edge and left side of the icon, but included
other scattered areas of retouching across most of the
surface. The losses were replaced with white, water-soluble
filler and inpainted using pigments that were probably
bound in oil. The palette included traditional pigments
such as vermilion for the overpainted red border and
some post-eighteenth-century materials such as cadmium
yellow and Prussian blue; the latter was used to retouch
the Magdalene’s blue robe that had originally been painted
with a mixture containing indigo and gypsum, Table 1. This
paint was applied directly on top of the older degraded oil
and conifer resin varnish from the previous treatment and
concealed areas of original paint and earlier restoration.
Unlike the earlier repairs, no attempt was made to recreate
the lost parts, using instead simple blocks of colour to fill
the losses. A further, thinner, layer of oil and mastic resin
varnish was then brushed over the whole surface.
CONSERVATION TREATMENT
Condition before conservation
As a result of its history of construction and change, the
painting was in urgent need of conservation, both to stabi-
lize it and to clarify the heavily restored and damaged
image. The icon was structurally unstable and visually
compromised by the previous restoration treatments. The
figure 7. Icon during conservation showing those areas (shaded in pink) that comprise earlier restorations or regilding, plus the black inscription; all of these were left in place
THE NOLI ME TANGERE: STUDY AND CONSERVATION OF A CRETAN ICON
33
two oil and resin varnish layers from previous restora-
tions were brittle and flaking and original paint was often
attached to these flakes. There were localized areas of recent
paint loss, some showing cleavage between the paint layers
while others included the ground and exposed the wood
support. Two rigid paint blisters in the centre were raised
out of plane and hollow to the touch. The later restoration
was particularly unstable along the left edge and was sepa-
rating from the wood.
Insect damage had caused areas of the original surface
to become soft and hollow. These had collapsed in places,
causing surface undulations and loss. The painted layers
were riddled with insect flight holes, many of which had
been plugged with restoration material. X-radiography
revealed the extent, depth and severity of a crack running
vertically through the centre of the panel; this was partic-
ularly evident in the electron emission radiograph, which
also provided a very clear view of other panel damage
and the restoration of the painted surface. The panel had
remained relatively flat with only a minor twist from top to
bottom, although shrinkage and expansion could readily be
observed in the behaviour of one of the paint blisters in the
upper centre right, which altered in height in response to
changes in relative humidity (RH).
Treatment
Conservation treatment was undertaken to render the icon
structurally stable and improve the clarity of the image.
The outermost oil and mastic resin varnish was removed
with a solvent mixture comprising propan-2-ol and white
spirits in a ratio of 2:3 (v/v), applied on small cotton wool
swabs rolled across the surface; this revealed the lower,
older varnish and the most recent restoration. Where these
restorations extended over the original surface they were
removed mechanically with a scalpel. The lower varnish
was then removed with propanone (acetone) applied in the
manner described above, uncovering the remains of a rela-
tively insoluble coating that had been applied directly onto
the painted surface and which was, therefore, interpreted as
an original material.
The remainder of the most recent restoration and asso-
ciated fills, along the left edge and where present on the
other edges, were removed mechanically using a scalpel,
revealing the wood beneath and exposing the insect
damage. The remains of a cloth layer between the wood
and ground were discovered at this point; its presence was
not previously known, as it had not been revealed by any
of the imaging methods applied to the painting. Traces of
earlier restoration were also uncovered along the left edge,
matching those present on the right, including the step in
level. It appears that prior to the later restoration the panel
had lost most of its previously restored left edge, together
with more of the original paint at the bottom and top left
corners, and that this may be the reason for the later treat-
ment to repair the left side.
The earlier restorations were left in place except where
they covered original material and obscured the original
surface, where they were removed mechanically. The
regilding and the added black inscription between the
mountains in the background were left, as neither the
extent of any surviving original gilding nor the presence of
an earlier inscription could be determined, Figure 7.
Localized areas of flaking original paint were consoli-
dated with an acrylic dispersion (Lascaux® 4176) applied
beneath the lifting flake with a small brush. The treated area
was then warmed with a heated spatula to approximately
40°C through release layers of lens tissue (closest to the paint
layer) and lightweight Melinex® polyester film to relax and
reattach the paint. The area was weighted with sandbags until
the adhesive dried. Localized areas of cleavage between the
ground and the cloth or wood were reattached by injecting
a warm solution of gelatine (approximately 10% w/v in
de-ionized water) through losses in the original surface with
a small syringe and then weighting with sandbags placed
over release layers as described above. The large rigid blister
discussed earlier was not treated, as the long-term stability of
this reattachment could not be guaranteed unless the icon is
henceforth stored permanently at a raised RH to prevent any
panel shrinkage. Were the panel to be subjected to a period
of low or fluctuating RH there would be increased risk of the
blister lifting again or, more worryingly, of the paint layers
becoming compressed, resulting in active flaking and loss.
For this reason the blister, which was considered stiff enough
to support itself, was not further treated.
The reverse of the panel was cleaned with ‘smoke sponge’,
a vulcanized rubber molecular trap that contains a minus-
cule percentage of a mild soap (<0.006%, or 0.06 grammes
per kilogramme).
Where access was possible, voids and soft areas of the
original painted surface (comprising paint and ground
layers), particularly around clusters of flight holes and at the
edges of paint losses, were strengthened with a 5% w/v solu-
tion of Paraloid® B72 (methyl acrylate/ethyl methacrylate
copolymer) in a 1:1 v/v mixture of acetone and industrial
methylated spirit (IMS). This was injected beneath the
figure 8. A detail of the upper left side of the icon during conserva-tion showing the condition of the original surface after cleaning and the newly applied white surface fills before inpainting
LYNNE HARRISON, JANET AMBERS, REBECCA STACEY ET AL.
34
painted surface and through flight holes to consolidate the
wood and frass. Where access was possible to voids directly
beneath the original paint, these were filled by injecting a
suspension of fine silica microballoons in a 10% solution of
Paraloid B72 in the same solvent mixture through holes in
the surface.
In order to unify damaged and undamaged elements of
the image, new fills were also applied to losses in the orig-
inal painted image and used to plug selected flight holes,
Figure 8. The original paint layer around the area to be
filled was first protected with a (temporary) brushed appli-
cation of a ketone-based picture varnish. A filler comprising
chalk in a 10% w/v solution of gelatine in de-ionized water
was applied to the losses and, once dry, was carved with a
scalpel blade and smoothed with cotton wool swabs damp-
ened with de-ionized water to mimic the original surface
topography. The temporary varnish was then removed with
white spirits. The larger losses along the edges were not
replaced. The whole painted surface of the icon was then
coated with a brushed application of a 12% w/v solution
of Paraloid B72 in dimethylbenzene (xylene) and the fills
were inpainted with raw pigments ground and mixed in a
20% w/v solution of Paraloid B72 in methoxypropan-2-ol.
Selected areas of wear, considered to be detrimental to the
integrity of the image, were also inpainted. A final thin coat
of a 10% w/v solution of Paraloid B72 in xylene was sprayed
onto the surface to reduce the gloss and to give a more even
appearance across the surface of the painting, Figure 9. As
the icon is generally displayed within a conditioned case,
only a thin protective coating, sufficient to saturate the
colours adequately and provide some protection against
dirt, was used.
figure 9. Icon of the Noli me Tangere (1994,0501.3) after conservation
THE NOLI ME TANGERE: STUDY AND CONSERVATION OF A CRETAN ICON
35
FINDINGS IN A HISTORICAL CONTEXT
While the need to conserve the painting was the primary
driving force in this investigation, the results have broader
implications, particularly with regard to provenance and
authorship.
The icon is recorded as having been purchased in
Crete and the findings described here certainly accord
with it having originated in this region. The subject of the
Noli me Tangere was common in Cretan painting from
the mid-fifteenth century onwards [2; p. 407 No. 50, 10;
p. 44 No. 370, 11; p. 187 No. 58, 12; p. 92 No. 19]. The
style of this icon is similar to other works from this period
that show Cretan or Venetian influences. The island of
Crete came under Venetian domination in 1211 and by
the mid-fifteenth century its hybrid society, consisting of
native Greek Orthodox Cretans and Catholic Venetians,
was experiencing widespread and fertile cross-cultural
interactions [13; pp. 194–217, 14; pp. 351–370]. The target
audience for icons such as this Noli me Tangere was both
Orthodox and Catholic and the image combines subjects
favoured by both Christian traditions, the resurrected
Christ being the focal point of the Greek Orthodox faith
and the penitent Mary Magdalene of great importance in
Catholic theology.
Analysis confirmed that the construction of the icon
seems to follow post-Byzantine Orthodox painting practice
as established in the literature [5, 8; pp. 54–56], employing
techniques used in earlier Italian panel paintings and
documented in painters’ manuals [7; pp. 152–192, 15;
pp. 11–48, 16]. Cypress wood was the traditional choice for
panel painting in Crete [5; p. 26], as it was widely available
and its inherent qualities of strength, hardness, fine grain,
resistance to splitting or warping and ease of cutting and
carving were ideal for this purpose. Furthermore, as cypress
retains its fragrance, it can be resistant to some insects [17].
The method of attachment of the horizontal battens on the
reverse of the icon, with nails too short to penetrate the
thickness of the structure, is more unusual. Longer nails
were more commonly used, with the exposed nail points
clinched (bent) at right angles into the wood to prevent the
batten easing off should the panel warp or develop a twist
[4; p. 34, 5; p. 26, 18; pp. 122–125].
The icon also shows great similarity with a considerably
larger depiction of the same subject in Saint Catherine’s
Monastery at Herakleion, Crete, which bears the signature
of the post-Byzantine Cretan artist Michael Damaskinos
(1530/1535–1592/1593) [2; p. 458 No.100]. It is possible
that the British Museum icon could be based on a scaled-
down anthibolon of the painting by Damaskinos. Anthibolawere commonly used by Cretan painters to create quick and
efficient reproductions [19; p. 181]. Changing the scale of
a cartoon was certainly a common practice in Renaissance
Italy, the most common method being the use of a ‘propor-
tional squaring grid’ [6; pp. 51 and 131], and it may be that
similar processes were applied to anthibola. Such were the
reputation of Damaskinos and the quality of his works that
his anthibola were in great demand after his death [20;
pp. 255–256 and 269–271]. His icons were copied by known
Cretan artists in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries
[2; pp. 453, 457, 465 No. 107, colour plate 107], although it
should be acknowledged that stylistically they often differ
substantially from the originals [1, 2; p. 465 No. 107 and
pp. 455–457 No. 99]. As discussed above, investigations of
the underdrawing revealed omissions to the incised image
in the background, angels’ wings and faces of the figures that
could explain slight variations in position and appearance
between this icon and the painting by Michael Damaskinos.
Analysis of the original paint media was not conclusive
and neither proteins nor fats were identified, Table 1. In
traditional practice, egg is generally described as being used
in this context, either alone or mixed with oil in the form
of a tempera grassa medium [9; pp. 202–203 and 234, 16;
p. 11]. But as described earlier, the identification of proteins
in paintings such as this is difficult, particularly if they are
only present in small proportions or if an interaction has
occurred between pigment and binder [21]. Additionally,
research is increasingly demonstrating the complexities
of the use and identification of the binding media in early
paintings [22]. Despite these caveats it is worth noting that
the appearance of the paint surface is certainly consistent
with egg tempera painting practice.
The use of tempera grassa was previously indicated in
a group of late fifteenth-century Florentine panels [23;
p. 30]. It has been suggested that it was sometimes employed
by the fifteenth-century Cretan artist Angelos, as it was
detected in two of six panels analysed [5; p. 40], and later by
Damaskinos [24; p. 187]. The addition of drying oil would
certainly have enhanced the glazing effect of the indigo and
red lake in the composition. Darkening of the paint layer as
a result of ageing of the oil would also explain the darkened
look of the green trees and perhaps the change in appear-
ance of the red lake glaze on the Virgin’s robe.3
The pigments identified, including the organic lakes,
are consistent with those found on Greek and Cretan icons
from the fifteenth century onwards [5; pp. 40–64, 25], and
would have been available as a consequence of vigorous
trade routes with Venice [5; p. 94 Note 43, 7; p. 183, 26;
p. 247]. The technique used to paint the Virgin’s robe is
thought to date from after the mid-fifteenth century and is
distinct from earlier practice employed for Virgins’ robes
[5; pp. 54, 92, Note 40 and 130]. Unfortunately neither the
palette nor the techniques employed are distinctive enough
to give a definitive date for the production of the British
Museum icon, although a seventeenth-century origin seems
most likely [1].
The icon certainly seems to have been used within a
liturgical context. Wax spots were identified on the original
surface above the earliest confirmed varnish and are inter-
preted as accretions accumulated during use. In Orthodox
practice icons are venerated through the act of Proskynesis [27; p. 8], in which they are kissed, handled and exposed to
candles and incense [9; p. 48, 28; p. 173, 29; pp. 38–39]. From
the time of the earliest restoration, and predating its purchase
LYNNE HARRISON, JANET AMBERS, REBECCA STACEY ET AL.
36
in the late nineteenth century, it is likely that repairs were
made to facilitate continued use in liturgy. The later restora-
tion to complete the image and apply a coat of mastic varnish
was probably undertaken at the National Gallery in 1924 [30].
CONCLUSIONS
Using a range of analytical and conservation approaches
it has been possible to identify the original materials and
methods of construction of the icon depicting the Noli me Tangere, together with the materials used in later conserva-
tion interventions. The interpretation of these findings was
only possible in combination with research into the history
of the production and use of icons and previous restoration
practices. Research has also helped establish a likely chro-
nology for previous interventions. The latest conservation
treatment has rendered the icon structurally stable and to a
certain extent reintroduced clarity to the image, revealing
the fine quality of the painting technique. The icon is now
included in a permanent display at the British Museum
alongside other Cretan icons, helping to highlight the exist-
ence of this important part of the collection and stimulate
interest in its study.
Technical examination has shown that the icon is
complex and well made, following traditional practice.
Identification of the materials and techniques employed,
together with art historical evidence [1], has helped to
strengthen a Cretan provenance. The painting technique
and, to a certain extent, the panel preparation suggest the
work of a skilled artisan. The character of the underdrawing
suggests that the work is a copy of a prototype, possibly by
the Cretan artist Michael Damaskinos.
This icon, together with the work by Damaskinos in Saint
Catherine’s Monastery at Herakleion, are representative
examples of the style of art created within a cosmopolitan
and multicultural urban environment on Crete, which
contains elements designed to appeal to a hybrid audience
from different Christian traditions.
EXPERIMENTAL APPENDIX
Surface examination under magnification was carried out
using a Leica S8 APO stereomicroscope with an APO ×0.63
WD 100 mm lens. The images were captured with a Leica
DFC320 camera.
Ultraviolet (UV) examination was undertaken using
two UV fluorescent lamps and captured with a Hasselblad
503CW camera fitted with a PhaseOne H25 digital back
and an 80 mm Carl Zeiss lens fitted with an UV-absorbing
filter. The exposure times were generally long (in the range
of c.5–10 minutes).
X-radiographs were produced using typical exposure
conditions of 60–70 kV for 25 mA minutes on Kodak
Industrex film and then scanned using an Agfa RadView
digitizer with a 50 μm pixel size and 12-bit resolution to
allow digital manipulation and enhancement of the images.
On some areas, electron emission imaging using a heavily
filtered X-ray beam at 300 kV was carried out [31; p. 101].
IR reflectograms (IRR) were produced using tungsten
Elinchrom 500 lights with an Osiris infrared camera fitted
with an InGaAs sensor and a six-element 150 mm focal
length f/5.6–f/45 lens. A Schott RG830 glass filter with a
cut-on transmission of 50% at 830 nm was placed in front
of the lens.
For wood identification, small (< 1.5 × 1.5 mm) samples
were fractured to expose transverse, radial longitudinal
and tangential longitudinal surfaces for identification
using a Leica Aristomet biological optical microscope.
Reflected light with dark field mode was used at magni-
fications ranging from ×50 to ×520. Polarized light was
selected as required. Standard techniques of wood iden-
tification and terminology were used as set out by the
International Association of Wood Anatomists (IAWA)
for the identification of modern wood as exemplified by
Wheeler et al. [32, 33].
Paint cross-section samples were mounted in clear
casting AM polyester resin and dry ground using Micro-
Mesh® abrasive and polishing cloths to avoid disturbing
any water-soluble layers. The samples were examined
under reflected visible and UV light at magnifications of
×400 and ×600. Any inorganic materials present were iden-
tified using Raman spectroscopy and SEM-EDX analysis.
Raman spectroscopy of dispersed samples and mounted
cross-sections was carried out using a Horiba Infinity spec-
trometer with green (532 nm) and near infrared (785 nm)
lasers, with a maximum power of 4 mW at the sample.
Samples for SEM-EDX analysis were carbon coated and
then examined in a JEOL JSM-840, equipped with an EDX
accessory (Oxford Instruments, ISIS with Si(Li) detector)
for elemental analysis. Sequential microchemical staining
tests were also carried out to indicate types of media. Amido
Black AB2A was used as a general stain for protein and
Rhodamine B as a general stain for oil [34, 35]. The cross-
sections were examined under magnification as above.
Samples for GC-MS analysis were collected by swabbing
or from surface scrapes. Methods of sample preparation
and analysis were selected according to sample type. A
lipid method was used principally for varnishes and the
characterization of paint media. Samples were extracted
using dichloromethane (DCM) and then derivatized
prior to analysis with bis(trimethylsilyl)trifluoroaceta-
mide (BSTFA) + 1% trimethylchlorosilane (TMCS) to
form trimethylsilyl (TMS) derivatives. A protein method
was used principally for ground layers and glues or adhe-
sives. Samples were prepared as amino acid extracts by
hydrolysation with hydrochloric acid, then derivatized
prior to analysis with N-(tertbutyldimethylsilyl)-N-methyl
trifluoroacetamide (MTBSTFA) + 1% tertbutyldimethyl
silyl chloride (TBDMSC). For further details of the analyt-
ical methods, see [3].
THE NOLI ME TANGERE: STUDY AND CONSERVATION OF A CRETAN ICON
37
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors would like to thank Chris Entwistle, curator of the icon collection at the British Museum; Marika Spring and Hayley Tomlinson of the National Gallery, London; Aviva Burnstock of the Courtauld Institute of Art, London; and colleagues from the British Museum: Catherine Higgitt, Duncan Hook, Kevin Lovelock, Nigel Meeks, Antony Simpson, Trevor Springett and Giovanni Verri.
MATERIALS AND SUPPLIERS
AM Polyester resin: Alec Tiranti Ltd, www.tiranti.co.ukLascaux 4176 and Paraloid B-72: AP Fitzpatrick, www.apfitzpatrick.co.ukLens tissue: Falkiners fine papers, www.falkiners.comSilica microballoons: Conservation by Design Ltd, www.conservation-by-design.co.ukMicro-Mesh: Craft Supplies Ltd, The Mill, Millers Dale, Derbyshire SK17 8SN, UK.Melinex and smoke sponge: Preservation Equipment Ltd, www.preservationequipment.comSolvents: VWR International Ltd, Magna Park, Hunter Boule-vard, Lutterworth, Leicestershire LE17 4XN, UK, uk.vwr.com
AUTHORS
Lynne Harrison ([email protected]) is a conservator and Janet Ambers ([email protected]), Rebecca Stacey ([email protected]) and Caroline Cartwright ([email protected]) are scientists, all in the Department of Conservation and Scientific Research at the British Museum. Angeliki Lymberopoulou ([email protected]) is a lecturer at the Open University.
REFERENCES
1. Lymberopoulou, A., Harrison, L. and Ambers, J., ‘The Noli me Tangere icon at the British Museum: vision, message and reality’, in Images of the Byzantine World: visions, messages and mean-ings. Studies presented to Leslie Brubaker, ed. A. Lymberopoulou, Ashgate, Farnham (2011) 185–214.
2. Μπορμπουδάκης, M. (Borboudakis, M.) (ed.), Εικόνες της Κρητικής Τέχνης (Από τον Χάνδακα ως την Μόσχα και την Αγία Πετρούπολη), University of Crete, Herakleion (1993). [Images of Cretan art (from Candia to Moscow and St Petersburg)]
3. Harrison, L., Ambers, J., Cartwright, C.R., Stacey, R. and Hook, D., Establishing an approach to the care and conservation of Orthodox icons at the British Museum, Report No. 7449/1 (forthcoming), www.britishmuseum.org/research/online_research_catalogues.
4. Papadopoulou, A., ‘Traditional wood technology and problems relating to wooden supports’, in The conservation of late icons, ed. N. Jolkkonen, A. Martiskainen, P. Martiskainen and H. Nikkanen, Valamo Art Conservation Institute, Finland (1998) 31–40.
5. Milanou, K., Vourvopoulou, C., Vranopoulou, L. and Kalliga, A.L., Icons by the hand of Angelos: the painting method of a fifteenth-century Cretan painter, Benaki Museum, Athens (2008).
6. Bambach, C.C., Drawing and painting in the Italian Renaissance workshop: theory and practice, 1300–1600, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1999).
7. Dunkerton, J., Foister, S., Gordon, D. and Penny, N., Giotto to Durer: early European painting in the National Gallery, National Gallery Company, London (1991).
8. Bouras, L., ‘Working drawings of painters in Greece after the fall of Constantinople’, in From Byzantium to El Greco: Greek frescoes and icons, ed. M. Acheimastou-Potamianou, Greek Ministry of Culture and Byzantine Museum of Athens, Athens (1987) 54–56.
9. Sendler, S.J.E., The icon: image of the invisible, 2nd edn, translated by S. Bingham, Oakwood Publications, California (1988).
10. Chatzidakis, N., Icons of Cretan School (15th–16th century),Benaki Museum, Athens (1983).
11. Acheimastou-Potamianou, M. (ed.), From Byzantium to El Greco: Greek frescoes and icons, Greek Ministry of Culture and Byzantine Museum of Athens, Athens (1987).
12. Chatzidakis, N., Venetiae quasi alterum Byzantium: Candia to Venice. Greek icons in Italy, 15th–16th centuries, Foundation for Hellenic Culture, Athens (1993).
13. Lymberopoulou, A., The Church of the Archangel Michael at Kava-lariana: art and society on fourteenth-century Venetian-dominated Crete, Pindar Press, London (2006).
14. Lymberopoulou, A., ‘Late and post-Byzantine art under Vene-tian rule: frescoes versus icons and Crete in the middle’, in A companion to Byzantium, ed. L. James, Wiley, Oxford (2010).
15. Bomford, D., Dunkerton, J., Gordon, D. and Roy, A., Art in the making: Italian painting before 1400, National Gallery Company, London (1989).
16. Hetherington, P. (tr.), The ‘painter’s manual’ of Dionysius of Fourna: an English translation with commentary, of Cod. Gr. 708 in the Saltykov-Shchedrin State Public Library, Leningrad, 2nd edn, Oakwood Publications, California (1989).
17. Charas, C., Revolon, C., Feinberg, M. and Ducauze, C., ‘Preference of certain Scolytidae for different conifers’, Journal of Chemical Ecology 8 (1982) 1093–1109.
18. Uzielli, L., ‘Historical overview of panel-making techniques in central Italy’, in The structural conservation of panel paintings, ed. K. Dardes and A. Rothe, Getty Trust Publications, Los Angeles (1998) 110–135.
19. Lymberopoulou, A., ‘The painter Angelos and post-Byzantine Art’, in Locating Renaissance art, ed. C.M. Richardson, Yale University Press, New Haven (2007) 174–210.
20. Κωνσταντουδάκη-Κιτρομηλίδου, M. (Constantoudaki-Kitrom-ilidou, M.), ‘Παραγγελίες Πινάκων, Εργαστήριο, Κυκλοφορία Σχεδίων του Μιχαήλ Δαμασκηνού στο Χάνδακα: Ανέκδοτα Έγγραφα (1585–1593)’, Θησαυρίσματα/Thesaurismata 34 (2004) 253–272. [Commissions for paintings, workshops and the circula-tion of drawings by Michael Damaskinos in Candia: unpublished documents (1585–1593)]
21. Spring, M. and Higgitt, C., ‘Analyses reconsidered: the importance of the pigment content of paint in the interpretation of the results of examination of binding media’, in Medieval painting in Northern Europe: techniques, analysis, art history, ed. J. Nadolny with K. Kollandsrud, M.-L. Sauerberg and T. Frøysaker, Archetype Publications, London (2006) 223–229.
22. Higgitt, C. and White, R., ‘Analysis of paint media: new studies of Italian paintings of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries’, National Gallery Technical Bulletin 26 (2005) 88–104.
23. Dunkerton, J. and Roy, A., ‘The materials of a group of late fifteenth-century Florentine panel paintings’, National Gallery Technical Bulletin 17 (1996) 20–31.
24. Moshos, T., ‘The conservation work on the Michael Damaskinos icons in the Saint Catherine Sinaiton collection in Heraklion’, in The conservation of late icons, ed. N. Jolkkonen, A. Martiskainen, P. Martiskainen and H. Nikkanen, Valamo Art Conservation Institute, Finland (1998) 187–192.
25. Milanou, K., ‘The techniques of post-Byzantine icons of the 15th century: observations on works of the Benaki Museum collec-tion’, in Changes in post–Byzantine icon painting techniques, ed. N. Jolkkonen and H. Nikkanen, Valamo Art Conservation Insti-tute, Finland (1999) 5–6.
26. Mathew, L. and Berrie, B., ‘“Memoria de colori che bisognino torre a vinetia”: Venice as a centre for the purchase of painters’ colours’,
LYNNE HARRISON, JANET AMBERS, REBECCA STACEY ET AL.
38
in Trade in artists’ materials: materials, markets and commerce in Europe to 1700, ed. J. Kirby, S. Nash and J. Cannon, Archetype Publications, London (2010) 245–252.
27. Weitzmann, K., The icon, Evans Brothers, London (1982).28. Lymberopoulou, A., ‘Audiences and markets for Cretan icons’,
in Viewing Renaissance art, ed. C.M. Richardson, K.M. Woods and A. Lymberopoulou, Yale University Press, New Haven (2007) 171–206.
29. Tarasov, O., Icon and devotion: sacred spaces in imperial Russia,translated by R.M. Gullard, Reaktion Books, London (2002).
30. Tomlinson, H., National Gallery, London, personal communica-tion (January 2011).
31. Daniels, V. and Lang, J., ‘X-rays and paper’, in Radiography of cultural material, 2nd edn, ed. J. Lang and A. Middleton, Elsevier, Oxford (2004) 101–103.
32. Wheeler, E.A., Pearson, R.G., La Pasha, C.A., Zack, T. and Hatley, W., Computer-aided wood identification, Bulletin 474, North Caro-lina Agricultural Research Service, Raleigh (1986).
33. Wheeler, E.A., Baas, P. and Gasson, P.E. (ed.), ‘IAWA list of micro-scopic features for hardwood identification’, IAWA Bulletin 10(3) (1989) 219–332.
34. Martin, E., ‘Some improvements in techniques of analysis of paint media’, Studies in Conservation 22 (1977) 63–67.
35. Wolbers, R.C. and Landrey, G., ‘The use of direct reactive fluo-rescent dyes for the characterization of binding media in cross sectional examinations’, in 15th Annual Meeting, American Insti-tute for Conservation, American Institute of Conservation, Wash-ington (1987) 168–202.
NOTES
1. The term ‘ground’ is used here to describe the smooth white prep-aration layer between the cloth and the painted and gilded layers.
2. It was not possible to characterize this mordant fully because of sampling difficulties; for further discussion see [3; Section 3.3.1.2].
3. It should be noted that the oil and resin mixture found may not be intentional and could be the result of the accidental migration of surface varnish layers as a consequence of traditional cleaning and repair treatments [3; Section 4.1].