The document discusses methods for filling in missing areas of archaeological glass artifacts. It proposes using detachable films made of synthetic materials like polyethylene terephthalate (PET) and polypropylene. These materials are commonly used in document conservation and have properties that make them suitable for reversibly filling gaps in glass artifacts. The researchers tested applying PET and polypropylene films shaped to the gaps and adhering them to artifacts, providing a reversible solution that facilitates viewing the object's form while respecting principles of minimal intervention and reversibility. Traditional filling methods often use irreversible materials like resins that damage artifacts. The researchers believe detachable films are a better alternative that balances preservation, understanding of the artifact, and respect for the original

1. the online magazine No. 20, July 2011

2. REVERSIBILITY AND MINIMAL
INTERVENTION IN THE GAP‐FILLING
PROCESS OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL GLASS
By Betlem Martínez, Trinidad Pasíes
and Maria Amparo Peiró

3. REVERSIBILITY AND MINIMAL INTERVENTION IN ARCHAEOLOGICAL GLASS
In recent research at the Museo de Prehistoria of Valencia (Prehistory Museum of Valencia) and the
Institut Valencià de Conservació i Restauració (Valencian Institute for Conservation and Restoration),
we have developed different methods of reversible filling based on the use of synthetic films such as
polyethylene terephthalate and polypropylene, materials commonly used in the field of document
conservation. These methods have now been applied to a variety of archaeological glass collections. The
results of this research project are set out in detail in this article.
Introduction
Archaeological glass is an extremely delicate ma‐
terial that requires particular ability and care when
treated by the conservator‐restorer. Glass objects
from archaeological origin are fragile, often very
fragmented, and have very thin walls. Besides, they
have undergone singular alteration processes when
preserved in unsuitable environments (figure 1).
In this article we put forward new proposals that Figure 1. Group of archaeological glass objects. Cycladic
concern one of the most controversial processes Museum (Athens, Greece).
carried out by conservator‐restorers: the treat‐
ment of the missing areas. We have developed an that sort of direct action do not only arise from
alternative that, while being coherent with re‐ lack of manual ability and experience of conser‐
versibility and minimal intervention criteria, a vator‐restorers themselves, they can also be
necessary prerequisite to any restoration inter‐ caused by the historical moment when actions
vention, does not prevent a reconstruction pro‐ take place: applied criteria, protocols, and ma‐
cess that facilitates form legibility of the object. terials used have varied with time.
Putting the concepts of reversibility and minimal If there is one thing we can currently learn from
intervention into practice: a question of criteria our recent past, that is the frequent mistakes made
when, without awareness of negative effects, ex‐
Traditionally, the gap‐filling has been understood cessive intervention on cultural heritage objects
as a process carried out in order to return form is applied without absolute respect for the minimal
unity to a piece. The ICOM 2008 resolution defines intervention criteria. The damage done by profes‐
it as a regular treatment in a restoration process sional conservator‐restorer, when they justified
that includes “all actions directly applied to a single excessive intervention to achieve a supposed im‐
and stable item aimed at facilitating its appreci‐
ation, understanding and use. These actions are
only carried out when the item has lost part of its 1 Terminology to characterize the conservation of tangible
significance or function through past alteration cultural heritage, Resolution adopted by the ICOM‐CC mem‐
bership at the 15th Triennial Conference, New Delhi, 22‐
or deterioration and are based on respect for the 26 September 2008, available at URL (accessed 20th April
original material”1. But the dangers involved in 2011)
e‐conser vation 41

4. BETLEM MARTÍNEZ, TRINIDAD PASÍES & M. AMPARO PEIRÓ
provement in the understanding of a piece, is have tried to make both concepts compatible in
precisely the reason why we should make the cri‐ our research.
teria of minimal intervention a priority, and con‐
sider it not only viable but also the alternative Applied alternatives to the casting of missing
that is most coherent with strict respect for the areas in archaeological glass
original material conserved.
Reconstruction of missing areas is often justified
The Ministry of Culture, through the Instituto del as a consolidation process of the piece. Its purpose
Patrimonio Cultural de España (Cultural Heritage is to improve the reading of the forms and the
Institute of Spain) published ten criteria for res‐ understanding of the piece as a historical docu‐
toration2. In relation to minimal intervention, the ment, where a gap is considered an interruption
document says that “the principle of minimal in‐ in the continuity of the form. Intervention might
tervention is crucial. Any manipulation of a piece be necessary or advisable in some cases, especially
involves risks, therefore we should limit ourselves when the stability of the piece is at stake. But we
to that which is strictly necessary and accept natu‐ know that this is not always the case and that con‐
ral decay caused by time. Over interventionist servator‐restorers are often subject to impositions
treatments that can damage an object integrity or wrong criteria that find justification in consi‐
should be rejected”. These recommendations also dering that an incomplete piece cannot be under‐
refer to the gap‐filling process that according to stood or lacks aesthetic quality.
the document should only take place “when it is
necessary for the stability of the piece or for some It is important to define certain areas before a
of the materials that form part of it”. The contro‐ process of conservation‐restoration is carried
versial but indispensable reversibility criterion is out. We must know what the final destination of
also mentioned. Any report or publication regard‐ the piece is: storage, research, temporal or per‐
ing restoration must include it, even though its manent exhibition. Once this has been established,
meaning can often create some misunderstand‐ a decision could be made regarding whether treat‐
ings [1]. Products used for the fill‐in process must ment should be preventive or if there is a need for
be reversible but reversibility should not be a a remedial approach. Other fundamental factors
traumatic moment for the piece nor for the con‐ are the preservation state of the material and
servator‐restorers themselves [2, pp. 60‐61]. some of its characteristics, like glass thickness,
and the size, shape and localization of gaps. In
Nowadays, we have sufficient resources to make any case, there comes a moment when the profes‐
reversibility and minimal intervention criteria fit sional will have to face the problem of a possible
perfectly into the fill‐in process. Acting with this reconstruction of missing areas. What alternatives
in mind does not mean no intervention or that it are there for that challenge?
is not possible to find alternatives that combine
both respect for and legibility of the piece [3]. We Unanimity of criteria is hard to achieve, above all
regarding the process that conditions the piece
appearance when it is eventually presented. When
we make a diagnosis for an object and establish
2 Free translation from Spanish from Decálogo de la Res‐
tauración ‐ Criterios de Intervención en Bienes Muebles,
the percentage that has been lost, we have to act
available at URL [pdf] (accessed on 20 April 2011) responsibly and decide among different proposals
42 e‐conser vation

5. REVERSIBILITY AND MINIMAL INTERVENTION IN ARCHAEOLOGICAL GLASS
Figure 2. A piece without casting of missing areas. Casa Romei (Ferrara, Italy).
that could be considered. The first thing to be Figure 3. New support to reconstruct the missing base of the
glass. Casa Romei (Ferrara, Italy).
ascertained is whether a casting of the gaps is
really necessary. No intervention could, in fact,
be a good option, especially in those cases where
the piece can be easily read (figure 2).
We may also decide that only a partial interven‐
tion is necessary, with occasional fillings that
strengthen strategic areas to give stability to the
piece. Or we may opt for a no integration proposal
and use other means of supporting the piece in‐
stead (figures 3‐5). There are different types of
supports used for glass made of synthetic resins
[4] or with blown glass [5; 6, p. 160]. In some
cases, instead of completing the object form, sup‐
port is minimized and its presence is reduced to
some elements that not only hold the piece but
in some way help to imagine the area of the ob‐
ject that has been lost (figure 6‐7).
e‐conser vation 43

6. BETLEM MARTÍNEZ, TRINIDAD PASÍES & M. AMPARO PEIRÓ
Figure 4 (above). The original artifact rests on an internal Figure 5. Support system made of moulding resin which bears
support system. Corinto (Greece). original fragments. Museo de Valladolid (Spain).
This approach requires a radical change of attitude as a complement for a better understanding of
not only in the case of conservator‐restorers, who pieces, avoiding thus the need of acting directly
are the first to be convinced of the many advan‐ on them.
tages of that decision, but also on the part of ar‐
cheologists, museum directors and the general But among traditional options there is also the
public who must learn to really value this alterna‐ total intervention, the complete reconstruction
tive and be aware that nowadays it is possible to of gaps in the object for conservation, aesthetic
create 3D digital reconstructions that can be used or exhibition related reasons. Many different pro‐
Figure 6. External support to hold a glass artifact. Hadrian's Figure 7. An internal support with a re‐creation of the base
Library (Athens, Greece). made in the Institut Valencià de Conservació i Restauració
(Valencia, Spain). Photography Pascual Mercé.
44 e‐conser vation

7. REVERSIBILITY AND MINIMAL INTERVENTION IN ARCHAEOLOGICAL GLASS
Figure 8. Casting of the missing glass made of plaster. Archaeological Museum of Haniá (Crete, Greece).
e‐conser vation 45

8. BETLEM MARTÍNEZ, TRINIDAD PASÍES & M. AMPARO PEIRÓ
ducts have been used in the fill‐in process. For tained, worked on and then adhered to the piece
instance, glass from other objects reused for this [14]. S. Koob experimented with detachable fills as
purpose, materials traditionally used for ceramics, well: “[…] the making an intermediate fill or cast‐
such as plaster (figure 8), acrylic resins (Technovit ing with plaster of Paris. The plaster will be re‐
4000, Plastogen G), polyester (GTS from Vossche‐ moved from the object and then molded in silicone
mie, C‐32 from Canuts), polyurethane (Crystal rubber, from which an epoxy fill or replacement
Clear 200) or epoxy resins (Ablebond 342‐1, Fyne‐ fragment will then be made. This can be joined to
bond, Araldite 2020, Hxtal NYL‐1, Epotek 301) [6, the original object with B‐72” [8, pp. 95‐104].
pp. 153‐159; 7, pp. 286‐304; 8, pp. 76‐95; 9‐11]
(figures 9‐10). In recent years epoxy resins have
been, without a doubt, the products most fre‐
quently used and research has focused on analyz‐
ing their long term aging [12, 13]. This process
involves making models (generally silicones,
modeling clays, dental waxes or clays) and fur‐
ther work on the resin finishing in contact with
the piece (figures 11‐12). Proposal for recon‐
struction of large gaps with resin by means of
molds made from the piece have been occasion‐
ally put forward. A replica of the lost area is ob‐
Figure 9 (above). Fill in resin in archaeological glass. Museu
de Conimbriga (Portugal).
Figure 10. Yellowing process of filling resin. Museo Arqueológico de Santa Pola (Alicante, Spain).
46 e‐conser vation

9. REVERSIBILITY AND MINIMAL INTERVENTION IN ARCHAEOLOGICAL GLASS
Figure 11. Polishing coloured epoxy resin made at the Institut Valencià de Conservació i Restauració (Valencia, Spain).
Figure 12. A casting with coloured epoxy resin made at the Institut Valencià de Conservació i Restauració (Valencia, Spain).
e‐conser vation 47

10. BETLEM MARTÍNEZ, TRINIDAD PASÍES & M. AMPARO PEIRÓ
But there are other less technical aspects that, In some areas of conservation, acrylic resin sheets
unfortunately, are sometimes forgotten such as have been made using products such as Paraloid
the high financial cost of many of those products, B‐72, Technovit 4004A [15, 16] or slow harden‐
their short life, toxicity and questionable rever‐ ing epoxies (AY 103, Araldite 2020, Hxtal NYL‐1,
sibility. In general, these products are not rever‐ Epotek 301) [17‐ 19]. These can be modeled while
sible; therefore we believe that the use of a primer they are becoming hard, in order to give them the
between the original piece and the new material, shape of the gap and then stick them to the piece
in order to make removal easier, should be not as if they were fragments [7, pp. 304‐306; 8, pp.
just necessary but compulsory. 104‐106].
Besides, we should not forget the technical com‐ There are publications that have mentioned the
plexity of the fill‐in process; mistakes can easily much less researched alternative of making de‐
occur. The process requires extreme precision, not tachable films with acrylic sheet precast (Perspex,
just for the preparation stages (making the mold) Plexiglass). Some authors define these materials
but also when pouring the resin and in the polish‐ as less manageable than others and not very suit‐
ing that later takes place. These are all risky ac‐ able for aesthetic reasons [6, p. 161; 7, p. 304; 8,
tions when they are performed on an archaeo‐ p. 104; 20]. Although it is true that the use of
logical object of extreme fragility. detachable films has its limitations, we have in‐
vestigated it as a proposal in relation to reversi‐
Conscious of the problems involved in the applica‐ bility and minimal intervention requisites. We
tion of these reconstruction methods, which use have used particular materials and methods and
traditional materials, we are researching in our we outline the results we have obtained below.
laboratories, a proposal that might solve the ques‐
tion of reconstruction and conform to reversib‐ There are many comparative studies for the gap‐
ility and minimal technical difficulty requisites. filling resins used for interventions on glass, for
their virtues and qualities. But we cannot find
A reversible fill‐in method: detachable films contrasted analyses for different type of sheets,
results, possibilities, or the limitations in their
The market offers a great deal of synthetic com‐ use, even in the cases when they are presented
pounds made for industries whose activities dif‐ as an alternative. Therefore, we have based our
fer a lot from those normally carried out in the
area of cultural heritage. Conservators have gradu‐ Figure 13. A detachable film solution. British Museum
ally been getting materials that had originally been (London, UK).
created for other purposes. Therefore, each new
product incorporated to our resources requires a
number of studies that make sure that is not dam‐
aging for the materials it might be in contact with,
and to judge the suitability of new ideas.
The use of detachable films in this proposal is not
new (figure 13), but it has not been sufficiently
studied to be considered a generalized practice.
48 e‐conser vation

11. REVERSIBILITY AND MINIMAL INTERVENTION IN ARCHAEOLOGICAL GLASS
selection of the laminated products that we have know. This is, to a great extent, due to the absence
used on analyses focused on other applications of plasticizing elements in its manufacturing
and materials within the field of conservation. process which avoids later emissions because
“the semicrystalline nature is the basis for the
Research on the causes for glass deterioration excellent resistance to chemicals” [24, p. 68].
has found evidence of an acceleration process
related to environment acidity [21, pp 79‐80; 22]. We have found that PET made in an uncoated, bi‐
Other objects of a different nature such as paper axially oriented, and polished form presents the
and metal, share that sensibility but with some best and more secure results within the different
differences concerning direct effects. We have varieties. This is the case of Melinex, the product
found detachable films of various types that have we use. Melinex shape and surface does not alter
been used, and analyzed, for application in those at least until 120 ºC and does not change its tacki‐
specializations for more than fifty years. In our ness for forty days at 37’7º C [25, Tables 1‐2].
proposal, we are putting forward incorporating
some of the results obtained in analyses origin‐ PP responded to tasting in a less conclusive way
ally focused on, among other things, applications than PET. Therefore, it is considered an acceptable
of lamination treatment for paper or for storage compound to be used in conservation but that
systems for metals, to the area of glass materials. should be tested further in order to confirm the
results. It is a chemically inert material and it is
Some compounds, for instance, those derived not toxic, but it is vulnerable to sun light effects.
from polyvinyl acetate (PVA), polyvinyl chloride
(PVC) and cellulose acetate (CA), turned out to PP is considered acceptable, provided that is
be suitable from the aesthetic and morphologic manufactured, as in the case of PET, without
point of view, and for their malleability and the plasticizing additives. PP is easy to manipulate
fact that they are easy to handle. But they have and to work with and can have a hazy and matt
all been rejected because of the damage they can finish, characteristics that in some cases turn
cause to glass surfaces. Plasticizing elements out to be an advantage for gap‐filling in archae‐
used in the manufacturing process are the main ological glass that has partly lost transparency.
agents for acid vapor emissions that make them
brittle and tacky [23, p. 15]. We have carried out tests with these two mate‐
rials, both at the Institut Valencià de Conservació
Eventually we considered two compounds as the i Restauració and the Museo de Prehistoria of
most tested and verified as harmless for our work: Valencia. The tests concern the application of the
polyethylene terephthalate (PET) and polypropy‐ materials as sheets in the fill‐in process of glass
lene (PP). PET has been used since the mid‐20th from archaeological origin. We have opted for
century and has been the object of several studies PET (Melinex) in the case of an islamic lamp
related to the multiple applications it has had, (figure 14). We have placed the sheet to support
due to its optimal results. In the conservation a group of fragments that were poorly supported
world, the use of PET is fundamentally associated by the base. PP (Plakene) was used for the loss
with archival work and graphic document treat‐ compensation of a medieval chalice that had partly
ment. Acceptance of this product in these fields lost its transparency and that had several small
shows it is the most suitable amongst those we gaps (figure 15).
e‐conser vation 49

12. BETLEM MARTÍNEZ, TRINIDAD PASÍES & M. AMPARO PEIRÓ
The sheet is made without having any contact
whatsoever with the piece. This avoids excessive
manipulation. Besides, it means that we do not
have to be over concerned with the possibility of
mistakes and with the possibility of having to
repeat the process. In the first place, we should
choose the material best suited to the piece (fig‐
ure 16), and then decide about the sheet thick‐
ness (figure 17). There are different options for
each of the products: 75 to 175 microns for PET
and 300 to 1,200 microns for PP. We have also Figure 14 (above). PET detachable film as a support in an
made colour tests for these materials. It might islamic lamp. Institut Valencià de Conservació i Restauració
(Valencia, Spain). Photography Pascual Mercé.
be interesting to colour them slightly in order to
harmonize the materials with the treated piece.
The application of a mix of pigments and Paraloid
B‐72 in ethyl acetate has been successful and we
can give the material an aesthetic finish closer to
the original if we wish to do so. This might depend
on characteristics of the piece and the differenti‐
ation criterion we choose to apply. But being a
totally reversible system, we can eliminate the
application with no complication if we decide to
do so. In fact, the main advantages of these sys‐
tems are the possibility of changing and elimina‐
ting sheets and the reduction to a minimum of
the risks involved in changes.
The first step in the process of making a sheet for
gap‐filling is to obtain the gap profile. We place
a thin acetate sheet on the original piece and
faithfully mark on it the gap contour with a per‐
manent marker. This acetate sheet will be used
as a pattern to cut the PET or PP sheet later as
accurately as possible; but mistakes can always
be rectified. In order to adapt the material to the
curve shape of a gap, we can heat the sheet by
Figure 15 (above right). Chalice with PP detachable film. SIP
Archive of the Museo de Prehistoria of Valencia (Spain).
Figure 16 (right). Preparations to make detachable films.
SIP Archive of the Museo de Prehistoria of Valencia (Spain).
50 e‐conser vation

13. REVERSIBILITY AND MINIMAL INTERVENTION IN ARCHAEOLOGICAL GLASS
Figure 17. Selection of the PP detachable film and its colour in connection with the original. SIP Archive of the Museo de
Prehistoria of Valencia (Spain).
means of a hot air blower at low temperature. This
will work provided that the curvature is not too
pronounced.
Once we have checked that the fitting of the sheet
is optimal, we only have to fix it in the gap, ad‐
hering the fragment to the glass walls with resin
(figures 18‐19). Following our reversible material
criterion we chose to use as adhesives Paraloid
B‐72 or Mowital B60HH at 20 %; we have obtained Figures 18 and 19. Above: Adhesion of one PP detachable film
excellent results with both of them. once coloured and cut. Below: The scalpel indicates one of the
missing areas made with PP detachable film. SIP Archive of the
Museo de Prehistoria of Valencia (Spain).
Conclusion
Nowadays we have sufficient resources to make
reversibility and minimal intervention criteria fit
perfectly into the fill‐in process. This can be done
using materials that are harmless and stable in
the long term. Acting with this in mind does not
mean no intervention or that it is not possible to
find alternatives that combine respect for and
legibility of the piece. In our research into the
e‐conser vation 51

14. BETLEM MARTÍNEZ, TRINIDAD PASÍES & M. AMPARO PEIRÓ
use of PET and PP sheets for the integration of gaps References
in archaeological glass, we have tried to make the
concepts mentioned above compatible, and we [1] B. Appelbaum, “Criteria for treatment: reversi‐
believe to have obtained satisfactory results. bility”, Journal of the American Institute for Con‐
servation 26(2), 1987, pp. 65‐73, available at URL
However, in spite of the success in adapting flat
sheets to small curvature of gaps, we are aware [2] J. Barrio, “Evaluación crítica de los principios
that it is there where the limitation of our pro‐ en arqueometría, conservación y restauración de
posals lies. PET and PP sheets modify their plas‐ los vidrios arqueológicos”, Patina 12, 2003, pp.
ticity with the application of heat and can be 53‐64
slightly modelled to adjust their flat shape to a
tridimensional object. But we cannot say that this [3] M. Favre‐Félix, “ Ambiguïtés, erreurs et con‐
is possible when the volumes to be reintegrated séquences: «Rendre l’œuvre lisible»”, Ceroart 3,
have more complicated shapes, or are rather large, 2009, pp. 2‐16, available at URL
angular or have pronounced curves. In those cases
where sheets cannot follow the voluptuousness [4] M. Quiñones López, and J. García Sandoval,
of the piece shape, we will have to put forward “Restauración de vidrio arqueológico. Montaje
other alternatives for partial reintegration as a de vidrio arqueológico sobre resina en las lám‐
means of support or an adaptation of the resin paras de la sinagoga de Lorca para su exposición”,
sheet approach suitable for those shapes. Our XX Jornadas de Patrimonio Cultural de la Región
system also finds limitations in objects or areas de Murcia, 2009, pp. 267‐275, available at URL
where glass is rather thick. We might not be able [pdf]
to get that thickness with this type of material
unless we join several sheets. [5] M. E. Ortiz Palomar, “Tratamiento para la con‐
servación, restauración y exposición de vidrios
However, we are committed to interventions that antiguos: la reintegración de vidrio con vidrio”,
follow the line of research described above, whose Boletín del Museo Zaragoza 13, 1994, pp. 303‐312
main objective is to develop gap‐filling systems
which are easily reversible and that do not rep‐ [6] M. Bailly, “Le verre”, in La conservation en
resent a risk for the conservation of the pieces. archéologie. Méthodes et pratique de la conserva‐
tion‐restauration des vestiges archéologiques,
M. C. Beducou (coord.), Paris, 1990, pp. 120‐162
Acknowledgments
[7] S. Davison, Conservation and Restoration of
We would particularly like to thank Carmen Pérez Glass, Butterworth‐Heinemann, Oxford, 2003,
and Helena Bonet, directors of the Institut Valen‐ pp. 284‐307
cià de Conservació i Restauració and the Museo
de Prehistoria of Valencia, respectively, for their [8] S. P. Koob, Conservation and Care of Glass
support for this research project and their under‐ Objects, Archetype Publications, London, 2006,
standing when it comes to value the criterion of pp. 75‐110
respect for the original piece in the intervention
on heritage. [9] G. Lemajič, “Advantages of using a transpar‐
52 e‐conser vation

15. REVERSIBILITY AND MINIMAL INTERVENTION IN ARCHAEOLOGICAL GLASS
ent PVC mould used in the process of replacing supportive resin fills for glass”, Conservation
missing pieces on hollow glass objects”, Diana 10, News 50, London, 1993, pp. 29‐30
Department for Preventive Conservation, National
Museum Belgrade, 2004‐2005, pp. 154‐159 [18] D. Ling, “Conservación de vidrio hueco en el
British Museum de Londres”, Jornadas Nacionales
[10] L. Fernández, L. Schönherr, M. Pugès, “Pro‐ sobre Restauración y Conservación de Vidrios,
ductes i tècniques per la reconstrucció de vidre Fundación Centro Nacional del Vidrio, 2000, pp.
arqueològic”, Quaderns tècnics de l’MHCB: Con‐ 135‐143
servació i Restauració 2, 2007, pp. 63‐79
[19] S. Davison, “Reversible fills for transparent
[11] B. Martínez Pla, “Restauración de alzata de and translucent materials”, Journal of the Amer‐
vidrio y cobre dorado perteneciente a un juego ican Institute for Conservation 37 (1), 1998, pp.
litúrgico del Real Colegio Seminario del Corpus 35‐47, available at URL
Christi del Patriarca (Valencia)”, Preprints of the
17th International Meeting on Heritage Conservation, [20] I. Gedye, “Pottery and glass: the conserva‐
Fundación La Llum de les Imatges, Conselleria de tion of cultural property”, Museums and Monu‐
Cultura i Esport, 2008, pp. 501‐504 ments 11, UNESCO, Paris, 1968, pp. 109‐113
[12] N. Tennent, “Clear and pigmented epoxy res‐ [21] L. Osete, Estudios de procesos de corrosión
ins for stained glass conservation: light ageing de vidrio y vidriados arqueológicos y caracteriza‐
studies”, Studies in Conservation 24(1), 1979, pp. ción de sustancias filmógenas tradicionalmente
153‐164 utilizadas en su restauración, Facultad de Quím‐
icas, Universidad de Valencia, 2005
[13] J. L. Down, “The Yellowing of Epoxy Resin
Adhesives: Report on High‐Intensity Light Aging”, [22] J. M. Fernández Navarro, El vidrio, Consejo
Studies in Conservation 31(4), 1986, pp. 159‐170 Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, Madrid,
2003
[14] E. Risser, “A new technique for the casting
of missing areas in glass restoration”, Journal of [23] B. Cope, “Transparent plastic film materials
Conservation & Museum Studies 3, 1997, DOI:10. for document conservation”, Paper Conservation
5334/jcms.3973, URL News 93, Institute of Paper Conservation, 2000,
pp. 14‐15
[15] R. F. Erret, “The repair and restoration of
glass objects”, IIC Bulletin of the American Group [24] L. Bottenbruch (ed.), Engineering Thermo‐
12, International Institute for Conservation, 1972, plastics. Polycarbonates, polyacetals, polyesters,
pp. 48‐49 cellulose esters, Hanser Gardner Publications,
Munich, Vienna, New York, 1996
[16] P. Jackson, “Restoration of an Italic glass
oinchoe with Technovit 4004A”, Conservator 7, [25] T. O. Taylor, “The use and identification of
1983, pp. 44‐47 plastic packaging films for conservation”, The
Book and Paper Group Annual 4, The American In‐
[17] L. Hogan, “An improved method of making stitute for Conservation, 1985, available at URL
e‐conser vation 53

16. BETLEM MARTÍNEZ, TRINIDAD PASÍES & M. AMPARO PEIRÓ
gical material treatment doing research and work‐
ing at different international centres such as the
Atelier de restauration de mosaiques (France);
Opificio Delle Pietre Dure and ICCROM (Italy);
Parque de Tikal (Guatemala); Ministry of Culture
(Greece). She has directed a large number of ar‐
chaeological conservation and restoration inter‐
BETLEM MARTÍNEZ ventions at national level. She has been working
Conservator‐restorer as a teacher since 1996. In 2007 Dr. Pasíes com‐
Contact: bmpla@ivcr.es pleted the Máster Oficial en Conservación y Res‐
tauración de Bienes Culturales at the Universidad
Betlem Martínez graduated from the Department of Politécnica de Valencia. She has participated as a
Fine Arts, Universidad Politécnica de Valencia, spe‐ researcher in Research, Development and Innova‐
cializing in conservation in 1997. She has expanded tion projects and her work has appeared in several
her knowledge through a number of courses since national and international publications.
1995; she has taken the Máster Oficial en Conser‐
vación y Restauración de Bienes Culturales ‐ at the
Universidad Politécnica de Valencia specializing
in archaeological materials in 2010. She has been
working in public and private projects related to
her specialization since 1998 both as part of a
private enterprise working in restoration of ar‐
chaeological materials and, since 2006, at the
Conservation and Restoration Service of Diputa‐ MARIA AMPARO PEIRÓ
ción de Castellón and the Institut Valencià de Con‐ Conservator‐restorer
servació i Restauració de Bens Culturals. Contact: mara2113@yahoo.es
M. Amparo Peiró graduated from the Department
of Fine Arts, Universidad Politécnica de Valencia
in 1999, specializing in restoration. Since then she
has expanded her knowledge and experience in
the field by means of grants and projects in Italy.
Since 2002 her work is mostly focused on archae‐
ology. She collaborates in projects with Museo de
TRINIDAD PASÍES Prehistoria of Valencia. In 2010 she continued her
Conservator‐restorer professional trainning with the Máster Oficial en
Contact: trini.pasies@dival.es Conservación y Restauración de Bienes Culturales,
with a final project on archaeological lead. She
Trinidad Pasíes (PhD) is a restorer at the Museo de currently combines her work at Museo Arqueoló‐
Prehistoria of Valencia. She graduated in Fine Arts gico of Burriana and teaching activity with various
in 1992, specializing in restoration. Since then she restoration projects of archaeological material for
has been expanding her knowledge of archaeolo‐ private and public enterprises.
54 e‐conser vation