http://cool.conservation-us.org/jaic/articles/jaic36-01-005.

html

JAIC 1997, Volume 36, Number 1, Article 5 (pp. 59 to 81)

PUVIS DE CHAVANNES'S ALLEGORICAL MURALS IN

THE BOSTON PUBLIC LIBRARY: HISTORY,
TECHNIQUE, AND CONSERVATION
TERI HENSICK, KATE OLIVIER, & GIANFRANCO POCOBENE

ABSTRACT—Puvis de Chavannes's allegorical murals, installed in the Boston Public Library

between 1895 and 1896, were recently conserved by the staff of the Straus Center for
Conservation as part of an ongoing major renovation of the building. The treatment of the murals
included the consolidation of large areas of flaking paint, the reattachment of detached canvas
sections, and the removal of tenacious surface grime. The opportunity to examine and analyze
the Boston murals and to study archival material in France, as well as other murals there, has
yielded interesting information about the materials and techniques Puvis used to create his
highly individual and influential murals. The authors combine information about the Boston
Public Library commission with the methods and materials used in the murals, the conservation
treatment, and additional materials analysis.

TITRE—Les peintures murales allégoriques de Puvis de Chavanne à la bibliothèque municipale

de Boston: Histoire, technique et restauration. RÉSUMÉ—Les peintures murales allégoriques de
Puvis de Chavanne, intallées dans la bibliothèque municipale de Boston entre 1895 et 1896,
furent récemment restaurées par le personnel du Straus Center for Conservation. Le traitement
de ces peintures murales s'inscrit dans le cadre d'une rénovation générale du bâtiment, toujours
en cours, et comprend la consolidation de zones importantes de soulèvements, la remise en place
des sections où la toile s'était détachée et le nettoyage de la surface couverte d'une saleté tenace.
L'examen et l'analyse de ces peintures murales, ainsi que l'étude de documents d'archives et de
certaines autres peintures murales conservées en France, ont permis la mise à jour de
renseignements intéressants concernant les techniques utilisées par Puvis pour créer ses peintures
murales, si originales et si influentes. Les auteurs présentent des informations sur la commande
de la bibliothèque municipale de Boston, les méthodes de travail et les matériaux employés dans
les peintures murales, la restauration de ces peintures et les résultats de l'analyse d'autres
matériaux.

TITULO—Los murales alegóricos de Puvis de Chavannes de la Biblioteca Publica de Boston:

historia, técnica y conservación. RESUMEN—Los murales alegóricos de Puvis de Chavannes
que fueron montados en la Biblioteca Publica de Boston entre los años 1895 y 1896, fueron
recientemente conservados por el equipo del Centro Straus para la Conservación, como parte de

1 of 31
 http://cool.conservation-us.org/jaic/articles/jaic36-01-005.html

la gran remodelación que se esta llevando a cabo en el edificio. El tratamiento de los murales
incluyo la consolidación de grandes áreas de pintura que se habia escamado, la unión de
secciones de lienzo desprendidas y la remoción de tenaz suciedad superficial. La oportunidad de
examinar y analizar los murales de Boston, y de estudiar documentos pertinentes ubicados en
archivos franceses, tanto como otros murales en Francia, produjo interesante información acerca
de los materiales y las técnicas utilizadas por Puvis en la creación de estos murales muy
particulares y trascendentales. Los autores combinaron información sobre la Comisión de la
Biblioteca Publica de Boston con los métodos y materiales utilizados en los murales, el
tratamiento de conservación y el análisis adicional de materiales.

1 INTRODUCTION

The Boston Public Library (fig. 1) is one of the great Renaissance Revival buildings of America.
Designed and built between 1888 and 1895 by the distinguished architectural firm of McKim,
Mead, and White, the library remains an impressive testimony to the late-19th-century fashion
for buildings both monumental in scale and eclectic in their architectural and artistic sources.
The building embodies the impulse toward a cultural continuity that brought European
civilization and the classical world to America. Its architects sought to unite the most celebrated
artists of the day to accomplish this goal.

Fig. 1. The facade of the Boston Public Library, 1904.

Courtesy of the Boston Public Library, Print Department

Pierre Puvis de Chavannes (1824–98), widely considered the greatest European muralist of the
time, was the ideal candidate to decorate the grandest and most complicated space in the new
library. By the 1890s he had painted most of his major mural decorations, including projects for
the Pantheon and the Sorbonne in Paris, and for museums and municipal buildings in Lyon,
Rouen, Amiens, Poitiers, and Marseille. Although in his youth he studied for brief periods in the
studios of Eugene Delacroix, Thomas Couture, and Theodore Chasseriau, Puvis's individual
style and technique were developed largely independently. Combining idealized classicism with
simple flat designs and pale colors, his murals were in great demand.

2 of 31
 http://cool.conservation-us.org/jaic/articles/jaic36-01-005.html

From the beginning, the intention was that the library's imposing grand staircase and loggia be
decorated with murals. Thus it was that in 1891 Charles Follen McKim traveled to Paris to
engage Puvis's services. Convincing the aged painter to undertake the commission proved no
easy task, but McKim was initially successful. Soon after, however, Puvis was awarded a
commission for the Paris City Hall and had second thoughts about the American project.
Another emissary was sent to Paris in 1892, and as a further inducement the artist was given a
plaster scale model of the library's interior. Finally, on July 7, 1893, Puvis signed a contract for
the murals that guaranteed him 250,000 francs, the equivalent of the then-unparalleled sum of
$50,000. A year later, after completing the Paris City Hall project, the painter began working on
the Boston murals and asked for more detailed measurements. He also requested, and was sent, a
sample of the marble to be used in the staircase so that he might harmonize his palette with the
surrounding architecture.

Puvis's oversized murals were executed on canvas in a specially designed studio at Neuilly,
which included a two-story door (fig. 2)(Milner 1988). The Inspiring Muses was the first mural
to be painted. It was exhibited at the Salon du Champs-de-Mars, then rolled and transported to
Boston in October 1895, and finally mounted on the east wall of the loggia a month later (fig. 3).
During the following year, the other eight panels were completed, exhibited in Paris, shipped,
and installed (fig. 4). In fact, the artist himself never saw his works in situ. Their installation
using a marouflage technique was overseen by Puvis's trusted collaborator Victor Koos. The
arrival of the murals in Boston was met with much fanfare and celebration. In France, on the
other hand, the art critic Gustave Geffroy expressed the feelings of many Frenchmen when he
wrote:

It is a great shame to see these works go to the Boston Public Library, to faraway
America. It is certain that many among us will never see them again. But, on
reflection their going is to be admired: art crossing the globe, braving the waves of
the ocean, to a new people, is a confirmation of one of its roles (Geffroy 1897,
148–49).

3 of 31
 http://cool.conservation-us.org/jaic/articles/jaic36-01-005.html

Fig. 2. The interior of Puvis's studio at Neuilly showing The Inspiring Muses before it was sent
to Boston in 1895. Courtesy of the Trustees of the Public Library of the City of Boston

Fig. 3. The Grand Staircase of the Boston Public Library showing the loggia with The Inspiring
Muses Acclaim Genius, Messenger of Light on the east wall

4 of 31
 http://cool.conservation-us.org/jaic/articles/jaic36-01-005.html

Fig. 4. North wall of the Grand Staircase with the murals Virgil, Aeschylus, and Homer. At the far
left, the mural Physics can be seen on the west wall

So it was that Boston acquired the only murals by Puvis to be found outside of France.

2 NARRATIVE OF THE MURALS

The spaces to be decorated consisted of eight arched spaces above the library's grand staircase
and a large, complex-shaped wall in the loggia. Puvis was given complete artistic freedom to
create a narrative for the cycle. He described the theme for his mural program as a synthesis of
the intellectual holdings contained in the Boston Public Library expressed in a symbolic
framework. The mural in the loggia, titled The Inspiring Muses Acclaim Genius, Messenger of
Light, is a summation of the entire schema.

The Inspiring Muses(fig. 3), the largest of the murals, covers 75.25 sq. m. (660 sq. ft.); it is 4.88
m (16 ft.) high and almost 15.42 m (50 ft. 7 in.) wide. Along the top of the wall, capitals and
vault supports project downward, dividing the field into five tympana. At the bottom is a
centrally placed door. Puvis expressed concern about the compositional problems caused by this
setting and at the possibility of having to paint separate images to fill the space. He made
numerous drawings and sketches and finally chose to unify the space with one continuous scene.
Above the door, a winged boy representing the Genius of Enlightenment stands on a cloud with
blazing lights in his hands against a pale yellow sky that extends across all five arches. Below
the sky is an expanse of deep blue water, and below that oak and laurel trees are scattered over a
green field dotted with flowering bushes. The nine Muses of Inspiration, representing the various

5 of 31
 http://cool.conservation-us.org/jaic/articles/jaic36-01-005.html

divisions of literature and the arts (Esch 1982), float above the landscape, draped in white and
holding lyres and laurel branches. On either side of the door Puvis painted stone statues
representing Study and Meditation in grisaille.

For the eight paintings in the staircase, each 4.37 m (14 ft. 4 in.) high by 2.18 m (7 ft. 2 in.)
wide, Puvis chose subjects that represent the various spheres of human knowledge. On the south
wall he painted Philosophy, Astronomy, andHistory, on the north Pastoral Poetry (Virgil),
Dramatic Poetry (Aeschylus) and Epic Poetry (Homer)(fig. 4), and on the west wall, on either
side of the windows that open out onto the courtyard, he painted Chemistry and Physics.

3 MATERIALS AND TECHNIQUE

Firsthand accounts of the materials and techniques Puvis used for the murals come primarily
from the writings of his students and contemporaries as Puvis himself revealed very little. The
observations of conservators and art historians, combined with recent scientific analysis, provide
additional information that corroborates much of what was written during Puvis's time.

The preparatory studies and sketches Puvis created for the murals were an indispensable part of
the final product; indeed, the sketches tell us most about his creative process. Prized in Puvis's
day, many of the sketches for the Boston Public Library project were exhibited in the Salon of
1896. Geffroy reported that

the entire room behind the frescoes [murals] for the Boston Library is filled on all
four walls with a series of drawings, an assemblage of research and studies…. There
are pencil, pen, and pastel sketches; detailed studies showing patient draftsmanship,
balanced panels which are as beautiful as paintings: powerful sketches, harmonized
by the rhythm of the lines (Geffroy 1897, 167).

Today, sketches for the library murals are preserved in numerous private and public collections.
The Cabinet des Dessins at the Louvre houses five related works. Two of the small
compositional studies, both about 10 x 33 cm (4 x 13 in.), are in ink over pencil on tracing paper.
They reveal that Puvis did not at first conceive of the Muses as figures floating over the
landscape but as figures standing firmly on the ground. In a third study at the Louvre (RF23070),
Puvis raised the Muses as in the final design. This change was made so that the figures would not
be truncated by the solid balustrade when seen from halfway up the staircase (Price 1994, 230).

Puvis drew hundreds of life drawings from models in his studio. He used distillations of these
sketches, squared up and transferred, for the figures in the murals. A drawing for one of the
Boston Public Library Muses (the second figure from the left in The Inspiring Muses) reveals
that Puvis carefully worked out the pose of the figure in a nude sketch (Petit Palais, P.P.D 274.1)
before draping her in a robe in another sketch of the same size (Lyon Inv. B607–28). Puvis also
made numerous small color studies for each mural project. He rendered his color ideas for the

6 of 31
 http://cool.conservation-us.org/jaic/articles/jaic36-01-005.html

library murals in various media. In a study for Physics he painted in gouache on cardboard.
Some sketches for the Muses were executed in oil on canvas, others in watercolor.

The final step in the preparatory process was the creation of a full-scale painted cartoon
combining many of the earlier studies. According to Puvis's student and collaborator Paul
Baudouin, the cartoons Puvis produced for his mural projects “were very precise and studied
works, in which all of the values were expressed” (Baudouin 1935, 300). Baudouin also noted
that Puvis used either paper or canevas (a French word describing a coarse, light-colored cloth
used for tapestry making) as a support for his large-scale cartoons. Notations on a photograph
taken while the cartoon for the Inspiring Muses was on exhibit in the Salon of 1920, in the files
of the Musée d'Orsay, indicate that the cartoon was painted in gouache on paper. The present
whereabouts of the cartoon are unknown; its last location was in the attic of the Comic Opera,
Paris (d'Argencourt et al. 1977, 231).

Puvis executed the Boston murals on a plainweave linen canvas, typical of the type he generally
chose for his monumental wall decorations. In the library murals the coarseness of the canvas is
evident in many thinly or dryly painted passages. Puvis had access to immense canvases. Only
two pieces of linen were used for The Inspiring Muses, each one measuring 4.88 m (16 ft.) high
with the left half 8.81 m (28 ft. 11 in.) long and the right half 6.60 m (21 ft. 8 in.) long. If seams
were necessary in his large mural projects, Puvis did his best to camouflage or hide them. In the
huge Sorbonne mural, The Sacred Grove (1886–89), for example, the two seams coincide with
vertical tree trunks. For The Inspiring Muses, Puvis located the join of the two canvases above
the central loggia door, where it is least likely to be noted from the floor below (a device he also
used for Ave Picardia Nutrix [1865] in Amiens). The seam is to the right of the figure of Genius,
where the height of the canvas is minimal.

Due to the light, unsaturated colors and almost matte surfaces of Puvis's murals, many people
—beginning with the critic Théophile Gautier—have mistakenly referred to them as frescoes
(Gautier 1861, 102–6). In fact, he appears to have experimented only once with pigments bound
in lime on plaster. These works were painted (ca. 1853–54) at Le Brouchy, his brother's home
outside of Lyon. Executed on an exterior wall, the paintings are now badly weathered.

Puvis's success in achieving a frescolike appearance for his murals using oils can be explained
by the combination of several techniques, starting with his grounds. Each library canvas was
primed with a fairly thin ground layer of white chalk in a glue medium (see appendix 1). Various
authors have described Puvis's grounds with the French term plâtre (plaster), which refers
generically to any sort of plaster, including lime and, hence, chalk. Grounds composed of chalk
and glue have been found on most of Puvis's murals analyzed to date (Galinier 1995). The role
of the ground in soaking up excess medium was duly noted in Puvis's time. According to one
author, it was this highly absorbent ground “which gives his work that dead surface” (Hamerton,
quoted in Crowninshield 1887, 105).

Two of Puvis's contemporaries also suggest how he achieved the particularly frescolike
appearance in his use of oil paints. According to the painter Frederic Crowninshield (1887), he

7 of 31
 http://cool.conservation-us.org/jaic/articles/jaic36-01-005.html

deadened his oils by adding spirits of turpentine. Paul Baudouin (1935) writes that Puvis drained
his oils by placing them on papier buvard (blotting paper). Baudouin also states emphatically
that Puvis never added anything to his paints (no siccatives, copal, varnish, or any other
ingredient). Each of these techniques, combined with the fond maigre (absorbent ground), would
obviously produce a lean, matte paint with little if any excess oil.

According to one contemporary observation, Puvis painted in “common oil-paints”

(Crowninshield 1887). This fact was confirmed by the discovery of some of Puvis's leftover
paint tubes in a paint box preserved by the artist's heirs at Le Brouchy (fig. 5). A list of the
various colors found in the paint box is included in table 1. Puvis purchased paint from several
different colormen and paint manufacturers in Paris. The tubes are tin with metal screw caps,
which would date them after 1865 when screw caps began to replace the corks previously in use
(Lefranc and Bourgeois 1990)(fig. 6). A box of six tubes is labeled “Exposition Universelle de
1889 Grand Prix.” Some of the tubes (from Gay and Lefranc) are labeled “ground in oil” while
those from Bourgeois Ainée are a “new preparation for painting in gouache.”

Fig. 5. Puvis de Chavannes's paint box at Le Brouchy.

Courtesy of the Straus Center for Conservation

8 of 31
 http://cool.conservation-us.org/jaic/articles/jaic36-01-005.html

Fig. 6. Paint tubes from Puvis's paint box at Le Brouchy. Courtesy of the StrausCenter for
Conservation

TABLE 1. TUBES OF PAINT FOUND IN PUVIS'S PAINT BOX AT LE BROUCHY

Numerous authors have also suggested that Puvis achieved a matte appearance by adding wax to
his painting medium. By the late 1840s, the use of wax was commonplace in French mural
painting. Delacroix (at St. Sulpice), Hippolyte Flandrin (at St. Germain-des-Près), and
Chasseriau (at St. Roch) all painted à la cire(Baudouin 1914). In this technique, wax was either
saponified with lime or dissolved in mineral spirits, making it usable without heat (Béguin
1981). According to his student Lasalle-Bordes, Delacroix added small amounts of wax to the
oils on his palette as he worked at L'Assemblée Nationale (Sérullaz 1995). There is no
documentary evidence that Puvis mixed wax with his oils in this manner. Indeed, no wax was
detected in the two samples from Puvis's Boston murals analyzed with gas chromatography (see
appendix 1). Furthermore, solubility problems were not encountered during the conservation
treatment of the murals. Wax was also not detected in samples taken from Puvis's murals at
Rouen. Other works by Puvis have, however, been found by analysis to contain a wax
component (Galinier 1995). This inconsistency in the use of wax has at least two possible
explanations. Either Puvis added wax to his medium in some works (perhaps especially his
earlier paintings) but not others, and/or wax was present as a component in some of the paint he
purchased commercially. Analysis of four samples from the paint found in Puvis's paint box
confirms that the latter theory is possible. Two of the samples contained wax, while the other two
did not (see appendix 1).

Puvis may or may not have been aware of the wax component in the tubes of paint he purchased.
One of the samples that contained wax is from a tube labeled “ground in oils” and gives no

9 of 31
 http://cool.conservation-us.org/jaic/articles/jaic36-01-005.html

indication of any wax additive. Carpentier (1875), among others, warned against mixing wax
and oil because the wax stops the oil from drying and the oil stops the wax from hardening. By
1897, Lefranc advertised an oil paint that was “completely solid” containing “not an atom of
wax” (Lefranc and Cie 1897). We can assume, therefore, that by the end of the 19th century,
fewer and fewer color manufacturers added wax to their oils.

To imitate the pale colors of fresco in his murals, Puvis painted in a very light key within a
narrow tonal range, “renouncing all the effects of depth belonging properly to oil” (Hamerton
1882, 336). Puvis was accused in his own day of starting “a contagion of white” (quoted in Price
1977, 25). Lead white was found as a major component in every layer of paint sampled at the
Boston Public Library (see appendix 2). Puvis kept the range of colors simple, limiting the
number of pigments used in each work and using them consistently within each painting. He
likely achieved this harmony in a process, described by his student Baudouin, of mixing large
amounts of “mother tones” (tons mères) in bowls (assiettes creuses) that he kept submerged in
water so that they would not dry out (Baudouin 1935, 302).

Puvis applied paint in a direct manner, often using just one or two layers. No glazes were
observed in the murals, and only one of the numerous cross sections taken revealed a third layer.
He textured his paint by various means: thick, dry impastos; thin, lean layers revealing the
coarse texture of the canvas; passages of thick paint scraped flat; and incisions and scratches
inscribed with various pointed tools or spatulas. Puvis also left some areas of canvas uncovered,
especially outlining figures and trees, which often reveal what appears to be a charcoal
underdrawing. The very few pentimenti visible in the Boston murals may well be explained by
his thorough preparation or by his practice of scraping off unwanted passages rather than
painting over them. Puvis recommended this practice to his followers: “Be fearful of useless
impastos which darken, turn bluish and heavy. When you have painted a passage that you
dislike, wait until it is possible to remove it. Judge it and if it is condemned, scrape it off firmly
with a palette knife…. Excess paint is an abomination. In twenty four hours the gold will change
to lead” (quoted in Vachon 1895, 57).

It is highly unlikely that Puvis applied a varnish to his mural works. Ultraviolet light
examination of his first mural cycle located at Le Brouchy has revealed that as early as the
1850s, Puvis chose not to apply a final varnish coating. The recent treatment and analysis of the
Boston murals detected no original resin coating. As with many other questions of technique,
Puvis appears to have written nothing at all about varnishing his paintings. His student
Baudouin, who notes that Puvis never added varnish to his paint mixtures, also makes no
mention of varnishing and adds that Puvis's Childhood of St. Genevieve (1876) in the Pantheon
“gives the total illusion of frescoes” (Baudouin 1935, 300).

The use of all these techniques produced the frescolike appearance so sought after by Puvis. He
firmly believed that murals should not dominate an architectural space. To that end, he created
paintings with minimal illusionistic depth by using light colors with unsaturated and unvarnished
surfaces. Puvis chose colors that would harmonize with the library's marble staircase, and he
flattened the figures and other elements to emphasize the two-dimensional nature of the wall.

10 of 31
 http://cool.conservation-us.org/jaic/articles/jaic36-01-005.html

In Boston, as in France, Puvis's gigantic canvases were mounted to the wall using marouflage.
The technique of affixing oil paintings on canvas to a wall or ceiling originated in 17th-century
France (Mora et al. 1984). Thus the artist could work in the comfort and privacy of his studio,
surrounded by his own paraphernalia. When the painting was finished it was usually rolled and
delivered to the site for installation by a mural hanger. In French, maroufle refers to the sticky
remnants of paint left in an artist's pots. The adhesive typically consisted of oils, resins, and
fillers mixed into a thick paste. By the beginning of the 19th century, céruse (lead carbonate) was
added to speed up the drying process (Mora et al. 1984, 157). For Puvis's murals at the library,
lead white was a major component in the mounting adhesive. Although Puvis was not involved
in the Boston installation, he did personally supervise the marouflaging of many of his murals in
France. Paintings marouflaged with lead white paste are extremely durable and often show no
signs of cracking.

Puvis's murals in Amiens and in the Boston Public Library were attached by first priming the
wall with an isolating layer of lead white in oil (d'Argencourt 1973, 253). When the primer had
dried, both the wall and the back of the canvas were coated with a layer of the marouflage paste.
The canvas was then attached using hand rollers to work out wrinkles, air pockets, and excess
paste (Mayer 1957, 34). The task of mounting an immense canvas such as The Inspiring Muses
was obviously not without problems. Although very close, the huge canvas did not register
exactly, especially in the arches where portions of the tacking margin were used to extend the
canvas. Air pockets that formed during the installation were slit open and additional adhesive
was inserted. Along some of the canvas edges, metal tacks were driven through the painting to
ensure contact while the adhesive dried. These edges, together with the extended edges in the
arches, were repainted in oils, most likely by Victor Koos after the installation.

4 CONSERVATION

Documentary evidence indicates that Puvis's murals were restored on at least three previous
occasions. The first documented treatment occurred in 1930 when they were cleaned and coated
by Charles Durham. Commenting on that early restoration, Edward Forbes wrote that “the
protective surface that was put on … was a mixture of the white of egg combined with some
other ingredients, which makes a sort of varnish and has given the paintings a slight gloss”
(Forbes 1940). In 1940, the restorer R. Arcadius Lyon cleaned the murals with a weak solution
of castile soap (sodium carbonate and olive oil) and water. At that time he found that the
previously applied egg white coating was tough and well adhered and that it did not respond well
to his cleaning efforts. Fearing possible damage to the paint layers, he chose not to try stronger
cleaning solutions and decided to leave the coating on the surface (Forbes 1940). Finally,
Finlayson Brothers restored the murals in 1953, but they do not appear to have left any
documentation of the treatment.

As part of a major restoration program for the library, the murals were scheduled for

11 of 31
 http://cool.conservation-us.org/jaic/articles/jaic36-01-005.html

conservation in 1994. They were generally in a very good state of preservation but did require
surface cleaning, consolidation of minor flaking, and retouching of minor abrasions. During the
early phase of the renovation, however, an unfortunate event necessitated the immediate
conservation treatment of The Inspiring Muses. In the early morning hours of February 3, 1992,
the painting was badly damaged by water condensing on its surface as a result of an accidental
steam valve release. Fortunately, the other eight murals on the staircase were not damaged, as
they had been covered with multilayer barriers to protect them from the renovation work. Kate
Olivier, who was the first conservator from the Straus Center for Conservation to arrive at the
scene, found the area still full of hot, white steam and described it as “like being in a Turkish
bath.” The first RH reading, taken that morning shortly after 9:00 a.m. was 87%, but it surely
must have been very near 100% earlier that morning. Fans were installed in the staircase
windows to extract the damp air. By midafternoon the RH had dropped to 77%, and by the next
morning it had dropped to 55%. Later, a protective polyethylene barrier was draped around the
scaffolding in front of the mural, and humidifiers were placed in the enclosure to control the
humidity level.

The steam caused three specific types of damage. The most serious was extensive lifting and
tenting of the paint layers that affected approximately 40% of the painting (fig. 7). Most of the
damage occurred on the right half of the mural; fewer and smaller sections were affected on the
left half. Why this occurred is not entirely clear, but a likely explanation is that variations in air
currents increased the amount of water condensation on the right. Fortunately, the canvas did not
shrink very much because of its strong attachment to the wall. The areas of lifting varied in
severity over the surface of the painting. The worst damage occurred along the bottom edge,
where most of the water collected, and in the blue areas on the right side of the mural. There was
moderate flaking in the middle section and minor flaking in the upper section. Generally, the
white paint layers exhibited less damage because of their greater thickness and the slow
absorption of water by lead white. In spite of their critical condition, the paint layers remained
surprisingly intact with very few visible losses. A second serious consequence of the water
condensation was overall blanching and the formation of dark vertical stains over much of the
paint surface. As the warm water ran down the mural, it dissolved surface material that was
re-deposited and dried in the form of disfiguring drip marks (fig. 9). The third problem
encountered was the detachment of small areas of canvas from the wall (fig. 11). These areas
were located near the bottom of the mural where the water had collected and in six of the cuts
made by the mural installation crew in 1895.

12 of 31
 http://cool.conservation-us.org/jaic/articles/jaic36-01-005.html

Fig. 7. Detail of an area of tented cleavage caused by

steam damage in The Inspiring Muses. Courtesy of the
Boston Public Library. Before treatment

Fig. 9. Detail of stains and drip marks on The Inspiring Muses. Before
treatment

13 of 31
 http://cool.conservation-us.org/jaic/articles/jaic36-01-005.html

Fig. 11. Detail of detached canvas around an original

installation slit in the arm of one of the Muses, before
treatment. Also visible is the extensive cleavage in the
surrounding paint layers.

Given the urgency of the situation, consolidation tests were begun immediately. Access to the
entire surface of the mural was provided by the fixed scaffolding that had been installed for other
renovation activities. Of the many adhesives considered, the two adhesives finally selected for
testing on the mural were sturgeon glue and BEVA 371. Both were effective in readhering the
paint layers. The BEVA 371, however, held the flaking paint more effectively during the removal
of the excess adhesive. In addition, it would not be affected by water-based cleaning solutions
that would later be required to remove the surface grime and stains; it would not cause further
canvas shrinkage during application; and it would be less affected by fluctuations in temperature
and relative humidity.

The BEVA 371 adhesive, diluted (1:1) in benzine and heated to increase its flow and penetrating
properties, was applied to the affected areas with sable brushes. Because of the vertical surface,
the adhesive did not always flow easily under all of the flaking paint. To assist penetration into
difficult areas, benzine was lightly sprayed onto the paint surface to wet it out before applying
the BEVA 371. Two or three applications of the adhesive were required in most areas to ensure

14 of 31
 http://cool.conservation-us.org/jaic/articles/jaic36-01-005.html

adequate consolidation. The BEVA 371 was allowed to dry at least 24 hours prior to paint
reattachment using Willard heated spatulas. The severity and extent of the flaking over the mural
made this a difficult and lengthy procedure, but in the end the paint layers were successfully
readhered (fig. 8). Then a xylenes/water emulsion was applied by brush to remove the excess
BEVA 371 adhesive (for the formula, see appendix 3). The emulsion and the gelled and partially
dissolved BEVA 371 were then lifted from the paint surface with dry cotton wads. This
procedure reduced the amount of solvent penetrating into the paint layers that might otherwise
have dissolved the adhesive. The emulsion had the added advantage of removing some of the
less tenacious grime layers. To eliminate the possibility of continued solvent action on the paint
layers, the emulsion residues were rinsed several times with water-moistened cotton wads. Once
dry, the paint surface was rinsed with benzine and cotton wads.

Fig. 8. Detail of The Inspiring Muses. Scale is 1:1 with fig.

7. After treatment

After the consolidation was complete, the fixed staging was replaced in favor of rolling
scaffolding, which allowed more flexibility and the ability to view the work as a whole. The
steam had completely disrupted the grime layers and surface coating (fig. 9). Even before the
steam damage occurred, the surface grime was known to be difficult to remove, t attempts to
clean the mural were further complicated by the redeposited drips. Coating samples were

15 of 31
 http://cool.conservation-us.org/jaic/articles/jaic36-01-005.html

analyzed with Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR), and distinct amide groups for
protein were found (see appendix 2). The source of the amide groups is most likely the egg white
coating that was applied in the early restoration but could possibly be a component of animal
glue extracted by the steam from the canvas support. To date, no further analysis has been
carried out on these samples. Numerous cleaning solutions and solvents routinely used in
painting conservation were tested without success. A cleaning solution recently devised by
Richard Wolbers was tried and, unlike the others, gave very encouraging results. The
effectiveness of this solution was confirmed by an ultraviolet fluorescence staining analysis
undertaken by Wolbers (see appendix 3). Further testing indicated that if the solution were used
in a controlled manner, the surface grime and blanched remnants of egg white coating could be
effectively and safely removed. The solution also caused no noticeable blanching of the paint
layers, a finding that had important implications for 74 later decisions concerning the possible
application of a protective coating. The solution was a citrate and detergent gel, buffered to a pH
of 8.5 (for the formula, see appendix 3). The cleaning gel solution was brushed onto the mural
and gently worked over the surface for approximately 10 to 15 seconds (fig. 12). Much of the
grime and staining was dislodged during this first application, which was removed from the paint
surface with large dry wads of cotton. Several more applications of the gel were required to
remove the grime and surface coating remnants (fig. 13). Finally, the mural was rinsed several
times with water followed by petroleum benzine (fig. 10).

Fig. 10. Detail of The Inspiring Muses. Scale is 1:1 with fig. 9. After
treatment

16 of 31
 http://cool.conservation-us.org/jaic/articles/jaic36-01-005.html

Fig. 12. Catherine Rogers applying the diammonium citrate gel solution on
the surface of The Inspiring Muses

Fig. 13. Detail of The Inspiring Muses during the removal

of surface grime and stains

17 of 31
 http://cool.conservation-us.org/jaic/articles/jaic36-01-005.html

A number of conservators and conservation scientists have expressed concerns about the use of
some of Wolbers's cleaning solutions. They question the solubility effects of various components
on the paint layers, the difficulties of clearing surface residues, and the long-term effects of
residues that might remain on the paint layers. These issues led to repeated, painstaking rinsing
of the mural surface. Given its size and the quantities of cleaning solution used, it is still possible
that some residues remain. However, no other cleaning solution was found to remove the
accumulated grime and staining.

In the white drapery of the Muses the redeposited accretions and streaks were also removed, but
it became evident after cleaning that the paint layers had been darkened slightly by the
condensing steam. While the nature of this darkening effect was not determined, possible causes
include: (1) the conversion of lead carbonate into lead sulfide, which is typically seen in fresco
paintings, (2) the much rarer conversion of lead carbonate into lead dioxide (Gettens et al. 1967),
and (3) the recrystallization of the lead carbonate, which would give it a darkened appearance.
Attempts were made to convert what was thought to be darkened lead sulfide into lead sulfate
(white form) using hydrogen peroxide. The very limited success of this procedure suggested that
lead sulfide was not present, and this conclusion was later confirmed by analysis.

The detached canvas areas were plasticized by the application of local moisture and pressure. To
apply the necessary pressure, a jig made from a veneer press was secured to the scaffolding
using C-clamps (fig. 14). Dampened blotters, sections of foam (to allow the blotter to conform to
the distortion), and a Masonite board were placed against the delaminated canvas, and gentle
pressure was exerted. After some 40 minutes the paint and canvas were sufficiently plasticized,
and the dampened blotters and foam were removed. They were replaced with dry blotters, a 1/4
in. thick Ethafoam section, and a Masonite board and left in place overnight to allow the canvas
to dry flat. The detached canvas was then readhered to the wall with Jade 403 (polyvinyl acetate
emulsion), and the adhesive was allowed to set under the pressure of Mylar, blotters, and
Masonite board for 24 hours. Although Jade 403 is basically an irreversible adhesive, it is
sufficiently weaker than the lead white paste and was chosen for its strength and flexibility.

18 of 31
 http://cool.conservation-us.org/jaic/articles/jaic36-01-005.html

Fig. 14. Pressure jig applied to the arm of a Muse to

readhere a pocket of detached canvas (see fig. 11 for
detail)

In comparison to the scale of the mural, the losses were small and relatively few. Filling of the
losses was not necessary since they occurred in the thinnest paint layers and thus would not be
noticeable from a normal viewing distance. The losses and irreversible remnants of the drip
marks were inpainted with Bocour Magna Colors (fig. 15). These paints were chosen for their
reversibility and appropriate degree of opacity to match the original colors. Although the colors
have been discontinued, the Straus Center for Conservation still has a full complement.
Retouchings that dried too matte were glazed and adjusted with Acryloid B-72 in xylenes.

19 of 31
 http://cool.conservation-us.org/jaic/articles/jaic36-01-005.html

Fig. 15. Detail of one of the nine Muses after inpainting

Once conservation of The Inspiring Muses was completed, treatment proceeded on the other
eight murals in the staircase. Apart from Philosophy, which has had a history of structural
problems, these murals were in good condition and required very little consolidation. Surface
grime was thick throughout, but especially obscuring in the murals nearest the windows (fig. 16).
The consolidation, cleaning, and retouching of these murals was carried out using the same
methods and materials described for the treatment of The Inspiring Muses.

20 of 31
 http://cool.conservation-us.org/jaic/articles/jaic36-01-005.html

Fig. 16. Aeschylus during the removal of surface grime

Although the Boston murals were not originally varnished, consideration was given to the
possibility of applying a protective coating. Issues of public accessibility, vandalism (thus far not
a problem), and the redeposition of grime were the main concerns. Natural resins and most
synthetics were considered but rejected because of their high saturating properties and poor
aging characteristics. Acryloid B-72 was chosen for testing because of its stability and lower
saturating properties. It was applied by brush in concentrations ranging from 2 to 6% in xylenes.
It was clear to conservators and art historians who were consulted that varnishing would impart
far too much saturation and gloss to be aesthetically acceptable. Another concern was the
solubility effect that aromatic hydrocarbon solvents would have on the BEVA 371 that was used
to consolidate the paint layers should it become necessary to remove the varnish in future
treatments. Furthermore, Puvis's clear desire for a matte surface dictated that the murals should
remain unvarnished. After the grand staircase was reopened to the public, low display cases were
placed against the dado below The Inspiring Muses to create a partial barrier between the mural
and visitors to the library.

21 of 31
 http://cool.conservation-us.org/jaic/articles/jaic36-01-005.html

5 CONCLUSIONS

The conservation decisions that were reached were based on the scale and urgency of the
problems faced. Using the citrate and detergent gel solution proved to be the safest and most
effective way of removing the surface grime and the worst effects of the stains and drip marks.
Although concerns about the effect of this solution on paint layers should not be ignored, in this
instance its positive attributes were decisive. An important factor was that it caused no
blanching, thus eliminating the need for varnish.

Puvis's skillful and remarkable integration of a mural cycle into a complex space for a building
he never saw is a testament to his unusual abilities. While it is recognized that Puvis's images
had a significant influence on 20th-century painting, the impact of his highly individual painting
technique has not been adequately acknowledged. Painting in oils on canvas, he combined
various methods and materials to imitate the matte appearance of frescoes. He used coarse
canvases, absorbent grounds, drained oils, pigments mixed with large amounts of white, and a
variety of texturing techniques. Contrary to common practice in the first half of 19th-century
France, he did not add varnish and other ingredients to his medium, nor did he apply a final
varnish coating to his murals. His role in the introduction of these innovative techniques, which
became common practice in this century, warrants further investigation.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors are greatly indebted to Richard Newman, who analyzed
the binding media and compiled appendix 1, and to Richard Wolbers, who produced appendix 3
and without whose research the treatment of the murals would not have been so successful. We
are also extremely grateful to David Bomford, Yvonne Hoppenot, Hayden Maginnis, Anne
Roquebert, Hubert de Truchis de Lays, Amy Snodgrass, and especially Aimée Brown Price for
their invaluable support and assistance. For their tireless work, enthusiasm, and efficiency we
would like to thank our conservation colleagues Nancy Buschini, Lenora Rosenfield, Danica
Stojkovikova, Lydia Vagts, Nancy Garrison, and particularly Catherine Rogers, who was
indispensable throughout the entire project. Finally, we would like to acknowledge the support of
the Boston Public Library and the architectural firm Shepley, Bulfinch, Richardson, and Abbott,
and to thank the National Endowment for the Arts for funding the professional development
grant.

Photographs are reproduced courtesy of the Trustees of the Public Library of the City of Boston
and the Boston Public Library, Print Department.

APPENDIX

22 of 31
 http://cool.conservation-us.org/jaic/articles/jaic36-01-005.html

1 APPENDIX 1

1.1 BINDING MEDIA OF THE MURALS

1.1.1 Ground

A sample of the ground was hydrolyzed, derivatized with phenylisothiocyanate, and analyzed for
amino acids by high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) following Waters
Chromatography “Pico Tag” method. Analyses were carried out on a Waters instrument that
consisted of two 510 pumps, a manual injector, and 991M photo diode array detector. The amino
pattern closely matched that of collagen, with the exception of considerably reduced glutamic
and aspartic acid levels; these amino acids are typically lost during sample preparation when
calcium carbonate is present, as was the case in the ground sample (Halpine 1992). Another
portion of the ground was saponified in 10% KOH in methanol, the solution neutralized and then
extracted twice with ether. Ether extracts were combined, evaporated to dryness, redissolved in a
small amount of methylene chloride, and methylated with 10 μl dimethylformamide dimethyl
acetal (Pierce Chemical Co.). Analysis was carried out by gas chromatography—mass
spectrometry (GC-MS) on a Hewlett Packard 5890 capillary gas chromatograph equipped with
an HP 5971A mass selective detector. The sample was found to contain traces of palmitic and
stearic acids, which are typical contaminants in animal glues. It is also possible that these fatty
acids came from the overlying oil paint layer.

1.1.2 Paint Binder

Two samples were saponified and analyzed by GC-MS as described above. While traces of
hydrocarbons were detected, such as those characteristic of hydrocarbon waxes such as ceresin,
the very low levels suggest that they may simply be contaminants in the oil and not indicative of
wax intentionally added by the paint manufacturer. Traces of methyl dehydroabietate, an
oxidation product commonly found in aged pine resins, were also detected in the two samples.
The level was extremely low, so it cannot be concluded that pine resin was an intentional
component of the paint. Ratios of the C9 and C8 dicarboxylic acids (diC9/C8) suggest that the
oil was not heat-bodied. The palmitic/stearic acid ratios (P/S) are somewhat high for linseed oil;
possibly the oil was walnut or a mixture of linseed and poppyseed. Poppyseed was identified in
all four samples from the tubes of paint (see next section).

23 of 31
 http://cool.conservation-us.org/jaic/articles/jaic36-01-005.html

1.1.3 Tube Paints

Four partially dried samples from tubes preserved from Puvis's studio by his heirs were analyzed
by GC-MS as described above. The oil in each appears to be poppyseed, based on the high
palmitic/stearic acid ratios (P/S). Two samples contained substantial amounts of straight-chain
hydrocarbons in the C22-C32 range, maximizing at C26. This hydrocarbon pattern is typical of
ceresin wax. The results were as follows (when two analyses were carried out, P/S ratios from
both are given):

2 APPENDIX 2

2.1 ANALYSIS OF THE PIGMENTS, MAROUFLAGE ADHESIVE, AND

STAINS

2.1.1 Pigments

Nine paint samples were selected for analysis, including two greens, one red, four blues, and two
whites. Cross sections of the paint samples were examined using a Leitz Laborlux biological
microscope fitted with visible and ultraviolet light sources. The cross sections were prepared by
imbedding the paint samples in cubes of bioplastic polyester resin, which were subsequently cut
and polished with micromesh polishing cloths to reveal the structure of the paint layers. The
cross sections were analyzed for their elemental composition using a JEOL 6400 scanning
electron microscope with a Noran Instruments Z Max 30 Series light x-ray energy dispersive
x-ray spectrometer (SEM-EDX). Sample sites were analyzed for 100 counts at an accelerating
voltage of 20 kilo electron volts (keV). Standardless quantitative analysis was performed by the
calibrated voyager quantitative microanalysis system using ZAF matrix corrections. Fourier
transform infrared microspectroscopy (FTIR) was performed using a Spectra-Tech IR-Plan
microscope attached to a Nicolet 510M spectrometer with an auxiliary MCT detector. Samples
were mounted for analysis on a Spectra-Tech Micro Sample Plan fitted with a diamond window,
and data were collected for 200 scans at a spectral resolution of 8 cm−1. The resulting spectra
were viewed in absorbance mode between 625 and 4000 wave numbers, and for consistency the
CO2 peak was removed and the spectra were baseline corrected.

Pigments were identified by microscopy and SEM-EDX (see table). Analyses showed that lead
white was used throughout the painting as highlights and aa matrix for the colors. For example,

24 of 31
 http://cool.conservation-us.org/jaic/articles/jaic36-01-005.html

the highlight from The Inspiring Muses is lead white over a gray layer composed of lead white
modified with ultramarine, red oxide, emerald green, and carbon black. The principal green
pigments used were emerald green (copper aceto-arsenite) and green earth (hydrous iron,
magnesium, and aluminum potassium silicate). Emerald green was found in the grass of
Philosophy and in the initial green layer of the foreground of the Muses, together with green
earth. The upper layer of the foreground of the Muses contains particles of green earth in a lead
white matrix. The principal blues found were cobalt blue (cobalt aluminate) and synthetic
ultramarine (sodium aluminum silicate). The water for the Muses was ultramarine mixed with
lead white, black, and red in one simple layer. The blue sky in both Chemistry and Aeschylus is
cobalt blue mixed with lead white. The blue water of Aeschylus was applied in two layers:
ultramarine blue and lead white overlaid by cobalt blue and lead white. Four reds were
identified: vermilion (mercuric sulfide), red lake on an aluminum substrate, red ochre, and red
lead. History's red robe is built up from a layer of lead white and red ochre followed by a layer
containing lead white, calcite, and vermilion. Red lake was found as a minor component of the
green grass in the Muses.

The yellowish white ground was identified by SEM-EDX and FTIR as chalk with a
proteinaceous binding medium. A small amount of oil was also identified in the ground, which
could account for the yellow color of the ground.

2.1.2 Marouflage Adhesive

The marouflage adhesive, which holds the canvas onto the wall, was analyzed by SEM-EDX and
FTIR. The sample showed absorbances for lead white, oil, and lead carboxylate (a byproduct of
the aging of lead white in the presence of oil).

2.1.3 Drip from Surface of The Inspiring Muses

A drip stain was sampled from the surface of the Muses. FTIR analysis showed major
absorbances for protein and lead white. There was a minor absorbance at 1076 wavenumbers
that was unidentified.

3 APPENDIX 3

3.1 UV FLUORESCENCE STAINING ANALYSIS OF PAINT SAMPLES

FROM THE INSPIRING MUSES AND CLEANING FORMULAS

25 of 31
 http://cool.conservation-us.org/jaic/articles/jaic36-01-005.html

Samples of The Inspiring Muses were taken in an attempt to characterize the drip and stains and
the accumulation of grime on the surface of the paint. Samples were also taken from similar
areas before and after grime and accretion removal tests to evaluate the effects of the cleaning
solution. These were mounted in Ward's Bioplast and sent to Richard Wolbers for ultraviolet
fluorescence analysis and photomicrography. Twelve samples were viewed and photographed in
the following sequence: normal light, UV only, UV stained with 4% triphenyl tetrazolium
chloride in methanol (TTC), UV stained with .25% rhodamine isothiocyanate in acetone (RITC),
and UV stained with .20% rhodamine 123 in acetone (RHO 123).

The results of the examination can be summarized as follows:

3.1.1 Samples of Paint with Surface Bloom but No Deposit from Steam Drips

Boston Public Library (BPL) 1. Green paint. The green paint stained with RHO 123 (for oils)
and with TTC (carbohydrates), signaling both materials and therefore potentially water soluble
components in the binder. Apart from a single droplet of a noncharacterized material (negative
staining with the stains listed above) and a substantial and continuous grime layer, no other
surface-accumulated materials were observed.

BPL 3. White paint. The white paint stained only lightly with RHO 123. Little accumulation of
grime was noted on the surface, which was slightly autofluorescent, indicating normal aging on
the surface.

BPL 5. Blue paint. The blue paint stained RHO 123 positive (oil), but, as in sample BPL 1, there
was a slight reaction with TTC (carbohydrate) as well. The surface is obviously aged
(autofluorescent) and grime-laden, but no additional deposits were noted on the paint surface.

3.1.2 Samples of Paint with Deposits from Steam Drips

Three samples of the green, white, and blue paint (BPL 2,4, and 6) all exhibited obvious
autofluorescent “deposits” along the surface and above the grime layer under UV light. The
morphology of the deposited materials was noncrystalline (organic) in nature and may have
signaled the extraction and redeposition of a discrete layer of polar organic material. However,
this material was negative for all of the applied stains.

3.1.3 Samples of Paint After Cleaning with Wolbers Diammonium citrate-

chelating/ionic strength solution

26 of 31
 http://cool.conservation-us.org/jaic/articles/jaic36-01-005.html

Three samples of the green, blue, and white paint (BPL 7, 8, and 9) all showed undisrupted
surfaces after cleaning with Wolbers's diammonium citrate-chelating/ionic strength solution.

4 FORMULAS

Xylenes/water emulsion formula (for the removal of BEVA 371 adhesive and less tenacious
grime layers):

50 ml xylenes, 20 ml Triton X-100, 30 ml water, 2 ml triethanolamine (the aqueous

phase was adjusted with dilute HCl acid to a pH of 8.5 prior to emulsification)

Diammonium citrate-chelating/ionic strength solution (for the removal of surface grime and
stains):

100 ml water, .5 g deoxycholic acid, 5 ml triethanolamine, 1 g ammonium chloride,

1 g diammonium citrate, .05 g Triton X-100, 1.5 g hydroxypropyl-methyl-cellulose
(adjusted with HCl acid to a pH of 8.5)

REFERENCES

Baudouin, P.1914. La fresque: Sa technique, ses applications. Paris: Librairie Centrale des
Beaux-Arts.

Baudouin, P.1935. Souvenirs sur Puvis de Chavannes. Gazette des Beaux Arts(Paris)13:
295–314.

Béguin, A.1981. Dictionnaire technique de la peinture. Paris: Audré Béguin.

Carpentier, P.1875. Notes sur la peinture à la cire cautérisée ou procédé encaustique, d'âprés les
laborieuses recherches de Paillot de Montabert. Paris: Librairie Renouard, Rue de Tournon.

Crowninshield, F.1887. Mural painting. Boston: Ticknor and Co.

d'Argencourt, L.1973. Les peintures murales de Puvis de Chavannes au Musée de Picardie.

Thesis, Université de Paris, Sorbonne.

d'Argencourt, L., M.-C.Boucher, D.Druick, and J.Foucart, eds.1977. Puvis de Chavannes.

Exhibition catalog. Ottawa: National Gallery of Canada.

27 of 31
 http://cool.conservation-us.org/jaic/articles/jaic36-01-005.html

Esch, E.1982. The decorative program of the Boston Public Library. Honors thesis, Harvard
University.

Forbes, E. W.1940. Letter to Robert Bellows, February 1. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University
Art Museums.

Galinier, C.1995. La décoration de l'escalier du Musée des Beaux-Arts de Lyon. Unpublished

monograph. Service de Restauration des Musées de France, Versailles.

Gautier, T.1861. Abécédaire du salon de 1861. Paris.

Geffroy, G.1897. La vie artistique, vol. 5, ed.H.Floury. Paris.

Gettens, R.J., H.Kuhn, and W. T.Chase. 1967. Lead white. Studies in Conservation12: 125–39.

Halpine, S. M.1992. Amino acid analysis of proteinaceous media from Cosimo Tura'sThe
Annunciation with Saint Frances and Saint Louis of Toulouse. Studies in Conservation37:
22–38.

Hamerton, P. G.1882. The graphic arts: A treatise on the varieties of drawing, painting, and
engraving in comparison with each other and with nature. Boston: Roberts Brothers.

Lefranc and Bourgeois. 1990. Le livre des couleurs. Le Mans: Lefranc and Bourgeois.

Lefranc and Cie. 1897. Les couleurs et lesvernis de J-G Vibert. Notes et renseignements sur les
produits préparés pour la peinture artistique d'après les procédés de J-G Vibert. Paris: Lefranc
and Cie.

Mayer, R.1970. The artist's handbook of materials and techniques. New York: Viking Press.

Milner, J.1988. The studios of Paris: The capital of art in the late nineteenth century. New
Haven and London: Yale University Press.

Mora, P., Mora, L., and Philippot, P.1994. The conservation of wall paintings. London.

Price, A. B.1977. The decorative aesthetic in the Work of Pierre Puvis de Chavannes. In Pierre
Puvis de Chavannes, ed.L.d'Argencourt et al. Ottawa: National Gallery of Canada.

Price, A. B.1994. Pierre Puvis de Chavannes. Amsterdam: Van Gogh Museum.

Sérullaz, A.1995. Delacroix à l'Assemblée Nationale.Paris: Assemblée Nationale.

28 of 31
 http://cool.conservation-us.org/jaic/articles/jaic36-01-005.html

FURTHER READING

Cartwright, J.1896. Puvis de Chavannes. Art Journal. 190–92.

Farell, E., and A.Snodgrass. 1992–94. Analytical reports on the Boston Public Library murals.
Straus Center for Conservation, Cambridge, Mass.

Moore, C.1929. The life and times of Charles Follen McKim. Boston and New York: Houghton
Mifflin Co.

Newman, R.1993. Analytical reports on the Boston Public Library murals. Research Laboratory,
Museum of Fine Arts, Boston.

Puvisde, Chavannes. 1896. Description of the decorative paintings of Puvis de Chavans. Boston
Public Library.

Sharp, W.1898. Puvis de Chavannes: An appreciation. Art Journal. 377–378.

Vachon, M.1895. Puvis de Chavannes. Paris.

Wattenmaker, R.1975. Puvis de Chavannes and the modern tradition. Toronto: Art Gallery of
Ontario.

SOURCES OF MATERIALS

BEVA 371

Conservator's Products, P.O. Box 411, Chatham, N.J. 07928

Acryloid B-72

Rohm and Haas Co., Philadelphia, Pa. Supplied by Conservation Materials, 1165 Marietta Way
Sparks, Nev. 89431

Deoxycholic acid Triethanolamine Citric acid-diammonium salt Triton X-100 Hydroxypropyl-

methyl-cellulose Triphenyl tetrazolium chloride (TTC) Rhodamine isothiocyanate (RITC)

Sigma Chemical, P.O. Box 14508, St. Louis, Mo. 63178

Ammonium chloride

29 of 31
 http://cool.conservation-us.org/jaic/articles/jaic36-01-005.html

Mallinckrodt Specialty Chemicals, Paris, Ky. 40361

Hydrochloric acid (reagent A.C.S.)

Fisher Scientific, Springfield, N.J. 07081

Mylar (.0005 in.)

Talas, 213 West 35th St., New York, N.Y. 10001

Magna Colors

Bocour Artists Colors, New York, N.Y. 10019

Willard heated spatula

Willard Developments, Leigh Road, Chichester, West Sussex P019 2T3, U.K.

Rhodamine 123 (RHO123)

Kodak Laboratory and Research Products, Rochester, N.Y. 14650

AUTHOR INFORMATION

TERI HENSICK has been a paintings conservator at the Straus Center for Conservation,
Harvard University Art Museums, since 1980. She holds a B.A. (Phi Beta Kappa) in art history
from Wellesley College and trained in paintings conservation in Florence (Universita
Internationale dell'Arte), Zurich (Swiss Institute for Art Research), and Nuremberg
(Germanisches Nationalmuseum). She interned in paintings conservation at the Harvard
University Art Museums in 1976–77 and was assistant and subsequently associate conservator of
paintings at the Detroit Institute of Arts from 1977 to 1980. In 1995 she spent two months in
France researching Puvis de Chavannes's materials and techniques with the support of a National
Endowment for the Arts professional development grant. Address: Straus Center for
Conservation, Harvard University Art Museums, 32 Quincy St., Cambridge, Mass. 02138.

KATE OLIVIER received her training at the Courtauld Institute of Art from 1962 to 1965. She
worked for six months in Florence following the flood in 1966 and one year in Venice on
paintings by Tintoretto. As a private conservator in London she worked regularly for the
Department of the Environment, the Royal College of Music, and private conservator Patrick
Lindsay. From 1974 to 1976 she was assistant painting conservator at the Winterthur Museum,
Delaware. She has been a conservator at the Fogg Art Museum since 1977. Address: Fogg Art
Museum, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass. 02138.

30 of 31
 http://cool.conservation-us.org/jaic/articles/jaic36-01-005.html

GIANFRANCO POCOBENE received his master of arts in conservation from the Art
Conservation Program, Queen's University, in 1984. He was assistant conservator at the Art
Conservation Laboratory in Raymond, New Hampshire, from 1984 to 1985. He returned to
Queen's to conserve paintings from the university collection from 1985 to 1988. During that time
he also worked on paintings from the Alfred Bader Collection and on several mural projects in
Canada. From 1988 to 1989 he was a paintings conservation intern at the Center for
Conservation, Fogg Art Museum. Upon completion of his internship he became assistant
paintings conservator. He is currently associate conservator of paintings at the Straus Center for
Conservation, Harvard University Art Museums. Address: Straus Center for Conservation,
Harvard University Art Museums, 32 Quincy St., Cambridge, Mass. 02138.

Section Index

Copyright © 1997 American Institute for Conservation of Historic and Artistic Works

31 of 31