Ressurreição de Cristo – Panel from the XVI century, Museu de Arte Sacra da Sé de

Évora. A repainted painting – dating and treatment (1974-2008)

Esteves, Lília Maria1

Leite, Raul Adalberto2
1
Laboratório de Conservação e Restauro – José de Figueiredo
2
Departamento de Conservação e Restauro
Instituto dos Museus e da Conservação
Rua das Janelas Verdes, Lisboa, Portugal

Abstract
The damaged painting came to the ex-Instituto José de Figueiredo, in the year of 1974, with extensive
problems of no adherence of the paint layer as well as lacunae and repaints.
Concerning the cleaning of the painting, the option the restorers choose in the seventies was to remove
the repaints. But in some localized places, as there was no more original painting, they did not remove it.
The stabilization of the paint layer was a problem through years. Now a compromise solution was
undertaken: the masticage and the retouching of the lacunae have not been total (see Fig.1).
The wood identification of the support panels, in this case oak, allow their dendrochronological study,
based on the tree-rings measuring.

1. INTRODUCTION
Only few works of art come to us, trough centuries, untouched. So, when they arrive to the
hands of a conservator-restorer, it has on itself not only the natural alterations of the materials
but it also shows all the accidents and repairs it has.
Conservation or restoration?
These two ideas that today look so different – even if sometimes, from same points of view,
they do not look so different – they did not always exist.
If a painting was damaged it was send, or someone come, to repair, paint or restore it.
When this painting came to the ex-Instituto José de Figueiredo, in the year of 1974, the painting
had extensive problems of no adherence of the paint layer as well as lacunae and repaints (see
Fig. 2).
Concerning the cleaning of the painting, the option the restorers choose in the seventies was to
remove the repaints. But in some localized places, as there was no more original painting, they
did not remove it.
The stabilization of the paint layer was a problem through years.
The masticage and the retouching of the lacunae have not been total - a compromise solution
was undertaken. Other problem was that the paint was also used as an object for scholar
practical exercise for conservation-restorer’s pupils and so the result was, that in different areas,
the painting offered different characteristics of retouching.
To finish the work and give it back to the Museum it was necessary a revision not only of the
masticage as well as the uniformization of the final retouching too.

Dendrochronology is an important method of dating using the tree rings measurements. It dates
the wood, not the painting, but if the wood is newer than the painting, we can say without doubt
that the painting is more recent than its attribution.

2. METHODOLOGY
2.1. Conservation
The painting arrived with many problems: burned by candles (see Fig. 3), blistering on the
pictorial layer (see Fig. 4), wet rot with cuboidal cracking (see Fig. 5), fungus on the painting
surface (see Fig. 6) and damages by woodboring anobiid beetles (see Fig. 7).
Curiously still exists a barb, accumulation of the ground layer, due to an original frame (see Fig.
8) that has nothing to do with the actual frame.
The support has been consolidated, the masticage and the retouching of the lacunae have been
made in some places (see Fig. 9), the pictorial layer was fixed and cleaned and all the painting
has been treated with fungicide.

2.2. Datation
The boards of oak are prepared and marked to see the rings (see Fig. 10). After, the rings are
measured with a manual loupe with a scale inside (see Fig. 11). With the obtained values,
graphics are made in paper, to match between them to see if the boards are from the same tree
(see Fig. 12). The values are also introduced in the computer (see Fig. 13) to match with a
master chronology of the same geographic origin. The oak of the Portuguese panels generally
came from the Baltic region, so we can date them, matching with the chronologies of this
region, using the TsapX program (see Fig. 14).
The obtained value of the latest ring is an exact year. But to date the panel we must add to this
value the sapwood rings (9-36, median 15) and a storage time (2 to 10 years). So the value we
add is a statistical figure.
In this painting “Ressurreição de Cristo”, made of six boards, we measured four, the other two
where not in good conditions. As we can see (see Tab. 1), 1551 is the more recent and an exact
year. Adding the necessary parameters (sapwood 15 years and storage time 2 years) to this value
we obtain the probable date from which the painting it would be made (1568).

2. 3. Figures and tables

Figure 1 – “Ressurreição de Cristo” after treatment.

Figure 2 – “Ressurreição de Cristo” before treatment.

Figure 3 – “Ressurreição de Cristo” – Detail from the inferior left corner, burned by candles.
 Figure 4 – Blistering on the pictorial layer.

Figure 5 – Wet rot with cuboidal cracking.

Figure 6 – Fungus on the surface.

Figure 7 – Damages by woodboring anobiid beetles.

Figure 8 – Barb - accumulation of the ground layer due to the original frame.

Figure 9 – The masticage, as well the retouching, was partial.

 Figure 10 – Wood of one panel marked to the tree-rings measuring.

Figure 11 – Measuring consecutive rings with a loupe with a scale inside.

Figure 12 – Graphic of two panels measures superimposed, where we can observe its analogy and to
conclude that the panels are made with wood from the same tree.

(a) (b)
Figure 13 – Graphics (a) and datings (b) obtained by informatics methods, for one of the panels of this
painting.

Figure 14 – Match of the dates with TsapX program.

Table 1: Dates obtained measuring the boards.

Boards Obtained values
Board I Not measured
Board II 1377-1549
Board III 1454-1546
Board IV Not measured
Board V 1378-1551
Board VI 1382-1550

References
1. Bauch, J. and Eckstein, D. (1970): Dendrochronological dating of oak panels of Dutch
seventeenth-century paintings. Studies in Conservation. 15 (1): 45-50.
2. Klein, P. (1986): Age determinations based on dendrochronology. Pact. 13: 225-237.
3. Klein, P., Eckstein, D., Wazny,. T. and Bauch, J. (1987): New findings for the
dendrochronological dating of panel paintings of the 15th to 17th century. Scientific
Examination of Works of Art. ICOM-CC. Sidney: 51-54.
4. Klein, P. (1991): The differentiation of originals and copies of Netherlandish panel paintings
by dendrochronology. Colloque VIII. Dessin sous-jacent et copies. Louvain-La-Neuve, 1989 :
29-42.
5. Klein, P. and Esteves, L. (2001): Dendrochronological analyses in Portuguese panel
paintings. Colloque XIII. La Peinture et le laboratoire. Bruges, 1999: 213-220.
6. “Multilingual Glossary of Dendrochronology. Terms and Definitions in English, German,
French, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese and Russian” (1995): Haupt, Bern.