Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T16:41:24.588Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Thing about Replicas—Why Historic Replicas Matter

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Sally M. Foster  and
Neil G.W. Curtis
Sally M. Foster*
Affiliation:
Centre for Environment, Heritage and Policy, University of Stirling, UK
Neil G.W. Curtis*
Affiliation:
University Museums, University of Aberdeen, UK
*
[email: [email protected]]
[email: [email protected]]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Reproduction of archaeological material was a significant and serious enterprise for antiquarians and museums in the long nineteenth century. Replicas embed many stories and embody considerable past human energy. Behind their creation, circulation, use, and after-life lies a series of specific social networks and relationships that determined why, when, and in what circumstances they were valued, or not. Summarising the context of their production, circulation, and changing fortunes, this article introduces the ways in which replicas are important, and considers the specific benefits and aspects of a biographical approach to their study. Beyond the evidential, the study of existing replicas provides a historical and contemporary laboratory in which to explore the concepts of value and authenticity, and their application in cultural heritage and collections management, offering us a richer insight into the history of ourselves as archaeologists and curators.

La reproduction de sujets archéologiques était une entreprise sérieuse et importante pour les musées et les amateurs d'antiquités au cours du long XIXe siècle. Une série de réseaux et de rapports sociaux précis qui ont déterminé pourquoi, quand et comment on a assigné une valeur (ou non) à ces reproductions est à l'origine de la création, de la circulation, de l'usage et de la survie de ces représentations qui intègrent de nombreuses histoires et incarnent une énergie humaine considérable. Notre article résume le contexte, la circulation et le destin de ces reproductions, introduit les aspects qui les rendent importantes, et examine les avantages et éléments particuliers qu'une approche biographique peut apporter. En dehors des éléments probants, l'étude des copies sert de laboratoire historique et contemporain permettant d'explorer les notions d'authenticité et de valeur et d'étudier leur mise en pratique dans la gestion du patrimoine culturel et des collections de musées, ce qui enrichit nos conception de notre propre expérience d'archéologues et de conservateurs. Translation by Madeleine Hummler.

Für Altertumsforscher und Museen im langen 19. Jahrhundert war die Nachbildung von archäologischen Funden ein bedeutendes und beträchtliches Unternehmen. Solche Nachbildungen schließen viele Geschichten ein und verkörpern ein bedeutendes menschliches Arbeitsvermögen, deren Erzeugung, Verbreitung, Brauch und Nachleben auf einer Menge von spezifischen sozialen Netzwerken und Verbindungen beruht; diese haben bestimmt, warum, wann und wie denen ein Wert (oder kein Wert) zugewiesen wurde. Unser Artikel fasst den Kontext, in welchem sie erzeugt wurden, die Verteilung und das wechselnde Schicksal von Abgüssen zusammen; weiter wird die Begründung ihrer Bedeutung einbezogen und die Vorteile eines biografischen Vorgehens ausgewertet. Außer den nachweisbaren Belegen bildet die Untersuchung von überlieferten Abgüssen ein historisches und gegenwärtiges Testfeld für die Auswertung von Auffassungen von Wert und Echtheit sowie eine Gelegenheit, ihren Gebrauch in der Denkmalpflege und in Museumssammlungen zu bewerten. Diese Verfahren erlauben, wertvolle Erkenntnisse in die Geschichte unserer Tätigkeit als Archäologen und Kuratoren zu gewinnen. Translation by Madeleine Hummler.

Keywords

archaeological reproductionsfacsimilesplaster castscultural biographyvalueauthenticityreproduction d'objets archéologiquescopiesmoulages en plâtrebiographies culturellesvaleurauthenticitéarchäologische Nachbildungenoriginaltreue KopieGipsabgüssekulturelle BiographieWertEchtheit
Type
Articles
Information
European Journal of Archaeology , Volume 19 , Issue 1 , 2016 , pp. 122 - 148
Copyright
Copyright © 2015 the European Association of Archaeologists 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alberti, S.J.M.M. 2009. Nature and Culture. Objects, Disciplines and the Manchester Museum. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Appadurai, A. 1986. Introduction: Commodities and the Politics of Value. In: Appadurai, A., ed. The Social Life of Things. Commodities in Cultural Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 3–63.Google Scholar
Baker, M. 2010. The Reproductive Continuum: Plaster Casts, Paper Mosaics and Photographs as Complementary Modes of Reproduction in the Nineteenth-century Museum. In: Frederiksen, R., Marchand, R.E., eds. Plaster Casts. Making, Collecting, and Displaying from Classical Antiquity to the Present. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter, pp. 485–500.Google Scholar
Bell, D. 1997. The Historic Scotland Guide to International Conservation Charters. Historic Scotland Technical Advice Note 8. Edinburgh: Historic Scotland.Google Scholar
Benjamin, W. 1936. repr. 1999. The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction, trans. by Zorn, H., ed. Arendt, H., published as Illuminations. London: Pimlico, pp. 211–44.Google Scholar
Bennett, T. 1995. The Birth of the Museum. History, Theory, Politics. London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bilbey, D., Cribb, R. 2007. Plaster Models, Plaster Casts, Electrotypes and Fictile Ivories. In: Trusted, M., ed. The Making of Sculpture. The Materials and Techniques of European Sculpture. London: V&A, pp. 152–71.Google Scholar
Byrne, S., Clarke, A., Harrison, R., Torrence, R. 2011. Networks, Agents and Objects: Frameworks for Unpacking Museum Collections. In: Byrne, S., Clarke, A., Harrison, R., Torrence, R., eds. Unpacking the Collection. Networks of Material and Social Agency in the Museum. New York, Heidelberg, Dordrecht & London: Springer, pp. 3–26.Google Scholar
Camille, M. 1996. Prophets, Canons and Promising Monsters. In: Camille, M., Çelik, Z., Onians, J., Rifkin, A., Steiner, C.B., eds. A Range of Critical Perspectives. Rethinking the Canon. The Art Bulletin, 78(2): 198–217, pp. 198–201.Google Scholar
Carré, D. ed. 2010. Cité de l'architecture et du patrimoine. Guide du musée. Paris: Cité de l'architecture et du patrimoine.Google Scholar
Conway, M.C. 1882. Travels in South Kensington with Notes on Decorative Art and Architecture in England. London: Trübner & Co.Google Scholar
Courtauld Institute of Art 2013. Gothic Ivories. Available at <http://www.gothicivories.courtauld.ac.uk/> [accessed 3 June 2014].+[accessed+3+June+2014].>Google Scholar
Curtis, N. 2007. ‘The Original May Yet Be Discovered’: Seven Bronze Age Swords Supposedly from Netherley, Kincardineshire. Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland, 137: 487–500.Google Scholar
Eco, U. 1987. Travels in Hyperreality. London: Picador.Google Scholar
Edelstein, T.J. ed. 1992. Imagining an Irish Past. The Celtic Revival 1840–1940. Chicago: University of Chicago.Google Scholar
Edinburgh College of Art 2012. Cast Contemporaries. Newcastle-upon-Tyne: Arts and Social Sciences Academic Press.Google Scholar
Effros, B. 2005. Art of the ‘Dark Ages’. Showing Merovingian Artefacts in North American Public and Private Collections. Journal of the History of Collections, 17 (1): 85–113.Google Scholar
Effros, B. 2008. Selling Archaeology and Anthropology: Early Medieval Artefacts at the Expositions Universelles and the Wiener Weltausstellung, 1867–1900. Early Medieval Europe, 16 (1): 23–48.Google Scholar
Effros, B. 2012. Uncovering the Germanic Past. Merovingian Archaeology in France, 1830–1914. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Effros, B., Williams, H. eds. 2008. Themed Edition: Early Medieval Material Culture in the Nineteenth- and Twentieth-century Imagination. Early Medieval Europe, 16 (1): 1–2.Google Scholar
Emerick, K. 2014. Conserving and Ancient Monuments. Heritage, Democracy, and Inclusion. Woodbridge: Boydell Press/International Centre for Cultural and Heritage Studies Newcastle University.Google Scholar
Factum Arte. 2015. Available at <http://www.factum-arte.com/> [accessed 3 June 2014].+[accessed+3+June+2014].>Google Scholar
Forsyth, K. 1995. The Inscriptions on the Dupplin Cross. In: Bourke, C., ed. From the Isles of the North. Early Medieval Art in Ireland and Britain. Belfast: HMSO, pp. 237–44.Google Scholar
Foster, S.M. 2001. Place, Space and Odyssey. Exploring the Future of Early Medieval Sculpture. Rosemarkie: Groam House Museum.Google Scholar
Foster, S.M. 2010. The Curatorial Consequences of Being Moved, Moveable or Portable: The Case of Carved Stones. Scottish Archaeological Journal, 32 (1): 15–28.Google Scholar
Foster, S.M. 2013. Embodied Energies, Embedded Stories: Releasing the Potential of Casts of Early Medieval Sculptures. In: Hawkes, J., ed. Making Histories. Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Insular Art York 2011. Donington: Shaun Tyas, pp. 339–55.Google Scholar
Foster, S.M. 2015. Circulating Agency: The V&A, Scotland and the Multiplication of Plaster Casts of Celtic Crosses. Journal of the History of Collections, 27 (1): 73–96. Doi: 10.1093/jhc/fhu008Google Scholar
Foster, S.M. forthcoming. Expiscation! (Un) entangling the Later Biography of the St Andrews Sarcophagus.Google Scholar
Foster, S.M., Jones, S. 2008. Recovering the Biography of the Hilton of Cadboll Cross-slab. In: James, H., Henderson, I., Foster, S.M., Jones, S., A Fragmented Masterpiece. Recovering the Biography of the Hilton of Cadboll Pictish Cross-slab. Edinburgh: Society of Antiquaries of Scotland, pp. 205–84.Google Scholar
Foster, S.M., Blackwell, A., Goldberg, M. 2014. The Legacy of Nineteenth-century Replicas for Object Cultural Biographies: Lessons in Duplication from 1830s Fife. Journal of Victorian Culture, 19 (2): 137–60.Google Scholar
Frederiksen, R., Marchand, R.E. eds. 2010. Plaster Casts. Making, Collecting, and Displaying from Classical Antiquity to the Present. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Geary, P.J. 2002. The Myth of Nations: The Medieval Origins of Europe. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Gilchrist, R. 2012. Medieval Life. Archaeology and the Life Course. Woodbridge: Boydell & Brewer.Google Scholar
Glenmorangie Research Project 2013–2014. Available at <http://www.nms.ac.uk/explore/collections-stories/scottish-history-and-archaeology/early-medieval-scotland/glenmorangie-research-project/> [accessed 21 Oct 2014].+[accessed+21+Oct+2014].>Google Scholar
Goldberg, M., Blackwell, A. 2013. The Different Histories of the Norrie's Law Hoard. In: Hawkes, J., ed. Making Histories. Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Insular Art York 2011. Donington: Shaun Tyas, pp. 326–38.Google Scholar
Gosden, C., Larson, F. 2007. Knowing Things: Exploring the Collections at the Pitt Rivers Museum 1884–1945. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Haskell, F., Penny, N. 1982. Taste and the Antique. The Lure of Classical Sculpture 1500–1900. New Haven & London: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Hodder, I. 2012. Entangled. An Archaeology of the Relationships between Humans and Things. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Holtorf, C. 2002. Notes on the History of a Pot Sherd. Journal of Material Culture, 7: 49–71.Google Scholar
Holtorf, C. 2013. On Pastness: A Reconsideration of Materiality in Archaeological Object Authenticity. Anthropological Quarterly, 86 (2): 427–43.Google Scholar
Holtorf, C., Schadla-Hall, T. 1999. Age as Artefact: On Archaeological Authenticity. European Journal of Archaeology, 2 (2): 229–47.Google Scholar
Hoskins, J. 2006. Agency, Biography and Objects. In: Tilley, C., Keane, W., Küchler, S., Rowlands, M., Spyer, P., eds. Handbook of Material Culture. Los Angeles & London: Sage, pp. 74–84.Google Scholar
Hughes, A., Ranfft, E. eds. 1997. Sculpture and its Reproductions. London: Reaktion Books.Google Scholar
Jeffrey, S. forthcoming. Challenging Heritage Visualization: Beauty, Aura and Democratisation. Open Archaeology, Topical Issue on Challenging Digital Archaeology.Google Scholar
Jensen, O.W. ed. 2012. Histories of Archaeological Practices. Reflections on Methods, Strategies and Social Organisation in Past Fieldwork. Stockholm: The National Historical Museum.Google Scholar
Jones, A. 2004. Archaeometry and Materiality: Materials-based Analysis in Theory and Practice. Archaeometry, 46 (3): 327–38.Google Scholar
Jones, S. 2009. Experiencing Authenticity at Heritage Sites: Some Implications for Heritage Management and Conservation. Conservation and Management of Archaeological Sites, 11 (2): 133–47.Google Scholar
Jones, S. 2010. Negotiating Authentic Objects and Authentic Selves. Beyond the Deconstruction of Authenticity. Journal of Material Culture, 15 (2): 181–203.Google Scholar
Jones, S., Yarrow, T. 2013. Crafting Authenticity: An Ethnography of Conservation Practice. Journal of Material Culture, 18 (1): 3–26.Google Scholar
Joy, J. 2002. Biography of a Medal: People and the Things They Value. In: Schofield, J., Johnson, W.G., Beck, C.M., eds. Matériel Culture. The Archaeology of Twentieth Century Conflict. London & New York: Routledge, pp. 132–42.Google Scholar
Joy, J. 2009. Reinvigorating Object Biography: Reproducing the Drama of Object Lives. World Archaeology, 41 (4): 540–56.Google Scholar
Kelly, T. 2013a. Products of the Celtic Revival: Facsimiles of Irish Metalwork and Jewellery, 1840–1940 (unpublished PhD dissertation, Trinity College Dublin).Google Scholar
Kelly, T. 2013b. Specimens of Modern Antique: Commercial Facsimiles of Irish Archaeological Jewellery, 1840–1868. In: Walker, S., ed. The Modern History of Celtic Jewellery 1840–1980. Andover & New York: Walker Metalsmiths, pp. 23–33.Google Scholar
Keppie, L. 1998. Roman Inscribed and Sculptured Stones in the Hunterian Museum, University of Glasgow. London: Society for the Promotion on Roman Studies.Google Scholar
Kriegel, L. 2007. Grand Designs: Labor, Empire, and the Museum in Victorian Culture. Durham & London: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Latour, B., Lowe, A. 2011. The Migration of the Aura, or How to Explore the Original through Its Facsimiles. In: Bartscherer, T., Coover, R., eds. Switching Codes. Thinking Through Digital Technology in the Humanities and the Arts. Chicago & London: The University of Chicago Press, pp. 275–97.Google Scholar
Leahy, H.R. 2011. ‘Fix'd Statue on the Pedestal of Scorn’: The Politics and Poetics of Displaying the Parthenon Marbles in Athens and London. In: Bonavenutra, P., Jones, A., eds. Sculpture and Archaeology. Farnham: Ashgate, pp. 179–95.Google Scholar
McAndrew, J. 1955. The Non-imaginary Museum. College Art Journal, 14 (2): 124–34.Google Scholar
McCormick, E.L. 2010. Crosses in Circulation: Processes and Patterns of Acquisition and Display of Early Medieval Sculpture in the National Museums of Britain and Ireland, circa 1850 to 1950 (unpublished PhD dissertation, University of York).Google Scholar
McCormick, E.L. 2013. ‘The Highly Interesting Series of Irish High Crosses’: Reproductions of Early Medieval Irish Sculpture in Dublin and Sydenham. In: Hawkes, J., ed. Making Histories. Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Insular Art York 2011. Donington: Shaun Tyas, pp. 358–71.Google Scholar
Moser, S. 2001. Archaeological Representation. The Visual Conventions for Constructing Knowledge and the Past. In: Hodder, I., ed. Archaeological Theory Today. Cambridge: Polity, pp. 262–83.Google Scholar
National Museum of Ireland 2005. Celtic Art: High Crosses & Treasures of Ireland. Ireland Pavilion. Expo 2005, Aichi, Japan. Tokyo: Ireland Expo.Google Scholar
National Museum of Ireland 2010. Irish High Crosses Exhibition. Dublin: National Museum of Ireland.Google Scholar
Nichols, M.F. 2005. The Politics of Display. Public Cast Galleries Enter the Twenty-First Century (unpublished MPhil dissertation, University of Cambridge).Google Scholar
Nichols, M.F. 2007. Museum Material? An Institution-based Critique of the Historiography of Plaster Cast Sculpture. In: Moffat, R., De, E., Klerk, , eds. Material Worlds. Proceedings of the Conference held at Glasgow University, 2005. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, pp. 26–39.Google Scholar
NMI n.d. The Hunterston Brooch, Ayrshire, Scotland, eighth century AD. Available at <http://www.museum.ie/en/exhibition/list/metal-reproductions.aspx?article=cafd58a9-a9c5-4b45-9695-8d4ceacf070d> [accessed 25 October 2014].+[accessed+25+October+2014].>Google Scholar
Nordbladh, J. 2012. The Shape of History. To Give Physical Form to Archaeological Knowledge. In: Jensen, O.W., ed. Histories of Archaeological Practices. Reflections on Methods, Strategies and Social Organisation in Past Fieldwork. Stockholm: The National Historical Museum, pp. 241–57.Google Scholar
Ó Floinn, R. 2012. Reproducing the Past: Making Replicas of Irish Antiquities. In: Harbison, P., Hall, V., eds. A Carnival of Learning. Essays to Honour George Cunningham and His 50 Conferences on Medieval Ireland in the Cistercian Abbey of Mount St. Joseph, Roscrea, 1987–2012. Roscrea: Cistercian Press, pp. 146–57.Google Scholar
Orvell, M. 1989. The Real Thing. Imitation and Authenticity in American Culture 1880–1940. Chapel Hill & London: The University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
Perry, S. 2013. Archaeological Visualization and the Manifestation of the Discipline: Model-Making at the Institute of Archaeology, London. In: Alberti, B., Jones, A.M., Pollard, J., eds. Archaeology after Interpretation: Reframing Materials to Archaeological Theory. Walnut Creek: Left Coast Press, pp. 281–303.Google Scholar
Phillips, D. 1997. Exhibiting Authenticity. Manchester & New York: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Pittock, M. 1999. Celtic Identity and the British Image. Manchester & New York: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Pringle, H. 2006. The Master Plan. Himmler's Scholars and the Holocaust. London, New York, Toronto & Sydney: Harper Perennial.Google Scholar
Redknap, M., Lewis, J.M. 2007. A Corpus of Early Inscribed Stones and Stone Sculpture in Wales. Volume I. Breconshire, Glamorgan, Monmouthshire, Radnorshire, and Geographically Contiguous Areas of Herefordshire and Shropshire. Cardiff: University of Wales Press.Google Scholar
Robinson, J.C. 1881. Memorandum Respecting the Origination and Supply of Reproduction of Works of Art by the Science and Art Department (unpublished manuscript). V&A Archive ED84/166.Google Scholar
Schwartz, H. 1998. The Culture of the Copy. Striking Likenesses, Unreasonable Facsimiles. New York: Zone Books.Google Scholar
SCRAN n.d. Replica of the Hunterston Brooch. Available at <http://nms.scran.ac.uk/database/record.php?usi=000-190-001-181-C> [accessed 25 October 2014].+[accessed+25+October+2014].>Google Scholar
Stewart, S. 1984. On Longing, Narratives of the Miniature, the Gigantic, the Souvenir, the Collection. Durham & London: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Tweney, R.D. 2004. Replication and the Experimental Ethnography of Science. Journal of Cognition and Culture, 4 (3): 731–58.Google Scholar
Wade, R.J. 2012. Pedagogic Objects: The Formation, Circulation and Exhibition of Teaching Collections for Art and Design Education in Leeds, 1837–1857. PhD dissertation, University of Leeds. Available at <http://etheses.whiterose.ac.uk/3751/> [accessed 9 April 2015].Google Scholar
Whitehead, C. 2009. Museums and the Construction of Disciplines. Art and Archaeology in Nineteenth-Century Britain. London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
Whitehill, W.M. 1970. Museum of Fine Arts Boston. A Centennial History. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Williams, H. 2007. Forgetting the Victorian in Anglo-Saxon Archaeology. In: Higham, N.J., ed. Britons in Anglo-Saxon England. Woodbridge: Boydell Press, pp. 27–41.Google Scholar
Wilson, D. 1851. Prehistoric Annals of Scotland. Edinburgh: Sutherland & Knox.Google Scholar
Wingfield, C. 2011. Donors, Loaners, Dealers and Swappers: The Relationship behind the English Collections at the Pitt Rivers Museum. In: Byrne, S., Clarke, A., Harrison, R., Torrence, R., eds. Unpacking the Collection. Networks of Material and Social Agency in the Museum. New York, Heidelberg, Dordrecht & London: Springer, pp. 119–40.Google Scholar