ANALYSIS OF EARLY WALL STENCILS AND SELECTED

Transcription

Keystone
Preservation
Group
Historic Preservation
Architectural Conservation
J. Christopher Frey
Shelby Weaver Splain
ANALYSIS OF EARLY WALL STENCILS AND
SELECTED HISTORIC INTERIOR FINISHES
ROSEBERRY HOUSE
PHILLIPSBURG, NJ
PREPARED FOR:
FRANK L. GREENAGEL
PHILLIPSBURG AREA HISTORICAL SOCIETY
JULY 2, 2010
Keystone Preservation Group
P.O. Box 831
Doylestown, PA 18901
215.348.4919
www.keystonepreservation.com
Roseberry House, Phillipsburg, NJ
Table of Contents
Table of Contents
Section A
Summary of Findings
A.1: Introduction
A.2: Historical Considerations
A.3: Assessment and Interpretation of Decorative Stencils
A.3.1: Design
A.3.2: Composition of the Binding Medium
A.3.3 Composition of the Pigments
A.4: Assessment of Other Elements
3
3
3
4
4
6
7
9
Section B
Stratigraphic Analysis of Historic Finishes
B.1:
Analytical Methodology
B.2:
Stratigraphic Data for Selected Elements
11
11
12
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C
Stencil Drawings
Unresolved Stencil Details
Orion Analytical technical Report
Keystone Preservation Project #10-004
Page 2 of 35
Section A: Summary of Findings
Section A:
Summary of Findings
Section A.1: Introduction
This report constitutes an analysis of selected
historic interior finishes from the Roseberry
House in Phillipsburg, NJ. In accordance with
the terms of our contract with the Phillipsburg
Area Historical Society (Frank L. Greenagel),
Keystone Preservation Group (J. Christopher
Frey and Elise S. Kemery) has completed the
following:
•
•
•
Two site visits during which ornamental wall
stencils were exposed in Rooms 102A and
102B.
Coordination of elemental analysis for
pigments contained within colors which were
noted within stencil patterns.
Stratigraphic analysis of historic finishes from
selected elements in Rooms 102A and 102B.
Room 102A.
Section A.2: Historical Considerations
The research and analysis which is detailed herein
has been conducted prior to the compilation of a
comprehensive report on the history and
evolution of the building. The Roseberry House
Room 102B.
is believed to have been built in the late 18th
century, and the decorative wall stencils which are the primary focus of this study are believed to date
to original construction, or at the very least, the general period in which the building was constructed.
Key dates in the historic of the building include the following:1
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Coxe family 1715 to 1766
Upon marriage of Grace Coxe to John tabor Kempe in 1766 it is transferred to Kempe's name
1776 confiscated
1787 sheriff's sale to John Roseberry, Sr.
1797 sale by John & _____ Roseberry to their son, John Jr.
1846 transferred to Elizabeth Anderson, granddaughter of Roseberry, Sr.
1887 sold to a third party
We have been advised that our work has been completed concurrently with parallel studies by other
analytical consultants. It is anticipated that the reports which issued during this phase of work will
both contribute to the knowledge regarding historically-significant, character-defining features and
form the basis for future studies.
1
E-mail from Frank L. Greenagel to J. Christopher Frey, July 1, 2010. Excerpted from “Who Built the Roseberry House?,”
narrative by Frank L. Greenagel, June 19, 2009.
Page 3 of 35
Section A.3: Assessment and Interpretation of
Decorative Stencils
This study focuses on three critical aspects to
consider within the analysis and interpretation
of the ornamental wall stencils which are
present in Rooms 102A and 102B: design, and
composition of the binding medium and
composition of the pigments which were used
to color the stencils.
Section A.3.1: Design
Observations were made after the manual
removal of subsequent finishes (mainly
whitewash) using a combination of palette
knives, scalpels and woodworking tools.
Although orientation and spacing varies from
room to room, stencils observed within the
study area are similar with respect to color and
design. Stencils were applied over a moderate
gray or dark gray background, with different
portions of the design executed in black, dark
gray, white, red and light yellowish brown.
Designs include:
•
•
•
•
Rope stencils: Used as a border element
for wall surfaces both above and below the
chair rail, this pattern features a series of
paired (Room 102A) and triple (Room
102B) rope coils which are flanked by dots
above and below the actual rope design.
Paired coils and associated dots were
executed in black and white (Room 102A),
while triple coils were executed in black,
white and light grayish brown (Room
102B).
Floral bands: Present only in Room 102A
and executed in white, red and light
grayish brown, this pattern features a
combination of large and small splayed
petals which join together in a stem
element. Vertical bands are present both
above and below the chair rail.
Daisy stencils: Arranged in vertical
columns and present above the chair rail in
both rooms, this design features petals
arranged around a center circle. Some
daisies feature black and white petals,
while others feature red and white or
black, white and light grayish brown petals.
Leaf stencils: Present in both rooms and
arranged in vertical columns above the
Page 4 of 35
Stencil patterns for Room 102A (top) and Room 102B (bottom):
drawing by Keystone Preservation Group.
Rope stencil, Room 102A.
Floral band, Room 102A.
chair rail in both rooms, this is an
abstracted, fern-like pattern which features
a center column of narrow leaves which
branch out at various angles. Individual
leaves were executed in black, white and
light grayish brown.
Although the wall stencils present in Rooms
102A and 102B created a distinct, aesthetic
impact, they were intended neither to be
symmetrical nor perfectly balanced (Appendix
A: Stencil Drawings). Whereas vertical bands
above the chair rail in Room 102B alternate
regularly (leaf-daisy-leaf-daisy, etc.), bands in
Room 102A alternate irregularly (leaf-floraldaisy-leaf-floral-leaf-floral-floral-floral-floralleaf-floral-leaf-daisy-floral-daisy). It should be
noted that a combination of previous damage
and the inability to remove subsequent finishes
in some locations have made identifying the
pattern present on every inch of every wall
impossible at this juncture (areas highlighted in
Appendix B: Unresolved Stencil Details).
The history and interpretation of decorative
wall stencils has been documented in treatises
such as Ann Eckert Brown’s American Wall
Stenciling 1790-1840, a resource which was
consulted throughout the course of this study.
Other resources examined include American
Decorative Wall Painting 1700-1850 (Nina
Fletcher Little), Paint in America (Roger Moss,
editor), Early American Wall Stencils in Color
(Alice Bancroft Fjelstul and Patricia Brown
Schad with Barbara Marhoefer). Although the
terminology used to describe the color of
stencils varies somewhat, the shades observed
within the study area are consistent with those
of the period:
Daisy stencil, Room 102B.
Leaf stencil, Room 102B.
It is evident from a study of original
paint, both in New England and the South,
that eighteenth century colors were, for the
most part strong, and inclined to be dark,
featuring Indian red, yellow ochre, blue,
green, and gray.2
Research completed to date has not produced
documentation which might identify the artist
or individual who is responsible for the design
2
Similar characteristics found in stencils from the Thomas Caitlin
House (top) and Stratton Tavern (bottom) (photos from Nina
Fletcher Little’s American Decorative Wall Painting).
Nina Fletcher Little, American Decorative Wall Painting 1700-1850, New York: E.P. Dutton, 1989, p. 5.
Page 5 of 35
and installation of the stencils. The stencils do incorporate design elements which were common in
the late 18th and early 19th centuries, such as leaves, flowers and ropes. A very preliminary search of
published images of ornamental stencils which have been documented within other historic
properties suggests that the aesthetics (leaf stencils and an intertwined border element, executed in
black, red and white, set against a gray background) are somewhat similar to those noted on walls of
the Thomas Catlin House in Litchfield, CT. Floral stencils set against dark backgrounds have also
been noted in historic properties such as the Hezekiah Stratton, Jr. Tavern in Northfield Arms, MA.
In neither case are the aforementioned observations intended to constitute a link between the
Roseberry House and other properties.
Section A.3.2: Composition of the Binding Medium
The composition of the medium in which paint colors are bound is an important characteristic of
these stencils. Elemental analysis suggests that the binder is protein-based, and in-situ evaluation
suggests that the stencil paint is water-soluble; these characteristics suggest that the stencils were
executed in distemper.
Architectural paints and coatings are composed of three elements: pigment, binder and vehicle.
Pigment gives the finish its color, while the binder and vehicle are responsible for performance and
properties like viscosity, pigment absorption, consistency, elasticity, reversibility. For distemper or
calcimine, which traditionally indicates pre-mixed distemper, the binder is glue, usually animal hide
glue, and the vehicle is water. Solidification or film formation for distemper occurs during
evaporation of the solvent or vehicle, water. The glue that remains does not completely fill in the
spaces between dispersed pigment particles, making distempers very porous coatings. The porosity
of distemper gives the paint good hiding properties, and because it is water-based, distemper is quick
drying. These two properties made distempers perfect for use in multilayered, multicolored
ornamental schemes. Also, unlike oil-based paints, distempers are not prone to yellowing.
Distemper paints were inexpensive and easy to make. Animal hide glue like rabbit skin would be
dissolved in hot water, and often, painters made distemper on site. Distempers were applied directly
to plaster walls and ceilings and also used to paint wallpaper that was then affixed to plaster walls. As
oil-based paints performed more optimally on wood elements, distemper was rarely used on wood
once oil-based paints became as common as distempers. Eighteenth- and nineteenth-century
decorative painters preferred distemper for both stencil and freehand work. Walls would often be
whitewashed or covered with a tinted whitewash as a ground for their ornamentation and then
colored distemper patterns, figures and motifs would be applied.
Distempers are fragile and water soluble, and eighteenth- and nineteenth century America saw
frequently changing tastes in both interior and exterior paint colors and schemes. For these reasons,
finding extant distemper stenciling is rare, though it would have been quite popular throughout the
mid-Atlantic during the late 18th century, one notable exception being wall stencils from the Peter
Wentz Farmstead in Montgomery County, PA.3 Because distempers are susceptible to water damage
and difficult to clean, distemper stenciling was sometimes varnished, changing the appearance,
characteristics and performance of the paint. Distempers could be, and were intended to be, easily
removed with water before repainting. In cases where distemper was not removed before repainting,
especially when oil or latex paints are applied over distemper, severe peeling and significant loss often
occurred. Although there is no evidence of varnish on stencils from the Roseberry House, fragments
of the stencils were solubilized when a subsequent layer of whitewash was installed over them. When
manually removing subsequently-installed finishes, fragments of the solubilized stencils were attached
to those later layers.
3
Ann Eckert Brown, American Wall Stenciling 1790-1840, Hanover, NH: University Press of New England, 2003, p. 5.
Page 6 of 35
Distemper paints were common in colonial times, having been borrowed directly from English
practice. Use of distemper pigments in America can be traced to seventeenth-century New England,
and examples of late eighteenth-century distemper stenciling have been found widely throughout the
New England Colonies of Rhode Island, Massachusetts and Maine. Pennsylvania, New Jersey and
New York distempers were more likely victim to changing tastes, although these Middle Colonies
have some of the earliest and “most English-like stenciling” of the colonies. Pennsylvania and New
Jersey were the most ethnically and religiously diverse of the colonies, and New York was a center
for trade and home to aristocrats from all over Europe. Especially in more metropolitan areas, the
overwhelming desire for the fashionable and latest trends “accounts for the lack of extant wall
stenciling” in these colonies, although they “most assuredly had a goodly number of Federal-period
paint-decorated walls.”
Popular pigments for interior finishes were Prussian blue, various greens and Spanish brown;
generally the palette for colonial painting was nearly identical throughout colonial America. For
stencilers the palette seems to have been larger, including red lead, red ocher, Venetian red, Prussian
blue, indigo, whiting, lampblack, bone black (mixed to form various shades of gray), verdigris and
yellow ocher. Stenciled designs were varied ranging from simple dots or mere paneling/sectioning of
walls to trees, birds, vines and garlands, festoons and floral motifs and sprays.
Section A.3.3: Composition of the Pigments
Keystone Preservation contracted with Orion Analytical of Williamstown, MA for the identification
of pigments which were use to color the stencils: dark gray, white, black, light yellowish brown and
red (Appendix C: Orion Analytical Technical Report). Fourier transform infrared microspectroscopy
(FTIR) was employed as the initial, primary method of analysis. A technique which is commonly
used to identify pigments in historically significant works of art, which parallel pigments used in
historic architecture, FTIR produces spectral readouts (spectra) for each material which is analyzed,
the results of which are then compared to spectra from known materials. FTIR successfully detected
(positive or probable detection) materials in three of the five shades which were subjected to this
method of analysis (gray, black and white). At no additional charge, Orion Analytical completed
subsequent assessment of materials which could not be identified with FTIR using Raman
microscopy. Raman analysis relies on the scattering of monochromatic light, typically from a laser in
the visible, near infrared or near ultraviolet range. This light interacts with excitations in the sample,
creating vibrational information which is unique to or consistent with specific chemical bonds.
Raman produced a strong, unique yet unidentifiable spectrum for one material (red) and no unique
spectrum for the second (light yellowish brown). Further analysis was completed using scanning
electron microscopy with x-ray energy-dispersive spectroscopy (SEM-XEDS). SEM images a sample
by scanning with high-energy electron beams; X-ray beams then produce information which is
characteristic of specific elements. This technology both provides imaging information on the
structure of material and information regarding which chemical elements are present within that
material. SEM-XEDS identified (probable) the red pigment but, despite producing detailed
compositional information, was unable to conclusively identify the light yellowish brown pigment.
Dark gray
FTIR produced a probable identification of carbon black (with no iron or bone black), combined
with calcite as the pigments present within dark gray elements. A “probable protein binder” has
been interpreted as distemper based in part on its water-solubility. Historically, carbon black and
calcite have been used since prehistory, and continue to be used today. 4 As such, their use in a
building which is believed to date to the late 18th century is reasonable. Two shades of dark gray
were noted, corresponding to Munsell N 5.25/ and Munsell N 2.25/.
4
http://www.webexhibits.org/pigments/indiv/history/carbonblack.html
Page 7 of 35
Black
FTIR produced a probable identification of carbon black (with no iron or bone black), combined
with calcite as the pigments present within black elements. The calcite content is likely lower than
that which was noted for dark gray elements. Black elements were also identified as having a
“probable protein binder,” and the use of such pigments is consistent with what might have been
used in the late 18th century. Black stencils correspond to Munsell N 0.5/.
White
FTIR produced a positive identification of calcite as the compound used for white elements. Calcite
consists of calcium carbonate, the compound which forms the basis for lime. It was often combined
with oil due to its poor hiding power or animal glue (distemper)/other aqueous binders as a white
pigment; 5, 6 in these stencils, however, no oil (or other) binder was noted. Also referred to
sometimes as “lime white,” “chalk” and “whiting,” calcite has been available since prehistory and
remains in use; 7 as such, its presence in a building which is believed to date to the late 18th century is
reasonable. White (technically “yellowish white”) stencils correspond to Munsell 5Y 9/1.
Red
FTIR detected the presence of calcite and lead, but was unable to positively identify the pigmenting
compound. However, analysis did identify a “probable protein binder” which has been interpreted
as distemper. Subsequent analysis with Raman spectroscopy produced a strong, unique spectrum,
but the spectrum did not match the spectrum of any known samples. Further analysis with SEMXEDS revealed the presence of lead, calcium, magnesium, strontium (associated with lead),
potassium, aluminum, phosphorous and silicon. Orion interpreted the large amount of lead and
corresponding absence of iron and mercury which are markers for iron oxide and vermillion,
respectively, as a probable identification of red lead as the primary pigment. Additional confirmation
using polarized light microscopy was noted as a possibility but was not pursued. Red lead is a dense,
finely-textured pigment with exceptional hiding power; 8 these qualities are characteristics which
contribute to the striking opacity and intensity which remain present on stencils which feature this
color. It was considered fairly permanent when mixed with oil, and possessed a good reputation with
tempera (distemper) painting.9 This pigment was commonly used in Byzantine and Persian
illuminations, and remained common through the late 19th century, when its use was largely
discontinued due to concerns over toxicity and propensity for color change.10 It is possible that red
lead was considered appropriate for use in the distemper stencils during the period in which this
building is believed to have been constructed. Red (technically “dark reddish orange”) stencils
correspond to Munsell 10R 4/8.
Light yellowish brown
FTIR was unable to detect a pigmenting compound for light yellowish brown features, but identified
a “probable protein binder” which has been interpreted as distemper. Subsequent analysis with
Raman spectroscopy did not produce a unique Raman spectrum. Further analysis with SEM-XEDS
revealed the presence of calcium, magnesium, sulfur and aluminum, but the results were not
sufficient to conclusively identify the pigment. Interestingly, the absence of iron rules out iron oxides
as a pigment, and the absence of elements which are typically associated with inorganic yellow
pigments was also noted. Additional confirmation using polarized light microscopy was noted as a
possibility but was not pursued. Red stencils correspond to Munsell 10YR 6/4.
http://www.naturalpigments.com/oil_paints/calcite_medium.asp
http://www.naturalpigments.com/oil_paints/calcite_medium.asp
7 http://www.naturalpigments.com/oil_paints/calcite_medium.asp
8 http://www.webexhibits.org/pigments/indiv/overview/redlead.html
9 http://www.webexhibits.org/pigments/indiv/technical/redlead.html
10 http://www.webexhibits.org/pigments/indiv/history/redlead.html
5
6
Page 8 of 35
Section A.4: Assessment of Other Elements
Keystone Preservation’s scope was intended to include microscopic analysis of and color matching
for 10 samples, with those locations to be determined during the completion of exposure windows.
In consultation with Frank L. Greenagel, we decided to focus analysis on elements in Rooms 102A
and 102B; analysis was expanded to include examination of 32 surfaces, with the balance provided at
no additional cost. Assessment included wall surfaces (including color matching for each stencil
color present), ceilings, chair rail, baseboard, door trim, doors and window frames.
Analysis suggests the following:
•
•
•
The finishes history within the study area is highly variable. Some elements display evidence of
as many as 21 finish layers, while others display evidence of as few as 2. While some of that
difference can be attributed to changes which have taken place over time (including the alteration
or replacement of certain features as well as localized damage to or loss of original finishes),
there is not a regular pattern to the varying number of layers present. Slight variations in the
shade of selected finishes are also a complicating factor. As such, we would recommended that
findings be considered preliminary at this juncture and would recommend additional assessment
in a future phase when finishes evidence from these rooms can be properly compared to
comparable samples throughout the building.
Wall surfaces featured several colors for background fields and stencils, including dark gray
(Munsell N 2.25 and N 5.25), black (Munsell N 0.5/), yellowish white (Munsell 5Y 9/1), dark reddish
orange (Munsell 10R 4/8) and light yellowish brown (Munsell 10YR 6/4).
Preliminary interpretation suggests that baseboards and door trim at baseboard level were
painted dark brown (Munsell 5YR 2/2-2/4), chair rails, chair rail caps, and door trim above
baseboard level were painted light olive brown (Munsell 2.5Y 7/2), and ceilings finished with a, and
ceilings finished with a yellowish white (Munsell 5Y 9/1) whitewash.
The following chart provides digital approximations for colors which are believed to date to the
installation of the stencils in Rooms 102A and 102B. These are intended for illustrative purposes
only and should not be used for official color selection. Chips which conform to the Munsell System
of Color will be provided by the Conservator, or are available from X-Rite (www.x-rite.com).
Historic colors
Element
Wall background field
Munsell Color/Color Name
Munsell N 2.25/
Dark gray
Munsell N 5.25/
Dark gray
Black stencils
Munsell N 0.5/
Dark gray
White stencils
Munsell 5Y 9/1
Yellowish white
Page 9 of 35
Color Equivalent
Historic colors, continued
Element
Red stencils
Munsell Color/Color Name
Munsell 10R 4/8
Dark reddish orange
Light yellowish brown stencils
Munsell 10YR 6/4
Light yellowish brown
Ceilings
Munsell 5Y 9/1
Yellowish white
Baseboards, door trim at
baseboard level
Munsell 5YR 2/2-2/4
Dark brown
Door trim above baseboards,
chair rails, window trim
Munsell 2.5Y 7/2
Light olive brown
Page 10 of 35
Color Equivalent
Appendix A: Stencil Drawings
Appendix A:
Stencil Drawings
3t?ti
-le
lH
_it
El
;t
{t)
o
o
^
:l--
.-_IA
Ui
0
o
()
U TT)
ln:
u(J
c(D
^f
I
l
ut
+
o
0
v2
o
:
o
,Z
.__L
t*
ulq
6'(D
(]
-'
l.D
O
I 3 sS o
ilili4tr
;;Y;
=
-.lCl
n.\
e
rD
lI
9
lU
-U
--l
o
jO
-:=
=A
cg
aco
rO
-a
Zc
C6
o
o
/)
O
o
U
-<J
-Tl
O
^'
u
o
-.
o
f
_()
--
a
j
(D
tc
arO*ffn)
J (r
UJ
tu 0r N T-
g
ol
o
I
a
o
l
a
r,,
---i
:
OL
C
C
I
d:
t't? T>
I J6fico
a_-:ro
f J 'c'o
J*.
=+
oO
l
::o'
(D
I
9
a
t{
lz
U:
I]
,o
l,r
o
l!
lxr
?
1
a)
i
r
i
l.s
l<
lT
l,r
1l;lI
+l+l
=i
tll
?l
Jlt^
O:V
,
b
tt)
-.
oo
vr6L)
o
+
f
(,
o
:
,rf
!o
\g:
(Z-
-_I
ll
aa
Ao
I
a
:
-rl
u)
q
I
o € --lu-u
Iioo^
- i -'< !,
u^t(u^ ----.,^ iT
,.^nvrw
''.<
u)
oo-lm
rJ('lc!
(])(a
lt:J
.. o
(.n <
d l_
'o (ll
l:!o
I,
v,
C)
a
o
-
T-
(A
xq e;
.r
J
d
-i
_U
(D
Co
o.a
=<
7c
L(n
o
a
o
toJ
6O
rol
l
o
O
6r
coV
qr
o
{L
I
c
I
-.
O
:)
o
C)
a
J
--l
?
o
o
(b
C,
C
:l
|\J
I
Z
c
(l
z
I
c
U)
N
O
o
O
i."
Appendix C: Orion Analytical Technical Report
Appendix B:
Unresolved Stencil Details

ANALYSIS OF EARLY WALL STENCILS AND SELECTED

Transcription

Similar documents

Germination Stencil Art Activity

In presenting this new collection of stencils from

ARTOOL INSTRUCTOR SERIES

The Thread Studio Newsletter

MoDA katagami stencils general background notes

The Thread Studio Newsletter

Brochure - Vishwkarma Impex Private Limited

stencils

Keystone Industries 52 W King St Myerstown, PA 17067 www

The stencil kit includes How to paint the mural