Specialized in Object and Library & Archive Conservation
Incense Burner
Report Summary
Owner: Penn Museum (see the object on their website)
Accession #: 2019-11-7.1 and 7.2 (base and lid)
Object: Incense burner
Artist/Maker: Teotihuacan style
Materials: Ceramic, plaster restoration
Dimensions: 48 x 25 x 22 cm
Consulted:
Penn Museum Conservation Staff
Associate Curator, American Section, Penn Museum
Report Date: 06.27.2022
Treatment Images
Historical Context and Significance
Incense burners were used in a religious context for deity, household, and funerary rituals. This object’s lid design is typical of those found archaeologically at Teotihuacán, especially the Tetitla compound. The mold made ornaments (“adornos” and “mantas”) are usually arranged to frame the central face. These ornaments can be attached prior to firing, resulting in a single form, or can be fired separately and attached to the incensario body with lime plaster adhesive. They are typically designed to be easily disassembled, which usually occurs prior to burial. This practice could be a means of preparing the objects to enter the Otherworld.
See full report for citations and references
Condition and Description
This is a pastiche object made of low porosity ceramic and plaster. The object design is symmetrical across the central vertical line.
Base:
Most, if not all of the flared top of the base is made of plaster, which is cracking. The center rosette has curved edges to imitate petals, while the two edge rosettes have smooth concentric circle designs. There are four round mounds between the center rosette and the side rosettes. The proper left (PL) rosette appears to have been broken off and re-attached to the base. There is an arch shaped dark brown streak across the bottom of the base, beginning above a fill on the proper right (PR) side, moving up, then coming down to the PL of center. In ultra-violet (UV) light, adhesive is visible along a ceramic-plaster joins at the back of the base and in the front above the center rosette. The plaster fluoresces brightly in cracked areas where the white of the plaster is exposed. The painted plaster fluoresces similarly to the ceramic. The arch shaped dark brown streak fluoresces, could potentially be excess adhesive accidentally deposited on the object. There are spots of fluorescence along the bottom rim and on the underside of the bottom.
Lid:
Overall, there is plaster cracking away from the ceramic and plaster cracking within itself. There is a crack in the back of the truncated cone base that was previously repaired with adhesive. The truncated cone base has two concave shapes that project out on either side. There would have been thirteen small rosettes and one large rosette if the three rosettes on the bottom PR side were not lost. There are three rosettes lost along the bottom of the proper right (PR) side. The three rosettes along the bottom of the proper left (PL) side are ceramic. The center rosette on the truncated cone base is the large one, with its own unique design. Sitting above this rosette is a head with open eyes and mouth in a bared teeth position. The head has large circular earrings and a headband as accessories. Above and behind the head is an elaborate headdress. There are areas of white discoloration on the ceramic surface on the chin, cheeks, and forehead of the face, where the lost 3 rosettes were, on the rosettes symmetrical to the lost ones, and on the back of the base at the bottom. This could be residual plaster from previous repairs and accidental deposits. The white of the plaster is visible on the back in areas that were worn or not completely painted over, mainly on the back central column and truncated triangle of the headdress. There are tide lines on the plaster parts of the back of the object.
In ultra-violet (UV) light, it is possible to distinguish the plaster parts from the ceramic parts as the plaster fluoresces green and the ceramic does not fluoresce. The large center rosette appears to be ceramic in the center, with the adhered pieces being plaster. The head appears to be ceramic, with the headband as a plaster addition. Most of the elaborate headdress is plaster, and the hollow tube for the incense smoke to escape is completely plaster. Of the three rosettes on the headdress, the top one is ceramic and the other two are ceramic and plaster, with the center three-dimensional design being ceramic. In UV light there is a brightly fluorescing adhesive used to adhere plaster pieces onto the large center rosette and repair the center ceramic rosette on the bottom on the PL side. Another adhesive fluoresces purple and was used to repair the crack in the back, as well as adhere the plaster rosettes and headdress base to the ceramic on the PR side.
Ethical Considerations
My concerns about the ethics of this piece deal with how it will be displayed. While the current display label text is accurate, it is not fully transparent about this object as it does not mention the large amounts of restoration present. There never was an incense burner that looked like this one, because half of the object is fabrication from the previous restorer and displaying it without acknowledging that is misrepresenting the Aztec culture. I think it would be better to display the object in the ceramic fragments that remain, because these incense burners were made to be easily assembled as part of ritual practice. The display of the fragments would be truer to the practice around these objects than displaying a whole, but largely fabricated piece. However, displaying this object in fragments would put it out of balance with the other seemingly whole objects that share its case, likely drawing attention to the incense burner in a negative way. To display the object in fragments, the whole case would have to be re-done, which involves a more than the conservation department. As an intern, I do not have the power to make this call. It is worth mentioning that the museum as a whole is very understaffed, and departments are stretched thin as they are with the current workload.
Treatment Summary
Base: Plaster Removal
I began with an acetone solvent chamber to dissemble the rim. The majority of the rim was removed at this step as the rim had previously broken and been re-adhered. The rim fragment that remained was plaster directly attached to ceramic, which I removed using 4% methyl cellulose and mechanical action.
Base: Rim Finishing
I used a Dremel to remove excess material from the rim between the second and third stage and after the third stage. I then filled any chatter marks and small surface flaws with Flugger. Lastly I coated the rim with 10% Paraloid B-72 to give it a uniform surface to paint over.
Base: Bottom Fill
I removed the plaster restoration material from this area using 4% methyl cellulose and mechanical action. I created a new fill using WoodEpox because it is light and easy to sculpt in place. It also is easy to finish. An aluminum foil barrier was between the ceramic and the WoodEpox when creating the fill. 40% Paraloid B-72 adheres the fill in place.
Base: Inpainting
I used Golden Fluid Acrylics to in paint the bottom fill and the rim. I also incorporated Golden Find Pumic Gel gel medium for a more matte and rough surface. The rim was painted in 4 coats: two base coats and two detail coats.
Base: Rim Building
The rim was re-built using Apoxie Sculpt because of its ability to stick to itself well after setting. This ability was important since the rim was to be built in three stages: first to obtain the contour of the ceramic, second to add height, and third to add the flared top. Stages one and two were built in situ and the third off the piece.
Lid: Consolidation
After treating the base, it was apparent that removing and replacing the restoration material on the lid would risk more harm than good to the object. I opted for stabilizing the cracks with 11% Paraloid B-72 bulked with micro balloons or 20% Paraloid B-72 depending on the gap.