Conservation in action: an album of medieval manuscript fragments with links to John Bagford

A conservation project involved treating a guard book containing sixty-eight medieval manuscript fragments, primarily from the 12th to 14th centuries. The fragments were recovered from the original volume, which had been recycled as bookbinding components. The volume was presented to the Library in 1916 and features a note by John Bagford concerning fragment collection practices. Previous conservation attempts involving plastic sleeves caused further deterioration due to paper brittleness. The final treatment involved disassembling the guard book, removing adhered materials with starch paste poultices, humidifying fragments, consolidating loose pigments using ethanol/isinglass solutions, and performing delicate paper repairs. Fragments were then encapsulated in polypropylene pockets before being reassembled into two new volumes using specialized binding techniques like tackets and Melinex backing sheets to create "lifting leaves." The final bookblocks were made from German mould paper, sewn with French link stitches, and covered in archival board and canvas cloth, resulting in two finished volumes stored in drop-spine boxes.

The process illustrates a tension between material preservation and the inherent instability of historical artifacts when subjected to modern handling and archival requirements. The shift from simple physical containment (plastic sleeves) to complex, multi-layered encapsulation with novel binding techniques reflects an awareness that conservation is not merely about stopping decay but actively reconstructing integrity while accepting necessary intervention. The development of methods like using controlled humidification and tailored consolidants for specific media—such as pigment vs. parchment—highlights a layered epistemology where the physical state dictates the methodology. The act of creating "lifting leaves" and articulated hinges demonstrates an acknowledgement that objects must be treated as dynamic systems rather than static containers, recognizing their inherent history in flexion and unfolding. This narrative suggests that scholarly access requires not just stabilization, but a philosophical commitment to managing the object's potential for future interaction, which implies a responsibility to mediate the relationship between the artifact and the user. The underlying pattern is the necessity of introducing robust, yet minimally invasive, structural solutions to manage fragility, suggesting that true conservation necessitates a dialogue about material limits versus scholarly aspiration.