130

never been wholly

rectified.33

A lack of written documentation of possible

earlier restorations supports this

supposition.34

The decades-long, unprotected

exhibition of the humidity- and light-sensitive object in the permanent

display of the Museum of Ethnology had doubtless also left clear traces on

the lacquer

screen.35

4.1 SECONDARY COATING

The secondary or really tertiary coating does not appear disturbing on first

glance. On closer observation and in comparison with untreated carved

lacquers, it is evident, however, that it both falsifies the original, subtle

sheen of the carved lacquer surface and includes particles of i.a. dirt. On a

number of test cleaning areas, the difference between the glossy, resinous

colophony coating and the matte, aged surface of the carved lacquer is evident.

 Also recognizable are the dirt particles in the cracks and interstices,

which are embedded in the coating, as well as the whitish masses in the interstices
 and at the edges (fig. 41).

The coating was only applied to the fronts, the lateral surfaces at the top

of the base, and the backs of the two small lower elements. As already mentioned,

 the ibota wax was presumably used for care in China, as it is not

common in Europe.

4.2 CRACKS, GAPS AND DEFORMATIONS, LOOSE AREAS AND LIFTING

LACQUER

In addition to the historically documented vertical crack in the middle panel,

there are multiple, sometimes gaping shrinkage cracks between the inset

panels and their rail-and-stile frames and at other construction-related joints

of the other pieces on the front and the back. These are associated with

numerous loose areas and losses on both sides, especially in the yellow
carved lacquer (in the sky; figs. 42 to 44).

33	 Already in 1901, Count Montecuccoli described a ‘large break’ in the middle

screen element in a dispatch to the Imperial and Royal Imperial War Ministry.
During the cataloguing of the screen in 1903 in the Imperial and Royal Natural
History Court Museum, damage to the base and a number of cracks in the lacquer
were noted. See Baustädter 2013 (cit. n. 4).
34	 According to verbal communication with Norbert Kirchner, M.A., former

conservator at the Museum of Ethnology, the folding screen, especially the
horizontal surfaces (base), were locally cleaned with rapeseed oil for reinstallation
 in the Japan/China Hall. Kirchner further confirmed the likelihood of a
shellac coating, which he also found on many other objects in the collection,
dating from the early years in the Museum of Ethnology. Verbal communication
between Silvia Miklin-Kniefacz and Norbert Kirchner, March 2011.
35	 Baustädter documents that during its time in the Imperial and Royal Natural

History Court Museum, the screen was presented in various (glass) cabinets; see
Baustädter 2013 (cit. n. 4), 141 f. It can be assumed, however, that from its move
to the Museum of Ethnology in 1928 until the closure of the permanent collection,
 the lacquer screen was no longer exhibited in a showcase and was thus exposed
 over a prolonged period to climatic variations and damage by museum
visitors. As already mentioned, Norbert Kirchner, M.A., reported that in the late
1970s the lacquer screen was located in a ‘niche’ on the mezzanine of the building’s
 Ringstrasse side, and from there was transferred to the raised ground floor
for the Japan/China reinstallation in 1987–88.

Christiane Jordan, Silvia Miklin-Kniefacz, and Richard Miklin