Archaeolog No 12 December 1979

ISSN: 0143-0661 The Royal Photographic Society of Great Britain

[rur»S l i1·clJnrolo9ic,nl <6t·ttttp No12 DECEMBER

Price

1979

40 p

(f,fbomasapoffolutl. < .

.

..

:,. .

.

,. .

·•

.,,

.

~

.

. ........ . . .....

.

'

Contents The Martyrdom of St Thomas

Cover

Editorial

2

An Essex Tile Kiln

3

Photography and the Ancient monuments Laboratory

4

Peru before Pizarro

6

The Glamis Bible

8

Fifty Years of Cameras

10

Ilford Multigrade: A Review

12

Correspondence

14

Announcements

15

Editorial "Start the day Witha stnileNthey say "and get it over". We got our smile for the month from Jack Scholfield's editorial in the PhotographicJournal for October. "One thing about editing the Photographic Journal" he was told "you'll have no trouble getting material with all those specialistgroups". Had we been consulted we would have warned Jack that getting anything .out of archaeologicalphotographers (other than Eric Houlder and John Stubbington whom the Fates preserve) requires an axe. Howeverwe¡are happy to encourage our readers to submit material to the Journal (which we now read from cover to cover) providing that they write something for Archaeolog first.

This month we publish a light-hearted autobiographical article by Philip Rahtz which we do standing and with our hat off because whereas the world is full of archaeologicalprofessors who photograph, Philip is the only photographer we know who professes. He reminds us of the extent to which post-war archaeologicalpioneers were expected to be able to do everything - dig, photograph, survey and draw as well as direct. As far as we can remember they were rather looked down on if they didn't. This we believe has had one unfortunate effect - some excavation reports may never see the light of day because their authors feel inadequate in view of rising standards of technical competence. All we can do is encourage them - indeed we suspect that the extent of the availabletechnical skill ih specialist fields such as survey and photography is not all that it is cracked up to be and that we could still do with a lot more than we have at present.

Although it would be premature to say that the dust has now settled in a comfortable film on the editorial desk we have had time for a quick look at the answersto the questionnaire and indeed to adopt some of the improvements suggested. Not having been involvedin such an exercise before we were surprised to find that it was possible for the quality of Archaeolog to be assessedall the way from 5 ticks in the 'Bad' column on the lef~to 5 in the 'Good column on the right. We were less surprised by criticism of the Editor which ranged from that of the reader who would prefer 'editing done by subject matter experts rather than those with high level Englishhonors (sic)' to the comment that our 'syllabication is sometimes arbitrary i.e.... 'effect-ively' should be 'effec-tively'.' Unfortunately we have neither a photographic diploma nor an English degree, but we are certainly going to look up syllabication - surely he/she can't be right?

Christmas good wishes and Archaeologon the door-mat (we hope) in good time for the Christmas break.

Archaeolog is produced by the ArchaeologicalGroup of the Royal Society and printed by WellingtonBureau, 23/25 CravenStreet, London W.C.2. ¡

z

AnEssexTile Kiln

by John Stubbington

LRPS

(The RPS group has not succeeded in establishing a pan el of consultant archaeological photo graphers . This, however, does not prevent individual members of the group making contact with local archaeological units. John Stubbington has done just that and has not only provided a useful service but, we suspect , learnt something himself in the proc ess! Ed.) In August of this year I was fortunate to have the opportunity of photographing a medieval (14th /1 5th centur y) tile kiln , discovered several years ago but only recently excavated . This particular site had been excavated under profe ssional direction by a totally inexperienced volunteer labour force with no outside funds, but rich in enthusias m .

The kiln lies near the village of Radwinter in a remote corner of a farm field. The farmer and his wife are keen amateur archaeologists and conservationists , and they had contacted Paul Drury of the Chelmsford Excavation Committ ee, who as Site Director had inspired the diggers to achieve the end result in four weekends . It was Paul Drury who suggested that I take the set-piece monochrome pictures for publication and record .

One very hot Sunday morning we met at the site , and it was clear that what was originally an immaculate excavation had suffered in the space of two weeks from the sprouting of deeply rooted couch grass and thistles . Brisk work was necessary with spade, shears and trowel to restore it for photography. I learned the hard way that hacking away with a pair of shears does nothing to increase one's steadiness of hand when using the camera without a tripod. The use of a tripod would have been awkward because of the location of the kiln , bounded by standing cereals, a hedge, a sunken lane and the spoil heaps.

The ground level shots with 50mm and 35mm lenses were therefore taken with my SLR camera hand held without a tripod, but with hindsight I realise that it would have repaid the trouble of erecting one.

Overhead shots were necessary of course . These were obtained by means of a 'bucket' on hydraulic arms , tractor mounted, the maximum height thus achieved being barely adequate for the task. It required a complicated ritual to elevate and lower the well-worn mechanism and I refused to enter the bucket until it had been fully raised. I then climbed up to it, the camera and lenses being passed to me on the end of a long-handled broom.

Picture by picture Paul manoeuvred the tractor round the site . There were times when I thought that we would be the first people to wedge a tractor into a medieval tile kiln . Moreover the tipping device on the bucket had developed a good deal of play, ro that leaning forward to improve the angle resulted in a sickening lurch of several inches while leaning backwards brought the bucket tines into the viewfinder. A 28mm lens would have solved the problem, but a 35mm was all I had.

Paul suggested that as I was aready 'up there', I might as well take some colour reversal shots for him nnd n:1ssedme his readyloaded camera. I should have suggested ¡that his film be loaded into my spare SLR body, since I h:id difficultyit i adapting to his unfamiliar camera. Tc my relief I have heard recently that results are highly satisfacto ry.

1 am grat~ful to _Mr & Mr~ Peter Co".'Vellfor p_ermissio~ to take the photographs and of course to Paul Drury tor creating the opportunity. His report 1s to be written dunng the wmter and I look forward to publication. I like to think my pictures will serve their purpose and contribute effectively to the final result.

Tile Kiln, Lower House Farm, with floor slotted to allow updraught of hot gases to kiln -chamber above .

Photograph John Stubbington .

Pho tograph John Stubb ington .

Photography

and the Aneient Monuments ÂŁahratory

by John Musty (Head of Laboratory) Although the foundation of the Laboratory goes back to the 1930's its present title and basis of operation dates only to the 1950's. In a sense it could be said that the new-style Laboratory achieved firm photographic links from the day of its inception as it took over in 1950 space in Lambeth Bridge House vacated by the Department's (then the Ministry of Works) Photographic Section. However, although photography has been an essential tool for the recording of evidence generated in the Laboratory, it was not until 1968 that permanent photographic staff were added to its complement. In 1972 the Laboratory moved to its present much more spacious and up-to-date specially planned accommodation in Fortress House and this made possible the provision of a modern photographic studio and dark-rooms as a part of the Laboratory's 10,000 sq. feet of working space. At the same time, an additonal photographer was added to support the existing senior photographer.

The Laboratory's function is.to provide the necessary scientific support for the archaeological work of the Department of the Environment and covers four main areas of activity viz: Geophysics, Environmental Studies, Early Technology and Conservation - involving work both in the field and at the laboratory bench. It is the purpose of this article to pinpoint briefly the various uses of photographic techniques in the Laboratory's work - some using conventional camera equipment; others only employing photographic film as the permanent recording medium.

Elsewhere (see reference below) I have already drawn an analogy between certain aspects of the Laboratory's work and that of the forensic 'scientist in that both attempt to reconstruct a past event from a small amount of surviving evidence. To extend this analogy further, an archaeological excavation becomes equivalent to the 'scene of crime' and photographs provide an essential visual record of the context of samples removed for subsequent examination back in the Laboratory whether they be of soil or human skeletons. Back in the Laboratory an examination of the corroded surface of a metal object found in an excavation may reveal organic remains preserved through contact with the metal - usually iron or copper alloy. Traces of textile found on objects from graves may provide information about the type of cloth used in the clothing of the body long decayed; insect pupae preserved in the corrosion product may relate to insects which fed on the corpse thousands of years ago. Such evidence must be recorded photographically {by macro- or micro-photography) before it is destroyed by later cleaning of the object and also as an aid to subsequent interpretation at leisure. This, too, continues the forensic science analogy as does the need to extend the methods of examination to the employment of other parts of the electromagnetic spectrum other than visible light, although ultimately imaged onto photographic film.

The Laboratory possesses powerful X-ray equipment {140 Kv and 250 Kv) and a scanning electron microscope (SEM) for this purpose. The latter is especially important in revealing (at high magnification) the surface architecture (often quite beautiful) of minute organic remains preserved on objects or the diagnostic features, for example, of fossil beetles preserved in waterlogged deposits, in both cases as an aid to identification. The SEM's enhanced depth of field and its high magnification is its special quality and is reflected in the striking photographs which record the images it produces. X-rays, too, probe into the unknown and invisible so that one can see beneath the corroded surface and recognise inlays or look into sealed containers in each case in advance of detailed cleaning and conservation.

The bulk of the photographic work of any archaeological laboratory which includes conservation work in its activities will consist, however, of the recording of the objects them$elves in both 'as found' and 'conserved' states including any special features. This requires both the ability to handle large quantities of objects (as most items are given 'before photographs') and considerable patience in obtaining the correct lighting etc. of the somewhat smaller number of conserved objects subjected to 'after photographs' which may need to have special features (tool marks, incised decoration etc.) emphasised. Some of these photographs will also have to be of "publication standard" to illustrate an excavation report or museum display. The Laboratory's photographers are also engaged in producing a photographic inventory of all the objects held at monuments in the Department's care.

It is satisfying to conclude by mentioning that the application of photography to archaeological recording including that of the associated scientific evidence, a technique now used by the Laboratory as part of the Inspectorate of Ancient Monuments, was pioneered by the first Inspector of Ancient Monuments, General Pitt-Rivers, at the end of the last century.

Further Reading The Ancient Monuments Laboratory, D.O.E. Official Handbook, HMSO, 1977. Obtainable from the Government Bookshop or other booksellers, price 30p. ¡

Wednesday23rd January1980, 2 - 4 p.m.

Group visit to Ancient Monuments Laboratory, Fortress House, 23 Savile Row, London Wl. Admission by ticket only obtainable from Hon. Programme Secretary, Michael Gill, Flat 5, Morris Court, Longmead, Windsor, Berks. Last minute applications by telephone to Mrs Hungerford, 01- 734 6010 x 403 during working hours. Assemble in the entrance hall, Fortress House at 2 p.m " The visit will begin with a brief introduction by Mr John Musty in Room 516, followed by guided tours of all sections, i.e. Geophysics, Environmental Studies, Early Technology and Analysis, Conservation and Photography.

Those attending are recommended to obtain copies of the laboratory handbook referred to above.

4

"'

Left: conservation of Bronze Age dagger using binocular microscope (up to 20 times magnification). Right: scanning microscope in use with up to 3000 times magnification. Photographs Cliff Birtchnell.

Crown Copyright.

Peru Before Pizarro b~ R.C. Rawcliffe

MA, FSA.

(The following is a summary of Roger Rawcliffe's talk to the Group at RPS House on ].\;ovember ~th arising out of a sabbatical term spent at Lima studying the ancient civilizations of Peru in comparis on with that of early Greece. Ed.) American Indians moved into the continent from Asia several thousand years B.C. When Europeans arri,·ed there aroun d 1500 A.D. they found varying states of civilization; in two areas it was both politically and materiall y much in advanc e: one of these was in Mexico, the other in Andean South America, principally in Peru. At the time of the conques t the Indian em·pire of the Incas was at a stage not unlike that of Mycenae in the 12th century, B.C. Politically the empire was enormous, stretching about 2,500 miles from the Equator to half way down Chile.

In describing the development of the civilization, we are immediately faced with the lack of historical information. The re was no system of writing in Peru, though there was one of numerical recording using knotted strings. The names of the Inca rulers handed down by tradition are recorded by Spaniards and others after the conquest, in particular by Garcilaso de la Vega whose father was a Conquistador and mother an Inca princess. Writing from Seville many years later he recorded his recollections of many aspects of Inca life. Yet the Incas are simply the last phase lasting about 200 years of a succession of Indian kingdoms, most of which were confined to Limited areas though they influenced each other culturally. All our knowledge, then, is derived from the archaeological remains which have been and are still being explored and evaluated. There is no handy measuring tape such as the dynasties of Egypt. The state of knowledge therefore is highly provisional and constantly being modified by new discoveries.

It is first necessary to have some conception of the geography of the region. There are three distinct regions, each quite narrow but stretching from North to South for some three thousand miles. There is a narrow coastal strip , up to fifty mile~ wide; of desert broken only by short and swift rivers fed by the Andean snows . Where the rivers can be channelled for irrigation the ground is fertile. The sea too is teeming with fish. Mud brick (adobe) was used for building.

In the centre is the Andean region of the Altiplano. The peaks are well above 20,000 feet ; the valley floors, which can be very fertile, average about 10,000 feet. The slopes were terraced to produce addtional cultivable surfaces · stone was used for building.

The third area is that of the Selva or jungle of the upper Amazon. There does not appear to have been much penetration here, though some information challenging this assumption has come to light.

The earliest monumental remains date from the early centuries B.C. - temples survive at Chavin in the Andes and Sechin on the coast, built of stone and decorated with carving. The next large building of similar construction and decoration is at Tiahuanaco in Bolivia dating from the middle of the first millennium A.D. The development of the civilizations can be seen in textiles and pottery. Exceptionally fine and well preserved textiles have survived as shrouds of mummies in the desert, especially around Paracas and Nazca. The subjects and designs on these are echoed in the carvings at Tiahuanaco, and on the brightly coloured Nazca pottery . Similar figures can be seen in the desert near Nazca, among the enigmatic Nazca lines.

During the same period in the Northern desert the successive civilizations of the Moche and Chimu have left many remains.

Mochica pottery is one of the glories of Indian art: fine figures of portraiture or of animals or of genre scenes depicting the whole range of human life. There was an immense adobe city at Chanchan.

All the coastal cultures were absorbed in about 1400 by the Inca. Their remains are perhaps the best known and most spectacular sights of the Americas. Their capital at Cuzio at about 12,500 feet was connected by stone roads with the who le of their empire. Although they did not know of the wheel, their organization was so good that fresh fish was brought daily from the coast. The stonework is justly famous; split by wedges and ground down, in the finest buildings the large stones fit together perfectly. There was some metal-working, and especially gold of which there was abundant supply. This caused the Incas' downfall, since the greed of the Conquistador combined with the missionary zeal of the church destroyed most of their civilizllfion.

6

Pisac cultivation terraces . Photograph Roger Rawcliffe.

"

Nazca 'lines', formed by displacement of small stones on desert floor. Photograph Roger Rawcliffe.

7

THE GLAMIS BIBLE

by MR Apted (Note. The author wishes to thank the Earl of Strathmore for agreeing to the publication of this article and Mrs Auld, Dundee University Archivist , for her help with the associated resear ch. Unless otherwise stated the photographs were taken

by Mr C. Hutchieson and are Crown Copyright, reproduced by permis sion of the Scottish Development Department).

The painted wooden ceiling and wall panels in the chapel at Glami s Castle have recently been resto red by artist-craftsmen from the Stenhouse Conservation Centre (part of the Ancient Monuments Branch of the Scottis h Development Department) which has in turn necessita ted research into the historica l background to the paintings in which photography is playing a crucial part.

The history of the chapel is well documented. It was built for Patrick , 3rd Earl of Strathmore and Kinghorne , between 1679 and 1683. The contract for the paintings, dated 18th January 1688 and discharged 17th November in the same year, has been published in the Clamis Hook of Hecord (Scottish History Society, Edinburgh, 1890). The painter concerned was Jacob de Wet (or de Witt), a Dutchman originally brought to Scotland to work in the Palace of Holyrood House. The contract sets out in detail the responsibilities of either party. De Wet was to paint the 15 panels of the chapel roof so that they contained 'everie one of them a full and distinct storie of Our Blessed Saviour Conforme to the Cutts (engravings) in a bible here in the house or the Service Book' . In addition he was to paint the Crucifixion over the altar, the 12 Apostles on panels round the walls ('each picture to have the name thereof above and at the foot of a scroll containing the same words as are exprest in the cutts') and 'in the rowme within' King Charles the Martyr, St Paul and St Stephen. For his part the 'Earl was to pay de Wet ÂŁ90 as well as 'to ca~se prime the roofe of the Chapell' and the side walls and to 'furnish oyle' and other materials to the painter.

The surviving decoration follows very closely the terms of the contract, with 15 scenes on the ceiling, the Crucifixion over the altar and the portraits of the Apostles, with their names duly enscrolled, round the walls . There are, however, three painted wall panels which are not specified in the contract, while the three paintings scheduled for the inner room were either never painted or have disappeared along with the room itself which has been converted into a stair -well. Clearly the engravings used by de Wet to paint these missing portraits could be used to identify them if they still exist and so lead to their recovery, while comparison between engravings and paintings could confirm or refute the attribution to de Wet of the additional wall paintings. Unfortunately it was found that the Great Bible now in the charter room at Glamis was evidently not that which was said to be 'in the house' and used by de Wet in 1688 - compare the spirited 'martyrdom of St Thomas' on our cover with the benerolent portrait of the Apostle painted by de Wet! This did not mean that the bible was not still somewhere in the castle even though 1t was said to be already missing in 1938 , but it did add a further dimension to the search tor copies of the engravings since their identification could be expected to give some clue as to the appearance of the missing bible.

The hunt for the engr avings began with the preparation of detailed photographs of the surviving paintings which were then hawked round the Institute of Historical Research, the Warburg Institute, the London Library and the library of the British and Foreign Bible Society . Here Mr Jasson, the librarian, ultimately iclentified the source nf the engravings. Starting with a

Glamis Castle: the chapel.

8

The chapel wing, Glamis

De Wet's painting of St Thomas

Left: the de Wet painting at Glamis.

A bove: the Boetius engraving.

Photograph A.F. Jesson .

Copyright British and Foreign Bible Society.

poss1bte 11stof 1726 bibles he reduced the number by catalogue search first to 37 and then to 16 which by careful collation with the Glamis photographs ultimately produced the answer required. The de Wet paintings proved to have been based on a series of scenes from the life of Christ engraved by the Dutchman Boetius a Bolswert, first published in 1622 and subsequently copied by another Dutchman, F .H. Van Houe in 1672 and republished in 1680. These engravings appeared in a number of Bibles printed in Britain , the first appearing in Edinburgh in 1633 , probably in connection with the coronation of Charles 1st. . .

Such a discovery is always exciting , but it was a surprise to find that the engravings were so small - the Glamis bible must be a thickish volume measuring no more than about 7" by 4". They reveal that with certain notable exceptions the ceiling paintings follow the originals closely and that the Crucifixion and one at least of the other wall paintings certainly belongs to the same series. In the latter case (the encounter between Christ and Mary Magdalen in the garden) the discovery confirms the attribution to de Wet but destroys one of the more entertaining local legends, ie. that de Wet, having quarrelled with the Earl over his fee, returned lo the chapel in a rage and painted a hat on the head of Christ! Although there was indeed a dispute, comparison between engraving and painting shows that the hat must have been an original feature . ¡ The story remains incomplete because the Glamis bible has yet to be found and the source of the Apostle portraits is still unidentified; although the bible in the library at Bible Society does contain an engraved set of portraits these are ~]early not those used by de Wet at Glamis. So the search continues.

q

FIFTY YEARS OF CAMERAS

by P.A.Rahtz In this article, I want to say something about my experience of archaeolo gical photogra phy , and how this is relate d to the way we hope to teach the subject in the new Department of Archaeology at York.

My pre-war cameras began in the early 1930's, with the usual sequence of I ~O box, folding VPK, and a very fine Voigtlander box, which looked like a twin-lens reflex but the upper lens was not focussing. Both its F6.3 Yoigtar lens and even more so the F3.5 Heliar ofmy first post-war camera, the Voigtlande r Rangefinder Bessa. were superb. and it still worries me that all the developments in lens manufacture since then have not significantly improved on such lenses as the Heliar, from which I still have I 5 x 12 in. enlargements to prove it , though I was foolish enough to part with the lens when the camera became shaky.

After the war, I started a photographic studio in Bristol, Studio Rahtz, which brought a living from babies, dogs and weddings , with even hand-colouring and framing thrown in. A side-line was making up films on old backing papers with ex-R.A.F. 5 in. wide film, cut to the right width and length in total darkness, by being wound from spool to spoo l over two mounted razor blades - film and blood. The films sold like hot cakes in Cheddar Gorge, and since they bore my prin ted _-colour label , they came back for D. and P. All this was useful background for my archaeological career; the Bessa and a fine ¼-plate reflex with an F __9 Ant icomar (another superb lens still in perfect order) continued to do service in the early amateur digs at Butcombe and Pagan's Hill in the late 1940's; but I purchased from George Boon a ¼-plate Sanderson which, apart from its standard lens, had a wideangle lens with a maximum aperture of F 16 and a minimum of F 128. When I look back at the albums of those days, I feel I should have stuck to these cameras; the results were so much better. But increased pressures came when I became a professional archaeo·Iogist in 1953, working fre-lance for the Ministry of Works (now D.O.E.) . The dfrector rarely had more than a gang of workmen, and all drawing and photography had to be done fast. An MCC Microflex did the black and white (a disappointing post -war British attempt to match the Rollei) and when colour became easily available in 35mm, it was (sparingly) used on an Ilford Advocate. There was little money to spend either on expensive cameras or on lavish use of film. Fortunately, with the exception of display photography, archaeological photographs are rarely reproduced at more than half-plate size, so 35mm and 2¼ square formats were satisfactory, and these remain the fastest and most reliable for everyday work. As prosperity increased, Prakticas were used (still perhaps the best for the archaeological beginner) an'd more recently Pentaxes. Since 1970 the black and white has all been done on the Pentacon Six, whose standard Biotar and the wide-angle F4 Flektogon have given very good results. In recent years we have also used a Polaroid Rangefinder as an important extra. Not only do we use it for record shots of features in the course of excavation at different stages, as a sort of diary of what the thing looked like this morning, but also as the standard recognition picture, to stick directly onto record cards rather than wait for prints to be processed. We also use it to photograph features (and especially skeletons) from a standard height, to give a picture at a scale of l :20, which can then be used to simplify the drawing process.

All this use of cameras in the field is a far cry both from the kind of photography taught in the Institute of Archaeology (half-plate formats) or the super-professional set-ups like those in the big units, such as Trevor Hurst's in London. It still seems an incredible luxury to me to have someone on a site who has nothing to do but take and process photographs!

I am now moving into a different situation at York, where I shall not only have a technician, who may be expected to shoulder much of the photographic burden on site and in the darkroom; but also, in a single-subject degree in Archaeology , photography will be an important part of the vocational skills taught. We also have money to buy expensive cameras for the first"time in my career. The standard monochrome camera will be the Mamiya 645 with the F4 85mm Macro for standard and close-up work, and the 35mm 90° lens which now at last matches the Sanderson camera. For colour work we have a Nikon FM with the standard 50mm F2, a 55mm F3.5 Micro-Nikkor for close-up work, a 35mm Perspective lens for architectural photography (and also as a standard medium wide-angle for site work) and the 20mm lens for really wide cover.

The students will be taught how to use these cameras and all their accessories for flash, copying, slide-making etc ., but they will also be encouraged to have their own 35mm camera and tripod. We shall supply them with cheap film (made up from 100 m bulk lengths) and they will have their own dark-room under the control and help of the technician .

One final recent development; one of the first pieces of work undertaken by the new Department will be the phot0Japhin 0 of the grave-stones at Wharram Percy , intended to be a model record. While direct, very obliqu e bright sun is bes to pi· up faint inscriptions, we are experimenting both with oblique flash (the Vivitar 283 with remote sensor) and also wi h a _ m long fluorescent tube in a casing emitting only a narrow long slit of light. This is powered by a 300 W. Honda enerator which is very portable, and doubles as a general lighting unit, able to drive 4 such tubes. (See illustrations .)

The only field I have not yet tried is that of colour printing · when we embark on this (whi h still seems to me surprisingly fiddly, in the light of Polaroid's automation ) students and st aff will all be startin g from s ratch.

10

I

.\ 'i.// \ ,, /\ +,~

....

.I

Recording inscribed gravestones, Wharram Percy deserted medi eval village.

Photographs Philip Rahtz .

f

')

:j

â&#x20AC;˘

i ?

't â&#x20AC;˘i

Ilfospeed Multiurade = A Revie

by Erie Boulder

LRPS

The re-introduction of multigrade paper on the updated resin-coated base marks a high point for monochrome photography.

Using a single paper and the special filters, eight different grades of con trast are possible. Exposure differences between the filters are compensated for by a simple to use disc calculator which is included in the filter kit.

Sets of filters are available for enlargers with colour drawers, and for those without there is a below-lens set with a plastic holder. It was the latter we tested after adapting the holder to slide up and down the focussing bars of our twenty -year-old Gnome. Though Ilford market a Multigrade developer, we found that the paper worked very well in our customary brew which is probably as ancient as the enlarger, goes by the name of Exprol, and has seen¡service with the R.A.F. Photographi c Recconaisance Units. Its chief advantage is the price, currently £2.50 for about two years' supply when diluted to our secret formula! However, to return to Multigrade : under the enlarger the surface is a pale pink with no filters in use, th e colour disappearing on development. Whites seem to be very slightly less bright than on llfospeed, though this may be an effect of Exprol.

Procedure We found that the following sequence produced the best results.

1. Measure printing exposure in the normal manner and make a test-strip if thought necessary.

2. Determine contrast required and select a filter.

3. Adjust exposure required using calculator.

4. Print.

5. Return filter to tray.

Conclusion The whole procedure is very much quicker and easier than the time taken to write it down. The illustrations show a) the below-lens holder adapted to fit the focussing bars of a Gnome enlarger. b) Three prints from the same negative using three different filters. The neg. was chosen as typical of a site-record shot on a rescue dig containing plenty of shadow detail and exposed and developed as recommended by Ilford. The three printing filters were chosen as representing minimum, maximum, and middle contrast. Incidentally, after printing it was evident from the prints that the ideal filtration for this negative would be a number three.

Experiments with aerial photographic negatives indicate that it is possible to obtain in-between grades by dividing the exposure into two and changing filters between exposures. It is also possible to alter the contrast in different areas of a print by this method plus shading and burning in.

Another useful weapon for the archaeological photographer's armoury !

ETRES Below-lens filter holder. PhotographEric Houlder

12

lJ

Correspondence Dear Sir I feel that A rchaeolog should neithe r be an Archaeological magazine nor a Photographic magazine but an Archaeological Photographic magazine. Therefore articles of general Archaeological (but no photographic) interest are misplaced -while purely photographic articles 'with archaeological application' would not be.

Archaeolog's format as No.9 is acceptable though all 4 potentia l photo pages should have been used. The presentation is poor: I do not like the Gothic main title or the type writer typeface used within.

Some suggestions for future articles : 1. How Archaeological Photographic differs from "Art" Photographic/photo-journalism.

2. Photography of coins, pots, marbles.

3. Large vs. miniature format for site photography.

4. Photogrammetry : when is it useful? Cost effectiveness?

5. Scales in site/object photography: why? how?

6. Remote systems for vertical photographs : kites, balloons.

7. The treacherous impermanence of colour/R.C. materials.

8. Articles on early archaeological photographers . .

9. People's views on all-time archaeological photographic "greats".

10. Site equipment "Which" reports - or personal views.

11. Dig photographic organisation/service.

12 Museum photographic organisation/service.

13. Archaeological Architectural Photography.

Richard Anderson Winchester

Dear Sir I would expect your membership to fall into two groups - photographers with a general interest in archaeology, and archaeologists with an interest in photography. As it stands, I think 'Archeology' is suitable for the former group bu t not really for the latter (to which I belong).

I find -that the archaeological articles are far better covered in specific archaeological books and periodicals and so are of relatively little interest to me.

The type of article I would like to see more ot in 'Arcnaeolog' should deal with specific photographic problems - how do you take photographs of objects in museum cabinets? - What type of equipment is suitable for on-site work? (well done Betty Naggar!). I think it would be extremely valuable to name names of equipment used, development information etc .

For example, the article by W.E. Nassau in Archaeolog No.9 was very good as far as it went - but what was the 'special formula developer' given by Brian Tremain? This article is an excellent introduction to the conservation of archaeological photographs (of which there must be many thousands languishing away in Museum and University Departments ) . Why not expand it in future issues to deal with the actual techniques involved? I wonder how many archaeologists think abou t the future deterioration of the photographic images they are taking today? How does one process material for permane ncy?

'A rchaeolog' should be pressurising archaeologists to think about these problems , because I cannot think of any other publication in which this could be done . To sum up - 'Archaeolog' needs a lot more 'meat' and in particula r, a lot more 'beer . Nevertheless, having answered your questions with many more, congratulations for bringing out 'Archaeolog' in the first place - I hope it goes from strength to strength.

Barrie Hartwell, Queen's University , Belfast.

Dear Sir It is good to r1;ceiveArchaeolog No 10 and to see that you have been given an ISSN numbe r. Have you also invited the British Library and the libraries of the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge (and Trinity College, Dublin I believe) also the National Library of Scotland to receive copies (they will want them from Issue No 1 of course)? It would be good to kn ow that copies are being preserved at these centres for all time.

Graham Woodmansterne Watford '" (We like this idea, but have only one complete set of A rchaeolog which we need to keep for reference. Would anyone prepared to donate a set to posterity please let me know. Ed.)

Announcements ELECTIONSTO COMMITTEE Notice is hereby given that the election for the posts of Chairman , Deputy Chairman , Hon. Secretary , Hon. Treasurer, Editor of Archaeolog and ten committ ee members will be held by postal ballot between Monday 7 January and Friday 1 February 1980.

Nominations for all these posts are invited and should be sent with the name of the proposer and seconder to the Hon. Secretary, Mr M J Leonard , "Woodlawn", Knatts Valley Road , Sevenoaks, Kent, to reach him not later than 24 December 1979.

M J Leonard, Hon . Secretary.

CONSTITUTIONAL CHANGES On Monday 5 November an Extraordinary General Meeting of the Archaeological Group unanimously approved a new constitution for the Group. The main changes result from the development of the Group over the last few years, i.e. the new rules include a more democratic procedure for the election of committee members and officers (by postal ballot), the delegation of additional powers to the committee to permit more efficient day-to-day running of the Group and the formal recognition of a class of subscribers to Archaeolog outside the membership of the R.P .S. Copies of the new constitution can be obtained from the Hon. Secretary, address as above.

SUBSCRIPTIONS Members of RPS Subscribers Students Overseas subscribers

£3 .00 per year £3.25 £2.00 £4.00

Address for subscriptions (other than RPS members) :- Miss Mary Mitchell, 3 Lorraine Court, Talbot Road, Wembley, Middx. HAO4UF. · ·

ARCHAEOLOG Address for contributions to Archaeolog:-

Dr MR Apted, 29 Cavendish Drive, Claygate, Esher, Surrey KTl0 0QE.

OVERSEASTRAVEL The proposed visits to Jordan planned for December 1st - 8th 1979 and January 19th ·- 26th 1980 have been cancelled owing to lack of support.

Programme Note: the location of events listed below is subject to amendment following the closure of RPS House.

Wednesday23rd January,LONDON Afternoon visit to Ancient Monuments Laboratorv, Fortress House. For details see separate notice. Admission by ticket only from Hon. Programme Secretary, Michael Gill, Flat 5, Morris Court, Longmead, Windsor, Berks.

Monday4th February,LONDON Annual General Meeting,RPSHouse, 6.30 p.m. followed by lecture 'Images of India' by Mr Tony Pearce, Group Chairman.

Monday3rd March,LONDON Lecture, RPS House, 7 p.m. 'Military Aspects of Wroxeter' by Dr Graham Webster. Admission by ticket only from Programme Secretary as above.

Wednesday19th March,LONDON Evening visit to Greek and Roman Galleries of British Museum, 5 .30 - 7 .30 p.m. Party of 12 with Brian Cooke, Keeper of the Greek and Roman Department . Admission by ticket only from Programme Secretary as above.

Thursday1st May,LONDON Closing day for submission of prints for 2nd International Exhibition of Archaeological Photography.

May,TURKEY Proposed visit to Turke~. Further details from Group Chairman.

Monday9th June, LONDON Opening of 2nd International Exhibition of Archaeological Photography.

Friday19th to Sunday21st September,BATH Vlth Annual Conference, Bath.