西汉帝陵

　　The Cantiere delle Navi Antiche and the Centro di Restauro del Legno Bagnato(Pisa-Italy)[1] and the YangLing Museum Project:problems involved in excavation end exposi-tion of archaeological organic materials
　　A.Camilli,Esmeralda Remotti
　　Since 1998,excavations in Pisa S.Rossore area,brought to light the remains of a fossil river bed,in which,due to occasional violent floods,sank more than 30 boats and ships.The boats,datable from Ⅱcentury b.C.to Ⅶ century A.D.,were in remarkable good condition,and needed a strong effort to project and start a full conservation program.
　　The discovery of Pisa in 1998 ships brought to the necessity of creating a centre for the conservation of wet wood;since 2005 the centre is keeping on a program of research in documentation and conservation techniques,while the conservation processes are keeping on.
　　The centre soon became a focal point for national conservation of wet wood themes,being asked for international consulting too.
　　Dismounting,conserving,displaying ships:the activity of Centro di Restauro del legno bagnato in Pisa
　　Cantiere delle Navi Antiche di Pisa started in 1998 after the unaspected discovery of a wide archaeolog-ical complex near the S.Rossore railway station,in Pisa.The research started as a rescue excavation,bringing soon to the light a serious amount of various ages shipwrecks.The understanding of the real size of the archaeological context caused the abandoning of the former rescue methods,the planning of a detailed project and the long time planning for the ending of the excavations.The site is a unique context under many aspects.In short,it consists of a thick group of sandy or clayish riverbeds,mixed up with complex clay and sand layers of flood origin.In these flood layers,dated from Ⅱcentury b.C.to at least Ⅶ century A.D.,lay the remains of at least 30 boats,fully preserved(at least 9)or fragmentary.The ground composition and the presence of waters,filtered by the sandy layers,allowed a remarkable conservation for organic finds,being bigger boats or smaller objects(board tools,ropes,baskets,leather,amphorae contains etc.).
　　The site can be interpreted as a wide river bed,probably the former bed of the Serchio river,in its crossing with one of the canals of the centuriated roman land.Not far from the city walls.The slow flowing of the waters,due to the crossing of the streams,generated a deposit area in which were collected sediments and waste brought by the river.The dramatic floods of Arno river(at least 6 were identified in a range of 9 centuries)brought here the wrecks to sink,some of them still with their cargo.The discovery of many organic finds,such as vegetal fibers,leather,wood,immediately brought to evidence the sudden necessity of“on site”first aid and laboratory conservation.It was then necessary to develop“on sit”techniques to preserve fragile finds in conditions mostly similar to those who preserved them for two thousands years.
　　It was necessary,at the same time,to prevent any damage from object who became fragile during the transportation,both in the structure of the mounted object and in the structure of the wood.
　　The use of fiberglass shells seemed then the best solution to these first preservation needs,to obtain a good connection between lifting and ultimate conservation process.The system,schematically needs,after lying on the wooden surface a net of small silica pipes to maintain it wet[2],the creation of a shell built with various layers of selected kinds of fiberglass[3] and resins,and it has been experimented on wide wooden structures too,such as entire ships.
　　The experience gained on the field brought to the opportunity of creating,in connection with the site,a fully equipped conservation laboratory,with proper space and instruments for conservation of organic and inorganic finds,such as leather,wood,ceramics,metals,bones,glass.
　　This project brought to the creation,in 2006,of the Centre di Restauro del Legno Bagnato-CRLB[4] nearby the site.
　　When the archaeological emergency ended and the site ended to be a rescue excavation,started the ne-cessity of reconsidering all the problems concerning wet wood treatment,both in a concrete way(involving impregnation,diagnostic,reversibility of treatment,substances to use matters)and in a more ethic and theoretical way[5].
　　The solution chosen and applied was to keep on experimenting treatments(not being available an uni-versally accepted conservation technique),and strengthening in the efforts of detailed documentation(to save at least formal shape data in case of treatment failure).
　　Various finds,between which the ships found,can be ordered in an exceptionally wide range of cat-egories,in terms of wood species,conservation level,complexity of assemblages and structural morphology of wood itself;we manage from single wooden pieces from collapsed wrecks to almost fully preserved ships(85% of the original).
　　The techniques applied in the CRLB[6] are then widely different,under various aspects,and chosen singularly for any object or complex.In mechanical terms we adopt both techniques of dismounting and conserving the entire ship;we use consolidants such as poliethylene Glycole(PEG),Colophonia vehicled in Acetone and a Melaminic resin(Kauramin*)[7];wet treated objects are dried in controlled atmosphere,using liofilization or microwaves.
　　An important question，which can condition seriously the future museum display of the object,is the surface texture and the colour of the treated wooden objects.While traditional PEG treatments bring to dark and plastic-like surfaces,colophonia or kauramin treatments bring to light surfaces,and allow the further application of coloured waxes to reconstruct the original colour.
　　The Displaying former wet wood:the Museo delle Navi antiche project
　　During the years from the discovery since today,all at once with archaeological excavations and re-storations,was bring on the Museo delle Navi Antiche project[8] that was born comparing different aims:the big economic effort of wet wood conservation,the necessity of using an historical building with its parti-cularities,and the will of obtaining a full modern museum in concept.
　　Instead of constructing a new building for the expositions,it was decided to restore a building complex strictly tied with the city of Pisa from historical and cultural matters:The Medici Arsenals.Cosimo I Medici had the first idea of building in Pisa,around 1540,an arsenal for the ships of the powerful Tuscan fleet,that made part of a project aimed to return to Pisa the ancient splendour;the construction of the Medici Ar-senals started during the years of power of Cosimo Ⅰ(1537-1574)-and was later continued by the sons Fran-cesco Ⅰ(1564-87)and Ferdinando Ⅰ(1587-1609)-in the southern zone of the town,between the Bridge of the Cittadella,the church of S.Agnese and the church of S.Vito.The arsenal was articulated in eight naves 60 meters long on average,8 meters high and about 10 meters wide based on arches leaning on pillars,with sloping roof with wooden structure.
　　The settlement strategy of the museum has been targeted on three main points:
　　-the museum is part of a three-party route that foresees the museum visit also of the Cantiere delle Navi Antiche-CNAP and of the Centro di Restauro del Legno Bagnato-CRLB;
　　-for sustainable environment reasons,the museum could not be housed in a new specially built building but had to be housed in an existing to-be-restored historical building,later located in the building of the an-cient Medici arsenals of the town of Pisa[9];
　　-the restoration method of the ships had to be compatible with the environment of conservation:without performing huge and complex works of conditioning on such large scale.
　　The true and actual planning strategy instead revolves on a clearly identified supporting idea:the choice of a museum strongly centred on the exceptional pisan discoveries that makes an introduction to the theme of the navigation,a Museum of the Ships of Pisa rather that another Museum of the Navigation.
　　The points of articulation of the museum rules are the following:
　　-the chronological contextualization:the chronological limits are those included in the sphere of the discoveries of the site,between the Etruscan phase and the late antiquity.
　　-the environmental contextualization:the context and its discoveries help to supply a framework of the Pisan paleoenvironment in its becoming,under the varied naturalistic,geological,geomorphological and human topography aspects;
　　-the Mediterranean dimension:through the discoveries we can supply a framework of the movements of heritage,people and ideas in the ancient Mediterranean sea;
　　-the ancient technology with special reference to the naval one,comprehensible thanks to the important discoveries of the site;
　　-the modern technology applied for the research and for the preservation of the heritage,comprehensible thanks to the exemplification of the innovative technologies applied in the course of the research;
　　-a strong educational imprint,consented by the obvious possibility of contextualizing the finds and by the typology of the available spaces.
　　The archaeological materials,even the most relevant ones,will come therefore placed in three different narrations,the historical and methodological one(theme areas Ⅰ-Ⅲ),the contextual one(Ⅳ),the functional and socio-economic one(Ⅴ-Ⅷ).
　　So it will be possible to place the large quantities of archaeological materials,not only like point of ar-rival of the information(“described”objects)and like point of development of the information(“describing”objects),but also and above all like information itself,through the reproduction of the original environments either of employment or of discovery.
　　The result is a museum project of considerable scale,realized on rather possibly modular supports,in order to be able to adapt and transform the exhibition with the continuing of the researches,and with a rather modest employment of technology,given the already sufficient spectacular aspect of the heritage in exhibi-tion.
　　The large quantity of exposed materials will allow to support in detail,with the varied typologies of building,the theme routes(functional,typological and documentary reading),without however impov-erishing the original contexts of the ships,which remain however the focal point of the museum narration.
　　The YangLing Museum cultural exchange experience
　　The experience grown up in the Yard of the Ancient Ships and near the Center of Restoration of Pisa,and particularly the peculiar“critic”topics concerning the excavation and the conservation of the archaeol-ogical organic materials,bring closer in obvious way the Pisano context to the archaeological evidences dis-played inside the YangLing Museum in Xi'an.
　　Worlds who can seem so distant at first,both from a geographical and cultural point of view,are in reality neighbors,if watched with the eyes of an archaeologist,a conservator and of those who they find to project an expositional plan able to valuing and explaining,in all its historian-cultural,technical and even aesthetic thematic,an important and stratigraphically complex archaeological context like the one displayed inside the YangLing Museum.
　　The present cultural exchange experience is therefore to think very important for a mutual increase uses of techniques,and in the development of new solutions to topics that are from thinking themselves unques-tionably common.
　　The second phase in which the Plan has been articulated has previewed,in the month of November 2008,the presence of the staff of the CNAP,in the person of who it writes,near the centers of the YangLing Museum,near the“Conservation and Restoration Laboratory”of Xi'an and on the area of the archaeological excavation of an Imperial group of Tombs of the Song dynasty,near the village of Lantian.
　　Since from the first visit in the YangLing Museum it was clear,on one side how much the problems involved in the archaeological excvavation and in the conservation of the materials they were near the Pisank situation,from the other how much deeply different they are,from both the theoretical and technical point of view,the displaying choices operated on the site of San Rossore and for the future Museum of the Ships of Pisa.
　　Also not being be possible to deepen,beyond a certain measure,on site the details of the techniques of excavation,and of the stratigraphy in the site of Xi'an,the nature of sediments,alluvial type,and at least some of formative dynamics of the sedimentary and stratigraphical processes of the site,seem to be comparable with the situation of Pisa.This is a not secondary data,from the moment that the conservation of organic materials inside of stratigraphy depends for the great part from factors intimately connected with the nature of sediments and with tile formative depositional and post-depositional processes involved in the archaeological site.
　　The YangLing Museum choice has been that of displaying the archaeological site constructing the struc-tures of the Museum directly on the place,chosen often operated,with a lot of most varied architectonic solutions,also in Italian and European archaeological sites.However a meaningful difference is constituted from the choice not to carry to complete fulfillment the archaeological digging of all the archaeological ma-terials,and,sometimes,of some structural elements,but more rather than“to reveal them only partially”,leaving in situ also part of the same sediment that has gone to cover the objects,in the course of the centuries.
　　To this point it must make an important assumption:archaeological excavation is,as known,a des tructive operation.Its fundamental principle is that one to proceed to taking apart of the minimal strati-graph-ical units,the layers,in the inverse order to that one of their same formation,from most recent to most ancient.Doing so they are brought to light ancient artifacts,but,at the same time,they definitively cancel the traces of what's happened,in the same place,quickly after the moment that the archaeologist,or the museum curators,decide“to always freeze”in order of the phase to show to the archaeological area visitors.
　　In short,archaeological excavation constitutes a kind of volume,the whose pages are shreds of history,life and culture of who has preceded to us,but in order to turn pages it will be necessary to tear it,and there-fore it will not be more possible to read the book on the beginning any more.
　　By truth,what makes us capable to read the book once more,is the quality of the documentation we record during the excavations,and today this quality is incredibly increased thanks to the developments of the technology.Inside of an archaeological area,the choice than or what is displayable,not in terms of single objects,but of contexts,like ancient structures,rooms,portions of buildings and their content,it does not have to be more based only on a painful decision“to freeze”an event and cut off the others.
　　The problem's solution can,and would have,to pass through the employment of techniques,or physical that virtual,in a position to reconstructing,to replace or to compensate,how much ruined by time,but also by the excavations,this based on the detail obtained from a rigorous documentation carried out during digging completes.
　　This way to proceed can represent also the solution to other present problems on the site in which is,also partial,decided to conserve archaeological objects left in situ.In fact,the conservation and the con-solidation of archaeological materials of different nature,as wood,organic materials,metal but also resin,bones and the same ceramics,left to contact with the ground,is extremely problematic,like emerged from the comparison with the same responsibles of the YangLing Museum.
　　To take in consideration the fact to complete in definitive way the excavation of the materials,to proceed to their restoration during laboratory,and to allocate them again in situ,in a context purposely redesigned in order to reproduce in all them original conditions,it can constitute a valid alternative,with positive on is up on conservative aspects that turn out,at the moment,more rather critic to us.
　　To such purpose it is rather obvious that lying conditions and recovery conditions are not always the same thing.If it is a good thing,in displaying an archaeological site,to reproduce and to conserve the lying context as original,that is the paraphernalia beside the corpse in a tomb,rather than the furnishings of a disposed room thus as they were in ancient,cannot be equally necessary and favorable to show to the visitor dynamics of fall or partial decayment of the same objects when the circumstances endured from the site modified the original position.
　　However,like known to whom work in the field,without a complete understanding of the finding con-ditions it is improbable to be able to proceed to a faithful reconstruction of the original contexts.
　　The Chinese experience has therefore fallen back interesting aspects connected with experimental acti-vities still carried out in the CNAP.
　　In fact,it will turn out stimulant to improve the experimentation still in course on conservation tech-niques for organic material,with particular regard to the factor represented from the environmental conditions endured them from the objects after their ri-deposing in situ;in fact,apart from the different displaying choices,carried out in the two archaeological contexts,in the Italian site there is yet today the problem of the still numerous presence of shipwrecks in course of exploitation,therefore to“a so to speak”positioning in situ forced from the circumstances.This circumstance is closely connected to the objective timing of the restoration of this kind of materials,wide and complex subject not to discuss here.
　　Other point of common reflection seems to be constituted from the realistic and virtual techniques in a position to reconstructing the ancient atmosphere in which originally the archaeological materials were plac-ed.The stratigraphical and topographical complexity of the Pisano site,thus like that wide intuitable one from the observation of the Imperial Tombs of the ancient Han dynasty,they join the two archaeological as-pects regarding the problem to give back to the public of the visitors,in its complexity and beauty,that entire“book”that contain pages of the history of the two cultures,pages,as mentioned above,that it has been necessary to tear in order to be able to be read.
　　Bibliography
　　Aa.Vv.,Ancient Ships of Pisa.Catalogo della mostra di New York,New York 2001
　　A.Camilli,ⅡCantiere delle Navi Antiche di Pisa:Note sull'ambiente e sulla periodizzazione del deposito,in Archeologia Marittima Mediterranea 1.2004,PP53-75.
　　A.Camilli,Le strutture“Portuali”dello scavo di Pisa-San Rossore,in A.Gallina Zevi,R.Turchetti(a cura di),Le strutture dei Porti e degli Approdi Antichi,Soveria Mannelli 2004,PP67-86.
　　A.Camilli,A.De Laurenzi,E.Setari(a cura dj)Pisa.Un Viaggio nel Mare dell'Antichita(Catalogo della mostra di Roma),Milano 2006.
　　A.Camilli(a cura di),Pisa.Museo delle Navi Antiche.Allestimento museale:progetto esecutivo,2009.
　　A.Camilli,P.Puma,E.Remotti,Dismounting,conserving,displaying ships;the MNAP-Museo delle Navi Antiche di Pisa and the activity of Centro di Restauro del Legno Bagnato di Pisa,Presentation at The 2nd Conference“Wood Architecture in Karelia”,Petrozavodsk,Russia,2009,PP270-277.
　　A.Camilli,E.Setari,Le Navi Antiche di Pisa.Guida Archeologiea,Milano 2005.A.Camilli,A.De Laurenzi,E.Remotti,E.Setari,(a cura di),Alkedo.Navi,merci e commerci nella Pisa romana(catalogo della mostra di Pisa).Pontedera 2006.
　　E.Remotti,Attivita di scavo archeologieo.Sperimentazione di tecnologie applicate,in A.Camilli(a cura di),Pisa.Cantiere delle Navi antiche e Centro di Restauro del legno bagnato.Resoconto delle attivita 2007-2008,in Notiziario della Soprintendenza per i Beni Archeologici della Toscana,3,2007,PP285-286.
　　E.Remotti,P.Machetti,Pisa-san Rossore.Applieazione di tecnologie di alta precisione e software dedicati nella documentazione nello studio di reperti archeologici di natura organica,in Notiziario della Soprintendenza per i Beni Archeol-ogici della Toscana,3,2007,pp.807-812.
　　E.Remotti,P.Machetti,V.De Troia,A.Spinetti,Reperti archeologici in fibra organica e legno da ambienti umidi:problemi di documentazione e di gestione a fini scientifiei ed espositivi,in Atti del Convegno“La diagnostica e la conserva-zione dei manufatti lignei:il legno bagnato”,PRIN 2005.Pisa 5-7 dieembre 2007,Gradus 3.2,2008,pp.27-41
　　M.Tangheroni(a cura di),Pisa e il Mediterraneo(Catalogo della mostra di Pisa),Milano 2003.
　　El puerto de las marhavillas,El Puerto de las Maravillas.Catalogo della mostra di Alicante,Cadix,Tavemes de la Valldigna(Spagna),Oeira(Portogallo),Alicante 2002.
　　Studio di Prefattibitita per un Museo della Navi a Pisa,ASK-Bocconi,Scuola Normale,Pisa 2004.
　　The Ancient Ships of Pisa.An European Laboratory for Research and Preservation(La navi antiche di Pisa.Un laboratorio europeo di ricerca e di valorizzazione),Bruxelles 2002.
　　www.cantierenavipisa.it.
　　Credits:
　　Andrea Camilli-Director of Cantiere della Navi Antiche in Pisa-CNAP and Director of Centro di Restauro del Legno Bagnato-CRLB;MNAP scientific project
　　Esmeralda Remotti-Documentation Coordinator in Cantiere della Navi Antiche di Pisa-CNAP;MNAP scientific and project collaborator
　　References:
　　[1] Ancient Ships of Pisa Yard and the Wet Wood Restoration Labolatory are structures of Soprintendenza per i Beni Archeologici della Toscana-Ministero dei Bani e della Attivita Culturali
　　[2] In manteinance and first treatment phases,washing of absorbed minerals,finds are kept under demineralized water,sometimes with added biocide.
　　[3] Different characteristics for used fiberglass materials,such as of the percentage of the epoxy resin with which have to be evalued for any single object,considering weight,
　　[4] The CRLB staff worked in partnership with several UE programs,such as Anser-Ancient Sea Routes of Mediter-ranean(2004-2006),and Rate del Musei del Mare(2007).The CRLB staff works as scientific consulting for main navigation musueums:MARQ(Alicante,Spagna),Museo Nacional de Arqueologia Maritima(Cartagena,Spagna),Museum für Antike Schiffart(Mainz,Germanin).
　　[5] Cfr.A.Camilli,in Conference proceedings“La Diagnostica e la Conservazione di Manufatti Lignei:il legno bagnato”:http://www.cantierenavipisa.it/Pubblicazioni_Gradus4.html
　　[6] Restoration Centre for Wet Wood of Pisa
　　[7] The process is being experimented through a collaboration with the Museum Fur Antike Schiffart,Mainz(Germany),whose conservation centre applied this technique for 30 years.See Markus Wittko Epper,Current developments in the pres-ervation of archaeological wet wood with melamine/amino resins at the Romisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum http://www2.rgzm.de/navis/Conservation/ConservationUK.htm.The method seems to be actually one of the best for wide dimension woods.
　　[8] General Coordinator:Mario Augusta Lolli Ghetti;scientific project:Andrea Camilli,Elisabetta Setari;scientific and exhibition path project collaboration:Angelina De Laurenzi,Alessandra Marino,Anna Patera,Paola Puma,Esmeralda Remotti;Soprintendente:F.Lo Schaivo;Conservation processes F.Fiesoli,F.Gennai;grafics and rendering:C.Ballini,A.Camilli,A.Cutruzzola,G.Degli Innocenti,I.Iacobelli,F.Paoli,M.C.Rinaldoni,M.Zanzotto;materials analisys and production techniques:Sauro Gaddi,Amedeo Cesa Bianchi,Paola Machetti,Francesco Pippia;web design:M.Masci.
　　[9] Comune di Pisa,Pisa e il Museo della Navigazione.Materiali e Percorsi per un Piano Regolatore della Grandi Istituzioni,Pisa 2001;Comune di Pisa,Ecosfera S.p.A.,RPA S.p.A.,Ernst & Young Financial Business Advisors S.r.1.,Leonardo S.r 1.,Studio di fattibilita per la riqualificazione urbanistica di aree della citta di Pisa.Recupero e valorizzazione a fini turistico-ricettivi e residenziali di tre caserme nel centro di Pisa,Pisa 2001;di Pisa,Esosfera S.p.A.,RPA S.p.A.,Ernst & Young Financial Business Advisors S.r.1.,Studio di Fattibilita per la riqualificazione urbanistica di aree della citta di Pisa.Primo documento operativo di sintesi sulle ipotesi di attuazione degli interventi previsti dallo studio di fattibilita,Pisa 2002;AA.VV.,La trasformazione delle Caserme Storiche.Valorizzazione urbana e percorsi di fattibilita,Roma 2004.
　　古代船舶与湿木材修复中心(比萨-意大利)[1]及汉阳陵博物馆项目：发掘中涉及的问题与考古有机物质的揭示
　　A·卡米利，艾思梅洛达·蕾莫蒂(意大利)
　　自1998年起，比萨圣·罗瑟地区的考古发掘已揭露出一处化石河床残骸遗址。由于偶然爆发的猛烈洪水，其上沉积着30多艘船只。这些船只的年代约为公元前2世纪至公元7世纪，保存得非常完好，故需要一个切实可行的计划，并开始一个全面保护项目。1998年比萨船只的发现使创建湿木保护中心势在必行。自2005年起，该中心一直在开展着文献记录和保护技术研究项目，与此同时，保护程序也一直在跟进。该中心很快变成国家保护湿木主题的一个焦点，也应邀参与国际咨询活动。
　　拆卸、保护、展示船只：比萨湿木材修复中心的活动
　　在比萨圣·罗瑟地区火车站附近出人意料地发现了一大片考古遗址建筑群后，1998年比萨船厂古代船舶保护中心成立。研究工作是作为一次抢救性发掘开始的，很快显露出很多各个时代的沉船。对考古范围实际规模的理解使我们放弃了以前的抢救性方法、一个详细的项目计划以及结束发掘的长期计划。该遗址在很多方面都是一个独一无二的环境。简言之，它由一组厚厚的沙质或泥质河床组成，与建筑群泥土和洪水发源处的沙层混杂在一起。在这些年代为公元前2世纪至至少公元7世纪的洪水层中，杂陈着至少30艘船只，有的保存完好(至少9艘)，有的已残破。底层构成与水的出现，加上已被沙质层过滤，使得有机发现物，或是更大的船只或是更小的物品(登船工具、绳索、篮子、皮革、罐类容器等)都处于完好的保存状态。
　　该遗址可以被解释为一处宽河床，可能是塞奇奥河以前的河床，地处此河与罗马延续数世纪土地上一个运河的交汇处，离城墙不太远。由于溪流交汇，河水缓慢流淌，产生一处沉积区，沉积物与河水带来的废弃物聚集在这里。阿农河凶猛的洪水(在连续9个世纪中至少能辨认出6次)将沉船带到这里，其中有些满载货物。很多有机物的发现，如植物纤维、皮革、木头等，将现场紧急抢救和实验室保护的突发性需要迫在眉睫地摆在人们面前。因此，有必要开发遗址现场技术，将脆弱的发现物保存在类似已保存它们两千年之久的基本环境中。同时，也有必要防止那些已变得脆弱不堪的物品在运输期间遭受任何损害，包括带框架物品结构和木质结构两方面。
　　使用玻璃纤维壳在当时似乎是满足这些最早保护需要、在提取与最终保护过程之间获得一种良好关系的最佳方法。在木质表面放置一个小硅胶管网保持湿度之后，[2]这套系统需要有计划地与选用类型的多层玻璃纤维[3]和树脂合构成一个壳，这种方法也已在宽的木结构中得到试验，例如整个船只。
　　实地保护经验为创建一个设备齐全的、与遗址相关联的、具有合适空间及有机与非有机发现物保护设备的保护性实验室提供了机会，如皮革、木器、瓷器、金属器、骨器和玻璃器等。
　　2006年，该项目促成湿木材文物修复中心—CRLB[4]的成立，地点设在在古船遗址附近。当考古急迫性解决后，遗址不再是一个抢救性发掘现场，有必要开始重新考虑所有关于以具体方法(涉及浸透、诊断、处理的可逆性、使用物质事宜)和一种更合适的理论性方法处理湿木材问题。[5]
　　所选择和采用的方案一直保持在实验性处理阶段(并非是一个现成的、普遍接受的保护技术)，详细的数据记录工作也在加强(如果处理失败，确保至少有正式的原始数据)。船只原址两侧的各种发现物可以按照木质标本、保护水平、装配物和木质本身结构性形态的复杂性等特别广泛的类别进行排序。我们设法从溃垮船只的单个木质标本到保存基本完整的船只(原物的85％)入手。
　　因此，CRLB[6]采用的技术在各个方面都是截然不同的。根据物体的差异性和复杂程度来做有区别地选择，任何物件或综合建筑都做单独处理。在机械方面，我们采用拆卸和保护整个船只的两种技术。我们使用的凝固剂包括poliethylene Glycole(PEG)、溶于Acetone的Colophonia，及一种Melaminic树脂(Kauramin*)[7]。经过湿处理的物品在可控环境中用Liofilization或微波进行干燥。
　　对未来博物馆器物陈列可能产生巨大影响的一个重要问题是处理过的木器表面纹理与颜色。传统的P E G处理方法会产生黑暗的、塑料状的表面，Colophonia或Kauramin处理法会产生光亮的表面，使得进一步采用彩色蜡重建最初颜色成为可能。
　　古老的湿木材陈列：古代船舶博物馆项目
　　在自发现直至今日的岁月中，所有经过紧急考古发掘和修复的东西都被带到古代船舶博物馆项目中。该项目诞生于较为不同的目标：[8]湿木材保护的巨大经济效力、使用一座带有特殊性历史建筑的必要性、在概念上获得一个全面现代化博物馆的意愿。
　　我们并没有为展示而新造一座建筑，而是决定修复一座与比萨有着密切历史和文化联系的综合建筑：梅第奇军械库。约在1540年，卡西莫一世时期的梅第奇最早萌生出在比萨为强大的图斯坎(Tuscan)舰队修建军械库的主意，藉此部分地恢复比萨昔日辉煌。梅第奇军械库建造工作始于卡西莫一世(1537-1574掌权期间—后来由其子佛朗西斯科一世(1564-1587年执政)和菲迪南多一世(1587-1609年执政)继续修建，地点在城南一带，Cittadella，桥与圣·阿吉尼斯教堂和圣·维托教堂之间。军械库被表现为8个平均长60米、高8米、宽10米的开阔中央大厅，凭由斜架在柱子上的拱形支撑，木结构部分带斜坡屋顶。
　　博物馆规划策略一直旨在三个主要方面：
　　——博物馆属于预先安排C N A P 和CRLB三方参观路线的组成部分。
　　——出于可持续性环境原因，博物馆不能放置于一座专门新建的建筑中，必须置于一座已存在的但需要修复的古建筑中，后来将馆址选择在比萨城古代美第奇军械库建筑之中。[9]
　　——船只修复方法必须与保护环境相一致：没有在如此大范围中进行巨大而复杂的给湿工程。
　　切实可行的规划策略是在一种清晰明辨的支持观点基础上反复推敲出来的：一个博物馆的选择要以比萨的独特发现为强有力中心，它构成航海主题的序篇，一座比萨古船博物馆，而非另一座航海博物馆。
　　博物馆原则表现要点如下：
　　——年代的环境化：年代的界定限于发掘现场范围内，即在伊特鲁亚时期和晚古时期之间。
　　——环境的环境化：环境及其发现有助于在不同的自然主义的、地质的、地貌学的和人类形态方面为比萨古环境的开始形成提供一个框架。
　　——地中海区域(空间)：通过发现，我们可以提供一个遗产、人和观念在古代地中海流动的框架。
　　——由于遗址的重要发现使得人们可以了解古代技术，特别是海上技术。
　　——由于研究过程中采用例证性革新性技术，让人们可以感知到现代技术已被应用到研究和遗产保护中。
　　——具有一种强烈的教育印迹，已被发现物环境化的明显可能性和可供利用的空间形态所证实。
　　考古资料，即使最有关联的那些，会因此被置于三种不同的叙述中：历史的和方法论的(主题区Ⅰ—Ⅲ)、环境的(Ⅳ)和功能的与社会经济的(Ⅴ—Ⅷ)。
　　因此，有可能放置大量考古材料，不仅包括信息到达点(“被描述的”器物)与信息发展点(“正描述的”器物)，而且在所有像信息本身之上那些东西，都是通过最初的工作或发现环境的复原来实现的。结果就是在相当可能的模块支持基础上实现的一个规模相当大的博物馆工程，目的在于能够用持续不断的研究和有限度地采用技术在展览中表现遗产中已经足够壮观的方面。
　　大量暴露的材料使得以建筑的各种形态和主题线路(功能的、形态的和文献阅读的)等细节支持成为可能，但并未剥夺古船的最初环境，它仍是博物馆叙事的焦点。
　　阳陵博物馆文化交流经验
　　围绕古船场和比萨修复中心积累起来的经验，特别是关于有机物质的考古发掘和保护等独特的“批评性”课题以显而易见的方式将比萨环境与西安阳陵博物馆内陈列的考古证据拉近。
　　从地理和文化角度看，最初认为世界如此遥远的那些人们实际上都是邻居。如果从一个考古学家、保护学家和那些发现要将一个展示计划变成特征鲜明且能够估价和解释的人们，总之是历史学家角度来看，它们都有一种在文化、技术、甚至审美主题方面非常重要且具有地层学意义的综合考古环境，正如阳陵博物馆内所展示的。
　　因此，我们认为目前的文化交流经验对于一种技术的不断双向使用、对于为本身已毫无疑问地非常普遍的课题开发出新的解决办法非常重要。
　　2008年11月，在计划已经对接的第二阶段，由起草人率领的C N A P 工作人员出现在汉阳陵博物馆中心附近、西安“文物保护与修复实验室”附近和蓝田一个村子附近的宋代皇实墓群考古发掘现场。自从首次参观阳陵博物馆起，有两方面的问题就已清楚，其一是考古发掘和物质保护方面所涉及的问题有多少与比萨情况相近；其二是从理论和技术角度看，圣·罗瑟遗址已运行的和为未来比萨古船博物馆的展示选择的深度区别有多大。
　　也不可能在遗址上超出某种程度地深化发掘技术、西安遗址的地层关系、沉积物性质、冲积类型、至少一些遗址沉积和地层过程的形成动力等似乎与比萨情况具有可比性的细节。从很大程度上依靠冲积物性质、考古遗址形成性沉积和后沉积过程对地层内的有机物质进行保护的那一刻起，这就是一种非二手资料。
　　阳陵博物馆的选择一直是以多种最具变化的建筑手段直接在考古遗址上建造博物馆并展示遗址，所做的选择也被实际操作，也与意大利和欧洲考古遗址相近。但选择不追求完成所有考古材料、有时是一些结构性因素的考古发掘任务，却远非“仅部分显露它们”，将现场也留作在数世纪中已覆盖器物的同一沉积层的一部分，这便构成一种有意义的区别。
　　在这点上必须做一种重要的假设：众所周知，考古发掘是一种毁坏性操作。其最基本原则是以倒置顺序、从最近到最古老，将最小地层单元、土层从它们同一构造中剥离出来。在考古学家或博物馆馆长决定以时代顺序向考古区观众展示“永远凝固”那一刻后，人们立即发现这样做可以让古代艺术品重见天日，但同时他们毫无疑问地隐匿了同一地方所发生一切的痕迹。
　　简言之，考古发掘构成一种书卷，其张页是我们之前那些人的历史、生活和文化碎片，但为了翻开书页，有必要撕裂它，因此不大有可能再从开始阅读书了。实际上，能够让我们重新阅读书卷的是我们在发掘过程中所做文献记录的质量。如今，由于技术发展，这种质量令人吃惊地增加。在一个考古发掘区内，选择可以展出的东西不是根据单个器物，而是根据像古代建筑、房屋、建筑物构成部分及其内容等环境而定。它无需更多地仅以“冻结”一个事件和剪断与其他东西一切联系的痛苦决定为基础。
　　问题的解决办法能、也应该是站在一种重新构建、代替或弥补的高度上，通过采用技术或物理手段，以挖掘完成期间所进行的有效的文献记录中所获得的细节为基础，虚拟出遗址有多少已被时间和发掘毁坏。
　　所实施的这种方法也代表我们对遗址上其他现存问题的解决办法，其中，也是部分地，决定在原地保护考古发掘器物。事实上，保护与加固像木头、有机材料、金属、树脂、骨器和陶器等不同性质的考古物质时让它们与地表接触是极端有问题的，正如对阳陵博物馆同样责任作比较之后所出现的那样。
　　要考虑这样的事实，即以实际而准确的方式完成材料发掘、在实验室进行其修复工作、然后再将它们放回原地一个专门重新设计的环境中，目的是在其所有最初状态下进行复原，这可以构成一种有效的选择(替代)，积极的一面是在保护方面之上，到那时，它会证明是对我们更加苛刻的要求。
　　为达到此目的，要相当清楚原貌与复原场景不总是同一件事情。如果在展示一个考古遗址时，复原与保护原来环境如初是一件好事情，即墓葬中尸体旁边的附属物，而非处理过的房间中的陈设，正如它们在古代一样，同样无须且乐于给观众展示当环境经受遗址原来位置改变时，相同器物衰落或部分腐败的动力。
　　然而，正如那些在现场工作的人所了解的那样，如果不完全通晓发现状况，就无法忠实地对最初环境进行重新构造。中国经验因此符合C N A P 仍在实施的相关实验性活动的有趣方面。事实上，这会转变为改进仍在进行中的有机材料保护技术的推动力，特别是关于文物被重新放回原地后、环境条件能否承载它们等代表性因素。实际上，除了在两种考古环境下完成的不同展示选择外，如今意大利遗址在利用过程中仍无数次出现过沉船，因此，环境迫使“一个如是说话”的原地定位出现。这种环境与修复这种材料的客观时间表密切相关，这里不讨论广泛而复杂的主题。
　　普遍反映的其他问题似乎是由在重新建构放置考古材料的古代氛围的位置上涉及的实际的和虚拟的技术构成。因此，比萨遗址地层和地形的复杂性，也正如人们从汉代皇室陵墓发现中广泛感知的那样。它们结合了关于以其复杂性和美观性、以包含两种文化历史之页的整部“书”将两个考古方面的问题反馈观众公众。如上所述，为了能够阅读，有必要将书页撕开。
　　参考资料
　　Aa．Vv.，纽约2001，比萨古代船舶，纽约展览目录
　　阿·卡米利，比萨I1船厂古代船舶：环境及定期展览备注，2004年1月，地中海海运考古；
　　阿·卡米利，比萨-圣罗索尔挖掘入口的结构，A．贾丽娜泽维，R．特克提(编辑)，Le strutture dei Porti e degli Approdi Antichi,Soveria Manelli 2004.
　　阿·卡米利,A.De Laurenzi,E.Setari (a cura di) Pisa.Un Viaggio nel Mare dell'Antichita (Catalogo della mostra di Roma),Milano 2006.
　　A.Camilli (a cura di),Pisa.Museo delle古代船舶.Allestimento museale:progetto esecutivo,2009.
　　阿·卡米利,P.Puma,艾 雷莫蒂,Dismounting,conserving,displaying ships; the MNAP-Museo delle 古代船舶di Pisa and the activity of Centro di Restauro del 湿木材di Pisa,Presentation at The 2nd Conference“Wood Architecture in Karelia”,Petrozavodsk,Russia(c.s.)
　　阿·卡米利,E.Setari,Le古代船舶di Pisa.Guida Archeologica,Milano 2005.阿·卡米利,A.De Laurenzi,艾 雷莫蒂,E.Setari,(a cura di),Alkedo.Navi,merci e commerci nella Pisa romana(catalogo della mostra di Pisa),Pontedera 2006.
　　艾·雷莫蒂，考古挖掘活动，测试技术，A．卡米利(编辑)，比萨·船厂古代船舶和湿木修复中心．2007-2008工作报告，托斯卡纳考古遗产新闻总监，2007，3，285-286页．
　　艾·雷莫蒂,P.Machetti,Pisa-san Rossore.Applicazione di tecnologie di alta precisione e software dedicati nella documentazione nello studio di reperti archeologiei di natura organica,in Notiziario della Soprintendenza per i Beni Arehe-ologici della Toscana,3,2007,pp.807-812.
　　艾·雷莫蒂,P.Machetti,V.De Troia,A.Spinetti,Reperti areheologiei in fibra organica e legno da ambienti umidi:problemi di documentazione e di gestione a fini scientifici ed espositivi,in Atti del Convegno“La diagnostica e la conservazione dei manufatti lignei:il 湿木材”,PRIN 2005.Pisa 5-7 dicembre 2007,Gradus 3.2,2008,pp.27-41
　　M.Tangheroni(a cura di),Pisa e il Mediterraneo (Catalogo della mostra di Pisa),Milano 2003.
　　El puerto de las marhavillas,El Puerto de las Maravillas.Catatogo della mostra di Alicante,Cadix,Tavernes de la Valldigna (Spagna),Oeira(Portogallo),Alicante 2002.
　　Studio di Prefattibilita per un Museo delle Navi a Pisa,ASK-Bocconi,Scuola Normale,Pisa 2004.
　　The Ancient Ships of Pisa.An European Laboratory for Research and Preservation (Le 古代船舶 di Pisa.Un laboratorio europeo di ricerca e di valorizzazione),Bruxelles 2002.www.cantierenavipisa.it.
　　作者简介：
　　Andrea Camilli-比萨船厂古代船舶(C N A P)馆长、湿木材修复中心(CRLB)主任、MNAP科学项目负责人。
　　Esmeralda Remotti-比萨船厂古代船舶(C N A P)档案协调人、MNAP科技与项目合作人
　　注释：
　　[1]比萨的古船现场和湿木修复实验室隶属于托斯卡纳考古遗产监管局—省文物文化活动部。
　　[2]在维持和最早处理阶段，洗掉发现物所吸收的矿物质后，将其置于去矿物质化的水中，有时与附加的杀虫剂放在一起。
　　[3]使用的玻璃纤维材料不同性质，如根据重量必须为任何单个器物估算将要采用的环氧树脂比例。
　　[4]CRLB工作人员与UE合作从事多个项目，如2004-2006年的安瑟尔—地中海古代海洋线路、2007年海洋博物馆网络。CRLB工作人员还以科技咨询员身份为一些主要的航海博物馆作科技顾问：MARQ(阿利坎特，西班牙)，海洋水族国家博物馆(卡塔赫纳，西班牙)，仿古船博物馆(美因茨，德国)．
　　[5]阿卡米利在会议中发表的“木制的诊断与保护：湿木材”：http：//www．cantierenavipisa．it/Pubblicazioni_ Gradus4．html
　　[6]比萨湿木修复中心
　　[7]过程通过与德国美因茨仿古船博物馆合作进行过试验，该馆保护中心采用这种技术已长达30余年。参考Markus Wittkoppe，Romisch Germanisches Zentralmuseum 考古发现的带三聚氰胺/胺树脂湿木材保护现状，http：// www2.rgzm．de/navis/Conservation/ConservationUk.htm.这似乎是处理大面积木器最好的方法之一。
　　[8]总协调员：奥古斯托马里奥罗立盖提；科技项目：安德烈卡米利、伊丽莎白塞塔里；展览和科技通道项目合作部：安吉丽娜者劳伦兹、亚利桑德拉圣马力诺、安娜帕特拉、宝拉普玛、艾思梅洛达·雷莫蒂；总监：露盖沙尔；保护过程：F·费索里、F·金奈；制图与描述：C·巴里尼、阿·卡米利、A·库土佐拉、G·德伊·伊诺森特、I·拉克贝里、F·薄利、M.C.瑞纳多尼、M.赞左拓；物质分析和生产技术:萨罗盖地、阿米多克撒比安奇、保罗玛盖提、弗兰切斯科皮匹亚；网站设计：M.马斯奇．
　　[9]比萨市政府，比萨航船博物馆，大型机构材料与方法监管计划，2001比萨；比萨市政府，Ecosfera公司.，RPA公司.,Ernst &会计师事务所金融业务顾问公司，Leonardo公司，比萨市区重建地区的可行性研究，比萨2001，比萨中心的旅游、住宿及住宅三大兵营的循环和利用；比萨2002，可行性研究计划假设执行资料的综述；AA.VV.，军营历史的转变，罗马2004，加强城市化及可行性方法。

汉阳陵·比萨：文化遗产的原址保护与考古博物馆