Accueil | Recherche | Appels | Refinding the Past. Rotondes Congress (Third Edition)

Galerie Colbert

fermée

Bibliothèque fermée

09:00 19:30

Refinding the Past. Rotondes Congress (Third Edition)

On going | Mis à jour le 16 September 2024 En cours

Context

Refinding the Past: Issues and Methods of Reconstruction in Art History and Archaeology. Rotondes Congress – Third Edition –3rd and 4th of April, 2025

Rotondes is a French congress created by and for young researchers in Art History and Archaeology. It is organised by the PhD students at the Institut national d’histoire de l’art (INHA) and targets the young professionals who think, create and contribute to the development of both our research fields. We aim to address issues deemed inherent to these disciplines, while linking them to current events in a multidisciplinary approach. In 2021, launch year of the first edition, the congress examined the possible roles of art history and archaeology in contemporary societies. Two years later, in 2023, the conference looked at the definitions, uses and limits of the canon – a paradigm that has played a decisive role in the development of our disciplines.

This third and forthcoming edition will explore Art History and Archaeology through the prism of reconstruction practices. The aim is to underline and hopefully understand the methods, techniques and issues when reconstructing an historical or archaeological object, a place, an atmosphere, a technique, etc. The 2025 edition will be open to young researchers living in other European countries in order to initiate international exchanges. It will be held on the 3rd and 4th of April at the INHA in Paris.

Description

Definition and historiography of the subject

Whether they are objects of study, tools for analysis, teaching aids or artistic practices, reconstructions fuel various approaches to exploring and visualising the past. Some give new life to medieval dances in Provins or to the battle of Alesia, while others promise to immerse museum visitors in bygone eras through the creation of period rooms. Reconstructions are thus protean. Their use is as much in the field of art history, archaeology and museology as it is in architecture. From a broader human sciences point of view, this diversity of uses gives rise to a plural semantics of reconstruction, and therefore to confusions in its terminology.

At the beginning of the 20th century, Camille Enlart confined the reconstruction practice to a few specialist fields: ‘The archaeologist, who only wants reliable information, will have to resign himself to not knowing everything. On the other hand, costume designers, as well as architects, have to carry out reconstructions that require them to take sides. Their professional knowledge will be their best guide […]’ (Enlart 1916). Later, in experimental archaeology, the reconstruction of creative workflows through experimentation offered a better understanding of some remains of the past. In museology and according to André Desvallées and Georges-Henri Rivière, reconstruction consists in filling in the gaps by adding coherent elements, to make it easier for visitors to interpret and understand the past. Therefore, the notion of reconstruction is also didactic and closely linked to the public reception.

Reconstruction and re-enactment (called reconstitution in French) are closely linked to the notions of restoration, restitution, and evocation. Some of the terms in this broad lexical field were clarified by ICOMOS in The Venice Charter (1964). The Charter made a clear distinction between restoration and reconstruction, based on the conjectural dimension of the latter. Given these differences in usage and acceptance, is it possible to consider reconstruction as a scientific practice? Archaeologist Pierre-Yves Balut raised the issues carried by the status and scientific legitimacy of this term. He drew a distinction between restitution, which expresses ‘the filling in of gaps by having recourse first and foremost to the internal data of the objects studied’, and reconstruction, which ‘reveals one (or more) ideas when the previous stages no longer provide an answer. The distinctive feature of reconstruction is therefore that it is unverifiable and, as a result, takes us out of the strict realm of science and into that of creation’ (Balut 1982).

The role played by interpretation in the reconstruction processes, methods, devices and discourses, contributes to the overall terminological confusion – especially when they lie at the crossroads of science, cultural outreach and creation. The balance or even the tension between scientific rigour and didactic approach has been at the heart of reconstruction, from the 19th century to the present day.

The Rotondes conference will also explore the notion in its historical complexity in the light of current scientific and technological challenges, amateur and professional artistic practises, without forgetting the question of public reception. By appealing to the visitor’s emotions and senses, reconstructions draw on their capacity for imagination and projection through more or less immersive and fictional experiences, which will be discussed.

Issues raised

Terminological ambiguities, paradoxes and epistemological tensions associated with the notion of reconstruction will be examined in this new Rotondes edition. The contributions may focus on – but are not limited to – the following themes:

Reconstructions: definitions, roots and practices. Defining reconstruction raises epistemological, conceptual and disciplinary issues. The translations and interpretations of this term as well as its lexical field can be questioned through professional and artistic acceptances. What do these lexical differences imply about the degree of interpretation conventionally accepted in each professional framework? To what extent can reconstruction be considered a scientific or creative practice? How can the practice of one discipline feed into academic research – and vice versa? How does reconstruction challenge the ideas of authenticity, illusion and collective memory? Which artistic and scientific practices can help us to rethink the notion of reconstruction today? And to what extent can reconstruction be considered as a research subject in its own right instead of a medium?

 Reconstructions, matter and sensoriality. The act of reconstruction necessarily implies an apprehension of the materiality or non-materiality of the object under study – an issue which was addressed among others in the previous edition of Rotondes. Materiality as a concept has been taken up by human sciences since the ‘material turn’ at the end of the twentieth century. The rise of materiality testifies to the in-depth evolution of disciplines facing the tangible reality of their objects. However, the materiality of reconstructed objects is lost by definition, as it belongs to the past. What’s more, reconstructions are not limited to material aspects, as the material can be the gateway to sensory re-enactments: smells, sounds, tactile sensations or even tastes. The relationship with materials can also be an opportunity to learn and experiment techniques and artistic knowledge that have been partially or totally forgotten. The relationship between research, creation and materiality can therefore be examined through the prism of reconstructions and re-enactments: how do they impact on the relationship between researchers, artists and materials? Is the material object used to re-enact immateriality, or is it the other way round?

Applications, limits and overcoming of reconstructions. There can be many reasons for making a reconstruction: scientific, curatorial, recreational, economic, political, etc. Some reconstructions even exist for ideological reasons. Often, one reconstruction is motivated by several factors, which makes it a tricky research object. In such cases, a multi-disciplinary perspective can be a useful way to understand a building, an exhibition or a collection as well as the issues that underlie them. This is particularly true when studying an archaeological or monumental site in a context of conflict, a universal and colonial exhibition, an ethnographic collection and the historiography related. What are the aims of today’s reconstructions? Do re-enactments and reconstructed objects have an impact on our individual and collective understanding of the past? How should we approach an ensemble of reconstructed objects as researchers? What protocols can be implemented to study them, while taking into account the epistemological issues they raise?

Sources, systems and distribution: the means of reconstruction. The history of reconstruction and re-enactment is a constantly evolving field, informed not only by technological and digital advances, but also by research into museology and scenography. The resulting viewing devices are more or less spectacular, and more or less rooted in reality. This raises the question of the sources used to create these devices and how they have evolved over time. What are the practices – amateur, scholarly, artistic – behind these reconstructions, and when do they date back to? What primary and secondary sources are useful for reconstructions? How are reconstructions presented? What are the associated museological systems, and what exhibition issues do they raise? Finally, what are the epistemological contributions and issues raised by digital reconstructions today?

Application guidelines and conditions

The conference is open to students and young professionals in research, heritage, art market and applied arts. Applicants must be currently studying or have graduated less than five years ago.

You are invited to present your work, whether it is completed or still in progress, and to share your thoughts on the theme of the conference. Papers may be presented in one of the following formats:

  • A 20-minute individual paper;
  • A one-and-a-half-hour round-table discussion;
  • A free-format practical or methodological workshop, lasting a maximum of one and a half hours.

Proposals for papers, round tables or workshops must be no longer than 500 words (main text). The accepted languages are French and English. They should include a title (even provisional), the development of one or more lines of thought on the theme of the conference, and a short indicative bibliography added after the text. Proposals should be sent to contact-rotondes@inha.fr with the CV(s) of the speakers by October 13th, 2024.

We look forward to hearing how the issues raised here resonate with your own research and practice!

Forum for Associations

Rotondes is also a time for meetings and exchanges around the Forum for Associations run by young researchers. The Forum will be held in the Galerie Colbert for the duration of the conference. This event is an opportunity for Art History and Archaeology associations to make themselves known to young researchers, to recruit new members or volunteers, and to develop exchanges between professionals of the fields.

Stands will be available for any association with a cultural, heritage or archaeological interest wishing to take part in the Forum. Associations interested in the project but unable to attend can send us a poster with information about them. The posters will be printed by us and displayed in the Forum’s area throughout the conference.

Applications to set up a stand at the Forum for Associations and to have posters printed should be sent to contact-rotondes@inha.fr before October 13th, 2024.

Scientific Committee and Select Organising Committee

Members of the scientific committee

Fanny CROZET, PhD student, Université de Technologie de Belfort-Montbéliard.

Liyuan FAN, PhD student, Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne.

Fanny GIRARD, heritage curator, Toulouse-Lautrec Museum.

Virginie GUFFROY, heritage curator, Besançon Museum of Art and Archaeology.

Lucie LAUTRÉ, student, École pratique des Hautes Études and Institut national du patrimoine.

Réjean PEYTAVIN, artist.

The PhD students on contract at INHA.

 

Members of the restricted organising committee

Aline BONTEMPS, Marie COLAS DES FRANCS, Adèle CROSSON, Dina EICKLAND and Raphaëlle RANNOU, PhD students on contract at INHA.

If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us at contact-rotondes@inha.fr

 

Selected bibliography

Jay Anderson, « Living History: Simulating Everyday Life in Living Museums », American Quarterly, vol. 34, n°3, Baltimore, 1982, p. 290-306.

Art of the Past: Sources and Reconstruction. Proceedings of the First Symposium of the Art Technological Source Research Study Group, Londres, 2005.

Philippe Artières (dir.), « Le goût de la reconstitution » [numéro thématique], Sociétés et représentations, n°47, Paris, 2019.

Pierre-Yves Balut, « Restauration, restitution, reconstitution », RAMAGE (Revue d’archéologie moderne et d’archéologie générale), n°1, Paris, 1982, p. 175‑205.

Anne Bénichou, Rejouer le vivant : les reenactments, des pratiques culturelles et artistiques (in)actuelles, Dijon, 2020.

Gianenrico Bernasconi, « L’objet comme document : culture matérielle et cultures techniques », Artefact, 2016 | 4, Strasbourg, 2016, p. 31-47.

Jessica de Bideran, « Des restaurations de papier aux restitutions virtuelles, construction d’une reconnaissance scientifique et d’une mémoire patrimoniale », dans Isabelle Fabre et Cécile Gardès (dir.), De la médiation des savoirs : Science de l’information-documentation et mémoires. Actes du colloque international MUSSI, 21-22 mars 2016, Toulouse, 2016, p. 193-212.

Marie Bonin, Pascale Gorguet-Ballesteros, « Le fonds ancien du Palais Galliera, musée de la Mode de la Ville de Paris : nouvelles perspectives de recherche », dans Chantal Georgel (éd.), Choisir Paris : les grandes donations aux musées de la Ville de Paris, Paris, 2015.

Jean-Luc Bonniol et Maryline Crivello (dir.), Façonner le passé : Représentations et cultures de l’histoire, XVIe-XXIe siècle, Aix en Provence, 2004.

Lara Broecke, « À quoi sert la reconstitution historique ? L’exemple d’un crucifix de Cimabue », dans Claire Betelu, Cécile Parmentier et Anne Servais (dir.), Contribution à une histoire technologique de l’art. Actes des journées d’étude de la composante de recherche Préservation des biens culturels, Paris, 2018, p. 233-241.

Georges Brunel, « Restitution : les dangers d’une notion obscure », dans Environnement et conservation de l’écrit, de l’image et du son. Actes des IIe journées internationales d’études de l’ARSAG, Paris, 1994, p. 189-193.

Aline Caillet, « Le re-enactment : Refaire, rejouer ou répéter l’histoire ? », Marges, 17, Vincennes, 2013, p. 66-73.

Leslie Carlyle, « Towards historical accuracy in the production of historical recipe reconstruction », dans Tempera painting 1800-1950: experiment and innovation from the Nazarene movement to abstract art, Londres, 2019, p. 81‑86.

Leslie Carlyle, Maria João Melo, Vanessa Otero et Tatiana Vitorino,  « New insights into brazilwood lake pigments manufacture through the use of historically accurate reconstructions », Studies in Conservation, vol. 61, no 5, 2016, p. 255‑273.

Hilary Davidson, « The Embodied Turn: Making and Remaking Dress as an Academic Practice », Fashion Theory, 23 (3), 2019, p. 329–362.

Camille Enlart, Manuel d’archéologie française depuis les temps mérovingiens jusqu’à la Renaissance, t. III, Paris, 1916.

Robert Fuchs et Doris Oltrogge, « Scientific Analysis of Medieval Book-Illumination as a Ressource for the Art Historian and Conservator », Gazette du livre médiéval, vol. 21, no 1, 1992, p. 29‑34.

Peter Geimer, Die Farben der Vergangenheit, Munich, 2022.

Roeland Paardekooper, « Experimental Archaeology: Who Does It, What Is the Use? », EXARC Journal, 2019/1, Leyde, 2019 [en ligne].

Haris Procopiou, « L’expérimentation : passé, présent, futur », Bulletin de l’APERA, no 1, Paris, 2021, p. 13‑16.

Olivier Renaudeau, « Du folklore médiéval à l’expérimentation archéologique, la révolution culturelle de la reconstitution du Moyen Âge en Europe », dans Le Moyen Âge en jeu, Bordeaux, 2010, p. 153-161.

Georges-Henri Rivière, Un musée-laboratoire : le Musée des arts et traditions populaires, Paris, 1947.

Pamela H. Smith, « Historians in the Laboratory: Reconstruction of Renaissance Art and Technology in the Making and Knowing Project », Art History, vol. 39, no 2, 2016, p. 210‑233.

Alan Sorrell, Reconstructing the Past, Batsford, 1981.

Audrey Tuaillon Demésy, « L’histoire vivante médiévale. Pour une ethnographie du “passé contemporain” », Ethnologie Française (vol. 44), n°4, Paris, 2014, p. 725-736.

Audrey Tuaillon Demésy, « L’histoire mise en vie ou l’apprentissage “par corps”. Dialogue avec Julie Deramond, le 15 juin 2022 », dans Dialogues autour du patrimoine. L’histoire, un enjeu de communication ?, Avignon, 2023, p. 263-271.

Lucy Wrapson (dir.), In artists’ Footsteps: the reconstruction of pigments and paintings, Londres, 2012.