JAIC 1988, Volume 27, Number 1, Article 9 (pp. 54 to 54)
JAIC online
Journal of the American Institute for Conservation
JAIC 1988, Volume 27, Number 1, Article 9 (pp. 54 to 54)


Erratum to Antoinette Dwan, “Paper Complexity and the Interpretation of Conservation Research,”Journal of the A.I.C.,26:1, 1–17

Page 4. After the first paragraph which ends: “Waterhouse discusses the manner in which restraint while drying can change fiber properties,” is the following quote:

“If we assume fiber A is held under restraint and B is free, then fiber A will apply microcompressions to fiber B through lateral shrinkage, thus altering its mechanical properties. Generally, a fiber which had been microcompressed will have a lower strength elongation to break. If fiber B had also been held under restraint during drying then its load elongation behavior would have been identical with fiber A. So, we can see in a very simplified way how fiber properties can be changed without altering fiber orientation.” 10 (fig. 5)

Erratum to Niccolo Caldarro, “An Outline History of Conservation in Archaeology and Anthropology as Presented Through its Publications,”Journal of the A.I.C., 26:2, 85–104

Page 13. The last sentence of the third paragraph should read:

“He discusses the number of tests needed to obtain significant data and the magnitude of differences in data necessary for significant results:”

The following acknowledgements were inadvertently omitted:

With regard to acknowledgements I must mention an observation by White (1983:172): (of) “…the benefit to be derived from having other archaeologists and conservators read over your text before submitting it for publication. Of course, readers must be chosen carefully, not for their agreement with your work (better the opposite), but for individuals who will actually read your work and comment openly. Although such people are few in number, their dedication and discipline are the necessary elements by which science is so often furthered with so little fanfare.” One is not so much concerned with avoiding embarrassing errors as the fact that no one today can keep up with the published literature (even that in English) and that much work that is done is not published and can only be had by recourse to good memories, thorough detective work, and some element of accident. Whole most of us are too busy to answer casual letters in detail, an unsolicited letter of inquiry can often be of great value if answered with even just a few lines.

In this spirit I would like to thank Robert Organ whose criticisms helped turn a jumble of facts into a more coherent picture; Zvi Goffer, Elizabeth West FitzHugh, David A. Scott, Harold Plenderleith, Ann and T.B. Kahle, Josef Riederer, Marian Bernstein, and Wesley Hurt for reading the text of this article and offering their criticisms. I am also indebted to JAIC editor Marjorie B. Cohn through whose efforts the manuscript has greatly benefited in clarity and direction. Finally, I would like to especially thank Robert Futernick, Head Conservator of the Western Regional Paper Conservation Laboratory, and Robert Flynn Johnson, Curator-in-Charge of the Achenbach Foundation for Graphic Arts, without whose encouragement this study could not have been conducted. And finally, special thanks to Wendy Trouette whose patience in typing unending revisions was invaluable.

Copyright � 1988 American Institute for Conservation of Historic and Artistic Works