This guest blog is written by Lindsey Gibson, Archive Conservator at Durham County Record Office, who with fellow conservator Zoe Ross carried out the conservation work.

This project involved the conservation of an interesting and significant collection of 758 early deeds, charters and papers of the Swinburne family of Capheaton covering the period, 1172-1714. The documents had been bound into seven volumes in the 19^th century.  Earlier posts on this blog have given an insight into the context of the collection, this blog will discuss the conservation of the collection.

The decision was taken to treat this collection after a conservation survey identified it as high priority for conservation. This was due to the historical importance and poor physical condition of some of the documents and the degree of interest in them. 

The purpose of conservation treatment was to physically stabilise the documents so that they can be  digitised and made more readily available without the need for repeated handling of the originals. Bespoke archival housing was also to be provided to protect the documents whilst in storage.  

Conservation treatment 

Prior to being bound the documents must have had a varied history; many had been damaged by mould growth, insect and rodent activity, and had been stained by rust, wax, oil and  water amongst other things.

Whilst the bound format had kept the collection together and protected the paper and parchment documents, the seals attached to many of the documents had been damaged and were at risk of further damage while they were in (or protruding from) the volumes. Many of the seals were already very fragile and crumbling due to deterioration of the very old wax.

We also suspected that there was text on the back of a number of the documents that could not be read because the parchment was stuck to the pages of the volumes. As many of the paper documents were sewn into the binding much of the text at the gutter edge was also obscured.

My colleague Zoe Ross and I in the conservation department at Durham County Record Office, in consultation with Sue Wood, the Head of Collections  at Northumberland Archives, agreed on a Conservation treatment plan for the collection. The treatment we agreed upon included disbinding the volumes in order to address the issues caused by the bound format.

Our treatment also included surface cleaning the documents using a soft brush and museum vacuum to remove the surface dirt and mould, and removing the discoloured, acidic adhesive residues from the paper and parchment.

Losses, tears and areas of extreme weakness had resulted from the action of mould, rodents and insects. These were repaired where necessary, to prevent further damage or loss and to allow the documents to be read and digitised. We try to use similar materials for repair: parchment and paper for the damaged documents and new beeswax to repair the cracked and fragmented seals.

Some of the ink on the parchment documents was powdery or flaking  and required the introduction of gentle humidity to help re-adhere the ink to the parchment.

After the documents had been flattened out using magnets to ease out the folds and creases, they were rehoused in folders and boxes padded with an archival foam which was cut to fit around the seals.

Challenges!

Conserving the Swinburne collections proved to be both challenging and very rewarding.

Estimating how long it would take to complete complex treatment of such a large collection was difficult, particularly as this was the largest collection that we have worked on to date. Some of the parchment was severely damaged and removal of some of the documents from the cumbersome volumes proved difficult in itself.

However the challenging nature of the project also gave rise to opportunities and we were able to undertake training in repairing wax seals and parchment. We  have since been able to share our new skills and experience with conservation students doing work placements at DCRO.

In addition to the excellent training, we also learned about medieval deeds and charters, for example: Some of the documents exhibited herringbone cuts to the parchment or appeared to have had the seals cut from the tags. When we researched this we discovered that these alterations were made to void the documents. Understanding why a document has been created or altered in a particular way affects our conservation treatment decision making. For example, many of the parchment documents have a long thin ‘tongue’ of parchment at the bottom of the document, these were invariably tightly curled and folded. We discovered that these thin strips of parchment were used to tie around the rolled or folded documents so did not attempt to flatten them as they provided evidence of how the document would have been secured.

Similarly several of the documents had historic repairs, unless these were obscuring text, or causing damage to the document we would not remove them as they show evidence of the document’s history. 

Overall working on the Swinburne collections was a very rewarding challenge and Zoe and I both learned a lot from it. We have also had the satisfaction of seeing the fragile documents stabilised, made safe for handling and digitisation; the text on the back of many of the documents has been revealed; and  the documents are now housed in protective archival packaging to ensure that they are preserved for the future.

Today’s guest blog is by Henry Holborn, on behalf of  ‘WW1 Enemy Aliens in the North East’, a project that looks at the lives of minority ethnic communities in the North East during the First World War.

Henry was a former History student at Newcastle University.

The project is supported by the National Lottery Heritage Fund. If you would like to get involved please contact Northern Cultural Projects,  ncp.cic@gmail.com.

The Enemy Aliens files held at Northumberland Archives paint a gloomy picture of life in our area during World War One. ‘Enemy’ aliens faced increasing surveillance and harsh recrimination from the authorities, but even ‘friendly’ aliens were viewed with suspicion. The files highlight official anxieties and the lengths they were prepared to go to in order to allay them.

Belgian nationals either living or visiting the region were closely monitored, despite the huge outpouring of public sympathy at the start of the war. Nearly 250,000 escaped from ‘Gallant Little Belgium’ seeking refuge here.The Birtley Belgians were a prime example of the complex issues facing ‘friendly’ Aliens. An agreement between the Armstrong munitions factory and Belgian officials saw 6000 refugees, most of them conscripted Belgian soldiers, set to work producing munitions.

Their freedom was strictly limited. The gates to the settlement were guarded and access was tightly regulated: only the occasional Saturday excursion to Newcastle provided any kind of break. A jaunt for which they had to have special permission – the files are full of letters to the police requesting a dispensation under the Alien Restrictions Act.

They must have hoped for a warm welcome. Instead they found themselves living in confinement in an atmosphere of general ambivalence or even hostility.  

Etienne Sommers, a Belgian clockmaker from Ghent informed the Police of his stay at Whitley Bay. He had moved there from Goole but was under close surveillance by the Blyth Police. They wrote a detailed report about why he visited the district and how he spent his time there. He was constantly in the company of local friends – the Lumney family – yet was still watched over closely.

Other cases were treated more leniently. In June 1915, Charles Bothamley, a Belgian soldier on leave asked permission to go and study Hadrians Wall – he had been a classics student before the war. The Police accepted his request without hesitation.

Reverend Wishart of Lowick wrote to the police asking that a Belgian family by the name of Von Buggenhondt could move closer to Berwick. The father of the family had found work there, but was still lodging in Lowick, incurring high costs. However, before permission was granted the Reverend sent a further letter to police stating that the man had ‘gone on the drink’, so he would no longer be responsible for him.

Whether or not alcoholism was induced by the stress of temporary work and endless travel is a matter of speculation.

Another file highlights the complexities of national identity; the difficulty of sifting ‘friend’ from ‘foe’. Lazar Ivonaff Boshansky was a Bulgarian employed at Palmers Shipyard in Jarrow. He had come to Britain in 1904 (aged 15) under supervision of a man who owned a cycle repair shop.

The police report tells us that the man who accompanied him to Britain treated Lazar poorly; he received meagre pay and slept on a workshop bench. Lazar received support from a sympathetic Mr Carr (under-manager of New Delaval colliery), who became his guardian and found him employment at the colliery. After the pit closed in the early stages of the war, he was employed at Elswick Works and finally at Palmers. Blyth police reported on 23^rd October 1915 of his presence in the area.

Only two weeks earlier, on 14th October 1915, Bulgaria declared war on Serbia, joining the Central Powers. Bulgarians were now to be treated as enemy aliens. For some reason Lazar went to live in Leeds. He soon put in a request to return to the North East were he had more friends and connections: he needed to find work. His hand-written letter to the Northumberland Constabulary on January 1^st 1917 states:

‘Sir,

I respectfully ask if you would grant me permission to take up residence in New Deleval, Blyth. I cannot get employment here and can in New Deleval as I was employed and resided there for a period of 10 years previous to the outbreak of war. I am in possession of an identity book, I am a Bulgarian subject but have been left the country since boyhood and am 27 years of age. I am well known by your superintendent at Blyth and other influential gentlemen resident there. Hoping you will give my request your kind consideration,

I am sir,

Yours obediently,

Lazar Ivanoff Boshansky’

The letter has a real sense of urgency about it: the hopelessness of losing community, employment, and freedom of movement stand out. The following day, he learnt the Police had rejected his request to return.

Further issues arose surrounding mistaken identities, where people’s status was often ambiguous. For example, Philip Smith who arrived at Blyth Harbour 29/8/1915 was ‘supposed to be a naturalized Austrian’. Sunderland police stated he had arrived from Austria 1873 and became naturalized British subject in 1898 while living in Manchester after marrying a British woman. The couple then moved to Sunderland. Upon being stopped, he produced a certificate proving his British subject status. However, the issuing policeman had died since the document’s issue. Further evidence was required from authorities in Sunderland

On the 2/9/1915 another letter was sent by Blyth police. Smith was subsequently prevented from sailing, and consequently became registered by Sunderland police as an enemy alien. This led to effective house arrest and prevention of travel. No freedom was granted until a copy of his naturalization certificate could be obtained from the Home Office. It is unknown what became of Philip, but his restriction would have severely limited his capacity to work, provide basic amenities, or travel for leisure. This reveals the extent authorities could take in subjugating even those with assumed legal status as British subjects.

There are all too many stories like this one in the files. Ordinary people struggling to survive in the midst of a war fought over Empires, subdued by surveillance, and treated with suspicion within a society they knew as their home.