Download Informing textile and wildlife conservation: DNA analysis of baleen

Informing textile and wildlife conservation: DNA
analysis of baleen from an 18th-century garment
found deliberately concealed in a building
Dinah Eastop and Ross McEwing
ABSTRACT There is a long-standing but seldom reported apotropaic (evil-averting and protective) practice of deliberately
concealing garments within buildings. Such garments are vulnerable to loss or damage because they are often soiled, creased
and fragmentary when found; they can easily be mistaken for rubbish and thrown away. The Deliberately Concealed Garments
Project (DCGP) was established to document such caches. Garments found in caches have huge evidential potential because
caches often preserve rare examples of everyday wear. The poor condition of such garments can make sampling possible.
The baleen (‘whalebone’) stiffened stomacher from the Nether Wallop cache provided an accessible source of 18th-century
baleen. Analysis of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) extracted from samples of the stomacher’s baleen stiffening provided
evidence for a previously unrecorded, and now extinct, mitochondrial lineage of North Atlantic right whales, Eubalaena
glacialis. This is the first recorded example of mtDNA extraction from samples of 18th-century baleen; the oldest example
previously was from large specimens of baleen plate dated 1885.
Keywords: garments deliberately concealed in buildings, baleen, DNA, North Atlantic right whale, Eubalaena glacialis,
conservation genetics
Introduction
Caches found in buildings
Many garments (especially shoes) and other objects (such as
bottles) have been found deliberately hidden within buildings
(Swann 1969, 1996; Eastop 2001; Hoggard 2001). As the garment finds are often dirty, creased and fragmentary, some
finders have dismissed them as rags and thrown them away as
rubbish. For other people, the finding of such objects provokes
intense curiosity, leading them to find out more about what
they have uncovered. In 1998, the Textile Conservation Centre established the Deliberately Concealed Garments Project
(DCGP)1 to help prevent the loss and destruction of such finds
by encouraging the reporting, investigation and preservation of caches2 and documentation of their location, and any
other material found in the cache including fabric and leather
offcuts, flowers and animal bones etc. (Eastop and Dew 2003;
Dew and Eastop 2003; Dew 2003). Caches have been recorded
in the UK, mainland Europe, North America and Australia.
A website was established as one way of encouraging interest
in such finds and the reporting of caches; the website had an
average of 2286 visits per month in the 12-month period from
June 2003 to May 2004. A virtual collection of garment and
associated finds has been made available on the website.
Garments found deliberately hidden within buildings provide
fascinating material for study. For historians of dress, such concealments have preserved rare examples of working dress. Two
caches found in houses in Abingdon, Oxfordshire preserved
the remains of a boy’s wool doublet of ca. 1600, and a once
common but now very rare printed cotton, detachable pocket
of 18th-century date (Harrison and Gill 2002). For curators and
conservators, these garments provide exemplary models of the
ethical and technical challenges of current approaches to preservation and interpretation. Should the garments be conserved
as examples of historic dress or should they be conserved as
examples of a once widespread domestic practice of household
protection via the concealment of objects within the fabric of
buildings? Should they be retained in museums for study and
display or should they be documented and re-concealed?
For archaeologists, historians and social anthropologists,
these caches provide material evidence of a common but rarely
reported practice of concealment. In the early modern period
in Western Europe it was widely believed that death, disease
and fire were the outcome of malevolent forces. Avoiding
and accounting for misfortune was a major concern in 16thand 17th-century England (Thomas 1971). It may have been
believed that concealed artifacts were one way of preventing
malevolent forces from entering buildings – or of distracting
or retaining such forces once they had entered. One significant
characteristic of caches is that they are commonly found at
161
D I N A H E A S TO P A N D R O S S M c E W I N G
points of entry to buildings – by doors, windows and chimneys. They are also found in voids (e.g. walled-up cupboards)
or at the juncture of old and new structures (e.g. where additional rooms have been added to an older building).
Analysis of the garments recorded in the DCGP and in the
Concealed Shoe Index held at Northampton Museums and Art
Gallery shows that garments were often concealed with other
types of object (e.g. bottles, newsprint, offcuts of cloth and
leather; bits of metal), as well as with plant and animal remains
(such as seeds and chicken bones). A cache may consist of only
one or two objects such as a garment and a bottle (as in the
Reigate cache) or it may be a collection of many items, as in
the Cuckfield cache, which included several bottles, a boned
corset, a child’s printed cotton dress, several pieces of metal,
a powder horn and children’s building bricks. In documenting caches as a whole, it has been possible to set deliberately
concealed garments in a wider context. Rather than describing
the mass of material found in caches via specific object types
(e.g. shoes, bottles), it has proved helpful to classify cache finds
according to properties identified as common to groups of
finds (Eastop and Dew 2003: 9). The seven broad categories
found useful to date are:
• Objects bearing evidence of humans (e.g. worn
shoes).
• Objects made of resistant materials (e.g. knives).
• Objects with the ability to hold something secure, i.e.
by holding it firm or holding its attention (e.g. bottles
and bridles; balls and bobbins).
• Human substitutes (e.g. animal bones).
• Objects which burn or light (e.g. candlesticks).
• Objects which may serve as dating devices (e.g.
newsprint).
• Finally, material which has the potential for growth (e.g.
seeds).
The Nether Wallop cache
The Nether Wallop cache, found in 1978, consists of a ‘boned’
stomacher, a man’s waistcoat and six pieces of paper. The six
paper pieces (three plain, three newsprint) are cut in the shape
of dressmaking patterns and have pin holes consistent with this
use. One of the newsprint papers bears the following text ‘The
London Evening Post, From Thursday May 14th to Saturday
May 16th, 1752’. The other two pieces of newsprint appear to
be cut from the same edition.
The discovery of this cache was made by owners of a property in Nether Wallop, Hampshire, while renovating their
house, which has a 15th-century cruck timber frame and was
originally a farm dwelling. The cache was found in a first-floor
room, above the current living room. The items were found
together, bundled into a knot-hole in one of the oak brackets,
which is joined to the main cruck frame and supports the
cross-beam spanning the two arched frame members. The
bracket is located in a wall facing northwest, directly above
the inglenook fireplace in the room below. The farmhouse was
altered in the 17th and 18th centuries, and the cache may have
been formed while alterations were being made to the house.
162
In the 17th century, an upper storey was built into the original
cruck frame to give two first-floor rooms, and an extra groundfloor room was built on to the southeastern end of the house.
In the 18th century, another ground-floor room was built on
the northwestern end with a corresponding upper room.
Following the discovery of the cache, the owners of the
property wrapped the items in polyethylene sheeting and kept
them in the old bread oven in the inglenook fireplace. The
cache remained in this location for over 20 years until the
objects were taken to Winchester Museum for identification.
They were then passed to the Textile Conservation Centre
where the stomacher became the subject of an MA dissertation (Barbieri 2003), and underwent X-ray examination3 and
DNA analysis.
The materials and condition of the Nether Wallop
stomacher
In its present form, this garment consists of a stomacher with
a shallow curved top edge and a spoon-shaped base (see Figs
1 and 2). A stomacher is a decorative, V-shaped panel worn
by women at the front of an open-fronted robe; it was part
of fashionable dress from the late 17th century until the last
quarter of the 18th century. This stomacher is made with
yellow silk on one side and a printed cloth on the other. It
has five main layers: first, an outer layer of yellow rep-weave
silk, which is backed with paper (the second layer). Below the
paper, is the third layer – the baleen (‘whalebone’) strips. The
fourth layer is a coarse weave linen fabric and the fifth layer is a
finer linen fabric, block printed in black with a flower pattern.
There are also the remains of a cream and orange twill-weave
fabric. The baleen strips are clearly seen in X-radiographs of
the stomacher (Fig. 3).
The stomacher is not symmetrical in shape; it appears to
have been reshaped along one side, where it is now bound
with a strip of linen fabric. There are also the remains of an
additional strip of baleen secured down the centre of the stomacher with thick linen thread. The same linen thread has been
used to add a series of large, randomly placed stitches across
the garment.
It is in a fragile condition: soiling and staining are evident,
but the remaining baleen appears to be in fair condition. The
baleen stiffening has prevented extensive creasing to the stomacher. There are large areas of fabric loss, particularly in the
yellow silk (that would have covered the front) which is so
abraded that it is barely visible. A slit has formed where the
central seam has opened up.
As mentioned above, one of the characteristics of garments
found concealed in buildings is that they are often in poor
condition. This soiled, creased and fragmentary state invites
several explanations. One is that garments with signs of
wear may have been preferred for concealment. Swann has
noted that most shoes found in caches bear the imprint of
the wearer(s). Another is that garments were deliberately
damaged before being concealed;4 this is consistent with
practices of deliberate damage known within archaeology as
‘ritual killing’, which may make the selected items unsuitable
for removal for alternative purposes and/or make them more
effective as agents of protection. Whatever the explanation,
I N F O R M I N G T E X T I L E A N D W I L D L I F E C O N S E R VAT I O N : D N A A N A LY S I S O F B A L E E N
Figure 1 The stomacher
(TCC 2674.1) showing the
yellow silk layer.
Figure 2 The stomacher (TCC 2674.1)
showing the printed linen layer.
(Plate 7 in the colour plate section.)
the poor condition of many once-concealed garments provides ready access to the internal construction and materials
of lined and multilayered garments; in the case of the Nether
Wallop stomacher it made some of the baleen strips readily
accessible for examination and sampling. At the suggestion
of dress historian Kay Staniland, DNA analysis of the baleen
was considered. Following consultation with the owner of the
stomacher, the decision was made to remove a sample of the
baleen for DNA analysis.5
DNA analysis
It is now 50 years since the discovery of the DNA double
helix was reported by Watson and Crick6 and the study of
the DNA molecule has revolutionised our understanding of
biology. DNA as an investigative tool came to public attention
when Alec Jeffreys (now Professor Sir Alec Jeffreys) published
his system for the DNA fingerprinting of humans (Jeffreys
et al. 1985). This publication has made a major contribution to forensic investigations and criminal prosecutions. For
non-human animals, the analysis of genetic information in
the form of DNA sequences or DNA fingerprints opens up
a major new field in wildlife ecology and conservation. Such
genetic information can elucidate ecological variables such as
the identification of species, identification of individuals, sex
determination, parentage, population origin, and population
size (e.g. Palsbøll 1999). In addition, measurable indices of the
genetic health of individuals, populations or species can also
be inferred, allowing conservation workers a basic unit with
which to assess the relative genetic health between species
(Frankam et al. 2002).
Tissue collection is a prerequisite for genetic analysis, but
cells can be collected either invasively, when cells are forcibly
removed from an animal (e.g. a plucked hair) or non-invasively
(e.g. via shed skin or faeces), without harming an animal. The
potential for releasing DNA from historical or even ancient
samples held at museums was realised in the 1980s (Higuchi
et al. 1984; Paabo 1985) although it was noted that such DNA
Figure 3 X-radiograph of
the stomacher (TCC 2674.1)
showing the baleen strips.
was typically fragmented to short lengths. This fragmentation
of the DNA molecule fortunately keeps Michael Crichton’s
Jurassic Park fictional,7 however, small fragments of DNA
can still be particularly informative to wildlife ecologists (e.g.
Higuchi et al. 1984).
DNA from whales
Large baleen whales are an excellent model species to investigate using genetic analysis. Representatives of the so-called
‘flagship species’, that is, a species which excites the general
public’s interest, they are fully marine and direct observation
is difficult and expensive. They are migratory, often travelling hundreds of miles between feeding and calving grounds,
and were extensively hunted over a period of several hundred
years, leaving many species vulnerable to extinction.
Over the last decade, all the large baleen whale species have
been surveyed to some extent using genetic markers, so an
extensive genetic database exists of contemporary populations.
As reducing a population size can have a resulting effect on the
levels of genetic diversity maintained in that population, however, a measure of pre-exploitation diversity is required to assess
any change as a consequence of exploitation. A reduction in
genetic diversity typically has the result of lowering the animal’s
evolutionary potential, i.e. its long-term ability to respond to
stochastic (randomly determined) environmental events.
DNA from museum collections
Constructing a genetic database from pre-whaling populations
relies on representative samples being available – and being
made available by museum curators. Previous work in this
field has been carried out using dried samples of baleen plate
(Kimura et al. 1997). Museums typically have only a single, or
few, representative baleen samples for each species, far fewer
than ideally required for a reliable comparison.
One way to augment the low number of baleen samples
from natural history collections is to use baleen recovered
163
D I N A H E A S TO P A N D R O S S M c E W I N G
from historical textile collections. Baleen (sometimes erroneously termed ‘whalebone’) has been used for the construction
of clothing, armour and baskets (Waugh 1954; Lauffenburger
1993). As part of a wider study, a protocol was devised that
could isolate DNA from historical samples of baleen (McEwing
2003), despite its often extensive industrial processing prior
to use (Stevenson 1907).
DNA begins to break down into fragments from the
moment an organism dies, and fragmentation continues over
time. So older samples (of baleen in this case) are likely to be
more fragmented than younger specimens. One consequence
is that DNA extraction from older specimens is likely to be
more difficult and may require larger samples. DNA analysis
is a destructive technique, i.e. a sample of the material under
investigation has to be removed for analysis and the sample is
destroyed during the process of DNA extraction. In the case
of the Nether Wallop stomacher, the maximum dimensions
of the available sample of baleen were 27 × 7 × 1 mm (Fig. 4).
Opinions about sampling historic material and sample size
vary: from the perspective of DNA analysis, this is considered
a small sample; from a curatorial or conservation perspective,
this may be considered a large sample. As techniques of extraction and analysis are developed further, it is likely that sample
size required for baleen analysis can be reduced. It is even possible that in the future a form of non-destructive in situ DNA
analysis may be developed, although this is a long way off. In
the meantime, decisions about sampling and sample size will
remain an important issue for discussion between custodians
of collections and DNA analysts when assessing whether or
not to proceed with DNA analysis of baleen.
DNA analysis of baleen from the Nether Wallop
stomacher
As part of the study of the Nether Wallop stomacher noted
above (Barbieri 2003), a loose fragment of baleen from the
stomacher was submitted for DNA analysis. The sample was
pre-cleaned to remove human and other organism DNA
contamination, ground in liquid nitrogen then digested with
protein-dissolving enzymes (McEwing 2003). A fragment of
the control region gene from the mitochondrial genome was
amplified via the polymerase chain reaction (Saiki et al. 1988)
and the gene fragment sequenced using laser detection of fluorescent labelled nucleotides.8
The recovered sequence was compared to type examples of
homologous gene fragments from all extant baleen whale species and the originating species identified using both a sequence
similarity9 (Table 1) and phylogenetic affinity approach (Baker
et al. 1996). The baleen sample was unambiguously identified
as originating from a right whale, Eubalaena sp.
Currently there are at least two, more likely three, subspecies of right whale (Rosenbaum et al. 2000a), all with discrete
geographical ranges. As each of these subpopulations has
been genetically studied, there exist a number of nucleotide
positions that can discriminate between these subpopulations
(Rosenbaum et al. 2000a). The Nether Wallop stomacher
baleen sample was consistent with a North Atlantic provenance (Table 2) and was therefore identified as Eubalaena
glacialis, the North Atlantic right whale.
164
Figure 4 Fragment of
baleen strip from which
mtDNA was extracted.
The North Atlantic right whale is classed as critically
endangered10 as a result of whaling since the 11th century ad
(Cummings 1985) and shows no signs of a population recovery.
Despite being previously geographically widespread throughout the North Atlantic, only a single population is now believed
to exist on the eastern seaboard of North America numbering
less than 350 individuals. Models of population viability, where
reproductive rate and mortality are measured, have predicted
that extinction is likely within 200 years (Caswell et al. 1999).
The North Atlantic right whale has been extensively studied
as a result of its current population status including extensive
genetic fingerprinting for almost every individual within this
population. These genetic studies have shown that the levels
of genetic diversity in this species are considerably lower than
other baleen whale species with the entire current population
consisting of only five maternal lineages (Malik et al. 2000).11
In a previous study in which five historical museum samples of North Atlantic right whale baleen, dating back to 1885,
were DNA tested, no new maternal lineages were observed,
leading to a suggestion by the authors that perhaps recent
whaling had not been responsible for any loss of genetic
diversity in this species (Rosenbaum et al. 2000b). The DNA
sequence recovered from the Nether Wallop stomacher sample was compared to the five maternal lineages observed in the
current population and found to be unique; it was therefore
classified as a sixth maternal lineage now extinct, lost as a
consequence of excessive whaling. These data were consistent
with another textile baleen sample that yielded yet another
previously unidentified seventh maternal lineage, also now
extinct (McEwing 2003).
Significance of these results for wildlife conservation
When a population undergoes a dramatic decline in numbers,
such as the populations of baleen whales, this is often referred
I N F O R M I N G T E X T I L E A N D W I L D L I F E C O N S E R VAT I O N : D N A A N A LY S I S O F B A L E E N
Table 1 Sequence similarity results for baleen (from stomacher, TCC2674.1).
Similarity
score
TCC 2674.1
Percentage Number of Number of
match
matches mismatches
Balaenoptera acutorostrata
1440
53%
242
58
Balaenoptera acutorostrata
1560
59%
248
52
Balaenoptera bonarensis
1380
69%
241
59
Balaenoptera borealis
1370
57%
238
63
Balaenoptera borealis
1310
56%
235
66
Balaenoptera edeni
1340
56%
236
64
Balaenoptera edeni
1340
56%
236
64
Balaenoptera edeni
1480
57%
239
61
Balaenoptera edeni pygmy
1380
57%
243
57
Balaenoptera musculus
1530
57%
242
55
Balaenoptera musculus
1470
57%
239
58
Balaenoptera musculus
1510
57%
241
56
Balaenoptera musculus
1510
58%
244
55
Balaenoptera musculus
2530
69%
277
24
Balaenoptera physalus
1460
57%
237
63
Balaenoptera physalus
1480
57%
238
62
Balaenoptera physalus
1520
58%
240
60
Eubalaena glacialis
3000
75%
301
1
Eschrichtius robustus
1440
57%
240
58
Eschrichtius robustus
1470
58%
245
52
Eschrichtius robustus
1380
56%
239
59
Megaptera novaeangliae
1240
57%
237
47
Megaptera novaeangliae
1260
58%
240
44
Table 2 Geographical origin of right whale haplotypes (after Rosenbaum et al. 2000b). [n] = number of individual whales sampled.)
Nucleotide position
Haplotype / Ocean
[n]
908
914
920
928
957
975
976
977
993
994
1009 1011 1066 1157 1158
North Atlantic (A)
[35]
A
A
T
C
A
A
T
C
T
G
C
A
A
T
C
North Atlantic (B)
[3]
A
A
T
C
A
A
C
T
T
A
C
A
A
T
C
North Atlantic (C)
[75]
A
A
T
C
A
A
C
T
T
A
C
A
A
T
C
North Atlantic (D)
[117]
A
A
T
C
A
A
C
T
T
A
C
A
A
T
C
North Atlantic (E)
[39]
A
A
T
C
A
G
C
T
C
G
C
A
A
T
C
TCC 2674.1
[1]
A
A
T
C
A
G
C
T
T
G
C
A
A
T
C
North Pacific
[12]
G
G
C
T
G
*
*
*
*
*
C
G
T
T
C
Southern Hemisphere
[99]
G
A
C
T
A
*
*
*
*
*
T
G
A
C
T
to as a demographic bottleneck. Demographic bottlenecks
can be common and relatively short term with the population recovering quickly to previous numbers but occasionally
numbers are reduced to such low levels that ecological factors
prevent population recovery. Such factors are often referred to
as Allee effects;12 a common example is the difficulty experienced by some wide-ranging animals in finding a mate when
their population has been reduced. Allee effects can compound
the initial demographic contraction of a population, hampering recovery and thus leading to the possibility of population
extinction. As discussed above, an additional complication
is the correlation of genetic diversity with animal fitness. As
genetic diversity is lost from a population, its potential to adapt
and recover to stochastic environmental processes is reduced.
In a healthy population, a short demographic bottleneck is
unlikely to reduce the genetic diversity of that population as
surviving individuals can hold two copies of each gene (one
maternally and one paternally inherited); these genes are then
reshuffled as the population recovers to previous numbers.
If the demographic bottleneck is both prolonged and severe,
however, then genes at low frequency are lost from the population and genetic diversity is lowered.
Unlike most other hunted whales, the North Atlantic right
whales have failed to recover from the demographic bottleneck induced by whaling, probably as a result of Allee effects.
We have demonstrated for the first time that in addition to a
demographic bottleneck being imposed on baleen whales, a
genetic bottleneck has also been imposed on the North Atlan165
D I N A H E A S TO P A N D R O S S M c E W I N G
tic right whale, resulting in the loss of maternal lineages as
a direct result of whaling. North Atlantic right whales have
therefore been dealt a double blow, an observation that could
explain their impending extinction.
The loss of genetic diversity from this species would have
been missed had samples of baleen not been made available from historical textile collections. Previous studies using
museum samples of baleen failed to identify any additional lineages, probably as a result of the limited sample size available for
analysis. Historical baleen recovered from well-documented
textiles could be of major importance in aiding future conservation strategies by identifying the whale species and geographical
populations hunted, and lineage extinctions in such species.
Conclusions
This paper has demonstrated that garments found deliberately
concealed in buildings, which are vulnerable to loss or damage
when mistaken for rubbish, have huge evidential potential. The
techniques of X-radiography and DNA typing have provided
insights into the history of the materials and the manufacture of one such find – an 18th-century stomacher. This garment provided an accessible source of 18th-century baleen,
the analysis of which has provided evidence for a previously
unrecorded mitochondrial lineage of North Atlantic right
whales, Eubalaena glacialis. The inclusion of a boned garment
in the Nether Wallop cache is not unique, with several other
examples already identified. Further DNA analysis of baleen is
planned, subject to funding and consent from the custodians of
garments selected for testing. Garments deliberately concealed
in buildings are providing fascinating opportunities for fruitful
interdisciplinary cooperation as well as useful data for both
textile and wildlife conservation.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank: Kay Staniland (independent scholar,
formerly Curator of Costume and Textiles, Museum of London), for
generous advice and infectious enthusiasm for baleen; textile conservator Gabriella Barbieri for using her MA dissertation to explore the
‘object biography’ model for analyzing and documenting the stomacher; Charlotte Dew, Project Development Officer, for contributing
to the effective development of the DCGP; the Natural Environment
Research Council; the Skaggs Foundation and the Arts and Humanities Research Board for supporting the DCGP (the latter most recently
via the AHRC Research Centre for Textile Conservation and Textile
Studies); Mrs Maynard and Nell Hoare, Director of the TCC, for
permission to publish.
Notes
1. The DCGP (www.concealedgarments.org) builds on previous
work notably that of June Swann who, while working on the
footwear collections in Northampton, initiated an index of onceconcealed shoes (Swann 1969, 1996). She worked closely with
Ralph Merrifield (1987) and Timothy Easton (1995).
166
2. The term ‘cache’ is used to describe a group of hidden
objects.
3. The stomacher was X-rayed at the University of Bradford by Sonia
O’Connor, Research Fellow in Conservation, AHRC Research
Centre for Textile Conservation and Textile Studies. For further
information see Barbieri (2003) and Brooks and O’Connor (this
volume, pp. 168–76).
4. Miriam Duffield is investigating such deliberate damage for her
MA textile conservation dissertation (TCC/University of Southampton). The working title of her dissertation, as at July 2004, is
Documenting Intentional Damage and Evidence of Wear in 3–4
Deliberately Concealed Garments.
5. DNA analysis was carried out by Wildlife DNA Services, University of Wales at Bangor, UK.
6. Although Rosalind Franklin first identified the DNA structure,
James Watson and Francis Crick were the first to publish (Watson
and Crick 1953).
7. Michael Crichton’s novel Jurassic Park (1993) saw the return of
dinosaurs created from ancient DNA.
8. The DNA sequence was resolved using an Applied Biosystems
ABI377 DNA PRISM automated sequencer.
9. The sequence similarity method was suggested by Andrew
Dizon, Southwest Fisheries, USA, and uses a weighted scoring
system to calculate the number of matches versus the number
of mismatches in a pairwise test between the unknown species
sequence and a type sequence from all other baleen whale species
(see McEwing 2003).
10. IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources) 2003. Red List of Threatened Species (www.redlist.
org).
11. For comparison, the North Atlantic fin whale, Balaenoptera
physalus, has at least 47 maternal lineages (Bérubé et al. 1998).
12. The Allee effects are named after the evolutionary biologist, W.
C. Allee, who noted a positive relationship between fitness and
population size.
References
Baker, C. S., Cipriano, F. and Palumbi, S. R. (1996) ‘Molecular genetic
identification of whale and dolphin products from commercial
markets in Korea and Japan’, Molecular Ecology 5: 671–85.
Barbieri, G. (2003) Memoirs of an 18th Century Stomacher: A Strategy for Documenting the Multiple Object Biographies of a Onceconcealed Garment. Unpublished MA dissertation, the Textile
Conservation Centre, University of Southampton.
Bérubé, M., Aguilar, A., Dendanto, D., Larsen, F., Notarbartolo-diSciara, G., Sears, R., Sigurjónsson, J., Urban-Ramirez, J. and Palsbøll, P. J. (1998) ‘Population genetic structure of North Atlantic,
Mediterranean Sea and Sea of Cortez fin whales, Balaenoptera
physalus (Linnaeus, 1758): analysis of mitochondrial and nuclear
loci’, Molecular Ecology 7: 585–600.
Caswell, H., Brault, F. M. and Brault, S. (1999) ‘Declining survival
probability threatens the North Atlantic right whale’, Proceedings
of the National Academy of Science USA 96: 3308–13.
Cummings, W. C. (1985) ‘Right whales’, in Handbook of Marine Mammals, S. H. Ridgeway and R. Harrison (eds), 275–304. London:
Academic Press.
Dew, C. (2003) ‘SPAB members own up to owning ancient clothing’,
SPAB News 24(4): 8.
Dew, C. and Eastop, D. (2003) ‘Hide and seek’, SPAB News 24(3):
22–3.
Easton, T. (1995) ‘Spiritual middens’, in Encyclopaedia of Vernacular
Architecture of the World, Vol. 1, P. Oliver (ed.), 568. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Eastop, D. (2001) ‘Garments deliberately concealed in buildings’, in A
Permeability of Boundaries? New Approaches to the Archaeology
of Art, Religion and Folklore (BAR International Series 936), R. J.
I N F O R M I N G T E X T I L E A N D W I L D L I F E C O N S E R VAT I O N : D N A A N A LY S I S O F B A L E E N
Wallis and K. Lymer (eds), 79–83. Oxford: British Archaeological
Reports.
Eastop, D. and Dew, C. (2003) ‘Secret agents: deliberately concealed
garments as symbolic textiles’, in Tales in the Textile: The Conservation of Flags and Other Symbolic Textiles. Preprints of the North
American Textile Conservation Conference (NATCC) 2003, Vol.
4, J. Vuori (comp.), 5–15. Albany, NY: NATCC.
Frankham, R., Ballou, J. D. and Briscoe, D. A. (2002) Introduction to
Conservation Genetics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Harrison, A. and Gill, K. (2002) ‘An eighteenth century detachable
pocket and baby’s cap found concealed in a wall cavity: conservation and research’, Textile History 33(2): 177–94.
Higuchi, R. G., Bowman, B., Freiberger, M., Ryder, O. A. and Wilson,
A. C. (1984) ‘DNA sequences from the quagga, an extinct member
of the horse family’, Nature 312: 282–4.
Hoggard, B. (2001) ‘Home’s hidden charms’, SPAB News 22(3):
18–21.
Jeffreys, A. J., Wilson, V. and Thein, S. L. (1985) ‘Hypervariable “minisatellite” regions in human DNA’, Nature 314: 67–73.
Kimura, T., Ozawa, T. and Pastene, L. (1997) ‘Sample preparation and
analysis of mitochondrial DNA from whale baleen plates’, Marine
Mammal Science 13: 495–8.
Lauffenburger, J. A. (1993) ‘Baleen in museum collections: its sources,
uses and identification’, Journal of the American Institute for Conservation of Historic and Artistic Works 32: 213–30.
Malik, S., Brown, M. W., Kraus, S. D. and White, B. N. (2000) ‘Analysis of mitochondrial DNA diversity within and between North
and South Atlantic right whales’, Marine Mammal Science 16:
545–8.
McEwing, R. (2003) Summary Report: Species Identification of Textile
Baleen (c. 18th Century). Unpublished report supplied by Wildlife DNA Services Limited, University of Wales, Bangor (www.
wdnas.com).
Merrifield, R. (1987) The Archaeology of Folk Magic. London:
Batsford.
Paabo, S. (1985) ‘Molecular cloning of ancient Egyptian mummy DNA’,
Nature 314: 644–5.
Palsbøll, P. J. (1999) ‘Genetic tagging: contemporary molecular acology’, Journal of the Linnean Society 68: 3–22.
Rosenbaum, H. C., Brownell, R. L., Brown, M. W., Schaeff, C., Portway,
V., White, B. N., Malik et al. (2000a) ‘World-wide genetic differentiation of Eubalaena: questioning the number of right whale
species’, Molecular Ecology 9: 1793–802.
Rosenbaum, H. C., Egan, M. G., Clapham, P. J., Brownell, R. L., Malik,
S., Brown, M. W., White, B. N. et al. (2000b) ‘Utility of North
Atlantic right whale museum specimens for assessing changes in
genetic diversity’, Conservation Biology 14: 1837–42.
Saiki, R. K., Gelfand, D. H., Stoffel, D., Scharf, S. J., Higuchi, R., Horn,
G. T., Mullis, K. B. and Erlich, H. A. (1988) ‘Primer-directed enzymatic amplification of DNA with a thermostable DNA polymerase’,
Science 239: 487–91.
Stevenson, C. H. (1907) Whalebone: Its Production and Utilization,
Bureau of Fisheries Document No. 626. Washington, DC: Department of Commerce and Labor, Government Printing Office.
Swann, J. (1969) ‘Shoes concealed in buildings’, Northampton County
Borough Museums and Art Gallery Journal 6: 8–21.
Swann, J. (1996) ‘Shoes concealed in buildings’, Costume (The Journal
of the Costume Society) 30: 56–69.
Thomas, K. (1971) Religion and the Decline of Magic. New York:
Charles Scrivener’s Sons.
Watson, J. D. and Crick, F. H. C. (1953) ‘A structure for deoxyribose
nucleic acid’, Nature 171: 737.
Waugh, N. (1954) Corsets and Crinolines. London: Taylor and
Francis.
The authors
• Dinah Eastop has worked at the Textile Conservation Centre,
University of Southampton since 1976 as a conservator, departmental manager, conservation teacher and Director (1988–1991).
She initiated the Deliberately Concealed Garments Project
(DCGP).
• Ross McEwing is Director of Wildlife DNA Services Ltd and Honorary Research Associate, School of Biological Science, University of Wales, Bangor. His current research includes genotyping
of captive and wild raptor species (DEFRA) and immunoassay
detection of bear products (WISPA).
Addresses
• Corresponding author: Dinah Eastop, Textile Conservation Centre,
University of Southampton, Winchester Campus, Park Avenue,
Winchester, Hampshire, SO23 8DL, UK ([email protected]).
• Ross McEwing, Wildlife DNA Services Limited, University of
Wales, Bangor, UK.
167