Modernising the Archaeological Museum of Samothrace

Disclaimer

The case study below was originally written as an undergraduate assignment for the Greek Open University in 2008, during a period when the author’s academic skills were still developing. Although the quality of this paper does not match that of later examples of the same author’s work, it is written in a thorough manner and contains useful information for students and other readers with non-specialised knowledge; therefore, it has been proudly included on this website.

The reader needs to be warned that the original assignment, on which this case study was based, was written in Greek and intended for specialised academics. Despite the author’s best intentions to present his essay in the clearest way possible, some points and arguments might still be lost in translation. The author recommends that readers consult the web for additional information on any unfamiliar words or specialised vocabulary.

The author admits that the bibliography for this case study is limited, which aligns with the requirements of an undergraduate assignment of this level. The author did not include any additional bibliography during the translation of his work into English due to time and access limitations. It must also be noted that the entire bibliography for this case study is in Greek due to the topic’s nature.

The paper presents a hypothetical case study for the re-planning and modernisation of an existing archaeological museum in Greece. The Museum of Samothrace was established after a visit to the site a year before the time of writing. Some information about the layout of the Archaeological Museum of Samothrace concerns how it looked in 2007. This layout no longer exists, as the museum was later modernised, though not in line with the current paper’s suggestions. Finally, some problems noted in relation to the management of the Archaeological Museum of Samothrace back in 2007 have been exaggerated for the needs of this mock exercise. The author apologises in advance and to prevent any misunderstandings, a note section clarifying such issues has been added at the end of this paper. The reader must keep in mind that the point of this case study is not to present false information but to discuss the basic functions of modern museums, their general principles of space organisation, and finally, the basic standards in managing museum collections.

Introduction

This case study discusses an improved design for the New Archaeological Museum in Samothrace, the modifications of which have been collectively funded by the Ministry of Culture and the European Union. The suggested works concern the modification and expansion of the older Archaeological Museum of Samothrace, located on the archaeological site of the Sanctuary of the Great Gods. The current proposal calls for the construction of additional facilities to meet the museum’s growing needs.

This case study is divided into five subsections. The first section introduces the Archaeological Museum of Samothrace and provides some key information on the island’s archaeology. The second section discusses the aims, objectives, and basic functions of the new museum, which is intended to replace the older one. The third section discusses the planned expansion works and the broader spatial organisation of the new museum, which is intended to house the existing collections and future additional finds. The fourth section presents the management specifications and exhibition standards for hosting archaeological collections. The final section summarises the operation framework of the new museum and its expected outcomes.

The Archaeological Museum of Samothrace

The Archaeological Museum of Samothrace is located at the Palaeopoli settlement on the island's northern coast. The museum was founded by the Greek government in 1939. Its construction was halted during the war, and the museum was finally completed in 1955 with the help of the American School of Classical Studies in Athens. Some extensions were included in the original design in 1961. It is part of the archaeological site of the ancient city-state of Samothrace, and its collections mostly come from the adjacent Sanctuary of the Great Gods, located on the western slope of the site. The Sanctuary of the Great Gods was one of the oldest Pan-Hellenic sanctuaries and cult centres of Greek antiquity. It was built during the 7th century BC as part of the early settlement of Samothrace. Its peak was in the 5th century BC, when the sanctuary was associated with the Cabeirian Mysteries, one of the most renowned mystic cults of the ancient world. The sanctuary saw great wealth during the 4th century BC, when the Macedonian court sponsored the construction of monumental buildings around the cult site (Matsas, 2007).

The earliest museum was housed in a limited space of roughly 220 square metres (1), which was originally designed to host sculpture, pottery and votive objects, excavated at the Sanctuary of the Great Gods in 1863. This museum building primarily aimed in storing such archaeological artefacts; however, the potentiality of functioning as a proper museum might have never existed at the beginning of its construction (2). From the mid 1980s onwards, when the museum was frequently visited by an increasing number of tourists, certain problems in its function were noticed for the first time (3). Since then, the island’s tourist development has driven the expansion and modernisation of the local archaeological museum. Such improvements will be combined with maintenance, preservation, and recreation works scheduled for the broader archaeological site and surrounding areas. The development project will convert the current archaeological site into a central reference point for the island’s tourist economy.

The aims and objectives of the New Archaeological Museum of Samothrace are the international promotion of the island’s history and archaeology; the attraction of more foreign and domestic visitors; the continuous exploration and exploitation of the current archaeological site; and the promotion of education and entertainment, both to visiting tourists and local communities (ICOM standards, after Nousia 2003, 22). Furthermore, the development project will strengthen the museum’s autonomy and convert it to an independent research institution, similar to the Archaeological Museum of the neighbouring city of Alexandroupolis (4).

With the creation of new workplaces, the New Archaeological Museum of Samothrace will contribute to the island’s tourism and economy. A number of locals who have recently moved to the Northern mainland due to unemployment are likely to return and work in the island’s tourism industry. In relation to the museum itself, the project’s deeper aim is to convert it into an active outreach and education centre that engages visitors and offers a unique experience alongside the island’s natural beauty.

The basic functions of the New Archaeological Museum

The basic functions of the New Archaeological Museum of Samothrace can be categorised in three broader groups: the management of archaeological collections, the exhibition of archaeological artefacts with emphasis on their classification and interpretation, and finally, public engagement (after Nousia 2003, 22). The original museum, which was expanded in the early 1960s, partly covers two of the above functions. The need for active public engagement has now been added to enrich the goals of the new design.

The current museum artefacts have been selected by the 18th Ephorate of Prehistoric and Classical Antiquities as a representative sample of systematically selected and categorised objects of similar functionality (after Nousia 2003, 42), all of which were previously recovered from the adjacent archaeological site. As it stands nowadays, the selection of representative artefacts and their categorisation (after Nousia 2003, 42) belongs to the Archaeological Museum of Alexandroupolis, which decides the numbers and types of artefacts sent to Samothrace for exhibition (5). The Archaeological Museum of Samothrace tends to host either low-value finds (e.g., pottery fragments) or large artefacts (e.g., sculpture), which are not easy to steal or transport off the island. It is highly likely that this selection of artefacts is purposely dictated by the low security standards at the Archaeological Museum of Samothrace (6).

The study, identification, and documentation of the museum’s artefacts (after Nousia 2003, 44-7) are normally carried out by the Archaeological Museum of Alexandroupolis, which is responsible for returning the artefacts to Samothrace. Due to the lack of proper facilities for documenting the artefacts in their area of recovery, the New Archaeological Museum of Samothrace is equipped to facilitate the return of stored artefacts to their original place of recovery, as well as their study, identification, and documentation. Furthermore, the new design allows a detailed study of such artefacts in relation to their production, use and deposit in relation to their context of recovery (after Nousia 2003, 46) (7). To promote this approach, the recreation project suggests documenting the artefacts according to the latest ICOM standards (including registration, entry verification, recording, indexing, transfer registration, and exit recording; after Nousia, 2003, 47-48) using advanced information technologies. The documentation service will operate as an independent branch of the museum’s administration, hosted in a new administration building. The documentation services will also upgrade the current exhibits with proper labelling, full artefact descriptions, relevant photographs, context information, artefact information, and recovery maps, which are currently unavailable. This process will follow the standards recently established by the Archaeological Museum of Igoumenitsa (Gazi 2007, 55).

The museum’s modernisation includes the installation of advanced security systems, such as motion detector alarms, window traps and armed security doors and windows. The environmental conditions and microclimate inside the museum are crucial for the preservation of the collections (Nousia 2003, 50); therefore, the old wooden showcases will be replaced by modern aluminium double-glazed showcases with controlled lighting, temperature, and humidity. The preservation and restoration of artefacts will also take place at the New Archaeological Museum, which has been designed to include a specialised, fully equipped conservation unit. This unit will be responsible for cleaning and consolidating artefacts, primarily ceramics and metal objects. Additionally, the conservation unit will restore heavily damaged objects, provided the method of restoration is visible and easily identifiable on the original object (after Nousia 2003, 51-2).

The New Archaeological Museum of Samothrace is a pioneer in the conservation and restoration of archaeological artefacts, as the entire process is accessible to the public and supervised in accordance with international security standards. Public involvement in artefact conservation is intended to provide additional publicity for the museum’s collections and to promote the museum's curatorial and management efforts. Furthermore, it is intended to attract more visitors interested in such procedures, which will be part of the museum’s public engagement scheme. This participation is not only meant to promote education, but also to increase public awareness of regional material culture. At a future stage, the conservation unit will host specialised research staff, who will study the natural decay of metal objects; promote scientific methods for the dating of organic materials; and finally, explore the material structure of ceramic objects with the use of petrographic microspores (after Nousia, 2003, 53-5) (8).

The design of the New Archaeological Museum suggests a re-organisation of the current exhibitions. The order of the exhibited collections has been redesigned to achieve maximum performance. As it stands, the museum has limited space to accommodate its collections due to the original building's small size. Space limitations restrict visitors’ movement, and they cannot access enough information due to the museum’s haphazard layout. The new design ensures that visitors are guided by a specific route plan, which has already been proven highly effective for accessing and understanding exhibited artefacts in other Greek museums (after Psarra 2005, 7). According to the typical approach to museum exhibitions, artefacts are either divided by topic or by typological category (Nousia 2003, 73). As it currently stands, museum artefacts have been divided into two exhibition halls according to their typological categories: the first hall consists of free-standing sculpture, and the second hall consists of wooden showcases with ceramic objects. The new design allows the same space to be divided into four sections, each spatially separated by poster boards. The four exhibition sections consist of artefacts arranged in chronological order. These cover the Archaic, Classical, Hellenistic, and Roman periods, during which the Sanctuary of the Great Gods remained active. The existing sculpture is rearranged by chronology and placed along the sides of the exhibition hall, following the same chronological order as the rest of the finds. This arrangement will guarantee better mobility and better use of the limited exhibition space.

The route among the exhibited collections is purposely comb-shaped (after Nousia 2003, 75), guiding the visitor through the chronology of the artefacts, which represent the sanctuary’s evolution over time. The horizontal axis of the new exhibition plan is marked by poster boards, which not only provide relevant information about the site’s excavation history but also accommodate the chronological division of the artefacts. The poster boards provide information on the recovery of the exhibited finds and other contextual data related to their possible use (e.g., votive or funerary artefacts, elite dedications, etc.). This exhibition model allows better accumulation of information; better division of exhibited artefacts into chronological categories; better public engagement; and better promotion of smaller and less impressive archaeological artefacts, which are not easily noticed by the non-expert eye.

The communication of information between the museum and the audience has been improved by the circulation of various bilingual information leaflets (in Greek and English), combined with visitor instructions, area maps and photographic material presenting the history of archaeological works in the nearby site (after Louvi 2007, 40). This information material is freely available for all visitors and can be found at the kiosk right next to the museum's main entrance. The visitors’ interaction with the museum artefacts and the broader learning process is enriched with virtual tours, documentary screenings, live presentations, and, most recently, the visitors’ own participation in the study and conservation of archaeological artefacts at the museum’s laboratories. The new museum participates in student-visit schemes with paid expenses, similar to the ones introduced by the Archaeological Museum of Mycenae (Gazi 2003, 53). Additionally, the Archaeological Museum of Samothrace participates in a Volunteer Tourism scheme by the Ministry of Education, which introduces the museum’s services to university students in relevant disciplines. Finally, new recreation facilities are added to the open grounds around the museum to accommodate more visitors and offer a variety of tourism and recreation services to the public.

General space organisation

In the modernisation plan for the New Archaeological Museum of Samothrace, the architectural team faces three basic problems. Firstly, the Neoclassical design of the original museum, which follows standardised features of early 20th-century Greek museum architecture (after Nousia 2003, 104) needs to be maintained as it stands (9). The pillars of the original museum are strengthened with new supporting materials, and the museum’s interior is modernised; however, the external design is kept at its original form, which blends with the broader history of local architecture.

The second problem is the limited space provided by the original design, which limits the museum’s functions and restricts the spatial organisation of the exhibited collections. To solve this problem, the museum’s old basement, used for storage, is remodelled and converted into a multi-purpose centre of a similar size to the original ground-level exhibition hall. This multi-purpose centre includes a lecture hall with a projector, a conservation laboratory and a safe room for storing artefacts that need to be swapped.

The third problem relates to the archaeological site’s morphology, characterised by the steep western hill-slope adjacent to it. Normalising this inclination with additional soil is not possible due to landslide danger; therefore, the administration and documentation building for the new museum is proposed to be built off-site, next to the archaeological site’s entrance. Until the new building is finished, the museum will not have any facilities to accommodate proper documentation; therefore, the addition of this new extension consists of a major improvement in upgrading the museum’s services.

The re-arrangement of the archaeological artefacts in the exhibition halls involves relocating large statues to a modified space between the museum and the new administration building. This open space needs to be properly sheltered to function as an exhibition hall and as a corridor between the two buildings. The entire structure is made of glass and steel, while the semi-cylindrical roof is reinforced with reflective panels and anti-UV filters to block any radiation that could damage the sculptures. This protective measure follows the standards set by the Archaeological Museum of Athens, which has recently installed a similar glass roof (Gazi 2007, 46). For additional security, the statues intended for exhibition in the sheltered area are sealed in polycarbonate-glass showcases, equipped with motion-detection alarms and other security features.

Due to the site’s steep slope, the museum’s recreation area is located at the top of the western hill, where the view of the archaeological site and the sea directly opposite is the most spectacular. The recreation area is a small cafeteria with an open front, sheltered by a carousel structure. The recreation area offers panoramic views of the entire site and is specifically designed for wheelchair access. As people with mobility limitations cannot tour the site due to the ground’s unpredictable inclinations, the recreation area offers a unique opportunity to see the site from above and combine the experience with touring the museum’s galleries.
Wheelchair access improvements will follow in the second phase of works. A special cement ramp with an electric elevation pulley, similar to the one recently built at the Sikyon Museum (Gazi 2007, 54), will improve wheelchair access to the actual exhibition hall, which currently has only a natural-soil ramp. An external glass-chamber lift will provide access to the basement level. This lift will serve for wheelchair access and for moving large artefacts to the conservation facilities during non-working hours.

At the moment, the new museum’s design does not include a souvenir shop, which would have been useful, particularly for promoting books or tourist guides for the island’s visitors. A souvenir shop is likely to be built in the future, at the top of the hill opposite the recreation area. Building such a facility will increase renovation costs due to the specialised earthworks required at this part of the site.

A main product, which would have been promoted through the souvenir shop, would have been a full publication of the site’s archaeology. Unfortunately, no national, international or regional funding body has expressed an interest in publishing the site’s excavation results. The same stands for the publication of tourist attraction leaflets, which the local municipality is not interested in sponsoring. The team responsible for the modernisation and upgrade of the Archaeological Museum of Samothrace believes that a substantial number of visitors may one day generate sufficient income to support a publication on the site’s archaeology, which will also be sold by the museum. Until then, the construction of a souvenir/bookshop on site is not strictly necessary. Instead, the museum’s upgrade team suggests that some promotional material is likely to be sold at the site’s cafeteria.

Basic issues in managing archaeological collections

The new design of the Archaeological Museum of Samothrace tackles certain issues regarding the management of current archaeological collections. First of all, the new design includes facilities for administration, research and conservation that were not there before. As mentioned earlier, the documentation services are hosted in the main administration building behind the original museum (10). Furthermore, the conservation laboratory on the basement floor engages in research, education and outreach.

The new museum introduces state-of-the-art security features for the collections, which are expected to return from the Archaeological Museum of Alexandroupolis. The underground storage room is equipped with an armed security door, and the only access to it is via the conservation lab, which is normally accessed by authorised personnel. The technical features of the storage room include an automatic dehumidifier for the protection of metal or other sensitive objects, particularly the famous funerary dedications from the Eastern Slope Cemetery (11). The ceramic objects from the site are stored in special shelf-compartments made of polymer glass, following the storing system by the Museum of Byzantine Culture in Athens (after Papanikolaou-Skordali 2003, 38-9). The storage room has motion-detection lights, a security alarm and a security camera.

The second contribution of the museum’s upgraded design is the presence of trained scientific, administrative, and other support staff to manage current artefact collections. The museum promotes interdisciplinary collaboration (after Gazi 2007, 45) of experts in archaeology, conservation, architecture and space planning. Such vacancies are highly unlikely to be covered by the island’s local population; therefore, the Ministry of Culture and the 18th Ephorate of Prehistoric and Classical Antiquities are authorised to advertise and interview candidates for such placements. Building maintenance, security services and certain administrative tasks are likely to be covered by the island’s local population. Such jobs will improve the island’s high unemployment.

In terms of management, the museum is run by a five-member committee, following the administrative model of several other Greek state museums (after Louvi 2007, 44). Two seats on this committee are reserved for representatives of the local municipality. The committee ensures the museum’s proper operation, always in relation to the local community's economic prosperity and cultural development.

Summary

This case study discusses solutions to extend and modernise the services of the Archaeological Museum of Samothrace. The project aims at the international promotion of the island’s history and archaeology; the participation of the local museum in the island’s touristic industry and local economic development; public outreach and education through various learning programmes; and finally, the gradual detachment of the local museum from the parent-museum of Alexandroupolis, which currently manages all of the County’s archaeological collections.

The basic operations of the New Archaeological Museum of Samothrace include the management of museum collections, the exhibition of archaeological artefacts (accompanied by adequate information), and public outreach. In relation to the management of the existing collections, the new museum promotes further research on the archaeological finds in context and supports the return of previously excavated collections to the island, which are currently stored by the Archaeological Museum of Alexandroupolis. This effort is supported by the modernisation of artefact documentation with the latest electronic technologies, modern referencing systems and interactive presentation of information to the public. The above tasks will be assigned to a special study-and-documentation team, which will be hosted in a new building. To protect the collections, the new museum is equipped with advanced security systems and will soon have trained security personnel. For the conservation and restoration of current collections, the new museum includes a recently constructed conservation laboratory in the basement of the original museum building. The trained professionals at the laboratory will ensure that archaeological artefacts are properly cleaned, consolidated, and, if necessary, restored. Furthermore, the conservation laboratory will engage the public and promote real-time archaeological conservation.
The exhibition space for the archaeological artefacts is rearranged. The new exhibition design follows the original classification format but divides the artefacts into four chronological groups, offering visitors a clearer understanding of the sequence. The artefact showcases are arranged in a comb shape, increasing the number of showcases and allowing visitors to move freely among the collections. Public engagement, previously absent, is promoted through the museum’s services. The museum distributes leaflets with information about the site, its history, and its collections, supported by detailed maps. Furthermore, the museum’s outreach activities promote local communities' participation in the island’s history and support local education.

According to the new museum design, the earlier Neoclassical building is to be treated, maintained, and conserved as part of local cultural history. Some new basement extensions assist in storage and conservation of artefacts, as well as public engagement activities and lectures. A new administration building is added behind the original museum, which is connected with it through a semi-cylindrical gallery. This gallery is purposely designed for the safe exhibition of large archaeological artefacts, such as sculpture. A new recreation space is located at the top of the site’s western hill, offering wheelchair access and a remarkable view of the entire archaeological site.

The new museum design effectively supports the management of the existing archaeological collections. It includes a large storage room with advanced security systems, which will soon be staffed with security personnel and other trained research partners. To manage its staff, advertise its vacancies, and hire specialised researchers, the museum’s five-member committee collaborates with the Ministry of Culture and the local municipal authorities.

The planning team hopes that the New Archaeological Museum of Samothrace will contribute to tourism promotion, create more jobs for the local community, and support the island’s economic growth. Furthermore, the museum will contribute to research, education and the study of the existing archaeological site, which is crucial for expanding our knowledge on the island’s history. Finally, the planning team hopes that the New Archaeological Museum of Samothrace will lead the way into re-planning and modernising many other peripheral museums in the country.

Bibliography

Gazi, A., 2007, ‘Public archaeological museums: new permanent exhibitions and re-exhibitions’, Museology Notebooks (4), 45-56.
Louvi, A., 2007, ‘Technological thematic museums: the museum network of the cultural foundation of Piraeus Bank’, Museology Notebooks (4), 40-4.
Matsas, D., 2007, The Mysteries of Samothrace and the Sanctuary of the Great Gods, Alexandroupolis: Ministry of Culture - 18th Ephorate of Prehistoric and Classical Antiquities.
Nousia, T., 2003, ‘Issues on Museum Studies’, in Papagiannopoulou, A. (ed.) Archaeology in Greece, Volume III, Museology, Antiquities’ Curation, Patra: Greek Open University, 17-120.
Papanikolaou-Bakirtzi, D. and Skordali, G., 2006, ‘The archaeological depots of the Museum of Byzantine Culture’, Museology Notebooks (4), 35-41.
Psarra, S., 2005, ‘Museum architecture: space and content’, Museology Notebooks (2), 3-8.

Notes

1. This metric feature cannot be confirmed at this time.
2. This is not entirely true as storing and exhibiting finds are two interconnected functions of modern museums. It is quite likely that the Museum of Samothrace was originally designed to function as a museum, yet in accordance with early 20th-century standards.
3. This sentence is purely hypothetical.
4. This is pure exaggeration.
5. This may not be totally true. During the time of writing, the relationship between the two museums had not been confirmed.
6. Another exaggerated statement, though not entirely wrong.
7. From an archaeological perspective, this statement makes no sense. In fact, context information is recorded during the excavation of the artefacts and post-excavation analysis reveals information regarding production, use and deposition, regardless of where this analysis takes place.
8. The citation does not necessarily match the information provided in the paragraph.
9. In fact, this piece of information is not true. The Samothrace museum building is not Neoclassical.
10. Needless to say, the archaeological site of Samothrace neither provides the luxury of additional building space nor is the archaeological services likely to approve further destruction of the site as a result of museum expansion.
11. At the time of writing, the author could not remember if such a cemetery exists.