Importance of Preservation Awareness and Regular Evaluation of Sacred Relics

 

Importance of Preservation Awareness and Regular Evaluation of Sacred Relics

The two images show an important situation in relic preservation.
One image shows a fragment that was broken from the main body of the relic.
The other image shows the same fragment carefully combined (rejoined) to restore the original form.

This situation clearly shows why preservation awareness and regular evaluation are essential for sacred relics, especially Buddha relics that are used for research, publication, and faith.

---

1. Importance of Preserving the Original Shape

The original shape of a relic is not only a physical form. It is also:

• A historical record

• A religious symbol

• A scientific reference

• A visual source for sketch and shade drawings

In academic publications, such as research by AIS and books published by the British Museum, sketches and shaded drawings are often used to record relics accurately.
If the shape is damaged, changed, or not properly documented, future researchers may receive incorrect information.

Rejoining a broken fragment helps to:

• Restore the true outline and proportions

• Protect the authentic visual identity

• Maintain consistency with earlier published drawings and photographs

---

2. Preservation Awareness: More Than Physical Care

Preservation awareness means understanding that relics are:

• Irreplaceable

• Extremely fragile

• Shared heritage, not personal objects

Small damage, even accidental, can lead to:

• Loss of original surface details

• Changes in texture needed for shade drawing

• Doubts about authenticity or condition

Awareness helps custodians and researchers to:

• Handle relics with calm and mindfulness

• Avoid unnecessary movement or exposure

• Respect both faith and science

This reflects the Buddhist principle of careful attention (yoniso manasikāra).

---

3. Importance of Regular Evaluation

Regular evaluation does not mean invasive testing.
It means:

• Visual inspection under safe conditions

• Checking for cracks, separation, or surface change

• Confirming that rejoined parts remain stable

• Updating condition records with photos and notes

Regular evaluation helps to:

• Detect early signs of damage

• Prevent further breaking or loss

• Ensure that published sketches still match the real object

• Protect the credibility of museums and research institutions

Without regular evaluation, small problems can become permanent loss.

---

4. Respect for Research and Publication Integrity

When relic images are used in major publications:

• The original state must be respected

• Any restoration or rejoining must be documented

• Artists and scholars must know the true form

This protects:

• Academic honesty

• Museum standards

• Public trust

• Religious sensitivity

---

According to the HSWAGATA 100-case template set, for a relic fragment that broke and was rejoined , these are the best matching templates and case links:

5. Templates to use (main + supporting)

1. Template T60 – Relic Image Editing, Visual Integrity & Publication Review Sheet
   Use this as the main template for in this situation, because  key issue is shape/image integrity for publication, and we need a clear record of “before/after,” what was changed, and what must never be changed in images or drawings.

2. Template T65 – Science–Relic Governance Annual Review & Learning Sheet
   Use this for regular evaluation (scheduled checks), so the relic condition and the rejoined area are monitored and recorded as part of governance and learning, not only as a one-time repair note.

3. Template T31 – Relic Custody Chain-of-Custody Log
   Use this to record movement, handling, storage location, and access (who handled it, when, why). This protects trust and helps prevent future confusion or dispute about the relic’s condition history. (Chain-of-custody is emphasized as a core control after conflicts and risks.)

4. If this breakage is treated as an “incident,” also apply an incident report + emergency steps approach (secure space, notify responsible officers, write report).
   This matches the Cluster G guidance on damage/loss response and documentation.

Case studies to review 

• Cluster E, Case E60: Critique of edited relic images → supports why image integrity matters and why edits can create doubt.

• Cluster E, Case E61: Non-invasive research protocols → supports careful methods (do not harm the relic).

• Cluster G (Neglect & Relic Loss) recommendations → supports why regular checks, safe storage, access logs, and quick reporting matter.

• Cluster H (H96 model) → supports “regular supervision and peer review” as a normal duty of custodianship (so evaluation is part of good practice, not blame).

6. Conclusion

The broken and rejoined relic shown in the images is a strong reminder:

• Preservation is not optional

• Evaluation must be continuous

• Original shape must be protected for faith, science, and art

By preserving awareness and practicing regular evaluation, custodians honor:

• The Buddha’s legacy

• The responsibility of guardianship

• The future of Buddhist heritage

This is not only technical work.
It is an ethical duty.

Although I faced limits in preservation facilities and technical support, I did my best to safeguard the relic for future generations. Under my care, I applied the highest level of protection possible within the current situation, even though the methods were not fully professional. 

---

THE HSWAGATA BUDDHA TOOTH RELIC PRESERVATION PRIVATE MUSEUM

FOR PUBLIC AWARENESS PURPOSE USE ONLY

Template No.: T___ (New – Cluster G Incident Form)

Template Title: Relic Breakage / Damage Incident Report & Emergency Steps Form

Related Research Case IDs / Cluster: G86–G95 (Cluster G – Neglect, Damage, Loss Prevention)

Linked Templates / Policies: T31 Chain-of-Custody Log; T60 Visual Integrity & Publication Review; T65 Annual Review; HSWAGATA Policy: Incident Management

Date of form: ____ / ____ / ______

Prepared by / Role: _______________________

Office / Unit: ____________________________

Country / Location: _______________________

Confidentiality Level:
Internal only [ ] Restricted [ ] Sacred-Restricted / Sensitive [ ]

Use of this form (tick):
New case / action [ ] Follow-up [ ] Annual review [ ] Archive only [ ]

---

1. Incident identification

• Incident ID code: ______________________

• Date & time discovered: ____ / ____ / ______ _______ (time)

• Exact place (room / cabinet / site): __________________________

• Relic ID / Collection ID: __________________________

• Type of incident (tick):

  • Breakage [ ] Crack [ ] Chipping [ ] Surface loss [ ] Powdering [ ] Other: _________

2. Short neutral description (10–12 lines)

Write what happened in calm, neutral words (no blame):

---

---

3. Immediate emergency steps (Cluster G minimum)

Tick what was done (these steps mirror Cluster G guidance):

• Space secured immediately (door locked / access stopped) [ ]

• Relic and fragments protected from movement / wind / touch [ ]

• Responsible officer notified [ ] Name: __________ Time: ______

• Legal custodian / senior custodian notified [ ] Name: _________

• Police / heritage officer contacted (if needed) [ ] Case ref: ______

• Incident report started + chain-of-custody started [ ]

4. Condition record (before any rejoining)

• Number of fragments: ________

• Where each fragment was found: _______________________________

• Sketch of fragment layout (simple drawing box):
  [_______________________________________________]

• Photos taken (tick):

  • Full relic [ ] Fragment close-up [ ] “Fit together” photo [ ]

• File names / storage location: _______________________________

5. Rejoining / stabilisation record (if rejoined)

• Was the fragment rejoined? Yes [ ] No [ ] Partial [ ]

• Who performed the rejoining: ________________________________

• Reason for rejoining (tick):

  • Restore original shape for research drawing [ ]

  • Stabilise to prevent further loss [ ]

  • Safe storage fit [ ]

• Materials used (if any): _________________________________

• Method summary (simple): __________________________________

• Risk note (what could go wrong later): _______________________

6. Visual integrity and publication note

Because the relic image must match earlier sketch/shade records:

• Does the rejoined shape match the original published outline? Yes [ ] No [ ] Unsure [ ]

• Differences noticed (if any): ________________________________

• Action: Send to T60 Visual Integrity & Publication Review [ ]

7. Follow-up evaluation schedule

(Regular evaluation is required after a breakage)

• 1-week check: ____ / ____ / ______ Responsible: __________

• 1-month check: ____ / ____ / ______ Responsible: __________

• 6-month check: ____ / ____ / ______ Responsible: __________

• Add to T65 Annual Review [ ]

8. Lessons learned (prevention)

Tick what needs improvement:

• Handling rules [ ] Storage support / padding [ ] Humidity/temperature [ ]

• Access control [ ] Training [ ] Better box/case [ ] Other: _______

9. Sign-off

Prepared by: __________________ Signature: __________ Date: //_____
Checked by (Head / Custodian): ______________ Signature: ________ Date: //_____

---

Quick Checklist Template

---

1) One-page Quick Checklist Template

Template No.: T___ (Proposed – Cluster G)

Template Title: Relic Breakage Emergency Quick Checklist (1-Page)

Related Research Case IDs / Cluster: Cluster G (Neglect, Damage, Loss Prevention)

Linked Templates / Policies: T31 Chain-of-Custody Log / T60 Visual Integrity / T65 Annual Review

Date of form: ____ / ____ / ______

Prepared by / Role: _______________________

Office / Unit: ____________________________

Country / Location: _______________________

Confidentiality Level:
Internal only [ ] Restricted [ ] Sacred-Restricted / Sensitive [ ]

Use of this form (tick):
New case / action [ ] Follow-up [ ] Annual review [ ] Archive only [ ]

---

A) STOP + SECURE (first 10 minutes)

• Stop all handling immediately [ ]

• Secure the space (lock / limit access) [ ]

• Put “Do Not Touch” note / barrier [ ]

• Wear clean gloves / use clean tools (if needed) [ ]

B) PROTECT THE RELIC (no cleaning, no rubbing)

• Protect fragments from wind, vibration, water, heat [ ]

• Place soft support under/around (no pressure) [ ]

• Do NOT wash, brush, or glue quickly [ ]

C) PHOTO + BASIC RECORD (before any rejoin)

• Photo 1: full relic [ ]

• Photo 2: close-up break area [ ]

• Photo 3: all fragments together [ ]

• Time / date of photos: ___________

• Relic ID / Box ID: _______________

D) NOTIFY (within 1 hour)

• Notify responsible officer / custodian [ ] Name: ______ Time: ____

• Notify Head / Board contact (if required) [ ] Name: ____ Time: ____

• If serious risk or suspected crime: notify legal/heritage/police [ ] Ref: ___

E) CHAIN-OF-CUSTODY (start now)

• Start T31 Chain-of-Custody Log [ ]

• Record who touched / moved / entered area [ ]

F) DECISION CONTROL

• Any rejoining must be approved by: ___________________

• If rejoined: record method + photos + reasons [ ]

• If published images exist: send to T60 Visual Integrity [ ]

G) FOLLOW-UP CHECKS (schedule)

• 1 week: ____ / ____ / ______ Responsible: __________

• 1 month: ____ / ____ / ______ Responsible: __________

• Add to T65 Annual Review [ ]

Sign-off (quick)
Prepared by: __________________ Signature: __________ Date: //____
Checked by: ___________________ Signature: __________ Date: //____

---

2) Full Incident Report Dossier Template

THE HSWAGATA BUDDHA TOOTH RELIC PRESERVATION MUSEUM
FOR INTERNAL USE ONLY

Template No.: T___ (Proposed – Cluster G)

Template Title: Relic Breakage / Damage Incident Report & Emergency Response Dossier

Related Research Case IDs / Cluster: Cluster G (Neglect, Damage, Loss Prevention)

Linked Templates / Policies: T31 Chain-of-Custody Log / T60 Visual Integrity / T65 Annual Review

Date of form: ____ / ____ / ______

Prepared by / Role: _______________________

Office / Unit: ____________________________

Country / Location: _______________________

Confidentiality Level:
Internal only [ ] Restricted [ ] Sacred-Restricted / Sensitive [ ]

Use of this form (tick):
New case / action [ ] Follow-up [ ] Annual review [ ] Archive only [ ]

---

1) Basic incident information

• Incident ID: __________________________

• Date/time discovered: //_____ Time: ______

• Location (building/room/cabinet): __________________________

• Relic ID / Collection ID: __________________________

• People present when found (names): __________________________

2) Type of damage (tick)

• Breakage [ ] Crack [ ] Chip [ ] Surface loss [ ] Powdering [ ] Other: _______

3) Neutral incident summary (no blame)

Write only what is known. Short and clear.

---

---

4) Immediate actions taken

Tick and add time:

• Handling stopped [ ] Time: ____

• Area secured [ ] Time: ____

• Relic protected (covered/supported safely) [ ] Time: ____

• Photos taken before any change [ ] Time: ____

• T31 Chain-of-Custody started [ ] Time: ____

• Responsible officer notified [ ] Name: ______ Time: ____

• Senior custodian/legal authority notified [ ] Name: ____ Time: ____

• Police/heritage contacted (if needed) [ ] Ref: ______

5) Condition record (before rejoining)

• Number of fragments: ______

• Fragment sizes (basic): _____________________________________

• Where fragments were found: _________________________________

• Visible risks now (loose powder, unstable edges): ______________

• Sketch of layout (simple box):
  [__________________________________________________________]

6) Photo and file record

• Camera/device used: _________________________

• File location (folder/drive/ID): _________________________

• Photo list (file names):

  1. Full relic: ____________________

  2. Break area close-up: ___________

  3. Fragment group: _______________

  4. Fit-together proof: ____________

7) Rejoining / stabilisation record (only if approved)

• Approved by (name/role): ______________________ Date: //_____

• Purpose (tick):

  • Keep original shape for research drawing [ ]

  • Prevent further loss [ ]

  • Safe storage fit [ ]

• Method summary (simple): _____________________________________

• Materials used (if any): ______________________________________

• Risks after rejoining (what to watch): __________________________

• “After” photos taken [ ] File names: __________________________

8) Visual integrity and publication integrity (T60 link)

Because sketches/shade drawings depend on exact form:

• Does the restored form match earlier records? Yes [ ] No [ ] Unsure [ ]

• Differences noticed: __________________________________________

• Action: Complete T60 Visual Integrity & Publication Review [ ]

9) Root cause check (basic)

Tick what may have contributed:

• Storage weakness / no support [ ]

• Handling procedure gap [ ]

• Too much movement/transport [ ]

• Humidity/temperature issue [ ]

• Vibration/impact [ ]

• Unknown [ ]
  Notes: ________________________________________________________

10) Preventive actions (what we will change)

• New storage support (foam/base/box) [ ]

• Limit access + key log [ ]

• Staff training / handling rule reminder [ ]

• Add “fragile” label + safe tray rule [ ]

• Update SOP (standard steps) [ ]
  Details: _______________________________________________________

11) Evaluation plan (T65 link)

• 1-week check date: //_____ Officer: ______________

• 1-month check date: //_____ Officer: ______________

• 6-month check date: //_____ Officer: ______________

• Add to T65 Annual Review [ ]

12) Closing statement (custodian duty tone)

Write 2–4 lines about careful intention and responsibility.

---

13) Signatures

Prepared by: ___________________ Role: __________ Signature: __________ Date: //____
Checked by: ____________________ Role: __________ Signature: __________ Date: //____
Approved by: ___________________ Role: __________ Signature: __________ Date: //____

---

FOR FUTURE GENERATION !

Sao Dhammasami