Can we PLEASE leave our mark?

September 24, 2009

When it comes to restoration/reconstruction in the world of archaeology, things seem to get a little tense. It is easy to criticize historians and archaeologists of the past because in retrospect, we always know better – but I find it difficult to do this because even though some poor decisions were made, their mistakes aided in the development of archaeology today.

Personally, I don’t think there is a big problem with restoration/reconstruction – as long is it is educated and informed. I appreciate the importance of preserving something in its original state, and ideally, any restoration should be done so the restored parts are noticeable. Without restoring or reconstructing objects, I think it’s hard for the average person with no background in history but just a general appreciation, to understand and visualize how certain objects would have been employed in the past.

As someone who studies history though, I have to say that anastylosis is probably the best method for recreating the past, as was done with the Library of Celsus at Ephesus. However, I can’t deny that viewing a reconstruction (not a cheesy Disney-fied one) is also really interesting as well – and even allows for tourists to better interact with the past.

On a side note, I really must say how disappointed I was to learn that at most ancient sites, the statuary has been removed and replaced with plaster moulds. Even at Ephesus, the sculptures featured on the library are not original but projections of what the originals are thought to have looked like. Most tourists don’t get the chance to discover this, which is really unfortunate because it kind of betrays the “legitimacy” of the site if they are claiming that it is not a reconstruction – when clearly, certain parts are.

I also feel that reconstruction, although it is not looked highly upon today, is important to the history of a site. If you look at the history of any cathedral, basilica, castle or ancient city – there are imprints from almost every century. Additions, improvements, and yes, even restorations can be reported when examining really any historical building. Take the Hagia Sophia for example, built in the time of Justinian, modified by the Muslims, and then renovated and restored by the Italians in the 19^th century. All of these factors come together to make these buildings multi-layered, and contribute to an exciting past. What mark are we going to leave if we shy away from touching these buildings?