Just realized how many people mix up restoration with reconstruction

Saw a post claiming a site in Egypt was 'restored' when they actually rebuilt half the temple with new stone. That's not restoration, that's reconstruction, and it matters because one preserves the original find and the other basically replaces it. I've been to the Parthenon in Athens where they did real restoration with iron clamps, and you can tell the difference. Why do so many popular articles blur this line? Does it bug anyone else who actually digs or works with these sites?

0 comments

0 Comments

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this discussion.