Today our group took a moment to work on our case study that was assigned for class.
While working on our own individual sites I came across something interesting happening at the Balnuaran of Clava cairn in Scotland. Turns the 3 cairns that make up the site have been restored a number of times. This then sparked a group discussion about the differences between conservation, restoration, and the ethical ramifications.
Conservation is the prevention of further deterioration and some preventative care. Individuals who do conservation work on artifacts are required to acquire additional education before doing any working in the field.
Restoration on the other had is the act of returning an artifact to the condition it was in when it was first created. Restoration unlike conservation apparently does not require additional education. Who knew?
Balnuaran of Clava was first restored by the land owner in the 1880s and has later been restored in the 40s and 50s. The restoration was constructed so that the site looked the way that the landowner and archeologists thought it would have looked like when it was first constructed. The reconstructions were done so tourists could go and see the site. Know ethically is it appropriate to restore cairn sites so that tourists can go and walk into them? I don't know. On the one hand I agree with the practise, for possible learning opportunities. On the other hand I disagree, because is it our place to speculate what these monuments looked like for tourist reasons.
No comments:
Post a Comment