I’ve recently done some work on a C13th church that was partially rebuilt in the 1860s. At the time the work was much lamented in some quarters as destroying the authenticity of the original building.

This had implications for the way it was subsequently treated, now being considered a reconstruction it was treated as if it were ‘merely’ a Victorian Pastiche. Historians and conservationists discounted it as unimportant and inauthentic.

Our analysis of the building suggests up to 50% of the original church is still there, that it retains the same plan, and many of the important burials. Now those who have an interest in the building believe that there is this ‘authentic’ fabric in the building much more notice is being taken of it.

The Church still looks exactly the same and is still used in the same way, but now that some of the stones and mortar are likely to be older that they thought, it suddenly looks more important.

Contrast this with a paper I’ve written on Saddam’s rebuilding of Babylon. The Ba’thists approach to their heritage completely discounted any value in the fabric of the city. The value of the site was almost entirely in the associations, the tradition, the history. No Iraqi would have visited the sand-washed ruins of the site, but they flocked to visit Saddam’s pastiche.

This idea of authenticity is a central one at Ashland, The Henry Clay estate in Lexington, Kentucky: we interepreted Clay’s legacy within the mansion that Clay’s son rebuilt after his death. Was it “really” Henry Clay’s home? Some insisted that he never set foot in this house, thus it is not authentically Clay’s.

But I – and others – believe that authenticity comes from more than just the actual physical walls: Ashland today in its rebuilt form is still on the exact location of Clay’s original house and even more important: the son’s memorializing motivation to rebuild it was in itself a way to authentically represent his father’s legacy for generations of public visitors to come.

The place may not be the authentic physical building, but it continues to pack an authentic emotional punch.

Thank you for this!

Yes, it got a few laughs, but he made an interesting point, and a similar one runs throughout your own article. I agree, authenticity is absolutely a perception, and to think that there might be a single approach to authenticity is ignoring the very essence of what makes us human and capable of seeking out such things – emotion. Bravo!