The Thing about Replicas—Why Historic Replicas Matter

Abstract

Reproduction of archaeological material was a significant and serious enterprise for antiquarians and museums in the long nineteenth century. Replicas embed many stories and embody considerable past human energy. Behind their creation, circulation, use, and after-life lies a series of specific social networks and relationships that determined why, when, and in what circumstances they were valued, or not. Summarising the context of their production, circulation, and changing fortunes, this article introduces the ways in which replicas are important, and considers the specific benefits and aspects of a biographical approach to their study. Beyond the evidential, the study of existing replicas provides a historical and contemporary laboratory in which to explore the concepts of value and authenticity, and their application in cultural heritage and collections management, offering us a richer insight into the history of ourselves as archaeologists and curators.

Concrete and non-concrete: exploring the contemporary authenticity of historic replicas through an ethnographic study of the St John’s Cross replica, Iona

“…Within modernist discourses, authenticity has been firmly associated with original historic objects, and these discourses continue to hold sway in many heritage and museum contexts. As a consequence, replicas have a chequered history (Foster and Curtis 2016;Lending 2017), regarded as unruly or 'wild' objects, potentially subverting or threatening the authenticity of originals (Stockhammer and Forberg 2017, 12). Even where their value is recognised, replicas are deemed to lack the 'history of felt relationships' of originals (Lowenthal 1985, 295).…”

“…At the same time, the importance of what Holtorf (2013) calls 'pastness' is clearly evident in terms of people's emotive responses, along with what we have coined 'anti-pastness'. Finally, the cultural biographies of replicas, and the 'felt relationships' associated with them, play a key role in the generation of authenticity, while simultaneously informing the authenticity and value of their historic counterparts through the 'composite biographies' produced (Foster 2018;Foster, Blackwell, and Goldberg 2014;Foster and Curtis 2016). In this regard, our research provides categorical support for emerging arguments about the importance of production, creativity and craft in generating authenticity at key moments in the story of a replica, whether it be physical or digital (Cameron 2007, 55, 60, 67;Jeffrey 2015;Jones et al 2017;Latour and Lowe 2011).…”

3D heritage visualisation and the negotiation of authenticity: the ACCORD project

“…In authorised museum and heritage discourses, there has been an overwhelming emphasis on material authenticity, with the integrity or 'true' nature of objects defined in relation to their origins, provenance and fabric (Cameron 2007, 52;Jones 2010, 184). In contrast, the authenticity of physical replicas and reconstructions has a much more checkered and ambivalent history (Foster and Curtis 2015;Fyfe 2004;Rabinowitz 2015). Whilst fluctuating according to their modes of production, accuracy, institutional associations and biographical trajectories, their authenticity and value are almost always seen as secondary, and indeed a potential threat, to the original objects they represent.…”

The Untold Heritage Value and Significance of Replicas

“…When they thought they did know something, they confused its life with the return of the original SJC in 1990. Part of the same 'composite biography' (Foster and Curtis 2016) in the sense that their lives and fortunes are inextricably entwined, the stories of both original and replica are grounded in the meaningful return of something 'lost' to the island. The replica was credited with agency, particularly by the HES stewards who shared the refrain of it not trying too hard or pretending to be something it is not.…”

“…Traditionally, authenticity has been associated with original historic objects, with replicas attributed a distinct and secondary nature. As a result, historic replicas have had a chequered history and mixed fates (Foster and Curtis 2016;Lending 2017). In the context of new thinking about authenticity (e.g.…”