True, but that still revolves around leaving it aa close as possible to how they were - preservation sometimes requiring active work to keep clues around
For the pyramids, the rate of exterior decay is probably deemed far less destructive than the need to use cement to restore the granite
I guess people want them to be fashionably ruined.
Frankly, I think re-cladding the pyramids would be great for keeping clues around, provided they don’t touch the existing stones while putting new ones on. That’ll stop erosion from digging deeper into the existing structure.
historical conservation isn’t really this cut and dry
sometimes it’s better to restore things, or to do work to prevent them degrading further
True, but that still revolves around leaving it aa close as possible to how they were - preservation sometimes requiring active work to keep clues around
For the pyramids, the rate of exterior decay is probably deemed far less destructive than the need to use cement to restore the granite
but when is the exact point of “how they were” when 4000 years of erosion has already taken place?
I guess people want them to be fashionably ruined.
Frankly, I think re-cladding the pyramids would be great for keeping clues around, provided they don’t touch the existing stones while putting new ones on. That’ll stop erosion from digging deeper into the existing structure.
Ye, I’d say the cement is the real issue there. If they could just place the granite blocks and not use cement, then that would work
They could mold each block, cast concrete into the mold, and use that as the base for the stones.