It's just my personal opinion, but the ruins seemed underwhelming and conveyed loss of what was great more than anything else. With the bricks eroding and constant measures needed to prevent further deterioration, what is to keep a restoration or reconstruction from occurring? Assuming it could be done correctly, a treasure could be reborn.
Reconstructions of historical monuments, some would criticise are far from the real thing.
The 'new' forum will despite your best efforts be easy for cynics to point out as being inauthentic based on a combination of factors including both the materials and methods used.
This consequently invokes the debates of the Theseus' Ship Paradox;
The ship of Theseus, also known as Theseus' paradox, is a thought experiment that raises the question of whether an object which has had all of its components replaced remains fundamentally the same object.
A common view among academics in these circles is pretty much that that the authenticity of something is in the event itself and can be manipulated by the 'author' to show a particular history (e.g. omitting something or emphasising something else). There are, however, arguments that debates of authenticity in historical recreations doesn't matter so much for non-academic audiences in these circumstances 'factuality' and 'credible reality' of your reconstruction can be separated against at the anger of the more traditional conversationalists measured independently.
__
I wrote a similar answer on the subject of 'authenticity' in historical reconstructions here .