Hello everyone. I’m Sally Foster, a member of the University of Stirling’s Heritage team. I’m an interdisciplinary scholar interested in the interlinked lives of original objects and their replicas. My colleague Sian Jones and I have just published ‘My Life as a Replica: St John’s Cross, Iona’: https://www.oxbowbooks.com/oxbow/my-life-as-a-replica.html and https://amzn.to/2yuyLc9, Preview it here: https://issuu.com/casematepub/docs/foster_jones2020. This book invites new ways of thinking about the authenticity, value and significance of replicas. It also tells important new stories about the much-loved, world-renowned island of Iona, and its internationally significant carved stones. Iona’s extensively copied, iconic St John’s Cross, created c. AD 750, is our case study, particularly its concrete replica, 50 years old today:
In 1970 a concrete replica of the St John’s Cross arrived in Iona sitting incongruously on the deck of a puffer delivering the island’s annual supply of coal. What is the story behind this intriguing replica? How does it relate to the world’s first ringed ‘Celtic cross’, an artistic and technical masterpiece, which has been at the heart of the Iona experience since the eighth century? What does it tell us about the authenticity and value of replicas? Our research shows that replicas can acquire rich forms of authenticity and value, informed by social relations, craft practices, creativity, place and materiality. Replicas are shown to be important objects in their own right, with their own creative, human histories - biographies that people can connect with. The story of the St John’s Cross celebrates how replicas can ‘work’ for us if we let them, particularly if clues are available about their makers’ passion, creativity and craft.
I’m delighted to be here and look forward to answering your questions after 4pm BST.
What role do you see replicas playing in the increased calls for repatriation of looted colonial artefacts from museums? Can meaning and ‘authenticity’ be transferred onto objects using new technologies (such as scanning and 3D printing) in a way that is more available now than when the St John’s cross replica was manufactured?
Sounds like a fascinating book and I look forward to reading it.
What are the ethics of using replicas in museum displays or heritage sites? Should the public always be told that what they're looking at is not original, or are there circumstances where it's better not to? Are there situations where displaying a replica is in fact more ethical than the real thing, perhaps with human remains or objects with conservation needs?
How do notions of authenticity vary across cultures? Is it a particularly western concern? Visiting Japan I noted that there seemed no loss of ‘authenticity’ for buildings that had been destroyed and rebuilt, possibly many times. Is it just the difference between wood and stone?
Thanks for hosting this AMA, Dr. Foster! Dr. Jones' and your topic is fascinating. I paged through the preview right away.
I am curious: how are you defining "authenticity"? Do/how do replicas create or help shape a new past? (On AskHistorians, we've talked a lot about questions of authenticity versus accuracy with respect to, e.g., the mythic spaces of video games).
Blatantly violating our own 20-year-rule--but, hey, historical memory!--spanning 1970 to 2016, did you see the rise of the Internet influencing how people understand or use the cross at all?
Thanks!
Thank you so much for joining us today! Reading up on the topic, this is absolutely fascinating. I quite easily recognized the image of the cross, but knew nothing about it. If I might ask something a bit more about you than the cross itself though, what got you first interested in it, and Iona? I can see why you would want to dig deep into the story, but what drew you to it in the first place?
Have you given thought to how your work applies to the off-site replica of the Göbekli Tepe discovery and how it is presented to visitors in a safe retreat, away from a war zone?
At what point does maintenance of a genuine artifact turn it into a replica? Can we restore sculpture that has been damaged/disfigured (such as the various Egyptian statuary disfigured by both ancient Egyptians and others since)? Should we?
Oh! Another question, oops. Your work here focused on a single example, of course--I don't know how far afield from that you've gone. Do idea of authenticity change (or, do you think they would) depending on what type of artifact, building, or other object is being replicated? I am thinking of 'dark tourism' in particular (old prisons, objects at sites of genocide, &c).
Hello Dr. Foster. Thank you for doing this AMA.
I have that noticed in the world of medieval recreation/reenactment that the term "museum replica" is met with some derision, as being shorthand for goods of poor quality. The origins of this appear to trace back to pre-internet days, when one could order medieval and renaissance themed goods by paper catalog. Said catalogs would sprinkle said term throughout, most often using it to describe cheap knives and swords. In present day, very few merchants will dare to use the phrase at all, especially so if the merchant aspires to standards of accuracy.
That said, is there or could there be some consensus on terms to determine if an item for display or sale meets any standard for research or accuracy of production method? If so, what might that look like? I am thinking of something parallel to the marketing terms "organic" vs "natural", wherein the latter is essentially meaningless, but the former usually indicates the item has met some standard set by a governing body.
Any famous accounts of replicas being surprisingly hard to make with modern tools and technology compared to their ancient and intricate counterparts?