Mocking-up Palmyra in London’s Trafalgar Square (Report, 20 April) rings a bell in my memory of that well-known scene from Spinal Tap regarding a mini Stonehenge. The intentions are good, however the final results is lacking. The virtual Triumphal Arch does, at least, draw interest to the tragic cultural losses which have took place in Syria and somewhere else for the duration of the contemporary conflict. But Roger Michel of the Oxford Institute for Digital Archaeology is incorrect to assume that a scanned replica may act as a attainable substitute.

New era lets in us to breed the shape of an historical shape extra as it should be than ever, however it could in no way recapture the spirit of the authentic that’s the made from genuine getting old and extrade over generations. William Morris, founding father of the Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings, rightly felt that replication leads to “feeble and useless forgery”.

Damage at Palmyra is a disaster, however it’s miles a loss we ought to all accept. This barbaric act of destruction, meant to erase cultural heritage, is now a part of the site’s lengthy history. While there may be an comprehensible inclination to opposite the damage, there may be actually extra dignity in remembering and retaining what stays as a sincere document of the human and cultural losses.

Elsewhere, we ought to focus on securing higher safety for the ones historical cultural icons that survive. It is welcome that the authorities has at ultimate indicated its aim to ratify the 1954 Hague conference for the safety of cultural assets withinside the occasion of supply conflict. This may also assist in destiny wars, however we have to now no longer faux that virtual copies can positioned matters proper in Syria. Je suis Palmyra, mais je ne suis pas Palmyra pastiche.