The term “restoration” was first used in connection with constructions in Rome, in the 16th century. Much later, the discipline we now call “Historic Building Restoration” was formed. Today, there is a noticeable concern for modifying the terminology to adapt to the evolution of the discipline. Indeed, since the end of the 19th century, when the discipline became independent in various countries, a certain terminology has been established: restoration, conservation, protection, etc., even though as early as 1883 Camillo BOITO had resolved the difference between restoration and conservation. The adoption of terms that exist in all languages with the same meaning was based on national sensitivities that wanted to highlight a certain direction. The evolution of the discipline in the 20th century makes the debate over terminology today pointless. Changes in terminology are often seen in different countries, such as how the name of the “course” in the school curriculum changes frequently. However, comparing analytical programs shows that these courses are identical. The changes in terminology only show a concern to keep up with the evolution of the discipline. In Romania, the discipline adopted French terminology at the end of the 19th century. This terminology is still used today, including in legislation, even though it is clear that it no longer reflects reality.
Virgil Pop (Fri,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: