ABSTRACT
Gradually, coincident with the shifting status of both the art and the artists, changes in attitudes towards restoration occurred as was evidenced by the emergence of new terminology. While the expression ‘to restore’ designated ‘remaking’ from the 1400s, it was not until 1681, employed by Filippo Baldinucci in his treatise on sculpture restoration, that it is unequivocally used in modern form (Thomas, 1998). Only in the nineteenth century was ‘retouching’ (English) appropriated for pictorial restoration (ritocco /Italian, retusche /German, etc.); formerly, it was (and is) used to designate a master’s final adjustments. Today, respect for the original is seen as a prerequisite for ethical restoration. Although much early work does not satisfy our contemporary standards, this concept was enshrined as early as the 1600s. In his biography of Carlo Maratti (1625-1713), Gian Pietro Bellori lauded the Roman painter’s restrained use of reversible retouching for frescoes. With remarkable foresight, Maratti also experimented with visible retouching (dotted applications of paint).
