The importance of Roman Reconstruction Archaeology

[M. CVRIVS ALEXANDER]

I received an email a few days ago about the value of reconstructive achaeology.
....

My own opinion is that reconstructive archaeology is of some value to archaeologists, and perhaps less value to historians. My correspondent believed that academics will never take it or re-enactment seriously.

To clarify, reconstruction/reconstructive archaelogy and reenactment are not one and the same thing. Sometimes there is not enough or simply none archaeological data for some of the items that reenactors use. For instance, subarmalis - it is not a reconstruction, since there is nothing to reconstruct (no findings). Or 1st century legionary scuta - how much archaeological data for the 1st century scuta do we have to call our reenactor scuta a reconstruction proper? The list can be continued.