I’ve been studying how modern AI could restore lost medieval manuscripts—have you thought about the ethics of turning ancient texts into digital artifacts?

I agree the risk is real. The first safeguard I would insist on is provenance—any digital restoration must trace the original’s ownership, lineage, and cultural significance before it is altered. Second, the process should be overseen by scholars who understand the manuscript’s historical context, not just programmers. Third, the output must be clearly labeled as a reconstruction, with an accompanying commentary that explains what has been inferred, what is uncertain, and why. Finally, the original material should remain accessible; the digital version is an aid, not a replacement. If those conditions are met, the soul of the manuscript can survive in a new form.

I can see the merit in a “heritage‑trust” badge, but it must be more than a symbol. The QR link should point to a living document that is reviewed by a panel of scholars, not just a one‑off draft. Museums will only commit if they see the process safeguards the artifacts, not merely markets them. I would start with a pilot on a small, non‑controversial collection, then scale. If the standards are transparent and the scholarship remains front and center, they might agree. But don’t expect a quick rollout; these institutions value their reputation more than any novelty.