A unique situation from a methodological standpoint occurred in Ukraine after the country gained independence in August 1991. The national cultural revival that followed created a nourishing background for enormous interest in significant monuments and sites that had been destroyed during the Soviet era. As a result, the question of reconstruction became a subject of vast discussion, splitting the professional community into followers of the Venice Charter and proponents of a new, more radical approach oriented around the reconstruction of lost monuments. A more moderate position declared that reconstruction could allow for the restoration of a building as ‘‘a document of revealed history,’’ but challenged the ultimate value of authenticity. The practice of preservation in Ukraine at that time illustrates the gravity of the reconstruction approach due to new social and cultural demands (as evidenced by the reconstruction of Dormition Cathedral in Kiev-Pechersk Lavra, St. Michael’s Cathedral in Kiev, and so forth). Continued obsession with reconstruction led to the neglect of methodological requirements and the misuse and misapplication of projects developed on a scientific basis. Subsequent disappointment with reconstruction revealed the importance and relevance of Venice Charter principles in Ukrainian modern preservation theory and practice.