Which specific Capitol artworks were repaired after January 6 and what did the conservation process entail?

1. What was damaged and how many objects needed repair

House curatorial testimony to Congress summarized the art damage as eight objects from the House collection in need of conservation—repeatedly framed in reporting as “six sculptures and two paintings”—and the House curator sought an emergency allocation of about $25,000 to remediate those specific items ^{[1] [2] [3]}. Coverage from the Architect of the Capitol and the Smithsonian contextualized that count within a much larger sweep of damage across the campus—535 items on display that day and $30 million in total repair and security costs for the complex—underscoring that the eight artworks were a small, but symbolic, subset of losses ^{[4] [2]}.

2. Which named artworks appear in reporting and what is uncertain

Reporting names some high‑profile works in the Capitol generally (for example, John Trumbull’s Declaration of Independence painting is described as part of the Rotunda holdings), but the provided sources do not definitively identify a full list of the eight objects that received conservation after January 6—most outlets report the aggregate number without publishing a complete itemized inventory of each damaged painting or sculpture and its fate ^{[5] [1] [3]}. Therefore, while the public record confirms the scale (eight objects) and the categories (paintings and sculptures), it does not allow a confident, source‑backed enumeration of every title and artist involved.

3. The conservation funding request and administrative response

The House curator formally requested about $25,000 in emergency funds to cover the restoration work on the eight items, an appeal repeated across art press and mainstream outlets; that appeal was presented alongside testimony to the House subcommittee examining the broader Capitol damage and security failures ^{[1] [3] [5]}. Federal officials and the Architect of the Capitol also reported far larger material repair figures—roughly $30 million—to cover masonry, windows, doorframes and campus security upgrades, signaling that art conservation was a relatively modest line item within a major restoration budget ^{[2] [4]}.

4. What the conservation work entailed, according to reporting

Descriptions of the conservation process in the available sources are general rather than technical: reporting indicates that trained AOC and curatorial staff cataloged and assessed artifacts, that conservators planned “conservation measures” for the eight objects, and that emergency funds would be used to stabilize and restore paintings and sculptures; specific techniques, materials or laboratories used are not detailed in the cited accounts ^{[1] [4] [5]}. Separately, the Architect of the Capitol described using historically appropriate materials for structural repairs—such as century‑old mahogany for window and doorframe restoration—showing that traditional conservation and preservation standards informed parts of the larger restoration program ^[2].

5. Gaps in the public record and competing narratives

Major outlets and the AOC provided numbers, budget requests and high‑level descriptions, but did not publish a forensic conservation log listing object‑by‑object damage diagnoses, treatment reports or before/after conservation photographs in the sources supplied here, leaving a transparency gap for researchers seeking granular technical detail ^{[1] [3] [5]}. Advocacy pieces and essays also reframed the damage within broader cultural debates about what the Capitol’s artifacts represent, which influences which objects receive attention—an implicit agenda that shapes public focus even as curators address material needs ^{[6] [4]}.

6. Bottom line

Documented, sourced facts: eight House collection objects (reported as six sculptures and two paintings) were identified for conservation and a $25,000 emergency request was made to cover their restoration; the Capitol complex’s total material repairs were orders of magnitude larger at roughly $30 million, and AOC personnel undertook cataloging and restoration work using preservation practices for building fabric and artifacts ^{[1] [2] [4] [5]}. The precise identities of all eight pieces and a step‑by‑step conservation protocol are not published in the supplied reporting, so further confirmation would require direct access to AOC or House Curator treatment records or subsequent technical reports not included in these sources.