1. S. Pescarin, S. Zanni CNR ITABC, Rome, Italy
Reconstructing Roman landscapes: interpretation and virtual reality

2. Table of content VHLab at CNR ITABC Reconstructing roman landscape:
archaeological landscape
ancient landscape
Research and/or communication
Interpretation
Methodology
Case-study 1 (rich set of data/sources): Ca' Tron
Case-study 2 (poor set of data/sources): Flaminia/Tiber Valley
Issues: transparency, data inconsistency, reliability, scale
Conclusions

3. VHLab activities
Reconstruction of archaeological landscape through digital technologies > activity carried out since 15 years
Aksum Project (2003)
Appia Narrative Virtual Museum (2005)
Flaminia Virtual Museum (2008)
Ca' Tron (2009)
Xi'an western Han landscape (2010)
Bologna and Apa (2011)
Aquae Patavinae (2011)
Tiber Valley VR project (2012)
Advanced school, from 2009 Italian School of Virtual Archaeology and from 2011 V-MUST Virtual Heritage School

4. Reconstructing the landscape
Reconstructing archaeological landscape and reconstructing ancient landscape is different. They have different challenges, issues, methodologies
Is landscape reconstruction just for dissemination?
Can it be also useful for research?
Why reconstructing, what reconstructing and how reconstructing ?
Our assumption is that the process of reconstructing the landscape can help the interpretation process.

5. Reconstructing archaeological landscape
Archaeological landscape is the contemporary landscape in its diachronicity. It includes:
archaeological remains
past historical traces
present structures Us
Its reconstruction is therefore aimed at acquiring it as it is at different scale and with different technologies:
RBM, IBM > 3D modeling
Remote Sensing
GIS

6. Reconstructing Ancient Landscape
The ancient potential landscape is how the landscape might have been during a certain historical period at a certain latitude/altitude. It includes:
natural vegetation
natural morphology
human activities
Techniques:
Not reality based modelling
Complex system and Procedural Modelling
Spatial Analysis
Based on FAO studies on Land Evaluation ('70s); Landscape archaeology studies

7. Procedural Modeling for the interpretation of ancient landscapes
Procedural modeling allows to visualize and better comprehend the spatial organization of ancient cities, not only the aspect of the main monuments.
Archaeological strong points:
GIS data as input (street network, archaeological relief data, land use, ...)
flexibility of the rules and consequent adaptability to different architectural styles
ability to create large-scale models
ability to generate different LoD for the visualization

8. Ancient Potential Landscape
Anthropology
Archaeology
Geography
Architecture
History
Ancient Potential Landscape
Geology
Computer Science
Botany
Topography

9. Research and/or communication
Research requirements
DTM
Reality-based 3D models
Botanic data
Archaeological GIS
Cultural data about landscape management
Communication requirements
Graphically attractive environments
User friendly interfaces
Storytelling
Transparency of reliability

10. Research and/or communication
Communication needs:
Immersivity and interactivity
Augmented comprehension of the past
Clear distinction among visible, invisible, certainty, hypothetical, imaginary.
Research needs:
Data integrity
Integration of simulation and experimental data
Connection with metadata
Transparency

11. Interpretation
VR reconstructions of ancient landscape help the interpretation of archaeological contents:
Linking the sites and objects to their wider social, cultural, historical and natural setting
Resulting from the collaboration between heritage professionals, CG experts, professionals of other disciplines (biology, botany, climate study, geology, …)
Maintaining the connection with the metadata
Enabling the visualization and contextualization of a huge amount of information
Providing a suitable environment to test the reconstructive hypothesis
> ICOMOS Ename Charter for the Interpretation of Cultural Heritage (Québec, 2008)

12. Issues data inconsistency/ reliability ? Scale?
Transparency ? > London Charter
reconstructing for an interactive application is different from reconstructing for a not-interactive application!

13. Virtual Reality applications for landscape reconstructions
Virtual Reality (VR) is a suitable medium to manage and visualize complex data such as ancient landscape reconstructions.
Main goals in the archaeological domain:
Communication
Reliability
TRANSPARENCY + =
INTERACTIVITY
OPENNESS
AFFORDANCE
INTERACTION
with
METADATA

14. The approach Ancient Potential Landscape S C I E N T F M H O D
three-dimensionality
terrain potentiality
spatiality
latitude
altitude
morphology
soil
Natural attitude of a terrain unit
Archaeological and cultural data
Ancient Potential Landscape

15. The approach
In order to reconstruct the potential landscape it is necessary to:
Map the archaeological landscape
Generate the terrain (based on DTM)
Map the natural vegetation
Perform spatial analysis for mapping the ancient pontential landscape
Locate 3D models of archaeological sites/objects in the space
Link virtual contents to metadata and enable their usability

16. (6) Data post-processing Virtual Reality application
The Workflow
(8)
Terrain generation
(1)
Planning the acquisition
(2)
Trial test
(3)
Verification of the tests in the different stages
(4)
choice of the acquisition techniques
(7)
GIS
(9)
Landscape reconstruction
New data
(6) Data post-processing
(5) Data acquisition
(10)
Virtual Reality application
(7) 3D modeling
Texturing
Shading
Graphic libraries
Techniques:
- total station
- DGPS
- 3D photogrammetry
- Scanner Laser
- Photomodeling
(8)
Database/
media:
contents VR
offline VR
online

17. Case study 1: Reconstructing Roman Ca' Tron
What happens when we can have a rich set of sources and data?

18. Case study 2: Reconstructing Rome Suburbium
(Flaminia/Tiber Valley)
What happens when you have little environmental information regarding the past?

19. Issues Data inconsistency/ reliability Transparency Scale
> Flaminia Virtual Museum: information on the level of reliability of architecture... why not also for landscape? How?
Transparency
> Aquae Patavinae
Scale
> Aquae Patavinae: constraint in the exploration

20. Conclusion
The process of reconstructing the landscape helps the interpretation process:
Linking the sites and objects to their wider social, cultural, historical and natural setting
Resulting from the collaboration between heritage professionals, CG experts, professionals of other disciplines (biology, botany, climate study, geology, …)
Maintaining the connection with the metadata
Enabling the visualization and contextualization of a huge amount of information
Providing a suitable environment to test the reconstructive hypothesis
> ICOMOS Ename Charter for the Interpretation of Cultural Heritage (Québec, 2008)