Virtual reconstruction and restoration of an uncommon bronze vessel from the Mălăiești Roman fort

Cercetări Arheologice 29.1, 2022, 245-258
https://doi.org/10.46535/ca.29.1.12



Virtual reconstruction and restoration of an uncommon bronze vessel from the Mălăiești Roman fort

Authors: Laurențiu-Marian Angheluță Ovidiu Țentea Alexandru Dozsa

Keywords:

Virtual archaeology, virtual reconstruction, virtual restoration, 3D digitization, Roman military vessel

Abstract:

This paper details the preparation stages and processes for the digital documentation and virtual reconstruction and restoration hypotheses of a heavily damaged archaeological artefact. The presented workflow starts with the immediate actions after the artefact unearthing, going through physical restoration, 3D digitization, virtual restoration (including virtual anastylosis) and a virtual reconstruction hypothesis proposal for the initial shape and looks of the object as when it was created. The artefact subjected to this process is an uncommon bronze vessel found on the premises of the Roman fort from Mălăiești, Prahova County, Romania. The scientific data and archaeological research have already identified with accuracy its dating, chemical composition, and the most probable functionality. All this information was disseminated in a recent study. The authors also discuss the good practice models applied in both virtual and physical restoration and how the two fields intertwine. The digital results are also exhibited in a simple but effective narrative style in the online medium, designed for both public and expert scientific groups.

Download: PDF

Material Suplimentar: Descarcă

How to cite: Laurențiu-Marian Angheluță, Ovidiu Țentea, Alexandru Dozsa, Virtual reconstruction and restoration of an uncommon bronze vessel from the Mălăiești Roman fort, Cercetări Arheologice, Vol. 29.1, pag. 245-258, 2022, doi: https://doi.org/10.46535/ca.29.1.12

Bibliography

  1. Angheluță, L. and Rădvan, R. 2019. Macro photogrammetry for the damage assessment of artwork painted surfaces. International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences – ISPRS Archives: 101-107.
  2. Angheluţă, L. and Rădvan, R. 2020. 3D Digitization of Translucid Materials in Cultural Heritage Objects: A Comparative Study between Laser Scanning and Photogrammetry. Romanian Journal of Physics 65 (7–8): 1–12.
  3. Angheluță, L., Țentea, O., Ghervase, L., Cortea, I., Dinu, M., Ratoiu, L. and Pârău, A. 2022. Integrated multi-analytical study of the bronze vessel from Mălăiești Roman fort. Journal of Ancient History and Archaeology 9 (1): 185-198, DOI: 10.14795/j.v9i1.743.
  4. Baratte, F., Bonnamour, L., Guillaumet, J.-P. and Tassinari S. 1984. Vases antiques de métal au Musée de Chalon-sur-Saône, (Suppl. RAE 5). Dijon: Revue archéologique de l’Est – Suppléments.
  5. Blackmore, E. 2019. Many historic icons face same threats as Notre Dame. National Geographic. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/culture/article/many-historic-icons-face-same-threats-notre-dame-cathedral.
  6. Clark, J. T. 2010. Fallacy of Reconstruction. Edited by Maurizio Forte. Cyber-Archaeology (Archaeopress) 63-73.
  7. ICOMOS General Assembly in New Delhi. 2017. The Principles of Seville – International Principles of Virtual Archaeology. Accessed 2022. https://icomos.es/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Seville-Principles-IN-ES-FR.pdf.
  8. ICOMOS. 1965. International Charter for the Conservation and Restoration of Monuments and Sites (The Venice Charter 1964). Accessed 2022. https://www.icomos.org/charters/venice_e.pdf.
  9. Jakob, W., Tarini, M., Panozzo, D. and Sorkine-Hornung, O. 2015. Instant field-aligned meshes. ACM Transactions on Graphics 34 (6): 1-15. doi:10.1145/2816795.2818078.
  10. Koster, A. and Riederer, J. 1997. The bronze vessels 2. Acquisitions 1954-1996. Nijmegen: Nijmegen: Provincie Gelderland, Provinciaal Museum.
  11. Luhmann, T., Robson, S., Kyle, S. and Boehm, J. 2014. Close-Range Photogrammetry and 3D Imaging. Berlin: De Gruyter. doi:10.1515/9783110302783.
  12. Mustață, S. 2017. The Roman metal vessels from Dacia Porolissensis. Edited by S. Cociș and A. Ursuțiu. Cluj-Napoca: Mega Publishing House.
  13. Mustață, S. and Țentea, O. 2022. The Roman metal vessels from the Mălăiești Roman fort.” In Faber. Studies in Honour of Sorin Cociș at his 65th Anniversary, by S. Mustață, V.-A. Lăzărescu, V. Rusu-Bolindeț, D. Matei (eds.) V. Bârcă. Cluj Napoca: Mega Publishing House.
  14. Petzet, M. 2004. Principles of Conservation: An Introduction to the International Charters for Conservation and Restoration 40 Years after the Venice Charter. Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) Vol. I: International Charters for Conservation and Restoration: 7-29.
  15. Potenziani, M., Callieri, M., Dellepiane, M., Corsini, M., Ponchio, F. and Scopigno, R. 2015. 3DHOP: 3D Heritage Online Presenter. Computers & Graphics 52: 129-141.
  16. Greshko, M. 2018. “Fire devastates Brazil’s Oldest Science Museum.” National Geographic. Accessed 2022. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/news-museu-nacional-fire-rio-de-janeiro-natural-history.
  17. Reilly, P. 1990. Towards a Virtual Archaeology. Computer Applications in Archaeology (Oxford, UK: British Archaeological Reports): 133-139.
  18. Shengyu, L., Yuanwei, T., Xin, W., Bo, Q., Zhenda, X., Yeliang, Z., Hai, Z. and Dongbo, H. 2022. Transparent Reversible Prosthesis, a New Way to Complete the Conservation–Restoration of a Black Ding Bowl with Application of 3D Technologies. Heritage Science 10 (1): 1–14. DOI:10.1186/s40494-022-00646-0.
  19. Smithsonian. Smithsonian 3D Digitization – Prehistoric artifacts. Accessed 2022. https://3d.si.edu/collections/prehistoric-artifacts .
  20. Stampouloglou, M., Toska, O., Tapinaki, S., Kontogianni, G., Skamantzari, M. and Georgopoulos, A. 2019. 3D documentation and virtual archaeological restoration of Macedonian tombs. Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spatial Inf. Sci XLII-2/W11: 1073–1080. doi:10.5194/isprs-archives-XLII-2-W11-1073-2019.
  21. Tasić, N., Novaković, P. and Horňák, M. 2017. Virtual reconstructions and computer visualizations in archaeological practice, CONPRA Series Vol IV. Ljubljana: University of Ljubljana Press, Faculty of Arts. doi:10.4312/9789612378998.
  22. Țentea, O. and Matei-Popescu, Fl. 2015. Why There? The Preliminaries of Constructing the Roman Frontier in South-East Dacia. Acta Musei Napocensis 52: 109–130.
  23. Țentea, O. 2018, Baths and bathing in Dacia during Trajan. In: S. C. Sommer and S. Matešić (eds.), LIMES XXIII: Proceedings of the 23rd Congress on Roman Frontier Studies Ingolstadt 2015, Akten des 23. Internationalen Limeskongresses in Ingolstadt 2015: 133-137. Mainz: Nünnerich-Asmus Verlag.
  24. Țentea, O. și Călina, V. 2019, Peisajul arheologic al castrului Mălăiești, Cercetări Arheologice 26, 1: 169–196.
  25. Țentea, O., Popa, A. G. and Cîmpeanu, A. 2018. Mălăiești. A trajanic fort in Muntenia – the results of recent magnetometric surveys. Acta Musei Napocensis 55, 1: 227–240.
  26. The London Charter. 2009. The London Charter – For the Computer-Based Visualisation of Cultural Heritage. Accessed 2022. https://www.londoncharter.org/.
  27. UNESCO. 2003. Charter on the Preservation of Digital Heritage. UNESCO. Accessed 2022. http://www.unesco.org/new/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/CI/CI/pdf/mow/charter_preservation_digital_heritage_en.pdf.

Creative Commons Licence
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License