De/construction sites: Romans and the digital playground

The Roman world as attested to archaeologically and as interacted with today has its expression in a great many computational and other media. The place of visualisation within this has been paramount. This paper argues that the process of digitally constructing the Roman world and the exploration of the resultant models are useful methods for interpretation and influential factors in the creation of a popular Roman aesthetic. Furthermore, it suggests ways in which novel computational techniques enable the systematic deconstruction of such models, in turn re-purposing the many extant representations of Roman architecture and material culture

Citizen science for cuneiform studies

This paper examines the potential applications of Citizen Science and Open Linked Data within a critical Web Science framework. Described here is a work-inprocess concerning an interdisciplinary, multiinstitutional project for the digitization, annotation and online dissemination of a large corpus of written material from ancient Mesopotamia. The paper includes an outline of the problems presented by a large, heterogeneous and incomplete dataset, as well as a discussion of the potential of Citizen Science as a potential solution, combining both technical and social aspects. Drawing inspiration from other successful Citizen Science projects, the current paper suggests a process for capturing and enriching the data in ways which can address not only the challenges of the current data set, but also similar issues arising elsewhere on the wider Web

The Xeros data model: tracking interpretations of archaeological finds

At an archaeological dig, interpretations are built around discovered artifacts based on measurements and informed intuition. These interpretations are semi-structured and organic, yet existing tools do not capture their creation or evolution. Patina of Notes (PoN) is an application designed to tackle this, and is underpinned by the Xeros data model. Xeros is a graph structure and a set of operations that can deal with the addition, edition, and removal of interpretations. This data model is a specialisation of the W3C PROV provenance data model, tracking the evolution of interpretations. The model is presented, with operations defined formally, and characteristics of the representation that are beneficial to implementations are discussed

Archaeology, formality & the CIDOC CRM

The CIDOC CRM is the most sophisticated, best documented and well-known ontology in the Cultural Heritage domain. So much so, that it is frequently referred to as a ‘miracle cure’ and ‘the only show in town’. Yet despite this perception, the rate of its adoption – like that of the Semantic Web with which it is frequently associated – has been glacial at best and almost exclusively by large, well-funded projects. What is hindering uptake and are there important lessons to be learned from it?In their 1999 paper ‘Formality Considered Harmful’, Shipman and Marshall identify four barriers to user interaction with formal knowledge systems: (1) The cognitive overhead required to understand the formalism, (2) The need to elicit tacit knowledge, (3) enforcing premature structure on unstructured or poorly-understood source material, (4) the problems caused by situational structure, i.e. the different needs of different users. While they note that there is no ‘silver bullet’ that addresses all of these challenges they do propose several palliatives that can assist, and therefore encourage, the transition from free to structured information where beneficial. This paper will discuss these principals in reference to current doctoral research being undertaken in archaeological data integration. While the work in question has elected to use ontologies other than the CIDOC CRM, the results derived are also likely to be of interest to the CRM community. In particular it focuses on means by which microproviders – owners of the small but important datasets that form the ‘long tail’ of excavation data – can participate in semantics-driven datasharing

Evaluating Gismondi's Representation of Portus, the Port of Imperial Rome

[EN] This paper introduces the Portus Project, an inter-disciplinary collaborative fieldwork project focussed on the ancient port of Rome. It demonstrates the use that is being made of a plaster model of the port produced by Italo Gismondi in 1937, initially as a means for focussing re-evaluations of the various illustrative and other data available relating to the port’s topography, and then as a source for background and comparative digital geometric data within the project’s work to remodel the entire site. The Portus Project employs three-dimensional computer graphics throughout the data gathering, analysis, modelling and representation phases and the paper considers the role that Gismondi’s model is playing in the development and evaluation of such a process.The Portus Project is directed by Simon Keay, and funded by the UK Arts and Humanities Research Council, the Soprintendenza per i Beni Archeologici di Ostia Antica, the University of Southampton, the British School at Rome and the University of Cambridge. It involves many partners including the British School at Rome, the Universities of Southampton, Cambridge, Oxford, Warwick, Bath, Aixen-Provence and Seville, the Institut Català d’Arqueología Clàssica, Parsifal Cooperativa Di Archeologia (Rome) and L-P Archaeology. The project is grateful to the Duke Sforza Cesarini for continued access to his land. Access to Gismondi’s model was provided by the Sorprintendenza per I Beni Archaeologici di Ostia Antica.Earl, GP.; Keay, SJ.; Beale, GC. (2010). Evaluating Gismondi's Representation of Portus, the Port of Imperial Rome. Virtual Archaeology Review. 1(1):21-25. https://doi.org/10.4995/var.2010.4752OJS212511FORTE M., PESCARIN S., PIETRONI E. (2005) "The Appia Antica Project", in Forte, M., Williams, P.R. (eds) The Reconstruction of Archaeological Landscapes through Digital Technologies, Atti del II Convegno Italia-USA. British Archaeological Reports. International Series 1379, 2005: pp. 79-95FRISCHER, B. Rome Reborn http://www.romereborn.virginia.edu/ [Consult: 1-04-2009].FRISCHER, B. (2008) "The Rome Reborn Project. How Technology is helping us to study history,", in OpEd, November 10, 2008. University of Virginia.GAIANI, M., BALZANI, M. AND UCCELLI, F. (2000) "Reshaping the Coliseum in Rome: An Integrated Data Capture and Modeling Method at Heritage Sites", in Gross, M. and Hopgood, F.R.A. (eds.) Proceedings of Eurographics 2000: European Association. for Computer Graphics, Interlaken, Switzerland, 2000 pp. 369-78 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-8659.00429GUIDI, G., B. FRISCHER, ET AL. (2005) "Virtualizing Ancient Rome: 3D Acquisition and Modeling of a Large Plaster-of-Paris Model of Imperial Rome,", in Beraldin, J.-A., El-Hakim, S.F., Gruen, A., Walton, J.S. (eds) Videometrics VIII 18-20 January 2005, San Jose, California, USA, SPIE, vol. 5665, pp. 119-133. http://dx.doi.org/10.1117/12.587355GUILLEMAIN, J. (2002) "Pierre-Joseph Garrez (1802-1852), porto di Traiano a Ostia, 1834", in Italia antiqua. Envois degli architetti franesi (1811-1950) - Italia e area mediterranea pp. 393-8. Paris, École Nationale Supérieure des Beaux Arts.HAPPA, J., WILLIAMS, M., TURLEY, G., EARL, G., DUBLA, P., BEALE, G., GIBBONS, G., DEBATTISTA, K. AND CHALMERS, A. (2009) "Virtual Relighting of a Roman Statue Head from Herculaneum, A Case Study", in Hardy, A., Marais, P., Spencer, SN., Gain, JE., Straßer, W. (eds): Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Computer Graphics, Virtual Reality, Visualisation and Interaction in Africa, Afrigraph 2009, Pretoria, South Africa, February 4-6, 2009. ACM 2009 pp 5-12HASELBERGER, L & HUMPHREY, J H. (2006) Imaging Ancient Rome: Documentation - Visualization - Imagination. Proceedings of the Third Williams Symposium on Classical Architecture. Journal of Roman Archaeology Supplement 61. JRA, Portsmouth R.I.KEAY, S., (2006). "Portus", in Current World Archaeology 20: 11-20KEAY, S., EARL, G., HAY, S., KAY, S., OGDEN, J., & STRUTT, K. (2008) "The Potential of Archaeological Geophysics. The Work of the British School at Rome in Italy", in Geofisica per l'archeologia: Possibilita e Limiti. Roma 10 Dicembre 2008. pp. 25-44. Rome, CISTEC.KEAY, S., MILLETT, M., PAROLI, L., STRUTT, K. (2005). Portus: An Archaeological Survey of the Imperial Port of Rome. Archaeological Monographs of the British School at Rome 15. London.LUGLI, G. & FILIBECK, G. (1935) Il Porto di RomaiImperiale e l'agro portuense. Bergamo, Officine dell'Istituto Italiano d'Arti Grafiche.MALAFARINA, G. (2005) La Galleria delle carte geografiche. The Gallery of Maps in the Vatican. Modena, Franco Cosimi Panini.MALZBENDER, T., GELB, D., WOLTERS, H . (2001) Polynomial Texture Mapping www.hpl.hp.com/personal/Tom_Malzbender/papers/PTM.pdf [Consult: 1-04-2009]POLLARD, J. & GILLINGS, M. (1998) "Romancing the Stones: towards a virtual and elemental Avebury", in Archaeological Dialogues 5:2, pp. 143-164 http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1380203800001276REDDÉ, M. & GOLVIN, J-C. (2008) I Romani e il Mediterraneo. Rome, Istituto e Zecca dello Stato. Libreria dello Stato.RICKMAN, G. (1971) Roman Granaries and Store Buildings. Cambridge.TESTAGUZZA, O. (1970) Portus: illustrazione dei Porti di Claudio e Traiano e della cittá di Porto a Fiumicino. Rome, Julia Editrice.VERDUCHI, P. (2007) "Porto", in Filippi, F. (ed.) Ricostruire l'Antico prima del virtuale. Italo Gismondi. Un architetto per l'archeologia (1887- 1974). pp. 245-52. Rome, Edizioni Quasar.VERDUCHI, P. (1999) "Il porto di Traiano, dépliant, Roma". Model available from: http://www2.rgzm.de/Navis2/Home/HarbourFullTextOutput.cfm?HarbourNR=Ostia-Traiano [Consult: 1-04- 2009]

Quick and dirty : streamlined 3D scanning in archaeology

Capturing data is a key part of archaeological practice, whether for preserving records or to aid interpretation. But the technologies used are complex and expensive, resulting in time-consuming processes associated with their use. These processes force a separation between ongoing interpretive work and capture. Through two field studies we elicit more detail as to what is important about this interpretive work and what might be gained through a closer integration of capture technology with these practices. Drawing on these insights, we go on to present a novel, portable, wireless 3D modeling system that emphasizes "quick and dirty" capture. We discuss its design rational in relation to our field observations and evaluate this rationale further by giving the system to archaeological experts to explore in a variety of settings. While our device compromises on the resolution of traditional 3D scanners, its support of interpretation through emphasis on real-time capture, review and manipulability suggests it could be a valuable tool for the future of archaeology

Cross-institutional MOOC data analysis and visualisation: a call for collaboration

Publisher PDFPeer reviewe