Archaeological Virtual Reality

(Header) Architip is an app used to show archaeological sites how they would have stood when in use. Visual Reconstuction for me is the most useful aspect of virtual archaeology.

The fifth practical workshop was Virtual Reality (3D Reconstructions) in Archaeology. This entailed the reconstruction of the Cat’s Brain Neolithic Building Excavated by Jim Leary using Sketchup from a basic archaeological plan.

The act of recreating and modelling landscapes, excavations, buildings, cities, people and environments shows a huge progression from 2D archaeological maps (Bruno et al. 2010).

For me it really is the next big revolution in archaeology!

The Reconstruct of the Cat’s Brain Neolithic Building Excavated by Jim Leary using Sketchup from a basic archaeological plan

Credit: University of Reading – School of Archaeology, Geography and Environmental Science – Youtube Channel. Showing the discovery and excavation the Neolithic building we are reconstructing.

The basic archaeological plan providing scale and guidance of Cat’s Brain *by Jim Leary*

An Early Neolithic Timber Farmed Structure in Pewsey Vale – Cat’s Brain (Area 4) :

The Process of Creation:

A Realistic Reconstruction:

As a field archaeologist, my interpretation will focus mainly around the physical archaeology present and my realistic interpretation of it with the raw material available to Neolithic populations, rather than aesthetics of the building. For example, making each wooden post individual according to the archaeological plan realistically not perfectly circular or the documented use of wattle and daub instead of just wood. Like realism of the virtual model of Çatalhöyük in Second Life. (Morgan, 2009)

After creating the layout for the structure I began putting the individually created post-holes in place, although more time consuming more accurate. Referred to as ‘post pipes’ by Leary.

The man gave a sense of **scale** and perspective to the structure.

A front perspective of the structure shows how it regresses narrower at the back.

With hindsight, I would have made the posts regressing in height from the monoliths as part on my archaeological inference as the post-holes start far apart and gradually get closer.

Next came the **texturization**of the post-holes and monoliths to contrast and show a difference in material.

Although unknown in the archaeological record, where the are two monolithic standing near each other at the front of a building, there could have been a **lintel** connecting the two like at Stonehenge – creating at facade at the front of the structure. However, a lintel hasn’t been found.

Highlighting the lintel of interpretation.

In keeping with Neolithic building construction I decided to use both **wattle and daub** for the walls.

I also added the ditches and charcoal traces to the side of the building and at the entrance.

The finished product without a roof because of limitations with Sketchup. However, it is also unknown whether the structure had a roof.

(Process Screen-Shots Credit: Author)

This type of reconstruction could be used in any presentation of how the site would have appeared with archaeological backing behind it.

Limitations of the reconstruction….

Timber or Turf roof?
Lintel absence in the archaeological record?
Archaeology damaged by agriculture
Destroyed structure – burnt down intentionally? Evidence for ritual? Then covered in mud from surrounding ditch made into a long-barrow.

Other forms of Virtual Reality in Archaeology…