Published April 3, 2026 | Version v3

Filling a hole in the wall: the contribution of 3D reconstructive models to the study of Roman windows (1st century CE)

Authors/Creators

  • 1. ROR icon University of Padua

Description

Construction archaeology has evolved profusely during the end of the 20th and the beginning of the 21st century, especially regarding the Roman world. Starting with planimetric approaches, studies have then evolved to include construction techniques and preserved elements from the elevations. However, some construction materials, such as perishable materials (wood) or easily recyclable materials (glass, metal) are not preserved very often and have only left traces.. In the Roman world, only Roman Campania contexts preserved the different constructive elements, sealed by the eruption of Mount Vesuvius in 79 CE.  Because of these difficulties, Roman windows have been very scarcely studied in the realm of Roman construction archaeology. The first comprehensive study on the matter was conducted by Lucia Michielin during her PhD in 2019 and published in 2021 (Michielin 2021). But little has been made on the closure systems and the closure system materials. The various components of the closure, such as wood or glass panels, have sometimes been studied separately but rarely been put together.

Starting with an example of a house in Roman Campania(2nd century BCE- 1st century CE), we were able to propose reconstructive 3D models of various examples of existing windows. Then, using the system of the Extended Harris Matrix (Demetrescu 2015), we suggested reconstructive hypothesis of closure systems, thanks to archaeological comparison.This reflection participates in a broader archaeological reflection about computer based treatment for construction archaeology , how it can be useful to study these kind of objects, but also in what way it can be useful to process issues about construction sites and constructions techniques as a whole.

Finally, we were able to do a comparison of the costs of construction for this type of closure, ranking these architectural layout amongst other construction and everyday life expenses.

Files

Fig.3.png

Files (11.0 MB)

Name Size
md5:93f01b2a70d392800903174341c98071
577.3 kB Preview Download
md5:83bab83858172d4736e810d188576b47
740.4 kB Preview Download
md5:a7e8cd431c69edbd35ac4dffbd1d674e
175.9 kB Preview Download
md5:06332e7469d07c9c03e53c48813afc75
124.7 kB Preview Download
md5:1d630d2669679e08379111a48ff46339
130.3 kB Preview Download
md5:9ad7c0bfad54af48be397b7a757c0c7b
70.6 kB Preview Download
md5:6498868d1caa650895ae3abf754320c9
77.4 kB Preview Download
md5:81ae8aea3fe3320fb89a5986c9efbf72
769.5 kB Preview Download
md5:693960e638ce5c2bcc24f81a84f5bdb0
719.0 kB Preview Download
md5:3b6e2479a776fb4b0673ddace58fccc4
22.0 kB Preview Download
md5:49a9c1720fe42593d3d2b78cba2efce8
84.9 kB Preview Download
md5:9b5e3bd29af1d5f30238741d37d60e20
1.1 MB Preview Download
md5:1a34f81277f67e2f98b181135705e861
994.3 kB Preview Download
md5:ed77ba288da044d5d04a7be3f48c0c29
24.0 kB Preview Download
md5:dbff0021a1d991b4c26e65874b81c1bc
1.1 MB Preview Download
md5:f8c2ab4463d31e58adaff15a0d7e685b
78.1 kB Preview Download
md5:2554547d5e2a956cc5f7154ad6366448
4.2 MB Download