Virtual Archaeology and Medieval Art History: Fundamentals and Applications

Abstract

Virtual Archaeology is defined as ‘the scientific discipline that seeks to research and develop ways of using computer-based visualizations for the comprehensive management of archaeological heritage’. In essence, it involves the creation of virtual models of various types whose purpose is to represent elements of the past based on historical data obtained from research. It is a discipline that has experienced a boom in recent years, thanks to the democratization of both technology and training, and has become one of the most fruitful branches of what is known as Digital Humanities. However, despite its name, it has applications beyond the field of archaeology, notably in Art History. In this sense, it allows recovering the original likeness of lost or altered works, the formulation of research hypotheses, or the generation of resources with great didactic and dissemination potential. This study aims to offer an overview of the fundamentals of the discipline and explore the possibilities it offers to Medieval Art History. Furthermore, this study serves as a starting point for new projects.

1. Introduction

Virtual Archaeology was consolidated as an academic discipline in 2017 with the ratification of an international charter, The Seville Principles: International Principles of Virtual Archaeology, by the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS). Drawn up by several experts in the field, this charter complemented the notions advanced by the earlier London Charter (The London Charter 2009). Its main objective was to lay down the foundations, bestowing this discipline with a scientific character and developing a common working framework.

Although virtual 3D models in the field of cultural heritage are not new, their implementation has multiplied exponentially over the last decade. There are several reasons behind this surge. The first is the democratization of its hardware and software. The second is the increase in specialists due to the emergence of a wide range of training schemes (including university programs) (Molina Vidal et al. 2013). The third is its growing acceptance by academia, which has become increasingly aware of its potential. In this sense, specialists from Spain have played a pioneering role (López-Menchero Bendicho 2013).

Since 2016, Virtual Archaeology has formed part of our research on the historical heritage of medieval military orders. Its application to more than a dozen projects has proven its potential in the fields of research, restoration and conservation, and the dissemination of knowledge (García Carpintero López de Mota and Gallego Valle 2018). Although the focus has been on the areas of Archaeology and History, the unique nature of Virtual Archaeology has likewise led us to shed light on its relevance in the field of Art History.

It is for this reason, and based on almost a decade of experience, that we submit this analysis, whose main objective is to delve into the potential and possibilities of Virtual Archaeology in research on Medieval Art History. Although several projects have integrated these two disciplines, we believe that there is still a lack of more general approaches that provide a working framework and guide Art History specialists in their initial approach to the resources offered by Virtual Archaeology. Therefore, the main motivation of our work is to build a bridge that allows the creation of synergies between both disciplines. However, we must first point out some limitations given the nature and scope of this work.

The first is that we do not intend to focus on the theoretical or highly specialized debates related to the more technical aspects of the discipline, as these are addressed by an abundance of literature. The second is that we do not intend to claim that the ideas presented here are new or pioneering, as several projects have in fact been developed in the field of Medieval Art History. However, we have identified a research gap regarding general approaches to applying these tools to the discipline, as most of the literature corresponds to monographic studies. Furthermore, the third, related to the two above, is that this study does not intend to offer a bibliographic overview of the subject, as this approach is beyond its objectives. The references to different works throughout the text only serve as examples to illustrate the issues.

The first section of this study thus discusses Virtual Archaeology as a discipline by focusing on its definition and foundations, and the general methodological aspects when approaching a project. This base then served to focus on the possibilities of its application to Medieval Art History, founded both on our experience and that stemming from other research.

2. Virtual Archaeology as a Discipline

2.1. Definition and Fundamentals

The principles of the Seville Charter define Virtual Archaeology as a ‘scientific discipline that seeks to research and develop ways of using computer-based visualizations for the comprehensive management of archaeological heritage’ (ICOMOS 2017). This implies that it goes far beyond simply creating three-dimensional virtual reconstructions. In this sense, research and development play a key role, and their focus is aimed at the comprehensive management of heritage. The charter also defines it as comprising ‘inventories, surveys, excavation work, documentation, research, maintenance, conservation, preservation, restoration, interpretation, presentation, access and public use of the material remains of the past’. It is precisely these concepts that explain its potential link with Art History. The definition of Virtual Archaeology has also led to identifying three levels of application, described below from lowest to highest.

The first is Virtual Restoration, which ‘involves using a virtual model to reorder available material remains in order to visually recreate something that existed in the past. Thus, virtual restoration includes virtual anastylosis’. This implies little interpretation on the part of specialists as it only requires ordering parts of an asset of heritage to regenerate its original form. It is a process similar to that put to use at many sites, monuments, or museums to reassemble, for example, an originally fragmented arch, column, or sculptural element. The difference here is that it resorts to virtual and not original models.

The next level, virtual reconstruction, requires a greater degree of interpretation by specialists. It ‘involves using a virtual model to visually recover a building or object made by humans at a given moment in the past from available physical evidence of these buildings or objects, scientifically reasonable comparative inferences and, in general, all studies carried out by archaeologists and other experts in relation to Archaeology and History’. Always supported by solid research, this approach involves filling in the gaps of what has not been preserved to represent its appearance at a specific moment in the past.

Finally, the last level is virtual recreation, which ‘involves using a virtual model to visually recover an archaeological site at a given moment in the past, including material culture (movable and immovable heritage), environment, landscape, customs, and general cultural significance’. As noted from its definition, it involves the inclusion of elements of cultural heritage, people, or landscapes, implying a greater level of interpretation, always founded on scientific evidence.

The choice of level depends on the aim and objectives of each Virtual Archaeology project. Intended precisely to guide these works from their conception to their final results, the Seville Charter establishes eight principles, which are summarized below.

The first principle is ‘interdisciplinarity’, as it is best for projects to unite a team of specialists from different fields. Moreover, the results are superior according to this level of plurality.

The second is that of ‘purpose’. As noted above, the first action is to clearly define the aims and objectives established for the project, as the execution process and resources will vary accordingly.

The third is ‘complementarity’, which implies that virtual projects must form part of heritage management and be integrated with other, more traditional means.

As the fourth, fifth, and seventh principles (‘authenticity’, ‘historical rigour’, and ‘scientific transparency’) are closely related, they are treated here together. The core of the three is that every Virtual Archaeology project must be founded on a solid base of knowledge. All possible sources of information must be taken into account: material remains, documents, drawings, photographs, plans, oral testimonies, etc. In addition, one must clearly reveal at all times which elements of the virtual model are original and which are recreated. Moreover, one must remain transparent as the degree of knowledge serves as a basis for representations.

The sixth principle is ‘efficiency’, which specifies that the investment of resources must be proportional to the objectives pursued by the project. This equates to always seeking to ensure a minimum economic and technological investment while simultaneously assuring the best results.

Finally, the eighth principle is ‘training and evaluation’. Like any discipline, Virtual Archaeology requires prior training and knowledge of its fundamentals. Furthermore, it is a field in constant evolution, demanding a continuous updating of specialists. Additionally, the results of each project must be evaluated to determine whether they meet the objectives and to take appropriate actions.

2.2. Methodology and Workflow

Methodologies and workflows differ for each team and project in Virtual Archaeology. However, there are certain recent proposals, such as those advanced by Bajena et al. (2025), Münster et al. (2024), and Kuroczyński et al. (2023), that offer a systematic framework. In any case, every project is conditioned by the following factors:

• The aim and objectives of the project. The modelling of simple volumes to carry out a spatial study of a building requires a different method than the recreation of the urban layout of a city for an audiovisual intended for the general public.
• The cultural heritage element of a project. An example is that the process involved in reconstructing an early medieval monastery will differ from that intended to represent the artifacts and decorations of a 15th-century palatine space.
• Available data and knowledge. The existence of prior sources and research will largely determine the workflow, reducing or increasing the initial collecting of records and research and limiting the scope of the project. Thus, reconstructing an early medieval church only known through archaeological data will differ radically from reconstructing an extant Late Gothic church using records on its design and execution.
• Human, technical, economic, and time resources. The combination of these factors will determine the length, depth, and ambition of the project. Limited resources will result in a simple work plan with priority given to fulfilling the basic objectives. Abundant resources, on the other hand, will allow efforts to be invested in meeting secondary objectives such as aesthetics and attention to detail.

Despite all these variables, and based on our experience, it is possible to establish a workflow that is typical and more or less common to most projects. It consists of five stages or phases:

• Documentation: This involves the collection of all available information about the element being studied in the project, whether primary sources (historical documentation, archaeological data, graphic representations, etc.) or studies of the element itself or similar elements that allow us to contrast and complement the hypotheses regarding its reconstruction. At this point, thoroughness and cross-referencing information from different resources are crucial. Additionally, we must mention the possibilities offered by another highly developed field in recent years within digital heritage: 3D documentation using techniques such as digital photogrammetry or laser scanning (Marín-Buzón et al. 2021; Balado et al. 2022). These techniques can produce ‘digital twins’ of real elements that can later be used in Virtual Archaeology projects1.
• Preliminary study and design: After accessing all the data, the next phase involves a discussion process among the various specialists about how the virtual model should be created. This is perhaps one of the most interesting phases, especially from a research perspective, as it is when hypotheses are proposed and new questions arise. At this point, it is advisable to use sketches or drafts to represent what is intended to be achieved before proceeding to the 3D modelling phase to optimize efforts and avoid unnecessary work (Figure 1). It should be noted that this phase remains active throughout the project, as in most cases, and we will need to constantly return to the discussion as new questions arise.
• Modelling: This is the most technical phase and involves the creation of virtual models using various software. At this point, there are many variables, so we cannot analyze them all. However, generally, the process consists of geometry modelling, texturing and material creation, and the application of lighting effects (Figure 2). In our case, and that of many other teams, we use Blender as the main program, which has the advantage of being an open-source software while offering great possibilities and having a large user community that continuously enriches it (Aparicio Resco et al. 2021, pp. 171–72). At this point, we also recommend, whenever possible, using original textures to configure the materials, whether from the heritage element itself or from similar ones when the original is not preserved.
• Generating resources: This phase, closely linked to the previous one, consists of developing the resources needed from the base virtual model (images, videos, exportable models, etc.). This also includes post-processing actions, integrating other software to create, for example, infographics or even interactive applications. At this point, it is also important to accompany the generated resources with a system of scientific transparency. There exists a wide debate and many proposals related to this issue, the most common being the use of colour codes (Aparicio Resco and Figueiredo 2017) and the most complex being the Extended Matrix method (Demetrescu 2018). Additionally, it is important to ensure that the resources obtained are durable over time and to address future issues related to the obsolescence of media and format and the preservation of digital files.
• Evaluation: This final phase consists of analyzing the entire process and its results to assess whether and how the initial objectives have been met and to devise possible means to improve future projects.

3. The Applications of Virtual Archaeology to Medieval Art History

After having laid down the broad foundations of Virtual Archaeology, we now turn to its specific application to Medieval Art History, a field with great potential. The following lines will attempt to outline different possibilities of action. While we will address all spheres of art, our focus is primarily on architecture and sculpture due to their three-dimensional nature.

The first application, the most logical, is the virtual reconstruction of lost elements, whether they be buildings or movable items, based on preserved material remains (if any), documentary descriptions, planimetries, pictorial, or photographic representations. The degree of their scope and detail depends on the factors discussed before: objectives, level of knowledge, resources, etc. One example of this is the reconstruction of the main apse of the Romanesque Cathedral of Girona (Spain), which includes both architectural elements and artifacts (Ledesma et al. 2024). Another example is that of some missing buildings in the city of Granada (Spain) (Rodríguez Moreno 2016). In our case, this is illustrated with the restoration of the spaces of the Church of Nuestra Señora de la Estrella of Montiel (Ciudad Real, Spain), where the digitalization of the site led to the raising of some of its walls, yielding a better grasp of its spatial arrangement (Figure 3).

Another application, directly deriving from the previous one, is the restoration of an element to its original form. It is very common for artistic objects, especially those of special value that have remained in constant use, to be preserved but to have undergone various degrees of alteration. Once again, the best examples to illustrate this are churches, many of which are hundreds of years old and have undergone countless transformations. Virtual Archaeology can facilitate the recovery of their original image. Practical examples include the Chapel of St Stephen in the Palace of Westminster (London, UK) (Ayers 2020) and the Mudejar church of San Miguel del Monte (Guadalajara, Spain) (Aparicio Resco 2016).

Processes of change and transformation can also be the main cornerstone of a Virtual Archaeology project. This is especially compelling in the case of spaces that experienced a continuous occupation throughout moments of history. Again, the case of religious buildings is illustrative as they tend not to relocate. An early Christian basilica, for example, often gave way to a Romanesque church before being dismantled to raise a Gothic feature. This same logic is applicable to urban planning, represented by the evolution of all or part of a community over a specific period, as is the case of the city of Burgos (Spain) in the 15th century (Alaguero Rodríguez and Checa Cruz 2019). Virtual Archaeology renders it possible to graphically depict all these processes of change in a much broader manner than, for example, traditional illustrations. A proper example is the architectural transformation of the cloister and courtyard of the Convent of Uclés (Cuenca, Spain) between the end of the 15th and the outset of the 16th century (Figure 4).

Another more specific application of great interest here is the recovery of the polychromy of buildings and sculptures. The loss of colour over time is one of the most common aspects and has led to erroneous perceptions of the original ancient features among the general public. Virtual Archaeology is useful in this sense as it can yield three-dimensional images of their original appearance. It thus offers the possibility to recover parietal paintings of a church that have disappeared or been masked by later linings. It was applied in this sense to the churches of the Transfiguration of Our Saviour on Nereditsa Hill (Nereditsa, Russia) (Petrova et al. 2011) and St Augustine in La Laguna (Spain) (Soto-Martin et al. 2020). Worth highlighting in the realm of sculpture are two projects applying colour to English alabaster sculptures (Mounier et al. 2020; Pereira-Pardo et al. 2019).

The issue of sensory perception is a vast field with applications that, in our opinion, have yet to be sufficiently explored. There exists, for example, the possibility of carrying out research on lighting and its impact on the perception of spaces and objects (Lassandro et al. 2021). It is thus possible, under this premise, to contemplate undertaking projects such as analyzing the effects of candlelight on sculptural elements of Romanesque architecture. There is also the possibility of delving into questions of sound in religious spaces, such as that carried out by Pedrero et al. (2019) in the Monasterio de Piedra (Zaragoza, Spain). These types of analyses require in-depth interdisciplinary work integrating Virtual Archaeology.

Another application closely linked to those above is the placing of objects in their original context, as most are today preserved elsewhere. And although in many cases this is due to conservation and protection, the consequence is that they cannot be fully interpreted as they were originally conceived. Here again, Virtual Archaeology offers the possibility of transferring these decontextualized objects to their original positions. This can likewise be applied in an opposite manner, allowing for the recovery of the original image of transformed or empty spaces by relocating their furniture and decor. A specific example is the reintegrating of the stalls of the Cathedral of Oviedo (Spain) in the study by Sánchez Riera et al. (2022). We also applied this aspect to the reconstruction of the medieval refectory of the Convent of Uclés (Cuenca), where, in the absence of preserved elements, we relied on documentary descriptions and based our modelling of the furniture on objects from the same period (Figure 5).

Another aspect of interest, especially concerning its application to architecture, is the possibility of generating views such as floor plans, elevations, and sections. It is true that although this is not novel, it is new in the sense that the options it offers are much greater than those of traditional 2D plans. An example is a virtual model of a cathedral that, through an interactive application, allows viewing any of its sections, yielding a much wider range of possibilities than the static floor plan. Estepa Rubio et al. (2022) applied this method to the Chapel of the Hospital de Santiago of Úbeda. We likewise resorted to this application for the medieval Convent of Uclés (Cuenca) by generating a section and a floor plan of the church (Figure 6). The diversity of this information is also greater than that offered by traditional plans, as it includes data on construction materials, decorative elements, artifacts, and lighting.

Finally, it is possible to underscore two areas of application of Virtual Archaeology in disciplines closely related to Art History, such as Conservation/Restoration and Museography.

For conservation and restoration, the method is applicable to two aspects. One is its use as a means of testing prior to a real intervention. Virtual modelling allows advancing the results of a conservation or restoration process of an element of heritage, which can serve to assess its visual impact, its differentiation and integration with the original, and its correct interpretation. A virtual test prior to an intervention allows for rendering the final aspect of the object with a fairly high degree of realism to assess whether the proposal is valid or requires modification. We have put this means of prior assessment into practice in several restoration interventions related to the archaeological complex of the Castillo de la Estrella at Montiel (Ciudad Real, Spain), which have facilitated communication with the construction company charged with carrying out the works (Figure 7).

In the same vein, Virtual Archaeology applied to Museography first allows the design of exhibition projects and the evaluation of their characteristics before bringing them to reality. It likewise enables the creation of virtual exhibitions, allowing museums to be visited by anyone, anywhere in the world, which exponentially increases the dissemination of collections (Styliani et al. 2009). Although it is true that nothing replaces real pieces, the virtual one is a viable alternative.

Finally, when compiling all of the applications of Virtual Archaeology, it becomes clear that it is a resource for museums when it comes to facilitating and dynamizing the interpretation of cultural heritage for the general public. Virtual models are an attractive medium and easy to grasp, with a wide range of possibilities for interactivity. In addition, their value increases exponentially when they are combined with technologies such as Virtual Reality or Augmented Reality. Although there are several projects following this line, this aspect still remains to be developed (Caballero Cano 2012).

4. Discussion and Conclusions

With this work, we have aimed to lay a foundation that serves as a starting point for future projects seeking to establish synergy between Virtual Archaeology and Art History. As we noted in the Introduction, there are already several projects developed in this line, but more general works that go beyond monographic approaches are still needed. Our contribution aims to be a first step in that direction.

In a final assessment, we can affirm that the potential of applying Virtual Archaeology to the field of Art History is enormous. After all, we are dealing with a discipline that has the visual as one of its key pillars, but this is often limited by the preserved artistic heritage. However, by relying on data provided by other types of sources (archival documentation, drawings, plans, photographs, and even oral testimonies), it is possible to recover the image of lost or altered elements. Similarly, the evolution of the same object or building over time can be represented.

Continuing with the visual aspect, we must also highlight the uses for dissemination and knowledge transfer, which are fundamental lines in current academic approaches. The use of 3D digital resources offers an almost infinite field of possibilities for the representation of art, especially architecture, facilitating the visualization and understanding of spaces. Additionally, societal demand will increasingly necessitate the use of virtual resources for new generations marked by digital and interactive platforms. Perhaps in the not-too-distant future, the characteristics of Gothic architecture will be explained by virtually visiting a cathedral under construction, while an avatar of the master builder explains how things are being done.

Finally, we must not overlook the potential of Virtual Archaeology for the field of research. This idea stems from our own empirical experience, as its use has allowed us to evaluate different hypotheses and led to new discoveries that we probably would not have reached otherwise. Likewise, the use of 3D virtual models is a very direct and clear way of conveying ideas, thereby facilitating the dissemination of ideas and debate among specialists.

However, we must also point out the challenges and issues posed by the use of Virtual Archaeology.

Firstly, there are technical challenges. Although there has been a democratization of resources and their accessibility in recent years, a high level of specialization is still required to handle design programs. This can be addressed by outsourcing to external companies, but this implies associated costs that projects must bear. Additionally, communication between researchers and artists must be fluid and clear for the results to be satisfactory.

Another aspect related to the above is that it is important to be clear about the limits and needs of the projects. Returning to the roadmap set by The Seville Principles, the use of virtual reconstructions or recreations should be a means, not an end, to enrich and facilitate the understanding of heritage. Therefore, the work must be limited to the economic budget, time, and real needs.

Moreover, we are dealing with digital products that, despite their many advantages, also pose challenges in terms of preservation: obsolescence of media and formats, loss of files, disappearance of equipment, etc. It is important to consider these variables so that when a project is carried out, it has the greatest guarantees of enduring over time. Additionally, there is the new challenge posed by the impact of Artificial Intelligence on the discipline. Its possibilities are vast, but so are the potential misuses.

In conclusion, we hope that this work serves as a starting point for projects, not only in Medieval Art History but also in any period, to incorporate the resources and possibilities offered by Virtual Archaeology. The ideas presented throughout the article are not the future but the present, and this is reflected in the various projects we have referenced. However, we believe that there is still great potential to be developed in the union between Virtual Archaeology and Art History.