The Streets of Pompeii is a walking tour of the ruins of Pompeii, one of two Pompeii walking tours that were assembled from photographs taken by several tourists and posted on Flickr, among other places.
Pompeii Street. Photo by Mossaiq
Recently, blogger Archaeopop wrote about a new Google Street View of Pompeii, developed with the full cooperation of the Italian government to give a boost to tourism in their country. Google Street view is video shot at ground and stitched together so that the user can get a personalized stroll through an area. While the tool is a little hard to use at first, when you try it, pretty soon you'll be gliding through the streets of Pompeii staring at ruins in amazement.
Archaeopop is of the opinion that, given the technology afforded by Google Street View, the Italian government should rebury the site, in the interest of preservation. Like the Upper Paleolithic art gallery called Lascaux Cave, Pompeii is suffering from over-exposure to climate and visitors, and Archaeopop believes that the best thing to do is as the French government did for Lascaux: do an interactive, detailed recording project and close it off to visitors. What's your opinion?
- Streets of Pompeii Walking Tour
- Archaeopop: Google Street View comes to Pompeii! Can we rebury it now?
- Google Street View: Pompeii Ruins
- Lascaux Cave, the French government's website
Comments
What is the purpose of reburial…so people can dig it up again in 300 years? What will they find, only all that was previousely found and probably damage much of that? I’m right,it serves no purpose so now let it be. Is it the caretaker asking for a raise?
A “virtual Pompeii” might be a good thing for people who can, for various reasons, not travel to Italy to see the original. But no virtual tour can ever replace the experience of walking the streets of Pompeii (or other sites) in reality.
That’s also the difference to Lascaux: the Lascaux cave has not just been digitized, but recreated as a 1:1 size reconstruction you can walk through and experience something like a cave-feeling.
Another aspect is more important: talking about long time conservation issues, the idea of relying on digital data files is simply ridiculous, as anyone concerned with data archiving will have to acknowledge. We already have troubles curating digital data from excavation records that are less than 20 years old.
Maybe the Italians should do like the Chinese and simply cover the whole of Pompeii under a megalomanian roof construction…
I have had the joy of visiting Pompeii. I first read about it in an encyclopaedia my Mum and Dad gave me when I was very young and it fascinated me all my life.
When visiting our family in England some years ago we all – independently of each other – decided that, when we went on a family jaunt to Rome, we would like to visit Pompeii. None of us were disappointed.
To rebury it, as Lee Messerlian correctly says merely means that, in hundreds of years from now, someone will dig it up again and redo what has already been done. In the meantime, many (like myself) will have been denied to joy of walking those streets – something that can NEVER be reproduced no matter how virtual the virtual site is.
Can a virtual site reproduce the feel of the place, the heat we experienced, the smells that accompanied our walk; the interaction with our gulde and others?
I fully understand why people want our past protected, but the question must be asked as to why? Are we to protect it just so we can say, “Under that pile of dirt lies Pompeii (or add any other site you may like to include)”? Or, is it better to work towards protecting – as best we can – such sites so that they are preserved, but yet physically available?
Personally, I vote for the latter.
I concur that Pompeii should not be buried it is an archaeological site and all digging and research that keeps on going on there must not cease until every known artifact is found then they should conserve it not bury it.
No, it should NOT be reburied, what good will that really do ? Maybe some of the structures should be better protected from tourism AND the elements ( maybe by using protective domes / structures ), & some sensitive areas should be off – limits to everyone but archeologists & conservators, but re – burying the site will solve NOTHING & perhaps create NEW problems.
It doesn’t make sense to cover Pompeii up again. The most amazing houses are already locked up to the public anyway. As archaeologists we deal with destruction all the time, remnants of places that used to exists but don’t anymore. At some point Pompeii will be completey destroyed and then we have to rely on all the publications, pictures, data, etc.
What total rubbish!
Are ALL such remains, world-wide, to therefore be covered up?
You’d need a big spade for the Pyramids!
There are still parts of Pompeii that are awaiting excavation, and the validity of further exploration of the site is being questioned, important reasons against being subsequent exposure to the elements and tourism and, of course, cost. So do we just stop everything now and re-bury, denying further insights into the life of Pompeii from its destruction in 79AD through to today? Also, reburial is no guarantee of secure preservation – artifacts have been looted from the site since its original burial, so how can we say that this would not happen again? The geology of the area is unstable and being in the ground, or kept for an unknowable future, may not be the safest place.
What good is a site if people can’t see it. Just like the landscapes no one can walk in?
As one who studies site ecology and stability I can say with great certainty that burying a site does not in any way (other than to obscure it) mean that the site is preserved. The conditions of reburial in no way reconstitute the conditions of burial. The only satisfactory way to “preserve” a site such as Pompeii is excavate no more and presume that some archaeologists of the future will have means of preservation not available to those of the present. That which is exposed deserves maximum protection, but to “rebury it” is not to preserve it but only to give the would be preservationists the smug satisfaction that they have done something “good.” All sites deserve maximum conservation whether they get it or not. But sometimes it is just too late to roll back the clock to what might be someone’s notion of “the right thing.” Take care of it. Take really good care of it, but don’t throw dirt on it and expect time to stand still. In fact the ultimate answer is to just stop doing archaeology all together. The site is the primary artifact and should receive all the care that might be lavished on a mosaic or a crumbling bone. But what is done is done and cannot be undone. Pompeii does far more good in illuminating the past than any google-like avatar site can do.
No virtual tour could ever give Pompeii the justice it deserves. Why bury these people and their city? The tragedy and chance preservation of Pompeii has shed light on many pieces of Roman culture that can’t be found anywhere else, and there may be more hiding in parts of the site that have not yet been excavated. It is true that preservation of the site is a major issue, but what is more important? Should we really follow through with the closer of a site that may have much more to offer, just to say we have supposedly saved it? What good comes from saving something as marvelous as Pompeii if we can’t even utilize, to the full extant, what we have saved?
I was lucky and saw Lascaux before it was closed and probably helped to breath some Vin Rouge fumes that helped the cause of the closure. The same can hardly be said for Pompei.
I have to admit I was a little taken aback when I first read the premise but after thinking about it, knowing a little bit about the process that’s gone on there since it was first uncovered (it is deteriorating as you say), I think there is merit in it. For one thing, I presume that like Lascaux, it doesn’t literally mean burying by just mindlessly dumping dirt back onto it, so much as covering it to protect it, but with some limited access for continued research, such as is done at other sites that are only partially excavated but finished as far as current active research plans. And it would have extra merit if some of the surrounding developed areas could then be moved to the re-covered areas so that some of the areas that have never been excavated because they lie beneath modern developement, could then be finally excavated using modern techniques and giving us a more comprehensive and better documented examination of areas we know are still waiting to be explored. It will take a bit of education and explanation as to the benefits that will result, and assurances that such a move would not be done without a good plan in place, in order to overcome people’s fear that archaelogists might be treating this treasure in a way that fails to respect what it represents and the loss they fear it would incur. Fascinating prospect with some marvelous opportunity if it’s done with intelligence and purpose. There’s still so much still waiting to be revealed. Cheers!
Burying the site would preserve it, but for who? How would anyone decide when to uncover it again, and for how long, which generations get to see it and who doesn’t? I believe our world has more history to uncover and will continue to provide us with discoveries for generations to come.
Buried, no, as I said earlier, cutting the site off totally from visitation & substituting it with virtual tours really WON’T work. My step – sister had the pleasure of visiting the site 20 – 25 years ago. I would like to experience the same thrill someday. If Pompeii is covered over again, I won’t be able to unless I live an extra century.
Protect the site, yes, use some protective measures like special environmentally – controlled areas or something, but leave Pompeii exposed in general.
No it shouln’t reburied but to manage the site carefully and rightfully let it be for all to see and watch the turbulent nature of the God
Vesuvius is just going to bury it again along with neopolis/naples and quite a bit of the surrounding countryside and the bay. We may as well enjoy it while it lasts. Then they can argue about reburying Naples in 3098 after they’ve dug it up and made a Disney version for the tourists. Virtual tours will be walk-thru then and perhaps our descendants can argue the virtues of reality vs virtual reality tours.