The Mystery of Palenque and Pacal Brought to the Web
Good news for Maya fans feeling the pinch of recession - Mexico's National Institute of Anthropology (INA) has brought the enigmatic 7th century AD city of Palenque into everyone's homes with an exciting new online virtual experience.
Located in the southern Mexican state of Chiapas, Palenque has long been a place of mystery; its majestic buildings, wrapped in a harlequin layer of vines and other flora, evoking dreams of adventure and romance. You almost want to slap on a fedora and crack a whip when you look at the unhinged magnitude of the Temple of Inscriptions, or the crumbling beauty of the Temple of the Skull.
You almost want to slap on a fedora and crack a whip when you lay eyes on the wild beauty of Palenque
Yet one of the ancient city's most famous sites, the tomb of K'inich Janaab' Pakal - or Pacal the Great - has been kept under lock and key by the Mexican government for the past five years, in a bid to prolong its posterity. A heartbreaker for those travelling to the tropical climes of one of Mexico's top tourist attractions, but for those behind a computer screen. The new tour allows 360-degree panoramic views of all the Maya buildings, allowing online enthusiasts the 
chance to see Pacal's funerary chamber for the first time in over half a decade.
Each building has its own pop-up information box (in Spanish, mind) - with particular objects of interest available to see in closer detail. The tour doesn't stop there, either: the foreboding lost Maya city of Yaxchilán is equally surveyed by the excellent project, demures of each city by showing their partial reclamation by nature.
It follows the emergence of the US University of Berkeley's virtual tour of the 7th century Khmer city of Sambor Prei Kuk, the Virtual Qumran project - and of course, Heritage Key's very own Virtual King Tut, which takes your avatar to the pulsing heart of the Valley of the Kings. The INA's model may not be what the other two would consider a virtual world, but it does provide some spectacular views of one of the planet's great ancient cities.
Images by Steve Bridger and National Institute of Anthropology.
Read 7 comments, or leave your own
videos
Comments
Do virtual versions of ancient sites replace the desire to visit them in person, or actually fuel our wanderlust? As more and more of us find it easier (for now) to jet around the world, sheer numbers of visitors are posing a threat to many sites. El Castillo at Chichen Itza is now closed to tourists, because the steps were literally being worn away by the multitude of feet that trample up and down it every year. Maybe virtual worlds will be needed to save the sites from actual damage before we know it. Much as I love the virtual versions, I hope not. Although I think somebody - ie Heritage Key - should get in there and create a virtual Stonehenge quick, just in case English Heritage lock us out completely!
I would not label this as a 'virtual experience', let alone compare to the likes of Virtual Qumran, Virtual SPK and King Tut Virtual. Why? Although it might be a nice thing to have on the web, this is far from an 'immersionalist' experience. All the 'virtual experiences' mentioned above have one thing in common:
Lots of work went into building them from 'unique blocks' of mesh. For this 'virtual tour' (which is a bit more appropriate) they just mapped together a few panoramas. You can click from one location to another, but not walk through it, and there's no sense of depth, ... . This is far from 'Woot! Hawt tech innovation!' as 360 degrees panoramas exist since the web abandoned 'stricly html'. (Admit it, Google StreetView has more options to look & move around. I believe image quality on Google StreetView is better also.)
So err... can we not call it a Virtual Experience, please? I swear, King Tut Virtual is turning himself around in his 3D mesh-based coffin at the moment! ;)
Virtual Stonehenge: Google StreetView already 'biked' by. See Bija's comment here.
Quite a few internet websites offer these "Virtual Tours", which are actually just linked webpages with images and articles, as opposed to our 3D Virtual Experience we offer here on Heritage Key. In a sense, you could say they are virtual in the sense that you view them as a computer generated simulation of the real thing, as you use a computer to access them. But as the web develops, we're finding the terms "virtual experience" does shift towards those of virtual worlds.
As for virtual experiences replacing real ones, I think a lot of people who want to experience the magnificance of the Ancient World can't because of differing reasons. A key advantage of virtual worlds is that a user can experience and do things which they normally would be unable to do in the real world. It's certainly no replacement for the real thing, but for some people, it's the closest they may ever be able to get!
I'm not saying it's remotely as interactive an experience as King Tut Virtual, or as technically advanced, immersive or fulfilling. But it is virtual in the sense you're not actually there. I think the key word would be 'interactive' rather than 'virtual' here, the former of which can definitely work on a scale of sorts where I don't think the latter can. You can get more or less immersed in an experience, but you're either on a computer or not.
I'd be picky on 'interactive' also. It's not like you can do anything but get dizzy? (We could classify this as a cheap high, though.) *continues to spin around*
What Ann said. The last word I'd use for it would be "interactive". I say "Visual Experience" in the sense that you experience it.. visually.
That's what I mean! It's on the weakest end of the interactive scale, whereas Virtual King Tut is on the other end. It is interactive by definition, because unless you do something yourself, you go nowhere.
Post new comment