The Giant Buddha Figures in Afghanistan: Virtual Reality for a Physical Reconstruction?

Part of the Transcultural Research – Heidelberg Studies on Asia and Europe in a Global Context book series (TRANSCULT)


More than ten years after the destruction of the giant Buddha figures in Bamiyan (Afghanistan) the emergency stabilization works for the preservation of the physical remains at the site have progressed. The condition of the heavily fractured Buddha niches has been documented using the latest high-resolution laser scanning technologies. Rock stabilization measures have been realized successfully and the destroyed figures have been reconstructed virtually using old photogrammetric documentation showing the Buddha figures before their destruction. High-level scientific methods in cultural heritage preservation focus on the documentation and analysis of the physical material itself while the immaterial aspects of the tangible heritage have to be addressed carefully also. The increased use of digital technologies has opened up new possibilities for visual exploration and the metric analysis of objects. Apart from the question of how far a virtual reconstruction of the destroyed structures can solve epistemological research interests it has to be carefully considered how the understandable desire of the local population for the emotional re-experience of their lost monuments is addressed. Questions are repeatedly raised as to whether or not the physical reconstruction of the figures should be pursued. While UNESCO does not consider a total reconstruction of the Buddha figures to be feasible at the moment, the discussion of how to preserve the physical remains of the destroyed figures in the long-term is far from concluded. The question of how far the reassembly of remaining fragments in their original position is adequate for the long-term preservation of the physical remains of the destroyed Buddha figures is still not answered satisfactorily.


Virtual reality Reconstruction Preservation Cultural heritage Bamiyan 



This work is supported by the German National Science Foundation (DFG) within the research cluster UMIC-Ultra High Speed Mobile Information and Communication established under the excellence initiative of the German government. We thank our colleagues Ralf Klamma and Mathias Jarke in the Information Science Department at RWTH Aachen University for many fruitful discussions. We also thank Prof. Minoru Inaba of the Institute for Research in Humanities at Kyoto University for making the contour line drawing of the giant Buddha available.


  1. Burnes, Sir Alexander. 1834. Travels into Bokhara: Narrative of a Voyage by the River Indus. Memoir of the Indus and its Tributary Rivers in the Punjab. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
  2. Falser, Michael. 2011. “The Bamiyan Buddhas, Performative Iconoclasm and the ‘Image’ of Heritage.” In The Image of Heritage. Changing Perception, Permanent Responsibilities. Proceedings of the International Conference of the Icomos International Scientific Committee for the Theory and the Philosophy of Conservation and Restoration. 68 March, edited by Andrzej Tomaszewski and Simone Giometti, 157-169. Firenze: Edizioni Polistampa.Google Scholar
  3. Grün, Armin, Fabio Remondino, and Li Zhang. 2002. “Reconstruction of the Great Buddha of Bamiyan-Afghanistan”. In International Archives of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, Technical Commission V Symposium 2002 Corfu (Greece). Close-Range Imaging, Long-Range Vision, 363-368. doi: Scholar
  4. Hackin, Joseph, and Jacques Meunie. 1933. Nouvelles Recherches Archeologiques à Bamiyan, Mémoires de la Délégation Archéologique Française en Afghanistan—MDAFA—Tome III. Paris: Van Oest.Google Scholar
  5. Hackin, Joseph. 1934. Le site archéologique the Bâmiyân: Guide du visiteur. Paris: Les Édition d’Art et d’Histoire.Google Scholar
  6. Hackin, Joseph, and Ria Hackin. 1939. Bamian Führer zu den Buddhistischen Höhlenklostern und Kolossalstatuen. Paris: Les Édition d’Art et d’Histoire.Google Scholar
  7. Hackin, Joseph, Carl, Jean, and Jacques Meunie. 1959. Diverses Recherches Archéologiques en Afghanistan (19331940). Mémoires de la Délégation Archéologique Française en Afghanistan—MDAFA—Tome VIII. Paris: DAFA.Google Scholar
  8. Higuchi, Takayasu (ed.). 1984. Bamiyan. Art and Archaeological Researches on the Buddhist Cave Temples in Afghanistan 1970–78. Kyoto: Dohosha.Google Scholar
  9. ICOMOS. 2004. International Charters for Conservation and Restoration. Monuments and Sites I, 2nd ed. Munich: Lipp.Google Scholar
  10. ICOMOS. 2005. “Afghanistan. Icomos Actions in Afghanistan.” In Heritage at Risk-ICOMOS World Report 2004/2005 on Monuments and Sites in Danger, edited by Michael Truscot, Michael Petzet, and John Ziesemer, 26–31. Munich: K.G. Saur.Google Scholar
  11. Jansen, Michael, Georgios Toubekis, Andreas Walther, Marina Döring-Williams, and Irmengard Mayer. 2008. “Laser Scan Measurement of the Niche and Virtual 3D Representation of the Small Buddha in Bamiyan.” In Layers of Perception: Proceedings of the 35th International Conference on Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology (CAA); Berlin, Germany, April 26, 2007, Kolloquien zur Vor- u. Frühgeschichte Bd. 10, edited by Axel Posluschny, Karl Lambers, and Irmela Herzog, 83-90. Bonn: Habelt.Google Scholar
  12. Klimburg-Salter, Deborah. 1989. The Kingdom of Bamiyan. Naples: Istituto per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente (ISMEO).Google Scholar
  13. Kostka, Robert. 1974. “Die Stereophotogrammetrische Aufnahme des grossen Buddha von Bamiyan”. Afghanistan Journal 1(3): 65–74.Google Scholar
  14. Miyaji, Akira. 1976. “Wall Paintings of Bamiyan Caves: Stylistic Analysis.” In Japan–Afghanistan Joint Archaeological Survey in 1974, edited by Kyoto Daigaku, Chuo Ajia, and Gakujutsu Chosatai, 17-31. Kyoto: Kyoto University Archaeological Mission to Central Asia.Google Scholar
  15. Petzet, Michael. 2002. “Anastylosis or Reconstruction—The Conservation Concept for the Remains of the Buddhas of Bamiyan.” In Strategies for the World Heritage. Preservation in a Globalized World. Proceedings of ICOMOS Spain for the ICOMOS 13th General Assembly, December 1–5, 2002, Madrid, Spain, 189-192.Google Scholar
  16. Petzet, Michael. 2004. “Principles of Conservation.” In International Charters for Conservation and Restoration. Monuments and Sites, edited by ICOMOS, Michael Petzet, and John Ziesemer, 7–29. Munich: Lipp.Google Scholar
  17. Petzet, Michael (ed.). 2009. The Giant Buddhas of Bamiyan—Safeguarding the Remains. Berlin: Bäßler.Google Scholar
  18. Ritter, Carl. 1838. Die Stupas (Topes) oder die architektonischen Denkmale an der Indo-Baktrischen Königsstraße und die Colosse von Bamiyan. Berlin: Nicolaische Buchhandlung.Google Scholar
  19. Sengupta, Rakhaldas. 1984. “The Restoration of the Small Buddha at Bamiyan”. Momentum 27(1): 31–46.Google Scholar
  20. Spaniol, Marc, Yiwei Cao, Ralf Klamma, Pablo Moreno-Ger, Baltasar Fernández-Manjón, J. Luis Sierra, and Georgios Toubekis. 2008. “From Story-Telling to Educational Gaming: The Bamiyan Valley Case.” In Advances in Web Based LearningICWL 2008, Proceedings, Jinhua, China, August 2008, LNCS 5145, edited by Frederick Li, Jianmin Zhao, Timothy K. Shih, Qing Li, and Dennis McLeod, 253-264. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer. doi:10.1007/978–3–540–85033–5_25.Google Scholar
  21. Talbot, Milo George, Pelham James Maitland, and William Simpson. 1886. “The Rock-Cut Caves and Statues of Bamiyan”. Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland 18(3): 323–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Taniguchi, Yoko. 2007. “The Bamiyan Buddhist Mural Paintings: Conservation Issues.” In Mural Paintings of the Silk Road: Cultural Exchanges Between East and West. Proceedings of the 29th Annual International Symposium on the Conservation and Restoration of Cultural Property, National Research Institute for Cultural Properties, Tokyo January 2006, edited by Yamauchi, Kazuya; Taniguchi, Yoko, and Uno Tomoko, 144-151. Tokyo: Archetype Publications Ltd.Google Scholar
  23. Tarzi, Zemaryalai. 1977. L’architecture et le décor rupestre des grottes de Bāmiyān. Paris: Imprimerie Nationale.Google Scholar
  24. Toubekis, Georgios, Irmengard Mayer, Marina Döring-Williams, Kosaku Maeda, Kazuya Yamauchi, Yoko Taniguchi, Susumu Morimoto, Michael Petzet, Matthias Jarke, and Michael Jansen. 2011. “Preservation and Management of the UNESCO World Heritage Site of Bamiyan: Laser Scan Documentation and Virtual Reconstruction of the Destroyed Buddha Figures and the Archaeological Remains.” In CIPA Heritage Documentation Best Practices and Applications, Series I, 2007 2009, edited by Efstratios Stylianidis, Petros Patias, and Mario Santana, 93-100. International Archives of Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences. Vol. XXXVIII, Part 5/C19, Athens/Kyoto: CIPA.Google Scholar
  25. UNESCO. 2005. Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention. Accessed 25 July 2012.
  26. UNESCO. 2011. Recommendations of the UNESCO/ICOMOS Expert Group for the Safeguarding of the Bamiyan site, 9th Meeting. Accessed 25 July 2012.
  27. UNESCO. 2012. Expert Working Group Releases Recommendations for Bamiyan Valley, Afghanistan. Accessed 25 July 2012.
  28. Urbat, Michael, and Klaus Krumsiek. 2004. “Paleo- and Rockmagnetic Criteria for the Reconstruction of the Giant Buddha Statues, Bamiyan/Afghanistan”. In Geophysical Research Abstracts, vol. 6. Accessed 25 July 25 2012.
  29. Urbat, Michael. 2009. “A Combined Geological and Paleomagnetic Approach Towards the Repositioning of Fragments from the Buddha Statues.” In The Giant Buddhas of Bamiyan—Safeguarding the Remains, edited by Michael Petzet, 89-102. Berlin: Bäßler.Google Scholar
  30. Warikoo, Kulbhushan. 2002. Bamiyan: Challenge to World Heritage. New Delhi: Bhavana Books & Prints.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.RWTH Aachen UniversityAachenGermany

Personalised recommendations