 |
 |
Dear Neven, Attendees of the recent Linked Ancient World Data Institute agreed that VIAF should be common ground for their projects. I think these are good resources to link to. For what it's worth, Pleiades has at least 94 fictional places: http://pleiades.stoa.org/search?getFeatureType=false+toponym&portal_type=Place These are typically the inventions or mistakes of single ancient or 19th century authors identified during the compilation of the Barrington Atlas and not major mythical places. Pleiades has real places that are well mixed up with fiction, such as the place Roman authors believed was the legendary island of the Lotus eaters: http://pleiades.stoa.org/places/344440. The data model can accommodate truly mythical places, but the editors of the project would need to discuss whether those are in the scope of Pleiades. Yours, On Sat, Sep 29, 2012 at 4:14 AM, "Neven Jovanović" <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Dear list, > > if we want to digitally and uniquely identify, or refer to, real ancient > places, such as Antikyra or Aulis, we turn to Pleaiades Project or > Pelagios. But what would you propose to do with fictional places, such as > (the mythological) Acheron? Would you use VIAF, perhaps > (<http://viaf.org/viaf/237428674>)? > > (You'll say, but why would we want to uniquely identify ancient fictional > places? For example, to be able to oppose them to real places -- and > analyse the use of one vs. the other.) > > And, if anybody knows where a list of ancient fictional places can be > found, would you please share the information? > > Best, > > Neven > > > Neven Jovanovic > Department of Classical Philology > University of Zagreb, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences