In my last posts, here and here, I started to deal with the idea of academic citation to digital resources. I explained that Elliott's insistence that Pleiades was 'citation-ready' is nothing more than a server rewrite rule. Such a rewrite rule does nothing for digital citation for the following primary reason:
Monday, July 25, 2022
Scholarly Citation of Digital Resources; Proofing your Site against Link Rot
Friday, July 22, 2022
Where broken links come from: the case of Peripleo
In my last post I suggested that rewrite rules were intended to make it easier for a user to search for an item on a web site. The general concept looks like this:
"This site can’t be reached"
- Elliott [2018] 45.
Wednesday, July 20, 2022
The concept of citation-readiness and Mycenaean Atlas Project
A URL is a 'universal resource locator': it refers to a web site, e.g. pleiades.stoa.org. A URI is a 'universal resource identifier': it refers to a specific item sheltered under the URL. So, in the pleiades scheme, 579885 is a URI that refers to Athens. And the link (URL + URI): pleiades.stoa.org/places/579885 is the pointer to 'Athens' in their database and which will be returned by Pleiades. This is a very friendly form and easy for the user to remember.
- Elliott [2018] 45-6.
- A guide to rewrite rules is here and a handy cheat sheet for regular expressions (RAs) is here.
Sunday, July 10, 2022
Search in the Mycenaean Atlas Project
The ability to search is a large part of the Mycenaean Atlas. Our search has changed a great deal over the years and so it's time for a new and detailed description.
![]() |
This lat/lon search is highly customizable by supplying additional arguments. These (in order!) are as follows:
- Lat
- Lon
- Zoom Level from 2 to 18 (default zoom level is 15)
- Frame size in decimal degrees from 0.01 to 0.30 (the default is 0.15 decimal degrees)
- A frame size of 0.01 is 1.11 km. wide.
- A frame size of 0.30 is 33.4 kilometers wide
- The default frame size of 0.15 decimal degrees is 16.7 kilometers wide.
You must always supply a lat/lon pair but you can also specify the zoom level, framesize, both, or neither.
- Just zoom: nn.nn , nn.nn , z[z]
- Just frame size: nn.nn, nn.nn , , 0.f[f] ----> notice that the comma for the zoom argument is still required.
- Both: nn.nn , nn.nn , z[z] , 0.f[f]
- Neither: nn.nn , nn.nn
nn.nn indicates latitude or longitude values; latitude comes first.
z[z] indicates a 1 or 2 digit zoom integer value from 2 through 18
0.f[f] indicates a frame size from 0.01 to 0.3. This includes such values as 0.08, 0.14, 0.25, etc.
Do not enter html tags or special characters.
Wednesday, June 29, 2022
Digital Antiquities Databases; Their Visualization and The Mycenaean Atlas Project Digital Atlas
Several of the common digital antiquities databases have very poor or non-existent visualization tools. Their focus is showing you individual sites on a map and with precious little other support. The least satisfactory in this regard is Arthur deGraauw's Harbors project. Dr. deGraauw is an outstanding expert in the field of harbor research; he freely and generously makes his data available to everyone. This data is, however, in the form of a spreadsheet (computer types refer to this as a 'flat file') and no map visualization is possible on his site. The remainder among these various DBs provide a dedicated page for each site along with minimal, mostly useless information about it, but without any larger visualization. The best user interface among these databases is Vici which provides a visualization map for each site and shows you the context. I do notice, though, that when I use Vici that there is often no site description or indication of the site's significance. Here's an example: this shows Neftina on Lemnos which appears to be a quarry although we are not told this:
Vici is actually pretty good and contains nearly everything you want in map visualization. Vici also provides context in the form of other near-by sites. The zoom-level is user controlled and jumping to another site does not require you to go back into outer space before zooming in again.
![]() |
| Pleiades: Searching for Kydonia. Phase 1: Outer Space! |
![]() |
| Part of Lemnos in the Mycenaean Atlas Project Digital Atlas Features (red F paddles), M.A.P. sites (Bronze Age) in blue and Trismegistos sites are displayed |
![]() |
| The Lemnos map (detail) Layer Menu visible along with 'spotter' map |
- Supports visualization for the following DBs: DARE, deGraauw's Harbors Project, Mycenaean Atlas Project (with features), Pleiades, Topostext, Trismegistos, VICI
- Displays these databases in a frame that is 0.18° 'square'.
- Differential selection among the seven data sets
- Persistent zoom level (user-controlled zoom) (The user is never catapulted into outer space against his/her will)
- User-controlled redraw of the frame by clicking anywhere on the map
- Links from each DB icon to the relevant details page (Pleiades, Topostext etc., even deGraauw's Harbors).
- User-selectable map sheet backgrounds
![]() |
| Sample detail page for Arthur deGraauw's Harbor data. This is Neftina on Lemnos |
Tuesday, May 17, 2022
Achaia-Klauss and environs in the Prehistoric
Achaia has benefitted from much recent scholarship that demonstrates how pervasive Mycenaean culture was during the Late Helladic. However, enthusiasts, and even scholars, when attempting to learn about Achaia in the Bronze Age, are faced with confusing and unclear maps as well as multiply-named sites that make it difficult to get a clear picture of Mycenaean influence in this time and place.
It is time for a series of clear blog posts that look at the important sites and which use clear maps for the purpose. This post is the first in that series. I have begun with the area covered by the orange rectangle in this next aerial photo. Let's call this the Achaia-Klauss complex.
| ID | Name | Lat | Lon | Type |
| C494 | Koukoura/Achaia Klauss | 38.196133 | 21.774009 | Cemetery |
| C7531 | Skondreika | 38.194305 | 21.778006 | Settlement |
| C3148 | Mygdalia/Mygdaleia | 38.187405 | 21.776154 | Settlement |
| C7530 | Tomb | 38.186336 | 21.776582 | Tomb |
| C500 | Petroto: Tholos | 38.193817 | 21.76769 | Tholos |
| C7532 | Hagios Konstantinos Β | 38.186908 | 21.764875 | Cem |
| C5009 | Hagios Konstantinos Α | 38.185674 | 21.766758 | Cem |
Saturday, May 7, 2022
Where are the Chamber Tombs of Achaea Klauss? (C494)
For a long time the Mycenaean Atlas has contained a location for the chamber tomb cemetery at the winery in Achaea called 'Achaea Klauss'. This is C494. However I have never been entirely certain of this position. Many archaeologists have worked at Achaea Klauss but they have all been decidedly cagy about exactly where the chamber tombs were located. For example Papadopoulos says this:
"At the north-west foot of the steep hill Koukoura (east of Eglykas in the neighbourhood of the wine factory Achaea-Klauss and ancient Antheia) is a small field belonging to A.K. Skondras. Kyparisses excavated twelve chamber tombs - variously called "Klauss", "Antheia", or "Skondras" in the PAE reports - and some others were found plundered."
While I'm sure that 'A.K. Skondras' is a fine and honorable person as well as a credit to the Greek nation it doesn't help us to know that these chamber tombs are on his property unless we're able to visit the land registry in Patras.[1]
A map of the area looks like this:
In the center is the large vineyard which lies behind the Klauss Winery (the orange roofs in the upper center left). Pleiades places its marker for the chamber tombs in the center of the field. Topostext puts its marker on the road just to the S of the winery. My long-standing marker (C494) which is in the lower center right of this picture is at the SE corner of the vineyard and in the woods. Which of these, if any, is correct?
I just recently ran across Paschalidis [2018] and while he and his team are just as cagy about the exact location as all other archaeologists he does let the mask slip just a bit and the result is a much more reliable location for Achaea Klauss. In that work (Fig. 5 on p. 8) he publishes the following photograph:
The caption reads "Fig. 5. The vineyard of Achaea Clauss wine factory as it looks from the cemetery site (from southeast)."
Crucially this picture is taken from the chamber tombs. This photo shows the east front of the Klauss complex, most notable are the two towers on the left. I reproduced this view in Google Earth in the next picture:
I drew in approximations for the towers along with a yellow line to join the towers along with the east face of the winery. I then led the red line from the winery face back to the observer. Let's see where that red line ended up.
In this photo from Google Earth the Klauss winery is in the lower center. The red line is the axis along which the previous picture was shot. When we follow that red line from Klauss buildings to the foothills we find the location from which the shot was made. That looks like this:
On the right-hand side of this picture is the location of the Achaea-Klauss chamber tombs. Let's blow up the right side and see where the photograph was taken from.
And right at that point there is a large structure. I don't know that that structure corresponds to the archaeological dig but it is not inconsistent with it.
At any rate I have now moved my point for C494 in the Atlas and I have much more confidence in its new location.
FOOTNOTES
[1] A long-time bugbear of mine. See this.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Ålin [1962]: Ålin, Per. Das Ende der mykenischen Fundstätten auf dem griechischen Festland. Carl Bloms Boktryckeri A.-B., Lund, 1962., 'Koukoura', pg. 63.
Åström [1965]: Åström, Paul. ‘Mycenaean Pottery from the Region of Aigion, with a List of Prehistoric Sites in Achaia’, Opuscula Atheniensia, V, pp. 89-110, C.W.K. Gleerup, Lund, 1965., 'Koukoura.', pg. 104.
Giannopoulos [2008]: Giannopoulos, T.. Die Letzte Elite der mykenischen Welt: Achaia in mykenischer Zeit und das Phänomen der Kriegerbestattungen im 12.-11. Jahrhundert v. Chr.. Bonn: Habelt. 2008., 'Clauss', pg. 55.
Kaskantiri [2016]: Kaskantiri, Sophia ΤΑ ΜΥΚΗΝΑΙΚΑ ΝΕΚΡΟΤΑΦΕΙΑ ΣΤΙΣ ΘΕΣΕΙΣ ΖΩΗΤΑΔΑ ΚΑΙ ΑΓΙΟΣ ΚΩΝΣΤΑΝΤΙΝΟΣ ΣΘΝ ΚΡΗΝΕ ΠΑΤΡΩΝ, ΔΙΔΑΚΤΟΡlΚΗ ΔΙΑΤΡΙΒΗ, ΙΩΑΝΝΙΝΑ 20Ι6 Online here.
Papadopoulos [1979]: Papadopoulos, Thanasis J.. Mycenaean Achaea; Part 1: Text. Paul Åströms Förlag, Göteborg, Sweden. 1979. Vol 1., '12. Klauss (Koukoura, Antheia)', pg. 27.
Paschalidis [2018]: Paschalidis Constantinos, The Mycenaean Cemetery at Achaia Clauss near Patras: People, material remains and culture in context. Archaeolpress Publishing Ltd. 2019. ISBN: 978-1784919191 This book retails for more than $100.00 but I was able to read it for free on play.google.com. Even if you have to pay for this book the price is still only about $22.00 for this e-books version. Find it here.
Simpson [1981]: Simpson, Richard Hope. Mycenaean Greece. Park Ridge, New Jersey: Noyes Press, 1981., 'D 29 Koukoura', pg. 90. Online here.
Simpson and Dickinson [1979]: Simpson, Richard Hope and O.T.P.K. Dickinson. A Gazetteer of Aegean Civilization in the Bronze Age, Vol. I: The Mainland and the Islands. Paul Åströms Förlag, Goteborg. 1979., 'B 44 Koukoura (near the Achaia-Klauss factory)', pg. 87. Online here.
Monday, March 28, 2022
Do Not Use the Pleiades Data Set
The river Quartaccio is a brook (described as 'fossa') just near Marina di San Nicola on the Lazio coast of Italy. This brook diverges from the Statua (another brook) at 41.9298 N, 12.135 E and flows N towards the town of Quartaccio and Valcanneto. Along this brook at about 41.9356 N, 12.1381 E a modern road crosses it. This is approximately the position of a Roman bridge which is given no name. This bridge is marked at this place in the Barrington Atlas (Map 43, A2, no. 2). Here's what it looks like in Google Earth:
All in all it took me about half an hour to trace down the right Quartaccio (there are several) and take a stab at the position of the bridge based on the Barrington Atlas.
In Pleiades this bridge is no. 426578 and its position is given by Pleiades as 41.875 N, 12.125 E which is in the Tyrrhenian some 3.69 km. from the nearest land and 6.83 km from the putative bridge. See it at the bottom of the next photo:
Now these gross errors of placement in the Pleiades data are nothing new. I looked at five examples last time and I attributed them to careless digitization and the complete lack of any quality control. I did notice that Pleiades puts their accuracy estimate for the Quartaccio Bridge as 'Rough'. I thought, 'Aha!', if I can see what 'Rough' means to the Pleiades group then maybe I can see how far the problem goes. I got the 'Rough' points out of the database that I made from Pleiades' data and plotted that on Google Earth. There are about 5000 points labelled 'Rough' in the Pleiades DB. I used a select to retrieve the first 3000 of these (about 1/10 of the entire Pleiades DB). Here's the result of plotting these 3000:
This is shocking.
Even if the location of these sites was not known (most of them are known as I will show) Pleiades has made no effort to place them even approximately. These points are simply dumped off at the nearest half-degree or quarter-degree vertex. Nothing else could make such a pattern.
And most of these points are not singles. They are multiples of 5 to 10 distinct locations which are simply dumped on top of each other. All these sites have simply been rounded to the nearest degree or half-degree. And most of these points are easily locatable. When I was criticizing P. for errors I truly believed that the number was, perhaps, about 100 points. Now I see that it is thousands of points that could be known but which are simply dumped off at the nearest vertex.
Greece looks like this:
I've said that many of these points are just carelessly dumped in a pile even though the locations they denote are easily locatable. Here's an example. In the Corinthian Gulf Pleiades has overlain six points at 38.25 N, 22.25 E.
I've drawn red lines from the vertex where they were dumped to their real locations. The line drawn to Phocis is drawn to the nearest point of land in Phocis. The lines from the rivers are drawn from the mouths of the respective rivers. The Styx is the modern Mavronero above Solos. The village of Solos is marked. Every point was easily locatable and the average error is 13.9 km.
I can think of no toponymical practice that can explain this pattern. What's absolutely clear is that the Pleiades data set has no conceivable use for any scholarly purpose.
The Pleiades data set is approaching twenty years of existence. In that time the P. team had plenty of time to fix these gross errors. I concluded long ago that Pleiades never had any interest in creating a scholarly (or even a reliable) map of the ancient world. Soon I will dedicate one of these posts to discussing what I think their real interest is.
The Pleiades data is unsuitable as a reference.
It is unsuitable for study of the Ancient World.
It is unusable as a basis for developing further geographic tools.
Pleiades owes the scholarly community an explanation of why their data so bad and what they intend to do to rectify this very poor database.
Blog Posts Concerning the Isthmian Wall
Since 2023 a number of posts concerning the Isthmian Wall and how we located its remaining segments, have appeared on this blog. This post ...
-
Users of Chapter 23 of the Laconia Survey, Cavanagh et al. [1996], etc. will probably be frustrated by the unnecessarily arcane Transverse M...
-
I learned from the Aegeanet bulletin board that the Arachne CMS databases are online. This includes a very large engraved seals data...

























