Itiner-E: the Google Maps of Roman Roads
Postedabout 2 months agoActiveabout 2 months ago
itiner-e.orgResearchstory
calmmixed
Debate
60/100
Roman EmpireHistorical MapsGeospatial Analysis
Key topics
Roman Empire
Historical Maps
Geospatial Analysis
The Itiner-e project provides an interactive map of Roman roads, sparking discussion on its accuracy, potential applications, and the value of collaborative mapping efforts.
Snapshot generated from the HN discussion
Discussion Activity
Very active discussionFirst comment
20h
Peak period
21
18-24h
Avg / period
9.5
Comment distribution38 data points
Loading chart...
Based on 38 loaded comments
Key moments
- 01Story posted
Nov 9, 2025 at 4:46 AM EST
about 2 months ago
Step 01 - 02First comment
Nov 10, 2025 at 12:19 AM EST
20h after posting
Step 02 - 03Peak activity
21 comments in 18-24h
Hottest window of the conversation
Step 03 - 04Latest activity
Nov 12, 2025 at 1:14 AM EST
about 2 months ago
Step 04
Generating AI Summary...
Analyzing up to 500 comments to identify key contributors and discussion patterns
ID: 45864341Type: storyLast synced: 11/20/2025, 8:00:11 PM
Want the full context?
Jump to the original sources
Read the primary article or dive into the live Hacker News thread when you're ready.
Also it is high time for everyone to understand that not every map out there is goog's and more importantly - there are at least 5 providers of mappings software that do it either better or likewise well, and these guys' work needs to be respected. In fact it is very likely that gmaps would rate very low if one is to rank it considering usability (APIs including), licensing, speed and quality of the render.
the Google Maps is being used to frame or position the sites intent of a data rich maps site of Roman Roads
"Itiner-e – The Digital Atlas of Ancient Roads"
And Goog does none of this to deserve any credit.
These Romans are crazy!
A bit of work on the UI would make this a really fun and interesting tool - currently it seems to be intended for people who know a lot about the dataset already.
- Pintia is almost confirmed to be near the Duero/Douro river, much more to the south and to the east. It is one of the most explored pre-Roman settlements in the area and while there has not been a definitive proof, there are many hints that show that it's on the place I showed and not where it's shown on the map
- Amallobriga is also, for most historians, located in Tiedra, but it shows Tordesillas. As you can see on the map, the actual location of Tiedra is also a road intersection. The location in Tiedra is consistent with archeological evidence and with route books that show the distance from Amallobriga to other cities we know.
- Nobody really knows where Intercatia or Tela are. But note that a there's a big road intersection at the south. It is confirmed that there was a settlement but we do not know the name of it, several have been proposed. In any case, Intercatia is very difficult to be located as it is shown in the map with no roads going to it. Many archaeologists say it could be in the actual town of Paredes de Nava.
- I don't think there's any real evidence of a bridge that crosses the Douro/Duero river there. What we know is that there's a medieval bridge closer to Septimanca and that it could have had a Roman origin, but according to the map there's no road there.
And yes, let me overstate it - Google is not part of anything related to this research, and for their valuable contribution, overall and in particular, they are very kindly not mentioned in the paper.
But guys here don't care about peculiar details, no?
Interestingly, the interesting (pun intended) topic did not rise the very obvious question - is the data open. Well, idk, but is at least downloadable.
For my part, the Romans never went more than halfway up the Netherlands, meaning the north ("above the rivers") is culturally somewhat different from the south, although the cultures did converge over time. But "below" the rivers is still generally Catholic wheras "above" is Protestant. For example.
It would be nice to be able to use Streetview or similar to see how the roads look today (where they still exist).
Two macroscopic problems are:
1. The only variant given is between Bolsena and Fabro. There is nothing about later routes to the west of Valdichiana and to the left of the Arno.
2. The section between Arezzo and Cascia used the exact route of the modern Setteponti, which was certainly not the case.
Beyond these errors, every section I have checked in detail for the Cassia contains inexact info.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44622543
(SCNR)
You can click on a road segment and get some info about it so the first step would be to add a way to contact its author to suggest improvements.
For example I know of some hidden ruins of a very ancient bridge where my local roman road crossed the river with two paths that show where the road on both sides would have been instead of where the road cross the river on the segment.
Unfortunately, Brughmans, de Soto, and Pažout neglected to include the legally required attribution for this use of OpenStreetMap data (via Mapbox). This is a shame, because these kind of projects are great to show people that there is more than just Google Maps.
West of Jajce in Bosnia there's a ring of roads that hasn't changed for 2000 years.
I wonder if there's a missing roman settlement under Sarajevo, considering the roads there match so well and the size of the city.