Talk:Prosopography

[Untitled]

Being a rookie at cite.php, could someone with more experience change Note 2? The classic series of volumes is of course Prosopographia Imperii Romani, and it deals with the Roman Principate, as opposed to the Principiate. Thanks. Thomas78 17:02, 20 March 2007 (UTC)Thomas78

Revision

The intro is WAY too long, and needs to be given a section title. I"m not familiar enough with this topic to do so, but pelase, get a section title. ThuranX 20:22, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm not familiar with the subject either, but after reading the article I felt 'History of prosopography' would be the best title for this section, so added it in. Terraxos 20:03, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Ubi sunt Romani?

What happened to the stuff about prosopography of ancient Rome? I have links to this article that are now less helpful. Cynwolfe (talk) 15:03, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Needs to be broadened

Except for the mention of Erben's piece on 19th century England, the assumption in the article seems to be that prosopography is expected to deal almost exclusively with classical & medieval topics. This is an outdated view. At the point where academic history and serious genealogical research meet, there has been, for a couple of decades, considerable use of prosopographical methods in analyzing communities and extended family groups. This has been done (and published about) regarding the Plymouth settlement, the Missouri Ozarks, the counties of Texas that border the Red River, and the Boonesboro settlement in Kentucky. And that's just what comes to mind. I guess I'll have to find time to extend the coverage, but I hope other readers will add a note pointing to other modern-era prosopographical studies that ought to be included. --Michael K Smith^Talk 14:27, 6 August 2011 (UTC)