#spatial history

[beyondvitruvius]

As a child of Vietnamese refugees who settled in Australia in the 1980′s, dad drove us around in his second hand 1980 Toyota Carona. I went to gymnastics, to Vietnamese school on Saturdays. There was a shed and a hills hoist, herbs growing in the backyard, a dwarf lemon tree always struggling to grow. A hybrid of cultures, one heritage grafted onto another.

[calliehenson-blog]

The Spatial Turn (Revisited)

    I’ve discussed Richard White and his Stanford paper “What is Spatial History?” on this blog before, but I’d like to try to tackle the topic again, now with a little more experience under my belt and with some different examples of how to go about creating a spatial, digital project.       

    Historians have used spatial analysis using physical maps to represent spatial ideas for visualization for centuries, and the recent development of technology such as GIS and other more accessible mapping tools has allowed historians to reinvent or re-approach these spatial questions. As a matter of fact, historical maps are still one of the most important components of spatial history and even specifically historical GIS, partly due to their value in placing historical events and places and partly because they are such valuable primary sources for capturing worldview, attitudes, and even the state of scientific understanding at the point of its creation. In David Rumsey and Meredith Williams discuss the new life that GIS has breathed into historical maps and as a result we see a “spatial turn” in the humanities, including history. The “spatial turn”, like most historiographical turns in history, is a trend among academics in the field to shift approaches and address old historical questions with new perspectives, and in this case new technology. In her article “The Spatial Turn in History,” Jo Guldi describes the spatial turn as an increased focus on the historical implications of space, place, and landscape. She notes that telling larger histories, such as the history of a nation rather than a family, necessitates using tools that “privilege the landscape over the portrait.” This is where GIS, or a geographic information system, becomes useful in a historical sense. 

 In the “Teaching the Salem Witch Trials,” Ben Ray discusses his total lack of experience with GIS and the dearth of existing digitized material at the beginning of his Salem Witch Trials project. He begins, like many of these projects do, by building himself an online archive to work from. Simply because one of his sponsors, the Electronic Cultural Atlas Initiative, required his archival material to be geographically referenced, a mapping element was created and Ray and his colleagues used GIS to develop a database structure connecting historical maps and primary visual documents to demographic, genealogical, and legal material, which connected the places to the people. Ray found that “pulling together so many historical documents and types of information created a complex set of categories and relationships.” The Salem Witch Trials is a topic already explored in geographic terms back in 1867, and again in 1974, which only served to help the digital application of a geographic element. These relationships that were revealed changed the accepted picture of how and why the accusations occurred, changing the motivation of the accusers from economic to social. This project is one of many, including Anne Kelly Knowles work on Gettysburg that has truly begun to utilize the power the digital technology to question and reveal hidden patterns that close human reading can’t already do alone.

 Screenshot of an interactive map found on Ray’s Salem Witch Trials archive at http://salem.lib.virginia.edu/maps/. 

    Ray’s updated version of Boyer and Nissenbaum’s 1974 map moves along a yearlong timeline that shows where the accusations and accused pop up over 1692. I found this a particularly useful tool that we have discussed possibilities for in class as it is able to show temporal and spatial shifts that can be essential in understanding the existing relationships in a huge data set. The downfalls of GIS as a mapping tool are also crucial to understanding whether it is the right tool for a given project. Most of these exemplary projects that we look at are using some form of GIS, but a number of projects reject the specificity of GIS because you need exact coordinates that don’t always matter to historical analysis and are often unavailable or unreliable. There are also issues with GIS inherently ignoring complexities of historical narratives due to its exact nature. Luckily GIS is not the only option for mapping projects, as there are apps like MyMaps on Google, StoryMapJS and other mapping software like Atlas, and there are mapping tools that use GIS or similar geodata tools behind the scenes, but don’t require that you know it to use the tool. You can also create simple map visualizations in Excel, as well as some other smaller online tools that may not be developed, but need the valuable feedback and ideas that we can provide by trying them out. 

    I think digital spatial tools are applicable to so many of our projects. It was already a part of my plan to apply GIS or something similar to my Sanford project, I simply lacked the time and experience like most scholars beginning in the field. I planned to have a map of Downtown Sanford on the splash page of my website and have each point connected to one building and its juxtaposition page and small narrative. It seems simple, but once it was mapped I was hoping to see patterns of change across the city, and compare the dates and trends of major changes to commercial buildings in Sanford. GIS seems to be good fit for a project like that because most of the buildings are already georeferenced for the sake of the Florida Master Site Files and the National Register. I can use the exact coordinates that have already been identified. I would love to be able to use a temporal-spatial interactive map such as the one shown above. I would love to find someway to have the historical photos display on the map if you hover over a point and then change into the next photo in it’s juxtaposition set when the timeline hits the year that a significant change was made to the building. 

Garrett’s Call for Collaboration:

  Since I’m writing this blog a little close to the deadline, and Dr. French pointed us in Garrett’s direction, consider this my response. Though my Sanford project is almost complete and ready to expand, I have been giving serious thought to Garrett’s proposal last week about a larger collaborative group. One of the most rewarding things about last semester’s experience with the state parks project was the group cooperation and the different perspectives that are valuable for digital projects. My Sanford project is only as complete as it is because I had help from several people and organizations, and even then I could have produced a more polished project with help from other students or group members who were working toward goal. I very much agree with Garrett that it would be useful to work together for better quality projects. I think UCF itself would be an excellent topic for a digital history project, and we have extensive primary sources for. No one has to travel farther than they already do for class, but I also think a larger project like this has applications that we can learn and apply with more skill in our personal projects. I believe if we break the project(s) down and focus on one part or perspective, we can teach each other how we approach the tools and share whatever knowledge or insight we might have. I can finish the Sanford project essentially on my own time from here on out, and I have all my thesis hours to develop the mapping application for my Caribbean to Central Florida Migration project, so I’m willing to join a group project on UCF and work together on something better than I could do alone in one semester. One idea that might be convenient for the upcoming Flickering Landscapes Conference could be a history of UCF and it’s participation or representation in film and visual media. I’m not married to the idea, but I think it might prove interesting.

[rebecca-roses]

Spatial History

      Spatial History is a topic that is difficult for me to wrap my head around. I understand that spatial history used digital technologies and maps to acquire a different perspective of how space relates to history. Richard White describes the turn as being “modest and humble”, comprising of collaborative efforts that use visuals to make clear human “constructed spaces” (White 1-2). William G. Thomas III adds to this definition by arguing that special history has the advantage of other perspectives to historical narrative other than the literal narrative (Thomas 4). I really don’t know much about positivism or “empirical approaches”, but Thomas names them as the qualities that spatial history rejects; qualities that “normal” history heavily relies on (Thomas 5). Mapping out the accusations of the Salem witch trials revealed conflicts between different churches, mapping out the different construction periods of Auschwitz gives reasons for periods of with higher escape numbers, mapping out the topography of the Gettysburg battlefield allows historians insight into what and who General Lee could and could not see, and mapping out farms affected by the Dust Bowl gives new insight into the debate o the causes of the environmental disaster. GIS tools and digital mapping techniques have the ability to allow historian to physically see patterns that might not surface using traditional research methods.

     Thomas noted however that with his collaboration on a project looking at two communities at the beginning of the Civil War, that Extensible Markup Language (XML) aided their project more than GIS (Thomas 6). As a person who is not all that technical, I quickly became confused by the terminology, but XML is an open source “markup system” that “mapped relationships” in the evidence and primary sources Thomas had collected (Thomas 6). From what I understand this system annotates documents to find relationships; however, even looking up unfamiliar terminology did not help much in my understanding of the technology. Richard While explains GIS as a tool that layers historical photographs and maps onto the modern landscape to reveal things the documents themselves could not show (White 4). These tools allow historians to view geographic space alongside of other theories of space, like the space Lebfebvre describes, the socially and economically created versions of space; basically it shows how space is laid out and how humans interact with that space. These visualizations then bring about unique research questions, thus the visualization becomes a research tool (White 6).

     I believe graduate students can do spacial history without the support of a major research center, but probably not on as grand of a scale as the projects mentioned. I believe our class has already dipped our feet into spatial history by our use of mapping tools in creating the itinerary for the “Wish You Were Here” Florida Parks project. These road-side attractions were popular because there was no interstate and because Disney World had yet to be built, which tells how human movement through the state of Florida changed with infrastructure and priorities. Maybe by attaching older road maps of Florida to modern maps we can see how tourists moved through the state and why certain areas became more popular, and why these private businesses were established in the first place. With an entire class collaborating with the Parks Department (who can allow us into their records and archives)  I believe a lot can be accomplished with the free tools available on the internet.

Side Note: I stumbled upon an interesting subreddit that pertains to spatial history. http://www.reddit.com/r/DesirePath/ is filled with pictures of routes that have been carved out by human (and sometimes animal) movement, that many times differ from the established, “official” route. 

Works Cited: 

2004 -William G. Thomas III, Director of U.Va.'s Virginia Center for Digital History, "Is the Future of Digital History Spatial History?"

2010 - Richard White, Director of Stanford University's Spatial History Project: "What is Spatial History?"

[calliehenson-blog]

What is Spatial History?

A true definition of spatial history seems somewhat elusive, though there are several characteristics that are associated with this new turn in historical analysis. Spatial history has not always been digital history, as historians have tried, and succeeded, to incorporate spatial and geographical changes into their analysis long before the rise of digital history, but digital history and improved technology has given us the tools that make that change quickly and adeptly. It has allowed us to see patterns that simply were not visible without the 3-D visualizations and maps that tools like GIS can create, or re-create (Cohen). According to Stanford University’s Richard White, there are five essential characteristics of spatial history that separate it from traditional history. Spatial history is collaborative, open-ended, digitally assisted, visualization based, and above all it is focused on space rather than time in terms of history. (White, p. 1)

The study and analysis of the impact of geography on historical actors, and their impact on the space that they act and move opens up entirely new perspectives and questions that no one had though to ask. Obviously with a name like spatial history, the key difference from traditional history is the fundamental conceptual focus on spatial movement rather than temporal movement. Traditional historians often take for granted the maps and geographical space that they are studying because their focus is almost solely on a chronological or some form of time based scale. As a result, misconceptions occur because the map-makers and context of the map is not accounted for. (Thomas, p. 2-3). This innovative approach, assisted by digital tools such as GIS, XML, and other markup languages, can show us entirely new or contradictory evidence that can alter historiographies, such as the recreation of the Gettysburg battlefield. Ann Knowles was able to much more accurately see what General Lee saw and understand his decisions based on what information was available to him, not to us. (Cohen)

The nature of spatial history relies on visualizing space and movement, and, in the digital age, the best way to produce that kind of interactive and engaging material is with these newly emerging digital tools. Spatial history allows us to incorporate the tools that we as historians have used for years, such as charts, maps, etc., and “allows the for exploitation of kinds of evidence and data bases that would be too opaque or too unwieldy to use without computers.” (White, p. 1)

Spatial history almost always requires some collaboration from various fields. Historians are limited by their time and technical abilities, so partners from various fields such as computer science, geography, visualization specialists, and more are necessary just to use and produce these projects. This could be a weakness because it makes it very difficult for lone scholars or students to take on an endeavor like this and succeed, but collaboration is often necessary in numerous other fields and disciplines. Historians themselves are not strangers to collaborative efforts and even traditional historians often have to rely on their institutional support to succeed in their projects and books, in terms of archival access, discussion, funding, etc.

Another characteristic of spatial history that is somewhat foreign to traditional history is its open-endedness. The benefit of this open-endedness is that it often allows the audience to directly interact with primary sources and evidence that would normally be worked into a text in a traditional history book. According to William Thomas, spatial history seeks to break the linear narrative and in doing so, creates the type of project that can be almost understood in completely different ways (Thomas, p. 5-6). These projects can be added to, changed, re-interpreted, recombined, mined for information and explored by anyone in the “scholarly commons” who wishes to use the information (White, p.1).

Spatial history certainly doesn’t seem to be trying to take the place of traditional history, nor is it mutually exclusive to traditional history. Several spatial history projects are companions to traditional historical monographs, such as Richard White’s Railroaded, the Site, and William Thomas’s accompanying article to the Valley of the Shadow project.  In this way, spatial history is more of a methodology or a “means of doing research” rather than the production of a map or simple visual effect (White, p. 6). Digital and spatial historians are simply trying to expand and adapt their research methods to the new tools that are at their disposal, in an attempt to get a broader and more complete view of history.

[cvzinflorida]

Disney Could Use Some Spatial History!

What is Spatial History? With the huge archives of data available historians are now able to visualize patterns within the context of space, and time. The “spatial turn” in history brings the skills of geography, history, and visualization technology together.  Using Spatial History historians can identifyand study continuity or change overtime in relationship to a the space that wasoccupied.  Looking for patterns in the historical information can be challenging to put on a map with the vast amounts of information required.  Special programs have had to be created to be interactive with maps, like GIS (Graphic Information Systems), which allows for expansive narrative information to be visually represented in images.  These visualizations can show the continuities or changes over time, confirmations or inconsistencies in the histories, identify new evidence with clusters of information, or migrations of people, and so much more.  As an educator, the visual representations provide another way for students to learn, as a support or in addition to textbook reading.

Recently I saw the American Adventure at Disney World and thought “Wow” what a great show!  That was Public History, for an audience, at a theme park! The Disney historians presented the past in a chronological, entertaining, and fast paced rapid succession of video images, in-between scenes with animated robotic displays. This appeals to a multi generational audience, to the current generation that is so use to the multimedia with video and quick changes, and the older generation who are interested in the historical narrative.  The show encompassed several social science education and history themes; democratic education, multiple perspectives, continuity and change over time, and connecting the past to our present.  Over all I truly liked the show.  I did think, however, that some aspects lacked depth.  For example the opening image of a ship on the water didn’t show a map of where the ship came from on a globe, or where it was going to.  No east or west was shown to represent Columbus’s voyage. No spatial representation was given of the vast migrations of people who then came to the new world, or where they came from. Slavery was only glanced over quickly.  The only image was that of slave market sale poster.  There was no representation of the triangle trade that so deeply changed our culture with the movement of people, food and goods.  Industrialization brought new waves of immigrants from new places.  Here the immigrant contribution was mentioned but again visualization would be effective in showing the movement of people coming to the United States. Another graphic representations that could be considered would be the growth of the cities at this time or the immigrant neighborhoods that worked for the factories.  WW1 and WW2 have their own set of historical facts and could offer many different kinds of graphic representations, to include battles where US troops fought, or changes at home due to the war (rationing, or wartime factories).  Other ideas for visualizations might also include Deployment charts, or The Costs of War (in money and casualties) could also be added.  Understanding the time constraints of the show perhaps a static display with interactive maps on the way in or out of the lobby.  This kind of display would  provide educational material while visitors wait, and entertain children with the interactive features.

Anne Kelly Knowles’ work on the Gettysburg battlefield showing the topographical mapping of what Lee would have been able to see with direct line of sight, revealed more than what scholars had previously thought he was able to see.  Her work on Auschwitz, creating a model that shows the buildings in exact locations by when they were constructed, can be used to corroborate primary source statements from the camps survivors.  

The Spatial History Project at Stanford University is a collaborative for scholars to work on creative spatial, textual and visual analysis in spatial humanities.  Like other Digital Humanities, the technology needed for this kind of research requires technical support.  Often links to projects are outdated or are no longer available due to lack of technical support for the programs themselves.  By working with collaborative scholars have technological support and storage for their projects.  As the infrastructure improves for digital humanities so will the abilities of scholars to contribute in more meaningful ways with Spatial Humanities. Disney will follow too, they capitalize on history and Spatial History is good history. 

See some of the Spatial History projects at Stanford University collaborative: http://web.stanford.edu/group/spatialhistory/cgi-bin/site/index.php

[firesolb]

What is Spatial History?

What is spatial history or more precisely how does it differfrom traditional history?

This is the focus for this week’s blog post.  A precise definition of what actually constitutes spatial history is somewhat elusive.  William Thomas of the University of Virginia lists several characteristics that define spatial history.  In his words spatial history, “Attempts to achieve multiple perspectives in its story and to break down the hegemony of linear narrative.”[1] Richard White of Stanford University breaks down his definition of spatial history to one word, “Movement.”[2]  In other words, as people and goods move throughout space and time they both impact and are impacted by their environment, establishing and analyzing these relationships is the crux of spatial history.   

Paul Carter, author of The Road to Botany Bay, has argued that traditional historians explain history through a temporal dimension rather than a spatial one.[3]  In laymen’s term, Carter is suggesting that historians tend to assume spatial areas as being part of a defined space, and then examine their events as simply acting within this predefined space.  By ignoring the impact of the geography on the actors or by superimposing predefined values and norms based on the ideals of the map-makers (i.e the powers to be), historians may risk missing small details that gives agency to less obvious features of the spatial area.

The advent of advanced computer programs like GIS (Geographic Information Systems) and XML (Extensible Markup Language) have made the mining and visualization of large amounts of data more efficient. By rendering this data on a map, spatial historians are able too identify trends that could be lost or marginalized using more traditional research methods.  Anne Knowles, of Middlebury College, used GIS mapping to highlight some of the topographical challenges that led to the Confederate Army’s disastrous defeat at Gettysburg, challenging a number of previously held theories on General Lee’s decision making.  Geoff Cunfer, from the University of Saskatchewan used data mining and GIS analysis to question long held beliefs for the causes of the 1930s Dust Bowl crisis.[4]  Spatial history is not limited to computer-based analysis as Fernand Braudel showed in his epic work, The Mediterranean.  However, the use of computers enables faster and more detailed looks at large data sets, allowing the historian to reference these points in connection to both space and time.

If there is a downside to spatial history for the average historian, toiling away at a small university, it comes for the tremendous amount of resources needed to conduct this type of research.  By its very nature spatial history requires a collaborative effort.  Sources must be digitized and stored in order for the computers to read them.  The historian must have partners familiar with the computer language used for parsing and displaying the mined information or they must learn it themselves. Knowledge of the geography being studied both in the present day and over time is needed to understand how space shaped the people or vice-versa.  Finally, the historian needs institutional support for the money required to build and maintain the systems used to operate these complex data analysis tools. In short, spatial history requires a team effort to function effectively.

Is spatial history the next cliometrics, full of promises but lacking in real world sustainability and functionality? Only time will tell.  Spatial historians are not claiming to change the world with their approach.  They simply hope to add visual context and a deeper understanding to historical events by thoroughly examining ALL of the factors that have shaped history.  Historians must continually evaluate the tools available to them.  In the age of computers and growing digital archives the use of spatial history tools like GIS seem to offer historians a great new tool for evaluating the stories we tell.

[1] William G. Thomas, III, University of Virginia Newberry Library Historical GIS Conference, March, 2004, 4.

[2] Richard White, “What is Spatial History,” Spatial History Lab, Sanford University, February 1, 2010, 3.

[3] Thomas, 2.

[4] Both Knowles and Cunfer’s articles are discussed in a 2011 New Times article.  Patricia Cohen, “Digital Maps are Giving Scholars the Lay of the Land,” The New York Times, July 26, 2011, accessed February 17, 2015. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/27/arts/geographic-information-systems-help-scholars-see-history.html?pagewanted=all

[historywithsarahp]

Spatial History Readings Response

1) What is the promise of Spatial History?

Spatial history prompts historians to engage with their material in a new, interesting, and often productive manner. Its interdisciplinary nature exposes the historian to new historiographical and methodological strategies which, although sometimes daunting in their unfamiliarity, ultimately encapsulate the multiplicity inherent within historical research and any constructions of the past. Spatial History, relying upon the use and interpretation of visuals, challenges the largely text-based historian to engage with and analyze new mediums, which can prove highly informative through their amalgamation of different thought processes and patterning. By visualizing change over time, the historian is able to interact with the past in an even more intimate and intricate manner, facilitating further understanding and novel interpretations. 

For example, the reconstruction of past landscapes can allow the military historian to situate him or herself within a battle, evaluating the landscape's influence upon strategy or, more specifically, a visibility analysis of a figure's line of sight so as to determine the reasoning behind his or her decisions. Or, the construction of a town could be evaluated in terms of it conforming to local topography or defying practicality in favor of fulfilling architectural ideals. 

In endeavoring to gain exact data regarding exact historical locations, the historian may be prompted to deeply engage with their sources, engendering a dedicated, thorough, and often productive context. 

Previously overwhelming and extensive data, such as that pertaining to land use, can also be organized within a GIS to provide a visual representation in which patterns are more easily discerned. By facilitating a more efficient and holistic representation of bulks of data, GIS can thereby help researchers draw connections that substantiate or produce entirely new theories. 

Furthermore, the oft neglected spatial economy, that is, the relationship between places, governed by trade, migration, and other large, transitory forces, can be conveniently illustrated for the historian, providing a new dimension to their research and analysis that would otherwise have remained obscure without strategic mapping. 

As well, layering data which had previously been studied separately can reveal hitherto overlooked geographical patterns. Information such as this, unless viewed simultaneously and with each piece in its entirety, often seems too disparate, detailed, or insular to interact in any meaningful way with other data sets in any efficient or productive manner.

2) What are the obstacles? The possible problems?

There are many perceived obstacles with the use of geographic information systems (GIS), which are highlighted by Anne Kelly Knowles and David J. Bodenhamer.

For one, the nature of GIS demands a measure of exactitude that the often ambiguous and incomplete nature of historical research cannot fulfill. Georectification, the process of assigning geographical coordinates to the map's digital image so that connections can be drawn between inputted data, demands stable landmarks. Unfortunately, boundaries between countries or delineated areas are ever-changing, shaped by economic, political, and physical forces, thus frustrating any attempts to definitively pin them down. Such temporal and contextual uncertainty is something that GIS scholars are increasingly interested in capturing and accommodating. 

As well, GIS' mathematical basis proves daunting to those who primarily work with written texts, suggesting a new skill set to be learned and mastered before any worthwhile research may be conducted. The formulation of a productive GIS database can also take years, a devotion of time on top of extensive research that many a historian would not wish to dedicate. 

Additionally, the seemingly established dichotomy between the nature and methodologies of geography and history (collaborative vs solitary research, visual vs narrative, the importance of temporal vs spatial proximity, etc.) as areas of study suggests an incompatibility that is entrenched within scholarly thought and is therefore necessary to overcome should one conflate the two areas during spatially historical research.

3) How do these readings connect with discussions we've had in class?

Digital history, by its very nature, involves employing an amalgamation of text and images and allows and encourages readers to engage with evidence so as to arrive at their own conclusions. Thus is the inherent nature of spatial history, which establishes pictorial patterns that the historian must then actively seek out and demonstrate relationships between. Each engages its authors and audience in novel ways, giving the study of history new life. 

GIS, if published online, could act as an accessible resource for countless historians. However, their accessibility is also limited to those who are willing to learn how to engage with and interpret such data, in addition to those who must learn its processes so that contributions can continue to be made.

Money is also a factor within the development of this field or tool of study in that, without funding, the admittedly expensive processes and research of GIS cannot continue. 

Finally, the reliability of such representations is also is question. For one, human error in computation could result in misrepresentation or, as previously mentioned, the fluid nature of landscapes or vague quality of historical research could frustrate the seemingly mathematical precision and accuracy of GIS mapping.