Maps can provide interesting access points to the past. The information, presentation, and context of historical maps can indicate more that geographic locations. Instead they carry cultural attitudes and values, changing demographics, and contemporary political inclinations. In gathering historical maps together, topical themes can be traced over time and place, and much can be gleaned from their nuances and details.
Derek Hayes’ Historical Atlas of the United States and the David Rumsey Map Collection offer two efforts to utilize historical maps for research and education, but accomplish their similar goals through very different approaches. There is much to compare and contrast between the two projects, including the comparative selection of maps and historical context they are placed in. Mostly, however, it seems relevant to dissect the differences between the digital and traditional methods of publication of each. Historical Atlas of the United States is a traditional printed atlas, while the Rumsey Collection is an online archive. The collections have much in common, but it is in their differences that the different potential uses for maps begin to appear.
Perhaps because the book is still a more familiar device, the overall look and feel of Hayes’ work is more attractive than the website. Historical Atlas of the United States is a gorgeous book with beautiful reproductions, and it is very enjoyable to turn the pages and closely examine the maps. It is laid out well, with text woven between the maps, and helpful captions supporting both the analyses and the primary documents. This layout seems to be the greatest advantage of the traditional method of publication. With the book it is much easier to place maps in context with each other due to large size of the viewing area. It is difficult to effectively do this through a website as most users do not have computer monitors near the size of the large paged atlas. Similarly, the quality of color and resolution is under control in the printed format, whereas the website is again reliant on the technology of the user. With regard to these simple presentation aspects the book offers a superior experience.
Additionally, the book was far more efficient at delivering complementary text alongside the maps. With all of the relevant information&emdash;primary sources (maps), commentary (captions), and narrative text&emdash;readily available it offers a seamless experience. Alternatively, the Rumsey Collection struggles to coherently present all of the material related to the map. Large versions of the map appear in different windows than the metadata, forcing the user to flip back and forth between the two. This makes the natural inclination to refer from text to map and back a difficult task. This seems to be a simple design flaw, however, and an effect similar to the atlas could be accomplished digitally with better site structure.
Maybe not coincidentally, Historical Atlas of the United States offers better analysis and context for the maps than the Rumsey Collection. This might be a difference in approach. The Rumsey Collection functions more as an archive than a historical argument. It does seem possible though that the awkward presentation system inhibited the development of textual analysis or commentary on the website. Nonetheless, the maps on the Rumsey site offers little in the way of information beyond some metadata regarding the map’s origins and relations to other maps. Again, this is likely a function of the goals for the site, but it is hard to imagine it presenting a coherent and useful historical narrative as it is currently constructed.
This is not to say the digital medium does not have its advantages. The Rumsey site asserts, “Presenting individual maps in a digital format literally breaks the boundaries of an atlas’s bookbinding, allowing the viewer to view single maps independent of their original encasing.” And in presenting the primary sources the Rumsey Collection offers much more than Historical Atlas of the United States. Most importantly, the maps appearing on the website can be zoomed in on, allowing for a much closer examination of detail than the book. For example a map of AT&T trunk lines from 1891 appear in both the atlas and on the website. As highlighted in the images below, it is apparent that the maps on the website are far more useful for research and for getting a sense of the information the map is conveying. If one only was able to view the AT&T map in the atlas the towns and routes would be unclear. Instead, viewing it on the Rumsey site, questions arise regarding why certain towns were chosen to receive telephone and telegraph lines in the early telecommunications era.
The above image which is the general size of the one pictured in the atlas offers little insight into the detail of the map. However, as shown below, the website allows a much closer analysis of the map
Ultimately, there are a number of trade-offs in choosing a method to present historical atlases. It seems harder to present a coherent narrative digitally, though this might simply be that the goals and technology of the Rumsey Collection are not congruous with such a project. However, the flexibility and precision the digital maps offer is a major advantage in developing a collection of maps for comparison and analysis.
A final advantage of the digital format that is not present in the Rumsey Collection, but bears mentioning, is the potential for creative uses of maps it offers. The photo sharing site Flickr contains a number of groups dedicated to historical cartography, including one called Memory Maps. While these are not strictly historical atlases, they do contain maps of a historical bent. The group description describes, “The idea is to take a satelitte image of your neighborhood from your childhood, and use “notes” to tell the story of you growing up.” In transforming maps of familiar areas, users are creating items which will speak to future historians, as well as create a usable record of the near past for current scholars. Here we can begin to further explore the way maps can be infused with narratives similar to the ones presented in both Hayes’ and Rumsey’s collections.
As one user notes, “So if memories are an expression of historical remberances, how is it possible to use current maps to express the temporal quality of those memories?” It is an interesting thought to keep in mind while examining maps of eras past. As both Hayes and Rumsey show, maps are far more than simple geographic representations. And as their projects exemplify, there are different ways we can come to know and understand maps more deeply and begin to unravel their meanings.
Another issue I had with “online atlases” is trying to understand what constitutes an online atlas. The atlas is very much a product of bookbinding. The binding makes the atlas– otherwise it’s just a collection of maps. Which is what the Rumsey collection felt like to me– a collection of maps. (Seriously, though– I know it’s in the name, but that didn’t occur to me until I was typing this.)
What elements could be included to make an online atlas more than a collection of maps? To “bind” the maps together, even if it is in a nonlinear fashion? What work do atlases do, other than keeping our maps from getting all over the place? And is it worth the work, both conceptual and time in doing the design, to make an “online atlas” proper? Or is a collection of maps enough?