https://www.oldmapsonline.org/maps/114fe56e-69a4-4459-8c05-fb0a04491ba8/
Georeferencing a map has its own charm and potential. It’s like connecting the dots between history and the modern world. When I finished my georectified map, I was impressed by the accuracy, even though there were a few hiccups, like a slightly misplaced river and Highway 3. The most striking thing I noticed was our college campus. The old map only had six buildings marked, showing the limited size of the campus at that time. So, my next step would be to add all the new buildings we have on campus today, including our beloved Bald Spot (and its mini version). I’d also make small adjustments to ensure the old map aligns perfectly with the new one. However, georeferencing isn’t a magic wand. It depends on how many reference points you use and their quality. In my case, I used only 11 points, which might not be enough for super precision. Plus, remember that while old maps might be geographically accurate, the finer details like building names and roads can change over time. Knowing the “distortions” in a map is equally important. These distortions can be due to things like map projections or the biases of the mapmaker. They give us a peek into the past’s limitations and perspectives. What’s cool is that this georeferencing process changed how I see spatial digital humanities (DH) projects. It’s not just about putting data on a map; it’s about connecting history to the present. Georeferencing helps researchers find hidden patterns, see how landscapes change, and understand history better. It’s like a bridge between the past and today, making spatial DH projects richer and more interesting.
In a nutshell, georeferencing maps is a great tool for history and spatial DH projects. It brings history to life by connecting it with the modern world. By understanding the map’s purpose and its distortions, we can see the past more clearly.
3 thoughts on “Blog 6 – Paul Jung”
Leave a Reply
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
I admire your commitment to accuracy. 11 points is a lot more than I did, but your map seems far more accurate than mine did. Your comment on connecting the dots between history and the modern world is also really cool and I agree. Finding patterns in georeferencing is a cool concept, too. It is an important step in discerning what information the maps are trying to tell us.
I ended up using the other Northfield map, but I also did about 15 points on it. Mine also wasn’t perfectly aligned, even though it was more recent. I wonder if it has to do with the distortions of the map due to the projection of the maps. I also agree that knowing about the distortion is important, and it can change the perceptions and contexts of a map.
I completely agree with your points. Georeferenced mapping technology is so powerful and can tell you so much about the past. I found it fascinating to just look at the 1905 Northfield map, and how things have changed. This is a tool that I hope to use more in the future to learn more about history.