Digital resources in the Social Sciences and Humanities OpenEdition Our platforms OpenEdition Books OpenEdition Journals Hypotheses Calenda Libraries OpenEdition Freemium Follow us

Borders, Data and Vassals – a Postdoc-Fellowship at the DH Lab

Johannes Vermeer: The Geographer

The map is not the territory, and the name is not the thing named. – Gregory Bateson1

Our spatial perception of the world in which we live is undoubtedly shaped significantly by maps. Political maps, which are frequently used, convey the size and political unity of territories through colored polygons and borders. They are deeply ingrained in our collective memory. Only rarely are we unsettled in this established knowledge by alternative representation methods that encourage new perspectives on the world. The choice of the base map alone is already a significant decision with immediate visual and thus cognitive consequences: the projection of a three-dimensional sphere onto a two-dimensional surface is by no means trivial, and aside from the commonly encountered versions, numerous alternatives exist, each with their advantages and disadvantages. The misleading perceptions of spatial dimensions caused by the commonly used Mercator projection can be explored interactively on https://www.thetruesize.com/.

Fig. 2: Only some possibilities of projecting the world. Screenshot of: https://kartenprojektionen.de/, 24.03.2025.

However, it is not only the projection that is subject to debate but also the shapes of the polygons representing political entities, that is, the borders of states. For example, the depiction of Crimea, following its annexation by Russia — which has not been recognized by most countries — has repeatedly sparked controversy. A recent case occurred when the world football association, FIFA, no longer displayed Crimea as part of Ukraine.2 Google Maps also takes an interesting approach to Crimea, representing it as separated from both Russia and Ukraine by a dashed border. This method of depicting disputed borders — and, ultimately, contested statehood — can also be observed in Google Maps in the Himalayas or regarding Western Sahara, whose sovereignty is not recognized by Morocco. Furthermore, Google’s handling of geoinformation within interactive web maps appears to be intriguingly simple and seemingly ‘neutral’: rather than assigning a location to a specific administrative unit and state as usual, Google simply omits such an attribution.

Fig. 3: Geoinformation provided by Google Maps for the Ukraine, Russia and the Crimea. Screenshot of https://www.google.com/maps, 24.03.2025.

How traditional maps picture early modern Europe

When examining the maps used in historical research, particularly in Early Modern Studies, one immediately notices that they are mostly traditional static maps in printed or digital form. These maps predominantly employ polygons, which suggest uniform statehood and clearly defined borders. However, this representation stands in stark contrast to the current state of research on early modern history and what we know about statebuilding and statehood in that period. In early modern Europe, and especially within the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation, unitary states with precisely defined territories were the exception rather than the rule.

Fig. 4: The Holy Roman Empire circa 1500 AD. © IEG / A. Kunz 2008, CC BY-NC 4.0 International, DOI: 10.25359/ISSN.1614-6352.MAP602.

Instead, such maps suggest conceptions of statehood that align more with the ideas of the 19th century: territories are clearly assigned to individual rulers and clearly defined borders separate these dominions. The common division of various sovereign rights over individual locations among different rulers, however, is rendered invisible: high justice, low justice, manorial rights, church patronage, hunting rights, and municipal authority often lay in different hands, yet the use of colored polygons only reflects territorial sovereignty, even when such sovereignty is not explicitly evident from historical sources. Due to our own experiences in a world largely organized into nation-states, we tend — perhaps partly unconsciously — to attribute relevance to these mapped territories in terms of the lived realities of past populations. While todays Europeans may frequently cross national borders in their daily lives for work and residence or own property in several states, for most of us this remains the exception rather than the rule. However, historical sources suggest that in the Holy Roman Empire, cross-border mobility was widespread. Nobles and merchants frequently traveled and maintained extensive (business) networks. Even among the rural population, property ownership and family ties were often more closely linked to specific landscapes or regions rather than to the often fragmented political territories. Similarly, the career mobility of scholars and officials in princely service also rather frequently extended beyond their sovereign’s domain.

Lately, Luca Scholz has shown in his widely acclaimed dissertation that despite the apparent territorial fragmentation of the Empire, the movement of people and goods was not only possible but common—although territorial rulers increasingly sought to regulate and channel such mobility.3 Consequently, early modern conceptions of space were shaped less by linear borders and more by the affiliation of places in a broader sense. Points of transition, such as city gates, customs stations, and controlled road checkpoints, were of greater significance, while the concept of fixed borders only gained prominence in the 18th century.

Advantages of a point-based approach to cartographic visualizations

These well-established insights from early modern research are, however, difficult to visualize on conventional maps that rely primarily on polygons. An alternative option to try to cope with that is to develop maps that focus on points representing locations as we explored in the DigiKAR project.4 These points can then be used to depict the distribution of various sovereign rights or, through connecting lines, to illustrate biographical mobility. A point-based cartographic visualization can thus help to break open and expand traditional notions of historical space. However, this approach should not be intended to completely replace conventional maps, as the depiction of territorial sovereignty through polygons remains relevant — although those maps represent only one dimension of early modern rule and its perception. The aim is therefore to use alternative cartographic visualization methods to broaden our spatial understanding of historical configurations. Point-based cartographic visualizations can make a significant contribution by depicting the complexity of historical realities in a different way than polygon-based maps.

Of course, both point-based and polygon-based maps have inherent limitations when it comes to representing complexity, especially in terms of temporal developments. Static maps, whether printed or digital, quickly reach the limits of readability. For example, the territorial development of the Electorate of Mainz is particularly challenging to represent, especially when depicting territories that were at some point acquired and later lost.

Fig. 5: Detail of the map „Die territoriale Entwicklung des Kurfürstentums Mainz“, in: Geschichtlicher Atlas von Hessen, https://www.lagis-hessen.de/de/subjects/idrec/sn/ga/id/30.

Also the detailed visualization of highly fragmented territories also presents difficulties, as illustrated by this finely subdivided map of the lordships and administrative divisions in southwestern Germany in 1790, which is characterized by different shades of color and hatching patterns

Fig. 6: Detail of the map: Herrschaftsgebiete und Ämtergliederung in Südwestdeutschland 1790, https://www.leo-bw.de/web/guest/detail-gis/-/Detail/details/DOKUMENT/kgl_atlas/HABW_06_13/Herrschaftsgebiete+und+%C3%84mtergliederung+in+S%C3%BCdwestdeutschland+1790

In this respect, interactive cartographic visualizations offer clear advantages over static maps: Specific temporal or spatial points of interest can be examined in greater detail and changes over time can be represented dynamically. Additionally, interactive visualizations can be designed in a way that users are able to select the variables relevant to their research questions — unlike printed or static maps, which can only display all information simultaneously. This selective approach enhances readability while also transferring decision-making power to the user, rather than leaving it solely to the map creator. Key editorial choices — such as which information to include, which to omit, and which chronological markers to use — are thus made flexible. This prevents the researcher from inadvertently constraining possible research questions or imposing interpretations. Depending on the research focus, conventional time markers — such as the year 1648 — might be unsuitable, because in some regions the borders were negotiated after that date. For instance, the north-western boundary of the Holy Roman Empire in the Spanish Netherlands was only determined in the 1660 Treaty of the Pyrenees between France and Spain.

Fig. 7: The Holy Roman Empire 1555 AD. © IEG / A. Kunz 2008, CC BY-NC 4.0 International, DOI: 10.25359/ISSN.1614-6352.MAP604

Early modern northern Italy as a case study

A particularly compelling case for interactive cartographic visualization is early modern Italy. In northern Italy, the Lombard king’s crown passed to the Ottonians in the early Middle Ages, bringing the region under imperial authority. Since then, northern Italy (excluding Venice) remained part of the Holy Roman Empire, albeit with fluctuating degrees of integration. The significance of northern Italy is evident in the medieval Italian campaigns of the Roman-German Emperors. Even in the early modern period, during the 16th century, northern Italy remained central to international politics, as the French kings contested its imperial affiliation during the Italian Wars. However, the various principalities, bishoprics, republics, and minor lordships ultimately remained under imperial suzerainty.

Fig. 8: The Holy Roman Empire 1555 AD. © IEG / A. Kunz 2008, CC BY-NC 4.0 International, DOI: 10.25359/ISSN.1614-6352.MAP605

While maps visualizing the 16th century typically depict northern Italy as part of the Empire, maps postdating the Peace of Westphalia generally omit these territories. Yet, this significant shift in representation is not entirely supported by historical sources or scholarly literature. Instead, northern Italian imperial vassals maintained varying degrees of relations with the Emperor and the Empire throughout the early modern period. They sought imperial investiture in ceremonial acts, paid contributions to support the Emperor, received privileges, and even brought disputes before the Imperial Aulic Council in Vienna.

Given the fluctuating and highly diverse power relationships of the over 200 northern Italian vassals, a conventional static map relying on polygons and lines cannot adequately depict these connections. My project aims to systematically compile statistical data on these relationships for the first time, relying on previously underutilized archival collections in Vienna and Milan. In addition to establishing an overview of these sources, the project also seeks to develop an innovative visualization of early modern governance: the data will be used to create a point-based interactive cartographic visualization that spatially and temporally differentiates the vassals’ relationships with the Emperor and the Empire.

The fellowship

Fig. 9: Das Domus Universitatis in Mainz, welches das IEG und das Journalistische Seminar der JGU beherbergt, © IEG.

I applied for a postdoctoral fellowship at the Digital Humanities Lab of the Institute of European History in order to develop this concept, which is only outlined here. Thankfully, my proposal was accepted and over the past few months I have been able to focus intensively on preparing the project proposal. The scholarships at the Institute of European History offer the great opportunity to live and work in Mainz for a few months to complete a doctoral thesis or to prepare a postdoc project, as in my case. The scholarship holders live together in the historic institute building, which was built for the Jesuit University at the beginning of the 17th century. In addition to the community with the other doctoral and post-doctoral fellows and the exchange with the staff, especially in the weekly colloquia, the integration into the DH Lab team is important. My project benefitted from the exchange with the traditional historians at the IEG on the one hand and from the expertise of the DH specialists in the Lab on the other. They have expertise at various levels, such as project planning, proposal design and, of course, above all, technical implementation, which is very helpful for preparing the proposal. If you consider a DH project, I strongly encourage you to apply for the fellowship.

Literature

  • Falk Bretschneider/Christophe Duhamelle: Fraktalität. Raumgeschichte und soziales Handeln im Alten Reich. In: Zeitschrift für Historische Forschung 43 (2016), H. 4., S. 703-746.
  • Matthias Schnettger: Die kaiserliche Gerichtsbarkeit in Italien in der Frühen Neuzeit, in: Akten des 36. Deutschen Rechtshistorikertages, Halle an der Saale, 10.-14. September 2006. Hrsg. von Rolf Lieberwirth und Heiner Lück, Baden-Baden 2008, S. 607–625.
  • Matthias Schnettger: „Principe sovrano“ oder „civitas imperialis“? Die Republik Genua und das Alte Reich in der Frühen Neuzeit (1556–1797), Mainz 2006 (Veröffentlichungen des Instituts für Europäische Geschichte 209; Abteilung für Universalgeschichte) (Beiträge zur Sozial- und Verfassungsgeschichte des Alten Reiches 17).

References

Featured Image: Fig 1. Vermeer had a great penchant for maps, which can be seen in the background of many of his works as wall decorations for bourgeois scenes. In his painting “The Geographer”, Vermeer explicitly thematizes the intellectual preoccupation with maps. The original can be seen at Städel Museum, Frankfurt. Johannes Vermeer, The Geographer, Oil on canvas, 1669, Public Domain, taken from: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_Geographer.jpg

  1. Gregory Bateson: Mind and Nature: A Necessary Unity. New York 1979, p. 30 []
  2. BBC News on 14 December 2024: “Ukraine demands Fifa apology over Crimea map”, by Emma Rossiter, https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cq5l49j6xw4o []
  3. Luca Scholz: Borders and Freedom of Movement in the Holy Roman Empire (= Studies in German History), Oxford: Oxford University Press 2020. []
  4. documentation currently in progress: https://ieg-dhr.github.io/DigiKAR/ []

OpenEdition schlägt Ihnen vor, diesen Beitrag wie folgt zu zitieren:
Sven Dittmar (28. März 2025). Borders, Data and Vassals – a Postdoc-Fellowship at the DH Lab. DH Lab. Abgerufen am 29. April 2025 von https://doi.org/10.58079/13lam


Schreibe einen Kommentar

Deine E-Mail-Adresse wird nicht veröffentlicht. Erforderliche Felder sind mit * markiert

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.