19

RefLection Essay: Progress

and the Nature of lCartography'
Matthew H. Edney
Osher Professor in the History of Cartography, University of Southern Maine, USA;
Director, History of Cartography Project, University of Wisconsin-Madison, USA

My 1993 essay 'Cartography without "progress'" (reproduced as Chapter 18 in this

volume) originated in the disconnect between what my own studies unveiled about past
cartographies and the history ofcartography as presented in the literature. Indeed, given
how the modern idealization of cartography - as well as its further abstractions by
academic cartographers - depended upon the established view of map history, I was
struggling to understand the very nature of this thing we call 'cartography'.
What the literature told me was that cartography was a uniform practice that had
steadily progressed throughout the history of human (i.e. Western) civilisation, except
for some abnormal periods when cartographic practice stagnated or even regressed. It
enshrined cartography's innately progressive character in a canon of key maps. The
automatic first step in the analysis of any old map was its comparison against other maps
of the same region, including those of the present day, so as to situate it along
cartography's supposed progressive trend line. The few maps marking major advances
in knowledge of a region were canonized; the many simple, derivative maps were
dismissed from consideration as inadequate or abnormal; the remainder, incorporating
minor advances, were listed in cartobibliographies but otherwise left unstudied. The
logic was cyclical, unacknowledged and immensely powerful. The result was an a priori
meta-narrative that constrained scholars to narrate only the progressive development of
map making.
I think I was opposed to the idealized meta-narrative from the start. Thinking I would
become a professional surveyor, I had focused about a third of my undergraduate degree
on land surveying. This training was fundamentally pragmatic: surveying comprises a
wide variety of techniques that must be selectively deployed to meet the various needs

Classics in Cartography: Reflections 011 Influential Articles from Cartographi ca Edited by Martin Dodge
© 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd
332 Reflection Essay

(and budgets) of clients. When I began my graduate studies with David Woodward in distinguished from
1983, I inevitably brought this perspective to bear on cartography and its history. For the ethnocentrism (som
MS thesis, I explored a particular constellation of practice, need and community in the cognitive with the soc
federal mapping of US states in the later 1800s (Edney, 1986). For the doctoral moral purity, alread)
dissertation, I turned to the constellation involved in the systematic mapping of India social functions fillec
by the British before 1843 (Edney, 1990, 1997). Not that I actually used the term this volume; Harley,
'constellation' at that time, and the concept remained inchoate. But as I worked on the culturally symbolic
dissertation, and encouraged by the then emergent critical m ap scholarship, I increas- Harley, 1980: 76-86;
ingly realized the need for a more formal explication of the concept. Fels, 1986, reproduCE
It seemed to me that a formal approach to understanding mapping practices a nd 'map' was recast al,
communities would form the basis for explaining cartographic history without resort- Woodward, 1987: xv
ing to any necessary presumptions of progress. Such a conceptual framework would Yet this incredible
serve to counter the apparent eternal verities of the modern cartographic ideal. Other Having successfully (
critical scholars had yet to dispel the ideal's meta-narrative of progress, the cartographic strated what cartogra
canon that legitimated the meta-narrative, and the very idea of 'cartography' that the larger picture of how
meta-narrative in turn sustained. A concern for practices and communities was - and perhaps the real poin
remains - essential for the successful development of critical map studies. approaches. It is not·
This is not to say that mapping has never progressed. Rather, if scholars employ as see focused textual
underdetermined a word as 'p rogress', then they must be absolutely clear about how relevance for their 0\
they define it, how they use it, how they measure it (quantitatively or qualitatively) and (2001: 3 1-32) compl
how it is limited to specific aspects of certain mapping practices. Cartographic progress ifested in a given mal
must be demonstrated, not presumed. cartographic works, I
Critical map histor
largely because of th(
19.1 The Modern Cartographic Ideal and its Critics twentieth century, m,
to make the content (
Since the 1870s, historians have blithely talked about the cartographies of ancient historians to diploma
Greece, Renaissance Europe and modern North America as if they were all one and the cartography's inherer
same thing. The underlying presumption is that what we perceive today as cartography and so give their stud
existed in essentially the same form in each of these widely differentiated societies. Such nature of cartography
historical writing is a key m anifestation of modern Western culture's pervasive and examine that context
persistent idealization of 'ca rtography' as a coherent and moral body of practice and augmented by that of
knowledge that is properly pursued by trained and disciplined individuals for the socio -cultural paradij
betterment of their own societies and indeed for human civilisation, that is applied the cultural
uniformly across all geographic scales of social organization, and that exemplifies the study of cartographic
strictly experiential creation of knowledge (and is thus 'empiricist' in character). The commentators, led in
problem is that this idealized cartography bears little, if any, resemblance to the multiple transcendentalist cril
ways in which people have actually produced and consumed maps. (Roszak, 1972:407-4
A great deal of intellectual energy was expended in the 1980s and early 1990s to point sophistication and I
out the many inadequacies of the modern cartographic ideal. Its claims for the inherent Harvey, 1989:
objectivity of all maps - excluding, of course, inadequate maps and mere 'map-like pragmatically, conte)
objects' - were now roundly trounced, so that it became possible to proclaim loudly required for the nece
that all maps are 'mental' maps, constitute propaganda, and are just plain 'subjective' Meanwhile, some a
(Axelsen and Jones, 1987). The personal, cognitive processes of mapping were clearly their academic status
 Matthew H. Edney 333

h David Woodward in distinguished from the socio-linguistic practices of making maps, while the
rand its history. For the ethnocentrism (some might say racism) underlying the ideal's confusion of the
and community in the cognitive with the social was exposed (Wood, 1993a, 1993b). The faith in cartography's
186). For the doctoral moral purity, already strained (Monmonier, 1991), was exploded by analyses of the
rlatic mapping of India social functions filled by maps (especially Harley, 1989, reproduced as Chapter 16 in
Ictually used the term this volume; Harley, 1988, 1990). New approaches were developed to read maps as
But as I worked on the culturally symbolic texts, drawing especially upon iconography (Blakemore and
, scholarship, I increas- Harley, 1980: 76-86; Harley, 1983; Harley, 1985) and semiotics (especially Wood and
mcept. Fels, 1986, reproduced as Chapter 14 in this volume). The fundamental definition of
napping practices and ' map' was recast along open, flexible and culturally sensitive lines (Harley and
history without resort- Woodward, 1987: xvi).
tual framework would Yet this incredible intellectual frenzy remained limited in extent and implication.
rtographic ideal. Other Having successfully exposed the mythic nature of modern cartography and demon-
)gress, the cartographic strated what cartography is not, there was little interest in developing any sense of the
f 'cartography' that the larger picture of how map making and map use have functioned and developed. This is
ommunities was - and perhaps the real point of contention for those map scholars who have resisted critical
nap studies. approaches. It is not that they have been unable to appreciate the critique; rather, they
r, if scholars employ as see focused textual interpretations and precise contextual analyses as having no
Ilutely clear about how relevance for their own understanding of progressive map history. As John Andrews
:Iy or qualitatively) and (2001: 31-32) complained, for example, an assessment of the power relations man-
Cartographic progress ifested in a given map or survey says little about the relationship of that work to other
cartographic works, before and since.
Critical map historians had hitherto lacked interest in the large sweep of map history
largely because of their intellectual trajectory (Edney, 2005a, 2011 b). For most of the
Critics twentieth century, map historians had worked entirely within the traditional paradigm
to make the content of old maps accessible to a variety of other scholars, ranging from
rtographies of ancient historians to diplomats. In doing so, they relied upon the overwhelming presumption of
ley were all one and the cartography's inherently progressive nature to situate each map into a broader context
Ie today as cartography and so give their studies broader intellectual significance; the self-evidently progressive
entiated societies. Such nature of cartography meant that map historians did not actually have to think about or
;ulture's pervasive and examine that context. As they adopted critical approaches and, as their work has been
Ii body of practice and augmented by that ofliterary and art historical scholars, the main focus of the post-1980
ed individuals for the socio-cultural paradigm of map history has remained on textual analysis, albeit now of
isation, that is applied the cultural meanings of old maps, supported by some analyses of social context. Close
I1d that exemplifies the study of cartographic context was discouraged by the manner in which many critical
cist' in character). The commentators, led in part by Harley (1988, 1989), were content to perpetuate an older,
nblance to the multiple transcendentalist criticism of modern maps as sterile and culturally impoverished
naps. (Roszak, 1972: 407-411; Tuan, 1977), especially in comparison to the evident cultural
lnd early 1990s to point sophistication and environmental awareness of non-modern cartographies (e.g.
claims for the inherent Harvey, 1989: 241-259; Duncan and Ley, 1993; but see Edwards, 2006: 1-15). More
ps and mere 'map-like pragmatically, contextual analyses have been discouraged by the difficulty and time
ble to proclaim loudly required for the necessary archival research.
e just plain 'subjective' Meanwhile, some academic cartographers, especially after 1950, had sought to justify
f mapping were clearly their academic status by studying cartography's professional history; while the resultant
334 Reflection Essay

internal paradigm of map history tended to be self-serving, it did produce many studies
of past map practices and it prompted many of the questions that would in the 1980s
displace the traditional paradigm (Edney, 2005b, 2011b). But the internal paradigm
declined rapidly after 1985 as academic cartographers increasingly focused on digital
technologies; the historical study of mapping processes and cartographic contexts lost
momentum. At the same time, academic cartography's fundamental concern to
improve map design so as to perfect the delivery of each (small-scale) map's message
served only to perpetuate the modern conviction that the cartographer is an empowered (EUR
individual; but now, while once it was argued that cartographers need to be properly
disciplined to maintain the integrity of maps (Wright, 1942), the choices made by the
individual cartographer became the source of each map's inevitable 'subjectivity'
(Black, 1997). Only Robert Rundstrom (1991) had tried to argue for a consideration
of ma pping practices as the core to a complex understanding of cartography that would
not depend upon a naive duality of objectivity versus subjectivity. His arguments about
the performative qualities of mapping have been broadly accepted by other scholars of
indigenous cartographies (Woodward and Malcolm Lewis, 1998: 1-10). But, because he
did not extend the crucially important implications of a processual analysis from
individuals functioning within small communities to the mapping activities of broader
impersonal societies, scholars of formal cartographies have failed to appreciate the
significance of his work.

19.2 JCartography without JJProgress'"

If there was a precise start to my formal conceptualization of cartography's constituent
modes, it was in my discussions with James Akerman in 1988 and 1989. At the same
time, I saw a number of scholars struggling with the divisions evident in the empirical
record between cartography's genres (Hodgkiss, 1981), archives (Belyea, 1992) and
spatial discourses (Thongchai, 1988). This was also when Penny Richards, then also in
the geography graduate programme at UW-Madison , produced an illuminating
visualization of the interactions of multiple streams and threads of spatial information
and perception concerning northern Pennsylvania in the eighteenth century, which she
likened to a loosely braided rope (Figure 19.1). Her complex diagram was the model for
my own, much cruder interpretation of the intersections, convergences and divergences
between cartographic modes (Figure 18.1). Finally, Rundstrom 's essay on a processual
approach prompted me to clarify and write up my ideas about cartography's discrete
constellations - which I now formally called modes - ofcommunities and practices. The
result was 'Cartography without "progress''' .
The essay's basic argument holds up very well. There is not one universal endeavour
of 'cartography'. That is a fiction created in the 1800s to distinguish and privilege
Western knowledge practices from those of other peoples as a key element of the
structures of sentiment that underpinned modern imperialism (Edney, 2009: 41-43).
Rather, there are many ways to conceptualize and graphically organize the spatial
complexity of the world between and within societies (Mukerji, 2002 came indepen- Figure 19.1 Penny Ric
dently to much the same conclusion). Each mode depends upon a functional in Richards, 1990: 12-1
 Matthew H. Edney 335

id produce many studies

that would in the 1980s
t the internal paradigm ""-,_JI &fHlt
'P1JS of
.ingly focused on digital
rtographic contexts lost

""""""", I t'..'f'!"" .;'r,,,,", i"'- I,:' <I"''' ,
Affair "ifofIt I Ra'l5an:.W.RM\ OF

mdamental concern to
rm-tP,
Ill-scale) m ap's m essage
;rapher is an empowered (E lJRDPf NJ

lers need to be properly

the choices made by the
inevitable ' subjectivity'
-gue for a consideration Cc. CIf., 1Iu JJJ tisirJ«; III lo:ia:Ws
'cartography that would ocr irodro w/tl. H.!
OJ (now
ty. His arguments about PJ.);
Jted by other scholars of Sd/(Onw hlo.c1
irr
8: 1-10). But. because he icYtlt ; Hoe 0,5f'.

rocessual analysis from Il1IfCd .n 'ndia.., ......., OII'idtt/ pictvn:. dlKirlj
ling activities of broader rcRtiCll!;, as illS1a.- 'iis -f1"/If€ Mt7VIf (s
'iltere. S"<'a!te )
failed to appreciate the knot tl>I: colon;/! '!>ou'/tout #ot pb',' od) -in( cI' ¥rt.
to Freon, CtImelJ\cw- is in
!niro:l!J,m&rf in: U>1"Irom"Stj b'1-iWvOWl rt1uso.l
In AI.); SIJa., it pfi"o.« meto\blrs, ir'(jLdi'1
Gjo.t'I'nOl' FitJ., !,dvl f;l\cthdal
ltd 01- eltorls r:l (" 'ih(
DOt rl'IIn, ihcSupt-in-
lr(:1iOltIJ' ·
f41rs,
'--- fk
lrtography's co nstituent <!'fa. m-jI,e later 511. '#roJ'fdI7l!
I and 1989. At the same
evident in the empirical
,----- I" ncmbm, -tI>eI.j fitd

fh'
!"D.t !¥s,I-
!ffin't of P..!. S0'l/. in
ives (Belyea, 1992) and
ly Richards. then also in
: PcJvll his <11-.
! b.;f
: f'Ol:/;c., 5t<we.. I"CI6 I"
I'"
lard
of dlljq,,-:'j M»O(r
VYdtr CJ oo:!U 'PA)'
.duced an illuminating hII(: wi'/{,
Is of spatial information If<h<>lI

'iI,( ICins

rl(90'

century. which she lialtd , *<It tw

Igram was the model for rtn,9< {....

:rgences and divergences

iI1( lXlo.l<.xlrel
1' S essay on a processual

Lt cartography's discrete not SQIH{
Th<<t .
nities and practices. The
::€mGMs/jf Am=I-\pr
me universa l endeavour MIT Wrrn VIOLENCE, r7103
istinguish and privilege
11('3.
LS a key element of the
n (Edney, 2009: 41-43).
lly organize the spatial
J
rji. 2002 came indepen- Figure 19.1 Penny Richa rds' 'Revised Diagram of Perce ption Trends, 1750-1762' (Source: Figure 1.3
Ids upon a functional in Richards, 1990: 12-13; Reproduced by permi ssion of Ms Ri chards .).
336 Reflection Essoy

conception of the world in which a set of institutions produces and consumes maps for supposed 'scientific n
specific purposes and at specific scales. Key implications include: construed only in 190
and might be said to
• mapping practices, from surveying technologies to symbolization strategies to the A second issue is t
formation of archives of knowledge, are all scale dependent; existing usages. I usee
(wno,> [place] + y,
• no single set of practices or epistemologies has ever been common to all mapping, supplant its modern n
even in the present day; modern commentato
phy' (the description (
• mapping practices are socially determined, or rather, to follow Bruno Latour's (2005) earth [YE]). In 1993,
reconfiguration of sociology, they are constitutive of social relations; them by using 'chol
subsequently decided
• each mode might exhibit a certain internal logic or dynamic, but the intersections regional and world m,
between modes are contingent; times. I have recently,
usefully about mapp
• intersections can occur in the production of maps, their circulation, or their mappings of territor
consumption; and (Edney, 2007a).
The key problem \
• the history of cartography becomes the history both of individual modes and of the terms of predefined:
intersections between them. survey. This approacl
complexity. A posts
I have found these principles to be crucial when synthesizing cartographic history variability of symboli
(Edney, 2007a, 2011 a). Indeed, my colleagues and I have designed the last three to be respected; each I
volumes of The History of Cartography (Harley and Woodward, 1987et seq.), which and external influenc
will cover the 250 years of cartography since 1650, in an encyclopaedic manner, around modes. That is, I shOt
the cartographic modes in each era. No other conceptual framework is able to manage had talked about the
the complex narratives of such a huge enterprise in a historically meaningful manner. 85-111 - and it was
In this respect, 'Cartography without "progress'" is a classic study. It still has great Foucauldian analysis
relevance and significance today. Indeed, comments by graduate students pursuing In working to intI':
studies in map history suggest that it has something of a cult following, even if it is several studies in tr
not cited as frequently as essays by Harley or Wood. However, fifteen years of of materials as a m
further research and reflection mean that I inevitably now see problems with how Darnton, 1982, McK,
I implemented the argument. stand as scholarly e)
In explaining how the modern cartographic ideal had evolved, I drew heavily on Eric the nature of maps: si
Forbes' (1980) elucidation of the eighteenth century concept of 'mathematical cos- to produce compellin
mography'. I presented mathematical cosmography as a mode in and of itself, one that 1-33) exploded the I
encompassed all other modes with the intent of creating a scale-less archive (Ed- tation; Warner (19
ney, 1994). I would now argue that mathematical cosmography is best considered as a are culturally constit
cultural ideal that coloured several modes, thereby giving the appearance of a unified had influentially cL
archive. Moreover, further analysis of the formation of the modern cartographic ideal processes by which p
indicates that it was created as a complex ideological palimpsest over the course of not for representations a
the eighteenth but rather the nineteenth century. In privileging mathematical cosmog- analysing the conSUI1
raphy I attempted to adhere to the common assertion (which unfortunately persists) By tracing the ci
that modern cartography acquired its idealized character as part of the 'Enlightenment through the market
Project' (Horkheimer and Adorno, 1972). That assertion correlates to cartography's which particular CO l

; and consumes maps for
ude:
lization strategies to the
.t;
ammon to all mapping,
Bruno Latour's (2005)
'IV
relations;
ic, but the intersections
Ir circulation, or their
'idual modes and of the
19 cartographic history
iesigned the last three
rd, 1987et seq.), which
paedic manner, around
'Work is able to manage
ly meaningful manner.
study. It still has great
late students pursuing
following, even if it is
vever, fifteen years of
problems with how Darnton, 1982, McKenzie, 1999). I have also found three works whose introductions
, r drew heavily on Eric
of 'mathematical cos-
n and of itself, one that
;cale-less archive (Ed-
is best considered as a
ppearance of a unified
lern cartographic ideal
over the course of not
nathematical cosmog-
tnfortunately persists)
of the 'Enlightenment
.Jates to cartography's
Matthew H. Edney 337
supposed 'scientific reformation' in the eighteenth century. Yet that reformation was
construed only in 1900 as the final rhetorical element of the modern cartographic ideal
and might be said to bind the whole together (Edney, 201Ib).
A second issue is that some of the labels r applied to modes have conflicted with
existing usages. I used 'topography' in its original meaning as the inscription of place
("(ono<; [place] + YQU<PELV [to write, describe]), but it has proved impossible to
supplant its modern meaning as both actual relief and the representation of relief. Early
modern commentators made much of the scale-based distinction between ' chorogra-
phy' (the description of a region [xoQo<;]) and 'geography' (the description of the entire
earth [YE]). In 1993, I sought to get around the problems of distinguishing between
them by using 'chorography' for the mode of mapping supra-personal space; I
subsequently decided the mode should be called geographical mapping. But maybe
regional and world mappings are different modes, or were so in some societies at certain
times. I have recently, therefore, begun to avoid specific terms and instead to write more
usefully about mappings of place, mappings of property, mappings of regions and
mappings of territory, which is to say mappings of regions as if they were places
(Edney, 2007a).
The key problem with 'Cartography without "progress'" is that I then thought in
terms of predefined structures (the modes) into which I sought to fit each map or
survey. This approach might have promoted coherency, but it has not dealt well with
complexity. A poststructural flexibility is far more appropriate: the variety and
variability of symbolic conventions and practices found in the empirical record need
to be respected; each mode needs to be able to be reconfigured through internal change
and external influence; there needs to be mechanisms to permit the formation of new
modes. That is, I should have thought in terms of discourse as well as practice. (Harley
had talked about the idea of discourse but did not properly develop it - Edney, 2005a:
85-111 - and it was not really until the later 1990s that I came to an appreciation of
Foucauldian analysis that satisfied me).
In working to integrate discourse and practice, I have been greatly influenced by
several studies in the history of the book that have focused on the circulation
of materials as a means to produce a 'social history of culture' (Hall, 1996: I;
stand as scholarly exemplars for any processual consideration of map history and
the nature of maps: simply replace the key term in each with 'mapping' or 'cartography'
to produce compelling arguments for properly poststructural map studies: Tagg (1988:
1-33) exploded the modern belief in photography as a 'natural' system of represen-
tation; Warner (1990: 1-33) demonstrated that the technologies of printing
are culturally constituted and do not determine modern culture (as McLuhan, 1962
had influentially claimed); Sigel (2002: 1-14) explored the legal and private
processes by which pornography has been constituted, which is to say how meanings
for representations are discursively created; Sigel also outlined effective strategies for
analysing the consumption of texts in poorly documented circumstances.
By tracing the circulation of maps through private and official channels and
through the market place, we can delineate precise spatial discourses through
which particular communities of producers and consumers constitute themselves
338 Reflection Essay

(Edney, 2008). More important, we can see how those maps were consumed in space all the way do'
conjunction with other kinds of texts (constituted from the written word, images, replicates the high m
physical monuments, rituals etc.) so that 'the map' loses its unfounded and entirely apparently scale-les!
unwarranted privilege as the means to represent spatial relations (consider, in this cartographic ideal.
respect, Meece, 2006). These precise spatial discourses are constituents of larger I have come to re
discourses that are grounded both in general practices of map production and inadequate, despite tI
consumption (i.e. modes) and in the contingent coincidences that permit specific into certain cultures;
practices to be transferred between discourses. Such analyses of the precise processes of need for a new agend
production, circulation and consumption permit us to say something meaningful and consumed, and t
about the development, spread and merging of conventions and practices. They permit conjunction with oth
us to consider fully the role of the consumer in defining a map's meaning without methodological state
having to get all bent out of shape about degrading agency of the map's producer, even reveal precise spatial
as they permit room for personal idiosyncrasy. produced and consu
and spatial variabilit)
to understand coml
19.3 Perspective intersections betweel
sional and disciplinal
These issues remain woefully unappreciated in map studies, whether historical or relationships, we mu
contemporary. The critique (Petchenik, 1977; Guelke, 1976, reproduced as Chapter one element of hum
10 of this volume) and subsequent abandonment of communication models did not standing from the gn
prevent map scholars from continuing to privilege the map maker as the primary than impose a priori
determinant of a map's meaning. Only recently have some sought to come to terms with reinterpretations of r
the manner in which map users imbue maps with meaning and the implications for world mapping in e
understanding mapping processes (Del Casino and Hanna, 2006; Kitchin and conventions (such as
Dodge, 2007; Edney, 2009). There remains little understanding ofthe regulated networks time and across mod
ofrepresentation (i.e. discourses) within which map makers and users function together. that many other pec
Admittedly it does take time and a certain creativity to study map circulation and map use
in an effective manner, but it is feasible. As a result, map scholars still rely instinctively on
concepts underpinned by the meta-narrative of cartographic progress. Further Readir
Some map scholars have thought through some of the implications of 'Cartography
without "progress'" (Monmonier and Puhl, 2000; Crampton, 2003: 33-36) and I am
Del Casino, V.J. and r
especially heartened that my understanding of modes forms the starting point of for interrogating n
Dodge, Kitchin and Perkins' (2009) manifesto for future map studies. This is because Critical Geographi.
effective map studies must be founded on the critical investigation of the complex plodes the modern
nature of maps and cartography. All too often, map scholars resort to idealized meaning of a map i
verities. Maps continue to be portrayed as individual interpretations based on and fast line betwt
idiosyncratic values and concerns. 'Cartography' is still depicted as a coherent and importantly, repres
singular practice, especially within the modern West. Indeed, most scholars insist on Edney, M.H. (2007)
referring to 'the map' as a meaningful concept, as if one unqualified concept can (eds. J.R. Akerma!
(A worked example
embrace the multiplicity of textual forms - performative and material, ephemeral or
have been pursued
durable - through which humans have sought to organize and simplify the world's
concise history of (
spatial complexity in order to comprehend and manipulate it. This seems to be
Edney, M.H. (2009) T
increasingly evident with the burgeoning creativity in online mapping, the emer- Mastery of Empire
gence of maps as promiscuous digital artefacts, and the apparent collapse of (An examination of
distinctions between modes (Dodge, Kitchin and Perkins, 2009: 221). The now \1\'estern culture, w
ubiquitous filmic convention of zooming in on the earth from some distant point in than they do betwt

aps were consumed in
written word, images,
unfounded and entirely
ltions (consider, in this
constituents of larger
f map production and
:es that permit specific
r the precise processes of
something meaningful
:l practices. They permit
nap's meaning without
Ie map's producer, even
, whether historical or
reproduced as Chapter
ication models did not
maker as the primary
It to Come to terms with
Id the implications for
a, 2006; Kitchin and
'the regulated networks
Isers function together.
:irculation and map use
till rely instinctively on
'ogress.
ations of 'Cartography
W03: 33-36) and I am
the starting point of
tudies. This is beca use
of the complex
rs resort to idealized
rpretations based on
ed as a coherent and
lOSt scholars insist on
lualified concept can
laterial, ephemeral or
simplify the world's
it. This seems to be
mapping, the emer-
pparent collapse of
009: 221). The now
orne distant point in
Matthew H. Edney 339
space all the way down to a street of field, and even further down to cellular levels,
replicates the high modernity of Powers ofTen (Morrison et al., 1982) to celebrate the
apparently scale-less character of spatial data and so re-establish the modern
cartographic ideal.
I have come to realize that the socio-cultural study of maps as texts is ultimately
inadequate, despite the amount of excellent scholarship that has generated true insights
into certain cultures and societies and their spatial concerns (Edney, 2007b). There is a
need for a new agenda, to explore the practices by which maps are produced, circulated
and consumed, and the spatial discourses that require and promote those practices in
conjunction with other representational strategies. This is no small task and defies easy
methodological statement. We might trace how map artefacts physically circulate to
reveal precise spatial discourses; within those discourses, we can explore how maps are
produced and consumed in conjunction with other texts, and we can model the social
and spatial variability in the discourse's participants. We can group discourses together
to understand common and differential cartographic practices, and so trace the
intersections between modes. Rather than wall off maps and mapping behind profes-
sional and disciplinary barriers and privilege 'the map' as the means to represent spatial
relationships, we must explore the ways in which maps are produced and consumed as
one element of human spatial practice. It is an approach that seeks to build under-
standing from the ground up, within a broad and flexible conceptual framework, rather
than impose a priori presumptions and meta-narratives. There is thus room for major
reinterpretations of map history (for example, what was the relationship of regional and
world mapping in eighteenth century Europe?) and for precise studies of individual
conventions (such as of the changing signification of the compass rose as deployed over
time and across modes). This is where I see my future work heading. I very much hope
that many other people will be joining me.
Further Reading
Del Casino, V.J. and Hanna, S.P. (2006) Beyond the 'binaries': A methodological intervention
for interrogating maps as representational practices. ACME: An International E-Journal for
Critical Geographies, 4( 1),34-56 http://vofww.acme-journal.org/voI4IVDCSPH.pdf. (Ex-
plodes the modern cartographic ideal by showing, inter alia, that once we accept that the
meaning of a map is re-established each time it is read, it becomes impossible to draw a hard
and fast line between map production and consumption, author and reader, and, most
importantly, representation and practice.)
Edney, M.H. (2007) Mapping parts of the world, in Maps: Finding Our Place in the World
(eds. J.R. Akerman and R.W. Karrow), University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 117-157
(A worked example, with many details, of the primary modes of cartographic activity, as they
have been pursued across multiple societies and several millennia, to provide an effective,
concise history of cartography.)
Edney, M.H. (2009) The irony of imperial mapping, in The Imperial Map: Cartography and the
Mastery of Empire (ed. J.R. Akerman), University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, 11-45.
(An examination of the discursive construction of both 'empire' and 'cartography' in modern
Western culture, which begins by arguing that mapping practices vary more between modes
than they do between political contexts.)
340 Reflection Essay

Kitchin, R. and Dodge, M. (2007) Rethinking Maps. Progress in Human Geography, 31(3), Edney, M.H. (2007b)
331-344. (A n effective argument for the need to consider the role of the reader/consumer in bibliography to the
creating map meaning, and therefore for a discursive approach to cartographic analysis. ) of the Map and Geog
Rundstrom, R.A. (1991) Mapping, postmodernism, indigenous people and th e changing direction oclc.orglcoordinate:
of North American cartography. Cartographica , 28(2),1-12. (The crucial essay for under- Edney, M.H. (2008) J(
standing the variety of strategies for creating map texts, whether inscriptive ('written') or publication of offi(
incorporative ('performed'), and advocating a processual approach to studying cartography.) Edney, M.H. (2009) .
and the Mastery of
11-45.
Edney, M.H. (2011a)
References the Atlantic World, (
.r<

Oxford.
Andrews, J.H. (2001) Introduction: Meaning, knowledge, and power in the map philosophy of
Edney, M.H. (2011b)
J B Harley, in The New Nature of Maps: Essays in the History of Cartography (ed. P. Laxton),
Knowing the Field: S
The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD, pp. 1-32.
(eds. c.J. Ries, K.H
Axelsen, B. and Jones, M. (1987) Are all maps mental maps? GeoJournal, 14,447-464 .
Edwards, J. (2006) Wr
Belyea, B. (1992) Images of power: Derrida/Foucau lt/ Harley. Cartographica, 29(2), 1-9.
Circles in the Sand,
Black, J. (1997) Maps and Politics, Reaktion Books, London.
Forbes, E.G. (1980) M
Blakemore, M.J. and Harley, J.B. (1980) Concepts in the History of Cartography: A Review and
Historiography ofEj
Perspective, Cartographica Monograph 26, University of Toronto Press, Toronto. University Press, C
Crampton, J.W. (2003) The Political Mapping of Cyberspace, University of Chicago Press,
Guelke, L. (1976) Cart
Ch icago, IL.
Cartographer, 13(2;
Darnton, R. (1982) What is the history of books? Daedalus: Proceedings of the American Academy
H all , D.D. (1996) Cult;
of Arts and Sciences, III (3),65-83. Press, Amherst, MJ
Del Casino, V.J. and Hanna, S.P. (2006) Beyo nd the 'binaries': A methodological intervention for
H arley, J.B. (1983) M
interrogating maps as representational practices. ACME: An International E-Journal for
1500-1650: Historic
Critical Geographies, 4( 1),34- 56, http://www.acme-journal.org/voI4IVDCSPH.pdf. Harley,J.B. (1985)The
Dodge, M., Kitchin, R. and Perkins, C. (2009) Mapping modes, methods and moments:
Intemazionale di St,
A manifesto for map studies, in Rethinking Maps: New Frontiers in Cartographic Theory
Ital iana, Rome, pp.
(eds. M. Dodge, R. Kitchin and C. Perkins), Routledge, London, pp. 220-243.
Ha rley, J.B. (1988) M:
Duncan, J.S. and Ley, D. (1993) Introduction, in Place, Culture, Representation (eds. J.S. Duncan
the Symbolic Repre.
and D. Ley), Routled ge, London, pp. 1-21 .
S. Daniels), Cambr
Edney, M.H. (1986) Politics, science, and government mapping policy in the United States,
Harley, J.B. (1989) I
1800-1925. The American Cartographer, 13,295-306.
Chapter 16 of this
Edney, M.H. (1990) Mapping and Empire: British Trigonometrical Surveys in India and the
H arley, J.B. (1990) Ca
European Concept ofSystematic Survey, 1799-1843. Unpublished PhD Thesis, Department of H arley, J.B. and Wood
Geography, University of Wisconsin-Madison.
and the
Edney, M.H. (1994) Mathematical cosmography and the social ideology of British cartography,
Chicago.
1780-1820. Imago Mundi , 46,101-116.
Harvey, D. (1989) n
Edney, M.H. (1997) Mapping an Empire: The Geographical Construction of British India,
Change, Blackwell,
1765-1843, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Hodgkiss, A.G. (1981)
Edney, M .H. (2005a) The Origins and Development of f.B. Harley's Cartographic Theories,
Dawson, Folkeston
Cartographica Monograph 54; Cartographica, 40( 112), University of Toronto Press, Toronto.
Horkheimer, M. and P
Edney, M.H. (2005b ) Putting 'cartography' into the history of cartography: Arthur H. Robinson,
Herder and HerdeJ
David Woodward, and the creation of a discipline. Cartographic Perspectives, 51, pp. 14-29
Kitchin, R. and Dod E
(Reprinted with corrections in eds. S. Engel- Di Mauro an d H. Bauder, eds (2008), A Reader in
331-344.
Critical Geographies, Praxis ePress, www.praxis-epress.o rg, pp. 711-728 ). Latour, B. (2005)
Edney, M.H. (2007a ) Mapping parts of the world, in Maps: Finding Our Place in the World
University Press, C
(eds. J.R. Akerman and R.W. Karrow), University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp. 117-157.

uman Geography, 31(3),
Jf the reader/consumer in
cartographic analysis.)
.nd the changing direction
crucial essay for under-
inscriptive ('written') or
to studying cartography.)
.n the map philosophy of
tography (ed. P. Laxton),
'nal, 14, 447-464.
aphica, 29(2), 1-9.
'rtography: A Review and
Press, Toronto.
ersity of Chicago Press,
ofthe American Academy
lological intervention for
ernational E-Journal for
4IVDCSPH. pd f.
nethods and moments:
in Cartographic Theory
'P. 220-243.
1tation (eds. J.S. Duncan
:y in the United States,
'IrveyS in India and the
) Thesis, Department of
I of British cartography,
Iction of British India,
Cartographic Theories,
Press, Toronto.
ly: Arthur H. Robinson,
spectives, 51, pp. 14-29
eds (2008), A Reader in
-728) .
Jur Place in the World
Chicago, pp. 117-157.
Matthew H. Edney 341
Edney, M.H. (2007b) Recent trends in the history of cartography: A selective, annotated
bibliography to the English-language literature [Version 2.IJ. Coordinates: Online Journal
of the Map and Geography Round Table, American Library Association, Series B, 6, http://purl.
oclc.org/ coordi nates/b6. pdf.
Edney, M.H. (2008) John Mitchell's map of North America (1755): A study of the use and
publication of official maps in eighteenth-century Britain. Imago Mundi, 60(1),63-85.
Edney, M.H. (2009) The irony of imperial mapping, in The Imperial Map: Cartography
and the Mastery of Empire (ed . J.R. Akerman), University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp.
11-45.
Edney, M.H. (201Ia) Knowledge and cartography in the early Atlantic, in Oxford Handbook on
the Atlantic World, c. 1450-1820 (eds N. Canny and P.D . Morgan), Oxford University Press,
Oxford .
Edney, M.H. (201Ib) Field/Map: An historiographic review and reconsideration, in Ways of
Knowing the Field: Studies in the History and Sociology ofScientific Field Work and Expeditions
(eds. c.r. Ries, K.H. Nielsen and M. Harbsmeier), Aarhus University Press, Aarhus.
Edwards, J. (2006) Writing, Geometry and Space in Seventeenth-Century England and America:
Circles in the Sand, Routledge, London.
Forbes, E.G. (1980) Mathematical cosmography, in The Ferment of Knowledge: Studies in the
Historiography of Eighteenth-Century Science (eds. G.S. Rousseau and R. Porter), Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, pp. 417-448 .
Guelke, L. (1976) Cartographic communication and geographic understanding. The Canadian
Cartographer, 13(2),107-122 (Reproduced as Chapter JO of this volume).
Hall, D.D. (1996) Cultures ofPrint: Essays in the History of the Book, University of Massachusetts
Press, Amherst, MA.
Harley, J.B. (1983) Meaning and ambiguity in Tudor cartography, in English Map-Making,
1500-1650: Historical Essays (ed. S. Tyacke), The British Library, London, pp. 22-45.
Harley, J.B. (1985) The Iconology of early maps, in Imago et Mensura Mundi: Atti del IX Congresso
Internazionale di Storia della Cartografia, vol. I (ed. c.c. Marzoli), Istituto della Enciclopedia
Italiana, Rome, pp. 29-38.
Harley, J.B. (1988) Maps, knowledge, and power, in The Iconography of Landscape: Essays on
the Symbolic Representation, Design and Use of Past Environments (eds. D. Cosgrove and
S. Daniels), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 277-312.
Harley, J.B. (1989) Deconstructing the map. Cartographica, 26(2),1-20 (Reproduced as
Chapter 16 of this volume.)
Harley, J.B. (1990) Cartography, ethics and social theory. Cartographica, 27(2),1-23.
Harley, J.B. and Woodward, D. (1987) Cartography in Prehistoric, Ancient, and Medieval Europe
and the Mediterranean, vol. I, The History of Cartography, University of Chicago Press,
Chicago.
Harvey, D. (1989) The Condition of Postmodernity: An Enquiry into the Origins of Cultural
Change, Blackwell, Oxford.
Hodgkiss, A.G. (1981) Understanding Maps: A Systematic Enquiry of their Use and Development,
Dawson, Folkestone, UK.
Horkheimer, M. and Adorno, T.W. (J 972) The Dialectic ofEnlightenment (Trans. J. Cumming),
Herder and Herder, New York.
Kitchin, R. and Dodge, M. (2007) Rethinking maps. Progress in Human Geography, 31(3),
331-344.
Latour, B. (2005) Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network- Theory, Oxford
University Press, Oxford.
342 Reflection Essoy

McKenzie, D.F. (1999) Bibliography and the Sociology of Texts, 2nd edn, Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge.
McLuhan, M. (1962) The Gutenberg Galaxy, University of Toronto Press, Toronto.
Meece, S. (2006) A bird's eye view - of a Leopard's Spots: The (:atalhoyi.ik 'map' and the
development of cartographic representation in prehistory. Anatolian Studies, 56, 1-16.
Monmonier, M. (1991) How to Lie with Maps, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Monmonier, M. and Puhl, E. (2000) The way cartography was: A snapshot of mapping and map
use in 1900. Historical Geography, 28,157-178.
20
Morrison, P., Morrison, P.and the Office of Charles and Ray Eames (1982) Powers ofTen: About
the Relative Size of Things in the Universe, W.H. Freeman, San Francisco.
Betweel1
Mukerji, C. (2002) Cartography, entrepreneurialism, and power in the reign of Louis XIV:
The case of the Canal du Midi, in Merchants & Marvels: Commerce, Science, and Art in Early Deconstl
Modem Europe (eds. P.H. Smith and P. Findlen), Routledge, New York, pp. 248-276.
Petchenik, B.B. (1977) Cognition in cartography, in The Nature ofCartographic Communication,
Cartographica Monograph 19 (ed. L. Guelke), B.V. Gutsell, Toronto, pp. 117-128.
Shawna(
Richards, P.L. (1990) Perception and Cartographic Depiction in the Eighteenth Century:
Pennsylvania's Northern Frontier, 1750-1782. Unpublished MA Thesis, Department of
Land an(
Geography, University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Roszak, T. (1972) Where the Wasteland Ends: Politics and Transcendence in Postindustrial Society,
Doubleday, Garden City, NY.
Canada
Rundstrom, R.A. (1991) Mapping, postmodernism, indigenous people and the changing Matthew Sparke 1
direction of North American cartography. Cartographica, 28(2),1-12.
Sigel, L.Z. (2002) Governing Pleasures: Pornography and Social Change in England, 1815-1914,
Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, NJ.
Tagg, J. (1988) The Burden ofRepresentation: Essays on Photographies and Histories, University of Abstract
Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, MN . Understood as the f
Thongchai, W. (1988) Siam Mapped: A History of the Geo-Body of Siam. Unpublished PhD dithit (the last kno
Thesis, University of Sydney. essential and Euroce
Tuan, Y.- F. (1977) Space and Place: The Perspective ofExperience, University of Minnesota Press, the 'new' -ness and e
Minneapolis, MN. traditional treatmer
Warner, M. (1990) The Letters of the Republic: Publication and the Public Sphere in Eighteenth- Canadian national h
Century America, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA. dominant modes of
Wood, D. (1993) The fine line between mapping and mapmaking. Cartographica, 30(4),50-60. order for such disru
Wood, D. (1993b) Maps and mapmaking. Cartographica, 30(1),1-9. logizing and decon
Wood, D. and Fels, J. (1986) Designs on signs: Myth and meaning in maps. Cartographica, distinguished in sch
23(3),54-103 (Reproduced as Chapter 14 of this volume.)
Woodward, D. and Malcolm Lewis, G. (1998) Cartography in the Traditional African, American,
[Colonial bounda
Arctic, Australian, and Pacific Societies, vol. 2, Book 3, The History of Cartography, University
illustrations of hal
of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Wright, J.K. (1942) Map makers are human . The Geographical Review, 32, 527-544.
in the minds of sta
first step in the app
critical in choreogi

l Originally published: 15

At the time of publicatio

University ofWashingtOl

Classics in Cartography: 1
© 2011 John Wiley & So