Mapping History

Mapping Freedom
Edward L. Ayers, University of Virginia
June 2007

    My first impression, when reading this essay for the first time? “A historical article that opens with a quote from Bob Dylan, I think I’ll read on.” I do not often say this, but I really enjoyed reading this article, not just because of the reference to Bob Dylan but because the concept being discussed was something which I have thought about before but never considered to be an academically shared opinion. 

    In previous assignments for our digital history class we dealt with text analysis, so it was easy to comprehend the idea of visually interpreting language. In an earlier blog I examined the word frequency in the “I Have a Dream” speech by Martin Luther King Junior and was then able to make a visual image of the most common words that appeared in the text. Presumably using a similar method Edward L. Ayers explains in his Mapping Freedom article, how visually presenting text and language has created new arguments in relation to the American Civil War. His example is that in primary sources from the period and as well as in the historical research that engages with it, the keyword changes from “slavery” to “emancipation” as the war draws to a close. This shows the subtle and slow change in attitudes after the war which would otherwise go unnoticed. 

    Ayers explains the problems with narrative history which most people do not recognise; that linearity only shows one direction and neglects alternative histories, that presenting the beginning point and ultimate destination as inevitably connected, makes the journey less interesting. This is probably a widely accepted opinion, as this is presumably why we now have courses in post modernism, women’s history and gender history. I think that what Ayers is trying to say is that presenting history in visual form will allow for all the subcategories and minority accounts or opinions, to be given a place in wider narratives. 

    The concept of history as a map is invaluable in my opinion. He says that using history as a map to determine our own place in time can be the difference between history becoming a dormant field or an active one. I think that this method can also be useful to those with a photographic memory and those who understand things better when they are presented visually. The words “relief map” bring to mind images of a primary school map of Ireland, where the mountains around the edges and the flat land in the middle make Ireland appear like a saucer. I could not for the life of me understand how a map of Ireland could look like a saucer, obviously it was in reference to the high edges and flat centre and not the actual shape. Anecdote aside, I think the idea of history as a relief map is genius, all orthodox narratives jump from one significant event to the next. I am familiar with the idea of co-ordinates in personal history, for example associating a particular song with a certain memory, but never considered that this could be applied to wider histories in terms of trends, patterns and connections between certain events and circumstances. 

    It is interesting to note that if we widen the “map” we use to represent history, we can see how little we know about the greater scheme of things due to the fact that we are so focused on our specialities. Even slightly broadening the scope of my own research will show aspects which I am unintentionally omitting, facts that could perhaps be used to give context to my arguments and make my extremely centralised topic of the Limerick Leader in society a little bit more rounded.

    Ayers’ overall argument is that visual and spatial patterns will help to make the past easier to understand and therefore our interpretations more accurate. I think that there are other ways to apply this concept that do not involve the idea of the relief map; personally I view the days of the week as a continuous bar chart with surges denoting every weekend, but that’s just me!