The Digital Turn: How Digital Tools and Visualization Methods Shape Place History

3D View of San Juan - Marshall Neighborhood

Digital history tools and methods have shaped spatial analysis, data analysis, and visualization of that data in profound ways. Many discussions of digital history focus on data analysis versus visualization. However, the two are more complementary than divergent. I have found data analysis tools often generate interesting visuals, and the process of creating visualizations of data analysis often creates new insight into the data creating new pathways for further analysis.

Straightforward examples of this are charts and graphs. The term visualization can seem complicated until you realize that it is simply referring to rendering data in a visual format rather than text. One of the most ubiquitous types of visualization is the data chart. Most people inside and outside of academia have seen and often created charts for school, work, or personal projects. Charts have a unique ability to render complex data accessibly.

Currently, I am conducting a place history of a small north-central Phoenix, Arizona neighborhood. I will be using charts as a powerful visualization tool to demonstrate factors driving change over time in this neighborhood. The neighborhood I am analyzing was part of the post-war housing boom that expanded Phoenix northward rapidly in the decades following WWII. Multiple factors propelled the expansion of the city northward, however a prominent driver of this expansion was affluent Phoenicians seeking larger homes on larger lots during the post-war economic expansion. As such, class factors heavily into the history of north-central Phoenix neighborhoods. Given this, consider the following chart:

Median Income 1990 to 2013 in North central Phoenix, Arizona
Median Income 1990 to 2013 in North central Phoenix, Arizona

Although outside of the specific time period I am analyzing for my place history, this chart (based on census data from socialexplorer.com), visualizes median income changes in inflation adjusted 2013 dollars over the 1990 to 2013 time period. It focuses on the census tracts north of McDowell Avenue and south of Northern Avenue in Phoenix. Pre-war, Phoenix ended at Thomas Avenue (Census tract 1118). Known as the Willow neighborhood, census tract 1118 has historically been wealthy. Census tracts 1105, 1171, and 1088 north of town pre-war were largely farming areas or locations where cheap lots could be purchased for home building. Post war, intense housing expansion began in census tracts 1075 (Medlock Place), 1066 (San Juan Marshall and Rancho Solano), and 1062. Medlock Place and Rancho Solano were marketed to wealthy homebuyers looking for larger lots and bigger homes in the late 40s and early 50s. Census tract 1062 featured even larger properties built in the 60s. Over time, the wealthy leapt over census tracts 1105, 1171, and 1088 seeking larger and larger properties northward. The data visualized in the chart suggests the effects of this leap frogging pattern persisted into the present with 1075, 1066, and 1062 retaining their wealthy inhabitants and 1105, 1171, and 1088 remaining poorer. The effects of income inequality over the last twenty-five years can also be seen as the richer census tracts largely retain and grow their wealth whereas median income in the poorer census tracts stays flat or declines.

This chart is a straightforward example of how data visualization can make complex trends readily accessible. For my place history, I intend to use charts to visualize aspect of change in the neighborhood like the ones shown in this chart. A specific example I am working on is charting the quantity of lots for sale as expressed in newspaper ads in the Phoenix Republic each year from 1945 to 1985 to show the size and pace of the post-war housing boom. Another, more narrow example, is to similarly chart the number of ads over time for lots and homes available in San Juan – Marshall to visualize how quickly the neighborhood filled in.

3D visualizations are another example of digital visualizations both making complex data accessible and creating new insight into the data. Although some may be surprised that 3D modeling is used in digital history, many historians have utilized 3D modeling techniques to great effect. The St. Paul’s Cathedral Project hosted by North Carolina State University is an example. The project recreated St. Paul’s Cathedral from the early seventeenth century using 3D modeling. The recreation allows viewers to experience what worship and preaching at the cathedral was like in that time. Specially, the project recreated the physical environment in existence when parishioners heard John Donne’s sermon for Gunpowder Day on November 5th, 1622 in Paul’s Churchyard located in the center courtyard of the structure. The project used 3D modeling to recreate both the physical space and texture mapping to emulate the building surfaces. This data was then used to acoustically model the space so that a recording of Donne’s speech could be made that would sound like how parishioners heard it during the actual sermon centuries ago. Recreating an environment like this using 3D modeling tools is particularly useful when you consider that the structure in question no longer exists. Old St. Paul’s cathedral burned down centuries ago. It is only accessible to researchers and the public through this virtual modeling project.

I am using 3D modeling in my place history as well. Here is an example:

3D View of San Juan - Marshall Neighborhood
A 3D View of the San Juan – Marshall neighborhood from the Setter Farm looking west.

Based on an aerial photograph from 1949, this 3D scene looks west from the modern intersection of San Juan Avenue and Central Avenue in Phoenix. From this vantage point, The Setter Farm is in the foreground with the Otter Farm to the South and the San Miguel subdivision in the background to the far west. The San Miguel subdivision was the first part of the San Juan – Marshall neighborhood plated and built. From a modern perspective, this entire area is all homes now. It is natural to assume it has always been like that. As I built this model and analyzed it from various perspectives, I settled on the point-of-view shown as particularly insightful. From this vantage point, the agricultural orientation of the area is quite prominent. Viewed from the San Miguel side, the model view seems to suggest a suburban dominance. However, viewed from the Setter Farm side you see that in 1949 agriculture still dominated the area. By 1959 this was no longer the case as all the farms are gone.

This is an example of how data visualizations can create new insights that lead to new avenues for research. Given the insights gleaned from this model, I intend to build further models off of newer aerial photographs to see what these visualizations tell me about the changes the area experienced over time.

As these examples illustrate, digital analysis tools and digital visualizations work together in a complementary fashion. The tools allow for data creation and analysis that often yields insightful visualizations. The visualizations, however, can also lead to new perspectives and avenues for further research. This powerful combination is continually shaping the practice of history.

 

“Virtual St Paul’s Cathedral Project.” Virtual St Paul’s Cathedral Project. Accessed November 20, 2016. https://vpcp.chass.ncsu.edu/

“Median Household Income.” Social Explorer. Accessed November 20, 2016. http://census.socialexplorer.com/pop-flash/

The Digital History Turn

Aerial photo of neighborhood in 1949

Web sites, blogs, and other online publishing platforms are nothing new, at least, anymore. Although some may still view the web as “new,” in reality it has grown old. First proposed by a researcher at CERN in 1989, the first web page was online by 1990. That makes the web approximately 36 years old. The Internet itself is older still. Even if you date ubiquitous web publishing to the “web 2.0” era of social media, those platforms aren’t new anymore either. Blogger.com came online August 23, 1999. WordPress came online May 27th, 2003. WordPress, the baby of the blogging bunch, is over 13 years old, which is centuries in technology time. Given these dates, many of us have been publishing online for some time now.

Which brings us to the digital humanities, and more specifically, digital history. How you view the meaning of the word “digital” in this context relates to whether you still see digital technologies as “new.” A layman might be forgiven for assuming that “digital history” refers to the history of digital technology. This layman might expect a digital historian to be working on a book about the founding of the Internet, not the use of digital tools to create or distribute historical knowledge. However, in much of the scholarly world, the qualifying term “digital” in digital history is used to denote using digital tools in the research or publication process. From some perspectives, this is used to separate the use of technology in the production of history as different from “the regular way” of doing historical research. This distinction often raises concerns with how digital technologies disrupt the traditional scholarly research model and pose problematic issues[i].

However, there is much evidence to suggest that many historians are embracing digital tools and methods for research and publication. Oral historian Michael Frisch, in his article “Oral History and the Digital Revolution: Toward a Post Documentary Sensibility” discusses how digital tools are creating new capabilities for oral historians that improve the practice of oral history. In his article he describes how digital tools restore the “voice” of oral history through providing means of viewing the audio and video recordings directly, but also democratize oral history by disintermediating it from the documentary producer or historian who was the exclusive gatekeeper shaping the oral history prior to digital tools and platforms.[ii] A great example of this is the Visual History Archive produced by the USC Shoah Foundation at the University of Southern California. This archive houses oral histories of people who were witnesses to or people who lived through acts of genocide. This powerful primary source material would lose much of its potency if only available in text format as a transcript. However, through this archive researchers and the general public can review these audio-visual based oral history primary source materials directly. The archive also provides powerful digital tools for transcript search, indexed terms hyperlinking, and full biographical, timeline, and geo-location data.[iii]

Another emerging area of the use of digital tools for research involves Geographic Information Systems. Originally developed for urban planners, historians have begun to adopt tools like GIS software to examine historical events spatially. This “spatial turn,” in many cases has generated new narratives for well-documented historical events that would not be possible using conventional methods. These include Dr. Anne Knowles work recreating the landscape of Gettysburg as it existed in 1863 to show what General Robert E. Lee could and could not see from his vantage point during the Battle of Gettysburg and providing new insight into why he made the decisions he did.[iv]

The other area where historians are embracing digital tools and methods is in the distribution of historical research. In this arena, print has reigned supreme. Whether in academic journals or popular histories, printed text has been the primary delivery method. This is beginning to change however. Mark Sample, a professor of Digital Studies at Davidson College in Charlotte North Carolina aptly stated in an article on his blog that “The heart of the digital humanities is not the production of knowledge; it’s the reproduction of knowledge.”[v] In other words, digital history is about sharing research and data with others. A great example of this is the Spatial Humanities web site published by the Institute for Enabling Geospatial Scholarship at the University of Virginia Library. The site is a repository housing information on what spatial humanities is, how it is done, and listing various spatial humanities projects. Many of the projects listed on the site, in turn, are additional examples of historians using digital platforms and tools to share their work with a larger audience[vi].

In my own historical research, I utilize digital methods and tools for both research and distribution. My current project is a place history for a small neighborhood in North-Central Phoenix, Arizona. This neighborhood was developed as part of the post-war housing boom in Phoenix. This is a map of what the neighborhood looks like today:

Neighborhood Map
Google map view of the neighborhood today.

This is a view of the neighborhood from the late-1940s:

Aerial photo of neighborhood in 1949
This is an aerial photo of the subject of my place history from 1949

My research to date has revealed discrepancies between the official Maricopa County Assessors Office records for the property in this neighborhood and other primary documents such as historical photos like the one above and newspaper articles from the late-1940s. The newspaper articles and photos suggest the neighborhood is older than the county records state.

This is an example of how digital tools and archives can be used to create new knowledge that traditional methods would struggle to deliver. Cross-referencing hundreds of county property records with multiple decades of newspapers articles and aerial photographs all in paper format would be prohibitive. With digital tools, however, it can be done efficiently and leads to both new knowledge and insight into historical methods.

In my case, this led me to think considerably about why these discrepancies might exist. Here is a podcast where I discuss issues with property record primary sources and the cross referencing methodologies I found effective in dealing with these issues:

I plan to use my blog to distribute new finding on my place history (as well as other projects), but also to discuss issues and trending topics in historical research and methodology like the subject of my podcast above.

For the humanities in general, and history specifically, digital tools and methods posts both new challenges and new opportunities. Beyond mere efficiency gains, these tools allow us to consider more sources in novel ways than we ever could before. Likewise, they allow us to share these digitally powered findings to a much larger audience enhancing our ability to share and discuss emerging historical thought. This sharing aspect alone will be transformative, since it gets at an issue gnawing at the side of the humanities for years: Relevance. No longer confined solely to academic journals, digital platforms promise to unbind work in the humanities, freeing it to engage with the world widely.

[i] Anne Burdick et al, Digital Humanities, (Cambridge: The MIT Press, 2012), 15-16.

[ii] Michael Frisch, “Oral History and the Digital Revolution: Toward a Post Documentary Sensibility.” In The Oral History Reader, edited by Robert Perks and Alistair Thomson, 102-114. New York: Routledge, 2006.

[iii] “Visual History Archive.” USC Shoah Foundation. Accessed October 30, 2016, https://sfi.usc.edu/vha.

[iv] Patricia Cohen, “Digital Maps Are Giving Scholars the Historical Lay of the Land,” New York Times, Last modified July 26, 2011, http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/27/arts/geographic-information-systems-help-scholars-see-history.html.

[v] Mark Sample, “The digital humanities is not about building, it’s about sharing,” Samplereality.com, Accessed October 30, 2016, http://www.samplereality.com/2011/05/25/the-digital-humanities-is-not-about-building-its-about-sharing/

[vi] “Spatial Humanities.” Institute for Enabling Geospatial Scholarship. Accessed October 30, 2016, http://spatial.scholarslab.org/.

Hello world!

Map Of Baltimore, Maryland, 1836

Hello World, and welcome to the introductory post on my blog.

I currently work in the field of interactive media development and online publishing, but I am also a history graduate student at Arizona State University. I am looking to transition into working as a historian in the future.

My research interests include the Civil War Era, transportation networks, and media representation of current and historical events. Along that line, in a recent class, I wrote a research paper on how Civil War era newspapers portrayed the question of formal recognition of the CSA by Britain, and how it differed from the actual diplomatic reality of the time.

Related to one of my research interests, here is an article from Time written by my Civil War Era professor Dr, Calvin Schermerhorn. It discusses how Baltimore, Maryland’s current racial troubles recently brought to the surface during the Freddie Gray incident have a history rooted in Slavery dating back before the Civil War.

Here is a link to the article: http://time.com/3901537/baltimore-slavery-history/

Street map image (by Lucas Fielding) shows Baltimore, Maryland, 1836. (Photo by Buyenlarge/Getty Images)