1
10
3
-
https://s3.amazonaws.com/atg-prod-oaas-files/hist1952/original/b98352ff68f888abdce015bd55a6752a.jpeg
e898189b69159b5695924d77f37fd0ac
Historical Map
Fill out as many of these fields as possible. Required Dublin core fields include Title, Description, Publisher
Cartographer
J.N. Henriot
Engraver
J.N. Henriot
Type
individual map, atlas sheet, book figure, part of bound collection, born-digital
Individual map
Call Number
G5834.P3 1855 .H4
Digital Repository
http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:FHCL:5168923?buttons=y
Date Published
1855
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Nouveau plan complet de Paris avec ses fortifications: divisé en 12 arrondissements & 48 sections avec les principaux monuments en elévation, donnant la distance légale en mètres des forts détachés aux murs d'enceinte & aux murs d'octroi indiquant la population & les fêtes patronales des environs de Paris
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
J.N. Henriot
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
A. Bes et F. Dubreuil
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1855
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
map
administrative buildings
administrative divisions
artistic embellishment
canals
churches
fortifications
France
memory
monuments
Paris
railways
urban environment
urban growth over time
urban limits
urban space
-
https://s3.amazonaws.com/atg-prod-oaas-files/hist1952/original/a7b20e092c1c0dbd6d28a858eb651736.jpg
a142eac7eb8628db0a01997bbe712eb8
Map layer
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Fortifications
Description
An account of the resource
The map takes great care to pick out Paris’ fortifications. The Murs d’Enceinte, walls built in the 1840s around Paris are highlighted in orange, and forts in the Paris region, which would not fit onto the map, are included with lines indicating truncated distances. While I could find one other civilian map of Paris that similarly emphasised fortifications, the only other ones to do so are military maps. Furthermore, the Murs d’Enceinte were unpopular in Paris, as it was suspected they had been built to hem Paris in rather than to defend it. This layer is interesting when considered in relation to the railways and monuments, and the political developments in France at the time: the map was published three years after the establishment of the Second Empire, which used the memory of Napoleonic military glory to legitimise itself. In elevating Paris’ military fixtures to the level of public monuments, this map seems to be making (or perhaps accepting or reflecting) an argument for the importance of the military to Paris and to France.
military
national identity
national politics
repression
truncation of distance
urban limits
-
https://s3.amazonaws.com/atg-prod-oaas-files/hist1952/original/1555e2e917cb91f842a863af58b34453.jpg
cf968d254313ee88317954b2c87d5990
Map layer
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Administrative Distinctions
Description
An account of the resource
This layer consists of the boundaries of the Arrondissements (administrative districts of Paris), the Murs d’Octroi, which marked the edges of Paris, and the towns of the surrounding area, which are named but not circumscribed. The names of towns are circled if the population is listed and underlined if not. It is perhaps strange that map-makers should take such care to demark municipal authorities, especially as these distinctions were created in 1795, and were not necessarily representative of qualitative distinctions in districts. It maybe speaks to the influence of government centralisation on spatial awareness and identity (government districts were meaningful divisions which people identified with), or that this map was made to educate students about their government (perhaps supported by the stamp on the map “Instruction Publique. M. Lebel, Auguste”). The division between Paris proper and the towns of the surrounding area is emphasised by their very different representation, and by highlighting the larger towns (the names of which are printed in larger, non-italicised type, and accompanied by the number of inhabitants) you can get a rough sense of the distribution of population in the areas around Paris. Updated versions of this map made in 1863 and 1866, after the city limits had been extended to the Murs d’Enceinte extend the visual language of central Paris to the extended city.
districts
divisions
forgetting
local government
rationalisation
urban growth over time
urban limits