geopolitical maps

32
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE !"#$ &’(#)*+ ,&$ -.,/*.&-+- 012 34/#5+’$#(1 .6 7.*.’&-. 8#0’&’#+$9 :/2 ;< =+)+>0+’ ;?@? A))+$$ -+(&#*$2 A))+$$ =+(&#*$2 3$B0$)’#C(#./ /B>0+’ D@D?EFEDE9 GB0*#$"+’ H.B(*+-I+ J/6.’>& 8(- H+I#$(+’+- #/ K/I*&/- &/- L&*+$ H+I#$(+’+- MB>0+’2 @?<;DNE H+I#$(+’+- .66#)+2 O.’(#>+’ P.B$+Q R<S E@ O.’(#>+’ T(’++(Q 8./-./ L@! RUPQ 4V W+.C.*#(#)$ GB0*#)&(#./ -+(&#*$Q #/)*B-#/I #/$(’B)(#./$ 6.’ &B(".’$ &/- $B0$)’#C(#./ #/6.’>&(#./2 "((C2XX,,,Y#/6.’>&,.’*-Y).>X$>CCX(#(*+Z)./(+/([(<@RFRN@N? W+.C.*#(#)&* O&C$2 A T\+()" P#$(.’1 .6 & M+I*+)(+- !’+/- #/ 7&’(.I’&C"1 K-.&’-. ].’#& & & ^&)B*(1 .6 G.*#(#)&* T)#+/)+Q 4/#5+’$#(_ ‘8& T&C#+/a&bQ H.>+Q J(&*1 !. )#(+ ("#$ A’(#)*+ ].’#&Q K-.&’-.c;??de fW+.C.*#(#)&* O&C$2 A T\+()" P#$(.’1 .6 & M+I*+)(+- !’+/- #/ 7&’(.I’&C"1fQ W+.C.*#(#)$Q @R2 ;Q ;<d g R?d !. *#/\ (. ("#$ A’(#)*+2 =:J2 @?Y@?d?X@EFN??E?d?@DD@N;; 4H82 "((C2XX-hY-.#Y.’IX@?Y@?d?X@EFN??E?d?@DD@N;; Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

Upload: lyhuong

Post on 09-Jan-2017

242 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Geopolitical Maps

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

!"#$%&'(#)*+%,&$%-.,/*.&-+-%012%34/#5+'$#(1%.6%7.*.'&-.%8#0'&'#+$9:/2%;<%=+)+>0+'%;?@?A))+$$%-+(&#*$2%A))+$$%=+(&#*$2%3$B0$)'#C(#./%/B>0+'%D@D?EFEDE9GB0*#$"+'%H.B(*+-I+J/6.'>&%8(-%H+I#$(+'+-%#/%K/I*&/-%&/-%L&*+$%H+I#$(+'+-%MB>0+'2%@?<;DNE%H+I#$(+'+-%.66#)+2%O.'(#>+'%P.B$+Q%R<SE@%O.'(#>+'%T('++(Q%8./-./%L@!%RUPQ%4V

W+.C.*#(#)$GB0*#)&(#./%-+(&#*$Q%#/)*B-#/I%#/$('B)(#./$%6.'%&B(".'$%&/-%$B0$)'#C(#./%#/6.'>&(#./2"((C2XX,,,Y#/6.'>&,.'*-Y).>X$>CCX(#(*+Z)./(+/([(<@RFRN@N?

W+.C.*#(#)&*%O&C$2%A%T\+()"%P#$(.'1%.6%&%M+I*+)(+-%!'+/-%#/%7&'(.I'&C"1K-.&'-.%].'#&&&%^&)B*(1%.6%G.*#(#)&*%T)#+/)+Q%4/#5+'$#(_%`8&%T&C#+/a&bQ%H.>+Q%J(&*1

!.%)#(+%("#$%A'(#)*+%].'#&Q%K-.&'-.c;??de%fW+.C.*#(#)&*%O&C$2%A%T\+()"%P#$(.'1%.6%&%M+I*+)(+-%!'+/-%#/%7&'(.I'&C"1fQW+.C.*#(#)$Q%@R2%;Q%;<d%g%R?d!.%*#/\%(.%("#$%A'(#)*+2%=:J2%@?Y@?d?X@EFN??E?d?@DD@N;;4H82%"((C2XX-hY-.#Y.'IX@?Y@?d?X@EFN??E?d?@DD@N;;

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf

This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial orsystematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply ordistribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contentswill be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug dosesshould be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss,actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directlyor indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

Page 2: Geopolitical Maps

278

Geopolitics, 13:278–308, 2008Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLCISSN: 1465-0045 print / 1557-3028 onlineDOI: 10.1080/14650040801991522

FGEO1465-00451557-3028Geopolitics, Vol. 13, No. 2, Mar 2008: pp. 0–0Geopolitics

Geopolitical Maps: A Sketch History of a Neglected Trend in Cartography

Geopolitical MapsEdoardo Boria EDOARDO BORIAFaculty of Political Science, Università “La Sapienza”, Rome, Italy

Between the two world wars a new strain of cartography emergedin Europe, which disregarded the standards of precision of tradi-tional geodesic, or scientific, cartography. Its scope was strictlypolitical and its approach openly ideological. In Germany, cradleof this new genre, it was called ‘geopolitische kartographie’ or‘suggestive kartographie’. These terms were later borrowed from thelanguages of other countries where the allure of German cartogra-phy was felt. Elsewhere, in Great Britain and the United States,these maps were generally termed propaganda maps or persuasivemaps.

Despite a recent rise in studies on global geopolitics duringFascism and Nazism, little attention has been devoted to the carto-graphic innovations of the time. Studies that have touched on thistopic, mostly monographic papers, do not allow for an evaluationof possible links between earlier and later cartographic develop-ments, or between developments occurring in different countries.This approach, which separates the phenomenon from its histori-cal context, gives the impression that geopolitical cartographybetween the two world wars appeared, like a comet, out ofnowhere and then simply vanished; that it was an isolatedphenomenon with neither precursors nor successors.

Following World War II, geopolitical cartography was largelyabandoned, presumably for the same reasons that had discreditedgeopolitical publications in general during the period in question:(1) the genre was considered a direct product of the propagandamachine of the dictatorial regimes; (2) it lacked scientific basis(on a par with traditional cartography); (3) it had no practicaluse, other than as a tool of propaganda.

Address correspondence to Edoardo Boria, Università La Sapienza, Faculty of PoliticalScience, Rome, Italy. E-mail: [email protected]

Downloaded By: [University of Colorado Libraries] At: 20:22 27 December 2010

Page 3: Geopolitical Maps

Geopolitical Maps 279

This paper intends to refute these three assumptions and to shedsome light on this remarkable cartographical phenomenon. Whatwere the origins of this new way of representing space? Who used itand why?

INTRODUCTION

The map is not just a tool for the advancement of knowledge, but also apossible weapon of propaganda. Only recently, though, with the studies ofJohn Brian Harley, has the close link between cartography and the interestsof the power elites clearly emerged. Indeed, despite ample evidence attest-ing to the obvious limitations of cartography, geography as a science haslong avoided dealing with the consequences of this state of affairs. Nine-teenth-century geography, espousing the positivistic premises of determin-ism with regard to the existence of laws governing nature and humanbehaviour, believed in objective knowledge, and thus considered the map afaithful representation of the land. Later came possibilism, which wasinspired by ideas partly antithetical to those of determinism, but was none-theless led (by its idiographic approach) to similar conclusions regardingthe meaning to be attributed to the geographical map – an essentiallyneutral descriptive instrument. The advent of functionalism did not changethis basic concept. The use of quantitative techniques in a neo-positivistphilosophical context, the use of calculators and satellite data collectiontechnologies, the emphasis on the accuracy of measurements – all of theseenhanced the technical aspects of cartography, but did not affect the theo-retical reflection on the meaning of the map, which was still being evalu-ated based on technical precision.

Hence, despite continuous developments in theoretical geography,embodied in a succession of schools and approaches that renewed andinvigorated the discipline, the perception of the geographical map as a neu-tral instrument representing reality has remained unchanged for more than acentury. Only recently have stimulating, alternative views been put forward:from perception geography, focusing on the individual sphere, to the criti-cal analysis of postmodern radical geographers. Among the latter, in thefield of cartography, John Brian Harley, authentic “father” of the school ofcritical cartography, stands out with his extremely efficacious analysis of themap as a product of power.

These conceptual innovations are still fresh however, so that muchwork remains to be done on the subjective nature of maps – its causes andimplications. Yet, two things clearly emerge: first, that since all maps areintrinsically subjective and persuasive, it follows that propaganda throughmaps and atlases cannot be considered the invention of Nazism or Fascism;and second, that the devices used to make propaganda are manifold:

Downloaded By: [University of Colorado Libraries] At: 20:22 27 December 2010

Page 4: Geopolitical Maps

280 Edoardo Boria

distorting information, emphasising one topic, choosing place-names,colours, titles and captions, excessive highlighting of certain elements, etc.This paper will address some innovations pertaining to method, whichappeared in Germany and Italy in the 1920s and 1930s. It should be notedhowever, that these innovations coexisted with the aforementioned tech-niques of cartographic propaganda, but did not supplant them. For example,the practice of focusing on a specific issue, such as ethnicity: The presenceof millions of Germans living outside the Reich was repeatedly evoked dur-ing the Nazi period and used to legitimise any action, including militaryaction, to redress such “injustice”. One of the most widely used Germanschool atlases of the time,1 for example, obviously engages in propagandawhen dedicating a section to the “nationalist revolution”.2 But it is not themaps themselves that are the culprits here; the maps are in fact scientificallyacceptable, factually correct: there are legends and scales, the borders of theReich are marked correctly, and the events illustrated are real: the Führer’stravels, the results of the elections, assassinations of members of the Naziparty, Jewish migrations. It is the choice of subjects that is biased, not themaps themselves.

Obviously, the creation of a biased narrative through the compilationof an atlas is independent of political leaning. An example in point, fromthe same period, is the atlas by the Hungarian Marxist geographer AlexRadó.3 Here too, the maps do not seem partial in and of themselves. It is thechoice of topics that gives the atlas its ideological slant (e.g., the scramblefor raw materials between capitalistic world powers, the universality ofcommunist brotherhood).

WHAT WE MEAN BY GEOPOLITICAL CARTOGRAPHY

Setting aside the classical tactics used to instrumentalise maps, we willinstead focus on the innovations in “graphical language” introduced inthe 1920s in so called “geopolitical maps”. These maps represent agenuine leap forward, an added sophistication in cartographic communi-cation techniques. Indeed, these new maps are not limited to showingplaces, theatres of historical events or the distribution of geographicalobjects. Instead, they openly aim to illustrate existing or potential bal-ances of power in a particular region. In other words, while traditionalcartography presents few political elements (e.g., borders, capitals) andportrays a static political situation, a geopolitical map renders the picturedynamic, showing the historical causes of a given political situation,possible future developments thereof, or both. Obviously, such interpre-tation is bound to be subjective. The intent is not merely descriptive, butrather interpretive, inevitably leading the author to express subjectivevalue judgements.

Downloaded By: [University of Colorado Libraries] At: 20:22 27 December 2010

Page 5: Geopolitical Maps

Geopolitical Maps 281

In terms of content, a geopolitical map tends to correlate a multitude ofphenomena (political, economic, cultural, social, demographic, religious,historical, ethnic, technological, etc.) and factors (space, distance, time, rela-tive position, etc.). These maps take into consideration opposing politicaland economic interests and spell them out to the reader through highly sim-plified, stylised cartographic drawings aimed at conveying a specific pointof view with regard to the represented situation or phenomenon. Suchpoint of view is clearly not inherent to the phenomenon in question, butrather the product of the author’s interpretation.

For this purpose a new set of specially designed graphic symbols wascreated. Geopolitical maps in fact differ from traditional political maps inthat they use geometric shapes to represent factors affecting the organisa-tion of political space: arrows to indicate territorial conquest or commercialpenetration, axes for alliance systems, circles or half-circles for spheres ofinfluence, parallel lines to mark equivalent or reciprocal tendencies, brokenlines for uncertainty, radial and linear structures, interrupted lines as a signof disintegration, stars and diamonds to indicate the hubs of political forcesin action, as well as borders and shadings in abundance – all are graphicsolutions typical of geopolitical cartography. The geopolitical map in Figure 1is an emblematic example.

Stylised and simplified, such maps are designed to be accessible to thepublic at large. They are intended to be read and understood by a verywide range of readers, including many who are unfamiliar with traditionalgeographical maps. Unlike geodesic cartography, based on rigorous scientific

FIGURE 1 Mario Morandi’s map “L’equilibrio politico mediterraneo” (Political Equilibrium inthe Mediterranean). Source: Geopolitica 10 (31 Oct. 1939) p. 523.

Downloaded By: [University of Colorado Libraries] At: 20:22 27 December 2010

Page 6: Geopolitical Maps

282 Edoardo Boria

assumptions and sophisticated techniques, these maps are clear and easy torelate to. Their message is presented in a very effective fashion.

A geopolitical map must indeed prove unambiguous. To reach thisobjective, it must limit itself to few, simple graphic signs, as a busy mapwould risk confusing readers. At the same time, it should be appealing,attract the reader, and this requires special attention to aesthetic consider-ations. An effective use of arrows, arches and lines, coupled with a power-ful interpretation of the political situation converts the arid, rigid traditionalmap into a readily understood, rich and dynamic map, conveying a specificpoint of view.

Ideally, the ultimate purpose would be to create a model, that is, tocome up with a general order, to illustrate some recurrent, underlyinggeopolitical dynamics. The basic idea of creating such a map is in fact toshow a general spatial tendency, a geographical law. This is surely a crudesimplification of complex phenomena which, by nature, can hardly beattributed to clear-cut trends; an attitude which is thus, at its core, decidedlydeterministic.

Obviously, to evaluate this kind of cartography we must use a differentyardstick from that used for traditional maps. The usefulness of a geopoliti-cal map is not to be gauged by technical standards such as cartographicprecision but by communicative effectiveness. To use Jacques Bertin’s aptwords in his first scientific treatise on cartographic visualisation,4 when itcomes to these kinds of maps – or “simplified images” – what matters is the“cartographic message”. Inevitably then, due to its inherent subjectivity inthe analysis of the political equilibrium and its openly persuasive character,geopolitical cartography tends to lend itself to propaganda. Indeed, thedividing line between geopolitical cartography and propaganda cartographyis difficult, if not impossible, to trace. Bearing this premise in mind, whichwe shall discuss later on, we will now turn to analyse and then comparegeopolitical cartography in Germany and Italy between the two world wars.

GEOPOLITICAL CARTOGRAPHY IN GERMANY

As noted, attempts at developing innovative ways of representing politicalorder appeared in Germany as early as the 1920s. Contemporary scholarshave clearly shown5 that efforts to hone the persuasive potential of geo-graphical maps began in Germany long before the rise of National Socialismto power. Geopoliticians of the time published papers on the subject;6 later,others attempted to build a general theoretical framework for geopoliticalcartography (an excerpt from the classification of symbols appropriate forgeopolitical representation can be found in Figure 2).7

So much interest was not coincidental. An increasing tendency towardpractical application in geopolitics created a need for representational tools

Downloaded By: [University of Colorado Libraries] At: 20:22 27 December 2010

Page 7: Geopolitical Maps

Geopolitical Maps 283

both for the analysis itself and – above all – for the publication of itsresults. Geopolitical cartography, therefore, satisfied a need to communi-cate geopolitics in new contexts, outside university classrooms. This needarose partly because geopolitics – accused of lacking scientific rigour –was not looked upon very favourably in the academic milieu, and partlyfrom the natural tendency of geopolitics toward activism and the transla-tion of theory into action. We do not know the extent to which Haushoferand other German geopoliticians were in fact aware of this need. We doknow however, that within a few years German geopolitics equippeditself with an utterly innovative tool of representation, able to convey itsmessage effectively to a public comprising both experts and non-experts.This kind of cartography proved itself useful in rendering clear andaccessible to the general public a specific point of view or idea of thepolitical space. This is the basis of its manifold applications and hencealso its success.

Before delving into the analysis of these maps, however, we shouldpoint out a few, earlier experiments, which seem to have blazed a trail forgeopolitical cartography. These first attempts at using geometrical shapesin maps probably inspired the specific technical solutions applied to

FIGURE 2 “Grundsignaturen” (Basic Symbols). Source: R. von Schumacher, ‘Zur Theorie der geopolitischen Signatur’, in Zeitschrift für Geopolitik 12/4 (1935) p. 256.

Downloaded By: [University of Colorado Libraries] At: 20:22 27 December 2010

Page 8: Geopolitical Maps

284 Edoardo Boria

German geopolitical cartography in the 1920s and 30s. In the GeographischerRepetitions- und Zeichen-Atlas, published in 1888 by the artillery cadetschool in Vienna,8 Captain Emil Letoschek produces dozens of very origi-nal stylised representations of European states, transformed here into sim-ple geometrical shapes. This was a sort of blank atlas, a genre widely usedfor teaching purposes in Europe at the time. Freehand drawing of geo-graphical maps was recognised as a useful exercise to help students famil-iarise themselves with the shapes of states and other geographicalentities.9

The difference between these attempts and what may be defined asgeopolitical cartography is the level of politicisation of the representation.Geopolitical representations are openly dominated by political-ideologicalbias. The message of the map is directly linked to a specific idea of spaceand is clearly intended to prompt the reader to concur. In contrast, thesole purpose of Letoschek’s maps is to teach geography. No ulteriormotives are involved. One map is a teaching aid, the other – a politicalweapon.

Compared to similar didactic atlases however, Letoschek did introducetwo very original innovations: (1) An effort to consider large geographicalareas. Indeed, his atlas includes many small-scale maps able to include vastportions of the planet; (2) An attempt to propose an alternative to thestrictly Cartesian representation adopted by traditional, scientific cartogra-phy. This was done through the substitution of geographical elements withgeometrical shapes. These two special traits are clearly visible in the stylisedmap of the European continent in Figure 3 (see for example the trianglerepresenting Great Britain).

A new edition of the atlas was published in 1906.10 In this edition theauthor, now a Lieutenant Colonel, takes the geometric abstraction yet a stepfurther, turning the geographical shapes into silhouettes only vaguely remi-niscent of the actual form of the territory. As the introduction to the atlassuggests, Letoschek’s sole intention was to help his students memoriseEurope’s political geography. Yet, conceivably, his assignments wereextremely useful to the German geopoliticians of the 1920s, in that theycleared the maps of all that “superfluous” information which could now bereplaced by a useful set of symbols to induce the desired psychologicaleffect. Away then, with names of states (borders are sufficient to allow thereader to recognise them!) and useless lettering; away with almost all oro-graphic data (it is less important in the context of international politics);away with the precise outlines of coasts, lakes and rivers; and – ultimately –away with legends. After all, the map should be able to speak for itself. Onemust make room for arrows, circles, half-circles, lines, etc. It is likely thatLetoschek’s assignments constituted an excellent starting point for thosewho, shortly after the First World War, produced the first rudimentary geo-political maps.

Downloaded By: [University of Colorado Libraries] At: 20:22 27 December 2010

Page 9: Geopolitical Maps

Geopolitical Maps 285

FIGURE 3 Emil Letoschek’s map “Europa”, Geographischer Repetitions- und Zeichen-Atlas.Source: Europa (Vienna: Im selbstverlage der Verfassers, k.k. Artillerie-Cadeten-Schule, Arsenal.Für den Buchhandel in Commission bei Ed. Hölzel 1888) p. 1.

Downloaded By: [University of Colorado Libraries] At: 20:22 27 December 2010

Page 10: Geopolitical Maps

286 Edoardo Boria

An exhaustive account of the history of German geopolitical cartogra-phy in the 1920s and 1930s is well beyond the scope of the present article.Readers interested in delving further into the subject may refer to variousexisting studies, in particular to Herb’s in-depth study.11 Here we will limitourselves to a brief comment on a few instances of geopolitical cartographyfrom that period which, for more than twenty years starting in 1921,12 pro-vided the German people with a cartography that was basic, namely onethat comprised few elements, and was readily understood.

This new type of cartographic representation was largely free of directties with the National Socialist movement, even though many geopoliticalcartographers sympathised with the extreme right.

Geopolitical cartography was immediately successful, partly because itspropagandistic force found fertile ground in Germany, and partly becauseGermans loved maps and made habitual use of them, thanks to worthy car-tographers and high-level cartographic institutes – as conceded at the time,even by Germany’s enemies.13 Moreover, geopolitical cartography couldcount on the support of powerful and authoritative figures. First amongthem was the leader of the school of Geopolitik, Karl Haushofer, who, aseditor of Zeitschrift für Geopolitik, was able to allocate space for this genrein his famous journal, both for theoretical discussion and for its practicalapplication. Papers and geopolitical maps, proliferated in fact in the yearsthat followed.14

By the end of the 1920s, thanks to the popularity of Haushofer’s journal(reaching the sizeable print run of 5,000 copies), the term geopolitische karte(geopolitical map) had entered not only professional parlance but also thespeech of the public at large. It was immediately recognised as a distinctcartographic genre, independent from scientific cartography, whichremained intent on the meticulous representation of the Earth’s surface.15

Geopolitical cartography, by contrast, took on the task of accounting for thedynamic and mutable nature of cultural, economic and political phenom-ena, a task considered important not only for lay publications but for scien-tific purposes as well, and was thus fully justified in developing a specificgraphical language suitable to its needs.

From the late 1920s onward, the genre would gain momentum anddiversify, appearing in periodicals, atlases and books (Figure 4).16 Mostnoteworthy was the contribution of atlases – publications entirely dedicatedto the new genre. The first was Geopolitischer Geschichtsatlas, authored byBraun and Ziegfeld.17 Then, in 1929, a first attempt at classifying and stan-dardising a cartographic set of symbols for geopolitical use was made at thecelebrated Perthes publishing house. The resulting atlas – GeopolitischerTypen-Atlas – authored by Hermann Haack and Max Georg Schmidt,includes no less than 176 “kartenskizzen”. In the years that followed, moregeopolitical atlases were published, increasingly politicised and distinctfrom traditional atlases.18

Downloaded By: [University of Colorado Libraries] At: 20:22 27 December 2010

Page 11: Geopolitical Maps

Geopolitical Maps 287

GEOPOLITICAL CARTOGRAPHY IN ITALY

Once geopolitical cartography had already established itself in Germany,which published large quantities of maps and atlases and made themwidely available to the general public, attempts at adopting this carto-graphic genre were made in other countries – Spain,19 Portugal20 and aboveall Italy, where this industry, although less prolific than in Germany, wascertainly noteworthy.

We shall devote more attention to Italian geopolitical cartography thanwe have to its German counterpart, because to date, studies outlining itshistory have been lacking. Only a few, brief remarks have appeared in stud-ies dedicated to fascist geopolitics in general. We have chosen an earlypoint of departure – the final years of the nineteenth century – to afford abetter understanding of the reasons that led Italian geopolitical cartogra-phers to follow German models, with a few important exceptions, whichwe shall discuss.

For decades, since the days of Ratzel, Italian geography had been influ-enced by its German counterpart. Italian geographers had been emulatingtheir German colleagues in their studies, more than their French or Anglo-Saxon peers. This, in fact, reflected a more general tendency among Italianscholars to be inspired by the positivistic trends of the German world.

FIGURE 4 Rudolf Heinisch’s map “Drei Imperien – Ein Meer” (Three Empires – One Sea).Source: W. Pahl, Das politische Antlitz der Erde. Ein weltpolitischer Atlas (Leipzig: WilhelmGoldmann Verlag 1939) p. 82.

Downloaded By: [University of Colorado Libraries] At: 20:22 27 December 2010

Page 12: Geopolitical Maps

288 Edoardo Boria

But it was not only the allure of the German positivist mood, or thetechnical prowess of German cartographers that led Italian geographers toadhere to the German model. The fact is, that Ratzelian determinism, withits expansionist and interventionist implications, resonated with the nation-alistic ferment among the élites of the young Italian state. The national inter-ests that geography would have to serve were rather clear: colonialaspirations in Africa, claims over the Eastern Alpine regions, Istria andDalmatia, and the consolidation of the centralised state.

Yet, at the beginning of the twentieth century the Italian cartographysector was still lagging behind. For this reason, foreign maps (mostly ofGerman manufacture) had to be imported, and the distribution of suchproducts to the general public was limited. Gradually the situationimproved, with the advent (in the 1910s) of a local, technically advancedcartography. These developments, combined with historical circumstances,contributed to an intensification of nationalistic manifestations in cartogra-phy. Surely, the combination of these two factors – the spread of localcartography and the rise in chauvinistic attitudes – facilitated the birth ofItalian geopolitical cartography, but it also conditioned its development.

To understand the atmosphere surrounding the relations betweengeography and political power in Italy, it is important to bear in mind thatattempts on the part of the Fascist Party to influence Italian academic geog-raphy did not meet with significant resistance. The reason was not so muchthat geographers opportunistically and unconditionally submitted to the willof the regime, but rather that Ratzelian determinism, the dominant orienta-tion in Italian geographic circles, naturally converged with the regime’sbasic inclinations. As noted above, atlases and geographical publicationswere already rife with nationalism and colonialism before World War I.

It would thus be a mistake to ascribe the atmosphere of passionatepatriotism entirely to Italy’s new political path. Recent historical events,from the unification of Italy to irredentism, had undoubtedly fostered senti-ments which now, with the Fascists in power, were being further promoted.

The development of political geography in Italy clearly attests to thisconcurrence of world views between geographers and the Fascist regime.The existing patriotic and interventionist inclinations of the former wouldprogressively gain ground with the consolidation of the latter – a regimesharing the very same ambitions. It was precisely during the Fascist periodthat political geography, the precursor of geopolitics, was born as anindependent branch of geography. The first manual of political geography,published in Italy in 1929 and authored by Luigi De Marchi, plainly reflectsthese ethnocentric and deterministic views. The same is true of later writ-ings by his student Antonio Renato Toniolo, by Giorgio Roletto, the school’sleading exponent, and by the younger geographers Umberto Toschi andErnesto Massi. This increasingly abundant production of scientific texts andpapers was accompanied by a popularisation of the discipline, that is, by

Downloaded By: [University of Colorado Libraries] At: 20:22 27 December 2010

Page 13: Geopolitical Maps

Geopolitical Maps 289

the advent of geographic publications destined for the general public, andcharacterised by widely accessible communication techniques. And so itwas in this context, that a few years following its debut in Germany, popu-lar geopolitical cartography made its first appearance in Italy.

Yet, geopolitical cartography would truly thrive only a few years later,with the first, albeit somewhat hesitant, attempts at its integration withinthe theoretical framework of scientific geography. Umberto Toschi21 wasthe first to acknowledge the existence of a new trend in cartography,albeit with some reservations. Toschi addressed only maps published inGeopolitica, organ of a narrow circle of openly fascist geographers. Wewill begin our discussion with this group of people, bearing in mind how-ever that they were not the only ones to experiment with innovative formsof dynamic cartography. Unencumbered by the influence of German geo-politics, one small but determined Italian publisher devised a new, inde-pendent cartographic style. This style, free of the excesses characteristic ofthe maps produced by fascist geopoliticians, would succeed in establish-ing itself after the war, emerging as the true novelty introduced by Italy inthe sphere of cartographic representations of political events. The pub-lisher in question was Federico De Agostini, and his publishing house atthe time was called Italgeo. De Agostini’s work will be discussed furtherbelow.

As noted however, the maps produced by Geopolitica – the journalpublished between January of 1939 and December of 1942 – were the firstand best-known geopolitical maps in Italy. The journal was based in Trieste,symbol of Italian nationalism and irredentism. The city had been annexed toItaly a number of years earlier (it had been part of the Austro-HungarianEmpire until 1919), redeeming Italian national pride and rousing thosewhose dream it was to see Italy in the role of world power. Giorgio Rolettoand Ernesto Massi, managing editors of Geopolitica, were relatively newmembers of the teaching staff, and were not in line with the academicestablishment of their discipline – geography. The former had followed anatypical professional path. After many years as teacher in a technical-commercial school he joined the academic world, but initially taught historyof economics rather than geography. Massi was still very young and neededto make a place for himself. It is also emblematic that the journal wasbacked by Giuseppe Bottai, Minister of National Education – a fascist whohad often been critical of the regime, and was certainly not liked by Mussolini.He was the one who found a publisher, guaranteed many subscriptions byeducational institutions and suggested a joint subscription arrangement withthe periodical Critica fascista.22

The few facts thus far mentioned suffice to demonstrate that Italiangeopolitics developed against a backdrop of significantly more complicatedand conflictual relationships, both with the political environment and withthe academic world, than has long been supposed.23

Downloaded By: [University of Colorado Libraries] At: 20:22 27 December 2010

Page 14: Geopolitical Maps

290 Edoardo Boria

Geopolitica was distinctly popular in nature – rendered accessible to thegeneral public. Its maps, for the most part drawn by Mario Morandi, werecrucial in allowing a simple presentation of geopolitical phenomena. It shouldbe noted that Geopolitica made ample use of maps and cartograms, muchmore so than the Zeitschrift für Geopolitik, making the most of the graphicallanguage of geography. Suffice it to say that that the journal dedicated twospecific sections (“geopolitical analyses” and “geohistorical analyses”) toMorandi’s large-format, double-page drawings alone.24 In addition, dozensof other maps accompanied the various articles. Morandi was the drivingforce behind the journal’s cartography, designed from the start to capitaliseon graphic representations.

Further evidence of such intent is found in a special section launchedby the journal – Cartographic Review – dedicated to the review of newlypublished cartographic products. For this important section, the contribu-tion of an eminent cartographer was required: Luigi Visintin. Evidently, thisexperiment did not yield the expected results, seeing that this traditionalapproach to the geographical map was soon abandoned even as MarioMorandi and his new cartography were gaining ever more space andlegitimacy.

Morandi was also a member of the editorial board of Critica fascista,probably brought in by Ernesto Massi who also worked for that periodical,which – like Geopolitica – was founded by Bottai. The cartography forGeopolitica was prepared by Morandi and by Dante Lunder, who alsoworked with the University of Trieste, was a journalist of the local daily Ilpiccolo, and was among the founders of the Istituto di Cultura Fascista(Institute of Fascist Culture) youth division in Trieste. Until May of 1941,both appear as editor-cartographers. From then on, Morandi is promotedand becomes the sole editor of the periodical. It is probably thanks to hismaps that he gained such prominence. In this context it is worth mention-ing that it was Morandi, in December of 1941, who hosted a meeting at theMilan offices of Critica fascista between a number of contributors to thepaper and delegates of Gioventù Universitaria Fascista di Milano (Milan’sUniversity Fascist Youth). From that moment on – in view of the growingestrangement of Roletto,25 and the absence of Massi, who volunteered toserve with the Bersaglieri corps – Morandi would become the true protago-nist of Geopolitica.

Morandi managed to create maps which were utterly original in theItalian context, and in complete harmony with fascist geopolitics. Theynumber a few hundred in total, between Geopolitica, a number of mono-graphs,26 and contributions to various publications.27 His work is very inter-esting in that it reflects the spatial view underlying the foreign policy of amedium-sized power, as was fascist Italy. The stylised shapes of the statesand numerous geometric signs found in Morandi’s maps, reveal a clearinterpretation of world politics, differentiating friends from foes and central

Downloaded By: [University of Colorado Libraries] At: 20:22 27 December 2010

Page 15: Geopolitical Maps

Geopolitical Maps 291

from marginal areas, displaying interests, ambitions, and causes underlyingtensions and alliances – all that which remains invisible in a traditionalscientific map.

Geopolitics was thus in vogue in Italy in the late 1930s, and its successowed much to the maps accompanying publications on the subject. Itwould be a little longer however, before an atlas entirely based on the pos-tulates of geopolitical cartography would be published. The first to put outsuch an atlas was Italgeo. In November of 1942, Italgeo published Itinera.Atlante storico commentato ad uso delle scuole medie superiori (Itinera. AnAnnotated Historical Atlas for Secondary Schools). For the first time in Italy,an atlas offers a comprehensive reading of history as it unfolds, expressedthrough a set of specially designed graphic devices. This product is strik-ingly different from the maps published in Geopolitica, and the differencesare significant. There are technical differences (symbols used, colours), aswell as differences in format (an atlas, rather than maps accompanyingarticles) and in target population (school children rather than adult aficionados).The method however, is the same. As the authors of the atlas, geographerGiuseppe Mori and publisher Federico De Agostini, state in the preface,

The concepts inspiring this work are . . . simplicity . . . and (and this isperhaps the most original idea) dynamism – [The atlas aspires to] conveya sense of change, of the perpetual progression of history, minimizingthe impression of stillness which seemed so irredeemably linked to anytransmitting historical concepts through geographical means.

The result, for the first time in an Italian atlas, was the introduction ofconcepts taken from classical geopolitics. Terms such as lines of resistanceand centres of expansion or radiation, are clearly mentioned in the preface.

The first booklet was dedicated to the Middle Ages, but the completionof the series would have to await the post-war years. The war had evidentlyinterrupted a project which was not only innovative but also extensive andambitious in scope. In 1946 two more booklets appeared – Antiquity, andthe Modern Era, but no booklet was published to cover more recent histori-cal events, probably to avoid having to deal with the thorny task of describ-ing those turbulent times.

The approach of this atlas was so original that it survived the war. In fact,atlases of this kind were offered to the public by two publishers after the con-flict: Italgeo, with the series Via Maestra. Atlante storico per la scuola media(Via Maestra. A Historical Atlas for Middle Schools), and the long-standingFlorentine publishing house Le Monnier, which was just entering the field ofgeographic publishing at the time, with textbooks and atlases relying pre-cisely on these maps, which it subsequently republished many times.

The merit of the new approach is confirmed by the following example:while other Italian atlases of the 1950s continued to show the traditional

Downloaded By: [University of Colorado Libraries] At: 20:22 27 December 2010

Page 16: Geopolitical Maps

292 Edoardo Boria

map of the world, illustrating the countries and their borders, the atlasespublished by Le Monnier in the early 1950s – Atlante storico didattico per lescuole medie superiori (Didactic Historical Atlas for Secondary Schools) andOrizzonti. Atlante storico commentato ad uso delle scuole secondarie(Orizzonti. An Annotated Historical Atlas for Secondary Schools) – were thefirst in Italy to clearly show maps of the antagonism between the UnitedStates and the Soviet Union, which would characterise the internationalpolitical scene for decades to come (Figure 5).

GERMAN AND ITALIAN GEOPOLITICAL CARTOGRAPHIES COMPARED

The fact that geopolitical cartography evolved in two countries that were, atthe time, under authoritarian regimes, is plain to see. Less successful, butnevertheless important efforts took place in Spain and Portugal, countrieswith similar political situations. Conversely, no such phenomenon wasobserved during the period in question in democratic France, Great Britainor the United States, despite well-established cartographic traditions, and awidespread circulation of maps among the general public. This raises manyquestions, starting with the relationship between those who produce

FIGURE 5 Map by Cartografia Prof. G. De Agostini “Il secondo dopoguerra del XX secolo”(The second postwar period of the XX century). Source: G. Mori, Atlante Storico Didattico Le Monnier per le Scuole Medie Superiori (Florence:Le Monnier 1957) p. 33.

Downloaded By: [University of Colorado Libraries] At: 20:22 27 December 2010

Page 17: Geopolitical Maps

Geopolitical Maps 293

cartography and totalitarian regimes. That is, whether and to what extentgeopolitical cartography was directly produced by the regime; commis-sioned by the regime; the fruit of indirect pressures; or, alternatively, theresult of the cartographer’s or the publisher’s own convictions coincidingwith the objectives of the regime.

This line of research may lead us to reflect on the intrinsic nature ofgeopolitical cartography, its propagandistic use, and its adaptability to dem-ocratic contexts. The following pages aim to offer a modest starting pointfor a reflection on these issues. We will begin with a comparison betweenGerman and Italian geopolitical cartographies, a comparison which has,thus far, yielded many common features (Table 1).

Continuity of Themes with Earlier Cartography

When analysing the relationship between cartography and the Nazi orFascist regimes we should begin with a basic observation: the emphasis ofpropagandistic tones and the intensification of plainly patriotic representa-tions precedes, rather than follows, the rise of the extreme right and itstotalitarian grip. The same is true of Portugal, where the “colonial discoursehad been hegemonic even before 1926”.28 The German case is particularlyemblematic. Both in his book29 and in a small article fittingly entitled“Before the Nazis”,30 Herb provides ample evidence that significant changesin maps and atlases can be traced back to the years 1926–1927 – long

TABLE 1 Characteristics common to German and Italian geopolitical cartography

Context of initial development:– Emerged in eccentric academic circles and largely opened itself to cooperation with

non-academics– Met with coldness on the part of a conservative academic milieu

Thematic continuity with the past:– Preference for themes that were already widely present in maps of the recent past

(ethnic issues, the Treaty of Versailles, Mare nostrum)Technical solutions:

– Few elements of information overall– Use of symbols expressing dynamism– Extensive generalisation, use of geometric forms

Target population:– Appeal to a broad lay readership

Publishing landscape:– Crucial role played by small, private-sector publishers– Few, very prolific, specialised cartographers

Relations with political power:– The regime does not make deliberate use of cartography – directly or indirectly – as an

instrument of propaganda. Thus:– Authors and publishers enjoy considerable independence.– The sector is not centralised.– Official institutions very rarely commission projects from geopolitical cartographers.

Downloaded By: [University of Colorado Libraries] At: 20:22 27 December 2010

Page 18: Geopolitical Maps

294 Edoardo Boria

before the rise of National Socialism to power. Similarly, in Italy, signs ofsympathy for nationalistic topics were very common in atlases publishedbefore the advent of Fascism, as attested by the abundance of maps pertain-ing to Ancient Rome and the Mediterranean as Mare Nostrum, Italiansabroad, Italian colonies and recent territorial conquests.

When, in 1939, Bottai, as Minister of National Education, decided tolaunch an extensive reform of the school system with the objective of rein-forcing fascist education, many of the maps and geography textbooks in usehad already been changed. The ministerial measures had been implementedvoluntarily, and in advance.31

A correct reconstruction of these events, with special attention to thesequence of time, offers valuable food for thought not only with regard tothe relationship between cartography and political power, but also to therelationship between cartography and society in general – topics whichgeographical research has only recently begun to explore in an adequatemanner.

Both under Nazism and under Fascism, the element of local culture ishardly distinguishable from the instrumental component, linked to theexpansionist aims of the two regimes. For example, the issue of the Mediter-ranean in Italy was nurtured by authoritative non-fascist historians (e.g.,Pietro Silva) long before Fascism appropriated it and consolidated the mythof the Mare Nostrum. The same can be said of ethnic and “Mitteleuropean”cultural emphases in Germany: recurrent themes in maps and atlases beforethe rise of Nazism to power, and certainly not a monopoly of the extremeright.

The continuity with the past is no news. It is in fact known that themovements of the extreme right rode on a wave of sentiments that werealready prevalent in large portions of the population. In our field ofresearch we can confirm these conclusions and thus refute the idea that itwas exclusively the advent of these two regimes which brought about theemphasis on certain themes in the atlases. Nationalism, irredentism andexpansionism were indeed existing and widespread inclinations in mapsand atlases of the preceding period, which the movements of the extremeright needed only to indulge. Studied in its wider historical context, the car-tography of the Fascist and Nazi periods presents strong elements of conti-nuity with previously published cartography. It would thus seem moreappropriate in this case to speak of instrumentalised, rather than imposed,cartographic knowledge.

Coldness on the Part of the Academic Establishment

The relationship between the advocates of geopolitics and the milieu oftraditional academic geography has never been rosy – not initially and notever. The initiatives of geopoliticians failed to obtain significant support

Downloaded By: [University of Colorado Libraries] At: 20:22 27 December 2010

Page 19: Geopolitical Maps

Geopolitical Maps 295

from the leaders of academic geography. They received neither official rec-ognition, nor direct involvement. With the passage of time and the increas-ing politicisation of the goals and focus of geopolitics, the prevailingattitude among the leaders of academic geography became progressivelymore distanced, despite a façade of acceptance. The academic establish-ment tended to consider geopoliticians as good as planted agents of theregime, potentially capable of undermining academic freedom, intent oncorrupting the noble and distinguished tradition of the discipline. The gap(in terms of views, approach, methods) and the misunderstandings separat-ing the leading geographers of the time and the two founders of geopoliticsin Germany and in Italy, respectively Karl Haushofer and Giorgio Roletto,are both rooted and reflected in the anomalous academic careers of thesegeographers, who started their academic teaching late, and were never fullyaccepted by the academic milieu.

If we analyse the make-up of the groups working on the two mostrepresentative geopolitical journals – the Zeitschrift für Geopolitik andGeopolitica – we see that these were comprised mostly of non-geographers(historians, anthropologists, political scientists, etc.), with the considerableparticipation of non-professionals, such as journalists and politicians. This wasonly partly a free choice. For the most part, it was due to specific constraints.On the one hand, the interdisciplinary scope of geopolitics demanded that itbe open to fields of interest beyond those traditionally addressed by academicgeography. On the other hand, the fact remains that academic geography wassuspicious of geopoliticians, accused them of discrediting geography, of twist-ing it and turning it into an instrument of propaganda.

The distrust of geopolitics obviously affected geopolitical cartographyas well, accused of amounting to mere political propaganda. In Italy,Umberto Toschi’s reservations about the “new cartography” expressed inthe 1940 edition of his textbook, were repeated even more vehemently inthe post-war editions of the book.32

In Germany, Siegfried Passarge wrote in 1935: “Something altogetherdifferent from scientific political geography are those popular science typepublications by modern geopoliticians”. While acknowledging it as useful inallowing the public a better comprehension of political-geographic facts,answering to a need felt by the people, he passionately declared that “thegeopolitical material published thus far is only minimally geographic.Mainly, it is political in nature, and geographical facts are included in asemi-scientific fashion”.33

In fact, the authors of geopolitical maps (Rössing, Morandi and Lunderin Italy; Springenschmid, Jantzen, Schumacher, Ziegfeld, Lange, Gebhardt,Jedermann, Heinisch, Pahl and others in Germany) did not come from thetraditional institutes that had made German cartography famous, andallowed Italian cartography to thrive. They were self-taught individuals withdifferent backgrounds. The few authoritative cartographers mentioned

Downloaded By: [University of Colorado Libraries] At: 20:22 27 December 2010

Page 20: Geopolitical Maps

296 Edoardo Boria

above got involved in geopolitical cartography only by chance: Luigi Visin-tin in the aforementioned fleeting and inconclusive contribution to Geopolit-ica, and Hermann Haack in a co-authored atlas.

Complex Relations with Political Power

It has long been accepted that those involved in the publication of geopolit-ical material during the Nazi and Fascist periods, had close ties with politicalpower, acted in a subordinate capacity to it, and were practically indistin-guishable from it. Recent studies have proven these convictions inaccurate,and exposed the prejudice that fuelled them for decades. The discrepanciesbetween Geopolitik and Nazi ideology, in both theoretical and practicalterms, have been demonstrated long ago.34 Haushofer’s opposition to theattack against the Soviet Union, for which the scholar paid with isolation, isbut one emblematic example.

In evaluating the relationship between geopolitics and the regime it isnecessary to consider the dissenting positions repeatedly expressed by thetwo leaders of the discipline, Karl Haushofer35 and Giorgio Roletto,36 tena-cious defenders of a position which, they believed, gave science prece-dence over propaganda. Ideological identification does not necessarilyentail subordination to the regime.

An analogous argument may be made for geopolitical cartography dur-ing the same period. Likewise, it cannot be considered an offshoot of theregime. In other words, the protagonists of geopolitical cartography – thosewho created, published and distributed the material – did not constitute anintegral part of the regime. They were not part of its official apparatus. Theywere not in a position to enjoy the total arbitrariness reserved only formembers of totalitarian centres of power. Neither the indirect financial sup-port granted, nor the basic approval given to geopolitical cartography offersany reason to deny the clear distinction between the regime and this milieu.

Moreover, it has been correctly pointed out that the regime clearlyunderestimated the propagandistic potential of cartography, failed to under-stand it, was indifferent to it, and even seemed to mistrust it.37 On those rareoccasions where political power did take interest, the results were decid-edly modest.38 In view of the renowned skill of these regimes in the use ofinstruments of propaganda, this might appear surprising. Certainly, the massconsensus they were able to obtain was largely a result of this very skill.Yet, it should be clearly stated, that despite their expertise in the use of pro-paganda tools, the political leaderships, both Nazi and Fascist, took littleinterest in popular geopolitical cartography. The near absence of geopoliti-cal cartography in the publications of the Zentralverlag der NSDAP isemblematic. Herb39 talks of the “reluctance of the Nazis to become the mainactor in cartographic propaganda”. Projects commissioned by official institu-tions of the regime from cartographers or publishing houses specialising in

Downloaded By: [University of Colorado Libraries] At: 20:22 27 December 2010

Page 21: Geopolitical Maps

Geopolitical Maps 297

geopolitical cartography were very limited and sporadic. In Germany, theonly significant instance is the “Stiftung Volk und Reich”.40 In Italy there isno trace of regular ties with official institutions.

Evidence of direct interference on the part of political power aimed atcensoring or even influencing the content of geopolitical cartographicproducts is rare and basically insignificant.41 What does emerge are cases ofvoluntary adaptation to the new political atmosphere on the part of estab-lished cartographers. Such is the case of Paul Diercke, author (after hisfather Carl) of a famous school atlas, who emphasises ethnic aspects in hiswork, and drastically changes his maps to favour German communities.42

The general lack of interest in cartography as a means of propaganda isfurther corroborated by the fact that neither of the two regimes took thetrouble to centralise the sector of cartography, as had been done for othersectors of communication.43 The situation was similar in Portugal as well.44

This confirms a fact amply demonstrated by Harley,45 namely thatcartographic analysis tends to overestimate the ability of external forces(e.g., in our case, Fascist and Nazi regimes) to influence cartography, whileat the same time underestimating the intrinsic power of cartography itself,that is, the power of the map as a rhetorical tool.

In this context it should be pointed out that propaganda is defined as:“The systematic propagation of a doctrine or cause or of information reflectingthe views and interests of those advocating such a doctrine or cause”(American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language). The definitionimplies a deliberate and systematic action involving all stages of preparationand dissemination of the propaganda material, carefully planned in everydetail to produce the required effect. Hence, the expression ‘state propa-ganda’, when referred to the Nazi or Fascist regimes, can be correctly usedonly to denote material that was directly planned and executed by therespective regimes. Instead, our analysis of geopolitical cartographyproduced in Germany and in Italy in the 1920s and 1930s has shown thatthe material in question was neither planned nor controlled directly by thecentres of power of these regimes. Consequently, even granted that geopo-litical cartography could be defined as propaganda material, defining it statepropaganda would be incorrect.

Despite their scant interest in atlases and maps for mass distribution,the Nazi and Fascist regimes did not altogether deny the propagandisticvalue of maps. The point is, the kind of cartography that these regimesappreciated was not the kind published in books or magazines, but rathermonumental cartography, fit for exhibitions and parades (scale models,giant posters), where huge cartographic displays expressed the leaders’greatness and megalomania.46 The most striking example is probably that ofthe marble tablets permanently affixed to the outer wall of the Basilica ofMaxentius on Via dei Fori Imperiali in Rome (named Via dell’Impero at thetime). This was a monumental cartographic display comprising five large

Downloaded By: [University of Colorado Libraries] At: 20:22 27 December 2010

Page 22: Geopolitical Maps

298 Edoardo Boria

tablets, illustrating the expansion of Rome – a city celebrated by the regimein search of links to a glorious past. The dimensions are considerable: thefirst four tablets, dedicated to the Roman Empire, are nearly five squaremetres in size. The fifth is larger still, and was added after the conquest ofEthiopia to glorify the new Fascist Empire, heir of the ancient RomanEmpire.47 The tablets were used as backdrop for the frequent parades heldalong that road. Unlike maps published in journals, this cartography servedas a stage for ritual. As for geopolitical maps, not only were they not greatlyappreciated by the regime, they were probably not even welcome. Thepolitical leadership could not possibly like these maps, for reasons pertainingto the nature of geopolitical cartography. A geopolitical map interpretingcurrent and future events has an inherently prescriptive value which isunacceptable to a totalitarian regime, by nature arrogant and closed to outsideinfluences. Such interpretations may well be perceived as an intolerable inter-ference, an instance of lèse majesté.

Considering the geopolitical cartography of that period solely as statepropaganda would therefore be less than accurate. The fact that it emergedand evolved in the broad context of the complex and heterogeneous milieu ofthe European right-wing movements of the 1920s should be acknowledged,but this does not, in itself, justify labelling it ‘state propaganda’, consideringthe indifference the Nazi and Fascist regimes showed in its regard.

But what could have induced this small group of cartographers toknowingly put their talent at the service of such fatal and tragic ideas? Whatcould have brought them to have their maps convey blatantly brutal mes-sages (see Jantzen’s antisemitic small atlas48)? In order to understand that,we must follow the famous principle of historical analysis, according towhich every document – in our case the map – can be interpreted and eval-uated if, and only if, framed in its proper political and social context. It is,therefore, impossible to comprehend the phenomenon without framinggeopolitical cartography in the context of those societies, steeped in mythand blind nationalist instinct, clouded by racism, wholly committed to anidolatrous cult of personality and the state. These were societies in whichindividual conscience, that of every individual (excluding the supremeruler), was eliminated, fused into that of the collective. In such societies,drawing maps – just like writing books, planning cities or serving the state –inevitably and unconsciously becomes a political mission. Everyone is a sol-dier, cartographers included.

The Decisive Contribution of the Private Sector

Indeed, a distinction should be made between two kinds of geopolitical car-tography: that published by political organs (such as the Ufficio Propagandaof the Partito Nazionale Fascista, or the Reichszentrale für Heimatdienst) onthe one hand, and that published by private publishers on the other.

Downloaded By: [University of Colorado Libraries] At: 20:22 27 December 2010

Page 23: Geopolitical Maps

Geopolitical Maps 299

As shown above,49 state cartography was very limited in volume, and decid-edly less sophisticated, less effective. The contribution of the private sectorand the participation of independent scholars were therefore decisive forthe development of geopolitical cartography.

On the whole, the publishing landscape of geopolitical cartography inGermany and Italy was similar. True, the number of publications wassmaller in Italy, but in both countries the small publishing house was theleading player in this sector. The most representative among them were: inItaly – Italgeo and Sperling & Kupfer (publisher of Geopolitica), and inGermany – Vowinckel (publisher of Zeitschrift für Geopolitik), Goldmann,Runge, Wunderlich and Knorr & Hirth.

As for the authors, despite reasonably large volumes of work –especially in Germany – few cartographers specialised in geopolitical repre-sentations, partly due to the reluctance of the academic milieu and of thelarge cartographic institutes, and partly due to the special skills required forthe job: interpretive as well as technical. It should come as no surprise thatthe most accomplished author of geopolitical maps, Arnold Hillen Ziegfeld,had experience in the field of commercial art, having attended courses inWeimar.50

Here we find further support for our conclusion, that geopolitical car-tography – long considered state propaganda – was not state cartography.The private sector, despite a lack of leading exponents, despite the absenceof special support on the part of political power, was nonetheless indepen-dently able to give rise to a highly politicised cartographic genre. Privatecartography probably proved even more forceful than state propaganda, inthat it could be perceived as more autonomous and no less authoritative:more autonomous, clearly, because formally detached from the regime, andno less authoritative, because based on a priori impartial knowledge –cartographic knowledge.

Innovations

German geopolitical cartography was more prolific, but less varied than itsItalian counterpart. This was due to the fact that, while in Germany, fromthe very beginning, a kind of school had emerged, complete with a theoret-ical framework, standardisation of elements,51 accepted syntactic rules,52

leaders and disciples,53 in Italy the genre was nurtured in two non-communicating, separate environments: that of the journal Geopolitica, andthat of the publisher Federico De Agostini. The first was clearly inspired bythe German school, whereas the second was left to his own devices, free tofollow the publisher’s individual initiative both in technical terms and interms of the interpretation of events.

As a result, German geopolitical maps, drawn by different followers ofthe genre, tend to be very homogeneous: the same symbols, the same black

Downloaded By: [University of Colorado Libraries] At: 20:22 27 December 2010

Page 24: Geopolitical Maps

300 Edoardo Boria

and white tones, the same upper case fonts. Exceptions were rare: KarlSpringenschmid used a strange font, called Sütterlin, and Gisheler Wirsingchose to use colour.54 But these were isolated cases that only confirm theexistence of a school of cartographic drawing to uphold the rules and thegeneral orientation.

By using the term ‘school’ to describe German geopolitical cartographywe do not wish to imply that there was a single leader or a single centre(e.g., a publishing house, a cartographic institution). We do however, wishto indicate the essentially uniform character of the maps, both in form andin substance, with clear-cut messages and limited themes. In Italy, on theother hand, the two groups differed considerably both in their technicalchoices and the messages conveyed, a fact which clearly emerges from acomparison of their respective material.

The cartography published in Geopolitica was evidently influencedby the German model. Morandi himself was well versed in the work ofmembers of the German school. He cites Springenschmid, Schmidt andHaack, and Pahl.55 The most manifest sign of recognition and admirationis to be found in Oddo Girowitz’s section dedicated to the review ofgeopolitical literature, bearing the telling title: “Searching through theCurrent German Geopolitical Literature”. A review referring to one ofthese publications reads, “Great care was taken in the preparation of theaccompanying cartographic material (let it serve as an example to ourauthors and publishers!)”.56

Of course, the cartography in Geopolitica displays a number of smalltechnical differences with respect to the German model (e.g., a larger vari-ety of fonts). The fact remains however, that just as German geopoliticaltheoreticians had strongly influenced those of Italian geopolitics, so too inthe field of geopolitical cartography, the experimental line traced inGermany had been adopted in Italy.

The situation differed however, with regard to the group based at Feder-ico De Agostini’s publishing house, Italgeo – the group coordinated byGiuseppe Mori, with Bernard Rössing as head of cartography. Here we discernno roots in previous experiences of geopolitical cartography, and we mayspeak of truly innovative solutions. These solutions derive from the fact that,unlike the German publishers active in the sector of geopolitical cartography,Federico De Agostini was not a beginner in the field of publishing. He waspart of a publishing tradition started forty years earlier by his father Giovanni,and mainly specialised in school textbooks and related material. The verychoice of producing an atlas designed especially for schools – i.e., for didacticpurposes rather than general propaganda – was a novelty with respect to theGerman model of geopolitical cartography. This is a decisive step forward,marking a point where this industry outstrips its German counterpart, for inGermany there had been no attempts at applying the new methods of geopo-litical cartography to school atlases. As noted above, the aim of Italgeo’s

Downloaded By: [University of Colorado Libraries] At: 20:22 27 December 2010

Page 25: Geopolitical Maps

Geopolitical Maps 301

cartography, too, was to create a dynamic representation illustrating the evolu-tionary character of political phenomena. The difference lies in the underlyingconcept, not as plainly politicised as in the German material.

For example, the idea of producing a historical atlas, which – despitecovering a very extended time-span – nevertheless avoids dealing with thepresent, would have been inconceivable for German cartographers, allintent on exalting the Reich. In addition, the atlas published by Italgeo lacksthe fixation with ethnic integrity and the fatherland, typical of Germancartography and the core of the entire narration of every atlas. Free of thesebiased and propagandistic elements, what this atlas still has in commonwith German geopolitical cartography is the basic approach of accountingfor the spatial consequences of political events from a dynamic perspective.Italgeo thus sets itself apart both from the geopolitical cartography of theperiodicals, as it avoids patent bias, and from scientific cartography, as itavoids limiting itself to presenting a static picture of the politico-territorialsituation, and instead renders it dynamic as it makes an effort to explain thephenomena and the links between them.

In conclusion, from the point of view of cartography as a medium, wecan say that while German geopolitical cartography, with its extreme simpli-fications, had taken the first step toward a widespread distribution of mapsto a large audience, Italian geopolitical cartography took matters a stepfurther in extending that audience to include schools.

History was to doom these cartographical experiments to failure, inter-rupting a process which was aberrant in its messages, but promising in itsinnovative communication modes.

An extremely thought-provoking topic is that of the relationshipbetween geopolitical cartography of the 1920s and 1930s, which was non-conformist with regard to traditional scientific standards, and contempora-neous artistic currents, which were non-conformist with regard to traditionalartistic standards of the time. Such a connection undoubtedly exists. Oneneed only consider the centrality of dynamism within the Italian futuristmovement (see an example in Figure 6). Like futuristic artists, geopoliticalmapmakers embarked on an audacious process of stylistic and technicalexperimentation, celebrating action, aggression and competition. An in-depth analysis of this subject is unfortunately beyond the scope of thispaper. Still, this remains a stimulating topic, which the geographic literaturehas, thus far, only rarely addressed.57

Similarly unexplored is the relationship between geopolitical cartogra-phy and the techniques of visual representation put forward in the 1920s and1930s by the neo-positivist philosophers of the Vienna Circle, most notablyOtto Neurath. Here, too, there is no doubt that a relationship exists. This isclearly identifiable not only in similar experiments in breaking down com-plex concepts into simpler components through the use of visual language,but also in the intention to disseminate information to the masses (Figure 7).

Downloaded By: [University of Colorado Libraries] At: 20:22 27 December 2010

Page 26: Geopolitical Maps

302 Edoardo Boria

FIGURE 6 Giacomo Balla, Guerra (War), oil and collage on board, 1916.

FIGURE 7 A diagram excerpted from O. Neurath, Modern Man in the Making (New Yorkand London: Alfred A. Knopf 1939) p. 88.

Downloaded By: [University of Colorado Libraries] At: 20:22 27 December 2010

Page 27: Geopolitical Maps

Geopolitical Maps 303

CONCLUSIONS

At the beginning of the twentieth century, the expansion of the readingpublic in Western countries – a phenomenon which had slowly begun inthe late nineteenth century – had become an established reality. The middleclasses, with their newly found aspirations and purchasing power, weredrawn closer and closer to culture, and thus also to books. In the carto-graphic sector, this phenomenon, along with the spread of offset and roto-gravure printing processes, facilitated the insertion of maps on the pages ofmagazines and other popular publications (daily newspapers, periodicals),with far-reaching effects on modes of cartographic communication. Likeother sectors in the field of communication, the cartographic sector, alreadymotivated by technological innovations allowing mass production, wasfurther stimulated to seek readily accessible means of expression, able toconvey a clear message to a lay public.

In the language of the map, the most evident innovations resultingfrom this effort were the stylised shapes and the new graphic devices aimedat expressing the dynamic nature of political and economic events. The cre-ation of the latter, in the mid-1920s, was a genuine victory. Up until then,the symbolic language of political maps was strictly limited to the static rep-resentation of certain elements. Now, to this snap-shot type of cartographiclanguage, another was added – more similar to a motion picture. Politicalcartography went from the “photo-map” to the “movie-map”. Politico-geographical actors (above all, states), were made to move on the stage andinteract with one another. For the first time, the reader could perceive theirmotivating factors and underlying dynamism.

Yet, one should not be deceived by the simplicity of shapes and thescarcity of information. This was not a lesser form of cartography, but rathera cartography different from the traditional one. It was different in thethemes it tackled (political and economic events) and in the readers itaddressed (the general public). It was politicised and enjoyed very limitedscientific legitimation. For these reasons, it was first ignored, and then dis-trusted by the academic world. However, this process of cartographic popu-larisation, capable of opening this form of communication to hithertounexplored, novel perspectives should be reconsidered in a different light.

As noted above, two main characteristics set the geopolitical maps ofthe 1920s and 1930s apart from previously published cartographic material:explicit objectives, and a target population which included lay readers.

As far as the first characteristic is concerned, it is well known that allmaps, being instruments of intellectual appropriation of space, reflect agoal, an intention, but this had never before been expressed in such a clearand obvious fashion. Even colonial cartography – clearly intended toredraw the political, economic and social borders and spaces of colonisedterritories – never seemed so shamelessly explicit. Geopolitical maps were

Downloaded By: [University of Colorado Libraries] At: 20:22 27 December 2010

Page 28: Geopolitical Maps

304 Edoardo Boria

the first to openly and contextually portray the legacy of the past, the per-ception of the present and the aspirations for the future.

The second characteristic was that of addressing the general public.Until then, maps were thought of as intended for the use of a restrictedgroup of people, namely those capable of promoting territorial policies andstrategies (members of government, the bureaucracy and the military). Nowthe intention behind geopolitical maps was to mobilise popular support.

A comparison of later geopolitical maps with what was defined “themost famous map in the geopolitical tradition”58 illustrates this well. In 1904,Halford John Mackinder used the map in question (or better, the five mapsaccompanying Mackinder’s paper, all of which were presumably presentedon that occasion) to illustrate the concept of “heartland” at the Royal Geo-graphical Society. He addressed a select audience and used the map merelyas support for his oral lecture. The map was not especially original, neitherin technical terms, nor in terms of the way in which it was used. Surely, themap worked, but it worked for an educated public in a quasi-institutionalcontext, and what’s more, was accompanied by the lecturer’s comments andexplanations. Were it not for the extraordinary force of the innovativeconcept it conveyed (heartland), it would have been a simple map accom-panying a lecture, not particularly self-explanatory, even a little enigmatic.

The geopolitical maps of the 1920s and 1930s are very different. Theseaddressed the general public and could circulate with or without accompa-nying text. They needed to be clearer and more self-explanatory. Newmethods thus had to be explored – not only new modes of representationand communication, but a revolution in the very relationship between themaker of the map and its reader. The result of this experiment was notobvious in the least. Indeed, it was literally extraordinary – it showed thatinternational political dynamics could be effectively represented throughmaps. This was an attempt at venturing into the area branded by officialcartography (as fittingly expressed by Harley) “no cartography land”.59

The innovations introduced by geopolitical cartography in that periodoffered possible solutions and prospects for problems which remain largelyunresolved to this day. They suggested that more flexibility be afforded thecartographer in managing the relationship between reality and representa-tion, that technical constraints be minimised and that geopolitical themes bebetter integrated into cartographic language.

Naturally, these suggestions contained elements of criticism with regardto scientific cartography which, due to its Cartesian foundations, favoursvisual and material characteristics of the territory, through graphic andgeometric rationality.60 Geopolitical cartography, on the contrary, did notconsider space a universal, static category, with the sole purpose of identify-ing the location of places. Moreover, by rejecting the traditional metric viewof Eucledian space, it also unwittingly questioned the very basis of scientificcartography, namely that, following Descartes’ principle of rationality,

Downloaded By: [University of Colorado Libraries] At: 20:22 27 December 2010

Page 29: Geopolitical Maps

Geopolitical Maps 305

accurate measurements will necessarily guarantee truthful representations.Geopolitical cartography thus afforded a glimpse of the possibility of over-coming limits thus far considered intrinsic to the cartographic method,thereby issuing an open challenge to traditional cartography, an attack onhitherto unquestioned principles, norms, standards and requirements.Furthermore, this kind of cartography seems to have had the (untapped) poten-tial of initiating a constructive discussion reconsidering the role of the map.

At work behind the scenes of this dichotomy between traditional scien-tific cartography and the cartographic heresies of geopoliticians were socialforces and power interests, as attested by the coldness between academicsand geopoliticians, which turned it into a competition between two differentpractices of producing knowledge of space struggling to assert themselves.

In closing, granted that the misguided ideological fervour of that carto-graphic period is worthy of censure, we should at the same time appreciateand strive to preserve the awareness it generated of the importance of thecartographic medium in representing phenomena, as well as the courage toexperiment with innovative technical solutions and to reclaim a role for car-tography as an important mode of expression.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to thank the editor and three anonymous reviewers for theirconstructive comments on an earlier draft.

NOTES

1. F. W. Putzger, Putzgers Historischer Schul-Atlas. Grosse Ausgabe (Bielefeld and Leipzig:Velhagen & Klasing 1940).

2. Ibid., pp. 136–137.3. A. Radó, Atlas für Politik Wirtschaft Arbeiterbewegung. Der Imperialismus (Vienna-Berlin:

Verlag für Literatur und Politik 1930).4. J. Bertin, Sémiologie graphique. Les diagrammes, les réseaux, les cartes (Paris-The Hague:

Mouton/Gauthier-Villars 1967) pp. 408–4115. G. H. Herb, ‘Persuasive cartography in Geopolitik and national socialism’, Political

Geography Quarterly 8/3 (July 1989) pp. 289–303; G. H. Herb, Under the Map of Germany.Nationalism and Propaganda 1918–1945 (London: Routledge 1997); M. P. Correa Burrows,‘Propaganda cartográfica en la Alemania de Weimar’, Revista Historia y Comunicación Social 9(2004) pp. 71 et seq.

6. K. Haushofer, ‘Die suggestive Karte’, Grenzboten 1 (1922) pp. 17–19; reproduced in a bookpublished in 1928 (K. Haushofer, E. Obst, H. Lautensach, O. Maull, Bausteine zur Geopolitik [Berlin-Grunewald: Kurt Vowinckel Verlag 1928]), which also included an article by Otto Maull on the sametopic: ‘Über politischgeographische-geopolitische Karten’, pp. 325–342.

7. R. von Schumacher, ‘Zur Theorie der geopolitischen Signatur’, Zeitschrift für Geopolitik 12/4(1935) pp. 247–265.

8. E. Letoschek, Geographischer Repetitions- und Zeichen-Atlas. Europa (Vienna: Im selbstverlageder Verfassers, k.k. Artillerie-Cadeten-Schule, Arsenal. Für den Buchhandel in Commission bei Ed. Höl-zel 1888).

Downloaded By: [University of Colorado Libraries] At: 20:22 27 December 2010

Page 30: Geopolitical Maps

306 Edoardo Boria

9. C. Sitte, ‘Möglichkeiten für den Aufbau besserer Raumvorstellungen und eines globalenAbbilds der Erde’, Geographie & Wirtschaftskunde-Unterricht 64 (1996) pp. 44–52.

10. E. Letoschek, Sammlung von Skizzen und Karten zur Wiederholung beim Studium der Matem-atischen, Physikalischen und Politischen Geographie (Vienna: Kartographischen Anstalt von G. Freytag &Berndt 1906).

11. Herb, Under the Map of Germany (note 5).12. This article by Joseph März marks the beginning of the debate over the use of cartography as

a means of propaganda: J. März, ‘Die Landkarte als politisches Propagandamittel’, Die Gartenlaube 16(1921) pp. 261–262.

13. R. Strausz-Hupé, Geopolitics. The Struggle for Space and Power (New York: Putnam 1942)pp. 114–126

14. J. Thies, ‘Geopolitik in der Volksschule II. Das Kartenbild’, Zeitschrift für Geopolitik 9/12(1932) pp. 629–634; K. Haushofer, ‘Rückblick und Vorschau auf das geopolitische Kartenwesen’,Zeitschrift für Geopolitik 9/12 (1932) pp. 735–745; R. von Schumacher, ‘Zur Theorie der Raumdarstel-lung’, Zeitschrift für Geopolitik 11/10 (1934) pp. 635–652; A. Hillen Ziegfeld, ‘Kartengestaltung – einSport oder eine Waffe?’, Zeitschrift für Geopolitik 12/4 (1935) pp. 243–247; von Schumacher, ‘Zur Theo-rie’ (note 7) pp. 247–265; W. Jantzen, ‘Kartenplakate für Aufklärung und Werbung’, Zeitschrift für Geo-politik 13/10 (1936) pp. 696–700; W. Jantzen, ‘Geopolitik im Kartenbild’, Zeitschrift für Geopolitik 19/8(1942) pp. 353–358.

15. Maull (note 6) p. 325.16. See for example the books authored by Walther Pahl (maps by Rudolf Heinisch), Kurt Tram-

pler (maps by Arnold Hillen Ziegfeld, Rupert von Schumacher and Guido Gebhardt), Karl Springen-schmid (maps by the author), Rupert von Schumacher and Hans Hummel (maps by Guido Gebhardt andG. Jedermann).

17. F. Braun and A. Hillen Ziegfeld, Geopolitischer Geschichtsatlas (Dresden: L. Ehlermann 1927).18. R. Zu der Luth, Wehrwissenschaftlicher Atlas (Vienna, Josef Lenobel 1934); A. Pudelko and

A. Hillen Ziegfeld, Kleiner deutscher Geschichtsatlas (Berlin/Tempelhof: Edwin Runge Verlag 1937).A series of small atlases Geopolitische Bildreihe by Karl Springenschmid published by Verlag ErnstWunderlich as of 1933, comprised: Die Staaten als Lebewesen, Der Donauraum, Deutschlandskämpft für Europa, Deutschland und seine Nachbarn, Deutschland, geopolitisch gesehen. Anotherseries of small atlases Geopolitik im Kartenbild by Walther Jantzen published by Kurt VowinckelVerlag as of 1939, comprised: Seegeltung, Die Juden, Verrat an Europa, Japan, Vereinigte Staatenvon Amerika, Mittelmeer. G. Wirsing, Der Krieg 1939/41 in Karten (Munich: Verlag Knorr & Hirth1942).

19. In Spain the main promoter of geopolitical cartography was Jaime Vicens Vives, whoattempted a classification of geopolitical symbols in his Tratado General de Geopolitica (Barcelona: Ed.Vicens Vives 1950) p 28.

20. H. Cairo, ‘Portugal is not a Small Country: Maps and Propaganda in the Salazar Regime’,Geopolitics 11 (2006) pp. 367–395.

21. In the second edition of his university textbook Appunti di Geografia Politica (Rome:Cremonese 1940).

22. As far as the circulation of Geopolitica, some say 1,000 copies a month (D. Atkinson, ‘Geopo-litical Imaginations in Modern Italy’, in K. Dodds and D. Atkinson [eds.], Geopolitical Traditions: ACentury of Geopolitical Thought [London: Routledge 2000] p. 106), some say 2,000, of which 1,600 forsubscribers, mainly institutions (L. Romagnoli, ‘La rivista “Geopolitica” (1939–1942) di Giorgio Roletto edErnesto Massi’, in Atti del XXVIII Congresso Geografico Italiano [2003] p. 3329; D. Lopreno, ‘LaGéopolitique du fascisme italien: la revue mensuelle “Geopolitica”’, Hérodote 63 [1991] p. 116).

23. Atkinson (note 22) p. 98; M. Antonsich, ‘La rivista “Geopolitica” e la sua influenza sulla politicafascista’, Limes. Rivista Italiana di geopolitica 4 (1994) p. 275–276.

24. For a detailed list see Romagnoli (note 22) p. 3341.25. A. Vinci, ‘“Geopolitica” e Balcani: l’esperienza di un gruppo di intellettuali in un ateneo di con-

fine’, Società e storia 47 (1990) p. 127.26. Appunti per una geopolitica degli Stati fennoscandinavi (Milan: Fratelli Magnani 1942); La

comunità imperiale e l’Albania: prime esperienze (Rome: Istituto Nazionale di Cultura Fascista 1942);Saggi di geografia urbana (Milan: Magnani 1943), with no less than 35 maps.

27. Morandi authored the cartograms of Sui confini dell’Africa Orientale Italiana: studi geopoliticisulla costa dei somali, sul Somaliland, sul Sudan anglo-egiziano, sul Chenia e Uganda, by Paolo D’Agostino

Downloaded By: [University of Colorado Libraries] At: 20:22 27 December 2010

Page 31: Geopolitical Maps

Geopolitical Maps 307

Orsini di Camerota published in November 1940. The same is true of Ernesto Massi’s La partecipazionedelle colonie alla produzione delle materie prime.

28. Cairo (note 20) p. 386.29. Herb, Under the Map of Germany (note 5) pp. 95 et seq.30. G. H. Herb, ‘Before the Nazis. Maps as weapons in German Nationalist Propaganda’,

Mercator’s World (May/June 1999) pp. 26–31.31. E. Boria, Cartografia e potere (Torino: UTET 2007) p. 148.32. The first edition of the textbook (1937) made no mention of geopolitical cartography. Criticism

appears for the first time in the second edition (1940), and is later reaffirmed (cf. 6th ed. [Rome:Cremonese 1961] pp. 47–50).

33. S. Passarge, ‘Politische Geographie und Geopolitik’, Petermanns Mitteilungen (1935)pp. 185–189.

34. G. Parker, Western Geopolitical Thought in the Twentieth Century (London: Croom Helm 1985)pp. 79 et seq.; J. H. Paterson, ‘German Geopolitics Reassessed’, Political Geography Quarterly 6/2 (April1987) pp. 107–114; M. Bassin, ‘Race Contraspace: The Conflict between German Geopolitik and NationalSocialism’, Political Geography Quarterly 6/2 (April 1987) pp. 115–134.

35. H. A. Jacobsen, Karl Haushofer. Leben und Werk, Schriften des Bunderarchivs 24 (Boppardam Rhein: Harald Boldt 1979); H. Heske, ‘Karl Haushofer: His Role in German Geopolitics and inNazi Politics’, Political Geography Quarterly 6/2 (April 1987) pp. 135–144; W. Natter, ‘Geopolitics inGermany, 1919–45’. ‘Karl Haushofer, and the Zeitschrift für Geopolitik’, in J. Agnew, K. Mitchell, andG. Toal (eds.), A Companion to Political Geography (London and New York: Blackwell 2003)pp. 187–203.

36. A. Vinci, (note 25) pp. 87–127; E. Bonetti and F. Micelli, ‘Ancora sul concetto di geopolitica: lelezioni di Giorgio Roletto nell’anno accademico 1943–1944’, in Ferro G. (ed.), Dalla geografia politicaalla geopolitica (Roma: Società Geografica Italiana) pp. 69–75.

37. Beyond the well-researched analyses on the relationship between cartography and Nazism,Herb, Under the Map of Germany (note 5) pp. 84–89, demonstrated this also relative to the behaviour ofthe German political leadership during and after World War I.

38. Compare, for example, the maps of the Italian journal Geopolitica and those printed for theUfficio Propaganda del Partito Nazionale Fascista (“I nostri fronti di guerra” series), or else those appear-ing in the “Soldaten-Atlas” of the Wehrmacht with those of the journal Zeitschrift für Geopolitik.

39. Herb, Under the Map of Germany (note 5) p. 160.40. Ibid., pp. 161–162.41. Ibid., pp. 165 et seq.42. Ibid., pp. 97, 165.43. This, at least, is the opinion expressed by Boria (note 31) p. 164–165 and Herb, Under the Map

of Germany (note 5) p. 159 et seq. A different opinion is expressed by M. Monmonier, ‘Mapping underthe Third Reich: Nazi restrictions on Map Content and Distribution, Coordinates. Online Journal of theMap and Geography, series B/2 (2005).

44. Cairo (note 20) p. 390.45. J. B. Harley, ‘Deconstructing the Map’, Cartographica 26 (1989) pp. 15–20.46. H. H. Minor, ‘Mapping Mussolini: Ritual and Cartography in Public Art during the Second

Roman Empire’, Imago Mundi 51 (1999) pp. 147–162; Cairo (note 20) pp. 367–395.47. For an account of the circumstances surrounding the project: Minor (note 46).48. W. Jantzen, volume Die Juden (Heidelberg-Berlin-Magdeburg: Kurt Vowinckel Verlag 1940

circa). ‘Series Geopolitik im Kartenbild’.49. See note 38.50. Herb, Under the Map of Germany (note 5) p. 83.51. von Schumacher, ‘Zur Theorie’ (note 7); Hillen Ziegfeld (note 14).52. H. Haack and M. G. Schmidt, Geopolitischer Typen-Atlas (Gotha: Perthes 1929); the didactic

objective of this work becomes clear already in the subtitle: Introduction to the Basic Concepts ofGeopolitics.

53. Note also that intellectual debt is often expressly acknowledged. For example, in the introduc-tion to the small atlas Deutsches Schicksal (Verlag von Julius Beltz, year of publication not mentioned)Karl Springenschmid’s work is acknowledged. The contribution of the “fathers” of geopolitical cartogra-phy is often acknowledged in papers on the subject.

54. Wirsing (note 18).

Downloaded By: [University of Colorado Libraries] At: 20:22 27 December 2010

Page 32: Geopolitical Maps

308 Edoardo Boria

55. The first in ‘La Svizzera’, Geopolitica (1941) pp. 257–261 and the others in ‘La Svezia,la Norvegia, la Danimarca’, Geopolitica (1941) pp. 587–593.

56. Geopolitica (Oct. 1941) p. 499.57. D. Cosgrove, ‘Maps, Mapping, Modernity: Art and Cartography in the Twentieth Century’,

Imago Mundi 57 (2005) pp. 35–54.58. G. O’Tuathail, Critical Geopolitics (London: Routledge 1996) p. 31.59. Harley (note 45) p. 6.60. C. Jacob, L’Empire des cartes. Approche théorique de la cartographie à travers l’histoire (Paris:

Albin Michel 1992).

Downloaded By: [University of Colorado Libraries] At: 20:22 27 December 2010