Conflict, information, and the limitations of maps

This map depicts the Battle of Blenheim during the War of Spanish Succession. The war began following the death of Charles II of Spain, who left behind no direct heirs. In his will, Charles left the Spanish crown to Philip of Anjou, grandson of Louis XIV of France. Fearing a consolidation of French power, England, the Dutch Republic, Austria, and Prussia formed the Grand Alliance, backing Archduke Charles of Austria for the Spanish throne.

In 1704, the French and their Bavarian allies were threatening Vienna, and with it, the fate of the Spanish crown. However, in just five weeks, the first Duke of Marlborough's army had marched more than 250 miles from the low countries to Bavaria to meet and attempt to stop the French at Blenheim.

Danube River, this map is oriented west, with the river flowing down the page.

Allied forces approach from the east

French and Bavarian forces are to the west, entrenched facing eastward

Allied attacks began with skirmishes on the sides of the line, drawing French reinforcements

With the enemy occupied at either end of the line, the British broke through the center

With the line broken, the Allies forced troops on the right flank to retreat

On the other flank, Marlborough's army succeeded in encircling more than 10,000 French troops in Blenheim, forcing a historic surrender.

For his hard-fought victory at Blenheim, John Churchill was awarded land and funds to construct a palace by Queen Anne.

The palace was named after the victory and it is where Winston Churchill, a direct descendant of the Duke of Marlborough, was born.

Beek's Battle of Blenheim map shows that a battle map can contain a staggering amount of information.

At first glance, however, Beek's map is difficult to comprehend, and the mapmaker foresaw this, attaching a multi-stage key to the map.

The map has a detailed key. Its creator knew it would be difficult to read.

Here's another map of the Battle of Blenheim. It's a contemporary map, made by John Fawkes. It is much more approachable, but the information contained is less complete. More legibility but less information.

That brings us to what I see as the principal tradeoff of battle maps, between legibility and information. This is a tradeoff faced by all mapmakers, but it may be most obvious in battle maps because of the sheer quantity of non-geographic information they contain, like time. In making battle maps, cartographers must carefully balance the two, and Beek's map of Blenheim is just one approach to the problem.

Beek's map of Blenheim appears so busy in part because of the complexities of battle. Unlike a feature like a river or street, there's no obvious way depicting the movements of troops across a small field over time.

One way to get around the tradeoff is not to depict a battle at all. If troop movements are hard to map, why map them? Instead, this map provides an overview of the French city of Aire-sur-la-Lys as it appeared following the Treaty of Utrecht (1713-1715), which ended the War of Spanish Succession. Although it does not show an active conflict — there was none at the time — it provides a detailed view of the fortifications surrounding the cities, which would doubtlessly be helpful to any would-be invaders.

This map shows the 1676 Siege of Maastricht, an unsuccessful attack by William of Orange to retake the now-Dutch city from France during the Franco-Dutch war.

It strikes a balance between geographical and military information by including both a map (without troop movements) and an image of the proceedings.

Perhaps most interestingly, it includes a side profile of the city’s fortifications, which would doubtlessly be useful to the Dutch army.

This 1703 depiction of the 1573 siege of Alkmaar is almost entirely pictorial. The siege, which took place in the Netherlands during the Eighty Years War, was a victory for Dutch rebels, who successfully held off their Hapsburg Spanish rulers.

Instead of splitting the depiction into separate map and pictorial elements, this image combines the two, with a geographically faithful creation of the city's surroundings in the background and an image of the Hapsburgian armies in the foreground.

While the course of the siege is clearly visible, as are some geographic details, neither is as detailed as Beek's map of Blenheim, the entire thing, however, is much more legible without further context.

Military information is often scarcely legible on a map, so why include a map at all? This 1698 image depicts of the armada of William of Orange and Mary Stuart crossing from Hellevoetsluis, in the Netherlands, to England at the beginning of the Glorious Revolution in 1688. The massive armada is correctly and carefully pictured, but not in any particular place.

 

But this is a presentation on maps, after all, and the map is not without geographic detail. At the top of the map the south coast of England and its principal cities are laid out accurately.

It is difficult to map an individual battle, all of the approaches we have looked at, some more creative than others, have succeeded in some areas and fallen short in others. Maps can't depict a battle alone, and in many of the cases we've examined, an image or written description can better serve a viewer. Today, videos can provide compelling and readily graspable depictions of battles, too.

So perhaps maps are not the ideal medium for depicting a single battle, but the cost of the tradeoff between legibility and information could be lessened by changing the information depicted in a map. Instead of focusing on a single battle, maps of military campaigns focus on a larger conflict, and are more successful in transmitting complex information legibly.

In fact, maps are essential to understanding military campaigns, as they revolve around taking territory.

George Washington's Continental Army faced a series of defeats leading up to Christmas 1776, but, resolved, to win, Washington led an attack on Trenton, starting in the early morning of December 26.

Washington and his army famously crossed the Delaware here (in a community now called Washington Crossing) on Christmas Night in 1776.

Washington split his army into two divisions on the approach to Trenton.

As marked on the map, Washington's two armies struck the Hessians stationed in Trenton at 8:00 a.m. on the 26th, winning a decisive victory in less than an hour.

Ten days later, the Continental Army won another victory, this time at Princeton. The two victories proved decisive in turning the tide of the war.

Whereas maps are not the best tool for depicting a single battle, they are essential to understanding a military campaign, alongside other sources. There exists some information, though, that only a map can display in a readily approachable manner.

These maps are by Charles Joseph Minard, a French who pioneered what we know today as infographics. Like the Revolutionary War maps we saw previously, both maps focus on military campaigns.

This map chart's Hannibal's famous journey, starting in Spain and following the French Riviera into the Alps. The width of the line corresponds to the size of his army, he began with more than 94,000 men. 

After crossing over the Alps, only 26000 remained. While greatly diminished, his force was still strong enough to triumph over the Romans in a number of important battles before returning to Carthage.

This map charts the journey of Napoleon's army into Russia, beginning on June 24, 1812, with the crossing of the Niemen River. At this point, Minard estimated Napoleon's force to be more than 420,000 strong.

The French arrive Moscow on September 14, their force already diminished to 100,000. They find the city largely empty, offering no shelter or supplies to the troops, forcing a retreat on October 19.

As the retreat continued, the temperature in Russia dropped steadily dropped and Russian forces followed closely behind Napoleon's army. Between the late November temperature already reaching negative 11 celsius or 12 Fahrenheit on November 28 and the Russian army meeting them, more than half of Napoleon's army was lost crossing the Berezina River.

By the end of his retreat, the Grande Armée had just 10,000 troops remaining.

Technology has changed the way the tradeoff operates. Video, for example, may be the single best medium to depict a battle, getting around the tradeoff between information and legibility.

Thank you for listening!

My presentation would not have been possible without the help of the following: