SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Alternatif Politika / 2020 / Cilt: 12 - Sayı: 2

NATION AND MAP

ULUS VE HARİTA

Özgür ADADAĞ
Pages
281–310
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The role maps play in construction and imagination of the nation will be analyzed.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Map renders the nation visible.
📊
Key Findings & Data:As a result of this from 19th Century onwards maps became elements of nationalisms.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The role maps play in construction and imagination of the nation will be analyzed.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Map renders the nation visible. It determines the borders of the homeland and distinguishes inside from the outside; it points to the probable threats to the land within the borders or engenders dreams of expansion towards outside the borders. Maps, through presenting the nation and the homeland within a meaningful coherence and concretizing them facilitates people to bond with this unity, hence reinforces the emotion of belonging to the nation. If there were no maps it would have been harder to think about the nation, feel a loyalty towards the homeland and imagine the nation. As a result of this from 19th Century onwards maps became elements of nationalisms. Maps with world maps, history atlases, schoolbooks find themselves an effective and widespread area of usage as educative materials. Hence maps from childhood onwards function as tools where we position the world and ourselves/nation within it. In this study the political language of maps, a neglected issue within the social sciences in Turkey, will be tackled through the nation- map relation. The role maps play in construction and imagination of the nation will be analyzed.

Özet

Harita ulusu görünür kılar. Ulusal toprağın sınırlarını belirleyip içeriyi dışarıdan ayırır, sınırın içerisine olası tehditleri gösterir ya da dışarıya doğru genişleme olasılığını düşletir. Ulusu ve vatanı anlamlı bir bütün olarak sunan, somutlayan harita insanların bu bütün ile bağ kurmasını kolaylaştırır, böylece ulusa aidiyet duygusunu pekiştirir. Haritalar olmasaydı ulusu düşünmek, vatana bağlılık hissetmek, ulusun tahayyülü daha zor olurdu. Bu sebeplerle 19. yüzyıldan itibaren ulusçulukların malzemesi olur. Haritalar, dünya haritalarıyla, tarih atlaslarıyla, ulusal atlaslarla, ders kitaplarıyla, eğitim malzemesi olarak yaygın ve etkin kullanım alanı bulur ve çocukluk çağımızdan itibaren dünyayı ve onun içinde kendimizi/ulusu konumlandırma işlevi görür. Bu çalışmada Türkiye sosyal bilimler alanında hayli arka planda kalmış haritaların siyasal dili ulus harita ilişkisi üzerinden ele alınacak. Ulusun inşasında ve tahayyülünde haritaların nasıl bir rol oynadığı incelenecek.

🔖

Cite This Article

ADADAĞ, Ö. (2020). NATION AND MAP. Alternatif Politika, Cilt: 12 - Sayı: 2, 281–310. https://ajindex.com/articles/141374

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. Adadağ, Özgür (2016), “Visualiser ‘l’indivisible unité de l’Etat avec son pays et sa nation’”, Les multiples facettes de l’Etat en Turquie (Paris: Harmattan): 17- 50. Adadağ, Özgür (2018), “Sömürgecilik ve Harita”, Asoscogress 5. Uluslararası Sosyal, Beşerî ve İdari Bilimler Sempozyumu (İstanbul): 121-134.
  2. Akerman, James R. (1995), “The Structuring of Political Territory in Early Printed Atlases”, Imago Mundi, 47: 138-154.
  3. Alp, İlker (1998), “Misak-ı Millî”, Misak-ı Millî ve Türk Dış Politikasında Musul, (Ankara: Atatürk Araştırma Merkezi): 175-252.
  4. Anderson, Benedict (1995), Hayali Cemaatler. Milliyetçiliğin Kökenleri ve Yayılması (İstanbul: Metis) (Çev. İskender Savaşır). Batuman, Bülent (2010), “The shape of the nation: Visual production of nationalism through maps in Turkey”, Political Geography, 29: 220-234.
  5. Billig, Michael (2002), Banal Milliyetçilik (İstanbul: Gelenek) (Çev. Cem Şişkolar). Biggs, Michael (1999), “Putting the State on the Map: Cartography, Territory, and European State Formation”, Comparative Studies in Society and History, 41 (2): 374-405.
  6. Black, Jeremy (1994), “Historical Atlases”, The Historical Journal, 37 (3): 643-667.
  7. Black, Jeremy (1997), Maps and History (Yale University Press). Boulineau, Emmanuelle (2001), “Un géographe traceur de frontières: Emmanuel de Martonne et la Roumanie”, L'Espace géographique, 4: 358-369.
  8. Bowman, Isaiah (1921), “Constantinople and the Balkans”, House, Edward M. ve Charles Seymour (Der.), What Really Happened at Paris: The Story of the Peace Conference 1918-1919 (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons): 140-175.
  9. Branch, Jordan (2014),
  10. Cartographic State. Maps, Territory, and the Origins of Sovereignty (Cambridge University Press). Copeaux, Etienne (2000), Une vision Turque du monde à travers les cartes de 1931 à nos jours (Paris: CNRS Editions). Craib, Raymond B. (2002), “A Nationalist Metaphysics: State Fixations, National Maps, and the Geo-Historical Imagination in Nineteenth-Century Mexico.” Hispanic American Historical Review, 82 (1): 33-68.
  11. Craib, Raymond B. (2015), “Decolonization and Independence”, Monmonier, Mark (Der.), The History of Cartography. Cartography in the Twentieth Century, Vol.6 (University of Chicago Press): 300-309.
  12. Crampton, Jeremy W. (2006), “The Cartographic Calculation of Space: Race Mapping and the Balkans at the Paris Peace Conference of 1919.” Social & Cultural Geography, 7 (5): 731-752.
  13. Culcasi, Karen (2015), “Nation-State Formation and Cartography”, Monmonier, Mark (Der.),