1. How might you use this georeferenced image to uncover new information about the history of the region you just mapped.
When comparing an older map to today’s Google Maps, changes in the region over time become apparent. Even in an older city like Rome, there have been changes since the creation of the map to today. In addition, this approach of georegerenced images can be helpful to have a more indepth understanding of the streets within the region. For example, the neighborhood of Trastevere, which lies on the other side of the Tiber, is hardly depicted in the original map. However, when layed with Google Maps, the viewer gains a more indepth understanding of the neighborhood as its vast network of streets. Similar to this, neighborhoods on the outskirts of Rome come into view when layered with Google Maps.
2. What are some weaknesses to this approach? Are there inaccuracies? Do some places map better than others? Why?
One weakness to this approach is that one of the two maps may have inaccuracies. When creating the older map, the author might not have had all the resources we have today to make accurate decisions about where to place its features. This leads into the idea of how some places are mapped better than others when using georeferenced images. Places along rivers tend to change over time as the river moves its course. This causes disreprecies between the two maps. In addition, cities with rapid urbanization in the 20th and 21st century would also be harder to map as it would be harder to pinpoint your control points. Examples of this can be seen all across North America as cities have changed dramatically over the past 50 years. However, this means that it might be easier to map from this approach with cities that haven’t experienced urbanization to the extent of other cities, such as Rome. Many of Rome’s key features have been around for centuries allowing the mapping of control points to be much easier than other cities with rapidly developing skylines.
