A quick update from my last post to report two network graphs that seems genuinely interesting.

This first graph (using an updated dataset – now up to 188 prints) plots the general place depicted in the print against the specific place depicted. I have given every print a value in each of these columns meaning, for example, there are prints listed as ‘House of Commons‘ (specific) and ‘London’ (general), or ‘On the way to Croydon‘ (specific) and ‘Environs’ (general), or ‘None‘ (specific) and ‘Country’ (general). I’m still to work out a consistent schema for these descriptions, but the network graph based on this information demonstrates a strong relationship between those prints depicting no specific location (central yellow node) and those prints depicting London in general.

If we then exclude the publishers Robert Sayer and his successors Laurie & Whittle from the graph (which roughly halves the dataset), it is interesting to note how the strength of that relationship declines.

What a comparison of these two graphs seems to be suggesting is that the publications of Robert Sayer and Laurie & Whittle were less targeted at the concerns of non-London audiences as has been assumed. Of course this observation may simply be available because of the incomplete nature of my dataset, but it does nonetheless represent (I think) that these network graphs may be of use to me after all.