Cartog raphi c Anal ysi s of the Constru cti on of Fabri ci u s' M ap of M oravi a (1 569)

. The map of Moravia (1 569) by the renowned Vienna scholar, Paulus Fabricius (ca. 1 528-1 589), is still considered to be the oldest known cartographic representation of Moravia. This paper focuses on the cartographic analysis of the map with the aim to identify possible methods of its construction with regard to some known circumstances of its origin. The author of the map mentions in the appended texts that he travelled through Moravia several times. The methodology of the work is based on selected spatial analyses of the positional and height aspects of displayed settlements. The achieved results are compared and discussed in the context of other information sources, especially the existing settlement structure and contemporary communication network. The conclusions reveal a correlation between the density of the depicted settlements and the proximity of a modelled communication network. The orographic conditions of Moravia have a significant influence on the map content. The plains are covered in detail, hilly lands and highlands are rarely and randomly mapped, whereas the mountains are not described at all. In the peripheral parts of the area of interest, the author probably worked only with data from travel itineraries. With regard to achieved results, it can be assumed that there is potential to apply the established procedures to the analysis of old maps of similar type. Unlike later maps, they are based on the author's travelling experiences and impressions, rather than on complex measurements of geographical coordinates.

1 Introduction Old maps have long been the subject of research in the fields of geography, cartography and, more recently, geoinformatics.Traditional analyses focus on aspects oftheir cartographic, geometric, as well as visual quality (Delano-Smith 2005, Jongepier et al. 2016, Muylle 2019).The content of old maps is an important source ofinformation, for instance, to monitor changes and evolution of the landscape (Wilson 2005, Trachet 2018) or its settlement (Quesada-García 2022).
The present paper deals with the cartographic analysis of Fabricius' map of Moravia (1569), one of the three historical lands of the Czech Republic.Using geospatial methods in a GIS environment, the paper aims to identify possible methods ofits construction.It is one of the first detailed maps of smaller territorial units, the so-called chorographical maps.Their construction usually reflects the author's personal experience and varying degrees of familiarity with the area they represent.The main focus is therefore on the socio-economic elements of the map (specifically settlements), its quality, spatial and elevation distribution.The achieved results are confronted with the model of contemporary settlement structure and communication network.Its form is based on available text and map itineraries.
The selected procedure combines the various methods described above.Vectorization of the map is carried out manually and has a selective character, dealing only with the dominant component of the map (settlements).Regarding the significant positional inaccuracy, it is implemented indirectly, i.e., by identifying the settlements on the current map.In this case, vectorization did not require a georeferenced map and was done remotely with a digital image in the online catalogue.However, the quality ofthe digital image must meet the prerequisite oflegibility ofthe descriptive component and map content.
2 Fabricius' Map of Moravia (FMM) The oldest known map of Moravia was created by the humanist Paulus Fabricius (ca. 1528Fabricius (ca. -1589)).Born in the Lower Silesian Voivodeship in southwest Poland a town ofLubáń, he established himselfat the University of Vienna after studies, where he eventually grew to become Dean ofthe Faculty ofMedicine.He later became the first court mathematician and physician to the Austrian emperors (Fröde 2010).He applied his versatile skills in many other fields, including botany, astronomy and cartography (Petz-Grabenbauer 2016, Oestmann 2014).It is documented that he prepared a concept map of Austria, the fate ofwhich is unknown today, as well as several maps for astrolabes.Thus, his greatest cartographic achievement remains the six-sheet map ofMoravia (88 x 96 cm), which was reproduced using the copperplate engraving technique (see Figure 1).The bilingual title is placed at the top ofthe map field and reads: MARCHIONATVS | MORAVIAE.-Das Marggrafftumb | Mährern.The scale ofthe map is approx.1:330 000.The identity of the engraver with the AF monogram is unknown.The printing plates of the map were later stolen and therefore the author had the map engraved once more in 1575 in a reduced single sheet version.At present, only seven existing copies ofthe map can be reliably documented (Chrást 2017).Literature mentions two other copies, but their existence and current location could not be verified.Complete copies, including an inserted printed acknowledgement and dedication to the map's readers, are documented only in two copies.The other copies are either test prints or a loose omnibus volume of test and final prints (see Table 1).The uniqueness ofeach copy also arises from the way in which all six sheets are connected.The problematic layout ofthe drawing was an issue already for the engraver, who engraved some ofthe settlement symbols and names on both adjacent plates.On some copies, there is a clear auxiliary line for the trimming of the printed sheets.The resulting volume can be considered unique with different geometrical characteristics affecting, for example, the content and especially cartometric analyses (Stachoň, Chrást 2017).
Three ofthese copies come from collector's atlases, the so-called Lafreri atlases, from the second half of the 16th century.These are the atlas of Doria, Lloyd Triestino (a copy from the Austrian National Library, see Figure 1) and an unnamed copy from the British Library (proofprint).
3 Methods of the FMM Construction We can learn more about how the map was constructed from the author himself, whose words are recorded in the acknowledgement and dedication for the readers of the map.The author states there that he had travelled and explored the country several times.He apparently discussed his personal observations with manor owners.Indeed, it is known that he was in contact with important Moravian noblemen (e.g., Albrecht Černohorský of Boskovice), to whom he dedicated the map.He probably used local distance measurements by means of steps or worked with measuring instruments such as Jacob's staff.Determination of geographical coordinates cannot be ruled out either, with regard to his astronomical activities, but they were probably not essential for the construction of the map.Of particular note are the discrepancies between the size and orientation of the frame with the geographic grid and the content of the map.Even the proof prints do not yet contain the frame with a geographic grid.The author himselfstates that he positioned the map on the cardinal points, i.e., with respect to the neighbouring lands.He presumably used available geographic coordinate data to illustrate the geographic grid.
The information provided about travelling through the country can in some cases be verified from preserved archival materials.His personal knowledge of south-eastern Moravia is illustrated by a drawing ofa single spring of healing water near Hluk, for which he composed an epigram during his stay at the residence of the highest provincial vice-chamberlain, Jetřich of Kunovice (ca. 1520Kunovice (ca. −1582)).For the royal town ofJihlava, he recommended a new town doctor.Its significance is reflected in the detailed perspective drawing, comparable only to the depictions of Vienna and Olomouc.With these mini vedutas, after all, he imitates a specific decorative trend in the cartographic work ofthe 16 th and 17 th centuries.The authenticity is sporadic with the exceptions ofthe aforementioned large cities and selected settlements.He named the hill Rudný, located north ofJihlava, where silver was mined, or the abandoned village ofZvonějov with the silhouette ofa ruined church.All along the Vienna-Prague road.In the 1570s, he was involved in the reconstruction of the astronomical clock in Olomouc, etc.The author of the map certainly did not lack experience of travelling throughout Moravia.The question remains whether this was a systematic mapping or whether the author was only in exposed localities and used also other opportunities for topographical work.Furthermore, to what extent does this mapping contribute to the overall design and content of the map.From external sources, these could hypothetically include inventories or smaller estate maps, if they existed.As the author himself states, he has no knowledge of any predecessor who created a map of Moravia, and therefore we cannot assume borrowing of larger map templates as was the case with later maps.
To further refine the model of the communication network, Müller's map of Moravia from ca. 1714-1716 (hereinafter MMM) was used as a source.Johann Christoph Müller (1673−1721) was an important cartographer of the Danube countries, especially Austria, the Czech Lands, Croatia and Hungary (Lapaine et al. 2004).The MMM shows the main and minor communication routes in greater detail than the above-mentioned itineraries, even though their depiction is often fragmentary and incomplete.In some locations, there is branching into multiple sections, indicating the variability oftheir course.

Methodology
Based on the above facts, three research questions were determined: 1.The travel itineraries were used as an input for creation ofFMM.2. Settlements on FMM are not evenly distributed and the relative frequency ofsettlements with respect to altitude corresponds to the current situation.3. The distribution of settlements identified on the FMM shows above-average densities in the areas around the communication network.
The methodology used for the research can be divided in two parts: 1. Establishment of a vector data model of the settlements identified on the FMM.Afterwards, a point layer of the existing settlement structure and a reconstructive polyline layer of the contemporary communication network were added.2. Subsequently, spatial analyses were performed to investigate the research questions: the comparison ofthe FMM content and the current situation, density analyses ofthe settlement structure, distribution of settlements in relation to hypsography.The spatial data creation, analysis, and the preparation ofstatistical and map inputs was carried out in the desktop application ArcGIS Pro (2.9.0) from ESRI.First, a vector data model ofFMM settlements in the WGS84 coordinate system was created and completed with the following attributes: name from the map, current name, country affiliation according to the map and according to the current state.Given the partially distorted map nomenclature (mostly German or Germanized), the identification process required comparison with other text and map sources.These usually included lexicons of towns and villages giving current and historically used Czech and German names or contemporary maps.Each settlement was assigned a reference point in the location ofits historical centre (square, church, town hall, etc.).It can be assumed that these were prominent landmarks in the landscape, which the author could hypothetically use for local measuring.The settlement structure ofthe FMM was then subjected to a basic statistical evaluation in terms ofquantity, quality (significance ofsettlements according to legend) and country affiliation.
In the second step, it was necessary to select a suitable dataset ofexisting settlements with a structure that would approximately correspond to the state at the time ofthe creation ofthe FMM and could be used as a reference source for comparative analyses.As for the Czech Republic, the necessary data is contained in the basic register RÚIAN (Registr územní identifikace, adres a nemovitostí -Registry of Territorial Identification, Addresses and Real Estate), which is maintained by ČÚZK (Český úřad zeměměřický a katastrální -State Administration ofLand Surveying and Cadastre).The settlement of the Czech Republic was, with a few exceptions, completed by the end of the 16 th century (Český statistický úřad 2003), and therefore the current settlement network captured by RÚIAN can be considered a suitable reference source.Data from existing municipalities, which represent the basic administrative units, would be the most suitable in the first place.A detailed assessment revealed, however, that their level of detail was insufficient, as many of them (especially larger towns) consist ofseveral municipal districts, which, however, formed a separate settlement unit at the time ofthe FMM.For this reason, a point set of local municipal districts was used.Their selection is supported by the fact that their current number in Moravia (approx.3000) corresponds approximately with the number ofsettlements recorded on the MMM.As for Austria, a database of administrative borders of Austria (VGD -Verwaltungsgrenzendatenbank) is available from the BEV (Bundesamt für Eich-und Vermessungswesen -Federal Office ofMetrology and Surveying).From the perspective of the Austrian settlement structure, the basic units are so-called "Ortschaften" (localities).These are the equivalent of the Czech municipal districts.The available polygon layer was converted to centroids using the Feature-To-Point tool3 .The settlement structure ofthe border areas ofthe neighbouring countries, Slovakia, Poland and Hungary, was modelled CHRÁST, J.I STACHOŇ, Z.: KARTOGRAFSKA ANALIZA KONSTRUKCIJE FABRICIJEVE KARTE MORAVSKE (1 569) znamenitostima u krajoliku koje bi autor hipotetski mogao koristiti za lokalna mjerenja.Struktura naselja FMMa potom je podvrgnuta osnovnoj statističkoj procjeni u smislu kvantitete, kvalitete (značaj naselja prema legendi) i državne pripadnosti.
The contemporary communication network was modelled using available text and map itineraries.In the first step of vectorization, a point layer of nodes was created based on individual itineraries in the WGS84 coordinate system.By linking them, a line model of the communication network passing through the area shown on the FMM was created.Each node was provided with the information whether the location is also shown on the FMM and, ifnecessary, what is its significance according to the legend.Above it, a synthesis ofall three source roads was made in order to get a clear overview of more and less preferred sections.The sections between major nodes were assigned a priority according to the number ofpassing routes.
The spatial analysis in the first step included a visual examination of the distribution and density of FMM settlements over the current map.Based on this analysis, a line schema was created replicating areas with significant concentrations of settlements, which represented the basic input for further comparison.In the second step, an analysis of the point density of both settlement models was conducted using the Point Density method 4 , which is part of the Spatial Analyst extension.For each cell of the selected raster, the method calculates the ratio of the number ofsettlements in its vicinity to the size ofthis adjacent area.The cell size parameter of the output raster was set to 2.5 km, which corresponds approximately to the average size of municipalities in the Czech Republic.The shape ofthe adjacent area was chosen to be a circle and its radius was set to 6 km.This distance is the sum ofthe average distances of the nearest settlements on FMM and its standard deviation.The distance of the points was determined using the Near method 5 .Due to the irregular distribution of FMM settlements in the peripheral areas, it would have an adverse effect on the outputs of the analyses, the area ofinterest for the calculation was limited to a polygon encompassing the territory of Moravia and a part ofAustria including a 10 km buffer zone.The density analysis was carried out for both sets of settlements and then the density ratio ofthe existing settlement structure depicted on the FMM was calculated using the Raster Calculator tool 6 .Using a histogram and the Natural Breaks method (Jenks), five approximately equivalent qualitative categories of density ratio were created: very low, low, medium, high and very high.Since the coverage with settlements is incomplete on FMM, the output raster of the density analysis contained null values.Such cells were marked as places with missing data (No Data) using the Set Null tool 7 .In these areas, the density data of the current settlements were visualized and examined, which were firstly standardized -through standard deviation and histogram (Natural Breaks method (Jenks)) -into five density categories: very low, low, medium, high and very high.
The spatial analysis also worked with the elevation proportions of the investigated area.For these purposes, the European Digital Elevation Model (EU-DEM) version 1.1, a product of the European Environment Agency (EEA) COPERNICUS programme, was used as a reference source for the reading of the altitudes of the settlements in both models.Subsequently, the distribution of individual settlements in the ranges of altitude was evaluated in increments of50 m, and the two models were compared.The DEM model also served as a source for representing the basic elevation relationships of the area depicted in the FMM.The landform classification was taken from Kudrnovská, Kousal (1971).
An overview ofthe actual data sources used for the analyses and map visualization is provided in the following list: The results can be divided into four parts.The first one deals with the statistical evaluation ofthe content of the settlement elements on FMM, the second part describes the simulated communication network, the third CHRÁST, J.I STACHOŇ, Z.: KARTOGRAFSKA ANALIZA KONSTRUKCIJE FABRICIJEVE KARTE MORAVSKE (1 569) standardne devijacije i histograma (metoda prirodnih prekida (Jenks), najprije standardizirani u pet kategorija gustoće: vrlo niska, niska, srednja, visoka i vrlo visoka.
1 .Statistička procjena sadržaja FMM-a Karta sadrži ukupno 559 elemenata naselja.Od toga su broja vlastelinski gradovi Ostrovačice i Veverská Bítýška zabilježeni samo na probnom otisku; uklonjeni su iz konačne gravure iz nepoznatih razloga.U sva su naselja uključeni dvorac Hukvaldy i ruševine dvorca Rožnov koji se na karti spominju samo imenom.Još sedam naselja nije imenovano (pet sela i dva vlastelinstva).U tablici 2 prikazan je sadržaj karte s obzirom na pripadnost pojedinoj zemlji.Najviše je naselja prikazano u Moravskoj (oko 64%) i Austriji (oko 26%), a zatim u Kraljevini Mađarskoj, Češkoj, Šleziji i Poljskoj.Iz perspektive sadašnjih država, prikazani su dio Kraljevine Mađarske današnje Slovačka i Mađarska, dok Šleska pripada Češkoj i Poljskoj.Razlike u broju naselja s obzirom na granice na karti i sadašnje granice rezultat su kako Tablica 2. Sadržaj karte s gledišta pripadnosti pojedinoj zemlji.The map contains a total of559 settlement elements.Of this number, the manorial towns of Ostrovačice and Veverská Bítýška are recorded only on the test print; they were removed from the final engraving for unknown reasons.The total also includes the castle ofHukvaldy and the ruins ofthe Rožnov castle, which are only mentioned by name on the map.Seven more settlements are not named (five villages and two manorial towns).Table 2 shows the content ofthe map in terms of land affiliation.Most settlements are depicted in Moravia (ca.64%) and Austria (ca.26%), followed by the Kingdom ofHungary, Bohemia, Silesia and Poland.From the perspective ofpresent states, the depicted part ofthe Kingdom of Hungary is today's Slovakia and Hungary, while Silesia belongs to the Czech Republic and Poland.The differences in the number of settlements with regard to the borders on the map and current borders are the result of both incorrect localisation by the map author and changes in administrative organisation.
The legend distinguishes between eight categories of settlements (see Graph 1), while the symbols for fortified towns and towns with a castle are further combined creating two more categories.The most numerous categories include villages (199) and manorial towns (193).These are mainly represented in Moravia and Austria.In the other countries, urban-type settlements prevail.In the text appendices to the map, the author states that "more villages could have been drawn, but this would have led to lack ofclarity."It is obvious that the countries he had travelled through were mapped in greater detail, whereas in neighbouring countries he had only plotted the more important settlements.

Sinteza modela suvremene komunikacijske mreže
Povijesna je komunikacijska mreža proučavana u trima vremenskim okvirima, što je također odgovaralo 3. Procjena prioritetnih ruta iz modela komunikacijske mreže.Fig. 3 The assessment of priority routes from the communication network model.to all the itineraries form the main backbone of the historical communication network (see Figure 3).With the exception of peripheral areas, they are also all recorded on the FMM, and these are generally larger towns.In Moravia, these include mainly Olomouc, Vyškov, Brno, Třebíč and Mikulov, in Austria, it is Vienna.Other nodes are located on the periphery ofthe area depicted on the FMM (Nový Jičín, Moravská Ostrava, Melk, Győr and Oświ cim).The main framework is completed by the towns of Krems an der Donau and, above all, Znojmo, which lies at the crossroads ofseveral routes.Figure 3 shows the connection between Moravia and Austria and the neighbouring lands.There are three routes between Bohemia (Prague) and Moravia, connecting Moravia with Poland (Wroclaw, Kraków), Austria with Slovakia (Bratislava) and Hungary (Győr).The between Linz and Vienna along the Danube are also indicated.The highest priority roads described in all itineraries include the connection between Moravia and Bohemia via Třebíč, the connection between Moravia and Poland via Moravská Ostrava and the connection between Moravia and Austria via Mikulov.The connection of Moravia and Austria via Znojmo and the northern connection ofMoravia and Poland have medium priority.Within Moravia, the connection of nodes often takes different paths.The situation is most evident on the routes between Znojmo and Brno, Znojmo and Třebíč, Olomouc and Vyškov, and Vyškov and Mikulov.For these routes, at least two itineraries track the road through other locations.On the other hand, the road between Brno and Mikulov has a surprisingly low priority and is replaced by the Mikulov-Vyškov connection towards Olomouc in two itineraries.High priority is given to the connection between Austria and Hungary via Győr and the connection between Vienna and Linz along the Danube, which varies considerably in different itineraries.The road passes along both the southern and northern banks of the Danube and crosses it in several places.An interesting detail of the FMM is that the map shows only three river crossings.These are the crossing of the three arms ofthe Danube north ofVienna, the Danube crossing at Krems an der Donau and the crossing ofthe southern branch of the Morava River in direction towards Olomouc.
3 Visual analysis of the FMM content When examining the original FMM, it is difficult to objectively evaluate the equal distribution of its content.Due to the positional inaccuracy, as well as the component, hypsography and other graphic elements of the map, the content seems to be distributed quite evenly, at least in the central part ofthe map.The peripheral parts of the depicted area are often empty or filled with other supplementary elements or texts.By displaying the content over a current map, the approximate concentration of settlements can be revealed (see Figure 4).In the case of Moravia, the distribution of settlements is very dispersed with higher densities in the area of southern and central Moravia.The area ofDrahanská vrchovina (northeast of Brno) and the peripheral areas of northern and eastern Moravia remain practically unmapped.An exception is the sequence of settlements arranged in a north-south direction between Šumperk and Staré Město.Very few randomly distributed settlements were captured by the author in western Moravia.An interesting trend can be observed in settlements depicted in the territories of Austria.These are concentrated around Vienna, along the northern bank of the Danube towards the Melk Monastery, eastwards towards Bratislava and especially in two directions into Moravia towards Znojmo and Mikulov.Furthermore, the author recorded settlements between these two branches along the land border between Austria and Moravia and around the tri-border area of Bohemia, Moravia, and Austria.In Bohemia, there are settlements located north of Jihlava and along the north-western border (from the viewpoint of Moravia).In Slovakia, the distribution is very irregular along the northern and southern foothills of the Little Carpathians, along the Váh River (Čachtice-Považská Bystřica) and the Danube (in the area around the river island Velký Žitný ostrov).For other lands, only a few settlements are represented.In the territory of Poland, it forms a link in the direction towards Kraków.This part of the map is illustrated with a drawing ofbodies ofwater and swamps.
In Moravia, the author drew only about 11% of the settlements.This situation is evident from the underlying point layer ofcurrent settlements (see Figure 4).The other countries can only be compared visually, as only their peripheral parts are shown on the map.It is evident from the map that the author did not pay much attention to their geography.The settlements are located randomly, only in Austria they form the above-described clusters.
4. Analiza gustoće modela/uzoraka naselja Rezultati analize gustoće obrađeni su i stavljeni u tematske karte.Kao prvi korak, uspoređena je gustoća naselja FMM-a i sadašnjih naselja (vidi sliku 6).Rezultati sinteze dostupni su samo na lokacijama koje pokriva FMM.Kao što je vidljivo iz karte, distribucija vrijednosti je znatno neravnomjerna.Uzduž veze Beč-Brno, koja prolazi kroz Zistersdorf i Mikulov, autor karte najtočnije je uhvatio suvremenu gustoću naseljenosti.Na nekim je područjima ucrtao gotovo sva tadašnja naselja.Srednje visoke vrijednosti također su prikazane na spojnoj liniji između Hollabrunna u Austriji i Uherskog Broda u Moravskoj ili na distinguishable direction.At a glance, it is clear that some sections correspond to the model of the communication network.These include, in particular, the connections of larger Moravian towns and the connection between Znojmo and Vienna.The second route from Vienna to Moravia is, as concluded by the visual analysis, located further to the east of the road according to the itineraries.The cluster ofsettlements is concentrated around the line connecting Vienna, Zistersdorf, Mikulov.Based on the visual analysis, the connection between Vienna and present-day Hungary runs more in the direction of Bratislava and along the northern bank of the Danube.The visual schema differs in local details where the itineraries do not describe any route -the connection between Brno and Svitavy, Olomouc and Svitavy, Olomouc and Staré Město, the area around Kroměříž and also the line connecting Hollabrunn, Mikulov, Kyjov, and Uherský Brod.Concentrations of settlements identified by expert estimation can be more reliably explained at the local level by means of the MMM communication network.The author recorded a communication between Znojmo, Mikulov and south-eastern Moravia that continues northwards to Kroměříž.Additionally, there is a route from Olomouc northwards to Staré Město or the connection between Brno and Svitavy.

Density analysis of settlement models/patterns
The outputs ofdensity analyses were processed and compiled into thematic maps.As a first step, the densities ofthe FMM settlements and the current settlements were compared (see Figure 6).The results of the synthesis are only available in locations covered by the FMM.As is apparent from the map, the distribution of values is considerably uneven.Along the Vienna-Brno connection passing through Zistersdorf and Mikulov, the author of the map captured the contemporary density of settlements most accurately.In some areas, he drew almost all contemporary settlements.Mediumhigh values are also depicted on the connecting line between Hollabrunn Austria and Uherský Brod in Moravia or on the connecting line Znojmo, Brno, Kroměříž.Other medium and higher densities are recorded as local hot spots around Svitavy, Staré Město or to the east of Kroměříž and Vienna or to the west of Znojmo.By contrast, the western part of the depicted area is characterised by a relatively wide area of lower medium and low values, which are also found in the peripheral areas ofnorth-eastern Moravia, as well as in the area between Kroměříž and Uherský Brod.
The second thematic map (see Figure 7) portrays the opposite extreme, namely the density of settlements in areas not recorded on the FMM.The author of the map completely omitted the peripheral areas ofthe northern and eastern part of Moravia, i.e., the Moravian-Silesian and Moravian-Slovak borderlands, whose population density is minimal.On the other hand, along the border between Moravia and Bohemia, he mapped only selected localities.Other places with a higher population density remained out ofhis interest.In the central part of Moravia, he omitted some territories situated north and west of Brno.As for Austria, this includes the polygon north ofVienna and the area to the north and west ofKrems an der Donau.
5 Analysis of the distribution of settlements in relation to elevation The distribution ofFMM settlements is highly irregular in relation to the hypsography (see Figure 8).The author recorded mainly settlements in the plains and hilly lands.These are especially the areas of the Dyje-Svratka Valley and Upper and Lower Morava Valleys and parts ofthe Vienna Basin.The higher elevations of the northern and eastern Moravia are hardly mapped.The highlands in western Moravia are filled with rather randomly scattered settlements without significant concentrations.
The conclusions ofthe hypsometric map interpretation are confirmed by the distribution of FMM settlements and current settlements by ranges ofaltitude (see Graph 2).The progression of both graphs is approximately similar, with the difference that the proportion of settlements not recorded on the map grows with increasing altitude.In the case of the FMM, 60% of settlements lie at altitudes below 300 m above sea level.
Furthermore, for the purpose of discussion of anomalies identified in the structure ofsettlements recorded on the FMM, an overview map was created where the discussed areas are marked with the letters A-O, accompanied by an elevation map and a model of the communication network (see Figure 9).

Discussion
Anomalies in the distribution of settlements can be in many parts ofthe FMM explained by the proximity of the communication network, which corresponds to the documented data about author's visits to the area.This is particularly the case for locations E and I, where a significant density ofsettlements was detected.In some of the peripheral areas, the author recorded exclusively settlements that constitute the main stops on the historical roads mentioned in the itineraries.These areas Slika 6. Omjer gustoće postojećih naselja prikupljenih s FMM-a (visok omjer ukazuje na relativno veliki broj naselja prikupljenih s FMM-a u usporedbi s trenutačnom situacijom).Fig. 6 Density ratio of existing settlements captured on FMM (a high ratio indicates a relatively large number of settlements captured on the FMM compared to the current situation).
Nedostatak veze između Moravske i Slovačke (nekadašnjeg sjevernog dijela Kraljevine Mađarske) uglavnom je uzrokovan nepristupačnim terenom graničnih planina Bijelih Karpata i Beskydy (F).Autor karte na tim prostorima nije zabilježio praktički nikakva naselja.Sporadična pojavljivanja mogu se pronaći u podnožju planina Beskydy, u dolinama manjih rijeka, ali veće nadmorske visine ostaju neopisane.Moguća se objašnjenja također mogu izvući iz nestabilnih vjerskih okolnosti i opasnosti od vojnog napada iz susjedne Mađarske.are characterised by the absence ofother settlements in their vicinity.A typical example is locality C, i.e., the connection of Moravia and Silesia through the area of Moravská brána, continuing further to Poland.A similar linear arrangement ofsettlements is evident in localities N and O. Interesting is the situation on the Bohemia-Moravia border, where the FMM contains settlement plotting only in localities B, D and H.This means, in the places where the main connections between the two lands passed through.No settlements are recorded in the in-between areas.These are the foothill areas of Javořická vrchovina and Ž árské vrchy, which are characterised by a concentration ofmainly smaller settlements (villages).The itineraries indicate that the crossing point in locality D (Jihlava or Polná) is connected with Třebíč.In contrast, the roads captured in the 150-year-younger MMM bypass the town and only connect Jihlava with Znojmo in a more southerly direction.Moreover, their courses vary significantly locally.The MMM routes the connection between Brno and Jihlava further to the north via Velké Meziříčí and thus bypasses Třebíč.The FMM shows a concentration of settlements from Velké Meziříčí northwards to Ž ár nad Sázavou or Polná instead of Jihlava.With regard to the localization of settlements on the FMM, Třebíč does not represent a significant node ofthe then communication network, as opposed to the itineraries and the MMM.In location B, a significant cluster ofsettlements was detected in the area around Svitavy, but no communication runs through it according to the itineraries.The route running north is more related to the line connecting Olomouc with eastern Bohemia.It is not until the MMM that the connection between Brno and Svitavy is recorded.The communication passes partly through Boskovická brázda and the valley of the Svitava river.In its central passage, the author ofthe FMM plotted settlements sparsely due to the less accessible valley of the Svitava River.Their number increases only once the border between Moravia and Bohemia is crossed.Both sources show that it is not possible to establish a fixed crossing point, since the communication network, including preferred areas (quality, safety, etc.), has constantly evolved over time.After all, the level ofdetail ofthe itineraries is a topic for further discussion.
The missing connection between Moravia and Slovakia (formerly the northern part of the Kingdom of Hungary) is mainly caused by the inaccessible terrain of the border mountains White Carpathians and Beskydy (F).The author of the map recorded practically no settlements in these areas.Sporadic occurrences can be found at the foot ofBeskydy Mountains, in the valleys of smaller rivers, but higher altitudes remain undescribed.Possible explanations may also be drawn from unstable religious circumstances and the risk of military attack from neighbouring Hungary.After all, even the text of the dedication of the map contains a poem at its end about the protection of the land against the Turks.In terms oflow density ofsettlements, the situation is similar in the highest Moravian mountains -Jeseníky (A).The area around Nízký Jeseník (the southern part featuring flat uplands) remained unmapped, whereas Hrubý Jeseník (the northern mountainous part) is described at least in the vicinity of Staré Město.In the north-south direction, several settlements, mostly villages, are plotted.The striking linear character can be explained by the morphology ofthe terrain, which was settled mainly in the valley areas.Distances between settlements are too small to indicate possible use ofitinerary data as was the case for locality C. According to the MMM, a road connecting Moravia with Kladsko passed through this area.The analysed itineraries do not mention any road here.According to the MMM, there is also a route between Olomouc and Silesia passing in two branches through Nízký Jeseník.Despite the more favourable morphological conditions in comparison to Hrubý Jeseník, the author of the FMM did not map the area in greater detail.A significant density of FMM settlements was detected in locality J.The morphology of the area is influenced by the flowing of the Morava River, it is a plain area of the Lower-Moravian and a southern part ofthe Upper-Moravian Valley.The model of the communication network does not describe any communication here, however, its presence can be using the MMM.One ofits branches continues westwards along the southern slopes of the Chřiby Mountains, where the author of the FMM also located several settlements.In the southern part ofthe Upper Moravian Valley, neither of the sources locate any communication in the direction from Vyškov to the east.However, the detailed settlement plotting can be explained by the plain character ofthe area.According to the MMM, the communication further connects the area with southern Moravia (Mikulov) and a connection with Slovakia is recorded.The expert analysis comes to similar The analysed itineraries describe in greater detail roads that are strategically important.The MMM also shows communications of a local significance.Although the MMM is about 150 years younger, it can be assumed from the analysed clusters that some local communication was already running through this area at the time of FMM.Another significant cluster of settlements was detected in locality L, which represents the area ofthe Dyje-Svratka Valley and the adjacent Austrian border region.The MMM captures a route between Znojmo and Mikulov.How the settlements are located on CHRÁST, J.I STACHOŇ, Z.: KARTOGRAFSKA ANALIZA KONSTRUKCIJE FABRICIJEVE KARTE MORAVSKE (1 569) Uostalom, tekst posvete karte na kraju ima pjesmu o zaštiti zemlje od Turaka.Što se tiče niske gustoće naseljenosti, slična je situacija u najvišim moravskim planinama -Jeseníky (A).Područje oko Nízký Jeseníka (južni dio s ravnim uzvisinama) ostalo je nekartirano, dok je Hrubý Jeseník (sjeverni planinski dio) opisan barem u blizini Staré Město.U smjeru sjever-jug ucrtano je nekoliko naselja, uglavnom sela.Izraziti linearni karakter može se objasniti morfologijom terena naseljenog uglavnom u dolinskim područjima.Udaljenosti između naselja premale su da bi upućivale na moguću upotrebu podataka o itineraru, kao što je bio slučaj za lokalitet C. Prema MMM-u, kroz to je područje prolazila cesta koja povezuje Moravsku s Kladskim.Analizirani itinerari ovdje spominju nikakvu cestu.Prema MMM-u, postoji i ruta između Olomouca i Šleske koja u dvama krakovima prolazi kroz Nízký Jeseník.Unatoč povoljnijim morfološkim uvjetima u usporedbi s Hrubým Jeseníkom, autor FMM-a nije detaljnije kartirao to područje.Značajna gustoća naselja FMM-a otkrivena je na lokalitetu J. Morfologija područja je pod utjecajem toka rijeke Morave, to je nizinsko područje Donjomoravske i južni dio Gornjomoravske doline.Model komunikacijske mreže ovdje ne opisuje nikakvu komunikaciju, ali se njezina prisutnost može pokazati pomoću MMM-a.Jedan od njegovih krakova nastavlja se prema zapadu uzduž južnih padina planina Chřiby, gdje je autor FMM-a također locirao nekoliko naselja.U južnom dijelu Gornjomoravske doline niti jedan izvor ne locira nikakvu komunikaciju u smjeru od Vyškova prema istoku.Međutim, detaljnije iscrtavanje naselja može se objasniti nizinskim karakterom teritorija.Prema MMM-u, komunikacija dalje povezuje područje s južnom Moravskom (Mikulov) te je zabilježena veza sa Slovačkom.Do sličnih zaključaka dolazi i stručna analiza.Analizirani itinerari detaljnije opisuju strateški važne prometnice.MMM prikazuje i komunikacije lokalnog značaja.Iako je MMM oko 150 godina mlađi, iz analiziranih se klastera može pretpostaviti da je u vrijeme FMM-a tim područjem već prolazila neka lokalna komunikacija.Još je jedna značajna skupina naselja otkrivena na lokalitetu L koji predstavlja područje doline Dyje-Svratka i susjedno austrijsko pogranično područje.MMM prikazuje rutu između Znojma i Mikulova.Da su naselja smještena na austrijskoj strani između Hollabruna i Mikulova, može se objasniti nizinskim karakterom područja koje je s juga omeđeno vapnenačkim planinskim lancem Leiser Berge te nastojanjem autora da poveže obje komunikacijske linije od Beča do Grafikon 2. Distribucija naselja na FMM-u i sadašnjih naselja po rasponima nadmorskih visina.
Graph 2 Distribution of settlements on FMM and current settlements by ranges of altitudes.
the Austrian side between Hollabrun and Mikulov can be explained by the plain character ofthe area, which is delimited on the south by the limestone mountain range Leiser Berge, and the author's effort to connect both communication lines from Vienna to Moravia.Interesting is the empty spot on FMM between this area and the tri-border area of Austria, Bohemia, and Moravia (K).Spatial analyses are currently frequently applied for extracting the thematic content of old maps.The findings ofthis work demonstrate that they are also helpful for detecting possible ways of construction of old maps.It is necessary to select them sensitively with respect to the characteristics of the input datasets.Some interpolation methods (IDW) or methods ofspatial statistics (OP-TICS) did not show good results in this study due to uneven distribution and low density ofsettlements.The spatial analysis tools modelling point density proved to be the most suitable.
A prerequisite for the effective use of existing tools is an adequate knowledge of the original work under study, the circumstances of its creation, its historical context and the author's life.The combination ofthe thematic content ofthe map with other sources, especially the contemporary communication network, is considered to be very beneficial in the presented study.
The research answers the initial research questions: 1.The use of travel itineraries as an input for creation ofFMM can be supported by the settlements identified in the peripheral parts of the map which correspond to them.2. The spatial analysis confirmed uneven distribution of settlements on FMM and corresponding altitude distribution except ofoutlying areas.3. The above-average densities of settlements on FMM correspond to the areas around the reconstructed communication network.
The results of the conducted analyses demonstrate a correlation between the areas with a higher density ofsettlements recorded on the FMM and the existence or proximity ofa communication network of transregional importance.Its routing varies significantly in partial sections, whereas the location of nodes is fairly stable.Some of the observed areas with higher concentrations of settlement density can only be explained by examining later sources of the course ofcommunications (MMM).Not only the quality of contemporary roads, but also the geography or morphology ofthe terrain influenced the level ofdetail in author's mapping ofMoravia.While highlands and mountains were left almost unexplored, plains and hilly lands, on the other hand, are described in much greater detail.It is obvious that with regard to the scale of the map, the author performed a selective generalisation of settlements.However, it was applied subjectively, as demonstrated by the differences in the density of settlement concentration with respect to spatial and elevation aspects.Although roads as such are not plotted on the map, their existence was demonstrably determining for the quality ofthe field mapping.The way in which the connections between Moravia and Austria and other lands are plotted suggests that the author took information from itineraries in peripheral areas, and therefore took a systematic approach.The drawing depicting a part of Austria can be interpreted as the initial, though incomplete, effort of the author to create a separate map ofAustria.Moravske.Zanimljivo je prazno mjesto na FMM-u između toga područja i tromeđe Austrije, Češke i Moravske (K).Područje karakterizira nepristupačan teren vijugave granične rijeke Dyje.Može se izbjeći zaobilaznim putem kroz Znojmo, koji je vidljiv na FMM-u, ili idući južno kroz niže dijelove Granitno-Gnajsove visoravni.to je područje prolazila najstarija poštanska ruta koja je povezivala Beč i Prag još iz 1527.godine, a čiji je dio prikazan na MMM-u.U Moravsku je stigao u blizini današnjeg Vratěnína.Posljednja upitna zona, koja je locirana na temelju provedenih analiza, označena je slovom M. Ruta koja prolazi između Beča i Mikulova zamišljena je razdjelnica između zapadnog područja koje nije opisano na FMM-u i istočnoga gusto naseljenoga područja koje je autor karte detaljno ucrtao.Središnji je dio dosta blago valovito brežuljkasto područje s manjim naseljima.Očito je da je autor svoju pozornost usmjerio samo na neposrednu blizinu glavnih prometnica, što pokazuje iscrtavanje naselja uz komunikaciju Beč-Znojmo.Gustoća naseljenosti u smjeru Beč-Mikulov ne odgovara trasi niti jednog od ulaznih itinerara.LK i IOC samo spominju vezu obaju naselja, samo mlađi IG (oko 1632−1640) pozicionira još dva stajališta uzduž trase koja ipak leže na zapadnoj granici naselja FMM-a.Diskutabilno je pitanje jesu li hodočasnici iz 16. stoljeća preferirali rutu bližu rijeci Moravi, koja je nešto ravnija, ili ju je iz nepoznatih razloga preferirao samo autor karte.Međutim, IG s početka 17. stoljeća bilježi komunikaciju bliže središnjem brežuljkastom području.

Fig. 4
An overview map of settlements identified on FMM.

Fig. 9
Anomalies identified in the structure of settlements on the FMM (areas marked A-O are commented in the text).

Table 2
Map content from the vantage point of land affiliation.
3. Vizualna analiza sadržaja FMM-a The area is characterised by inaccessible terrain of the meandering border river Dyje.It can be avoided by a detour through Znojmo, which is visible on the FMM, or by going south through the lower parts of the Granite and Gneiss Plateau.The oldest postal route connecting Vienna and Prague dating back to 1527, part ofwhich is depicted on the MMM, passed through this area.It reached Moravia near today's village Vratěnín.The last questionable zone, which was located on the basis ofthe analyses carried out, is marked with the letter M. The route passing between Vienna and Mikulov is an imaginary divider between the western area not described on the FMM and the eastern densely populated area, which the author ofthe map plotted in detail.The central part is a rather gently undulating hilly land with smaller settlements.It is obvious that the author focused his attention only on the immediate vicinity of the main roads, as shown by the settlement plotting along the Vienna- 8 Conclusion