This article was downloaded by: [University of Colorado - Health Science Library]

On: 14 December 2014, At: 21:08

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

The Professional Geographer

Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rtpg20

An Integrated Approach to Germanic

Place Names in the American Midwest
a
Stephan Fuchs
a
University of Heidelberg
Published online: 14 Nov 2014.

Click for updates

To cite this article: Stephan Fuchs (2014): An Integrated Approach to Germanic Place Names in the
American Midwest, The Professional Geographer, DOI: 10.1080/00330124.2014.968834

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00330124.2014.968834

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising
out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
 Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-
and-conditions
Downloaded by [University of Colorado - Health Science Library] at 21:08 14 December 2014
 An Integrated Approach to Germanic Place Names
in the American Midwest

Stephan Fuchs
University of Heidelberg

Place names represent an established topic in sociocultural and critical scholarship on human space and place. Based on a
comprehensive data set of Germanic names in the American Midwest, this article explores the value of a novel approach
integrating advanced spatio-statistical measures with critical interpretation to revitalize the field of toponomy on a concerted
methodological and theoretical level. Processed in a geographic information system (GIS) environment, the regional toponymic
Downloaded by [University of Colorado - Health Science Library] at 21:08 14 December 2014

pattern provides a broad and reliable framework that evokes interpretative discussion of underlying structures and processes.
This characterizes Germanic toponyms as versatile sociodemographic, political, and ethnocultural indicators. Key Words:
American Midwest, ancestry, critical toponomy, Germans, GIS.

, , 

, , —,  
, 
,  (GIS) , ,  
   : ,
, , , 

Los nombres de lugares representan uno de los tópicos con posición propia en la erudición sociocultural y crı́tica sobre
espacio y lugar humanos. A partir de un bien surtido conjunto de datos sobre nombres de origen alemán en el Medio Oeste
americano, este artı́culo explora el valor de un novedoso enfoque que integra mediciones espacial-estadı́sticas avanzadas con la
interpretación crı́tica para revitalizar el campo de la toponimia a un nivel metodológico y teórico concertado. Procesado en el
ambiente de un sistema de información geográfica (SIG), el patrón toponı́mico regional provee un amplio y confiable marco de
referencia que evoca la discusión interpretativa de estructuras y procesos subyacentes. Esto caracteriza los topónimos germánicos
como versátiles indicadores sociodemográficos, polı́ticos y etnoculturales. Palabras clave: el Medio Oeste americano, linaje,
toponimia crı́tica, alemanes, SIG.

P lace names are generally acknowledged as an in-

dispensable element of human orientation and
communication (Tuan 1991; Randall 2001). They
combine the function of spatial orientation (denota-
tion) with the complex world of symbolic association
(connotation). The long-standing field of toponymic
studies, however, appeared marginalized within the
discipline of geography over the last few decades due
to broad associations with “antiquarian empiricism”
(Rose-Redwood, Alderman, and Azaryahu 2009, 3).
Critical voices have, for instance, doubted the value of
place names as ethnocultural indicators and claimed a
lack of theoretical foundation in toponymic research
(Sherman 1983, 4–5; Zelinsky 2002). The field has
recently been revived by a critical turn, however, that
calls for an expansion beyond etymology and taxonomy
into the politics of spatial inscription (Rose-Redwood,
Alderman, and Azaryahu 2009; Vuolteenaho and Berg
2009). Toponymic scholarship is consequently char-
acterized by a split emphasis on either cartographic-
analytical or critical-interpretative analyses that await
coherent integration. In this article, I discuss a novel
approach to the study of place names that combines
modern empirical methods with interpretative and
critical thinking on ethnocultural space and place using
the example of Germanic toponyms in the American
The Professional Geographer, 0(0) 2015, pages 1–12  C Copyright 2015 by Association of American Geographers.
Initial submission, February 2013; revised submissions, May and November 2013; final acceptance, February 2014.
Published by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.
Midwest.1 I contend that this integrated perspective
can yield new insights into the denotative and con-
notative function of toponyms and can help to fur-
ther revitalize toponymic scholarship on a concerted
methodological and theoretical basis.
The use of toponyms to delineate the geographical
dimension of sociocultural features represents an es-
tablished means of research. Early on, Wright (1929)
pointed out the value of place names as versatile so-
ciocultural and ecological indicators. Zelinsky (1955,
1967) picked up the baton in his analyses of the Amer-
ican landscape. Toponyms hereby provide historical
and cultural information on settlement patterns and
allow insights into the status, character, and mind-
set of settlers, eponyms (name givers), and local res-
idents. This “leads to an understanding of the cul-
ture which created the names . . . which goes beyond
the surface of facts to the spirit which made the facts
possible” (Richmond 1991, 23). Toponyms bear last-
ing witness to events and people, thus representing
a valuable potential for the study of historic immi-
grant groups in the United States that have been ex-
posed to processes of acculturation and assimilation,
such as Germans and other Europeans. Several au-
thors, such as Kaups (1966) for the Finns in Minnesota,
use descriptive mapping and statistics of place names
 2 Volume 0, Number 0, xxxx 2015
to delineate ethnocultural areas as persistent features
of cultural identity and landscape expression. Expand-
ing the antiquarian scope of cataloging and mapping,
I contend that modern spatio-statistical methods and
cartographic techniques provide new perspectives for
toponymic research by evoking and directing interpre-
tative discussions.
Recent scholarship especially emphasizes critical
analyses of toponyms (Alderman 2008; Rose-
Redwood, Alderman, and Azaryahu 2009). Embedded
in their practical purpose and everyday use, place
names serve as symbolic texts and cultural arenas that
Downloaded by [University of Colorado - Health Science Library] at 21:08 14 December 2014
refer to larger systems of representation, meaning, and
ideology through time. The practice of naming places
thus represents an important agent for the social
construction of human space and place (Vuolteenaho
and Berg 2009). Toponyms particularly reflect issues
of control and order; for instance, in terms of ethnic,
sociocultural, and governmental authority (Berg and
Kearns 1996; Herman 1999; Withers 2000). They
(sub)consciously provide normality and legitimacy
to dominant groups, narratives, and politics but
also entail issues of resistance and contestation.
In addition to sociodemographic dynamics, name
changes indicate significant political conflicts and
ideological shifts (Zelinsky 1983; Azaryahu 1996;
Yeoh 1996). Several authors have explicitly employed
place names to access underlying ideologies and
power structures of the American ethnic fabric (e.g.,
Alderman 2000; Grounds 2001; Kelleher 2004;
Tretter 2011; Alderman and Inwood 2013). Rep-
resenting highly valuable contributions that fill a
persistent void in toponymic research, these studies
have generally focused on minority or marginalized
groups as part of the “most dramatic political conflicts
over place naming” (Rose-Redwood and Alderman
2011, 3). They, however, rarely integrate toponyms
and other means of ethnocultural identification such
as census data on ethnic or national origin.2 Their
explicit focus on critical analysis yields important
insights but makes only limited use of the various
synergetic potentials of applying advanced means
of quantitative research to further contextualize and
complement conclusions based on qualitative and
interpretative analyses.
This article presents an integrative approach to to-
ponyms as symbolic and complex sociocultural indi-
cators in terms of their quantitative and interpretative
value. I employ spatio-statistical and critical analyses
to assess overall patterns, types, and specific contexts
of Germanic place naming in the American Midwest.3
As crucial points of intersection, I selectively high-
light name types and clusters as well as related power
structures on a regional and local scale. Within this
framework, I extend the critical discussion of ethno-
cultural names in the United States to German and
German-related groups, which today represent an es-
tablished element of mainstream U.S. society (Adams
1993). In addition, I integrate contemporary ancestry
data as important means of ethnocultural identifica-
tion, which breaks new ground by combining aspects
of place and personal identity.
Data Set and Approach
German-speaking immigrants represent one of the
major European groups that came to North Amer-
ica since colonial times (Daniels 2002). Especially
through immigration waves in the nineteenth cen-
tury, the American Midwest has become a focal
point of Germanic settlement and ancestry (Hoerder
1995a, 1995b; Brittingham and De La Cruz 2004).
As my working definition, I designate persons and
names with origins in the territory of the German
Empire of 1871 as German. The German-related cat-
egory covers source areas outside of this core area,
specifically the Austro-Hungarian Empire of 1871,
Switzerland, Luxembourg, the Volga and Black Sea
regions in the southern Russian Empire (hereafter re-
ferred to as German-Russian), and the Pennsylvania-
German/Dutch areas of colonial North America. The
term Germanic includes this geographically heteroge-
neous but ethnically and culturally similar collective
(Rippley 1993, 1–2).
My analysis focuses on historic and still existing pop-
ulated places defined by the U.S. Board on Geographic
Names (U.S. Geological Survey 2013).4 Place name
gazetteers in conjunction with a variety of local, on-
line, and scholarly resources provided extensive infor-
mation for identification and critical reassessment. I
compiled a list of 770 Germanic names (634 German,
136 German-related). For a toponym to qualify, two
reliable sources had to confirm its Germanic connec-
tion.5 My data set includes names that were given by
Germanic persons or by their second-generation de-
scendants; places that were named after a Germanic
place (e.g., a town or region) or person (e.g., a local
settler or popular figure); and names that represent a
direct Germanic reference (e.g., Germantown). As a
classic ethnocultural indicator, ancestry data represent
a suitable source for comparison and validation. The
categories used by the U.S. Census Bureau for cur-
rent ancestry data generally parallel these source areas
(U.S. Census Bureau 2012a).
An Integrated Toponymic Approach
To illustrate the value added by an integrated to-
ponymic approach, I first establish a concise regional
framework that outlines general sociocultural patterns
and various contexts, before I turn to critical discus-
sions of underlying structures and processes. Look-
ing at the simple point pattern of Figure 1, Germanic
place names can be found all over the American Mid-
west. They sometimes appear loosely scattered, such
as in Iowa and Minnesota, but more concentrated in
other areas; for instance, around Chicago or in central
Kansas. Considering naming as a means of power and
authority, this indicates substantial socioeconomic re-
sources and the decisive cultural standing required to
establish and name numerous settlements. This power
to name, however, appears far from uniform across the
region and awaits further empirical specification and
critical analyses of associated politics and sociodemo-
graphic dynamics. The Germanic pattern, for instance,

Downloaded by [University of Colorado - Health Science Library] at 21:08 14 December 2014
Figure 1 Germanic place names in the Midwest, 2010.
implies various contexts of cultural dominance, sub-
ordination, or appropriation expressed and enforced
via toponyms (Herman 1999; Grounds 2001; Kelleher
2004).
County-Level Data and Hot Spots
Relative place name proportions on the county level
allow an intuitive analysis based on percentage values
and official administrative boundaries that are directly
Figure 2 Germanic place name proportions per county, 2010. (Color figure available online.)
Germanic Place Names in the American Midwest 3
comparable to census formats (see later). Figure 2
shows continuous areas of high rates in central North
Dakota, northeast Nebraska, eastern Missouri and
southwestern Illinois, eastern Wisconsin, central
Kansas, and the eastern Kansas–Nebraska border.
Moving beyond simple mapping by calculating
the Getis-OrdGi∗ statistic (z score with respective
probability value p), Figure 3 highlights these zones
as statistically significant concentrations of high
values (hot spots; z > 1.65, p < 0.1) based on the
 4 Volume 0, Number 0, xxxx 2015
Downloaded by [University of Colorado - Health Science Library] at 21:08 14 December 2014
Figure 3 Cold and hot spots of Germanic place names, 2010. (Color figure available online.)
proportion of Germanic names of each county and the
surrounding counties (Wang 2006, 171–80).6 The hot
spots include or straddle major populated centers such
as the Chicago metropolitan area or are located in
sparsely populated areas on the western Plains (Wilson
2009; U.S. Census Bureau 2013b). This outline fits
with the “leapfrog” pattern of Germanic settlement
(Conzen 1984; Kampfhoefner 1984) and highlights
areas of high Germanic impact and cultural authority.
The specific form of Germanic naming at certain
locations—for example, for religious or nationalistic
motives (see later)—evokes critical interpretation of
broader sociocultural and ideological processes in-
volved (Zelinsky 1983; Yeoh 1996; Withers 2000). The
county-level pattern, however, first requires additional
validation because of possible analytical distortions
resulting from the chosen scale of aggregation.7
Density and Spatial Cluster Analysis
To remedy possible distortions, point data can be
effectively summarized using kernel density estima-
tion (Wang 2006, 35–42). Based on feature location
and the relative prominence of Germanic place
names, continuous surfaces of gradually changing
values indicate local concentrations within and across
county lines.8 Figure 4 confirms the major toponymic
concentrations identified earlier but renders local
patterns more precise, such as the common border
area of Ellis, Rush, Barton, and Russell counties in
central Kansas as a coherent zone of highest impact.
This refined method thus outlines the symbolic realm
and cultural arena of Germanic naming in greater
detail. To test the point-based pattern for statistically
significant concentrations, I employed the spatial scan
statistic method, which yields primary and secondary
clusters sorted by their likelihood ratio test statistic
and p values (Kulldorff 1997).9 Figure 5 shows local
clusters of medium to high significance that parallel
the identified hot spots (Figure 3). Two areas of dis-
crepancy, however, exist: The cluster on the eastern
Kansas–Nebraska border yields only a low level of
confidence and the Chicago area shows a concentrated
secondary cluster. This critically modifies the degree
of toponymic prominence, lowering it in the former
and increasing it in the latter case. The scan statistics
also indicate previously unmatched concentrations of
high, medium, or low significance such as the nucle-
ated Amana Colonies in east central Iowa. Founded by
German pietists in 1855, these seven villages represent
a highly concentrated and viable cluster of religious
order and ethnic representation (Barthel-Bouchier
2001). Point-based analyses thus allow the identifi-
cation of important small-scale patterns and critically
complement area-based methods.
Figure 6 summarizes the results of the spatio-
statistical analyses and highlights five major clusters
and several medium to tentative concentrations. It
forms a concise geographical outline of Germanic
naming and sociocultural impact in the American
Midwest that pinpoints areas of ethnocultural repre-
sentation and authority. Understanding toponyms as
meaningful sociocultural constructs that are insepara-
bly tied to issues of power, ideology, and representa-
tion (Alderman 2008; Rose-Redwood, Alderman, and
Azaryahu 2009), several critical questions directly en-
sue: What are the underlying contexts and dynamic
processes that have shaped these patterns? What do
 Germanic Place Names in the American Midwest 5
Downloaded by [University of Colorado - Health Science Library] at 21:08 14 December 2014

Figure 4 Kernel density of Germanic place names, 2010. (Color figure available online.)

they tell us about the cultural politics of naming; that
is, respective structures of power and (intra)group re-
lations? How do they align with personal means of
ethnic identification such as ancestry data? Draw-
ing on empirical aspects, critical perspectives, and
additional background information, I address these
questions.
Naming Types and Backgrounds
The places recorded were predominantly founded,
named, or both during the nineteenth and early
twentieth centuries, following the general pattern of
European mass immigration and westward settlement
(White 1991; Daniels 2002). As Tuan (1991, 687–88)
noted, the performative act of naming converts

Figure 5 Germanic place name clusters, 2010. (Color figure available online.)
 6 Volume 0, Number 0, xxxx 2015
Downloaded by [University of Colorado - Health Science Library] at 21:08 14 December 2014
Figure 6 Toponymic concentrations, 2010.
undifferentiated space into place and includes the cre-
ative power to call something into being. Possessing
this creative power at numerous locations in the re-
gion, Germanic founders and eponyms were an inte-
gral part of the European colonization of the Amer-
ican heartland. This process generally involved the
physical and cultural displacement of native groups as
well as the selective appropriation of indigenous names
(Herman 1999; Grounds 2001). The data set includes
only one toponym of Native American origin: Eudora,
Kansas, named for the daughter of the local Shawnee
Indian chief complying with his condition for selling
the town site; this represents a rare case of inverted
power that put the German settlers on the receiving
end.
The overall character of Germanic naming in the
Midwest epitomizes the hegemonic thrust of Anglo-
European settlement. Cases of cultural transfer and
individual commemoration dominate the toponymic
pattern as place-based (38.7 percent) and person-based
names (45 percent) make up the bulk of the toponyms
recorded. They confer the highest indicative potential
to regional and individual origins and generally de-
scribe a possessive character of Germanic naming in
the Midwest. Germanic toponyms have thus been in-
strumental in establishing and legitimizing European
control in America’s symbolic landscape. This author-
ity, however, has increasingly been challenged since
the mid-twentieth century; for instance, by Native or
African Americans (Kelleher 2004; Alderman and In-
wood 2013). Place-based toponyms illustrate regional
origins, cultural ties, or both, such as Kiel and New
Franken in eastern Wisconsin. The replication of geo-
graphic names of their source area highlights, on the
one hand, the assertiveness and authority of early de-
velopers and settlers within the contemporary Ameri-
can frontier culture. On the other hand, it expresses an
intrinsic need to confer familiar and meaningful labels
to new environments that links former and new homes
and solidifies claims on and emotional attachment to
place (Tuan 1991).
Person-based names work on two intricate levels
of significance: as a marker of personal achievement
and a commemorative item. The former reflects the
powerful position and influence of specific pioneers,
residents, and businessmen such as Dheinsville (af-
ter the Dhein family from the Hunsruck area) and
Thiensville (after local businessman and Free Thinker
John Henry Thien) in eastern Wisconsin. The latter
permanently inscribes them in the landscape as the first
European pioneers settling new territories. This fits
with the powerful American frontier narrative that is
characterized by a strong ethno- and androcentric bias
(Wunder 1994); “the process of gendering the land-
scape in Western masculinist terms” (Berg and Kearns
1996, 30) is intriguingly reflected by only 1 percent
female eponyms (e.g., Eudora) in the overall data set.
Commemorative names of prominent Germanic
figures represent ideological transfers, such as Her-
mann in east central Missouri (for the Germanic
hero Hermann the Cheruscan) or Bismarck in cen-
tral North Dakota (for the former German chan-
cellor). They express ethnocultural and political
associations that fostered national pride and identifica-
tion (Azaryahu 1996).10 The former indicates the local
pioneers’ patriotic appreciation of their native coun-
try and culture; the latter honors the powerful socio-
economic impact of German railroad investors in the
1870s before international relations deteriorated dur-
ing World War I (Luebke 1974). Detached from

Table 1 Germanic places renamed because of World War I
German name Name today
Potsdam (Gasconade County, MO) Pershing
Berlin (Ottawa County, MI) Marne
Berlin Crossroads (Jackson County, OH) Roads
Bismarck (Saint Francois County, MO) Bismarck
East Germantown Pershing
(Wayne County, IN)
Downloaded by [University of Colorado - Health Science Library] at 21:08 14 December 2014
Germania (Kossuth County, IA) Lakota
Germantown Mercier
(Brown County, KS)
Hamburg (Wells County, ND) Hamberg
New Germany (Carver County, MN) New Germany
New Berlin (Stark County, OH) North Canton
their historical referent and integrated into everyday
social communication over time, these commemora-
tive names might lose their original connotation but
subconsciously “render a certain version of history not
only familiar, but also self-evident” (Rose-Redwood,
Alderman, and Azaryahu 2009, 7). Places named for
heroes of the American Revolutionary War, such as
Steuben(ville) and de Kalb (six and two times in the
data set, respectively), further illustrate the subtle in-
tegration of Germanic origins in the construction of
U.S. national history and identity (Zelinsky 1983). The
identified spectrum and proportions of name types
thus point to a number of critical issues in terms of
gender, race, and national politics and lead beyond
mere description into critical questions of cultural au-
thority, ideology, and representation.
Name Changes
The assessment of altered and historical toponyms
holds similar potentials revolving around this ques-
tion: Who had or has the right to (re)name?
(Alderman and Inwood 2013). Germanic toponyms
generally reflect the situation at first effective settle-
ment but might have also become abandoned or re-
named. Different groups or institutions might delib-
erately or unintentionally change names and spellings.
Millstadt in southwestern Illinois, for instance, rep-
resents the U.S. Post Office’s altered version of the
German Mittelstadt given by Saxon immigrants who
translated the initial place name of Centreville. This
example illustrates the intricate mixture of vernacu-
lar and official influences, internal and external ac-
tors, and respective levels of power. The overall rate
of name changes by secondary Germanic settlers is,
Germanic Place Names in the American Midwest 7
Origin
Named by its German settlers after their hometown in Germany or for
Mr. Potts (not verified) who built a local mill and dam. Renamed
during World War I (1914–1918).
Originally named after the many German settlers in the area and
renamed in 1919.
Settled by German immigrants and a predominantly African American
community today. Renamed during World War I (1914–1918).
Named after the German statesman and chancellor Prince Otto von
Bismarck; attempts were made to change to Loyal during World
War I (1914–1918).
Originally named Georgetown after founder George Shortridge and
renamed Germantown in 1832 after the local German settlers from
Pennsylvania; changed to Pershing in 1918.
Initially referring to the local concentration of German settlers and
renamed in 1919.
Original German name changed in honor of the Belgian Catholic
Cardinal organizing the resistance against the German occupation
forces during World War I (1914–1918).
Named for the German seaport by the local German settlers and
renamed 1917 as a compromise between its Scandinavian and
German residents.
Named by its German settlers and briefly changed to Motordale during
World War I (1914–1918).
Initially laid out by a local German pioneer and settled by German
immigrants; renamed in 1918.
however, low (1.6 percent). This indicates general
stability and authority of initial eponyms and sug-
gests patterns of complacency and mutual accommo-
dation among groups of European descent that have
continuously defined U.S. mainstream society. Issues
of toponymic repression and resistance such as dur-
ing World War I (see later) in the German case are
rare.
The regional toponymic pattern is accordingly char-
acterized by a high proportion of current names (85.7
percent), indicating a general permanence of the Ger-
manic legacy. Local concentrations of historic names,
however, exist, most prominently in the Chicago area
(see later discussion). In addition, there is a relatively
high historic proportion (39.1 percent) among names
that represent a direct Germanic reference (e.g., Ger-
mantown). This highlights the ephemeral character of
conspicuous toponyms that, for instance, became sub-
ject to substantial renaming efforts because of World
War I (Table 1). In eastern Missouri, the renaming
of Potsdam to Pershing (for the commander of the
U.S. expedition forces) and the attempts to change
Bismarck to Loyal represent intriguing examples for
the pronounced nationalism and consequent public
and political pressure on the German-American com-
munities between 1914 and 1918. They were part of
national patterns of suspicion, surveillance, and ha-
rassment by federal, state, and local authorities that,
for instance, required nonnaturalized Germans to reg-
ister as alien enemies, confiscated properties, and en-
dorsed name-changing campaigns (Luebke 1974; De-
Witt 2012). These activities intensified over the course
of the political and later military conflict, which si-
lenced public German culture in the United States
for several decades. Patriotic efforts, however, did not
 8 Volume 0, Number 0, xxxx 2015
take universal effect, as names were only changed
temporarily (e.g., New Germany, Minnesota), partly
(e.g., Hamberg, North Dakota), or not at all (e.g.,
Bismarck, Missouri), indicating specific contexts of
power, ideology, and cultural maintenance (Yeoh
1996; Azaryahu and Golan 2001). They involve various
social groups and (inter)relations on the vernacular or
official level that foster, avoid, or reverse (re)naming
efforts “prompting us to consider the multiple layers
and axes of identity and contestation at work in place
naming” (Rose-Redwood, Alderman, and Azaryahu
2009, 12).
Downloaded by [University of Colorado - Health Science Library] at 21:08 14 December 2014
Group and Power Relations
In addition to external influences, Germanic naming
in the Midwest is characterized by different internal
subgroups and fractions. German toponyms dominate
the overall pattern (82.3 percent), but German-related
names locally complement them; for example, in east-
ern Wisconsin (see Figure 2). The local alignment of
German and German-related place names supports the
idea that the different Germanic groups share gen-
eral migration and settlement patterns (Conzen 1984;
Kampfhoefner 1984). They regularly intersettled in
spontaneous arrangements or through deliberate plan-
ning by a powerful entity. For example, Germania in
central Kansas was established in 1873 by the Santa
Fe railroad agent Carl B. Schmidt from Saxony to at-
tract various Germanic groups to railroad lands on the
nineteenth-century frontier (Shortridge 1995). The
iconic, trans-Germanic name, however, vanished from
the official toponymic grid, leaving the principal town
of Ellinwood (after the Santa Fe railroad’s chief engi-
neer) as a permanent toponymic marker of the com-
pany’s authority. Each toponymic concentration thus
outlines a sphere of (inter)group relations that entail
various critical issues of ethnocultural representation
(e.g., Germanic vs. Anglo-American heritage), socio-
economic motivations (e.g., individual settler vs. com-
pany benefits), and uneven levels of power (e.g., settlers
vs. railroad officials).
Toponymic clusters illustrate patterns of domina-
tion and subordination within and beyond specific
local contexts (Withers 2000; Azaryahu and Golan
2001). High proportions of German-related names in
central North Dakota, such as New Leipzig named
indirectly for the German city through a colony at
the Black Sea, predominantly reflect homogeneous
colonies of German-Russian migrants seeking socio-
economic prospects and continued self-determination
on the Dakota Plains (Sallet 1974; Sherman 1983;
Figure 2). In northeast Nebraska and neighboring
South Dakota, a number of ethnoculturally hybrid
names, such as Breslau (Polish) and Jelen (Bohemian-
Czech), highlight problems of subsuming culturally
distinctive individuals and groups as Germanic fol-
lowing the imperial power system of Europe (Luebke
1977).11 Registered as born in the former German
and Austro-Hungarian Empires by contemporary U.S.
censuses, they were continuously deprived of their
identity in the official ethnocultural grid.
In sum, a detailed spatio-statistical outline and
analyses of toponymic groups and clusters effectively
frame and foster critical discussions of culturally self-
contained and hybrid contexts. This includes politics
and processes of power on multiple levels that might
afford or constrain people’s autonomy and sense of
belonging (Berg and Kearns 1996; Herman 1999).
Naming and Ancestry
Understood as powerful and dynamic sociocultural
devices, toponyms parallel other means of ethnocul-
tural expression such as personal identification with the
Germanic background, which analytically and concep-
tually broadens the scope of an integrated approach.
The preceding discussion indicates an early but highly
variable impact and cultural authority of Germanic
groups in the Midwest. How do these patterns align
with contemporary ancestry data?
The distribution of self-declared Germanic descen-
dants in Figure 7 is dominated by German ancestry,
which is only locally joined by critical proportions of
German-related descendants; for instance, in Green
County, Wisconsin (33 percent).12 The major place
name concentrations identified earlier generally align
with areas of high Germanic ancestry. Individual coun-
ties of high toponymic rates (Figure 2), such as Logan
County in south central North Dakota (50 percent)
and Ozaukee County in eastern Wisconsin (26.1 per-
cent), also yield high ancestry rates (70.9 and 43.6
percent, respectively). Place name and ancestry data
thus reveal several areas of overlap and mutual con-
firmation, which is reflected by a moderate but highly
significant correlation on the county level (r = 0.42,
p < 0.001).
This indicates a significant Germanic impact and
ethnocultural stability on both toponymic and per-
sonal levels. The creative power of naming thus ties
into current practices of sociocultural identification,
linking the semantic-performative and psychoemo-
tional realm of the human life world (Buttimer 1976;
Tuan 1991). At the same time, several areas of dis-
crepancy exist, indicating ethno-demographic and cul-
tural dynamics not reflected in the overall toponymic
structure. Zones of high ancestry rates generally ex-
ceed local place name clusters or parallel areas of low
to medium toponymic rates, such as in eastern Wis-
consin where Germanic migrants gradually took over
already existing settlements of Irish, American, and
Norwegian pioneers (Everest Levi 1898, 353). Lack-
ing initial cultural authority, a delayed influx, sub-
sequent expansion, or a higher locational stability of
Germanic residents and their descendants accordingly
elides toponymic conspicuousness. This entails multi-
ple levels of interpretation; for instance, how and why
have previous groups been replaced? What cultural
and authoritative patterns of identity, belonging, and
representation ensued? Has this process been peace-
ful or conflict-laden? The spatio-statistical analysis of

Downloaded by [University of Colorado - Health Science Library] at 21:08 14 December 2014
Figure 7 Germanic ancestry, 2010. Source: U.S. Census Bureau (2013a). (Color figure available online.)
toponymic and ancestry data thus indicates demo-
graphic changes and cultural dynamics, which puts so-
ciocultural developments into context and stimulates
further critical discussion.
An intriguing example is the Chicago metropoli-
tan area, identified as a major toponymic concentra-
tion. Its low ancestry rates can be related to profound
urban dynamics and increased Germanic integration
into mainstream society over the twentieth century
(Hudson 2006). The high proportion of historic names
in the area illustrates corresponding shifts in cultural
representation and spatial inscription (Rose-Redwood,
Alderman, and Azaryahu 2009, 2). In addition to ide-
ologically motivated changes, this example illustrates
the historic and context-dependent character of nam-
ing (Zelinsky 1955, 1967). It is sensitive to sociode-
mographic and ethnocultural changes, which can be
effectively assessed through an integrated approach.
Methodologically, it also shows that an analysis of just
one indicator (toponyms or ancestry data), a singular
time frame, absolute numbers, or simple point patterns
can lead to false conclusions.
As another example, German-Russian toponyms
in central Kansas reflect the prominence of self-
contained migrant groups from the Volga and, in
smaller numbers, from the Black Sea region. Born
outside of central Europe, they were recorded as Rus-
sian natives in the historic U.S. censuses; although the
Russian or German-Russian option is given, current
ancestry data indicate a strong identification with
German roots (U.S. Census Bureau 2012a). Historic
as well as contemporary census data hence do not fully
appreciate the complex background of this group by
either obscuring the German cultural origin or the
Germanic Place Names in the American Midwest 9
Russian settlement history. The origin and semantics
of local place names, such as Liebenthal (lovely valley),
Munjor (former Volga colony), and Emmeram (first
local Catholic priest), however, provide direct access
to local ethnocultural contexts. Using this combined
information as a starting point, local patterns en-
courage detailed interpretative analyses. Emmeram,
for instance, indicates religious influence as well
as patterns of personalized commemoration, which
expresses cultural and individual privilege. In total,
6.5 percent of the toponyms in the data set express
religious motives most directly through the practice
of naming after churches or Catholic patron saints.
Place names therefore highlight the local character of
resident groups and the power of cultural institutions
and provide sociocultural background information
not accessible through sources like the census.
Conclusion
An integrated approach combines the potentials of
recent methodological and theoretical advancements
that to date have mostly existed in parallel in to-
ponymic scholarship. Working at the intersection of
quantitative and critical analysis, it overcomes the split
emphasis on either cartographic-analytical or critical-
interpretative perspectives and encompasses the de-
notative and connotative character of toponyms. The
analysis on a point and aggregate level using advanced
spatio-statistical tools in a geographic information sys-
tem (GIS) environment moves toponymic studies be-
yond simple tabulation and mapping indicating pat-
terns and processes otherwise unnoticed. It provides
 10 Volume 0, Number 0, xxxx 2015
a sophisticated empirical framework locating and cat-
egorizing the spatial concentrations of place names,
allowing reliable quantitative conclusions and high-
lighting areas of particular interest for critical analy-
sis. The spatio-statistical outline includes various name
types and allows close comparison with means of per-
sonal identification such as ancestry data, often lack-
ing in previous research on U.S. ethnic toponyms. The
identified types and clusters directly inform interpreta-
tive and critical analyses of the kind that have recently
spurred a renewed interest in place name research.
My discussion has shown that the opportunities and
Downloaded by [University of Colorado - Health Science Library] at 21:08 14 December 2014
standing of Germanic settlers and eponyms have been
highly variable across the Midwest as the naming pro-
cess is embedded in broader patterns of cultural poli-
tics, authority, and power within and beyond the U.S.
context. Toponymic patterns are connected to issues
of ethnic distinctiveness, complacency, and cultural
authority and reflect inter- and intragroup relations
such as those defined by race, gender, and national
origin. Conspicuous toponymic transfers and appro-
priations, for instance, highlight power-laden contexts
of domination and subsumption within and beyond
ethnoculturally homogeneous (e.g., German-Russian
settlements of the Kansas and Dakota Plains) or hy-
brid areas (e.g., Czech and Polish groups in north-
east Nebraska). Name changes demonstrate profound
ethno-demographic dynamics (e.g., at the Chicago
metropolitan area), the impact of governmental
control (e.g., via the U.S. Post Office), and ideolog-
ical tensions (e.g., during World War I).
The process, patterns, and politics of place nam-
ing become contextualized, more apparent, and better
understood when spatio-statistical and interpretative-
critical analyses are combined. This analysis of Ger-
manic toponyms in the Midwest represents a starting
point for a more integrated perspective in toponymic
research, further revitalizing the field of toponomy. 
Notes
1 The term ethnocultural reflects the definition of ethnicity
as a social construct (Waters 1990). I discuss Germanic
immigrants and their descendants as a distinctive ethno-
cultural group of common ancestry and cultural tradition;
their personal affiliations, however, increasingly represent
matters of relatively free choice.
2 Tretter (2011, 38–39) does include a brief and basic com-
parison with national data on African Americans.
3 This includes Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, Illinois, Wiscon-
sin, Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, Kansas, Nebraska, North
Dakota, and South Dakota (U.S. Census Bureau 2012b).
4 Historic toponyms are names no longer in use because of
name changes or place abandonment.
5 Reliable sources include printed publications and web-
sites of professional scholars, organizations, and official
national, state, and local institutions. In addition, I used
historic census manuscripts to verify the nationality or
birthplace of eponyms and local residents.
6 The Getis-OrdGi∗ statistic compares the summarized lo-
cal and neighboring rates with the expected rates based
on all counties in the region (ArcGIS Help Library: How
Hot Spot Analysis Works). Hot spots (z > 1.65, p < 0.1)
indicate significantly higher, cold spots (z < –1.65, p <
0.1) significantly lower rates than expected.
7 The definition of artificial boundaries and territorial units
(i.e., counties) influences related summary values (Open-
shaw 1984).
8 In a spatial smoothing process, I incorporated the rela-
tive prominence of Germanic names among all populated
place names within a 50-km radius around each location
of Germanic naming using the floating catchment area
method (Wang 2006, 35–42). The kernel density estima-
tion calculates a generic raster surface that I reclassified
into a continuous scale from low to high based on natural
break values.
9 The scan statistic applies a purely spatial analysis focused
on features’ frequency. It detects and evaluates clusters
of Germanic naming across the study area using circular
scanning windows of different sizes.
10 Hermann represents a highly symbolic figure of Germanic
resilience, unity, and independence (Rampelmann 2008).
Bismarck is venerated as the political architect of the uni-
fied German Empire of 1871 (Gerwarth and Riall 2009).
11 The German and Austro-Hungarian empires included
additional ethnoculturally mixed areas, such as Alsace-
Lorraine, Moravia, Silesia, and East Prussia that are now
part of France, Poland, the Czech Republic, and Russia,
respectively.
12 I used data on the first ancestry reported from the
2006–2010 American Community Survey (U.S. Census
Bureau 2013a). The Germanic ancestry claimed in the
census represents the current self-perception of a person
(Farley 1991) and does not necessarily reflect historic set-
tlement areas.
Literature Cited
Adams, W. P. 1993. The German-Americans: An ethnic experi-
ence. Indianapolis, IN: Max Kade German-American Cen-
ter, Indiana University–Purdue University Indianapolis.
Alderman, D. H. 2000. A street fit for a king: Naming places
and commemoration in the American South. The Profes-
sional Geographer 52 (4): 672–84.
———. 2008. Place, naming and the interpretation of cul-
tural landscapes. In The Ashgate research companion to her-
itage and identity, ed. B. Graham and P. Howard, 195–213.
Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.
Alderman, D. H., and J. Inwood. 2013. Street naming and
politics of belonging: Spatial injustices in the toponymic
commemoration of Martin Luther King Jr. Social & Cul-
tural Geography 14 (2): 211–33.
ArcGIS Help Library. How Hot Spot Analysis (Getis-
OrdGi∗ ) Works. http://resources.arcgis.com/en/help/
main/10.1/index.html#//005p00000011000000 (last ac-
cessed 10 May 2013).
Azaryahu, M. 1996. The power of commemorative street
names. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 14:
311–30.
Azaryahu, M., and A. Golan. 2001. (Re-)naming the
landscape: The formation of the Hebrew map of Is-
rael 1949–1960. Journal of Historical Geography 27 (2):
178–95.
Barthel-Bouchier, D. 2001. Authenticity and identity:
Theme-parking the Amanas. International Sociology 16 (2):
221–39.
Berg, L. D., and R. Kearns 1996. Naming as norming:
“Race,” gender, and the identity politics of naming places
 Germanic Place Names in the American Midwest 11
in Aotearoa/New Zealand. Environment and Planning D:
Society and Space 14:99–122.
Brittingham, A., and P. C. De La Cruz. 2004. Ancestry 2000:
Census 2000 brief. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.
http://www.census.gov/prod/2004pubs/c2kbr-35.pdf (last
accessed 27 May 2013).
Buttimer, A. 1976. Grasping the dynamism of lifeworld.
Annals of the Association of American Geographers 66 (2):
277–92.
Conzen, K. N. 1984. Deutsche Einwanderer im Ländlichen
Amerika: Problemfelder und Forschungsergebnisse
[German immigrants in rural America: Problem areas
and research findings]. In Auswanderer, Wanderarbeiter,
Gastarbeiter. Bevölkerung, Arbeitsmarkt und Wanderung in
Downloaded by [University of Colorado - Health Science Library] at 21:08 14 December 2014
Deutschland seit der Mitte des 19. Jahrhunderts: Referate
und Diskussionsbeiträge des Internationalen wissenschaftlichen
Symposiums “Vom Auswanderungsland zum Einwanderungs-
land?” an der Akademie für politische Bildung Tutzing,
18.-21.10.1982, ed. K. J. Bade, 350–77. Ostfildern,
Germany: Scripta Mercaturae.
Daniels, R. 2002. Coming to America. A history of immigration
and ethnicity in American life. New York: HarperCollins.
DeWitt, P. 2012. Degrees of allegiance: Harassment and loyalty in
Missouri’s German-American community during World War
I. Athens: Ohio University Press.
Everest Levi, K. 1898. Geographical origin of German im-
migration to Wisconsin. In Collections of the State Histor-
ical Society of Wisconsin, ed. R. Gold Thwaites, 341–93.
Madison, WI: Democrat Printing.
Farley, R. 1991. The new census question about ancestry:
What did it tell us? Demography 28 (3): 411–29.
Gerwarth, R., and L. Riall. 2009. Fathers of the nation? Bis-
marck, Garibaldi and the cult of memory in Germany and
Italy. European Journal of History 39 (3): 388–413.
Grounds, R. A. 2001. Tallahassee, Osceola, and the
hermeneutics of American place names. Journal of the
American Academy of Religion 69 (2): 287–322.
Herman, R. D. K. 1999. The aloha state: Place names and
the anti-conquest of Hawai’i. Annals of the Association of
American Geographers 89 (1): 76–102.
Hoerder, D. 1995a. Mid-Europe to Midwest: Immigration
from west central Europe, 1860–1920. In The settling of
North America: The atlas of the great migrations into North
America from the Ice Age to the present, ed. H. Hornbeck
Tanner, 116–17. New York: Macmillan.
———. 1995b. Prairies and plains: Midwestern and western
cultural patterns, 1865–1920. In The settling of North Amer-
ica: The atlas of the great migrations into North America from
the Ice Age to the present, ed. H. Hornbeck Tanner, 124–25.
New York: Macmillan.
Hudson, J. C. 2006. Chicago: A geography of the city and its
region. Santa Fe, NM: The Center for American Places.
Kampfhoefner, W. D. 1984. Entwurzelt oder Verpflanzt?
Zur Bedeutung der Kettenwanderung für die Einwander-
erakkulturation in Amerika [Uprooted or transplanted?
The importance of chain migration for immigrant ac-
culturation in America]. In Auswanderer, Wanderarbeiter,
Gastarbeiter. Bevölkerung, Arbeitsmarkt und Wanderung in
Deutschland seit der Mitte des 19. Jahrhunderts: Referate
und Diskussionsbeiträge des Internationalen wissenschaftlichen
Symposiums “Vom Auswanderungsland zum Einwanderungs-
land?” an der Akademie für politische Bildung Tutzing, 18.-
21.10.1982, ed. K. J. Bade, 321–49. Ostfildern, Germany:
Scripta Mercaturae.
Kaups, M. 1966. Finnish place names in Minnesota: A
study in cultural transfer. Geographical Review 56 (3): 377–
97.
Kelleher, W. 2004. A contemporary public naming con-
troversy in Phoenix, Arizona: The changing social per-
spectives on landmark nomenclature. Names 52:101–
27.
Kulldorff, M. 1997. A spatial scan statistic. Communications in
Statistics: Theory and Methods 26:1481–96.
Luebke, F. C. 1974. Bonds of loyalty: German Americans and
World War I. DeKalb: Northern Illinois University Press.
———. 1977. Ethnic group settlement on the Great Plains.
The Western Historical Quarterly 8 (4): 405–30.
Openshaw, S. 1984. The modifiable areal unit problem. Nor-
wich, UK: GeoBooks.
Rampelmann, K. 2008. Funktionen eines Denkmals im
transnationalen Kontext: Das Hermanns-Denkmal in New
Ulm [Functions of a monument in transnational context:
The Hermann monument at New Elm]. Jahrbuch für Eu-
ropäische Überseegeschichte 8:153–74.
Randall, R. R. 2001. Place names: How they define the
world—And more. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow.
Richmond, E. W. 1991. The value of the study of place
names. In The study of place names, ed. R. L. Baker, 23–31.
Terre Haute: Indiana Council of Teachers of English and
Hoosier Folklore Society.
Rippley, L. J. 1993. Toward a 1993 definition of German-
American studies. Yearbook of German-American Studies
28:1–10.
Rose-Redwood, R., and D. Alderman. 2011. Critical inter-
ventions in political toponyomy. ACME: An International
E-Journal of Critical Geography 10 (1): 1–6.
Rose-Redwood, R., D. Alderman, and M. Azaryahu. 2009.
Geographies of toponymic inscription: New directions in
critical place-name studies. Progress in Human Geography
34 (4): 453–70.
Sallet, R. 1974. Russian-German settlements in the United States.
Fargo: North Dakota Institute for Regional Studies.
Sherman, W. C. 1983. Prairie mosaic: An ethnic atlas of rural
North Dakota. Fargo: North Dakota Institute for Regional
Studies.
Shortridge, J. R. 1995. Peopling the plains: Who settled where in
frontier Kansas. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
Tretter, E. M. 2011. The power of naming: The toponymic
geographies of commemorated African-Americans. The
Professional Geographer 63 (1): 34–54.
Tuan, Y.-F. 1991. Language and the making of place: A
narrative-descriptive approach. Annals of the Association of
American Geographers 81 (4): 684–96.
U.S. Census Bureau. 2012a. Ancestry. http://www.census.
gov/population/ancestry/ (last accessed 26 May 2013).
———. 2012b. Census regions and divisions of the United
States. http://www.census.gov / geo / www / us regdiv.pdf
(last accessed 25 May 2013).
———. 2013a. American Community Survey 2006–2010 es-
timates. http://www.census.gov/acs/www/ (last accessed 27
May 2013).
———. 2013b. Metropolitan and micropolitan sta-
tistical areas of the United States and Puerto
Rico, December 2009. http://www.census.gov/geo/maps-
data/maps/cbsacsa.html (last accessed 25 May 2013).
U.S. Geological Survey. 2013. U.S. Board on Geographic
Names. http://geonames.usgs.gov (last accessed 27 May
2013).
Vuolteenaho, J., and L. D. Berg. 2009. Towards critical to-
ponymies. In Critical toponomies: The contested politics of place
naming, ed. L. D. Berg and J. Vuolteenaho, 1–18. Burling-
ton, VT: Ashgate.
Wang, F. 2006. Quantitative methods and applications in GIS.
Boca Raton, FL: Taylor & Francis.
 12 Volume 0, Number 0, xxxx 2015
Waters, M. C. 1990. Ethnic options: Choosing identities in Amer-
ica. Berkeley: University of California Press.
White, R. 1991. “It’s your misfortune and none of my own”: A
new history of the American West. Norman: University of
Oklahoma Press.
Wilson, S. G. 2009. Population dynamics of the Great Plains:
1950–2007. Population estimates and projections. Washing-
ton, DC: U.S. Census Bureau. http://www.census.gov/
prod/2009pubs/p25-1137.pdf (last accessed 25 May 2013).
Withers, C. W. 2000. Authorizing landscape: “Authority,”
naming and the ordinance survey’s mapping of the Scottish
highlands in the nineteenth century. Journal of Historical
Geography 26 (4): 532–54.
Wright, J. K. 1929. The study of place names: Recent work
Downloaded by [University of Colorado - Health Science Library] at 21:08 14 December 2014
and some possibilities. Geographical Review 19 (1): 140–44.
Wunder, J. R. 1994. What’s old about the new Western his-
tory: Race and gender. Part 1. The Pacific Northwest Quar-
terly 85 (2): 50–58.
Yeoh, B. S. A. 1996. Street-naming and nation-building: To-
ponymic inscriptions of nationhood in Singapore. Area 28
(3): 298–307.
Zelinsky, W. 1955. Some problems in the distribution of
generic terms in the place-names of the Northeastern
United States. Annals of the Association of American Geog-
raphers 45 (4): 319–49.
———. 1967. Classical town names in the United States:
The historical geography of an American idea. Geographical
Review 57 (4): 463–95.
———. 1983. Nationalism in the American place-name
cover. Names 31 (1): 1–28.
———. 2002. Slouching toward a theory of names: A tenta-
tive taxonomic fix. Names 50 (4): 243–62.
STEPHAN FUCHS is an academic associate in the In-
stitute of Geography at the University of Heidelberg,
Im Neuenheimer Feld 348, 69121 Heidelberg, Germany.
E-mail: stephan.fuchs@geog.uni-heidelberg.de. His research
focuses on demographic and sociocultural patterns in histori-
cal and contemporary contexts and the application of modern
qualitative and spatio-statistical analyses.