Connecting the Dots

  • Zef M. Segal


This chapter highlights the findings of the book and stresses the interdependence of the three parts, which are neither hierarchical, nor are they isolated. It separates between the historical results, which show the integration of Bavaria and Saxony, the disintegration of Hanover and Württemberg, and the lack of German unity, and the theoretical results, which focus on the connection between mobility and spatialization, as well as the never-ending incompleteness of social spatialization.


  1. Arndt, Ernst M. 1894. Gedichte von Ernst Moritz Arndt. Vollständige Sammlung. Vol. 2. Leipzig: Verlag von Karl Fr. Pfau.Google Scholar
  2. Bukey, Evan B. 1972. “The Guelph Party in Imperial Germany, 1866–1918.” Historian 35 (1): 43–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Gieryn, Thomas F. 2000. “A Space for Place in Sociology.” Annual Review of Sociology 26: 463–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Smith, Monroe. 1919. “Bismarck Reconsidered.” Political Science Quarterley 34 (3): 476–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Soja, Edward W. 1996. Thirdspace. Cambridge: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  6. von Kleist, Heinrich. 1809. “Katechismus der Deutschen abgefaßt nach dem Spanischen, zum Gebrauch für Kinder und Alte.” Werke und Briefe in vier Bänden.Google Scholar
  7. Wolf, Nikolaus. 2009. “Was Germany Ever United? Evidence from Intra- and International Trade, 1885–1933.” The Journal of Economic History 69 (3): 846–881.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Zef M. Segal
    • 1
  1. 1.Open University of IsraelRa’ananaIsrael

Personalised recommendations