Physical space, in the process of land development, turned into geographical space (reflected on mental maps, in périples, itineraries, etc.), while the latter was then “conceptually transformed” into a set of categories and turned into social space, i.e., space that had been named, which was comprehensible to a certain group of people (a socium) and which was common to the representatives of one and the same culture. Space took on meanings that could be “understood by reference to particular social categories, rather than by reference to purely physical [and geographical] properties” (Hastrup 1985, 50). The individual perception of space was thus dependent on those social categories that had been the products of, and inherent to, a particular society or culture.

To give an example of different cultures using different “languages” in the “dialogue” between them, we can look at the modern (1951) edition of Heimskringla written by the Icelandic historian Snorri Sturluson ca. 1230. Speaking about Sigurðr Jórsalafari (the Crusader, 1103– 1130) and his pilgrimage to the Holy Land, Snorri tells how he comes to Lisbon (“til Lizibónar”), now in Portugal but then a large city in Spain (“borg mikil á Spáni”), where heathen Spain is separated from Christian Spain (“skilr Spán kristna ok Spán heiðna”). “Eru þau herǫð heiðin ǫll, er vestr liggja þaðan” (Hkr 1951, 242) (“All the districts west of that are heathen”), writes the medieval Icelander, and he has grounds for this statement, since this is how the people of his time envisaged the world (to be discussed in more detail below). Meanwhile, the modern Icelander, the editor of Heimskringla Bjarni Aðalbjarnarson, comments on this usage in the following way: “Rétt væri: suðr” (“suðr [south] would be correct”), and he proceeds: “Áin Tajo greindi lengi sundur lönd kristinna manna og Múhameðstrúarmanna” (“For a long time the River Tagus separated the lands of Christians and Muslims”) (Hkr 1951, n1).