By: Blonde Two
Hopefully I excited you with news of my new map cupboard yesterday. Today I am planning to further titillate your literary senses by telling you about an old map that was saved from the ignominy of being stored in the loft. Here it is;Published in 1946 and showing both Chez Blonde Two and sections of Dartmoor as far north and west as Two Bridges, this map has a lot to recommend it and I have spent many happy hours scouring it for features that are different to those on my modern OL28.
For a start, it shows one inch to a mile. I would love to be able to say that this makes perfect sense to me but, although I know how big an inch and a mile are, I seem to be incapable of making any logical connection between the two and how this might relate to my 1:25,000 version. Magnetic variation has apparently, varied since 1946, which is reassuring as anything in a static state but with “variation” in the name would maybe suggest imminent apocalyptic disaster (just a thought).
Dartmoor, despite its looking all solid, lumpy and unchanging, has also varied. I am afraid man is responsible (I know we shouldn’t blame men for everything but in this case …) If you know Dartmoor, have a look at the picture below and see if you can tell me what is missing and what year the missing thing appeared. If you don’t know Dartmoor, well then, take some time to admire the lovely type face and flowing lines of the map. I did!
Whether it is the modern 1:25000 or 1:50000 or the revered OS 1 inch to the mile they are all divided into kilometre squares and that is the unit I always use now enabling distances to be fairly accurately calculated measuring by eye in kilometres using the squares as a guideline.
The old one inch and the new 1:50000 give a much better, immediate representation of the lie of the land, and way back Bartholomews did a half inch map that was contour shaded in different colours which did even better for quick visual comprehension of the terrain.
I tend to use the 1:50000 all the time combined with Memory Map on my iPad-mini and iPhone which includes GPS. A big advantage here is that the map can be enlarged, but of course a kilometre square is still a kilometre. I find a lot of the writing and features on the 1:25000 are almost too small to read without a magnifying glass, but its biggest redeeming feature is representation of field boundaries. The downsides are its sheer bulk and square footage and difficulty of folding and the irritating double sided feature. Try opening one out in a high wind on Dartmoor and you will become an instant hit as a paraglider.
I do have a soft spot for that old one inch map and spent hours and hours of my teenage years poring over them reading them like books, and I do feel like a traitor abandoning the paper maps but we must move on. I will never throw them out.
Maps in high winds and rain have always been a problem. I get over this when I’m leading walks in various parts of the country by using mapping software on my PC. I plan routes and then print off on an A4 sheet which folds neatly into my pocket, popping it into a plastic bag if raining. However, I always carry a full map in the rucksack as back-up, but no matter how good technology is, there’s still nothing like laying a big map out on the table and poring over it for an hour or two!
Mmmmm we do seem to be missing a rather large reservoir and dam!!!!
Excellent – it looks funny doesn’t it. I find myself wondering whether it would have looked better or worse before 🙂
Hee! I am looking at a lovely old OS 5th relief edition map, scale 2 inches to 1 mile, price 2 shillings dated 1933. It’s beautiful – lovely thick paper, small size and coloured to show the hills. Also a Gall and Inglis map of the Scottish Lake District scale half inch to 1 mile, 1 shilling and 6 pence .
Both are cloth mounted.
Love old maps.
Cloth mounted – remind me to have a look at those when I next visit!