In the Middle Ages etc., when maps of Britain were drawn, how did people know what it looked like?

Question

This is considering they had no satellite or anything, but the maps were still fairly accurate, considering erosion and stuff.

Answer 1

For that matter, Jenn, how'd they know the shape of any large land mass? Good question, and surprising to me that the answers (so far) haven't been very good. Let's see what's involved here...

First of all, when you draw a map to your house (from memory) how do you know what to put on paper? Answer: your brain puts you up in the sky looking down on your place and then drawing in a bird's eye view of the maps and various features along the way. Likewise, kids playing football on a vacant lot will draw their strategy in the dirt -a bird's eye view, again.

The point I'm making here is that the human brain has the capacity to understand a top down view, even though we live in a "horizontal" view, so to speak. And so, the middle age navigators and explorers were able to get a mental picture of what coast lines looked like if seen from the air. And likewise, someone looking at a drawing from that point of view could switch it back to a "sideways" orientation. Kinda cool when you think about it.

Now, if you look at ancient maps -especially ones of the new world- you'll note that many are accurate as to over all shape, but pretty poor when it comes to proportions. Thus, Florida may be way too big (or too small) on an early map, even though the basic penninsular shape looks about right. Try a web search for "new world maps" or something like that to scan a few.

Back to Great Britain. Since GB has been populated for almost as long as there have been people, folks in that part of the world are pretty familiar with their territory. Most may not have known the entire land mass, but there was enough collective knowledge to piece together a pretty accurate quilt of the whole place. Not only that, but GB was one of the stomping grounds (literally) of the Romans, whose engineering skills were very good even by modern day standards. And they had surveying instruments such as transits, lines, and wheels they used to lay out their system of roads, define lines of territory, mark water courses, etc. So, their maps and plats were accurate to within a few feet or inches. Their written records were kept safe in monasteries and other religious institutions even during the dark ages, so when the middle ages rolled around and folks had to re-learn a lot of stuff, there was at least some foundation material left from the Romans. In a nutshell -the data for the map makers was pretty good.

Parallel with all this was the technical development of instrumentation, as noted by other respondents to tour question. That gave better tools to the users -but you had to know how to use 'em.

And this brings to the actual map-maker him(or her) self. Making maps is all about drawing to scale, being able to make 1" on paper always represent one mile on land or water. When we see an old map of a land mass surrounded by water, we may be amazed at how so many of the tiny little inlets and tributaries appear so accurately on the map. Remember, though, that while the map may seem to be drawn from the point of view of being over water and looking down at land, the actual data was often taken on the actual land, and could therefore be accurately drawn because the observer was standing still -not actually bobbing and floating on the water. That said, many new world maps WERE made from observations aboard ships (at least, initially) and that is precisely WHY the dimensions weren't up to snuff.

Anyway, the map makers needed to be skilled artists, to be able to take what was in their heads and put it on paper. One such was John White, sent with Sir Walter Raleigh's expedition to colonize what is now the Outer Banks of North Caroline (USA) in the 1580's. White not only drew maps, but also detailed drawing of native inhabitants, wildlife, etc. And those maps survive today in British museums and universities. Have a look:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_White_(surveyor)

And these folks had no prior data from the Romans or locals ("Indians"). They'd go out in boats, slog through swamps, explore, draw, make maps.

In summary, the answer to your question is that there is plenty of good data (measurements), a human ability to draw "top down" while observing "sideways," some surveying instruments and specialists who can draw to scale.

And this reminds me of a question I'VE always had. How did North get to be UP on all maps? Why do do globes show the north pole "on top?" Matter of fact, I think I'll ASK that very question.

OK?

Answer 2

The governments at the time (under Royal patronage) sent out teams of ordnance experts, who triangulated the whole of Britain over a period of twenty five years or so.

These small 'pieces' were eventually slotted together to give the first 'Ordnance Survey' map system of England Wales and Scotland (Ireland and Eire came later)

The work of the 'Royal Ordnance' has continued now for several hundred years and maps are constantly updated, from 'road maps' (based on OS maps) to topographical maps highlighting every bump in the ground. The detail on some of the maps (at 3" to the mile) is immense. It is possible to see the ground area of every house, every field and every farm plot in great detail.

The original mappers were very, very accurate and little has had to be changed through inaccuracies over the years since. Of course, as coastal erosion, new buildings and urban growth have escalated, almost all of the maps have been totally redrawn many times.

They didn't, of course, have satellites to view the ground, but they had a very efficient triangulation system which until very recently was the basis for any accurate mapping.

Hope that helps,

BobSpain

Answer 3

There have been maps of Britain since Roman times. It seems likely therefore that these maps simply got copied and later had more information added to them.

The oldest English map is called the "Mappa Mundi" [I think that's correct]. It is a map of the world as perceived by the Medieval scholars of the day, whoever they were. I think the map is kept at Chichester or Winchester.

I would just like to add that the most accurate maps [charts] ever made, were made by Captain Cook. His charts, showing the coastline of New Zealand are so accurate, it is possible to navigate with them today. Watch out for rocks.

Answer 4

They weren't all that interested in the shape of things, more important was getting from A to B. So a lot of maps will show routes, places to stay on the way, barriers such as marshes, rivers or mountains. Many medieval maps derive from tax collectors going around their circuit, or pilgrims travelling to a holy place, and so they are practical guides to travel routes, not geographical in the modern sense.
Maps are all about perspective and usage, so beautiful things like the Mappa Mundi, drawn around 1290 and hanging where it was created in Hereford Cathedral, show Jerusalem in the middle of a great big circle, which is the earth. Rome and Constantinople are also highlighted, as is Hereford which is shown on a par with London and Paris - see what i mean by perspective?
The shapes of the coastline are vague, and a lot of the detail is completely inaccurate, but what was important to the map maker - the location of holy places, the wonders of the world, and of course Hereford - they are easy to see and to follow.

Answer 5

The ability to survey land was around then and much earlier than that. They knew the math needed to figure out how to draw the land. There were mistakes made that is for sure but not real serious ones just for Briton.

The size of the earth was miscalculated for a long time and that is the reason Columbus thought he could sail to India in a short time. The size they thought the earth was then did not allow for the Americas to be there and it was only ocean all the way to India.

Surveyors would walk and count their steps as they went noting every direction change and at what number of step. Again not extremely accurate but good enough for most purposes.

Answer 6

A lot of the early maps aren't very accurate - look at Matthew Paris's map.
The first accurate maps were Portolano sea charts, which used bearings. But when first used in the 17th century, astronomical observations still proved maps inaccurate . Louis XIV joked that France had lost more by the new mapmakers than it had gained by his victories.

Answer 7

People were actually quite clever in those days you know.
Nowadays we're so reliant on modern technology we wonder how anything ever happened before the 21st century.

Look at what the Egyptians, Romans, Chinese achieved while we were still living in mud huts.

p.s. How do you think Ordnance Survey maps were drawn less than 50 years ago? I don't know how old you are, but we haven't had sattelites for that long you know.

Answer 8

In fact, it just wasn't in the Middle Ages. The Romans had maps of the British Isles which were roughly correct in the shape. Mainly, these maps would have been prepared by sailors. Ships in Roman times and in the Middle Ages tended to hug the shore and needed to know its shape fairly accurately as they would navigate from known point to known point

Answer 9

If it's a world map, i think the UK will kind of be centred, but it is not exactly in the middle, it will be like this because our maps usually are measured by GMT, which is 0 hours in the UK.

Answer 10

They relied alot on mesasurement based off of the position of the stars in the sky. They also use other instruments, such as sextants and other sailing type devises. This still wasn't that accurate, because, if you look at maps from those times, they all kinda differ from each other.

Answer 11

A skilled navigator can pinpoint your location fairly accurately with the stars using only a sextant.

I know it seems impossible, but I understand that accuracy within 500 metres or so is apparantly possible.