Hit 1,000 old maps in my collection and realized I was wrong about 1700s borders

I sorted through my stack over the weekend and counted 1,002 sheets. That number surprised me because I thought I was barely past 800. Seeing that total made me rethink how I judged disputed borders in old maps, I always trusted the neatest linework. But a 1747 map of the Ohio Valley showed a boundary that matched a treaty I had never heard of, so now I look up the treaty before I assume the cartographer messed up. Anyone else find that hitting a certain count changes how you read the details?

1 comments

1 Comment

the_patricia12d ago

That bit about "trusted the neatest linework" hit home for me. I used to do the same thing, thinking if a border looked clean and precise, it had to be right. Then I hit around 900 maps and found a 1760s one that showed a river border I'd never seen, turned out there was a whole separate treaty I'd skipped over. Now I always check the date against the treaty list before I judge a line as wrong. It really does change how you read the details once you get past a certain count, you start looking for the story behind the ink instead of just the drawing.