GDG- Standardized Map Features

[elcarto at comcast.net]

>>	“...In books, my ideas for standards include: 1. never mentioning a
unit or physical feature that is not designated on a map; 2. Including
topographical elevations; 3. Providing 2 maps (one detailed, the other 
more focused instead of small insets with printing so tiny that it defies 
reading with a magnifying glass. 	

>To this list of Dick’s standards, I would like to add some other 
items:  for every five or six pages of text, a map should be available 
to illustrate what is being explained in words. Of course, I am 
prejudiced in this matter — the more maps the better is my motto. All 
maps should be placed as close as possible to the text that the map is 
illustrating. I find it a bother to have to flip to the front of a book 
to view a map that is explaining action on page 114, or page 248 etc. 
Also, in a perfect world, the reader should not have to rotate a book 
90 degrees to read a map. In the real world of limited page space this 
is sometimes (usually) impossible, but one can wish.

>As to topography, as Dave Shultz and Rich Rollins have pointed out in 
their article in Gettysburg Magazine, issue No. 17, the Warren map, 
used as the basis for the Bachelder maps (1876), and consistently used 
as an important research tool when matching words with location, has 
its limitations as to accuracy. The authors have determined that 
elevations are about 100 feet off. I believe (cannot find source at 
this time) it has been determined that there is a deviation of up to 40 
feet on the horizontal.

I think it was Charlie Fennell that let me copy his 15 sheet version of the Warren Maps early on in my adventures mapping this field, but then warned me that Warren had "A Teams, B Teams and C teams when it came to their accuracy - must have been hot work, and they didn't all choose the same way to cool off!  I've learned to use every different possible source that you can get your hands on, and trust none of them entirely (just like written accounts, as we all know!)  They all have their own truths to tell, and their own lies and or mistakes, so you just have to try and come up with the most likely bit of truth you can - always an ongoing process!  (And Dave Powell and I have a standing joke about the risks of going on a stomp with Wayne Wachsmuth - invariably we come back knowing we should have handled at least some little detail different when designing our game maps!)

Personally I fault Imhof for doing a half rate job - he has far too few maps for the amount of text............. ;-)

Ideally (meaning it will never happen) even a book such as his should have been published as TWO volumes; one with the text and one with the maps, (and spiral bound while we're wishing!)  That way you could always have the proper map open and in view when you're reading the story.  Dave Powell - I sense a business possibility!

Rick Barber