JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for LIS-MAPS Archives


LIS-MAPS Archives

LIS-MAPS Archives


lis-maps@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Monospaced Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

LIS-MAPS Home

LIS-MAPS Home

LIS-MAPS  January 2007

LIS-MAPS January 2007

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: Separating and mounting maps from 19th century reports

From:

Iain Taylor <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

A forum for issues related to map & spatial data librarianship <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 11 Jan 2007 12:55:30 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (170 lines)

I agree that the condition of maps in bound volumes of the BPP series
is poor and that the Chawick-Healey fiche are usually unreadable, but
I wonder whether it might be possible to compromise by leaving a high
quality scan in a separately bound volume with inserted directions
within the text portion to the appropriate map or chart?

Iain Taylor
Halifax, NS

At 9:39 PM +0000 1/10/07, Humphrey Southall wrote:
>Replying to Andrew Cook, I hope it was clear I am very aware of the
>negative aspects of what I am proposing to do, but:
>
>(a) I don't think I should say who wrote this, but it wasn't me:
>
>>About 18 months ago [our] Library Committee agreed to dispose
>>of our set of British Parliamentary Papers. The decision reflected the
>>critical shortage of space to expand the remaining collections, and the
>>existence of other printed sets in the [nearby] library, which has a
>>chronological set and also one bound thematically. The chronological set
>>was significantly better than [ours], even before we took the
>>opportunity to use [our] set to fill some gaps in it before selling
>>the remaining volumes.
>
>(b) Having made extensive use of several different sets of British
>Parliamentary Papers in major libraries, the state of the maps bound
>into them is often lamentable, and it is not hard to imagine a
>situation where substantial parts of EVERY copy of a particular map
>have disintegrated, even though the volumes they are part of still
>look very imposing sitting on the shelves. The combination of thin
>high acid paper with regular unfolding and re-folding is very
>unfortunate.
>
>(c) The treatment of these maps by projects to microfilm or scan the
>BPP volumes has also been poor. In at least parts of the
>Chadwyck-Healey microfiche editions, they are treated as if they
>were the same size as the ordinary pages when they are in fact much
>bigger; as a result, they were unreadable at least on the viewer I
>had access to. Even more seriously, they had been reproduced in
>monochrome. Boundary maps almost always use a monochrome base map
>with the boundary lines superimposed in colour, so monochrome images
>are almost useless; completely so with the Boundary Commission
>maps, which generally show "before and after" boundaries, or even
>multiple alternatives, using different colours which are
>indistinguishable when reduced to monochrome.
>
>(d) There therefore seems to be a case for a project which focuses
>on capturing the maps as fully as possible, and also ensures the
>physical preservation of one set of the maps.
>
>(e) Other will know more, but my sense is that the boundary
>commission maps from 1868 onwards are cartographically unremarkable.
>However, the maps in the 1831/2 report are often based on specially
>commissioned surveys, and look to be hand coloured. There is no
>proposal to disassemble those volumes, and I am now very concerned
>we find a good home for them when we are finished; fortunately, the
>bindings are generally in a much better state than the later
>volumes, some of which are half disassembled already.
>
>I should maybe add that our twentieth century boundary maps come
>mainly from the map library of St. Catharine's House, discarded by
>the Office of National Statistics when they moved to Pimlico and
>quite literally rescued by us from a builder's skip. I am grateful
>to the individual librarians at ONS who alerted us (and the Royal
>Statistical Society) to what was going on, but this incident in
>particular made me very aware of the slim margin between the
>priceless -- which no library would lend us for digitising -- and
>the worthless. The really alarming part is that a few of those ONS
>maps include additional hand-drawn lines showing boundaries which
>may not be recorded elsewhere. The new funding I cannot talk about
>yet may not be doing all that much for the physical preservation of
>boundary maps, but it will ensure the preservation of the
>information on them.
>
>Best wishes,
>
>Humphrey Southall
>
>At 17:54 10/01/2007, you wrote:
>>Three points about British Parliamentary Papers:
>>1. The more people butcher sets of BPP, 'given that there are several
>>other copies ... in more easily accessible locations', the fewer sets
>>are left to consult. Repeatedly destroying just one more because there
>>were plenty left was what killed off the dodo in Mauritius, and
>>deforested Easter Island. Will the person butchering the last set,
>>please turn out the light in the archives of parliamentary democracy.
>>2. The sets 'in more easily accessible locations' are subjected to
>>heavier use, and suffer the most damage and casual depredation,
>>particularly damage to and loss of folding maps. Not even the most
>>important libraries, and the libraries of last resort, can keep pace
>>with this heavy use, nor make good the gaps which result.
>>3. It is not necessarily the case that the maps in all copies of a PP
>>are from the same printing or issue. They can also differ in content.
>>This is one of the bibliographical questions about BPP which await
>>fuller investigation, after Susan Gole alerted us to the phenomenon a
>>few years ago in her work on maps of the Mediterranean in BPP.
>>
>>Andrew S Cook MA PhD FRHistS FRSA
>>Map Archivist, India Office Records
>>The British Library
>>96 Euston Road
>>London NW1 2DB
>>+44 20 7412 7828
>>
>>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: A forum for issues related to map & spatial data librarianship
>>[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Humphrey Southall
>>Sent: 10 January 2007 17:18
>>To: [log in to unmask]
>>Subject: Separating and mounting maps from 19th century reports
>>
>>I am not allowed to say anything about the funding for this, but this is
>>about something we need to do in the near future. I also apologise to
>>anyone offended by the proposed act of vandalism!
>>
>>The reports of the Parliamentary Boundary Commissions form part of the
>>vast body of British Parliamentary Papers, i.e. big fat volumes, mostly
>>quarto in size. However, unlike most BPP volumes, they of course
>>include a large number of maps bound in. With the exception of the very
>>first Boundary Commission, for 1831-2, the maps are usually much larger
>>than the ordinary pages, so they are inserted folded. Over the years,
>>there were fewer and fewer ordinary pages, so by the mid-20th century
>>the report consisted literally of a box containing a set of folded maps.
>>However, this is about the 1868,
>>1884 and 1917 reports.
>>
>>We need to scan a set of these maps both as the first stage of a project
>>to construct vector boundaries and to create scans as a resource in
>>their own right. We have had a set of the reports on long-term and
>>informal loan, and we have just been told by the actual owners they do
>>not want them back: they are disposing of the rest of their collection
>>of BPP reports, and are donating to us the ones they have loaned.
>>
>>Here comes the vandalism bit: given that there are several other copies
>>of the reports in more easily accessible locations, and given that the
>>bindings for our copies are in very poor condition, I am proposing to
>>have the books taken apart with the aim of creating a really good set of
>>the maps, both for scanning and for long-term preservation. The maps
>>are mostly printed on thin and fairly brittle paper (i.e. high acid), so
>>so long as they are stored as part of the volumes and have to be
>>un-folded and re-folded each time they are used, they will be subject to
>>continuing damage. My guess is that they need to be permanently mounted
>>on some kind of backing sheet.
>>
>>Has anyone experience of a project like this? Not having to scan the
>>maps in situ within the books will cut the cost of scanning, giving us a
>>budget to pay for restoring the maps (while, sadly, butchering the
>>books). Can anyone suggest possible contractors?
>>
>>Best wishes,
>>
>>Humphrey Southall
>
>
>====================================
>Humphrey Southall
>Reader in Geography/Director,
>Great Britain Historical GIS Project
>Department of Geography, University of Portsmouth
>Buckingham Building, Lion Terrace, Portsmouth PO1 3HE
>
>GIS Project Office: (023) 9284 2500
>Home office: (020) 8853 0396
>Mobile: 0796 808 5454
>
>About Britain: http://www.VisionOfBritain.org.uk
>About us: http://www.gbhgis.org

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

April 2024
March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
October 1998
September 1998


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

For help and support help@jisc.ac.uk

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager