How many times can a 4 year old shout ARE WE THERE, YET? in two hours?
Probably too late to edit the other post. That does help. The globe has one Korea – it became North and South in 1953. It also has Indochina, which was over in 1954. And it doesn’t have the Central African Federation, which started in 1953; it does have Southern and Northern Rhodesias and Nyasaland, all separately. So that pretty much brings it to between 1948 and 1953.
Newfoundland and Labrador are shown the same color as Canada; so probably 1949 or later. (The color scheme is a bit confusing – generally different adjoining entities are different colors, but some US states are shown in different colors and some although adjacent are the same, plus which of course a US State is part of the same country as all the other states.)
The world may never know.
Great Circles got f***-all to do with it.
NYC is about the same latitude as Lisbon, and London is a lot further east than Lisbon. That extra east matters a LOT. If you go straight south from London you hit Lisbon’s latitude near the Mediterranean coast in Spain.
It sounds like you’re making the totally unwarranted assumption about north being “up” on that map. It isn’t.
Ah.
North’s somewhere in the upper center?
It doesn’t help that I can’t read any of the print on the map; even in the enlarged version you get by clicking on it, and even if I then try to enlarge that, the print is all way too blurry to read.
Is it possible that some maps or globes took a significant enough of time to construct and/or borrowed from multiple sources, so that they are not correct as of any specific point in history? If so, perhaps it is impossible to tell. I’m surprised that there is no year on it. My parents bought me a similar-sized globe circa 1980, which is sitting in my living room, but it has faded a bit. Will inspect it once I get my first pair of glasses next week.
Yep. And that doesn’t even account for how big it is north-to-south, since the far north mostly can’t be accessed by road (except maybe by ice road in the winter).
For reference for anyone not familiar: the easternmost point on Ontario is almost due North of New York City, the westernmost point North of Kansas city, the southernmost point at a similar latitude to the California-Oregon border, and the northernmost point is about a third of the way up Hudson’s bay, well north of the Alaskan panhandle. The land area is about 1.5 times the size of Texas, and nearly 200 times the size of Canada’s smallest province, PEI. I have also always found it amusing that Minnesota claims the title of 'Land of Ten Thousand Lakes", when their neighbour to the north outdoes them by a factor of about 100.
They claim a factor of ten. However, when I look at the map, the shoreline of Lake of the Woods looks like it is, in sum, greater than the circumference of the earth (it looks like many little lakes, but they are all connected).
I always had an uncanny sense of direction. But I lost when I spent a year in the Southern Hemisphere. I think it was because in the south, the sun appears to move across the sky from right to left, and unconsciously threw me off.
Now that’s more like it!
About the 10,000 lakes, there is often a US-centric view of the world. And that bugs me,
Saskatchewan is rectangular.
No, because the Manitoba - Saskatchewan boundary has several east-west correction lines. There are places where you can be in Saskatchewan, simultaneously due south of Manitoba, and due west of Manitoba.
“Manitoba: a nice place to live – if you’re wheat”
(— some Canadian comedy show)
Looking at that map carefully, the North Pole is at the top border in the center left-right. And at any other point on the map, a straight line drawn from that point to the North Pole represent North. So from Cape Horn at the bottom of South America, North is up and to the left. While from Cape of Good Hope at the bottom of Africa, North is to the upper right at a shallower slop than the line from Cape Horn.
You’ll also notice there is additional land shows in light gray surrounding the colored area. That demonstrates this map “tiles the plane”. There’s another gray Antarctica at lower left south of the colored Africa and another gray Greenland above where the colored Finland meets Russia. And another gray Scandinavia above colored Greenland.
Once you think about it a bit it makes sense. But it’s pretty mind-bending at first.
Are you sure you’re not looking at Mandatory Palestine? It existed from 1920 to 1948 and at that scale its boundaries would be indistinguishable from Israel with or without the West Bank.
If you can read a label saying “Israel” then I got nuthin’.
Our colorful post-WW2 atlas had Germany split into four parts - each colored differently - one part for each of the occupying powers. The Saar had alternating vertical stripes - the two colors matching those of France, and the French occupied zone of Germany. (Austria was likewise colored by occupation zones.) The most colorful map was that of Texas, with its 254 counties spread over two pages of living color.
My grandmother had an interesting atlas, which featured a region called “Central Australia”. It existed from 1927 to 1931, and was the southern part of the Northern Territory. It’s the only atlas in which I have ever seen that area shown under that name.
That is fantastic! Thank you for mentioning it.
Talk about a time sink. I particularly enjoyed the spider hazards in what used to be Colorado.
85 in parts, but ironically, only between Austin and San Antonio on a toll road: Speeding Through Texas: Going 85 MPH on the Nation's Fastest Highway - ABC News
I have a commemorative reprint of an encyclopedia from the 1790s. A lot of the maps contain the phrase “Parts Unknown”. This phrase always reminds me of famous WWF wrestler Bob Marcus, who always quickly lost to an opponent who was permitted to have a birthplace, flag, themed costume and catchy song (such as “Love Is Like A Pile Driver”) that would play while walking to the ring.
I can read a label saying “Israel”.
That’s possible, it seems to me. And genuine uncertainty at the time about the status of Germany could well have been another factor.
I think ‘sometime between the second half of 1948 and some time in 1953’ is close enough to satisfy my curiosity. – I can’t find a date on the thing anywhere.
I may come back to it; especially if I come across a version of it that’s legible for me.
I note that the beginning of whatever happened in Colorado appears to be scheduled for next year.
This past year has left me unnerved enough to find that joke a bit worrying.
– I may have gone wrong on my attempt to use that one by being entirely confused about whether this globe shows Pakistan as a separate country; the word “Pakistan” is shown but it’s colored the same as India.