Map dating challenge

[shawmat]

There are two undated maps of European railways on https://timetableworld.com, both originally published in Germany. I have attempted to date them using clues on the maps but need your help to be more precise. Please look at both maps and provide your estimates for the the dates, including the reasons. The clues don't have to be based on railways; consider changing political boundaries etc too.

The first one is catalogued as being 1870 but I am fairly sure it is earlier, and have posted "c.1860" to the website. Notice how the Scottish Highlands have no railways yet, and the Severn Valley Railway is missing.

Timetable World Viewer

timetableworld.com

The second map has "1871" pencilled on it by a cataloguer. Is that correct? Or could it be later? The scale of railway development between the two maps is considerable.

Timetable World Viewer

timetableworld.com

If you haven't previously used the Timetable World viewer, there is a user guide here: https://timetableworld.com/ttw-user-guide.

 

[randyrippley]

The S&DJR dates map 1 to 1862-63: the Dorset part only show Wimborne-Blandford, which opened November 1860.The gap was closed August 1863.
It shows the Somerset line as open from Highbridge to the junction at Cole - which happened in February 1862
However you had to remember this map could have taken some years to draw and may have been out of date at publication. It certainly has inaccuracies for instance the main line is wrongly shown as routed via Wells, not Glastonbury

On map 2 the Sidmouth branch is shown, that opened July 1874

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

There are conflicting dates for the first map.
It shows Venetia as part of Italy, which didn't happen until 1866.
In Eastern Europe it shows railways from Lemberg (Lviv) to Kijeff (Kyiv) which were not connected until 1871.
In the Balkans I think the Zagreb-Sisak-Banja Luka line opened in 1869 (the first rail line in Ottoman Bosnia), and is still shown as incomplete in Croatia.

The second map shows Budapest-Belgrade-Sofia complete, and that didn't happen until 1884.
Nearer home, Blaenau Ffestiniog is shown with LNWR and GWR routes, and they didn't open until 1879/1882 respectively.

It must have been very hard to keep up with railway expansion across Europe in those years.

 

[stuu]

The second map has the Lynton and Barnstaple open, and others which didn't open till around the same time, so must be around 1900

 

[randyrippley]

There's a good chance that the map may have been partly drawn speculatively based on plans and intentions rather than completed works.
Map 2 appears to show the Knott End line as open to the coast, but insolvency prevented that happening until 1908

 

[mailbyrail]

The Franco-Prussian War changed the borders between the two countries. The map shows the borders which were set in 1871 after Alsace-Lorraine was absorbed into Germany where it remained until 1918 - eg Strasbourg, Colmar, Metz are in Germany after having been in France until the war.
News of railways opening, being built or simply proposed was much less likely to be circulated promptly and accurately than political borders

 

[Ayrshire Roy]

The first map I'm not sure but the second shows the Girvan and Portpatrick Junction Railway which opened in 1877 but doesn't show the Maidens and Dunure Light Railway which opened in 1906 so it must be somewhere in between those dates.
I only really know my local lines so can't help with other lines that should or shouldn't be there.

 

[Essan]

The 2nd map shows the Mallaig extension to the WHL - work didn't start on that until 1897 (it opened in 1901).

 

[randyrippley]

The Franco-Prussian War changed the borders between the two countries. The map shows the borders which were set in 1871 after Alsace-Lorraine was absorbed into Germany where it remained until 1918 - eg Strasbourg, Colmar, Metz are in Germany after having been in France until the war.
News of railways opening, being built or simply proposed was much less likely to be circulated promptly and accurately than political borders

Both maps appear to show the post-1871 borders. Was the earlier map actually drawn retrospectively - old railway data on a new political map?

 

[Taunton]

Maps like that of the era were drawn, painstakingly, by cartographers on copper plates, and lettered by hand. When revised editions were produced later, the plates were just amended, and thus one can come up with all sorts of date mismatches. Sometimes, if you know where to look, you can see traces of work that has been rubbed out.

The spelling of the Welsh placenames seems to have been a particular challenge to the German cartographer!

The second map shows the GCR from Aylesbury to Nottingham as differently marked, presumably 'under construction', which makes that bit around 1900.

 

[OVS Flatbottom]

As far as Ireland is concerned, there is actually a reasonably accurate (though it does contain a couple of errors) 1870 map on page 37 of Doyle and Hirsch's Railways in Ireland 1834-1984, so the comparison is relatively easy to make. The "1870" map is missing Castlebar-Westport (1866), Manulla-Foxford (1868), Carrickfergus-Larne (1862), Downpatrick-Newcastle (1869) and Ballingarrane-Newcastle West (1867). On the other hand, it includes Enniscorthy-Wexford (1872) and the Cashel branch (1904! - though the Great Southern & Western had vague aspirations to reach Cashel from the very early days). Magherafelt-Macfin (1880), the Sligo Leitrim & Northern Counties (1879-82), Ballywilliam-Macmine (1870-1873) and Bandon-Bantry/Clonakilty (1866-1886) are all "im Bau."

The "1871" map appears to reflect a much later position as regards Ireland. Waterford-Rosslare (1906) is shown as under construction. (The other lines under construction on that map are Bundoran-Sligo, Manorhamilton-Sligo direct and Cootehill-Cavan - although I know the first one was proposed, I don't think any of these ever started construction). Various other lines opened in the early years of the 20th century (the Lough Swilly extensions (1901-03), Donegal-Ballyshannon (1905), Armagh-Keady (1908-09) etc.) are missing, as is Westport-Achill (1894-95), though Claremorris-Sligo and the Glenties branch (both 1895) are there. I think the Irish elements can be dated to the period 1895-1900 with a reasonable degree of confidence.

 

[randyrippley]

Just to add confusion
the earlier map shows routes to Fleetwood, Blackpool and Lytham (but not Lytham-Blackpool), while the later map only shows the original route to Fleetwood.
Rather the reverse of what you'd expect

The South Wales and Bristol GWR cutoff of 1903 is shown on the second map, but not the 1906 Castle Cary to Langport. But the lines around Castle Cary look to be based on bad info anyway

 

[etr221]

The earlier map ("c.1860") shows Alsace & Lorraine as part of Germany - which is shown unified, so is post 1871; but Serbia and Romania still as parts of the Ottoman Empire, so pre 1878.
The later map ("c. 1871") not only has Serbia and Romania independent, and Cyprus as British, so post 1878, but Greece including Thessaly (so post 1881). It does show railways (several) which were only built in the early 20th century - including the Wocheinerbahn from Triest to Jesenice, opened 1906. But Norway and Sweden are not distinguished - union was disolved 1905. So I would suggest a date of about 1905-1906.

Interestingly, it has the Great Chesterford and Newmarket Railway as "under construction" ("im Bau") opened 1848, closed 1851!

 

[Western Sunset]

Interesting spellings on the first map. Here are but a few:
Conventry (Coventry)
Blankford (Blandford)
Bourton (Burton)
Devontport (Devonport)

 

[Senex]

The earlier map (c.1860) distinguishes the various states by colour, and only one colour is used for Germany, which seems to imply a political entity. That seems to place it after the creation of the German Empire following on from the German victory in the Franco-Prussian War. So 1871 or after seems the most likely date for the mapping. The second map has on it the Lehrter Bahn, opened in 1871, the Dresdener Bahn, opened in 1875, and the Kanonenbahn, opened in 1879. So for that a date after 1879 seems likely.

Further thought: The first map shews the Dresdener Bahn but not the Kanonenbahn, and the Nordbahn which was opened in 1877 is apparently shewn as planned/under construction. Furthermore, the line from Breslau to Stettin is shewn as complete and open as far as Küstrin, which was reached at the beginning of 1875, but not beyond. The stage to Königsberg (the other one) was opened in autumn 1876 and the remainder to Stetting in 1877. Also, the Settle & Carlisle of 1876 isn't shewn. Does a date round about 1876 seem plausible?

 

[30907]

I would be particularly interested to know when the Shoreham-Petworth-Petersfield-Eastleigh route was proposed! Not the only line that never got off the drawing board...
Ignoring that (uncorrected on the later one) and just looking at the Southern area, the first is 1870-ish (consistent with the depiction of Germany as well) and the second more like 1900. Similarly Switzerland - the first has the Gotthard and Simplon projected or under construction, the second has the Albula completed, so again 1900-ish.

 

[AlbertBeale]

The earlier map shows the Frejus Tunnel as under construction - which was happenng from 1857 to 1871. [The second map suggests the tunnel was in operation.] The first one also shows the border after Savoy became part of France, which happened in 1860. Though how that "under construction" ties in with the map showing Alsace/Lorraine in their post 1871 situation (ie part of Germany, not France) is not clear. As has been suggested, international borders were more likely to be up to date on the maps than new railway routes (or tunnels), so your dating of the map to c1860, rather than the catalogued 1870, seems to be an adjustment in the wrong direction.

 

[shawmat]

Thanks for all your helpful comments so far (please keep them coming). I shall have to think again how to present the dates for maps on https://timetableworld.com. With the timetables there is rarely any ambiguity about dates, or at least the start date (some are valid "until further notice"). But clearly the maps can contain data from a range of dates. I can put a range in the title of the artefact but the search tool uses a specific year (+/- a range supplied by the user)

Please give me a few days to update the descriptions for these two artefacts on the website, using the points made above. I think I may go for the following:

The earlier map: c.1870 (as catalogued)
The later map: c:1900 (not 1871 as catalogued). Some people are suggesting even later, but we should probably go for a reasonable mid-point in the estimates.

I'll post the descriptions here as well.

So why did the cataloguer add "1871" to the map? Maybe it was nothing to do with its publication date; rather, the as-at date for the political borders.

As a general point, there may be other things presented as facts on https://timetableworld.com where you know better. It is intended to be collaborative project so please share what you know via the email address to be sure they'll be seen.

 

[randyrippley]

Don't forget the possibility of national jingoism - its quite possible that the cartographers chose to ignore the actual borders and used what they thought should be the borders of Greater Germany

 

[Western Sunset]

Remember that a single map may have sections revised at different dates - very common on OS maps. Hence apparent discrepancies between lines on different parts of the map.

 

[DerbyFriargate]

The first map shows the border between Denmark and Germany as it was after 1866 when Prussia had taken Holstein from Austria, this was after Prussia and Austria jointly had taken Slesvig-Holstein from Denmark in 1864.

The second map shows a railway in Denmark from Randers to Hadsund which was planned in 1881 and opened in 1883,so 1870 definitely seems too early.

 

[Bevan Price]

The first map contains several mistakes in UK.
It shows a line from Market Weighton to Hornsea (never built); (the line to Driffield did not open until 1890).
It also shows a non-existent branch heading west from Tebay towards "Boroness" (presumably getting confused with Bowness (Windermere)

 

[randyrippley]

The first map contains several mistakes in UK.
It shows a line from Market Weighton to Hornsea (never built); (the line to Driffield did not open until 1890).
It also shows a non-existent branch heading west from Tebay towards "Boroness" (presumably getting confused with Bowness (Windermere)

If you look closely that branch actually connects at Kendal to the WCML - the Kendal-Tebay section is badly drawn

 

[30907]

Ignoring the uncorrected errors from the earlier edition (another is Watchet to Chard which ISTR was going to be a ship canal), the newest lines I can identify in England are the Meon Valley (1904) and the Lavington cutoff (1900), while the GC (1899) is still under construction.
I think I might go for 1905 but TBH that might imply a greater degree of accuracy than the map has.

 

[jumble]

There are two undated maps of European railways on https://timetableworld.com, both originally published in Germany. I have attempted to date them using clues on the maps but need your help to be more precise. Please look at both maps and provide your estimates for the the dates, including the reasons. The clues don't have to be based on railways; consider changing political boundaries etc too.

The first one is catalogued as being 1870 but I am fairly sure it is earlier, and have posted "c.1860" to the website. Notice how the Scottish Highlands have no railways yet, and the Severn Valley Railway is missing.

Timetable World Viewer

timetableworld.com

The second map has "1871" pencilled on it by a cataloguer. Is that correct? Or could it be later? The scale of railway development between the two maps is considerable.

Timetable World Viewer

timetableworld.com

If you haven't previously used the Timetable World viewer, there is a user guide here: https://timetableworld.com/ttw-user-guide.

On the c1860 Map Romont to Bulle in CH is shown but this apparantly did not open till 1868
The Gotthard is shown but construction only started 1872
It occurs to me as well that different countries on this map must actually be dated differently

I think the second map is much later
Wenegenalp bahn and Jungfrau were not started before 1895
Brienz railway station 1888
The dotted lines to Interlaken did not get filled till 1916

In UK Appledore to Dungeness is shown that did not open till 1881

( I qualify this from Wikipedia so may be talking nonsense)

 

[Howardh]

Just about the map - thanks for the upload! - it's fascinating how different the east of Europe looks compared with today. I wonder (shudder?) to think what the map of europe will look like in 2150!

I'm impressed by how much of Europe was covered by rail, and I'd love to know how practical it was to travel then throughout Europe by rail, it does look like you could get from London to Malaga wholly by train (and ferry) and I wonder how long that would have taken, and what would the cot be in today's money? I really must pick up Bradshaw's guide and look it all up!

But on the negative side, look at all the soot and CO2 that would have been pumped into the atmosphere.

 

[etr221]

My overall thoughts ... while the maps were undobtedly drawn from the 'most reliable' sources (and what were these?) available in Glogau, details of what lines had or had not actually opened, or were still under construction, or were merely projected are unlikely to have been accurate and up to date - especially for the remote parts of far off countries (and, from Glogau, the UK was far off...) [1]

Political border changes were much more likely to have been up to date. Which would put the older map between1871 and 1878 (so c.1875 would be a good compromise). And the newer one 1905 at the latest (based on dissolution of Swedish-Norwegion Union) [2]

[1] Just think how difficult you might find getting the details of (say) the Chinese network today right - or how difficult someone from far away might find getting our network correct.

[2] But with many lines opened in that decade shown, not much before 1905.

 

[shawmat]

I've now updated the dates and the text on the maps as follows:

• The earlier map becomes 1871: https://timetableworld.com/ttw-viewer?token=88d235fd-cdd5-4b4b-ae1a-1a4a337e56df
• The later map becomes 1905: https://timetableworld.com/ttw-viewer?token=47e0049d-80e5-40bd-930b-500b5f56f32e

Click the Info tool on the map to read the text.


I have also added some new general words on the Search page about taking care with dates: https://timetableworld.com/ttw-search

A good collaborative effort all round - thank you.

 

[Senex]

I've now updated the dates and the text on the maps as follows:

• The earlier map becomes 1871: https://timetableworld.com/ttw-viewer?token=88d235fd-cdd5-4b4b-ae1a-1a4a337e56df
• The later map becomes 1905: https://timetableworld.com/ttw-viewer?token=47e0049d-80e5-40bd-930b-500b5f56f32e

Click the Info tool on the map to read the text.

View attachment 84557
I have also added some new general words on the Search page about taking care with dates: https://timetableworld.com/ttw-search

A good collaborative effort all round - thank you.

Does "c.1871" seem too precise? How much latitude does the "circa" suggest — with a figure as precise as 1871, it suggests to me not much more than a year either side. But I think all the evidence people have brought forward for this map rather suggests that 1871-ish is a little early and "mid-1870s" might be safer. (Back to my Dresdener Bahn hobby-horse: the company to build it hadn't even been formed in 1871, yet the line is shewn as open.)

 

[shawmat]

Does "c.1871" seem too precise? How much latitude does the "circa" suggest — with a figure as precise as 1871, it suggests to me not much more than a year either side. But I think all the evidence people have brought forward for this map rather suggests that 1871-ish is a little early and "mid-1870s" might be safer. (Back to my Dresdener Bahn hobby-horse: the company to build it hadn't even been formed in 1871, yet the line is shewn as open.)

Two alternative answers !

The Search tool requires a mid point. It is then for the user to choose the bands i.e. Exact, +- 2 years, or +- 5 years. I acknowledge that 1871 is the earliest date, so the mid point might be slight later
The title can be descriptive, so I could put "early-1870s"