←back to thread

210 points benbreen | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
disillusioned ◴[] No.41084770[source]
My wife found a cool 1896 Harper's School Geography textbook at an antique shop and got it for me, and it had the original pupil's name and signature (and date of 1897!) written on the front matter, but there are also a few other handwritten notes and the name of the school itself... it's such a neat little self-contained time capsule.

It also boggles my mind:

1. How accurate it was, in terms of map fidelity

2. The quality of the illustrations and prints, many of which are in several (what I imagine was offset?) colors!

3. How well it's held up. The cover looks essentially completely trashed, but the interior of the book's pages are almost entirely intact, and in great shape. (I'm not worried of them turning to dust in my hands, for instance.)

It's always fascinating to see just how little has changed, especially among schoolkids in nigh on 300 years!

Here's essentially the exact book I'm talking about, so it's not _that_ uncommon. Looks to be in almost identical condition, too: https://www.ebay.com/itm/184283104558

replies(6): >>41085715 #>>41085842 #>>41086184 #>>41086978 #>>41087282 #>>41089830 #
whimsicalism ◴[] No.41086978[source]
i feel that by the turn of the 20th century we generally had fully accurate maps. 1897 is not really all that long ago - we were well on our way to discovering special relativity at that point
replies(1): >>41087963 #
1. 1659447091 ◴[] No.41087963[source]
> by the turn of the 20th century we generally had fully accurate maps

New Zealand may having something to say about that...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omission_of_New_Zealand_from_m...

replies(1): >>41089321 #
2. whimsicalism ◴[] No.41089321[source]
i’m not sure why an article describing the modern day accidental omission of NZ in maps is really relevant. they also often exclude Antarctica - not from lack of knowledge of the existence