The Map Room

The only atlases I have are the times atlas of world history, which is lots of fun, and an old world war II atlas published by hammond (sometime around 1940 or 1941 I think), complete with flags of the principal allies and axis powers you can cut out and pin onto the map.

What kinds of information might you be interested in, Marc? Political? Natural? Both?

I own the barnes & noble illustrated world atlas. It’s really nice and not very expensive. It profiles economic activity, population density, environmental issues, some current border/political issues. It also has low-angle “views” of geographically interesting areas (mountain passes, river valleys, volcanic activity, etc.)

Its only shortcoming is that there are no small scale profiles of important regions or cities.

I’m not really familiar with other atlases, but this one is really interesting!

Hope this helps.

As in all things, it depends. Most people, I guess, want to locate places. One also wants context: is the area hilly? what is the elevation? what roads link the place to what other places? Maps are compromises, and atlases are more so. Highway networks are important in developed countries and almost non-existent elsewhere. Tinting is great for showing elevation, but can miss the character of local relief and its effects on transportation and local life styles.

At the risk of offending one of your sponsors, the National Geographic, which I used to own, is the best at locating sheer number of places (cities, towns, village, wide spots in the road), but there is no context. And they still use colors to denote different countries or states. I still remember when I was a kid traveling from Boston to Niagara Falls, and being surprised to find that New York State was the same color as Massachusetts and the Berkshire Hills did not look like pictures of the Rocky Mountains.

The Times atlas is excellent, but expensive. The Times is also difficult to work with because of its size. Of course the size allows for comprehensiveness. The maps in the Times are beautiful, especially the elevation tinting. I own the 1999 US edition of the Times atlas.

The Rand McNally Millennium Edition atlas is a good compromise, being smaller and less expensive. Most English-language atlases are skimpy in coverage of areas outside of western Europe and North America and that is especially true of the Rand McNally; but its maps of developed countries are outstanding. This atlas uses tinting plus shading to show relief. Someitmes the shading in very steep areas obliterates features such as towns and roads.

IMHO everyone should own a copy of Goode’s World Atlas, published by Rand McNally. I have the 19th edition, printed in 1990. There is information one needs to know that atlases do not show in regular maps. Things like climate, language, mineral resources, population density, etc. are usually displayed, if at all, in a few, very large scale, world maps at the beginning or end of the book This makes it difficult or impossible to integrate that information with the detail of the maps that make up the heart of the book. Goode’s has those maps at the front of the book; but it also has a section on each continent so that in looking at a particular country one is only a few pages away from information about the distribution of population.

Finally, the indices of some atlases uses page coordinates, A1 or C9, etc., to locate places. I hate that. Goode’s uses latitude and longitude, which is as it should be. One should go to Amazon.com to compare and contrast atlases. but you really need to pick one up and flip through the pages. To my pleasant surprise, Goode’s is often found on remainder tables in bookstores.

I think Jim’s answer is first-rate. Wow. (I just added paragraph breaks to help readability.)

One needs to have more than one atlas, as each is so different and omits different things. The problem with Goodes is a lack of detail on the otherwise beautiful maps, and inconsistency on the descriptive maps such as climate from land to land. They provide much more for N. America than other continents for example. It’s no good for worldwide comparisons. National Geographic is good for finding places and information, but not in great detail. That would seem to require the Times atlas, or a similar one. And there are historical atlases and the like. I would say to have the latest Goode’s, Ntnl. Geographic and something different to begin with, and perhaps a comprehensive almanac.

I can’t believe I found such a site. My first experience with such. I own several Atlases each of which has problems. I recently was searching for the Ile de Porquerolles off France and neither of my Atlases at our winter home show this Island (Rand McNally and Nat’l Geographic Our World.) I have three other Atlases at our 8-mo home but cannot of course check them.

I am searching for the best Atlas as a hostess gift. I am going to Paris in April and want to take a gift to each of six friends there. I thought, what would I like? Answer: An up to date, comprehensive World Atlas. Therefore I’m looking for the best to buy for my friends