John Speed Maps online

[Coombe Barton]

John Speed's maps, made in the 17th century, go online at http://www.lib.cam.ac.uk/deptserv/maps/speed.html

[BoD]

But they don't show any railways!!

[spamcan61]

John Speed's maps, made in the 17th century, go online at http://www.lib.cam.ac.uk/deptserv/maps/speed.html

 

Thanks for posting, interesting to see which villages round my way have survived 400 years (almost always with a change of spelling, even allowing for 'f' =lower case 's'), and which have disappeared completely.

[Kenton]

They are quite interesting though - and amazing to see just how much is missing or simply in the wrong place.

[Ohmisterporter]

Interesting viewing though. The map of Lancashire seems to indicate that Salford was more important than Manchester at one time. What we now call Liverpool was Lerpoole and as has been mentioned there are places not on the map that have appeared and others that have gone. Noticably there are villages that appear to have had enough prominence to be named at the time Speed drew the maps, but are probably still no bigger than when he drew them. Others have become prosperous towns due in no small part to the industrial revolution and the railways. With a railway connection, Chat Moss is shown.

Hats off to John Speed though. Bearing in mind the equipment at his disposal and having to travel on foot and horseback it was a remarkable acheivement to map the whole country. And not a "Here be Dragons" in sight.

 

Geoff.

[Coombe Barton]

Interesting viewing though. The map of Lancashire seems to indicate that Salford was more important than Manchester at one time.

 

St Ives (Cornwall) was a larger and more industrialised place than Manchester during much of the eighteenth century.What you're seeing in the Speed maps is pre-inductrial Britain.

[petethemole]

Spellings of place-names, particularly of villages and small towns, didn't become fixed until the early 19th century, or even later. This was usually down to the Ordnance Survey, although their early maps still have some older spellings. Previously, spelling was partly phonetic, you wrote what you heard!

 

Some places shown on his map were very small at the time. Using Hampshire as an example, he shows places with churches, even though they may not have been nucleated villages at the time, more a scatter of farms. His town plans, in the map corners, are remarkably accurate, although stylized. We frequently use the Southampton plan in our reports as it illustrates the layout of the medieval town.

[Kenton]

he shows places with churches,

I certainly received the impression that this was the whole basis for the mapping.

I don't think it was simply location of towns and populations which tend to dictate later maps, and it certainly did not have its basis in lines of communication as quite significant roads of Roman and Saxon origin are missing even though at that time they may well have only be cart tracks they were still important links between towns and villages. It is more of a parish based record and may to some extent explain why some are in odd, geographically incorrect alignment with each other.

 

It was still, no doubt, quite a useful document to travelers at the time.