"Oxford Atlas" Map

[?]e Were Mistakes in:

Putting Papua-N. Guinea On The

By G. A. V. Stanley

the dust-jacket of the latest dition of the Oxford Atlas, it Jates (amongst other things) atlas inevitably contains some kes and mis-spellings. It is hope that users will inform any errors, so that the maps Gazetteer may be kept up to and as accurate as possible.” here goes. s Oxford Atlas (lOi in. x 15i 88-plates of maps; XXVI of Distribution Maps; and jes of the Gazetteer; plus ;s of Appendix, Addenda and ;enda) in the characteristic ■blue binding of the Oxford rsity Press, is a handsome npressive production. It was r ears in preparation, It is 1951, which means that it »ut in hand soon after the n 1946, when the cartographic al covering remote places, le South-West Pacific (which

in World War II suddenly became a battle area) had been immensely increased.

This material, covering Papua and New Guinea and Netherlands New Guinea (to which area t confine mv criticism) was undoubtedly available in London during the compilation of the Atlas, The Terrain Studies, Terrain Handbooks and Special Studies issued by the Allied Geographical Section of the SWPA, and also the Australian Series of Charts pre pared and issued by the RAN were certainly available to the Editors anc * their Assistants and Examiners (who checked the maps). The Australian Aeronautical Sheets (Scale 1 1,000,000) were also readily available, but very evidently none of this material was used, The craftsmen of Messrs Cook Hammond and Kell (the printers of the maps) are credited with

having devised the “. . . new system of layer tints . . .” to indicate topographical relief and bathymetry. In a note on “Compilation of the Atlas” it is stated that to show relief “Actual contour lines have been omitted, since they interfere with the smooth gradation of the layers, and with the legibility of the lettering. The junction of the layer tints are, however, contour lines.” Let us see how the new system of delicate tints and subtle shades works out in practice.

Netherlands New Guinea (Irian, and more recently West Irian to the Indonesians) is shown on Plate 61, in the scale of 1 16,000,000. The Territory of Papua and New Guinea (presumably East Irian to the same gentry), drawn to the same scale, is depicted on Plates 66-67.

The political boundary of the Republic of Indonesia is clearly shown as passing between New Guinea and the Aroe (or Aru) Islands, but the boundary with Australia is not shewn. Presumably it is along the oceanward edge of the Sahul Shelf (which is not named on the maps), along the 100-fathom line, but the very faint colour difference between the 100fathom line and the 1,000-fathom line is in such marked contrast with the dark-blue shade covering

;hs of over 1,000-fathoms that casual observer might easily ake the Australian (Sahul) f as embracing Soemba, Timor r Ceram, as well as the naheras and Biak, north of vink Bay. Such an impression it lead to most unfortunate ical conclusions. [Torres Strait “Port Kennedy” lewn, but not Thursday Island, [larger rivers in Netherlands i Guinea are not named, iugh the names are shewn on i 66. The political boundary he Republic of Indonesia is sed from Plates 66-67, where irould be of most use to ralian users of the Atlas, who ;not commonly aware that r and Jamdena are but 350and 250-miles respectively our nor’west coastline (or say, lame distince as that between )urne to Canberra and Sydney anberra respectively). the matter of political iaries, the 141st meridian of Greenwich is correctly i as the boundary between irlands New Guinea and the tory of Papua and New ?a. But on Plates 66-67 the lary is incorrectly shewn as 100th curve eastwards from • Hollandia to Nukumanu instead of directly north the 141st meridian to the or, thence eastwards along the or to 160-deg. E., thence

south along that meridian to a parallel of latitude about halfway between Nukumanu and Ontong Java, thence west to 159-deg. E., and thence sou’westwards to Bougainville Strait, between Bougainville Island and Choiseul Island (in the BSIP).

A small thing, one may say, but for an authoritative Atlas to shew such “information” is misleading.

Again, on Plates 66-67, the Aus tralian interstate boundaries are shewn, but not the boundary between Queensland and Papua.

Turning to a detailed criticism of the depiction of the Territory of Papua and New Guinea on Plates 66-67, it is very difficult to know where to begin. Perhaps the most serious defect is the fact that the green colour tint between sea-level and the 500-foot contour is rather darker than the green colour tint between the 500-foot contour and he 1,000-foot contour: and that the next layer (tinted light yellow) up to the 2,000-foot contour is often omitted altogether.

It is quite understandable that the omission of the yellow should be necessary along steep mountain fronts, such es the northern scarps of the Bismarck Range (not named as such, although Mt. Wilhelm, the highest peak, is shewn, but incorrectly as 14,190-feet instead of 15,400-feet), and the Owen Stanley Range (named, although its highest

peak Mt. Victoria, 13,120-feet, is omitted).

But elsewhere the omission of the yellow is confusing. The result is that the eyes must be strained severely to pick up even the salient topographical features with which one is so familiar. Admittedly, if one is not familiar witn them, no eye strain is involved, but then, on

the other hand, a quite false npression of the morphological .nape of the Territory is gained.

Again, in North-East New Guinea he complete omission of the Ramu River is incomprehensible; in Papua he Strickland River is shewn, but not named, and its headwaters are emitted presumably in favour of minting the words Muller (sic) Range, which is given thereby an mportance which is certainly does not merit.

Around the coastline, it appears o have been the intention of the Editors to shew all Government Stations and coastal towns. Com mencing on the north coast, at the Netherlands boundary, Vanimo is omitted; Aitape, Wewak, Marien oerg (a mission station only), 3ogia, Madang (an important centre), Ribi (unknown on modern

maps), Finschafen (important), Lae

very important), Salamaua (aban doned since World War II), Morobe former German Government Ration but abandoned since World ar I), Buna (destroyed in World Var ID, Tufi, Baniara, Samarai n island, and not, as depicted, on he mainland), Abau, Rigo, Port Moresby (the capital of Papua-New Guinea), Kairuku, Kerema, Kikori, Sagona (unknown on modern maps), Daru (an island and an .important centre, but incorrectly depicted as on the mainland) and

Bugi (a village, near a Government Station) are all shewn (except Port Moresby) as of the same size and importance. The only inland “towns” shown are Balwa in NE New Guinea, quite unknown unless it is a misprint for Bulwa, a small centre of no importance compared with Bulolo and Wau nearby (both

are omitted) and Mugulo in H (quite unknown to modern man Serious omissions inland (iii New Guinea) are Ambunti i: Angoram on the Sepik I Telefomin, Wabag, Mt. HH Goroka and Kainantu in the I lands; Wau and Bulolo; antu Papua) Kiunga and Mava

rray), Lake Kutubu, Mendi and 1 (in the Southern Highlands). ia. in Papua, is shewn, but radays is of little importance pared to Popondetta, which is tted. There is ample room on map for all these names. i the Bismarck Archipelago the ur layering gives a misleading ression of New Britain, angai, which is up to 2,800-feet i, is coloured as if it were less i 500-feet. Similarly, Bougain , owing to the defective colour me appears to be very flat in southern part. In Papua, the Itrecasteaux Islands appear to juite flat, like the Trobriand ids nearby; in actual fact they steeply mountainous, up to i-feet in Normanby Island, up up to 8,500-fect in Goodenough id. en on the small scale of 1 : I they are quite large enough >e coloured brown instead of a, to indicate their true nature. 1 of which adds up to one L the Oxford Atlas has been badly compiled and edited in :ase of New Guinea, both in the erlands and the Australian ;. As one of the largest islands le world, and nowadays, more ever, a centre of political and tific interest, it deserves better ment. is to be hoped that in future ms some pains will be taken imedy these glaring defects to ti I have drawn attention, and isert information which is of ■aphical significance. e best source material is ips the “Atlas of the Resources apua and New Guinea,” pre l by the CSIRO, issued by the >try of National Development inberra, and dated 1951, which tot secured the wide circulation i it undoubtedly deserves, i, the general map prepared by

National Mapping Section of

Department of National opment should be consulted. drawn on a scale of 1 ; 100 (or 40 miles to 1-inch) the price is 2/-. la, a Fijian pupil at Auckland imar School, won the senior put, the discus and 75 yards I at the school sports meeting irch. and Mrs. James Barrie, with three children, returned to ta, NG, in March after four is in Australia. Mr. Barrie is fricultural officer. the instigation of Mr. L. John )f Noumea, 24 quail were air ited to New Caledonia from Zealand in February. It is i that they will be acclimatised They will be released about vay up the island.

From the Markham

to Adelaide

Mr. Keith Noblett, right, manager of "Wanau", MacRobertson's cocoa plantation in the Markham Valley just out of Lae, NG, sees where the end product of the cocoa beans he grows will ultimately be sold. He is shown with Mr. Jack Highett, South Australian manager of the company, inspecting plans for the new warehouse to be erected in Adelaide, SA.