260 National Geographic Magazine. 



contour in a contoured map of ten foot intei'val is a very labori- 

 ous proceeding, and not worth the time it takes, as in nine out of 

 ten maps of such interval only the fifty-foot or the one hundred- 

 foot curves are definitely fixed, the intermediate lines being 

 merely filled in. This filling in can be done as well, or better, by 

 the modeler. 



The question as to the proper amount of exaggeration to be 

 given the vertical scale, as compared with the horizontal, is the 

 question about which has raged most of the controversy con- 

 nected with relief map making. This controversy has been 

 rather bitter ; some of the opponents of vertical exaggeration 

 going to the length of saying that no exaggeration is necessary, 

 and that " he that will distort or exaggerate the scale of anything 

 will lie." On the other hand the great majority of those who 

 have made relief ma]3S insist upon the necessity of more or less 

 exaggeration of the vertical scale — generally more than seems to 

 me necessary, however. 



An increase of angle of slope accompanies all vertical exagger- 

 ation, and this is apparent even in models in which the vertical 

 element is only very slightly exaggerated. It produces a false 

 effect by diminishing the proportionate width of the valleys, and 

 by making the country seem much more rugged and mountainous 

 than it really is. A secondary effect is to make the region rep- 

 resented look very small — all idea of the extent of the country 

 being lost. This can be illustrated better than described. The 

 King model of the United States is an example of one extreme ; 

 it is worthy of note that no examples of the other extreme — too 

 little exaggeration — are known. 



In small-scale models of large districts some exaggeration of 

 the vertical scale is necessary in order to make the relief appar- 

 ent, but the amount of this exaggeration is often increased much 

 beyond what is essential. The proportion of scales must depend 

 to a large extent on the character of the country represented, and 

 on the purposes for which the model is made. It has been sug- 

 gested by a writer, quoted by the Messrs. Harden, that the 

 following exaggeration would afford a pleasing relief : " For a 

 map, scale 6 inches to I mile : if mountainous, 1:3; if only hilly, 

 1:2; if gently undulating, 2:3. For smaller scales, except for 

 very rugged tracts, the exaggeration should be correspondingly 

 increased. For a tract consisting wholly of mountains no exag- 

 geration is necessary." I know of no country of such a charac- 



