1848.] British Himalayan Frontier in Kumaon and Garhwdl. 537 



regarding the determination of the elevations of places on my journey- 

 to the lakes, which are entered on that part of the map. 



My orthography is always after the system of Sir "W. Jones, and the 

 Asiatic Society, hut for Hunia names it follows the simple Hindustani 

 pronunciation of the Bhotias, and not the complex Tibetan spelling, 

 which can only be mastered by a critical knowledge of the language. 

 I have had to ascertain de novo and re-write most of the names of 

 places given in the Indian Atlas, the mistakes of which surpass belief : 

 those which I have now given are, I hope, tolerably correct for most of 

 the places in Kumaon and in Gnari, but I had not equal opportunity 

 for revising those of Garhwal. 



In my map I have made and explained the distinction between agricul- 

 tural villages and mere temples and monasteries, places permanently in- 

 habited and mere encamping-grounds, and all other requisite discrimi- 

 nations, the neglect of which simple but necessary details, together with 

 the abominable kakography of names, has much impaired the value of 

 the sheets in question of the Indian Atlas. 



The separate sheets of the Atlas (Nos. 65 and 66 at least) though 

 with scales, margins and other marks of completeness, omit to state 

 their scale referred to a known standard, and their mode of projection. 

 I had no access to authentic information on these points, till after the 

 completion of my own map, and the latter was drawn, from one or two 

 old copies of the Atlas, the paper of which had lost its proper size and 

 shape, so that my scale is 25 miles to 6 inches, the nearest Aliqout 

 measure that I could find to my originals, instead of 4 miles to one 

 inch, as it should have been. My map differs from the Atlas also in 

 its graticule, being on the conical development, which I adopted for 

 its facility of execution (being without proper drawing instruments) and 

 in ignorance of the projection applied to the Atlas. The latter I have 

 since found to be based upon the most scientific elaboration, emanating 

 from high authority, notwithstanding which it is palpably inferior to 

 the simple geometrical process of the conical development, both in 

 theoretical accuracy and in facility of practical application. My copies 

 of the Atlas, sheets 65 and 66, gave the length of the meridional arcs 

 sensibly in excess of the truth (like the Tables of Baily) ; in my map 

 I have reduced them to the lengths given in the tables of Pearson, &c. 

 (after Lambton). In other respects however my map does not pre- 



