FOR VARIOUS REASONS, as far as Protestant missions are concerned, the making of statistical atlases seems to have shifted with the turn of the century from Europe to the United States, for since 1900 practically every effort of this kind has developed west of the Atlantic. Such volumes are expensive to produce and sales do not by any means cover their cost, and with the gradual coming of North America to a place of predominance in the relative sums given for missions it has been found possible to secure in America the underwriting for such an elaborate task. This, in itself, has been almost determinative. Small wonder, then, if the atlases, as these appear, should exhibit American characteristics, though they are meant to serve the need for a statistical atlas of Protestant missions wherever this need is felt. Although the various atlases have benefited by the criticisms and constructive suggestions of British, Continental and other scholars, yet European missionary leaders would doubtless decide a multitude of questions pertaining to plan and procedure in different ways than these same questions have been decided by the editors of the World Missionary Atlas.
If the initiative and the underwriting in reference to statistical atlases of Protestant missions are found in North America, it should be said that commercial map making in the United States and Canada has not reached that combination of technical and artistic skill which we are accustomed to expect from London, Edinburgh or Gotha. The maps for such an atlas are best made in Great Britain or Europe. Given a decision as to map makers, the problem arises as to the division of responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of data to be presented on the maps. Clearly the editors of the Atlas could not go into the research involved, for instance, in presenting the physical and political features of the earth. For that the map makers had to be responsible. On the other hand the Atlas editors had to decide what missionary facts were to be mapped. For reasons of expense, it was essential that maps already to hand in the geographical establishment should be used or adapted, the missionary data to be superimposed thereon by extra printings. A fairly clear line of division of responsibility for accuracy thus becomes apparent. But the issue was not so clear in certain cases, of which a single illustration must suffice.
In one regard the present Atlas has values decidedly in advance of earlier volumes in that a number of small maps of the world, on Mercator's projection, are given, these setting forth particular ranges of facts, such as climate, communications, languages of commerce, etc. One such map, included in Plate 1, is worthy of note at this point, namely, the map of prevailing religions. It will be noted that in the Explanatory Statement to the General Descriptive Notes (p. 181 of the Atlas), a somewhat lengthy statement is made as to why the editors have not endeavoured to prepare statistical tables which should indicate the relative strength of the principal religions in the various regions of the world. Yet on Plate 1 there appears this map of the prevailing religions. This was a case where the editors found it inexpedient to attempt the task of preparing statistics of the world's religions but admitted a map showing these same religions. The situation faced was that the Edinburgh Geographical Institute had available such a map of prevailing religions which was usable for the Atlas, a map which, within its limitations, was of value for the Atlas readers. Some fair indication of the setting of the great religions of the world was offered. To make a new map was as impracticable as to compile new statistics of the religions. The choice, therefore, was to print no map at all or to use one already prepared and available for use. As in the case of the other small world and feature maps which were used, the map makers were responsible for all the map data, and the editors for the choice of the particular maps to be used for the Atlas.
Practical considerations have thus had to enter into decisions, processes and relationships at every step.
If the initiative and the underwriting in reference to statistical atlases of Protestant missions are found in North America, it should be said that commercial map making in the United States and Canada has not reached that combination of technical and artistic skill which we are accustomed to expect from London, Edinburgh or Gotha. The maps for such an atlas are best made in Great Britain or Europe. Given a decision as to map makers, the problem arises as to the division of responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of data to be presented on the maps. Clearly the editors of the Atlas could not go into the research involved, for instance, in presenting the physical and political features of the earth. For that the map makers had to be responsible. On the other hand the Atlas editors had to decide what missionary facts were to be mapped. For reasons of expense, it was essential that maps already to hand in the geographical establishment should be used or adapted, the missionary data to be superimposed thereon by extra printings. A fairly clear line of division of responsibility for accuracy thus becomes apparent. But the issue was not so clear in certain cases, of which a single illustration must suffice.
In one regard the present Atlas has values decidedly in advance of earlier volumes in that a number of small maps of the world, on Mercator's projection, are given, these setting forth particular ranges of facts, such as climate, communications, languages of commerce, etc. One such map, included in Plate 1, is worthy of note at this point, namely, the map of prevailing religions. It will be noted that in the Explanatory Statement to the General Descriptive Notes (p. 181 of the Atlas), a somewhat lengthy statement is made as to why the editors have not endeavoured to prepare statistical tables which should indicate the relative strength of the principal religions in the various regions of the world. Yet on Plate 1 there appears this map of the prevailing religions. This was a case where the editors found it inexpedient to attempt the task of preparing statistics of the world's religions but admitted a map showing these same religions. The situation faced was that the Edinburgh Geographical Institute had available such a map of prevailing religions which was usable for the Atlas, a map which, within its limitations, was of value for the Atlas readers. Some fair indication of the setting of the great religions of the world was offered. To make a new map was as impracticable as to compile new statistics of the religions. The choice, therefore, was to print no map at all or to use one already prepared and available for use. As in the case of the other small world and feature maps which were used, the map makers were responsible for all the map data, and the editors for the choice of the particular maps to be used for the Atlas.
Practical considerations have thus had to enter into decisions, processes and relationships at every step.
