N THE course of dealing with certain morphological questions' the writer encountered the problem of classification and mapping and cartographic expression of the extent to which is dissected. The commonly used method of giving absolute heights does not meet the need for clear-cut morphological expression, since altitude in itself fails to express sharpness of relief. This shortcoming has already been noted by other authors.2 The problem cartographers must solve, namely how to express three-dimensional with a two-dimensional medium, remains, though much progress has been made by the use of several methods in conjunction. One method of expressing morphologically is the relief energy cartogram; this seems to have been originated by Partsch in 1911 and adopted by Krebs, Schrepfer and Kallner, Smith, Waldbaur, and Thauer.3 To express relief energy, all these authors employed the difference in altitude between the highest and lowest points within a defined area-that is, the relative altitude. The points (or pairs of points, used by Krebs) were measured by different authors in squares of different sizes (o.s-1o kilometers on a side) and on maps of different scales. Critics of this method objected to the lack of uniformity in the size of the squares and in the scale.4 Smith and Krebs used isopleths instead of squares. Thauer also opposed the use of the square as a unit area and suggested a circle instead. The method proposed in the present paper differs from previous ones in that, instead of the relative altitude within a defined area, it employs the ratio between the maximum relative altitude and the maximum absolute altitude within a defined area. An attempt is also made to analyze orographical data statistically, with a view to classification of the area and comparison with other areas. The Mt. Carmel region has been selected to demonstrate the method because of its mountainous character and its relative isolation from other landscape features.
Read full abstract