It turns out that for the past 127 years anyone following standard walking directions has unintentionally been playing a game of “Are you fitter than a Victorian mountaineer?” As a result, Ordnance Survey has finally decided that it is going to shake things up and provide 21st-century directions for 21st-century walkers, with an update to the way it works out how long a given walk should take.
Something obvious you want to know before you lace up your walking boots and set off into the wilderness is when you might expect to reach your destination, and the standard rule of thumb for working out whether you’re about to set out on a brief stroll or a back-breaking endurance test was formulated by William Naismith, the founder of the Scottish Mountaineering Club, in 1892.
Naismith’s rule, which he casually chucked into the end of a short report about a trip into the Scottish Highlands (among other things he apparently “saw large bird, probably an eagle prospecting for lambs”), states that in fair conditions, you should allow “an hour for every three miles on the map, with an additional hour for every 2,000 feet of ascent”.
The endurance of Naismith can probably be put down to “it sounds about right”, but it definitely doesn’t cover all walkers in all situations (eg “are you for a strange reason not as fit as a Victorian mountaineer?”, “are you likely to get tired after having been walking for hours already?”, “are you walking downhill?”) so over the years corrections and alternatives have been offered by various walking theorists.
But Naismith has persisted and is even used in Ordnance Survey’s hi-tech replacement for squinting at a creased map in the rain – squinting at the OS app while waving your arm in the air trying to get phone signal. Well, until August, when it will be replaced by an exciting new algorithm fit for the modern era. The OS haven’t revealed the exact ingredients of the secret digital walking sauce that will apparently provide this clearer advice, but inevitably it will involve looking at data collected by the app (maybe it should snoop via phone microphones and listen for an increased rate of swearing).
And certainly, there are many features of modern walking that Naismith couldn’t have predicted and any replacement should probably incorporate: if a walking route includes “helpful” signposts, what percentage of them will have been swivelled round, graffitied or otherwise vandalised by locals who seemingly want to trap you on an industrial estate?
What are the route’s main Instagramming opportunities and how much time should be set aside accordingly?
What percentage of the public “rights of way” on the route will involve five minutes of looking back and forth between the map and what you can see in front of you before attempting to walk through a thick hedge and then falling into a muddy ditch?
How long is it going to take the little arrow on your phone to figure out the difference between north and south while you do that stupid figure-of-eight gesture and decide that you’ll definitely buy a real compass before immediately forgetting then repeating the whole process half an hour later?
Are you planning on making a weak joke on social media about a marginally funny road sign you’ve seen and how often are you going to stop to check whether it’s got more than two likes?
Does time need to be added because part of the route involves walking down pavement-less country roads mainly used by car drivers who think it’s bloody Silverstone only you get extra points for taking out anyone wearing a rucksack?
Are you at some point going to miss an important turning because you just got to a really exciting bit of the true crime podcast you’re listening to, only to find out that it was a total red herring and they still don’t know who done it while you slowly backtrack up a hill?
And most importantly: how many pubs does the route pass, how tempted are you going to be to stay in them longer than you should, and exactly how deleterious an effect will the pints of beer have on walking speed?
• Ed Jefferson writes about pop culture and history
