Perhaps we should leave our perceptions of our respective personal deficiencies out of the discussion aramis, lest we provoke the mod's ire?
However, I'm not quite sure you've followed what I've written, aramis.
Apart from that you basically seem to be stating that the "period style" of maps remains unchanged for 200 years from the 17th to the 19th century, which I'll just let speak for itself — if you go back through the posts on this thread and see what has been written, you'll find that I've said ... repeatedly, in fact ... that I love the 17th century styling of the map. It slots right into the atmosphere of the game. Fantastic! Works perfectly as an in-world handout showing a mysterious, ancient map artefact found at the headquarters. I've said this since the first page.
I just wish they'd left it alone!
Because what Fria Ligan did between the Beta and the print was to alter all the roads into railway lines.
And I, for my own part, do feel that railway lines on a 17th century map are a jarring anachronism.
However, aramis; if you wish to maintain that the map doesn't in fact look at all like a 17th century map like I claim in my previous post, but that you could perfectly well find actual nation maps (as opposed to some local or novelty map) like that with all the features I specifically point to and show in graphics in that post (including the greatly deformed coast lines), AND railway lines in the mid-19th century ... well, I'm just curious to see an example.
But until then, going only from my own, personal experience with historical maps (which is a bit more than incidental, btw — I did mention a degree in human geography?), it looks like a 17th century map (love). With railway lines (abhor).