Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2014 12:30:25 GMT
Hi all,
Not sure if this is the right section to post in or not.
I've noticed that on historical (and a few modern ie. the Northern line 95 stock) London Transport signs it seems to be custom to use + (or a slightly more stylish symbol) as a shorthand for "Cross". For instance Charing + instead of Charing Cross or Charing X.
Elsewhere in the country however people tend to use the letter X. I'm just wondering if this is a London thing and if so, when it started. Is it still today part of the TfL/London Underground guidelines?
|
|
|
|
Post by revupminster on Jul 10, 2014 16:25:35 GMT
If it was Charing+ it may be in relation to the Eleanor Cross sited there and then used as unique company ID in a more religious time.
|
|
|
|
Post by londonstuff on Jul 10, 2014 18:23:17 GMT
If it was Charing+ it may be in relation to the Eleanor Cross sited there and then used as unique company ID in a more religious time. I can confirm that the cross came from the overnight resting place of the funeral cortège of Edward I's wife, Eleanor of Castille, which he marked with wooden crosses, including one at Waltham, now Waltham Cross. Upon arrival in London her body went next to her father, the person who rebuilt Westminster Abbey in its modern guise, Henry III. Unusually for that period their relationship was a aid to be based on love rather than just acquisition of land and he was apparently devastated when she died. History lesson over, no idea why it's often a + other than it might be easier to show on a dot-matrix but I suspect this convention predates dot matrix displays. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2014 18:57:21 GMT
Well, I mean, if you type cross into wikipedia, the first thing you see when the page loads is a large +. Apparently, this type of cross is called a 'Greek cross' and it's very common and undoubtedly a type of cross. Why this type of cross should have been preferred to x I can't really tell you. It could be that it's closer in appearance to the cross which would have marked the overnight resting place, but that's just speculation. I doubt that much thought or history would have gone into it, + is just a very common type of cross, e.g. the red cross uses this type of cross. It's true that X is more common now, I would tend to write Charing X or King's X, but that's no more intrinsically obvious, right, or appropriate than +, it's merely convention. I suspect the choice of + either stems from prevailing convention at the time, or a simple, straightforward choice made by an individual (or individuals), which could have been for any reason from style, practicality, unambiguity, recognisability, personal preference, etc. To be honest, it could easily have been a simple, one-off, arbitrary decision, in the same way I might one day write & and the next day write + in some notes.
There might be a fun and interesting answer which some knowledgeable forum member will duly provide you with, but I kind of doubt it. Even if there was a strong, identifiable reason, I doubt it was recorded.
|
|
|
|
Post by metrailway on Jul 10, 2014 19:24:36 GMT
History lesson over, no idea why it's often a + other than it might be easier to show on a dot-matrix but I suspect this convention predates dot matrix displays. Definately predates dot matrix indicators - The + was present on 1938 stock destination boards. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2014 19:35:20 GMT
From my memory, the Johnston cross symbol as used on bus blinds had a long vertical and a short horizontal stroke. The closest character available in Word is the dagger symbol, but the cross had the horizontal bar halfway down.
|
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Jul 10, 2014 22:03:45 GMT
Didn't the 1938 stock destination plates show "via Charing X"?
|
|
|
|
Post by John Tuthill on Jul 10, 2014 22:23:29 GMT
Didn't the 1938 stock destination plates show "via Charing X"? Yes |
|
|
|
Post by railtechnician on Jul 11, 2014 6:34:17 GMT
Well, I mean, if you type cross into wikipedia, the first thing you see when the page loads is a large +. Apparently, this type of cross is called a 'Greek cross' and it's very common and undoubtedly a type of cross. Why this type of cross should have been preferred to x I can't really tell you. It could be that it's closer in appearance to the cross which would have marked the overnight resting place, but that's just speculation. I doubt that much thought or history would have gone into it, + is just a very common type of cross, e.g. the red cross uses this type of cross. It's true that X is more common now, I would tend to write Charing X or King's X, but that's no more intrinsically obvious, right, or appropriate than +, it's merely convention. I suspect the choice of + either stems from prevailing convention at the time, or a simple, straightforward choice made by an individual (or individuals), which could have been for any reason from style, practicality, unambiguity, recognisability, personal preference, etc. To be honest, it could easily have been a simple, one-off, arbitrary decision, in the same way I might one day write & and the next day write + in some notes. There might be a fun and interesting answer which some knowledgeable forum member will duly provide you with, but I kind of doubt it. Even if there was a strong, identifiable reason, I doubt it was recorded. Mmm, let's be really controversial for the sake of argument, could it be an extreme form of political correctness? To me there is no real difference between the various ways of representing a cross with two strokes, whether they be of equal or unequal length a + or an X, however, these days is one form seen to be more politically correct than another? |
|
roythebus
Pleased to say the restoration of BEA coach MLL738 is as complete as it can be, now restoring MLL721
Posts: 1,275
|
Post by roythebus on Jul 11, 2014 7:46:26 GMT
It's an abbreviation of Charing Angry.
|
|
|
|
Post by whistlekiller2000 on Jul 11, 2014 7:59:06 GMT
If it was Charing+ it may be in relation to the Eleanor Cross sited there and then used as unique company ID in a more religious time. I can confirm that the cross came from the overnight resting place of the funeral cortège of Edward I's wife, Eleanor of Castille, which he marked with wooden crosses, including one at Waltham, now Waltham Cross. Upon arrival in London her body went next to her father, the person who rebuilt Westminster Abbey in its modern guise, Henry III. Unusually for that period their relationship was a aid to be based on love rather than just acquisition of land and he was apparently devastated when she died. History lesson over, no idea why it's often a + other than it might be easier to show on a dot-matrix but I suspect this convention predates dot matrix displays. When do you want our homework in?  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 11, 2014 11:03:42 GMT
Didn't the 1938 stock destination plates show "via Charing X"? Yes My (rather vague) recollection is of an upright (Greek) cross being used (i.e via CHARING + , but it was a full height cross, not a shorter plus sign). But it's perfectly possible - indeed probable - that over the years, both versions were used. A question - did the Johnston font (as then used) include an upgright cross? My own thoughts are that if asked to draw a coss, I would make it upright, but if I was writing I would probably use a (letter) X (and if typing would have to) - if only because X is in the character set, and upright coss isn't. |
|
|
|
Post by John Tuthill on Jul 11, 2014 12:04:09 GMT
My (rather vague) recollection is of an upright (Greek) cross being used (i.e via CHARING + , but it was a full height cross, not a shorter plus sign). But it's perfectly possible - indeed probable - that over the years, both versions were used. A question - did the Johnston font (as then used) include an upgright cross? My own thoughts are that if asked to draw a coss, I would make it upright, but if I was writing I would probably use a (letter) X (and if typing would have to) - if only because X is in the character set, and upright coss isn't. I've just checked the web inserting 'Johnson typeface' and it only shows a 'X' and not a '+' Looked thru' my library and all the photos I've found of the 38's show 'VIA CHARING X' |
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Jul 11, 2014 13:51:32 GMT
Perhaps it is an attempt to remind customers that even though they have to endure the northern line, they should remain positive...
|
|
|
|
Post by railtechnician on Jul 11, 2014 13:59:49 GMT
Perhaps it is an attempt to remind customers that even though they have to endure the northern line, they should remain positive... Being rather obtuse then, perhaps 'VIA CHARING X' means exactly what it says and 'VIA CHARING +' means praying to go via Charing X ! |
|
|
|
Post by wimblephil on Jul 11, 2014 14:00:58 GMT
I've always wondered about that.
You (at least I!) tend to read a + as 'plus' not 'cross'!
I don't get why abbreviate it at all really 'Cross' isn't exactly long and it looks better to read! Unless they're really tight for space, but with the scrolling text on the inside, that's obviously not an issue!
Mill Hill East is just as long as Charing Cross in terms or characters, and longer with spaces... I don't think there's an abbreviation for that is there!?
|
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Jul 11, 2014 14:23:45 GMT
I suppose the sensible alternative is to use a shorter via destination, perhaps waterloo? It is arguably a more major interchange than Charing cross
|
|
|
|
Post by wimblephil on Jul 11, 2014 14:32:06 GMT
I suppose the sensible alternative is to use a shorter via destination, perhaps waterloo? It is arguably a more major interchange than Charing cross I always prefer the idea of the 'City' and 'West End' branches, rather than 'Bank' and 'Charing Cross'... might not be as useful for unfamilar travellers though? I've also just realised that, Charing Cross is not a termniating destination, so my comparison to Mill Hill East in my previous post loses some merit! Doh. Stupid me. I still prefer X to + though...! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 11, 2014 15:21:02 GMT
I've also just realised that, Charing Cross is not a termniating destination, so my comparison to Mill Hill East in my previous post loses some merit! Doh. Stupid me. I still prefer X to + though...! Well, it is, just not in the destination "S via Charing Cross" (S for station, e.g. Kennington/High Barnet/whatever, I didn't want to use x, because that could be confusing  ). Does anyone know if "Charing Cross" or "Charing +" is used when Charing Cross is the actual destination of the train? |
|
|
|
Post by John Tuthill on Jul 11, 2014 15:51:17 GMT
I've also just realised that, Charing Cross is not a termniating destination, so my comparison to Mill Hill East in my previous post loses some merit! Doh. Stupid me. I still prefer X to + though...! Well, it is, just not in the destination "S via Charing Cross" (S for station, e.g. Kennington/High Barnet/whatever, I didn't want to use x, because that could be confusing ). Does anyone know if "Charing Cross" or "Charing +" is used when Charing Cross is the actual destination of the train? Neither the Northern or Bakerloo to my knowledge ever terminated at CX, there are no sidings or reversing facilities. I remember when I started work in 1963,seeing E/B District Line trains terminate at CX, then draw forward and take the W/B by a trailing cross over. I think that practice finished soon afterwards? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 11, 2014 15:55:17 GMT
There is an emergency crossover to the north of Charing Cross on the Northern line, allowing north-south and south-north reversal. The District line can still reverse east-west and west-east at Embankment (formerly Charing Cross, in the days when the Northern line station was called Strand and the Bakerloo line station was called Trafalgar Square) and the east-west move was used extensively during recent weekends when the line was closed between Embankment and Aldgate East for engineering work. The Circle can, of course, also reverse there. The move is achieved by a crossover to the east of the station (/towards Temple). Of course, the Northern and Bakerloo lines (platforms currently closed) also serve today's Embankment which was once called Charing Cross. Perhaps that's what you were thinking of John Tuthill? Neither the Northern nor the Bakerloo line terminate here, that's true. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 11, 2014 17:12:18 GMT
+ and X are two different crosses I would think. + being the religious type of cross, and x being a x marks the spot sort cross.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dstock7080 on Jul 11, 2014 17:15:23 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by John Tuthill on Jul 11, 2014 17:17:59 GMT
There is an emergency crossover to the north of Charing Cross on the Northern line, allowing north-south and south-north reversal. The District line can still reverse east-west and west-east at Embankment (formerly Charing Cross, in the days when the Northern line station was called Strand and the Bakerloo line station was called Trafalgar Square) and the east-west move was used extensively during recent weekends when the line was closed between Embankment and Aldgate East for engineering work. The Circle can, of course, also reverse there. The move is achieved by a crossover to the east of the station (/towards Temple). Of course, the Northern and Bakerloo lines (platforms currently closed) also serve today's Embankment which was once called Charing Cross. Perhaps that's what you were thinking of John Tuthill? Neither the Northern nor the Bakerloo line terminate here, that's true. Thanks Tut. I was going back to the days when the Northern Line went Waterloo-Charing Cross-Strand, and the Bakerloo went Waterloo-Charing Cross-Trafalgar Sq. I remember there was a crossover at the north end of Strand? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 11, 2014 17:51:23 GMT
I remember there was a crossover at the north end of Strand? That's the one  |
|
|
|
Post by John Tuthill on Jul 11, 2014 18:14:17 GMT
I remember there was a crossover at the north end of Strand? That's the one Many thanks |
|
|
|
Post by phillw48 on Jul 11, 2014 20:13:41 GMT
As a lot of the early tube lines were American owned/financed could the use of '+' be American practice?
|
|
gantshill
I had to change my profile pic!
Posts: 1,372
|
Post by gantshill on Jul 11, 2014 21:01:43 GMT
I wonder if it started on the buses and spread to the underground once they were part of the combine or if using a + shape was a regular occurrence in other places?
|
|
|
|
Post by whistlekiller2000 on Jul 11, 2014 21:41:57 GMT
As a card carrying atheist I struggle a bit here but from a purely historical death penalty POV, crucifixion almost exclusively took place on a cross set vertically in the ground, a +, not an "X" Of course, this method of capital punishment holds particular relevance for Christians as it was used to dispatch their Messiah. It therefore follows that areas of Christian significance, like the resting places of royalty, en-route to the cemetery would have been awarded a vertical cross. The fact that the correct symbol wasn't available in the relevant LUL typeface is quite amusing! I'm not sure how religious Pudding Mill Lane or Paddington are but............+Rail anyone?  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 11, 2014 21:46:09 GMT
Neither the Northern or Bakerloo to my knowledge ever terminated at CX, there are no sidings or reversing facilities. Charing Cross was the southern end of the Hampstead Tube, with a loop, until (IIRC) 1926 (when the line on to Kennington opened) - but that was before it was called the Northern Line. |
|
).
