The Lure of the List

I’ll admit it, I do like a good list!

To do lists, ticklists and spreadsheets all feature prominently in my day-to-day life, both professionally and personally.  But it is as a hillwalker that they have the most influence.

Most hill lists fall into one of two types; those that are fixed with no possibility of additions or removals and those that define the criteria for inclusion.  For those lists of the second type, there may be the possibility of hills being added to or removed from the list, mostly as a result of ever more accurate surveys.

The hill list that started it all for me is the Wainwrights; 214 fells in Lakeland that were the focus of my hillwalking ambitions for 30 years.  Alfred Wainwright gave no clear definition for his list and although he outlined (literally!) the geographical area to be considered by using the outer limits of the major lakes, he had to tweak the resulting area by extending the boundary to include Caldbeck and Longsleddale.  His list of 214 fells was purely his personal choice and the beauty of the list is that it will never change.  His inclusion of Mungrisdale Common still perplexes many but Andy Beck gives a plausible explanation in his superb book “The Wainwrights in Colour”.

After completing the Wainwrights and to fill my aspirational void, my attention has turned to the TRAIL 100 and the Nuttalls.

The TRAIL 100 is a list of “the finest UK mountains” and like the Wainwrights, it is a fixed list.  There are many of the 100 that are absolutely worthy of inclusion but, having trudged up to the top of Clougha Pike in Lancashire, I wondered whether those that compiled the list were trying to include a geographical balance.

Many of the modern hill lists have specific criteria and the Nuttalls is one of those.  There is a clear definition of location, height and prominence which when combined, produce a popular list for hillwalkers.  There have been occasional changes to the list as a result of surveys of some of the more marginal inclusions (and exclusions) and in the last ten years there have been ten hills added to the list and six that have been removed.  To their credit John and Anne Nuttall (who original compiled the list) welcome the accuracy and have no hesitation in amending their list if a change is required.

Another hill list with specific criteria is the Donalds but its definition is convoluted.  If you want an intellectual challenge you could do worse than to try to fully understand the reasoning; I’ve never properly got to grips with it!

Probably the most famous hill list is the Munros, mountains in Scotland that are at least 3000 feet high.  Sir Hugh Munro never gave specific criteria but there appears to be a broad consensus reached by the Scottish Mountaineering Council which oversees the list and any changes; Robin N Campbell’s book “The Munroist’s Companion” has some interesting reading on the subject.  But in recent years when surveys have judged that mountains previously thought to be higher than 3000 feet actually aren’t, the SMC has been reluctant to comment and officially update their list.  I suspect the reasons are political but it is frustrating that such a respected organisation fails to act on accurate (as confirmed by the Ordnance Survey) data.

You may have concluded by now that there are many hill lists, each with their own characteristics.  One (or more) can be picked up off the shelf in the form of the many guidebooks available and there is likely to be one that suits your own ability and ambition.  A lot of lists claim to include “mountains”, but what is a mountain?

That’s something I’ll explore in my next blog.