And I assume now property boundaries are kind of based on a mixture of all of this? But there's a trend toward WGS84 coordinates or similar?
I also assume along the way measurement mistakes have been reasonably common or situations where those "stable" features in the landscape turned out to be not so stable.
Resolving all these issues must be a nightmare and while I've been vaguely aware of this history of surveying it now seems like it must be quite fascinating and I should try and read more about it.
If it's cartography, the two were intertwined (with differences).
Before WGS84 there were tens of state level ellipsoids and hundreds of global datums - with more than a few readjustments on the way to global unification.
One book, of many on the cartography side is
Flattening the Earth Two Thousand Years of Map Projections - John P. Snyder
https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/F/bo363285...
who formulated the sinusoidal US space projection seen in war room move scenes showing global maps with S tracks across them for satellite paths.
On the dull and technical side (a lot of truncated Taylor series and a couple of projections using <gasp!> complex numbers) see:
Map projections: A working manual - also Snyder (free download for PDF & wallchart)
Here's my actual parcel description:
All that certain lot, piece or parcel of land situate, lying and being on the southeastern side of the XXX Road, in AREA NAME, in the Parish of PARISH, in the County of COUNTY and Province of New Brunswick bounded and more particularly described as follows:
Beginning at a point on the southeastern boundary of a Crown Reserved Road known as the XXX Road; said point of beginning being located at a distance of ONE DISTANCE NUMBER (###) metres measured southwesterly along the southeastern boundary of the XXX Road from its intersection with the southwestern boundary of the OTHER PROPERTY OWNER NAME property by document number ##### registered in the COUNTY County Registry Office in book ### at page ###; said boundary being the southwestern grant line of Lot # originally granted by the Crown to PERSON NAME.
Thence in a southwesterly direction following the southeastern boundary of the XXX Road a distance of ONE DISTANCE NUMBER (###) metres to a point at a corner at the intersection of the northeastern boundary of the PROPERTY OWNER NAME property by transfer number ###### registered in Land Titles for the District of New Brunswick on DATE.
Thence in a southeasterly direction parallel to the southwestern grant line of Lot #, the OTHER PROPERTY OWNER NAME property following the northeastern boundary of the PROPERTY OWNER NAME property a distance of THREE DISTANCE NUMBER (###) metres to a point at a corner.
Thence in a northeasterly direction on a line parallel to the southeastern boundary of the XXX Road a distance of ONE DISTANCE NUMBER (###) metres to a point at a corner.
Thence in a northwesterly direction parallel to the southwestern grant line of Lot X, the OTHER PROPERTY OWNER NAME property a distance of THREE DISTANCE NUMBER (###) metres to the point of beginning.
The so-described parcel of land contains an area of SOME (###) hectares more or less and is located in Lot # originally granted by the Crown to AN ORIGINAL OWNER.
BEING the same lands and premises (PARCEL NAME) conveyed to LTD CORP by Transfer duly registered at the Provincial Land Registration Office in the District of New Brunswick on DATE, as number #######.
I find it interesting that the boundaries are defined by a combination of physical land features and other property boundaries.
I guess this means that there's the error could potentially accumulate when you reference against property boundaries. Then you come up against some physical reference and have to resolve the inconsistency somehow.