I agree about the crudeness. This was what I meant with my comment that perhaps Ptolemy drew the map. The defects are more than simply what might be expected due to the limitations of the medium.
If you take the north sides of cells 16 & 17, that represents 130km, 65km per cell. The remainder of the row, 9 cells, represents 150km, 17km per cell.
Another serious flaw : if you assume that the last letter of 15 represents a well known easterly point to the SE of the northern capital, then the 3 unerased letters of 19D should be erased. Nowhere in the south comes within 32km of the easterly extent of the point in the north.
If you're going to attempt to represent a map, surely you should pay attention to these 'details' ?