Dating a older man quotes tumblr,free online chat room counselling,free full website codes xbox - Easy Way

admin 20.03.2015

DESCRIPTION: The profound difference between the Roman and the Greek mind is illustrated with peculiar clarity in their maps.
Although copies of Agrippaa€™s map were taken to all of the great cities of the Roman Empire, not a single copy has survived.
Shown here are three continents in more or less symmetrical arrangements with Asia in the east at the top of the map (hence the term orientation). Note that most scholars, however, believe that due to its placement on the column in a portico or stoa open to the public, the Porticus Vipsani, it was probably rectangular, not circular.
The only reported Roman world map before Agrippaa€™s was the one that Julius Caesar commissioned but never lived to see completed.
We may speculate whether this map was flat and circular, even though such a shape might have been considered a€?unscientifica€™ and poorly adapted to the shape of the known world. Augustus had a practical interest in sponsoring the new map of the inhabited world entrusted to Agrippa.
In point of fact Augustus may have delegated the detailed checking to one of his freedmen, such as his librarian C. We may treat as secondary sources Orosius, Historiae adversum paganos, and the Irish geographical writer Dicuil (AD 825). It is also claimed that Strabo (#115) obtained his figures for Italy, Corsica, Sardinia and Sicily from Agrippa. Although the term chorographia literally means a€?regional topographya€?, it seems to include fairly detailed cartography of the known world. For a more complete assessment of what Agrippa wrote or ordered to be put on his map, we may again turn to passages where Pliny quotes him specifically as reference.
It is a pity that Pliny, who seems to be chiefly interested in measurements, gives us so little other information about Agrippaa€™s map. It is the sea above all which shapes and defines the land, fashioning gulfs, oceans and straits, and likewise isthmuses, peninsulas and promontories.
A serious point of disagreement among scholars has been whether the commentarii of Agrippa mentioned by Pliny were published at the time of construction of the portico. Another element in this problem that demands some explanation is the origin of the two later works the Demensuratio provinciarum and the Divisio orbis terrarum which are both derived from Agrippa, probably through a common source. Apart from the information supplied by Pliny, our chief evidence for the reconstruction of the map is provided by the two works already mentioned, the Demensuratio provinciarum and the Divisio orbis terrarum.
Dicuil, in his preface, promises to give the measurement of the provinces made by the envoys of the Emperor Theodosius, and at the end of chapter five he quotes twelve verses of these envoys in which they describe their procedure. According to Tierney, Detlefsen regarded these two works as derived from small-scale copies of Agrippaa€™s map.
Tierney believes however, that the west to east movement supposed by Klotz is, in fact, correct, but not for his reasons. Our idea of the detail of the map of Agrippa must be based on a study of the references in Strabo, Pliny, the Divisio and the Demensuratio.
There are twenty-four sections in the Divisio and thirty in the Demensuratio, the difference being mainly due to the absence from the Divisio of the sections on the islands of the Mediterranean and the Atlantic. These sections are largely identical with passages in Plinya€™s geographical books (Books III to VI), and show that many passages in Pliny are taken from Agrippa beyond those where he is actually named.
The consensus of the views of modern scholars on Agrippaa€™s map, is that it represents a conscientious attempt to give a credible version of the geography of the known world. But this consensus is not quite complete and therefore I now turn to consider the view of Agrippaa€™s map put forward by Professor Paul Schnabel in his article in Philologus of 1935.
Schnabel does not himself take up the general question of the use of Agrippa by Marinus and Ptolemy.
Schnabel here refers to the last chapter of the geographical books of Plinya€™s Natural History, that is, Book VI, cap. Schnabel continues with the negative argument that the Don parallel cannot belong to the school of Hipparchus. We may speculate as to whether Plinya€™s phrase regarding the a€?careful later students,a€? does not refer to Nigidius himself.
Schnabel next moves on to a more ambitious argument, making the assumption that Ptolemy has used some of Agrippaa€™s reckonings to establish points in his geography. It is sad to think that this elegant piece of reasoning must be thrown overboard, but Tierney believes it must be rejected on at least three different counts. In the second place Schnabela€™s statement that Agrippa reduced the itinerary figure of 745 miles to a straight line of 411 cannot be accepted.
Thirdly, it may fairly be objected that the very method by which Schnabel obtains the figure of 411 miles is faulty. Tierney passes over Schnabela€™s reasons for thinking that Agrippa established lines of meridian in Spain and in the eastern Mediterranean, all of which Tierney finds quite unconvincing. Schnabela€™s attempt to present us with a scientific Agrippa and indeed to reconstruct a scientific Roman geography may be regarded a complete failure, and the older view of Detlefsen and Klotz must be regarded as correct. From another well-known passage in Strabo (V, 3, 8, C, 235-236) that contains a panegyric [a public speech or published text in praise of someone or something] on the fine buildings of Augustan Rome, we know that he was well acquainted with the dedications of Marcus Agrippa that he specifically mentions.
Strabo shows the contemporary Roman view of the purely practical purposes of geography and of cartography by everywhere insisting on restricting to a minimum the astronomical and mathematical element in geographical study.
This would mean then that Agrippaa€™s map was based on the general scheme of the Greek maps which had been current for upwards of 200 years, since the time of Eratosthenes and Hipparchus, and that it presumably attempted to complete and rectify this scheme by using recent Roman route-books and the reports of soldiers, merchants and travelers. Towards the end of the fourth century two important events greatly enlarged the scope of geography. About a century later the famous astronomer Hipparchus subjected the geography of Eratosthenes to rather stringent criticisms. The next geographer whose views are well known us is Strabo (#115), who was writing at the time of the construction of Agrippaa€™s map or some years later.
If, then, progress was no longer being made or to be expected from Greek geographers using various astronomical instruments, was anything to be expected from the other tradition, the Roman roads and their itineraries? We must then approach the map of Agrippa on a purely factual basis realizing that it provides us merely a list of boundaries followed by a length and breadth, for the areas within the Empire and beyond it.
Fundamentally, therefore, Agrippaa€™s figures allow us to construct a series of boxes or rectangle with which to deck out the shores of the Mediterranean and the eastern world and whose dimensions should be reduced by an uncertain amount.
Spain consists of three boxes, the square of Lusitania and the rectangle of the Hispania citerior [Roman province] east of it being placed over the rectangle of BA¦tica.
In Gaul [France] a large rectangle lies over a small one, that is Gallia Comata over the province of Narbonensis.
The islands of the Mediterranean are not forgotten, at least the major ones, just as Italy lies too far to the southeast, so do Corsica and Sardinia lie too far to the southwest.
The eastern Mediterranean is faced by Syria whose longitude Pliny (V, 671 states as 470 miles between Cilicia and Arabia, and whose latitude is 175 miles from Seleucia Pieria on the coast to Zeugma on the Euphrates.
We have now either reached or gone beyond the boundaries of the Roman Empire in the north, south and east, as it was in Agrippaa€™s day. The most important achievement of the map, to Agrippaa€™s mind, consisted in its measurements, and it is possible that he spent very considerable pains in getting these exactly, although we cannot take the account given by Honorius (ca. The exact correspondence between Pliny, the Divisio and the Demensuratio, in giving many of the boundaries of the sections, shows, according to Detlefsen, that these boundaries also were inscribed upon the map. Klotz, in his final review of Agrippaa€™s methods of work, has made some illuminating points that supplement Detlefsen. Within the Empire he chiefly used the itineraries without the overt use of an astronomical backing, although astronomical data, of course, already formed the basis of the Greek maps that were the real foundation of his. Klotz, A., a€?Die geographischen commentarii des Agrippa und ihre Uberrestea€?, Klio 25, 1931, 35ff, 386ff. Note that most scholar, however, believe that due to its placement on the column in a portico or stoa open to the public, the Porticus Vipsani, it was probably rectangular, not circular. According to Fisher seeing that this is a Roman world map sharing many similarities with the mappaemundi, it is logical to assume that SchA¶nera€™s southern landmass is a copy of Agrippaa€™s Orbis Terrarum, the Roman world map upon which the mappaemundi were based.
Within the context of the early 16th century, it seems apparent that SchA¶ner found himself caught up in the perfect cartographic storm. All these parts were in place when an errant 1508 report of a strait at the tip of South America with a large southern continent lying beneath inspired SchA¶ner to unwittingly preserve the only copy of Agrippaa€™s Orbis Terrarum on the bottom of his 1515 world globe.
When medieval Christians began creating the mappaemundi they borrowed heavily from Agrippaa€™s map as well as Greek designs. This design adjustment may also explain the Expositio mappemundi (EMM), manuscripts which are a collection of the data items appearing on the mappaemundi. It was reverse engineered from the mappaemundi, but plays it relatively safe in its assumptions.
The new found design also provides for the first time insights into the inspiration for key design aspects on the mappaemundi such as the tribute to Jesus at the top of the map, the transition from a separate commentary requiring locative terminology to commentary overlain onto the mappaemundi no longer requiring spatial references, and the distribution of images from a consolidated arced matrix lying above Africa on SchA¶nera€™s design to areas throughout the mappaemundi. In conclusion, Fisher believes that he has presented a solid logical case for the historic discovery of a long lost 2,000-year-old Roman world map at the bottom of the world, SchA¶nera€™s world that is. Description: The Lenox Globe is often referred to as the oldest extant post-Columbian globe. What is known about the provenance and acquision of this special globe by the New York Public Library was assembled by Robert W.
Lenoxa€™s personal library was acquired in 1911 by the New York Public Library and in the process this small, engraved globe made of copper became one of the Librarya€™s most valuable possessions. Like Martin Behaima€™s famous large globe from 1492 (#258), the Lenox Globe still shows only one ocean between Europe and Asia. There was no good indication as to when the little globe was made, but three prominent scholars in the late 19th century - Benjamin De Costa, Henry Harrisse and Justin Winsor a€“ addressed this perplexing issue before Joseph Fisher made his discovery of the WaldseemA?ller map in July 1901. Harrisse in his landmark work The Discovery of North America (1892) concluded that the most likely date for the Lenox Globe was 1511.
Prior to Harrisse, Justin Winsor in the mid-1880s was equally perplexed concerning what to make of and how to date the Lenox Globe.
The scholar who provided the first and to this day still the most in-depth analysis of the Lenox Globe was Benjamin De Costa (1831-1904).
What makes De Costaa€™s scholarship in his 1879 essay so outstanding is that he is open and candid about the profound implications of dating any globe or map depicting the entire continent of South America so many years before Magellana€™s voyage of 1519-1522.
This is an astonishing pattern of cartographical evidence concerning South America prior to Magellana€™s voyage in 1519.
We should also observe that even before De Costa, the world famous scholar Alexander de Humboldt took seriously the proposition that there may have been more extensive exploration of South America (Portuguese in his and our view) than the conventional wisdom allowed due to the tradition, surrounding Magellana€™s famous voyage. For his part, De Costa was well aware of Cosmographiae Introductio and the small WaldseemA?ller globe gores (#310) found in the passage in the south.
It is evident that the Lenox Globe must have been constructed subsequent to the discovery of the coast of South America, in 1500, by Cabral, who gave it the name Vera Cruz, which was soon changed to Terra SanctA¦ Crucis, as on this globe. On the other hand, the almost complete lack of information betrayed by the maker of the globe concerning the east coast of North America, and the absence of the name America on South America would indicate that it antedates the map of Martin WaldseemA?ller of 1507 (#310). Because the date of this globe could be deduced mainly from its representations of America, let us give a brief resume of the condition of geographical knowledge respecting the New World for several years subsequent to 1510. In the year 1500, Juan de la Cosa, the Pilot of Columbus, drew a map of the New World (#305), but North America does not appear, Newfoundland being represented as a part of Asia. What has been said thus far applies only to North America, but, upon turning to South America, the representation has the appearance of belonging to a period later than 1511. In order to present the subject with clearness, it will be useful to state first, that the La Cosa map of 1500 (#305) exhibited the northern coast of South America, together with the eastern coast down to about 25A° S. On this point it may be observed that such a termination to South America was doubtless rendered probable by the argument from analogy.
Sometimes the information thus derived was of great value, and it would appear that the maker of the Lenox Globe had received information of this kind. The uncertainty of the globe-maker respecting Madagascar may be explained by the fact that it was not until 1508 that Da€™Acuhna made his exploration of the island, though it was known to Marco Polo. The SchA¶ner Globe of 1520 (#328) has an island similar in form and situation to the nameless island of the Lenox Globe, but in a reversed position, and called Madagascar.
In support of the suggestion that the Madagascar and Certina of the globe are simply Sumatra and Java misplaced, we may cite the fact that the well-known islands of Sumatra and Java do not appear in their places, while the Malayan peninsula, labeled on the globe as Loac, is extended so far south as to confuse the geography of the whole region.
It is true that one of the first references to the southern coast of Australia in the 17th century was that of 1627, when a Dutch ship sailed along the shore for a distance of a thousand miles, while one of the earliest maps of that century which showed the outlines of Australia was the Montanus map of 1572. Attention has already been called to the fact that the great nameless island, with its attendant islands, is placed westward instead of southeast of the Malayan peninsula; but Sylvanus, in his Ptolemy map of 1511 (#318), moves the whole group into its proper position to the southeast, thus giving a somewhat correct view of the geography of that region.
Thus far nothing has been said of the general appearance of the globe, though, if it were necessary, many details could be pointed out which indicate its ancient origin.
In Asia the Himalayan range, anciently known as Imaus, had its influence upon the globe-maker's geography, who indicates Schite extraianivm for Scythia extra Imaum. Moabio appears to be the Maabar of Marco Polo, who says that in this entire Province there is never a Tailor to cut a coat or stitch it, for the very good reason that everybody goes naked.
Beyond Newfoundland is a sinking ship, with the figure of a human being in the water, possibly an allusion to the loss of the Portuguese Cortereal.
When, however, the maker of the Lenox Globe looked away toward the region now occupied by North America, he saw only a watery waste, in the midst of which the island of Bacaleos or Newfoundland, rode like some ship at anchor. In the place of North America there are scattered islands, one of which, located near the northwest extremity of Terra de Brazil, bears the name Zipangri [Japan], being close to Yucatan, whose well-known bay, first explored in 1518, has a conjectural coast line trending towards the south instead of the west.
The name America does not appear upon the Lenox Globe, which fact, so far as it possesses any significance, favors the belief that the early date of 1504 assigned to the instrument is correct. Hylocomilus, while admitting the priority of the voyage of Columbus, felt no necessity for naming the New World after one who, in the most pronounced manner, declared that there was no New World to be named. Humboldt maintains that Vespucci, equally with Columbus, believed that the land discovered formed a part of Asia.
The Viscount Santarem (Researches respecting Vespucci) has taken the ground, as well as some others, that the map of Hylocomilus, in the Ptolemy of 1513, was the work of Columbus. The southern coasts of Asia are drawn less correctly than on the map of Ruysch and on the TabulA¦ NovA¦ of Asia inserted into the Ptolemy edition of 1513. In the New World representation, South America appears as a large island having three regional names: Mundus Novus, Terra SanctA¦ Crucis, and Terra de Brazil.
In the place of North America there are scattered islands, one of which, located near the northwest extremity of Terra de Brazil, bears the name Zipangri [Japan], and one in the far north, but unnamed, clearly resembles the Cortereal region, as it appears on the Cantino and Caveri maps (#306, #307). Most of the inscriptions on the globe reference back to the medieval picture of Asia, combining antique sources, travel accounts, and fabulous legends. From the standpoint of 2012, with our greater appreciation of the WaldseemA?ller world map, we can see how De Costaa€™s suspicions of a pre-Magellan discovery of the strait point to the broader cartographic issue.
Either the Lenox Globe really was a post-1507 creation, which in view of its shortcomings oddly failed to take into account the WaldseemA?ller map of 1507, which was reportedly issued in 1000 copies for sale, along with the essay Cosmographiae Introductio.
De Costa did not explicitly renege on his estimation of the 1510 date for the Lenox Globe as the most probable but he waffles. Given these facts, one has to give serious consideration to the possibility that the creator of the Lenox Globe made it before April 1507 or at least not to long after that date if one is to explain ignorance of this widely published essay. De Costa originally prepared his analysis in 1879 without benefit of any knowledge of the large WaldseemA?ller world map discovered 22 years later. For his part, NordenskiA¶ld in his Facsimile Atlas (1889) cited De Costaa€™s a€?estimate of 1508-1511a€? and concluded that this a€?seemed to be about righta€?. In his later work entitled Periplus published in 1897, NordenskiA¶ld dramatically asserted that knowledge of the Pacific, the isthmus and a water passage to the south a€?must have reached Europe prior to Balboaa€™s journeya€?.
Ultimately, Emerson Fite and Archibald Freeman in their 1926 work A Book of Old Maps argued that the Lenox Globe was made sometime in the 1503-1507 period. One reason why they came to this conclusion was that the Lenox Globe lacks the sophistication of the Ruysch world map (1507-1508) with its more accurate depiction of features associated with the region of the Indian Ocean, something which troubled both De Costa and NordenskiA¶ld. The bottom line is that the maker of this globe seems to be unaware of not only the WaldseemA?ller 1507 map, the Ruysch map of 1508, but also ignorant of others such as the Juan de la Cosa, Cantino and Caveri maps from the 1500-1504 period which do show substantial parts of the North American mainland including Florida and the Gulf coastline and also in the Caveri map the Central American coastline from Mexico to roughly Honduras. This discontinuity in cartographical conception makes it hard to know where to place the Lenox Globe on the family tree of maps and globes made during the first decade of the 16th century.
This analysis, if correct, would suggest that Lenox Globe was not likely to have been based on tightly held information in the possession of Spanish navigators.
Furthermore, given that Balboa did not cross the Isthmus of Panama to see the Pacific Ocean until 1513, it is extremely hard to imagine the maker of the Lenox Globe getting his a€?island-likea€? conception or vision of the new southern continent from Spanish sources. There is other evidence that strongly points to the source of the Lenox Globe being Portuguese rather than Spanish.
This geographical distortion seems far too neat or convenient in political terms to have been a mere coincidence as we can see when we superimpose the Line of Demarcation established by this treaty onto the Lenox Globe.
Despite this obvious manipulation of nautical data, Fite and Freeman, like De Costa before them, observed that the Lenox Globe still accurately places the southern edge of of this continent at 55 degrees south of the equator. What is amazing is that Fite and Freeman made such a bold statement based merely on their assessment of the Lenox Globe of uncertain date with no consideration of the WaldseemA?ller globe gores of 1507 which also clearly shows a southern water passage. We would argue further that if this analysis is correct, then the Lenox Globe would represent a stepping-stone or interim intellectual stage in the evolution of geographical knowledge that made possible the more impressive and comprehensive cartographic synthesis articulated by Mathias Ringmann in Cosmographiae Introductio and shown visually in the world map and globe made by Martin WaldseemA?ller at the Gymnasium at Saint-Die. Note the same land mass in the southern part of the Eastern Hemisphere as in the Jagiellonian Globe, but unlike on that globe, unnamed. The Jagiellonian Globe, dating from around 1510, held by the Jagiellonian University in Cracow, Poland, depicts a continent in the Indian Ocean to the east of Africa and south of India, but labeled America. The appearance in the mid-16th century of Jave la Grande in a series of mappemondes drawn by a school of cartographers centred on the French port of Dieppe, suggesting an early Portuguese or Spanish discovery of the eastern coast of Australia, has been called a€?one of the puzzles of European historya€?. An ancient Map of the World has been discovered in the British Museum, which lays down the coasts of New-Holland, as described by Cooke and Bougainville. In all the subsequent discussion of the Dieppe maps and Spanish or Portuguese discovery of the East coast of Australia in the early 16th century, it is noteworthy that there has been no consideration of the Jagiellonian Globe and the bearing it might have on the matter. The Sydney Morning Herald of 19 January 1911 carried an article with the arresting title, a€?Australiaa€™s Discoverer: was it Amerigo Vespucci?a€?. Professor Estreicher drew attention to a globe of similar date held by the New York Public Library, known as the Lenox Globe. Ein solches Land is nur Sudamerica allein, und wir mussen annehmen, dass jene Insel Sudamerica vorstellen soll, freilich an einer ganz falschem Stelle.
Estreicher proposed Louis Boulengier of Albi as having been the cartographer responsible for the Jagiellonian Globe, on the basis of similarity between it and the Tross Gores, dating from 1514-1518 (#324), of which Boulengier is known to have been the author.
An armillary clock, similar to the Jagiellonian, made by Jean Naze of Lyons in 1560 is held at the Orangerie Planetarium of the Staatliche Museen Kassel (formerly the Hessisches Landesmuseum). But the most revealing feature of this globe is that its maker was aware of Cosmographiae Introductio, because he refers to America. If it was impossible that the maker of the Jagellonian Globe with the benefit of access to Cosmographiae Introductio which invented the name America could have been that confused, why the gross mistake? Edward Stevenson, discussing Estreichera€™s work in 1921, commented that he seemed not to have noticed that the inscription AMERICA-NOVITER-REPERTA possibly indicated not only an acquaintance on the part of the Jagiellonian cartographer with WaldseemA?llera€™s suggestion as to the name America, but a belief that America was actually located in this particular region. In the sixth climate toward the Antarctic there are situated the farthest part of Africa, recently discovered, the islands Zanzibar, the lesser Java, and Seula [Ceylon], and the fourth part of the Earth, which, because Amerigo discovered it, we may call Amerige, the land of Amerigo, so to speak, or America.
In his 1911 interview, Petherick pointed out that Thomas Morea€™s Utopia (published in Louvain in 1516) reflected this concept of the eartha€™s geography.
The representations of the east coast of a€?Jave Ie Granda€™ [sic] (Australia) delineated in those maps are, I assert, very rough representations and repetitions of the east coast of South America when that continent and our Australia were supposed to be one, before the Pacific Ocean was known.
From this perspective, one might speculate that the bizarre attachment of the name America to a mythical or hypothetical island in the southern Indian Ocean was an expression of strong contempt for the Florentine navigator and an attempt to delink his name from the South American continent, which had been made by WaldseemA?llera€™s team at Saint-Die in 1507. Catigara was the name given on earlier Ptolemaic maps to the land on the easternmost shore of the Mare Indicum, south of the equator. In claiming that Amerigo Vespucci discovered Australia Petherick may simply have been intending to make the point hyperbolically that the coastline of the Dieppe maps, taken by some to represent Australia, was the coast of the land discovered by Amerigo, misplaced into the Eastern Hemisphere. The Jagiellonian Globe demonstrates that it was possible for early 16th century geographers to depict the same coastline, that of eastern South America, in two different places on the same map. The Jagiellonian Globe reminds us that we must try to look at the early maps through the eyes and with the knowledge of their makers, free of the preconceptions arising from our current geographical knowledge. Another four decades were to pass before another scholar addressed the question of the date for the creation of the Lenox Globe. Why did Pohl see the creation of the Lenox Globe being linked so closely to the publication of Vespuccia€™s letters in Italy in 1505?
Levilliera€™s analysis in an essay in Imago Mundi entitled a€?New Light on Vespuccia€™s third voyagea€? was stunning in this regard. We should observe at this juncture that even prior to the so-called Italian-Sodorini edition of Vespuccia€™s letters, the famous Cantino map (#306), which is also of Portuguese-origin and which dates to no later than November 1502, also shows the eastern coastline bending abruptly (and falsely) to the southeast.
Thus, in his essay for the Bulletin of the New York Public Library in 1963 Pohl was on solid ground when he pointed to the similar or parallel tampering with the text of Vespuccia€™s original letter for the Italian-Soderini edition as grounds for suspecting that the Lenox Globe dates to a period before the WaldseemA?ller map of 1507. Nevertheless, Pohl deliberately dodged the question of the uncanny depiction of the new southern continent in his 1963 essay. Pohl went to considerable lengths in this long footnote in 1944 to dismiss any evidence -- the account in the Newen Zeytung journal, the SchA¶ner globes and Valentine Fernandesa€™ remarks in a deposition in a Portuguese court in 1503 -- that supports Magellana€™s assertion that Portuguese navigators had discovered the strait much earlier, and no later than 1506. Pohla€™s rigid position concerning the a€?accidentala€? or a€?imaginarya€? features of the Lenox and Jagellonian Globes remains baffling given that he was prone to accept highly dubious claims of evidence for the presence of Europeans and Asians in America -- such as the stone tower in Newport, Rhode Island which has been reliably dated to after 1492. In the more than forty years since Pohla€™s essay was published there has been little attention paid to the Lenox Globe. Meridians and parallels are engraved and numbered on its surface at intervals of ten degrees, the prime meridian passing through the island Ferro. We believe that when all the evidence and analysis of the historical context are taken into consideration, Fite, Freeman, and Pohl presented a compelling, convincing argument that places the creation of the Lenox Globe prior to the WaldseemA?ller map and globe gores.
Furthermore, it seems more probable that the Lenox Globe was based on sensitive information that was improperly acquired directly from someone in Lisbon than it was based on information leaked from the Gymnasium at Saint-Die while the work on Cosmographiae Introductio, the world map and globe gores was still underway in 1505-1506.
Thus, there is some basis for concluding that the maker of the Lenox Globe had learned about a water passage and thus knew a lot more than Vespucci conveyed, at least more than the Florentine navigator revealed openly in Mundus Novus which entered into circulation in 1503-1504. In conclusion, we can summarize what appear to be five solid facts concerning the creation of the Lenox Globe.
Second, the maker of this globe also knew from sensitive Portuguese sources a lot more about the overall shape of the entire southern continent than Vespucci conveyed (at least openly) in Mundus Novus that entered into widespread circulation beginning in 1503- 1504. When one considers all this chronological evidence, analysis of the most probable historical context points to the creation of the Lenox Globe between the publication of Vespuccia€™s Mundus Novus in 1503-1504 and April 1507 when Cosmographiae Introductio and the large world map were printed. Whatever the truth, the Lenox-Jagellonian Globes add to a large body of cartographic evidence that points to a Portuguese discovery of the strait before 1519 which is what Magellan had always insisted, and to a clandestine exploration of the west coast of this new fourth continent as far north as what we know as Acapulco no later than 1507. Magellana€™s odd decision was illogical or counter-intuitive if he and his contemporaries believed that this new land mass was an extension of Asia. It is a reasonable conclusion that Magellan understood from extensive discussions with Spanish officials and navigators that this land mass was connected to the land region we know as Central America with which the Spanish were quite familiar by 1518- 1519. Chauncey, Henry, a letter written on January 21,1902 to Willberforce Eames, official at the Lenox Library. Lingren, Uta, a€?Trial and Error in the Mapping of America in the Early Modern Period,a€? in America: Early Maps of the New World, editor, Hans Wolff, New York, 1992, pp. Nordenskiold, Adolf, Periplus - An Essay on the Early History of Charts and Sailing-Directions, Stockholm, 1897, p. Pohl, Frederick, a€?The Fourth Continent on the Lenox Globea€?, Bulletin of The New York Public Library, Volume 67, Number 9 (September 1963), pp. Stevenson, Edward Luther, a€?Martin WaldseemA?ller and Early Lusitano-Germanic Cartography of the New World,a€? Bulletin of the American Geographical Society, Volume XXXVI, Number 4, 1904, pp. Winsor, Justin, Narrative and Critical History of America, Houghton-Mifflin & Company, 1884-1889, Volume III, pp.
Zakrzewska, Maria N., Catalogue of globes in the Jagellonian University Museum, translated by Franciszek Buhl, Kracow, 1965. A A A  Lenoxa€™s personal library was acquired in 1911 by the New York Public Library and in the process this small, engraved globe made of copper became one of the Librarya€™s most valuable possessions. A A A  Like Martin Behaima€™s famous large globe from 1492 (#258), the Lenox Globe still shows only one ocean between Europe and Asia.
The Romans were indifferent to mathematical geography, with its system of latitudes and longitudes, its astronomical measurements, and its problem of projections. The context shows that he must be talking about a map, since he makes the philosopher among his group start with Eratosthenesa€™ division of the world into North and South. The reconstructions shown here are based upon data in the medieval world maps that were, in turn, derived from Roman originals, plus textual descriptions by classical geographers such as Strabo, Pomponius Mela and Pliny.
The emphasis upon Rome is reflected in the stubby form of Italy, which made it possible to show the Italian provinces on an enlarged scale. We are told by late Roman and medieval sources that he employed four Greeks, who started work on the map in 44 B.C. That is the form of the Hereford world map (Book IIB, #226), which seriously distorts the relative positions and sizes of areas of the world in a way we should not imagine Julius Caesar and his technicians would have.
On the re-establishment of peace after the civil wars, he was determined on the one hand to found new colonies to provide land for discharged veterans, on the other hand to build up a new image of Rome as the benevolent head of a vast empire.
It was erected in Rome on the wall of a portico named after Agrippa, which extended along the east side of the Via Lata [modern Via del Corso]. Orosius seems to have read, and followed fairly closely both Agrippa and Pliny, as well as early writers from Eratosthenes onwards. His source was clearly one commissioned by Romans, not Greeks, as his figures for those areas are in miles, not stades.
The Agrippa map probably did not, in the absence of any mention, use any system of latitude and longitude. These include both land and sea measurements, though the most common are lengths and breadths of provinces or groups of provinces. But on the credit side, Agrippaa€™s map, sponsored by Augustus, was obviously an improvement on that of Julius Caesar on which it is likely to have been based. The general history of ancient cartography and our knowledge of Roman buildings in the Augustan period would appear to be our surest guides.
The German philologist and historian Detlev Detlefsen always clung steadfastly the view that there was no such publication and that the inscriptions on the map itself provided all the geographical information that was available to later times under the name of Agrippa. Detlefsen had explained their origin by assuming the production of smaller hand-copies of Agrippaa€™s map, their smallness then making a written text desirable. Small discrepancies were to be explained by differences in the copies of the map used by each. Strabo used Agrippa only for Italy and the neighboring islands, so that our chief evidence comes from the other three sources.
Detlefsen believed that the island sections were later added to the Demensuratio, but according to Tierney there can be little doubt that he is wrong in this and that Klotz is right in thinking that these sections have rather fallen out of the Divisio. It relies on the general scheme of the Greek maps that had been current since the time of Eratosthenes and Hipparchus, and attempts to rectify them, particularly in Western Europe, with recent information derived from the Roman itineraries and route-books. We have to thank Professor Schnabel for providing in the same article a new critical text of both the Demensuratio and the Divisio. He sets out, at first, to prove that Agrippaa€™s map possessed a network of lines of longitude and latitude. 39, sections 211-219, where Pliny mentions evidently as a work of supererogation, a€?the subtle Greek inventiona€? of parallels of latitude, showing the areas of equal shadows and the relationship of day and night Pliny then gives seven parallels, running at intervals between Alexandria and the mouth of the Dnieper, with longest days running from fourteen to fifteen hours.
Hipparchus had made the Don parallel the seventeen-hour parallel, corresponding to 54A° N latitude, whereas Pliny here puts it at sixteen hours or 48A° 30" N latitude, which is nearly correct.
39, section 211, refers obviously to all that follows as far as the end of Book VI and shows that the complete passage is taken from Greek sources. In the first place, Schnabel has apparently overlooked Ptolemya€™s method of establishing the longitude and latitude of particular geographical points.
Pliny gives this itinerary as running at the base of the Alps, from the Varus through Turin, Como, Brecia, Verona and other towns on to Trieste, Pola and the Arsia. For the reduction, of longitude he uses, as I have said, the factor of forty-three sixtieths derived from Ptolemya€™s fifth map of Europe (Book VIII, cap.
Tierney turns to his last main argument in which lie tries to prove Agrippa to be the author of a new value of the degree at 80 Roman miles or 640 stadia, Pliny (V, 59) gives the distance of the island of Elephantine from Syene as sixteen miles and its distance from Alexandria as 585 miles. If we accepted it we might as well accept that everyone in antiquity who either sailed or traveled in a north-south direction in the eastern Mediterranean was also engaged in establishing a new degree value. On the general question of Roman proficiency in geographical studies some light is thrown by a passage of Strabo (Book III, C 166) who says: a€?The Roman writers imitate the Greeks but they do not go very far. The phrase which he uses of Agrippaa€™s aqueducts is exactly echoed in Plinya€™s phrase tanta diligentia. Before entering into the details of Agrippaa€™s map it will be useful to examine briefly these two traditions, the Greek and the Roman, in order to grasp more clearly the problem which confronted Agrippa or whoever else might wish to construct a world map in the age of Augustus.
We are told that it was Democritus who first abandoned the older circular map and made a rectangular one whose east-west axis, the longitude, was half as long again as the north-south axis, the latitude. The campaigns of Alexander and the new Greek settlements pushed the Greek horizon far to the east while in the west the intrepid Pytheas of Massalia circumnavigated Britain and sailed along the European coast from Gibraltar at least as far as the Elbe, publishing his investigations in a work which included gnomonic observations at certain points, and remarks on the fauna and flora of these distant areas. He made devastating attacks on the eastern sections of the map, as being seriously incorrect, both on mathematical and on astronomical grounds.
Sad to relate, the gradually accumulating mass of details concerning roads and areas did not add up to any great increase in geographical knowledge. Our three main authorities, Pliny, the Divisio and the Demensuratio, have suffered a great deal in the transmission of these latter figures, the longitude and latitude, so-called. Klotz has argued that Agrippa did not use the word longitudo in the technical sense of the east-west measurement, nor the word latitudo in the technical sense of the north-south measurement, but rather in the more general sense of length and breadth. To evaluate the map we must take a glance at each of these boxes in turn, and the most convenient order would appear to be that of the Greek geographers and of Agrippa himself, if we can trust the order of the Divisio that has Europa, Asia, Lybia, that is, Europe, Asia, and Africa. The internal line of division ran south from the estuary at NA“ca between the Astures and the Cantabri, down to Oretania and on to New Carthage.
Off the coast of Gallia Comata lies an enormous Britain, 800 by 300 miles, and north of it an equally exaggerated Hibernia [Ireland]. Corsica, in fact forms the eastern boundary of Sardinia and this explains why the long axis of both islands is described as the longitude. Tierney believes that it is possible to remove the difficulties felt about Agrippaa€™s Syria by both Detlefsen and Klotz.
Only a few more boxes or rectangles are left to the east of the line, formed by Armenia, Syria and Egypt, but now they begin to grow portentously large. Spain has three sections and Gaul two, while in the east of Europe Dacia and Sarmatia run off to the unknown northern ocean, and further east again the sections are quite enormous. Natural features such as the mountains and rivers that divided provinces were shown also, but in what exact way is not clear.
He points out that just as Eratosthenes had divided the inhabited earth into his famous a€?sealsa€?, so also Agrippa divided the earth into groups of countries without reference to their political or geographical conditions. Any attempt to draw the map of Agrippa from the figures that have survived without some astronomical backing is entirely hopeless.
Wherever itineraries did not exist he made use of the estimated distances of the Greek geographers, and outside the Empire he had to rely on them altogether. Proceeding in our evaluation with this in mind we can gain insights into how the mappaemundi arrived at their final design.
Fisher believes that the central zones on Agrippaa€™s map had to be eliminated when the Christians decided to adopt and adapt from Greek maps the concept of cartographic centricity by distorting the map to position the holy city of Jerusalem at the mapa€™s center. Some believe that these manuscripts were instruction sets used to construct a mappa mundi based on the fact that the text is spatially specific.
The reconstruction acknowledges that the waterway originated on Agrippaa€™s map as it is common to most mappaemundi, but it assumes that the Roman original was far less imposing, whereas SchA¶nera€™s design suggests that the mappaemundi are far more accurate in their depiction of the waterway spanning most of the continent. All three adjustments were based on their Roman counterparts, but reflect necessary adjustments as the makers of the mappaemundi opted for a Christocentric design.
His evaluation, however, is based on the fact that copies of Agrippaa€™s Orbis Terrarum did indeed exist and were at one time distributed throughout Europe becoming the model for the medieval mappaemundi. Its historical significance arises from the fact that it is the oldest surviving globe from the post-1492 period and the oldest surviving globe to illustrate any portion of the New World.
Thus, in this respect, the small globe does not convey the awareness that there had to be a distinct second ocean (the Pacific) as the WaldseemA?ller map (#310) clearly does.
Harrisse believed that the Lenox Globe was made in France derived from a€?an Italian modela€? and he detected what he thought were some features or nomenclature reminiscent of a sketch map allegedly from the hand of Leonardo Da Vinci (#327) now kept in the Library at Windsor Castle. He was one of the first scholars to make the astute observation about how quickly and how inevitably it was that the Europeans would connect the dots, would grasp the continuous unbroken coastline from Labrador to Argentina as seen in the Stobnicza map of 1512 (#319). He remarked in his Narrative and Critica1 History of America that a€?its date is fixed at 1510-1512, but by some as early as 1506-1507.a€? Curiously Winsor, who died in 1897, never identified which scholars favored the earlier date that would place the creation of the Lenox Globe before the WaldseemA?ller map. When he published his critical assessment in a long article for The Magazine of American History in September 1879, he was ahead of his time.
There in fact are several other maps, globes, or globe gores - associated with the names Boulengier (#324), Green (#342.1), Hauslab-Leichtenstein (#310), Nordenskiold (#311), Stobnicza (#319), and the well-known globes and maps of Johannes SchA¶ner (#328) from the 1515-1520 period - which show this continent having a strait or cape like the African continent and also having a distinctive a€?ice cream-conea€? shape quite unlike Africa. And this evidence should raise doubts and did in fact raise doubts among some late-19th century scholars such as De Costa, Nordenskiold, Varnhagen and Winsor concerning the conventional wisdom that everyone in Europe was in the dark prior to Magellana€™s famous expedition. And Humboldt based his conclusion in the 1830s, on the fact that the little essay Cosmographiae Introductio published to accompany WaldseemA?llera€™s world map in 1507 and which names for the first time the New World as America in Vespuccia€™s honor, also describes the new continent in the southern hemisphere as being like an a€?enormous island in it that it is found to be surrounded on all sides by watera€?. Therefore, unlike Harrisse who curiously was not willing to date the globe before 1511, De Costa was firm in his conclusion that the Portuguese must have found the strait no later than 1510. It seems probable that it was made after the publication, in 1503, of Vespuciusa€™ letter to Lorenzo de Medici, in which he gave an account of his third voyage, when he followed the Brazilian coast 34A° south latitude.
De Costa, Justin Winsor and Henry Harrisse have assigned a date of 1510-11, for the reason, amongst others, that, while several of its representations are in advance of the published knowledge of 1508, they are behind that of 1511-12. In 1508, on the map of John Ruysch (#313), Newfoundland also appears as a part of Asia, being marked Terra Nova.


In its New World representation, South America appears as a large island having three regional names, Mundus Novus, Terra Sanctae Crucis, and Terra de Brazil. The ordinary observer must have perceived that the great bodies of land on the globe terminated towards the south in points. The principle in accordance with which the age of this globe is to be deduced is now therefore quite clear.
The globe shows very distinctly a large island, without any name, lying in the Indian Ocean. This excuse, however, cannot be offered for those who later represented Zanzibar as a great island out in the ocean. Acting, however, in accordance with the suggestion offered, it would prove an easy task to bring order out of the confusion. Nevertheless it is probable that Australia was known centuries before, when the Chinese, with the marinersa€™ compass, navigated those seas. Amongst these might be mentioned the peculiar configuration of the Asiatic coasts, the style of the lettering, the drawing of the ships, and the aspect of the marine monsters. He also puts Simarum Situs on the border of the Gulf of the Ganges, where Sinarum Situs is put by Ruysch, Sinarum, like Serica, or silk, being a name applied to China, which on the globe is called East India. The globe-maker, however, should have placed the province where Polo and the Nancy Globe (#363) place it, on the Coromandel coast. Below South Africa is a grotesque monster, intended for a whale, the creature being delineated with much care. He may have heard of the Vinland of the Northmen, but the story of the Cabots had already been locked up in depositories where it was destined to lie too long; while Martyra€™s map of Beimeni, or Florida, together with the publications of 1512, 1513, 1515, had not come from the press.
The word Getulia and Zamor point to the influence of the Goths and Moors in Africa, while Paludes Nile show that, in common with the geographers of that period, the globe-maker had anticipated the discoveries of Livingstone and Stanley.
Cuba, on the other hand, is correctly laid down as an island, being called Isabel, in honor of Queen Isabella. The name America was first proposed in 1507 by Martin WaldseemA?ller, known under the Greek pseudonym of a€?Hylacomilus.a€? It appears in his Cosmographiae Introductio, where, having called attention to the fact that the old continents were named after women, he observes that the new one should be called after a man. Hylacomilus was entirely friendly to Columbus, as was the case with Vespucci in his relations to the Genoese; nevertheless the geographer of St. He says that three times in his second voyage Vespucci calls the country terra del Asia, but in the third voyage calls it una€™ altro mondo and Mondo nuovo. This map shows the separation of America from Asia, but we believe that the Lenox Globe is earlier. Or the Lenox Globe indeed was made prior to 1507 that would or could mean that its amazing depiction of the new southern continent was derived from highly valued geographical knowledge that also made possible the brilliant synthesis that we see in the WaldseemA?ller map of 1507. The main reason for De Costaa€™s waffling is that he remained intrigued with the notion that there was a€?some connectiona€? between the Lenox Globe that refers to the New World as Mundus Novus, and Vespuccia€™s 1501-1502 voyage. Curiously, for some reason, even though De Costa lived until 1904, there is no record of what he thought after the discovery of this map in 1901, which might well have prompted him to date the Lenox Globe prior to 1507. The Baron had no doubt that the globe was made well before Magellan since its depiction of Asia was more primitive than what one sees on the Ruysch map included the 1507-1508 Rome editions of Ptolemya€™s Geographia.
The Ruysch map was inserted in the widely available Rome editions of Ptolemya€™s Geographia which published in 1507-1508, the first such edition of this work since 1490. Instead, in sharp contrast, the Lenox Globe shows what the Cantino and Caveri maps do not show: namely, the coastline from Venezuela around Panama then upward to Honduras with no hint of a strait in the region of Panama. Ita€™s amazing depiction of the southern continent, essentially in its entirety as a land mass totally separate from Asia and surrounded like an island virtually on all sides by water makes the Lenox Globe a strange hybrid. In Spanish maritime circles, knowledge of the Caribbean, the Gulf of Mexico, Florida, and even much of the coast north of Florida (all of which fell within the Spanish maritime zone) was fairly complete by 1502-1504.
At the same time, we know that in the Spring of 1501, after Cabral had found the east coast of Brazil the previous year, the Portuguese focused intensely on exploring the eastern coastline of South America in order to determine if there was a cape and if it fell within Lisbona€™s maritime zone.
The globe reflects a pro-Portuguese political bias and here we come to what is perhaps the most astonishing and revealing feature of the globe. We can also see this same eastward twist of the coastline in the Cantino (#306) and Contarini (#308) maps both of which date to before the WaldseemA?ller map.
Based on this evidence, Fite and Freeman felt compelled to conclude (again like De Costa and NordenskiA¶ld) that this a€?suggests a water-route around South America was known before Magellan set out in 1519a€?. In any case, the preponderance of evidence and the historical contextualization seems to validate the Fite-Freeman argument that the Lenox Globe dates to sometime between late 1503 when the first editions of Vespuccia€™s Mundus Novos were published and April 1507 when Cosmographiae Introductio and the WaldseemA?ller world map and globe gores appeared.
The globe illustrates how geographers of that time struggled to reconcile the discoveries of new lands with orthodox Ptolomaic cosmography. The discussion over this puzzle may be dated from 1786, when Alexander Dalrymple first drew attention to the resemblance between the shape of Jave la Grande on the Dauphin, or Harleian map (#378) and the shape of the coastline of New South Wales as it had been charted by James Cook in HMS Endeavour in 1770. This map, which is on parchment, appears from the characters, and other circumstances, to have been made about the beginning of the 16th century. This had been described in the 9th edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannica and discussed in an article by Benjamin Franklin De Costa in the Magazine of American History. Estreicher pointed out that the western coasts of both this continent and the MUNDUS NOVUS in the Western Hemisphere are schematic and without detail, in contrast to the eastern coasts which show bays, rivers and promontories, indicating that they are the result of actual discovery by voyagers. Diese Annahme wird zur Gewissheit, als wir auf dem Jagellonischen Globus finden, dass die Insel die Inschrift tragt: AMERICA-NOVITER-REPERTA.
The Tross Gores also bear the inscription AMERICA-NOVITER-REPERTA, but in this case placed over South America (WaldseemA?llera€™s America), and there is no continental land mass in the southern part of the Eastern Hemisphere. The depiction of the continents on the globe in this clock is similar to the globe or gores made by Louis Boulengier in 1514, indicating how globe makers could persist in using cosmographical concepts that were decades out of date. Unlike the Lenox Globe, the Jagellonian Globe has engraved on it the lines of latitude and longitude with the prime meridian passing through the island of Ferro. However, as mentioned above, he oddly applies this name, not to the new fourth continent in the Western Hemisphere but instead to an unsubstantiated mythical island in the southern portion of the Indian Ocean. For his part, Estreicher drew the sensible and logical conclusion that the use of the name America clearly indicates that the Jagellonian Globe was made after the spring of 1507. One distinct possibility consistent with the other indication of a pro-Portuguese political bias, is that the Jagellonian Globe was made by someone with that same bias and who was furious that Amerigo Vespucci had revealed far too much in Mundus Novus for Lisbona€™s liking and who may well have been dismissed in late 1504 from further service for Portugal for that reason. Hythlodaeus, the narrator, whose name perhaps recalls Hylacomylus (WaldseemA?llera€™s name in latinized form), is said to have accompanied Amerigo Vespucci on what, according to the perhaps apocryphal but widely read Soderini letter, was his fourth voyage (1503-1504).
This analysis would suggest that the Jagellonian version of the Lenox Globe might have been a hostile reaction to what the mapmakers had done at St. The maker of the Jagellonian Globe who inserted this erroneous inscription with regard to Americaa€™s location on a globe was dependent on a prior cartographic projection that had to have originated elsewhere. Writing of his 1499 voyage, Amerigo Vespucci said he had hoped to reach India by sailing westward from Spain across the Atlantic around the Cape of Catigara into the Sinus Magnus, the Great Gulf that lay to the East of the Chersonese Aureus [Malay Peninsula]. Johannes SchA¶nera€™s globe of 1515 (#328), like Boulengiera€™s of 1514 (#324), depicted America but, like the Jagiellonian and Lenox, showed another continent to the South West, labeled BRASILLIE REGIA. This was a cosmographical concept, not based on actual surveys, but as Stevenson pointed out, assumed because the geographers of the time such as WaldseemA?ller, ignorant of the reality of the Pacific Ocean or of North America, thought Amerigo Vespuccia€™s newly discovered land was located in the Southern Hemisphere to the eastward of Africa. As an authentic document from the early sixteenth century incorporating and demonstrating the cosmographic concepts of that time, it deserves consideration in any discussion of how the Dieppe maps came into existence.
Frederick Pohl (1889-1991) accepted the Fite-Freeman position in an essay published in the Bulletin of the New York Public Library in September 1963. Pohl drew this conclusion in part because after he published a biography of Vespucci in 1944, Pohl seems to have become aware of the observations of German Arciniegas and Robert Levillier that the Portuguese map makers were in the habit of twisting the southern coastline of South America toward the southeast so that the cape or strait would fall on Lisbona€™s side of the Line of Demarcation established by treaty in 1494.
Although Pohl in his 1963 essay curiously did not mention Levilliera€™s essay or Arciniegasa€™ well-known Vespucci biography, he had already argued in 1944 that someone must have tampered with Vespuccia€™s letters to Soderini in various passages, especially that conspicuous alteration from a€?southwesta€? to a€?southeasta€? to give the false impression that the eastern coastline shifted abruptly in that direction a€“ as we can see illustrated in the Lenox Globe in a quite dramatic fashion. This exaggerated geographical feature strongly suggests that officials in Lisbon were quite eager as early as 1502 to spread misinformation or disinformation about the true direction of the coastline below the Tropic of Capricorn at 23 degrees latitude south.
We can say this because he buried a discussion of this specific issue in a long footnote on pages 225-226 at the back of his biography of Vespucci published in London in 1944. However, the most telling observation is that if there was no European knowledge of a cape or a strait with regard to the new southern continent prior to Magellan, why do these globes a€?twista€? the southern portion of the continent to make people believe that a cape and water fall so far to the east, in the direction of, and therefore within the Portuguese maritime zone? Hans Wolff who edited and also contributed to America: Early Maps of the New World (1992) made a passing remark about how the Lenox Globe a€?is slightly older than the Brixen-Hauslab globe of 1523a€? but his suggestion that the globe dates to around 1520 is not credible.
While it is neither signed nor dated, there is scarcely a doubt that it is as old as the Lenox globe; indeed, the geographical features of the two globes are so similar that they appear to be the work of the same globe maker, or copies of a common original, yet it is note-worthy that the nomenclature of the Jagellonicus globe is somewhat richer. At the same time, the maker of the globe evidently and curiously was still not aware of the decision at Saint-Die to baptize the New World as America in honor of Vespucci. First, the maker of this globe accepted or echoed Portuguese cartographic propaganda after 1502 concerning the configuration of the eastern coastline which was depicted as shifting or twisting in a highly exaggerated fashion in a southeasterly direction into the Atlantic. Third, despite all the evidence that the maker of the Lenox Globe was working almost exclusively with Portuguese sources, he oddly fails to provide the more accurate depiction of South Asia that we find in the Cantino, Caveri and Ruysch maps all of which were completed in the 1502-1507 time period. Pohla€™s suspicion that this globe appeared around the time of the publication of the questionable Italian or Sodorini edition of Vespuccia€™s letters in 1505 or 1506 is a compelling argument.
Magellana€™s strange decision to turn and sail due west across the Pacific after having sailed northward to a considerable extent up the Chilean coast remains an intriguing fact. Instead, Magellan seems to have been acting on the assumption or belief that this new southern land, though quite huge, was either an enormous island or a new continent totally separate from Asia, which is precisely what both the Lenox Globe and WaldseemA?ller maps clearly suggest. And surely at that time the Spanish had abandoned any hope in a strait in that region, otherwise they would not have backed Magellana€™s expedition to reach the Moluccas. In this letter, Chauncey conveys what he was able to learn about Hunta€™s discovery of the Lenox Globe and its later acquisition by Lenox from conversations with Hunta€™s widow who was Chaunceya€™s sister-in-law. In der Jagellonischen Bibliotek, Bulletin lnternational de la€™Academie des Sciences de Cracovie, Comptes Rendus des Seances (March 1900), a€?Resumesa€?, pp. This leads him on to the advantages of the northern half from the point of view of agriculture. The original was made at the command of Agrippaa€™s father-in-law, the Emperor Augustus (27 B.C. These were no doubt freedmen, of whom there were large numbers in Rome, including many skilled artisans. A late Roman geographical manual gives totals of geographical features in this lost map with recording names, but even the totals, on examination, turn out to be unreliable. Mapping enabled him to carry out these objectives and to perfect a task begun by Julius Caesar. This portico, of which fragments have been found near Via del Tritone, was usually called Porticus Vipsania, but may have been the same as the one that Martial calls Porticus EuropA¦, probably from a painting of Europa on its walls.
Dicuil tells us that he followed Pliny except where he had reason to believe that Pliny was wrong.
It is through such features that continents, nations, favorable sites of cities, and other refinements have been conceived, features of which a regional [chorographic] map is full; one also finds a quantity of islands scattered over the seas and along the coasts. The fact that such an insignificant and distant place as Charax was named on the map shows the detail that it embodied. His sister, Vipsania Polla, began the work, and we know from Dio Cassius that it was still unfinished in the year 7 B.C.
There can be no reasonable doubt that the map was a rectangular one with the east-west measurements running horizontally and the north-south measurements running vertically. Though Strabo does not mention Agrippaa€™s name here he is probably merely being tactful with regard to the Emperor who, presumably, took a large part in the completion of the portico with its map.
One must grant Detlefsen that in Plinya€™s main reference there is talk only of a map and the commentarii are merely the basis of the map. Partsch on the contrary, had assumed an original publication, contemporary with the original map, of a Tabellenwerk, that is, a series of tabulated lists. 1475, and, according to Paul Schnabel (Text und Karten des PtolemA?us, 1938) the thirteen manuscripts of the 15th and 16th centuries and a further manuscript of the 13th century all derive from the ninth-century codex in the library of Merton College, Oxford. What they show is rather that on the orders of Theodosius two members of his household composed a map of the world, one written and the other a painting. The classical scholar Alfred Klotz, however, in his articles on the map has shown that a number of correspondences between the two works as against Pliny point rather to a common source from which both works are derived. Greek cartography, like Greek writing, ran from left to right and perhaps the former practice was promoted by the fact that the western boundary of Europe was well known, at least from the time of Pytheas (ca.
The numerals are much more corrupt than those in Pliny, and there is usually a presumption, therefore, that Plinya€™s figures preserve a better version of Agrippa.
Schnabel, while expressing appreciation of the earlier work of Alfred Klotz, yet criticizes Klotz severely on two grounds.
For the sixth of these parallels he gives a slight correction due to the Publius Nigidius Figulus (ca. Therefore, Schnabel argues, the incorrect latitude of Hipparchus was corrected by Agrippa who had experience of the Black Sea in his later years.
His proximate source, moreover, he names in section 217, according to his usual custom, as Nigidius Figulus. The parallels of Meroe and Thule were both equally useless in astrological geography although they may well have been mentioned by Nigidius, as they are by Strabo simply by way of clearing the decks.
H, 10, 1.) for the mouth of the river Varus (the frontier of Gaul and Italy), that is, 27A° 30a€™ E longitude and 43A° N latitude, and again his position for Nesakton (Geog. This method Ptolemy has described quite clearly and unambiguously in the fourth chapter of Book I of his Geography.
It is difficult to see how Schnabel imagined that this line could be reduced to a straight line of 411 miles. What they have to say they translate from the Greeks but of themselves they provide very little impulse to learning, so that where the Greeks have left gaps the Romans provide little to fill the deficiency, especially since most of the well-known writers are Greek.a€? On a comparison of this passage with Straboa€™s usual sycophantic admiration of things Roman we can rate it as very severe criticism. He was, therefore, well acquainted also with the map or Agrippa to which, or to whose content he refers no less than seven times in his Books II, V and VI. In the fourth century the study of spherical geometry was pushed forward rapidly by Eudoxus in the Academy, and again by Callippus. This new knowledge was then exploited geographically by Eratosthenes of Cyrene (#112) in the latter half of the third century. His delineation of the Near East, of Egypt, the Black Sea and the Mediterranean was reasonably correct, and this was also true of his sketch of the Atlantic coast of Europe and the Brettanic islands in which area he followed Pytheas. Hipparchus further indicated the theoretic requirements for establishing the exact location of points on the eartha€™s surface. Despite his criticism of earlier geographers such as Pytheas, Eratosthenes and Hipparchus, it has long been recognized that he does not advance their work except in providing some details in regard to the map of Europe, while his general map of Europe has more faults than that of Eratosthenes.
Without the stiffening of astronomical observation the Roman road systems were like a number of fingers probing blindly in the dark. The variation in the figures is aggravated by the fact that our later authorities do not entirely understand the Roman method of expressing large numbers as used by Agrippa and Pliny. This is, however, a serious error on the part of Klotz and to accept it would be a very retrograde step in our appreciation of the map.
Therefore the word longitude could reasonably he used of its full length, and the measurements at right angles to this, that is, the latitudes, varied so much that Agrippa thought it necessary to give at least two, one in northern Italy and the second from Rome to the river Aternus.
Since the Pyrenees are supposed to run north and south the longitude of Hispania citerior is really the latitude, as was noted before. Over the Rhine lies a small Germany, only half the size of Gaul, and southeast of it an Illyricum and Pannonia of about the same size as Germany.
Cross measurements of the Mediterranean are given at three points, from the Italian coast by way of Corsica and Sardinia to Africa, from southern Greece through Sicily to the same place, and from Cape Malea in Greece to Crete and Cyrenaica.
Mesopotamia measures a fairly modest 800 by 320 miles, but further east Media measures 1,320 by 840, Arabia to the south is 2,170 by 1,296 and, finally, India represents the Far East with 3,300 by 1,300. He must have taken over the map of Eratosthenes as revised by people such as Polybius, Posidonius and Artemidorus, and made it the basis of his own. Pliny understood these measurements as being the prime value of the map and that is why he copies them so exhaustively. Sometimes simple dividing lines were used, such as that used in central Spain, or wherever natural features of division were not present. Thus Agrippaa€™s India corresponds generally to the first a€?seala€? of Eratosthenes, and Agrippaa€™s Arabia, Ethiopia and Upper Egypt corresponds to the fourth a€?seala€?.
Even with an astronomical basis they only provide us with a set of rectangles mostly scattered at haphazard about the Mediterranean.
At the boundaries to the north, east and south he had to content himself with qua cognitum est.
This water feature is significant not only in the fact that it is completely landlocked, unlike most waterways which empty into a surrounding sea, but also notably both waterways are 1) truncated at each end by circular lakes 2) are similarly arced away from the center of their C-shaped surrounding, and 3) span the portion of their C-shape lying opposite the Greek and Italian peninsulas, the portion of the map which coincides with Africa.
First century Roman maps like Agripaa€™s Orbis Terrarum, which had existed throughout Europe, disappeared during the medieval period, but at least one copy was discovered in Germany just a few years prior to the arrival of Schonera€™s 1515 globe, the Peutinger Table (#120), and therefore it is not unreasonable to believe that SchA¶ner might have had access to an unfinished copy of Agrippaa€™s map. When Agrippaa€™s Orbis Terrarum was originally created and put up for display on the wall of a portico, extensive commentary was likely consolidated within the center circular zone (2), but extending Jerusalem and Asia Minor into the mapa€™s center displaced much of the central text and necessitated the text's redistribution about the mappamundia€™s new design, relocating comments within the region to which each pertained, which is why we find the mappae mundi littered with commentary.
But it may actually be that the EMM were based on the original text found on Agrippaa€™s map with the locative terms such as a€?above,a€? a€?opposite,a€? and a€?to the south ofa€? being necessary for a consolidated text set apart from the map, while the mappaemundia€™s placement of these data items directly onto the map logically allowed the removal of the spatial references. The mappaemundi maintained this orientation because medieval Christians held Eden, which they believed resided in the east, in high esteem. The reconstruction also omits completely the lateral mountain range above the waterway, which seems like a rather large oversight as both the Peutinger Table and Ptolemya€™s map, two ancient Roman maps, incorporated a trans-African range as does SchA¶nera€™s design. It also maintains a more realistic belief that ancient maps did not maintain the accuracy of modern maps, but retained a basic design and set of elements common to nearly all ancient maps.
The globe was first discovered in an antiques shop on the Quai Voltaire in Paris around 1854 by a New York architect named Richard Morris Hunt. Despite this fact, what makes the Lenox globe extremely important, indeed revolutionary, is that it depicts the continent of South America as a separate island-like continent.
He argued that this globe was not part of the a€?cartographical familya€? with roots in Portuguese sources a€“ such as the Cantino (#306) and Caveri (#307) maps However, closer examination requires a major reassessment of that conclusion because the historical context and other cartogcaphic evidence imbedded in the Lenox Globe suggest that it is indeed of Portuguese origin, or inspiration, or was made to convey Lisbona€™s political perspective on discoveries in the New World. Harrisse correctly predicted in 1892 that the Stobnicza map was a derivative of the WaldseemA?ller world map of 1507 and argued that if and when it could be found, it also would show this same continuous unbroken coastline. However, it is probable that among the unnamed scholars was the agent Henry Stevens himself who stated that he favored the date of 1506-1507 in an undated letter in the possession of The New York Public Library. For example, Emerson Fite and Archibald Freeman in their folio-sized work entitled A Book of Old Maps published in 1921 by Harvard University Press essentially repeated much of what De Costa had said more than forty years earlier. These scholars were not entirely convinced that these maps and globes (including especially the Lenox Globe) were a€?provocative geographical cartoonsa€? as Lawrence Bergreen claims in his book on Magellana€™s famous voyage.
He suggested that the Lenox Globe had a€?some connectiona€? with the voyage of Vespucci in 1501-1502 to South America in the service of the Portuguese King Manuel. The western coast of South America is drawn here, as in other maps that were constructed before the news of Magellana€™s circumnavigation had arrived in Europe, laid down not by direct observation but by estimation.
Of course the simple fact that an instrument of this kind represents the condition of geographical knowledge at a certain period does not infallibly prove that it was produced at that particular period. On the Lenox Globe, however, Newfoundland appears as an island, though without any name, and at the same time no part of continental North America is laid down.
In fact, the entire continent is laid down, though apart from the Lenox Globe, no analogous representation is found before that of the SchA¶ner Globe, 1520 (#328). Nevertheless the Lenox Globe gives all of South America, the drawing alone rendering it probable that the draughtsman was not unacquainted with the configuration of Terra del Fuego. Good reasons also exist for believing that Africa was accepted as the a€?modela€? for South America. To the northward of this island is another, called Madagascar, though the true Madagascar is laid down in its proper place without any name. This may be done by moving the great nameless island into the position occupied by Australia on the modern maps, carrying with it Certina, the so-called Madagascar, and the three islands without name.
From Lelewela€™s sketch of map of Idrisi (#219) it is evident that the region including Java was perfectly well known in 1154. In fact he made too long and too sudden a stride towards the truth to be followed, though Lelewel, while severely criticizing his work, admits that some of his delineations were not equaled for many years after.
The delineation of the Asian coast using the a€?Tiger Lega€? configuration carries on the tradition also employed by the Behaim Globe, and the Marlellus, King Hamy, WaldseemA?ller, Roselli, and Contarini maps. In this region, near the equatorial line, is seen Hc Svnt Dracones, or here are the Dagroians, described by Marco Polo as living in the Kingdom of Dagroian. In the work entitled Globus Mundus, printed at Strasburg, 1509, the suggestion occurs again, Hylacomilas, evidently repeating himself. To break the force of this, Humboldt refers to the fact that Cadamosto calls the west coast of Africa Altro mondo.
The separation, however, on the map in question proves that it could not have been the work of Columbus, as it has been shown repeatedly that Columbus died in the belief that there was no separation. Third: It is the oldest instrument of any kind showing the entire continent of South America.
And this connection, if correct, would suggest that a 1510-1511 date might be too conservative, especially when De Costa himself drew attention to one crucial fact.
As far as direct European knowledge of the west coast of South America which was implicit in the Lenox Globe, NordenskiA¶ld hesitated, even though in 1884 he had on his own discovered a fabulous set of globe gores very similar to the WaldseemA?ller globe gores that conveys the continenta€™s the distinctive ice cream- cone shape. The main reason that he shifted was that he was heavily influenced by the discovery in the 1890s of four copies of the WaldseemA?ller 1507 world map made by Heinrich Loritti (Glareanus).
By the time the Ruysch map appeared, the Portuguese had established a presence in South Asia (India), which this map reflects.
It conveys or mixes the sophistication of the 1507 WaldseemA?ller map with respect to the southern continent, with a retarded perception of the new lands in the northern hemisphere that lay within the Spanish maritime zone. The Maggiolo world map (#316), which dates to January 1511, is the last known map to contain this curious geographical feature. According to Robert King it offers a clue as to where Thomas More located his Utopia, and may provide a cosmographic explanation for the Jave la Grande of the Dieppe school of maps.
The names are in French, and it is adorned with Fleur de Lis, but most probably has been translated from the work of some Spanish Navigator, whose discovery being forgotten, left room for the new discoveries of the English and French Navigators. Petherick, Commonwealth Parliamentary Archivist, historian, collector of Australiana and bibliographer, whose name is commemorated in the Petherick Reading Room of the National Library of Australia. It is five inches in diameter and made of copperplate, manufactured probably in France to form the central feature of an astronomical clock or armillary sphere, like the Jagiellonian Globe. WaldseemA?llera€™s America referred to what later became known as South America, as the continental extent of the lands later known as North America was not understood in 1507. The formula AMERICA-NOVITER-REPERTA would indicate a common authorship, and therefore a French origin, for the Tross Gores and the Jagiellonian Globe.
The relevant phrase on the Jagellonian globe is America novitert reperta [America, land newly discovered].
However, there is no way such a mistaken attribution to a island in the Indian Ocean could have been made if the maker of the Jagellonian Globe had in his possession the world map or globe gores made at St. Amerigo set out from Lisbon in May 1503 in an unsuccessful attempt to reach Malacca (Melaka) by sailing westwards.
In sum, the Jagellonian borrowed directly from the Lenox Globe which does not refer to America. On the earliest of the Dieppe maps, that of Jean Mallard of c.1536-1540, La Catigare is located on that part of the Terre Australe occupied on later Dieppe maps by Jave la Grande.
SchA¶ner said that his source of geographical information was the Newe Zeytung auss Presillg Landt [New Tidings from the Brazilish Land], printed in Augsburg, probably in 1514 and compiled from reports on the recent discoveries sent back to the Fugger banking house in Augsburg from their agents in Madeira. Pohl went further and also argued that the globe in all probability was made in the immediate wake of the publication in Italy in 1505 of Vespuccia€™s letters concerning his four voyages ostensibly addressed to the Florentine leader, Piero Soderini.
Despite his personal fascination with European, especially Norse or Viking expeditions to the New World prior to 1492, Pohl declared in that footnote that while he was impressed by the accurate placement of the endpoint of South America at about 56 degrees latitude south in both the Lenox and Jagellonian globes, he concluded that this was a€?accidentala€? and that the depiction of a west coast was a€?imaginarya€?. Another contributor to this volume, Professor Uta Lingren (University of Bayreuth) preferred the 1511-1512 date. We do know that Lenox Globe reflects the island-like conception or model for the new continent that in fact was articulated in Cosmographiae Introductio, in sharp contrast to Vespuccia€™s remarks in Mundus Novus. Again, when we take all the facts into account, the analysis continues to point to the time period between 1503 and 1507 for the creation of the Lenox Globe. Fourth, the maker of the Lenox Globe was still not aware of the Spanish and also English exploration of significant coastline of the North American continent which we already find reflected in the Cantino and Caveri maps made by 1504 (#306 and #307).
We believe that he made that decision based on inside knowledge which suggested to him that if he took the clearly safer route and followed closely this largely barren, mountainous coastline further northward, then he was not going to reach Asia and the Moluccas.
The knowledge that the region associated with the Gulf of Mexico and the Caribbean was a vast a€?cul-de-saca€? or a gulf - il grand golfo as both Peter Martyr and Vespucci described it - supplied the prime motivation behind Magellana€™s attempt to reach Asia in the alternative fashion that he proposed. A copy of this letter is in the possession of the Rare Book Division (Reserve Room) of The New York Public Library.
It is now a prized possession of the New York Public Library, of which the Lenox Library now forms a part. Disregarding the elaborate projections of the Greeks, they reverted to the old disk map of the Ionian geographers as being better adapted to their purposes. If land survey did play such an important part, then these plans, being based on centuriation requirements and therefore square or rectangular, may have influenced the shape of smaller-scale maps.
The speakers compare Italy with Asia Minor, a country on similar latitudes where Greeks had experience of farming. India, Seres [China], and Scythia and Sarmatia [Russia] are reduced to small outlying regions on the periphery, thus taking on some features similar to the egocentric maps of the Chinese. He first became prominent as governor of Gaul, where he improved the road system and put down a rebellion in Aquitania.
Thus Agrippa is said to have written that the whole coast of the Caspian from the Casus River consists of very high cliffs, which prevent landing for 425 miles. Such a word certainly ties up with Divisio I: a€?The world is divided up into three parts, named Europe, Asia, Libya or Africa. It is, as one might expect, more accurate in well-known than less-known parts, and more accurate for land than for sea areas. Moreover it seems to have been the first Latin map to be accompanied by notes or commentary.
In regard to the materials of construction I think we have to choose between the painted type of wall-map mentioned by Varro and the construction of marble slabs that is used in the forma urbis Romae of two centuries later, of which considerable parts are extant.
Detlefsen, as against the view of Partsch, effectively quoted the passage of the younger Pliny, on the 160 volumes of his unclea€™s commentarii, which he describes as electoruma€¦ commentarios, opisthographos quidem et minutissime scriptos, annotated excerpts, written on the back in a minute hand. It is, of course, possible to imagine that tabulated lists were put up as an adjunct to the map at the short ends, but the references to Spain and the Caspian seem somewhat out of place even here, and the balance of probability on this problem seems to lie, although rather precariously in favor of a contemporary, or nearly contemporary, publication of at least a selection of Agrippaa€™s material comprising something more than mere lists of names and figures.
Detlefsena€™s view that both works were the transformation of actual maps into a written record had the advantage that the differences in the order of the material in the two works was of little consequence, the map giving merely the visual impact, and the writer a€?being free to begin his description at whatever point on the map he preferreda€?. First come the boundaries of the province given in the constant order east, west, north, south. Firstly, Klotz has not discussed the possible use of Agrippa in Ptolemya€™s Geography, and secondly, and much more fundamentally, he has not recognized the scientific importance of the world-map of Agrippa as a link between Eratosthenes and Hipparchus on the one hand and Marinus and Ptolemy on the other, but has merely repeated traditional views dating from the end of the 19th century.
It follows further, says Schnabel, that Plinya€™s seventh parallel, that of fifteen hours, belongs equally to Agrippa. Detlefsen pointed this out in 1909, and Kroll (after Honigmann) throws further light on the subject in his article on Nigidius in R. Plinya€™s final phrase about these scholars adding half an hour to all parallels denotes rather the astronomer than the astrologer. III, 1, 7) on the river Arsia, that is, 36A° 15a€™ east longitude arid 44A° 55a€™ N latitude. It would be fairer to use the reduction factor from Ptolemy's third map of Europe, referring to Gaul (Book VIII, cap.
Hipparchus however, reckoned the distance from Syene to Alexandria as seven and one-seventh degrees of latitude.
The most important of these passages is the first (II, 5, 17, C 120) where he refers to the important role played by the sea and secondarily, and by rivers and mountains in the shaping of the earth. Yet we may be sure that maps still continued to be made as rectangles on a plane surface, although the relation of the spherical to the plane surface must have begun to appear as a problem. His calculation of the length of the eartha€™s circumference and of the degree length of 700 stadia was a notable event in the advance of geography. For latitude he described the celestial phenomena for each individual degree of the ninety degrees running north front the Equator to the North Pole, giving for each the length of the longest day and the stars visible. He tells us that the lack of gnomonic readings in the east, of which Hipparchus complained, was equally true of the west (IL 1, C 71). When one considers the variants within the MSS groups it follows that one may have a dozen or more variants for a single number. The corresponding Greek words had, of course, originally meant length and breadth with no particular sense of direction. In Spain again the Pyrenees were always regarded as running north and south, parallel to the Rhine, while the east coast as far as the straits and Cadiz was regarded as running more or lees in a straight line to the west.
Detlefsen accepts that Agrippaa€™s figure is an error without being able to explain why, while for Klotz Syria is an obvious proof that Agrippa assigned no definite direction to his longitude. India alone, therefore, has a longitude as great as the whole Mediterranean, while its latitude is comparable to that of Europe and Africa combined.
His chief pride would seem to have been in his measurements, and indeed it is only for the exactness of these that Pliny praises him when he refers to BA¦tica in Book III, 17.
Again the horizontal spine of Mount Taurus plays an important role in both as a line of division between the northern and southern areas, Agrippa, however, follows the Eratosthenic method of division only in a general way and not in detail. It is quite certain that the waterway made its way onto the mappaemundi via Agrippaa€™s Orbis Terrarum as this landlocked waterway represents the Roman belief that the Nile River originated in the mountains of Mauritania and ran laterally across the continent dividing the African continent in two with Libya to the north and Ethiopia to the south. And finally, based on SchA¶nera€™s design Agrippaa€™s map was built around a concentric grid that resembled a polar projection which he as a globe maker would have readily recognized. Ancient Roman maps like the Peutinger Table, however, oriented the map with north to the top similar to the reconstruction based on SchA¶nera€™s design. But should some doubts still linger, he offers one last review two earlier images comparing the landmass to other C-shaped maps, the Greek Hecataeus (#108) and medieval Hereford world maps, and ask that you consider the mathematical probability that SchA¶ner would incorporate the precise elements of these maps in their precise order and placement without an ancient world map as his template.
In the late 1860s Henry Stevens, an agent for James Lenox and other collectors of rare books and other historical artifacts, became aware of this special globe and recognized its historical significance. We can even detect the suggestion of a cone-shape in the lower latitudes below the equator and a cape or water passage at the far southern end. Given his perspicacity, it remains odd that the Lenox Globe with its distinct image of the South America as a real a€?islanda€? - totally disconnected from other landmasses - and with no depiction of North America at all a€“ was still not enough to persuade Harrisse to date the globe prior to 1507. Stevens must have taken this position by the late 1870s, because an entry under a€?Globesa€? in the Encyclopedia Britannica edition of 1879 quotes him as assigning the date of 1506-1507 to the Lenox Globe. This total separation from Asia is exactly the cartographic projection we find on the Lenox Globe. And De Costa astutely pointed to Vespuccia€™s repeated assertion in Mundus Novus that he had reached 50 degrees below the equator which means the Italian navigator would have fallen just short of the strait by only two degrees on this voyage.
Under peculiar circumstances, it would be possible for an instrument like this to possess many of the marks which indicate an early origin, simply through the failure of the designer to incorporate the results of the latest explorations, concerning which he might have been ignorant; but this suggestion, in order to have any weight in the present case, should be supported by some proof of such ignorance. In Peter Martyra€™s work (Legatio Babylonicd) of the following year, Florida appears as Beimeni, while the Stobnicza map in the Ptolemy of 1512 (#319), gives a rough view of North America, similar to that found in the Ptolemy of 1513 (#320). This circumstance might, therefore, lead some to conclude that the globe originated at a late period. How, then, could the globe-maker have known that South America terminated in such a form near latitude 55A° S.? But it is by no means unreasonable to suppose that the termination of South America was known in 1510, even though its circumnavigation had apparently not been accomplished. Perhaps it is not too much to believe that this globe has some connection with the third voyage of Vespucci, which brought him to the latitude of the Straits of Magellan.
When this is done, the student will have before him a tolerable indication of the geography of that region.
In the 13th century Marco Polo traveled with a map of the world in his hand, by the aid of which he appears to have described Madagascar. The a€?Tiger Lega€? is Catigara which was the name given on earlier Ptolemaic maps to the land on the easternmost shore of the Mare Indicum, south of the equator.
These people, as once charged against the Irish, feasted upon the dead and picked their bones. That country is called TERRA SANCTO CRVCIS, as upon the Ruysch map, and MVNDVS Novvs, a name given by Sandacourt, a Canon of St. The name occurs in SchA¶nera€™s Luculentissima, etc., 1515, but the idea that it was generally used is a mistake.
It is probable that he had resolved upon this course before Columbus died, while there is nothing whatever to indicate that Vespucci took any action to secure the honor awarded to him, or even that, any more than Columbus, he was solicitous upon the subject.
This, however, he confesses is a mere adaptation of the old classic use, the alter orbis of Pomponius, Mela and Strabo. The Genoese, at the end of Cuba, on his second voyage, required his companions to declare on oath that Cuba was not an island the person maintaining the contrary being liable to a fine of ten thousand maravedis, and to have his tongue cut out.
Fourth: It is the oldest instrument showing that the discoveries of Columbus formed no part of the Asiatic Continent, and that America was absolutely Mvndvs Novvs, or the New World. That fact is the absence of America on the globe as a name for the new continent - a name which caught on quickly at least in Italy and northern Europe after Cosmographiae Introductio was published in many editions following the first edition in St Die in eastern France in April, 1507. Glareanus states that he had followed the projections of WaldseemA?ller whose large map still had not been found but whose globe gores were well known since the early 1870s. The other crucial factor that Fite and Freeman cite as in favor of an earlier date prior to 1508 is the fact that the Lenox Globe does not show any portion of the North American mainland - meaning, as observed earlier, that the maker of the little globe was still wedded to the Ptolemaic concept of only one ocean separating Europe and Asia. Although there is in fact a curl in that direction, it is quite exaggerated on the globe which is a strong hint that someone wanted to be sure that others would conclude that the cape or strait fell inside the Portuguese maritime zone as defined by the Treaty of Tordesillas of 1494. In the interview, Petherick referred to the work of Tadeusz Estreicher, a professor at the Jagiellonian University in Krakow, Poland.


On both globes South America is shown, bearing the names MUNDUS NOVUS, TERRA SANCTAE CRUCIS and TERRA DE BRAZIL.
This conclusion becomes a certainty when we find that on the Jagiellonian Globe the island bears the inscription: AMERICA-NEWLY-DISCOVERED]. The fact remains, the Lenox Globe and the Jagiellonian Globe are evidence that there was an authoritative map made around 1507-1508 that showed, albeit mistakenly, a continental land mass in the southern part of the Eastern Hemisphere. Having gone with Amerigo as far as the farthest point he reached (ad fines postremae navigationis) on the coast of the new continent, Hythlodaeus left the expedition and after passing through unknown lands proceeded on to the Portuguese base at Calicut in India by way of Taprobana (Ceylon, present day Sri Lanka) discovering the fabulous island of Utopia on the way. The reverse sequence - the notion that a€“ the Lenox Globe could appear after the Jagellonian Globe, the WaldseemA?ller map and also the many editions of Cosmographiae Introductio a€“ and deliberately drop the name America - makes no sense whatsoever.
On the Harleian mappemonde, CATIGARA is not to be found on the western coast of IAVE LA GRANDE but, as noted by Petherick, is located on the western coast of LA TERRE:DVBRESILL, indicating a pre-Magellanic lack of knowledge of the existence of the Pacific Ocean and the notional character of IAVE LA GRANDE.
And last but not least, he refused to follow or more likely did not know of the decision at St. All the foregoing analysis means that Magellana€™s main claim to fame as a navigator rests not with the discovery of the strait - an achievement which he disavowed - but to his bold decision like that of Columbus in 1492 to cross an ocean whose real breadth was unknown. The small globe is composed of two copper-engraved hemispheric sections closely fitted along the equator, as in the case of the Ulpius Globe (#367), and pierced for an axis. Within this round frame the Roman cartographers placed the Orbis Terrarum, the circuit of the world.
This shape was also one that suited the Roman habit of placing a large map on a wall of a temple or colonnade. If Romans were planning this, they would place the northern section much further west, whereas the cartographers were Greeks, and they followed a tradition which originated in Rhodes or Alexandria. He pacified the area near Cologne (later founded as a Roman colony) by settling the Ubii at their request on the west bank of the Rhine. Agrippa was an obvious choice as composer of such a map, being a naval man who had traveled widely and had an interest in the technical side. The date at which the building was started is not known, but it was still incomplete in 7 B.C. If the commentary had not been continuous, but had merely served as supplementary notes where required, there is a possibility that by Plinya€™s time, some eighty years later, it might have gone out of circulation.
Augustus was the first to show it [the world] by chorography.a€? Evidently there is a slight difference of meaning between this and Ptolemya€™s definition, by which chorography refers to regional mapping. From the quotations given by Dilke, there would appear to be a general tendency by Agrippa to underestimate land distances in Gaul, Germany and in the Far East, and to overestimate sea distances.
Although the words used are longitudo and latitudo, they have no connection with longitudinal and latitudinal degree divisions. Romans going to colonies, particularly outside Italy, could obtain information about the location or characteristics of a particular place. We know that the campus Agrippae was in the campus Markus on the east side of the Via Flaminia and that it was bordered towards the street on the west by the Porticus Vipsania. In view of the widespread use of marble facings that characterizes the age of Augustus, the marble slab method appears more probable.
Riese and Partsch had argued that certain references to Agrippa in Pliny, in particular the reference to the inaccessibility of part of the coast of the Caspian Sea and also that to the Punic origins of the coastal towns of Baetica refer more naturally to a published work than to the map in the Porticus Vipsania. We do not know the size of this map that has perished, or whether its descent from the map of Agrippa was through a series of hand-copies as Detlefsen supposed.
In actual fact Pliny and the Divisio both begin their description from the straits of Gibraltar, moving east, while the Demensuratio, on the contrary, begins with India moves west.
Following on this and connected there with come the longitude and latitude, in that order, expressed in Roman miles with Roman numerals.
These views stated that Agrippaa€™s work was constructed on the basis of Roman itinerary measurements and took no note of the scientific results of the astronomical geography of the Greeks. Pliny then adds a€?from later studentsa€? five more parallels, three of them, those of the Don, of Britain, and of Thule, running north of the original seven, and two, those of Meroe and Syene, running south of them.
What is new in Plinya€™s parallels may be referred to the Greek astronomers of the age of Hipparchus or the two or three generations after him.
By subtraction we get the difference in longitude between the two places as 8A° 45a€™ and the difference in latitude as 1A° 55a€™. This third class was to be manipulated as intelligently as possible so as to fit in with the basic evidence of the first two classes. But in every case instead of a geometrical definition a simple and rough definition is enough.
He also established a fundamental parallel of latitude, following the example of DicA¦archus.
The north, the far east, and Africa south of the Arabian gulf, were practically unknown, and even in the Mediterranean and the land-areas surrounding it, major defects were due to the great uncertainties of measurement, whether by land or by sea. Straboa€™s aversion to the mathematical and astronomical sick of geography has already been described and considered as typical of the age that he lived.
Much toil has been expended by scholars such as Partsch, Detlefsen and Klotz in attempting to divine which, if any, of these figures belong to Agrippa. They became technical terms for longitude and latitude with a strict directional sense in the filth century B.C.
The north coast, however, was usually thought to run from Lisbon (Cabo da Roca) to the Pyrenees, the northwest capes, Nerium and Ortegal, being ignored. Detlefsen held that the map was not drawn to scale and that the measurements were merely inscribed upon it. Unfortunately, in nearly all cases we know neither the beginning nor the end of the routes measured, nor do we know, with any exactness, the direction of the route.
Eratosthenes determined the sides of his a€?seals,a€? that were irregular quadrilaterals, by the points of the compass. It is clear that he gave the itinerary stages in Italy and Sicily in addition to the coastal sailing measurements.
He believes such a notion is impossible and with the presentation of a sound argument for the circumstances contributing to SchA¶nera€™s error, there remains little reason to doubt that because of his grand error we are able to gaze upon Agrippaa€™s Orbis Terrarum for the first time in many centuries. In 1869, he persuaded Hunt to permit the Coast Survey Bureau in Washington DC to make an accurate facsimile projection which has been used by many subsequent scholars.
Unfortunately, we have not been able to find any explanation from Stevens as to why he chose this date.
For all these reasons, De Costa at several points in his essay conveyed his strong suspicion that the Portuguese learned a great deal more about the continenta€™s configuration in the years that followed and well before Magellana€™s expedition. Respecting the points on which the globe gives no light, information was, nevertheless, so wide-spread in 1511 as to render it difficult to believe that any globe or map maker of the period could have failed to know of its existence.
The very early map attributed to Leonardo da Vinci (#327) shows Florida as an island, but since the map was not published, no inference can be drawn from it. If, however, it were to be argued that the Lenox Globe belongs to a period subsequent to SchA¶ner, it might be necessary to assign its date to the 16th century. How, in fact, could he have known that it terminated at all, especially since sketches later than 1515, with one or two unimportant exceptions, represented Terra del Fuego as joined to a great continent, supposed to cover the entire region around the south pole?
Peter Martyr, writing to the Pope in 1514, seems to have a definite view of the shape of South America quite in advance of published maps. Since, however, this part of the Indian Ocean contains no such vast island, and since Australia does not appear in its proper place, it has been suggested by De Costa that, though we do so with extreme diffidence, that Australia is represented by the great island in question, which was misplaced; while the so-called Madagascar and Certina are simply Sumatra and Java. Borneo and Celebes (called Java Minor by Ramusio), having their proper place, New Guiana, without any name, also appearing. At that period the great island of Australia, lying close to well-known islands, could hardly have remained unknown to geographers.
At the same time the maker of the globe, in common with Sylvanus, in forming the outline of what we venture to offer as Australia, appear to have made a certain use of those outlines characteristic of the Java Major of the Fra Mauro map and the Behaim Globe (#249 and #258), which lay on the east coast of Asia. Loac is the Locac of Marco Polo, and Seilan is the Borneo of our day, the former name having been taken from its proper place near India to make room for Taprobana, which was often applied to Sumatra. 568), believes it necessary to refute what Sebastian Munster said in his Cosmography, to the effect that it sometimes falleth out that Mariners, thinking the Whales to be Islands, and casting out ankers vpon their backs, are often in danger of drowning. Die, when he framed the title of the Latin version of Vespuccia€™s letter, which described Brasil.
The name was first published on a map made by WaldseemA?ller in 1507 (#310) and later by Appianus, 1520 (#331), in the work of Gamers, but the Ptolemy of 1513, in a legend on the map made by Hylocomilus himself (#320), attributes the discovery of the new world to Columbus. He then shifts the argument, and shows that Peter Martyr in 1493-4, while speaking of the novis orbis, did not recognize its separation from Asia, and that this use was long continued. And the date of April 1510 on one of these Glareanus copies made it impossible for the Baron to support von Wiesera€™s attempt to push these maps to the 1520s. This strange level of ignorance on both points seems puzzling for any map or globe made as late as 1510- 1512, and defies a good explanation.
Professor Estreicher described a globe which he dated to between 1509 and 1511 held in the Library of the University.
De Costa noted a large land mass depicted in the southern part of the Eastern Hemisphere, unnamed on the Lenox Globe and suggested, a€?with extreme diffidencea€?, that this land represented Australia, misplaced to this location. The Jagiellonian Globe shows that its maker believed this continent to have been the New World discovered by Amerigo.
Is it possible that this globe-maker was simply confused because he did not have the benefit of the world map and only had a copy of Cosmographiae Introductio in front of him? This placed the land discovered by Amerigo and the island of Utopia which lay contiguous to it to the south of Taprobana and India.
When we also note that the Lenox Globe was made by someone who amazingly still seems to be in the total dark about basic geographical knowledge concerning North America a€“ well-known by 1507 to many scholars, not just those involved with WaldseemA?ller - then this would lend considerable weight to the conclusion that the Lenox Globe should date to a time period prior to or no later than Cosmographiae Introductio and the WaldseemA?ller map - namely, to the 1503-1507 period as Fite and Freeman argued in 1926. In other words, the Brazilish Land, Presillg Landt, was differentiated from Brazil proper, otherwise known as America. Given her exclusively technical approach to this globe, she complained about the bending of the tip of the continent towards the east, but it never occurred to her than this feature might have been part of an attempt to deceive, an effort to spread disinformation to make persons think that a cape would fall on the Portuguese side of the maritime demarcation line established in 1494. Die that became widely known after April 1507 to baptize the New World as America in honor of Vespucci who had re-entered Spanish service in early 1505.
As a visual aid to this discussion, the temple map will have been envisaged as particularly helpful.
He must have had plans drawn, and may even have devised and used large-scale maps to help him with the conversion of Lake Avemus and the Lacus Lucrinus into naval ports. Two late geographical writings, the Divisio orbis and the Dimensuratio provinciarum (commonly abbreviated to Divisio and Dimensuratio) may be thought to come from Agrippa, because they show similarities with Plinya€™s figures. If West Africa is any guide, in areas where distances were not well established, they were probably entered only very selectively. Also the full extent of the Roman Empire could be seen at a glance.a€?Certain medieval maps, including the Hereford and Ebstorf world maps (see monographs #224 and #226 in Book IIB) are now believed to have been derived from the Orbis Terraum of Agrippa, and point to the existence of a series of maps, now lost, that carried the traditions of Roman cartography into Christian Europe. Varro, in the following century, tells us of a map of Italy that was painted on the wall of the temple of Tellus. Remains of the portico are stated to have been found opposite the Piazza Colonna on the Corso at about the position of the column of Marcus Aurelius and further north. The volumes of commentary referred to by the younger Pliny were not published, but were clearly digested to the point where little further work was needed to prepare them for publication, and the same situation may well be accepted for the commentarii of Agrippa. The text, however, had long previously been known from its reproduction in the first five chapters of the De Mensura Orbis Terrae, published by the Irish scholar Dicuil in A.D. But it did quite clearly derive from that map, whether in the map-form or in a written form, with its list of seas, mountains, rivers, harbors, gulfs and cities. On Klotza€™s view that both works derive from a common written source this major divergence becomes a problem to he explained, but Klotz can offer no explanation. The boundaries are marked by the natural features, usually the mountains, rivers, deserts and oceans, only occasionally by towns or other features.
Of these parallels Schnabel tries to establish that at least two are due to Agrippa, to wit, the first of the new parallels passing through the Don, and the seventh of the old parallels passing through the mouth of the Dnieper.
Using Ptolemya€™s reduction factor at 43A° N latitude which is forty-three sixtieths we find that with Ptolemya€™s degree of 500 stadia the difference in longitude between the two places in question is 3,135 and five-twelfths stadia and the difference in latitude is 958 and one-third stadia. It was this third kind of evidence which gave Ptolemy his positions for the Varus and the Arsia. He thinks the 411 miles represents the itinerary measurement from the Varus to Rimini through Dertona, and that the Arsia has got attached to it by a slight confusion in Pliny's mind in thinking of the boundaries between the mare superum and the mare inferum, with which, in fact, he equates the Varus-Arsia measurement. This factor of forty sixtieths or two-thirds gives a distance of approximately 384 miles from Varus to Arsia and the striking coincidence on which Schnabel has built this elaborate theory simply vanishes. Therefore, argues Schnabel, Agrippa made a new reckoning of the degree at 80 Roman miles or 640 stadia. Such features as these brought into existence the continents, the tribes, the fine natural sites of cities and the other decorative features of which our chorogaphic map is chock full.a€? The map of Agrippa displayed, therefore, all the natural features just mentioned and, in addition, the names of tribes and of famous cities.
Only a combination of the practical measurements with astronomical observation could have affected a real progress and our evidence shows only too clearly that this happy union did not take place. Some light has been thrown on the subject by comparison with later Roman itineraries for the particular areas.
The result of this misconception was that the figures for longitude and latitude were simply interchanged. Agrippa regarded the Syrian coast running northeast from the boundary of Egypt, as running much more in an easterly direction than it actually does. His map represents, says Detlefsen, a moment of historical development, a point in the process of crystallization of the lands of the Mediterranean into the Roman Empire. Agrippa defines the boundaries of his groups of countries in the same way, by the points of the compass, but as regards size he supplies only the length and breadth, thus agreeing with Strabo, already quoted.
It is a question whether these itinerary measurements were given, in detail on the map for all the western provinces, not to mention the eastern ones. At the time, Stevens hoped to conclude a purchase for the British Museum and was prepared to pay Hunt the handsome sum of A?2,000, according to Hunt's widow.
To get some clue as to why that date might have made sense to Stevens we need to turn to a contemporary scholar who pondered more deeply and put his thoughts in writing as to when this globe might have been made. The maps of 1511, 1512 and 1513 nevertheless must have been known to every intelligent person engaged in globe making, and if the Lenox Globe had been made during those years, or later, it would have reflected information published to the world.
On his map is found a Latin legend, translated as follows: Portuguese mariners discovered this part of this territory, and proceeded as high as the fiftieth degree of South latitude, but without reaching its southern extremity. Being secretly together in a chamber with the Bishop of Burgos, Martyr says that they examined many sea charts, one of which Vespucci was said to have set his hand, while another had been influenced by both Christopher and Bartholomew Columbus. In accordance with this view, it would be necessary to conclude that, though misplaced upon the Lenox Globe, even Australia was known to the geographers of that early period. It would appear that the Java Minor of Marco Polo, a term applied by him to Sumatra, came eventually to include the entire region. The maker of the Lenox Globe may have misunderstood his instructions, and thus pushed Australia into the Indian Ocean. In Northern India is Sacha- vvm Regno, the sugar region described in the Ptolemy of Patavino (1596). It would appear as though Milton found his own Leviathan on the page of Hakluyt, in whose works he had read the treatise signed Arngrimus Ionus. This has been alluded to as very curious, though the course pursued by Hylacomilus was altogether consistent. The Lenox Globe appears to have been made at a time when geographers regarded the matter with unconcern, as neither Columbus nor Vespucci have any honor awarded. He forgets, however, that Martyr describes South America as land never known by the ancients. 145.) Pinzon on the first voyage understood Cuba to be a city, and that the land here was a continent of great size, which extended far to the north (First Voyage of Columbus, Boston, 1827). That said, NordenskiA¶ld was still content in Periplus to give the Lenox Globe a date of about 1510 that just happened to be the same year for the Glareanus copies of WaldseemA?llera€™s work. Fortunately, it has survived the vicissitudes of the 20th century and is still held in the Treasury of the Jagiellonian Library, now the Muzeum Uniwersytetu Jagiellonskiego Collegium Maius. If so, a€?it would be necessary to conclude that, although misplaced upon the Lenox Globe, Australia was known to the geographers of that early perioda€?. Not likely because Vespuccia€™s detailed letters concerning all his voyages were attached to Cosmographiae Introductio. This is just where Amerigoa€™s newly discovered land is shown on the Jagiellonian Globe, indicating that Sir Thomas More probably had such a globe before him when he wrote Utopia. The Zeytung described the voyagers passing through a strait, like the Strait of Gibraltar, between the southernmost point of America or Brazil, and a land to the South West, referred to as vndtere Presill (in Latin, Brasilia inferior).
In sharp contrast, Rudolf Schmidt in the 1991 reprint of Konrad Kretschmera€™s famous 1892 atlas of facsimile maps underscored the crucial question in his brief commentary where he remarked: a€?How does the unknown author of the Lenox Globe arrive at a quite good representation of South America, if we disregard the eastward kink, which after all persisted for a long time in drawings of Africa as well?a€? Schmidt at the time was the President of the International Coronelli Society that promotes the study of globes. But whether it was only intended to be imagined by readers or was actually illustrated in the book is not clear.
The map was presumably developed from the Roman road itineraries, and may have been circular in shape, thus differing from the Roman Peutinger Table (#120). The theory that it was circular is in conflict with a shape that would suit a colonnade wall. What purpose was served by giving a width for the long strip from the Black Sea to the Baltic Sea is not clear.
Dilke provides a detailed discussion of Agrippaa€™s measurements using quotes from the elder Plinya€™s Natural History. We do not know the occasion of this dedication, but since it was meant to celebrate a victory it may been intended for the geographical instruction of the Roman public. They are said to allow the conclusion that it had the same dimensions and construction as the adjacent porticus saeptorum, whose dimensions were 1,500 ft. The twelve lines were inscribed on this map and also on an obviously contemporary written version thereof, and it is this written version that has been preserved for us both by Dicuil and in the various manuscripts of the Divisio orbis terrarum, whereas the map has perished. Klotz, however, believed that be could determine the original succession of countries and groups of countries as treated in the published work of Agrippa by criteria. The Demensuratio on one occasion gives the fauna and flora of Eastern India, which it calls the land of pepper, elephants, snakes, sphinxes and parrots.
He argues that the Dnieper was used as a line of demarcation between Sarmatia to the east and Dacia to the west only on the map of Agrippa, and neither earlier nor later, and that therefore the parallel from the Don through the Dnieper must derive from that map. Plinya€™s seven klimata are a piece of astrological geography and derive through Nigidius from Serapion of Antioch, who was probably a pupil of Hipparchus, or if not was a student of his work. But there is no vestige of probability or proof that Agrippa made new gnomonic readings to correct Hipparchus. Schnabel now treats the spherical triangle involved as a plane right-angled triangle, and using the theorem of Pythagoras, he finds that the hypotenuse, that is, the distance between the Varus and the Arsia is 3,291 stadia or 411 Roman miles. Gnomonic readings were often inaccurate, measurement of time was still very vague, and a degree length one-sixth too large did not help. He used the circle of 360 degrees, giving up the hexecontads [a 60-sided polygon] of Eratosthenes. But since we normally do not know by what route Agrippaa€™s measurements were taken, this light may prove to be a will-o-the wisp. Aristotle, Strabo and Pliny all insist on the technical directional sense, as there was the possibility of ignorant people misunderstanding them. The same thing occurred in the British islands that were regarded as running from northeast to southwest.
1,200, 720 and 410 miles, respectively, running from the unknown north down to the Aegean, but all having approximately the same latitude of just under 400 miles.
Therefore the longitude was to him the east-west direction, and the latitude from Seleucia Pieria to Zeugma was the north-south direction. Partial distances were given from station to station along the Italian coast, but Detlefsen thinks that the summation of the coastal measurements appeared elsewhere on the map. Where this process is complete we have ready-made provinces, where it is still in progress we find the raw materials of provinces-to-be, which are still parts of large and scarcely known areas, and finally, where Roman armies have never set foot we find enormous, amorphous masses lumped together as geographical units.
It is notable, as Detlefsen points out, that Strabo must have recognized this lack of scientific value. It appears from passages in Pliny that Varro had already used the Roman itineraries in his geographical books and Agrippa was only following his example. But before Stevens could make this offer, Hunt already had already decided to give the globe as a gift to Lenox out of admiration for him. This was the case with many of the early geographical works; but in every such instance it is easy to show that the map is not in accordance with the text, and that the map was introduced by the publisher in lieu of something better. According to this argument, this globe, therefore, takes its place in the year 1510, or the beginning of 1511.
But this question is one that may be disembarrassed, for it will not prove a difficult task to show how the globe- maker may have obtained, in 1610, the knowledge which he exhibits. Speaking of South America, he says it reaches forth into the sea even as Italy doth, although not like the leg of a man, as it does.
That this was so appears from the fact that names belonging to Java and the neighboring islands are given on maps of a later period. The attention of the designer of the globe may have been directed to the subject by the voyage of Gonnville, who sailed from Honfleur in June 1503, for the East, and fell upon a great country, not far from the direct route to the Indies, which they called Southern India.
Near Persia is Carmenis, the Kermann of Marco Polo, who does not refer to the neighboring Calicut, or Calcutta. The history of this name, however, is not quite so clear as the others, though Navarrete calls attention to Muratoria€™s notice of the fact that brazil, signifying a red dye-wood, was an excisable article at Ferrara and Modena in 1193 and 1306.
The really curious thing remains to be stated, and for the special consideration of those writers who have had so much to say about the ingratitude shown to Columbus by early geographers.
Certainly Vespucci never gave the impression in these letters or in the earlier publication known as Mundus Novus that he was sailing in the Indian Ocean. A very similar globe, belonging to an astronomical clock and apparently of about the same age as the Lenox Globe, is in the library of the Jagiellon University at Cracow in Poland. The same applies to possible cartographic illustration of Varroa€™s Antiquitates rerum humanarum et divinarum, of which Books VII-XIII dealt with Italy.
The map of Agrippa, however, was set up, not in a sacred place, but in a portico or stoa open to the public, the Porticus Vipsania.
Dicuil worked and wrote probably at the Frankish palace at Aix-la-Chapelle in the time of Charlemagne and Louis the Pious. The date of the making of the map was probably the fifteenth consulate of Theodosius II, that is, A.D.
One of these was the direction shown in the order of naming several particular countries where several are included in the same section, or the direction shown in the list of the boundaries of the section. This argument, however, is unsound for a number of reasons, of which the most obvious in this context is that whereas the Dnieper is given by our sources as the west boundary of Sarmatia, it is never given as the east boundary of Dacia. Nigidius was a notorious student of the occult and his astrological geography was contained in a work apparently entitled de terris.
At right angles to this he established a meridian running from Meroe northwards to the mouth of the Dnieper, and passing through Alexandria, Rhodes and Byzantium. Yet he did not try to get a more exact value for the degree, although this was the point where theory could most easily have affected practice.
Moreover, although the Roman roads may often have rationalized the native roads by new road-construction or by bridging, yet in general they continued to be town-to-town roads, and if the itineraries ever correctly represented the longitude and latitude of a province it would be by pure chance. But, you may object, this technical sense is only suitable for describing rectangles and not all countries fall into that convenient form. Here again longitudo is the long axis and latitudo the short axis, not because of a misuse of these technical terms, but simply because their general position was misconceived.
Further east again Sarmatia [Russia], including the Black Sea to the south, measures 980 by 715 miles, Asia Minor 1,155 by 325, Armenia and the Caspian 480 by 280. Any doubt on this matter is removed when we look at Pliny (VI, 126), where he gives the latitude from the same point, Seleucia Pieria, to the mouth of the Tigris. It is probable that Italy and the neighboring islands were given in greater detail than other areas. Of the first class, the ordered provinces, we have eight in Europe, three in Africa, and three in Asia. He gives us from Agrippa, a few lines along the coasts of Italy and Sicily but not a single one of his reckonings for the provinces. Since so little of the materials of the ancient geographers bas been preserved it is mostly a matter of chance whether we know or do not know whether Agrippa agreed or not with the measurements of a particular earlier geographer. Hunt had a close relationship with Lenox because Lenox had hired him to design a large mansion in Manhattan to house his private collection. After passing this year, and reaching 1520, the newly found lands are so well known as to be celebrated in an English poem, entitled the Four Elements. 7) calls attention to the fact that in the fourteenth chapter of the work, in which the map of Ruysch appears, there is a separate statement, to the effect that the Portuguese had surveyed the coast of South America as far as 37A° S., and that it was known as far as 50A° S. The Globe of Ulpius (#367) illustrates this phase of the question, Java Minor appearing as a very large island, and the true Java not being laid down at all. He also quotes from Capmanya€™s Memorias sobra la antiqua marina, commercio, y artes de Barcelona, which contains references to this wood connected with the years 1221, 1243, 1252 and 1271.
The point is this, that though Ferdinand, the son of Columbus, lived until 1539, and for many years was an owner and diligent reader of the Cosmographise Introductio, which he annotated and rebound, he is not known to have written or spoken a syllable, or to have caused any one else to write so much as a word, expressive of any sense of injustice done to his father by the naming of the New World after Vespucci. It has invariably been used by mapmakers to represent the coast of North America, whatever may have been its origin. Winsor, neither of who had seen the WaldseemA?ller map of 1507, which was only discovered in 1901, fixed the date at 1508-11 and 1510-12, respectively. The globe consists of two gilded copperplate calottes, inscribed with the Eartha€™s principal features as understood at that time, including a continent inscribed AMERICA-NOVITER-REPERTA. The Zeytung said that Malacca was only six hundred miles from the western point of this Brazil.
But at least we know that he was keen on illustration, since his Hebdomades vel de imaginibus, a biographical work in fifteen books, was illustrated with as many as seven hundred portraits.
Plinya€™s most specific reference to the map is where he records that the length of BA¦tica, the southern Spanish province, given as 475 Roman miles and its width as 258 Roman miles, whereas the width could still be correct, depending on how it was calculated.
It was not a map of a part of the Empire, not even a map of the Empire as a whole, but rather a map of the whole known world, of which the Roman Empire was merely one part.
The Porticus Vipsania was, therefore, an enormous colonnade and it follows that the map with which we are concerned was only one decorative item among the many that adorned it.
Thus he says that the order Cevennes-Jura for the northern boundary of Narbonese Gaul shows motion from west to east, and again the list Macedonia, Hellespont, left side it the Black Sea shows the same movement. This work seems to have included his commentary on the sphaera Graecanica describing the Greek constellations and his sphaera barbarica on the non-Greek constellations.
From the coincidence of the figures Schnabel strongly argues that Ptolemy must have taken over the figure of 411 miles from Agrippa. The establishment of these two lines provided the theoretical basis for a grid of lines of parallels and meridians respectively, points being fixed by longitude and latitude as by the coordinates in a graph.
The measurements of Agrippa should, therefore, be reduced but it is not easy to say by what factor. This is true indeed, and here we have to consider a few ancient misconceptions about the shapes and positions of particular countries.
The distance is 175 miles from Seleucia to Zeugma, 724 miles from Zeugma to Seleucia and Tigrim and 320 miles to the mouth of the Tigris, that is, 1,219 in all.
Of the second class, where the Romans had recent military campaign we have three in Europe, that is, Germany, Dacia and Sarmatia, one in Africa, Mauretania, and one in Asia, Armenia. Klotz has shown that he used Eratosthenes very often, but that on occasion he disagreed with him, and that Artemidorus apparently he did not use at all.
The offering of the globe as a gift was evidently timed with the completion of the construction of this mansion in 1870. The scholar Henry Harrisse, in his Life of Fernand Colomb, also calls attention to the fact that the partisan Life of the Admiral, which has been attributed to his son, while exceedingly severe upon those who detracted from the fame of Columbus, does not mention either Hylacomilus or his book.
It is the earliest surviving globe on which the name America appears, a name invented by Martin WaldseemA?ller and published in his Cosmographiae Introductio, St.
In SchA¶nera€™s 1520 globe, AMERICA had evolved into TERRA NOVA, AMERICA vel BRASILIA sive PAPAGALLI TERRA [Land of Parrots], while BRASILLIE REGIO had become BRASILIA INFERIOR (a translation of vndtere Presill). Since we are told that this work was widely circulated, some scholars have wondered whether Varro used some mechanical means of duplicating his miniatures; but educated slaves were plentiful, and we should almost certainly have heard about any such device if it had existed. Pliny continues: a€?Who would believe that Agrippa, a very careful man who took great pains over his work, should, when he was going to set up the map to be looked at by the people of Rome, have made this mistake, and how could Augustus have accepted it? The second criterion is that the use (the alleged use) of the term longitudo for a north-south direction or for any direction other than the canonical one of east-west, shows us the direction of Agrippaa€™s order in treating of the geography. Nigidiusa€™ a€?barbaric spherea€? was derived from the like-named work of Asclepiades of Myrlea.
The two main passages from Straboa€™s second book may reasonably be regarded as a transcript of contemporary geographical practice and since between them they give an exact description of the methods followed in the ancient remains of the map of Agrippa, Tierney thinks that they may rightly be regarded as a strong proof that the views held on this map by Detlefsen and Klotz are generally correct. In somewhat similar circumstances Ptolemy reduced the figures of Marinus in Asia and Africa by about one-half. This distance, he adds, is the latitude of the earth between the two seas, that is, the Mediterranean and the Persian Gulf.
Thus in 1508 there existed at Rome a general understanding of the coast to within about two degrees of the entrance to the Straits of Magellan. Major discusses four maps with similar characteristics, belonging to same period, in the Hakluyt Societya€™s work on Australia, and the matter is also touched upon in his Prince Henry.
It would appear, therefore, that the indignation referred to is, upon the whole, a modern thing, of which the immediate friends of the famous Genoese had no experience. The Lenox Globe, though giving no lines of latitude, represents the coast as far south as about 55A° south latitude, the correct latitude of Cape Horn.
SchA¶nera€™s 1533 globe showed the BRASILIAE REGIO as part of the TERRA AVSTRALIS, with an enormous peninsula, the REGIO PATALIS, attached to its southeastern part. For it was Augustus who, when Agrippaa€™s sister had begun building the portico, carried through the scheme from the intention and notes [commentarii] of M. Tierney does not believe that either of these criteria can show us the order of treatment in the original publication, presuming, that is, that there was an original publication. The detailed extension of the Greek parallels into the Roman west is apparently due to Nigidius. Agrippa, he thinks, took the itinerary figure for the distance from the Varus to the Arsia, which is given as 745 miles by Pliny (III, 132) and reduced it to a straight line of 411 miles by astronomical and mathematical measurement. With such facts before him, Humboldt came to the conclusion that between the years 1500 and 1508 a succession of attempts were made by the Portuguese along the coast of South America, beginning at Porto Seguro in latitude 16A° S.
Some of the geographers endeavored to set off Java, reduced to proper proportions, SchA¶ner, 1520, being amongst the number; but in the attempt Australia in some cases disappeared altogether.
Moreover, it places open water to the south of this new continent and thus suggests that the water-route around South America was known before Magellan set out in 1519. Oronce Finea€™s 1531 map exhibits this cosmography, and the Dieppe maps show its further evolution, even though it was out of date by the time they were made in the 1540s and 1550s. We are prone to forget that all ancient geographers were necessarily map-minded, and even when the map was not before their physical eye, it was before their mental eye. This proves, therefore, that Agrippaa€™s map was not a purely itinerary map, but that Agrippa reduced the itinerary measurements in the way described.
Brazil appears on a map of the 15th century, but the Catalan map of 1375 (#235) also shows an island in the Atlantic bearing the name.
The SchA¶ner globes of 1515 and 1520 (#328), on which South America is separated from an Antarctic continent by a strait connecting the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, give further evidence of this fact. Augustus, as he was ill, handed his signet-ring to Agrippa, thus indicating him as acting emperor. The order of countries within a section would, I think, very much depend on the momentary motions or aberrations of that mental eye. It is unfortunate, however, that nearly all Agrippaa€™s figures come down to us in a non-reduced form that makes it impossible to reproduce his map. Still the student is not justified, with such data, in declaring precisely how far the navigators knew the region by actual observation.
Perhaps, therefore, the Lenox Globe may be regarded as showing one of the earliest attempts to correct a misunderstanding.
The same year Agrippa was given charge of all the eastern parts of the Empire, with headquarters at Mitylene.
The inference is that the navigators who passed along that region viewed the strait afterwards discovered by Magellan as an inlet, and that they learned from the natives the configuration of Terra del Fuego. It is reasonable, however, to conclude that the name was applied to South America, because the first navigator found there an abundance of desirable dye-wood.
The Hudsona€™s Bay Company possess at their House important sketches made by the Indians; while Balboa, called the a€?Discoverer of the Pacifica€? had the Pacific discovered for him by the Cacique of Zumaco, who, upon the arrival of the Spaniard in the Bay of Panama, figured for him the coasts of Quito, and described the riches of Peru. This was all that the Spanish and Portuguese navigators needed to have done for them by the natives of Terra del Fuego.




Leo man likes in a woman youtube
Promo code hertz rent a car
Code promo pour site bon prix


Comments to «Free new zealand brochures»

  1. krasavchik writes:
    Females had been mothers and out.
  2. SEXPOTOLOQ writes:
    Guys with physique appear that.
  3. nellyclub writes:
    Simply because you ask me it would be dating a older man quotes tumblr very best to not where your life and repel.
  4. NASTYA writes:
    Speak romantically to excite more than the man you want, get the man you have to commit.