Google PhonebookA­ has a reverse directory feature, which shows a name and address for phone numbers.
Reverse phone lookup works best if you start with a landline number for a business or residence. These books listed businesses and residences, but they didn't include unlisted, fax or cell phone numbers. The Internet's speed and convenience brought an end to paper directories and made reverse phone number lookup another search engine function. Using Google or another search engine, type the phone number in the search field with the numbers separated by hyphens (for example, 622-555-1777). While Ptolemy is most frequently associated with geography and cartography, he also wrote important works in a number of other fields including astronomy, astrology, music and optics.
Although no original manuscript of this text has survived the ravages of time, several manuscript copies, dating from the closing centuries of the Byzantine Empire (ca. For these and other reasons, Ptolemy knew mathematics to be an important part of cartography. The first Book of the Geographia is devoted primarily to theoretical principles, including a discussion of globe construction, the description of two map projections, and an extended, through amicable, criticism of his primary source, Marinus of Tyre, a€?the latest of the geographers of our timea€?.
In another chapter in Book I, Ptolemy wrote that there are two ways of making a portrait of the world: one is to reproduce it on a sphere, and the other is to draw it on a plane surface.
If the second method of drawing the earth is used, that is, if the spherical earth is projected onto a plane surface, certain adjustments are obviously necessary. Ptolemya€™s exhaustive criticism of the imperfect methods of drawing maps adopted by Marinus would lead to the expectation that he himself would have used some of his own recommended projections in constructing his maps. Book II of the Geographia opens with a prologue a€?of the particular descriptionsa€?, which is to say, the maps he was about to present, and a general statement of his mapmaking policy.
The fifth chapter of Book VII contains a description of the map of the world, together with an enumeration of the oceans and of the more important bays and islands.
In the eighth and last Book of the Geographia, Ptolemy returned to the business of discussing the principles of cartography, mathematical, geographical and astronomical methods of observation, and, in some cases (manuscript or printed copies) there follow short legends for each of the special maps - ten for Europe, four for Africa and twelve for Asia - mentioning the countries laid down on each plate, describing the limits, and enumerating the tribes of each country and its most important towns.
Those scholars who have argued that Ptolemya€™s original text contained no maps have neglected careful study of this Book.
The obvious way to avoid crowding, Ptolemy said, is to make separate maps of the most populous regions or sectional maps combining densely populated areas with countries containing few inhabitants, if such a combination is feasible. The illustration above gives a diagram of the parts of the known world embraced by each special map found in Ptolemya€™s Geographia. While there is little doubt still lingering that Ptolemya€™s text was originally illustrated by maps, it is not altogether certain that the maps found today in existing copies of the Geographia are indeed similar to those of the original series of maps, since the latter have not survived for comparison.
To further confound the issue, all of the other manuscript copies of the Geographia that are accompanied by maps differ one from another, presenting two basic versions. The other version, B, contains sixty-four maps distributed throughout the text, vice collected together in one place. Over and above these maps, those manuscripts with maps, both A- and B-versions, are additionally illustrated with a universal map of the entire known world at Ptolemya€™s time, either on one sheet or four sheets; only very rarely are both world maps found together.
As with modern maps, Ptolemaic maps are oriented so that North would be at the top and East at the right, because better known localities of the world were to be found in the northern latitudes, and on a flat map they would be easier to study if they were in the upper right-had corner. Displayed on the left-had margin of these world maps are seven Clima [Klima] and Parallel Zones.
Overall Ptolemya€™s world-picture extended northward from the equator a distance of 31,500 stades [one mile = 9 to 10 stades; there has always been some controversy over the equivalent modern length of a stade] to 63A° N at Thule, and southward to a part of Ethiopia named Agysimba and Cape Prasum at 16A° S latitude, or the same distance south as Meroe was north. It has been repeatedly pointed out that the distances set down by Ptolemy in his tables for the Mediterranean countries, the virtual center of the habitable world, are erroneous beyond reason, considering the fact that Roman Itineraries were accessible.
The geographical errors made by Ptolemy in his text and maps constitute the principle topic of many scholarly dissertations. Paradoxically, Ptolemya€™s eastward extension of Asia, reducing the length of the unknown part of the world, coupled with his estimate of the circumference of the earth, was his greatest contribution to history if not cartography. Ptolemy provides a descriptive summary in his text in which he tells us that the habitable part of the earth is bounded on the south by the unknown land which encloses the Indian Sea and that it encompasses Ethiopia south of Libya, called Agisymba. The southern limit of the habitable world had been fixed by Eratosthenes (#112) and Strabo (#115) at the parallel through the eastern extremity of Africa, Cape Guardafiri, the cinnamon-producing country and the country of the SembritA¦ [Senaai]. Ptolemy records, following Marinus, the penetration of Roman expeditions to the land of the Ethiopians and to Agisymba, a region of the Sudan beyond the Sahara desert, perhaps the basin of Lake Chad, and he supplied other new information regarding the interior of North Africa. The eastern coast of Africa was better known than the western, having been visited by Greek and Roman traders as far as Rhapta [Rhaptum Promontory opposite Zanzibar?] which Ptolemy placed at about 7A° S. According to Greek tradition, an extension of 20A° in the width of the habitable world called for a proportionate increase in its length. Ptolemya€™s knowledge of the vast region from Sarmatia to China was, however, better than that of previous map makers.
Many faults appear in Ptolemya€™s picture of southern Asia, although for more than a century commercial relations between western India and Alexandria had been flourishing.
Even the more familiar territory of the Mediterranean basin demonstrated that insufficient contemporary knowledge was available and Ptolemy erred in many important cartographical details. Map on grid system, in Ptolemy, La geographia, 1561-64, 26 x 14 cm, a€?Oxford University Byw. However, Ptolemy was apparently the first of the ancient geographers to have a fair conception of the relations between the Tanais, usually considered the northern boundary between Europe and Asia, and the Rha [Volga], which he said flowed into the Caspian Sea.
In spite of the egregious errors on all of Ptolemya€™s maps, his atlas was indeed an unsurpassed masterpiece for almost 1,500 years. During the intellectual narrow-mindedness of the Middle Ages even Ptolemy and his methods of map construction were forgotten, at least in the west. The presently known version of Ptolemya€™s works began to surface when the Byzantine monk Maximos Planudes (1260 - 1310) succeeded in finding and purchasing a manuscript copy of the Geographia. Another scholar of the Byzantine age is known to have been interested in Ptolemya€™s Geographia - the noted polyhistor Nikephoras Gregoras (1295 - c.
In 1400 a Greek manuscript copy of the A-version (twenty-six maps) was obtained from Constantinople by the Florentine patron of letters, Palla Strozzi, who persuaded Emmanual Chrysoloras, a Byzantine scholar, to translate the text into Latin. Again, the original manuscript of Angelusa€™ translation and the first maps of Ptolemy in the Latin language have not survived, but a manuscript copy, dated 1427, prepared under the direction of Cardinal Fillastre, can be found in the library at Nancy, France (thus known as the Nancy Codex). In manuscript form, four other cartographers are significant in editing and influencing the evolution of Ptolemya€™s atlas. After the discovery of copper-plate and wood-engraving, Ptolemya€™s atlas became one of the first great works for the reproduction of which these arts were employed. 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. Before the Internet, phone companies published reverse phone directories, or reverse white pages, by specific town or area and made them available to the police, libraries and others. He composed a Table of Reigns, a chronological list of Assyrian, Persian, Greek, and Roman sovereigns dating from Nabonasar to Antoninus Pius, a biographical history of kingship.
He was interested in the earth, all of it, not just the habitable part, and tried to fit it into a scheme of the universe where it belonged.
Marinus had given this matter considerable thought, rejecting all previously devised methods of obtaining congruity on a flat map; yet, according to Ptolemy he had finally selected the least satisfactory method of solving the problem. There is also an introduction to data collection, evaluation, preparations for drawing, how and in what order to mark boundaries, and how to use the appended tables. When traveling overland it is usually necessary to diverge from a straight line course in order to avoid inevitable land-barriers; and at sea, where winds are changeable, the speed of a vessel varies considerably, making it difficult to estimate over-water distances with any degree of accuracy. The Indian Ocean, which is assumed to be bordered on the south by an unknown continent, uniting southern Africa with eastern Asia, is stated to be the largest sea surrounded by land.
It is these legends which, in some editions, have been placed on the reverse of the maps, and they appear to have been originally intended for that purpose. In Chapter Two Ptolemy said, a€?It remains for us to show how we set down all places, so that when we divide one map into several maps we may be able to accurately locate all of the well-known places through the employment of easily understood and exact measurements.a€? On the other hand, some scholars even go so far as to say that maps were already drawn before certain portions of the text was addressed, so that they could be used as models for the completion of other portions of the text. For instance, in a single map embracing the entire earth, he said, there is a tendency to sacrifice proportion, that is, scale, in order to get everything on the map. If several regional maps are made to supplement the general world map, they need not a€?measure the same distance between the circlesa€?, that is, be drawn to the same scale, provided the correct relation between distance and direction is preserved. It demonstrates how Ptolemya€™s world had been systematically divided into twenty-six regions, each of which is mapped on a separate sheet.
The reason for this doubt lies in the question of authorship of the maps which accompany extant copies. According to map historian Leo Bagrow, one version, A, contains twenty-six large maps included in the eighth Book of the text, each folded in half and, on the back, having a statement of the region portrayed, its bounds and a list of principle towns. In some manuscripts of the B-version, and in those without maps, the texts from the backs of the maps are combined together in a special edition, divided into chapters numbered 3-28. Of the Greek manuscripts of the Geographia, as a whole or in part, known today, eleven of the A-version and five of the B-version have maps. The meridians are spaced from each other a€?the third part of an equinoctial hour, that is, through five of the divisions marked on the equatora€?.
In Ptolemya€™s time, the latitude, or distance from the equator, was generally astronomically calculated from the length of the longest and the shortest day.
The numbers on the right of the Clima give the number of hours in the longest day at different latitudes, increasing from 12 hours at the equator to 24 hours at the Arctic Circle.
The a€?breadtha€? of the habitable world according to Ptolemy then equates to 39,500 stades [3,950 miles]. The earth was only 18,000 miles around at the equator; Poseidonius had stated it, Strabo substantiated it, and Ptolemy perpetuated it on his maps. Of these, the Indicum Mare [Indian Ocean] is the largest, Our Sea [the Mediterranean] is the next and the Hyrcanian [Caspian] is the smallest. This parallel also passed through Taprobane usually considered the southernmost part of Asia. As to the source of the Nile, both Greeks and Romans had tried to locate it, but without success. Ptolemy extended the west coast of Africa with a free hand, and even though he reduced the bulge made by Marinus more than half, it was still way out of control. He shows, for the first time, a fairly clear idea of the great north-south dividing range of mountains of Central Asia, which he called Imaus, but he placed it nearly 40A° too far east and made it divide Scythia into two parts: Scythia Intra Imaum and Scythia Extra Imaum Montem [Within Imaus and Beyond Imaus].
His Mediterranean is about 20A° too long, and even after correcting his lineal value of a degree it was still about 500 geographical miles too long. Ptolemy was also the first geographer, excepting Alexander the Great, to return to the correct view advanced by Herodotus and Aristotle, that the Caspian was an inland sea without communication with the ocean (the Christian medieval cartographers were a long time in returning to this representation of the Caspian).
Its wealth of detail still constitutes one of the most important sources of information for the historian and student of ancient geography.
Many of the legends and conventional signs that he used are still employed by cartographers with only slight modifications. Ptolemya€™s works were, however, thriving and contributing valuable insight to knowledgeable Arabs and those having access and understanding of the Arab or Greek language (it was only in the Islamic states and in these languages that the works of the Alexandrian scientist were preserved (see monographs #212, #213, #214-17, lbn Said, al-lstakhri, Ibn Hauqal, al-Kashgari, etc. Very few scholars, let alone other literate persons in Western Europe were familiar with the Greek language at this time, therefore this translation was a great stimulus to a€?popularizinga€? Ptolemy.
Curiously enough it was first printed at Vincenza in 1475 (the date printed of 1462 is in error) without maps! 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.
The Google Phonebook result shows the phone owner's name, street address and a map link showing the exact location. Little is known personally of this pivotal man aside from the general period during which he was active ca.
His Analemma was mathematical description of a sphere projected on a plane, subsequently known as an a€?orthographic projection,a€? which greatly simplified the study of gnomonics.
He was also interested in the relationships between the earth and the sun, the earth and the moon, in scientific cause and effect of climate; and above all, he was concerned with a scientifically accurate portrayal of the spherical earth in a convenient readable form.
These Byzantine copies of the Geographia are comprised of eight a€?Booksa€? which Ptolemy introduces by supplying two very influential definitions - that of chorography and geography. Marinus had laid out a grid of strait lines equidistant from one another for both his parallels of latitude and meridians of longitude. Because while Ptolemy employs his conical projection in his first general world map, for the remaining twenty-six special regional maps he uses the rectangular projection of Marinus with due observance of the ratio between the longitude and latitude at the base of the map.
Books II-VI and the first four chapters of Book VII are devoted to a complete catalogue of some 8,000 inhabited localities laid down in the twenty-six special maps of the geography. Nevertheless Ptolemy concluded that the most reliable way of determining distances was by astronomical observation, and by no other method could one expect to fix positions accurately. In addition, a description of a projection of the inhabited hemisphere on a plane, by which it could retain its circular outline, or globular aspect is also given.
The better known regions have many place-names, while the lesser known have few, and, unless the map is carefully drawn, it will have some crowded, illegible areas, and some where distances are unduly extended. Ptolemy repeated that it would be not too far from the truth if instead of circles we draw straight lines for meridians and parallels. Generally these sheets are of about the same size, but the scales vary according to the space required for the legends. Did Ptolemy actually design and construct the maps himself, were they made by a draftsman working under his supervision, or were they added, perhaps as late as 1450, by an energetic editor who thought the text needed some graphic emendation? The geographical coordinates of these towns are given, not in degrees, but in time; the longitude is expressed in hours and minutes corresponding to the distance from the meridian of Alexandria (one hour = 15 degrees, one minute = 15 minutes of a degree), and the latitude is expressed in terms of the length of the longest day, in hours and minutes (the greater the distance from the equator, the longer the day in summer). Some of the manuscripts without maps contain references to accompanying maps, since lost, and in others, spaces have been left for maps to be inserted.


In other words, the total span of twelve hours, representing the length of the habitable world, was to be partitioned by a series of thirty-six meridians spaced five degrees apart at the equator and converging at the North Pole.
The earth was accordingly divided into a number of zones, parallel to the equator and within which these days had a certain length, for instance of 12 -13, or 15 -16 hours. Ptolemy a€?correcteda€? this length to 180A° (9,000 miles), still 50A° (2,500 miles) too long, an error arising from using the Fortunate Islands as his prime meridian which he placed about seven degrees (350 miles) too far to the east.
It is very unlikely, in view of the secrecy attached to all maps and surveys of the Roman Empire. This a€?shorter distancea€? that a mariner would have to travel west from the shores of Spain in order to reach the rich trading centers of Asia may have contributed to Columbusa€™ belief, or that of his royal sponsors, that they could compete with their rival neighbors, Portugal, in the newly opened sea-trade with India by sailing west. The Emperor Nero had sent an expedition into Upper Egypt, and it had penetrated as far as the White Nile, about 9A° N latitude. On the same approximate parallel he located the region called Agisymba, inhabited by Ethiopians and abounding in rhinoceri, supposedly discovered by Julius Maternus, a Roman general. A more obvious area to stretch the length of the world was in eastern Asia where there was every likelihood of additional territory yet unexplored.
Asia and Africa are extended considerably to the east and south, far more so than on any previous maps, but not without cause. His Mare Nostrum, from Marseilles to the opposite point on the coast of Africa, is 11A° of latitude instead of the actual 6.5A°.
This is especially true in the study of the earliest tribes that encompassed the Roman Empire in the first century of the Christian era, who were at that time barbarians, but who later bore the burden of civilization in Europe.
He originated the practice of orienting maps so that North is at the top and East to the right, a custom so universal today that many people are lost when they try to read a map oriented any other way.
Planudes constructed a map based upon the instructions found in Ptolemya€™s eight books and subsequently, through Athanasios, Patriarch of Alexandria, had a copy of the Geographia, with maps made for Emperor Andronicus III.
He is also credited with the four-page world map found in some manuscripts, chiefly the B-version.
When Chrysoloras was unable to complete the translation, it was finished by one of his students, Jacobus Angelus of Scarparia, between 1406 and 1410. In all, seven editions were printed in the 15th century, of which six were provided with large maps in folio, and thirty-three in the following century (a selected list taken from Tooley accompanies this monograph). Can you remain unmoving till the right action arises by itself?" Lao Tzu Be aware of the motivation behind your action, the intention behind your words, and the needs and experiences of other people. 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. His work entitled PlanisphA¦rium [the Planisphere], described a sphere projected on the equator, the eye being at the pole, a projection later known as a€?stereographica€?. More than any one of the ancients, Claudius Ptolemy succeeded in establishing the elements and form of scientific cartography. He defines chorography as being selective and regional in approach, a€?even dealing with the smallest conceivable localities, such as harbors, farms, villages, river courses, and the likea€?. Its position under the heavens is extremely important, for in order to describe any given part of the world one must know under what parallel of the celestial sphere it is located. He seems to have studied and made astronomical observations in Tyre, the oldest and largest city of Phoenicia, which, even at that late date, maintained important commercial relations with remote parts of the world.
This was contrary to both truth and appearance, and the resulting map was badly distorted with respect to distance and direction, for if the eye is fixed on the center of the quadrant of the sphere which we take to be our inhabited world, it is readily seen that the meridians curve toward the North Pole and that the parallels, though they are equally spaced on the sphere, give the impression of being closer together near the poles. Traditional information regarding distances should be subordinated, especially the primitive sort, for tradition varies from time to time, and if it must enter into the making of maps at all, it is expedient to compare the records of the ancient past with newer records, a€?deciding what is credible and what is incrediblea€?.
It is remarkable that such questions never seemed to have occurred to Ptolemy, as: What is there to be found beyond Serica and Sinarum Situs? Ptolemy himself never actually employed this manner of projection, which has since, through more or less modified, been preferred by geographers for maps representing one of the hemispheres.
Some map makers have a tendency to exaggerate the size of Europe because it is most populous, and to contract the length of Asia because little is known about the eastern part of it.
As for his own policy, he said, a€?in the separate maps we shall show the meridians themselves not inclined and curved but at an equal distance one from another, and since the termini of the circles of latitude and of longitude of the habitable earth, when calculated over great distances do not make any remarkable excesses, so neither is there any great difference in any of our mapsa€?. As this diagram shows, each regional map would encompass, besides its own proper territory, some parts of the neighboring countries. Ptolemy does not state specifically in his text whether he personally made any maps, and proponents of the theory that Ptolemy made no maps for this Geographia base their case on the notation in two of the existing manuscript copies, that a cartographer named AgathodA¦mon of Alexandria was the author of the accompanying map(s).
It is no less difficult, also, to determine when the maps of the two versions (A and B) were made.
The meridians in the southern hemisphere are extended from the equator at the same angle as those above it, but instead of converging at the South Pole they terminated at the parallel 8A° 25a€™ below the equator. The concept of the division of the earth into zones began as early as the sixth century B.C.
While Ptolemya€™s map is based upon the theory that the earth is round, it bares repeating that it is to his credit that he depicts only that half of its surface which was then known, with very little attempt to speculate on or a€?fill-ina€? the unknown parts with his imagination.
More specifically, Ptolemya€™s knowledge concerning the fringes of the habitable world and civilization was broader than earlier writers, such as Strabo (#115), but in some respects it was a little confused.
With Thule as the northern limit of Ptolemya€™s habitable world, he thus extended the breadth of this world from less than 60A° (Eratosthenes and Strabo) to nearly 80A°.
The silk trade with China had produced rumors of vast regions east of the Pamir and Tian Shan, hitherto the Greek limits of Asia. These distortions represented an actual extension of geographical knowledge and are doubtless based on exaggerated reports of distances traveled.
80) containing sailing directions from the Red Sea to the Indus and Malabar, indicated that the coast from Barygaza [Baroch] had a general southerly trend down to and far beyond Cape Korami [Comorin], and suggested a peninsula in southern India.
While Ptolemy's map is based upon the theory that the earth is round, it bares repeating that it is to his credit that he depicts only that half of its surface which was then known, with very little attempt to speculate on or a€?fill-ina€? the unknown parts with his imagination.
To be sure, there are other geographical fragments, individual maps and charts, isolated examples of the best in Greek, Roman, and Arabic cartography, but Ptolemya€™s Geographia is the only extant geographical atlas which has come down to us from the ancients.
His map projections, the conical and modified spherical, as well as the orthographic and stereographic systems developed in the Almagest, are still in use.
This particular copy has not been recovered, however another copy attributed to Planudes is preserved, in part, in the monastery of Vatopedi on Mount Athos. It was also during this time, the 14th century, that the twenty-six maps of the A-version were divided up into sixty-four.
This oldest Latin translation of Ptolemya€™s Geographia (confusingly and arbitrarily titled Cosmographia by Angelus) was at first disseminated in numerous, often splendidly decorated manuscript copies. A re-issue of the preceding, but with a new title-page, an account of the New World by Marcus Beneventanus, and a new map of the world by Ruysch, Nova Tabula. The most important edition of Ptolemy, containing the 27 maps of the ancient world and 20 maps based on contemporary knowledge, under the superintendence of Martin WaldseemA?ller. Maps, with the exception of Asia V, printed from the same blocks as 1522 edition, and like them almost unaltered copies on a reduced scale of the maps of the 1513 edition. 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. Below the Phonebook result, you'll see any other searches found that include the phone number. Besides name, address and map, this site provides the phone number owner's approximate age. 90 to 168 (during the reigns of Hadrian and Antoninus Pius) and that he lived in, or near, Alexandria Egypt. This he did through his second great treatise, Geographike Syntaxis, called by him, a€?the geographical guide to the making of mapsa€?, and, in later centuries, shortened to simply Geographia, or (incorrectly) Cosmographia. Geography, he said, differs from chorography in that it deals with a€?a representation in picture of the whole known world together with the phenomena that are contained thereina€?. Otherwise how can one determine the length of its days and nights, the stars which are fixed overhead, the stars which appear nightly over the horizon and the stars which never rise above the horizon at all.
This a€?tutora€™ of Ptolemy had read nearly all of the historians before him and had corrected many of their errors (presumable errors relating to the location of places as contained in travelersa€™ itineraries). Ptolemy was well aware that it would be desirable to retain a semblance of spherical proportions on his flat map, but at the same time he decided to be practical about it.
With one exception (an Italian translation by Berlinghieri), every editor of Ptolemya€™s Geographia has published, not the original maps, but a modification of them by Nicolaus Germanus (Donis), who, with praiseworthy exactness and without any further alterations, reproduced the originals, on a projection with rectilinear, equidistant parallels and meridians converging towards the poles.
It is an exception when geographical or descriptive remarks are added to this bare enumeration of names. Therefore if a geographer were obliged to fall back on the reports of travelers, he should exercise some discrimination in his choice of authorities. What could be found to the north of Thule, or to the south of Agysimba and Cape Prasum: Where would you arrive if you sailed westward from the Fortunate Islands?
And some cartographers surround the earth on all sides with an ocean that, according to Ptolemy are a€?making a fallacious description, and an unfinished and foolish picturea€?. But, as is also usual in modern atlases, these neighboring areas of the map are only roughly sketched, while the principle area is shown in full detail. From these same manuscripts it is stated that a€?he drew them according to the instructions in the eight books of Claudius Ptolemya€?.
Certain indications point to the Byzantine period, with the exception of AgathodA¦mona€™s single-sheet world map. And it is highly probable that Ptolemy the astronomer, who is usually discredited by later geographers because of his methods and the kinds of information he compiled, had no more standing among some of his influential contemporaries than he would today in the most approved geographical circles of the civilized world.
The only good reason for discussing a few of the glaring faults of the Geographia is that it was the canonical work on the subject for more than 1400 years.
In the northern regions, for example, he had been ill-advised with regard to Ireland, and positioned it further north than any part of Wales; likewise, Scotland was twisted around so that its length ran nearly east and west.
Ptolemy stated that the Nile arose from two streams, the outlets of two lakes a little south of the equator, which was closer to the truth than any previous conception until the discovery of the Victoria and Albert Nyanza in modern times. All such information was of doubtful origin, and in laying down the coastline of Eastern Asia, Ptolemy ran the line roughly north and south.
Ptolemy, apparently following Marinus, ignored this document, or else never saw it because the shape of his India is unduly broadened and foreshortened. Leaving the habitable world from the Strait at the Pillars of Hercules to the Gulf of Issus, it passed through Caralis in Sardinia and Lilybaeum in Sicily (30A° 12a€™ and 37A° 50a€™ N).
Ptolemy stated that the Nile arose from two streams, the outlets of two lakes a little south of the equator, which was closer to the truth than any previous conception, or any later one until the discovery of the Victoria and Albert Nyanza in modern times. There is nothing in the literature to indicate that any other such systematic collection of maps was ever compiled, with the exception of the maps of Marinus, about which almost nothing is known, save what Ptolemy has mentioned. The listing of place-names, either in geographical or alphabetical order, with the latitude and longitude of each place to guide the search, is not so different from the modern system of letters and numerals employed to help the reader, a little convenience that is standard on modern maps and Ptolemaic in origin.
Four new mapsa€”France, Italy, Spain and Palestinea€”being based on contemporary knowledge. The map of the world is the first to show contemporary discoveries, and the first map to bear the name of its engraver, Johannes Schnitzer de Armssheim. The other 6 mapsa€”northern Europe, Spain, France, Poland, Italy and the Holy Landa€”are based on contemporary knowledge. Includes the Tabula Terra Nova, the first map specifically devoted to the delineation of the New World. 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. During the second century, Alexandria was not only the richest city in the world, with regard to learned institutions and treasures of scholarship, but also the wealthiest commercial place on the earth. This work is actually the first general atlas of the world to have survived, rather than a a€?Geographya€? with a long textual introduction to the subject of cartography. As he proceeds to elaborate his definition of geography, it becomes apparent that Ptolemy conceived that the primary function of geography was a€?mapmakinga€?, and that, to him, geography was synonymous with cartography.
He had, moreover, edited and revised his own geographic maps, of which at least two editions had been published before Ptolemy saw them. Finally, Ptolemy thought, about all one could do was to locate unfamiliar places as accurately as possible with reference to well-known places, in as much as it is advisable on a map of the entire world to assign a definite position to every known place, regardless of how little is known about it. The longitudes would be determined from the meridian of Alexandria, either at sunrise or sunset, calculating the difference in equinoctial hours between Alexandria and point two, whatever it might be. As mentioned earlier, the original text called for twenty-six regional or special maps, which in all extant manuscript copies bear a strong family resemblance and are laid down on the projection apparently used by Marinus in the form of isosceles trapezoids. However, this statement has never been dated and, confusingly, AgathodA¦mona€™s single-sheet world map employs a projection unlike any proposed by Ptolemya€™s text. But, again, when they were constructed - totally and faithfully copied from the originals, or constructed from Ptolemya€™s instructions but without benefit of original models - is significant in trying to determine the degree of similarity to their a€?prototypea€™ and the possibility of additions or corrections based upon more contemporary knowledge.
Different from what is now accepted as the meaning, this word in ancient maps had a purely geographical, not a meteorological significance, although they also perceived that the climate of a region was somewhat related to its distance from the equator.


Similarly he showed the length of the Mediterranean as 62A°, whereas, in reality it is only 42A°.
Geographers of the 15th and 16th centuries relied on it so heavily, while ignoring the new discoveries of maritime explorers, that it actually exerted a powerful retarding influence on the progress of cartography. Instead of continuing it to the Land of the LinA¦ [seacoast of China] he curved it around to the east and south, forming a great bay, Sinus Magnus [roughly the Gulf of Siam].
Carthage is positioned 1A° 20a€™ south of the parallel of Rhodes; actually it is one degree north of it. Corrected and amended by a succession of editors, this version also formed the basis upon which all of the editions of the 15th century are built. The text is a metrical paraphrase by Francesco Berlinghieri, and is the first edition in Italian.
The greatly increased number of a€?modern mapsa€? makes this in effect the first modern atlas. 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.
It was a place where seafaring people and caravans from all parts of the known world would use to congregate, thereby providing the opportunity to collect knowledge of far away lands and seas.
Here for the first time are documented the duties and responsibilities of the mapmaker, his limitations, and the nature of the materials he was to work with.
The final drafts were nearly free from defects and his text, which we know of only through Ptolemy, was so reliable in Ptolemya€™s estimation that a€?it would seem to be enough for us to describe the earth on which we dwell from his commentaries alone, without other investigations.a€? According to Ptolemy, the most significant feature of the maps of Marinus was the growth of the habitable world and the changed attitude toward the uninhabited parts.
When such a conical surface is extended on a plane, a network with circular parallels and rectilinear, converging meridians arise. Unlike Marinus who listed longitude on one page and latitude on another, Ptolemy began the tradition of listing the positional coordinates together and in a usable system that was practical to follow. Some of the other conspicuously modern conventions include the previously noted lack of ornamentation, his method of differentiating land and water, rivers and towns, by means of either hachures or different colors, and his use of a€?standardizeda€™ symbols all of which is accepted at first glance without a thought being given to the origin of the technique. This particular world map is usually found at the end of Book VII, preceded by three chapters containing some practical advice, a general description of all known areas of the world and the three principle seas (the Mediterranean, the Caspian and the Indian Ocean), with their bays and islands, and instructions for drawing a sphere and maps on a plane surface. It is noteworthy here to point out that, regardless of when these existing manuscript reproductions were made, they somehow escaped the pictorial fancies such as sketches of animals, monsters, savages, ships, kings, etc. The eastward extension of Asia is also exaggerated, measuring about 110A° from the coast of Syria to the outermost limits of China, instead of the true distance of about 85A°.
The Geographia was both a keystone and a millstone, a pioneering effort that outlived its usefulness. The northern coast of Germany beyond Denmark, Cimbrica Chersonese, is shown as the margin of the Northern Ocean, and running in a general east-west direction. Continuing it around to the south until it joined Terra Incognita at the southern limit of the habitable world, he made a lake of the Indicum Mare [Indian Ocean]. For the most part, the lands beyond the Ganges were not well known until a thousand years later when the brothers Polo first acquainted western Europe with the existence of a number of large islands in that part of the world. Byzantium is placed in the same latitude as Massilia, which made it more than two degrees north of its true position.
It is also the only edition with maps printed on the original projection with equidistant parallels or meridians. 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.
In spite of such scant personal knowledge, Claudius Ptolemya€™s writings have had a greater influence on cartography, and on geography in general, than that of any other single figure in history. 141), a composition dealing with astronomy and mathematics, more commonly known by its hybrid Greco-Arabic title, the Almagest, in which he lays down the foundation of trigonometry and sets forth his view of the universe. This single treatise remained the standard work on geographical theory throughout the Middle Ages, was not superseded as such with the 16th century, and constitutes one of the fundamental tenants of modern geodesy. Cartography is not an artistic endeavor according to the Greek scholar, but should be concerned with the relation of distance and direction, and with the important features of the eartha€™s surface that can be indicated by plain lines and simple notations (enough to indicate general features and fix positions). Marinus was a good man in Ptolemya€™s estimation but he lacked the critical eye and allowed himself to be led astray in his scientific investigations. Lest the proportions of certain parts of the mapped territory should be too much deformed, only the northern or the southern hemispheres should be laid down on the same map by this projection, which is consequently inconvenient for maps embracing the whole earth. This particular projection shown of the general map of the habitable world, the one believed to be employed by Ptolemy in his original general map, is laid down in the lazy mana€™s projection he talked about, the modified conic instead of the spherical projection that he recommended for a faithful delineation of the eartha€™s surface. Many scholars ascribe these three chapters to AgathodA¦mon, as the descriptive text for his map.
As can be seen from these world maps, Ptolemy divided the northern hemisphere into twenty-one parallels, noted, again, in the margin of this maps.
To judge, therefore, from the map, Ptolemy discarded both the older Greek belief that the earth was surrounded by water, and Herodotusa€™ description of the Phoeniciana€™s circumnavigation of Africa.
And there were no good maps of the East Indian Archipelago until after the Portuguese voyages to the Indies. This particular error threw the whole Euxine Pontus [Black Sea], whose general form and dimensions were fairly well known, too far north by the same amount, over 100 miles.
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. As with a search engine, you'll usually be given the person's name, street address and a link to a map for driving directions. Here he explains his belief that the earth is a stationary sphere, at the center of the universe, which revolves about it daily. According to Ptolemy, even Marinus had made mistakes, either because he had consulted a€?too many conflicting volumes, all disagreeing,a€? or because he had never completed the final revision of his map.
However, Ptolemy rigorously applies the conical projection only to the northern part of his map of the world.
The parallel bounding the southern limit of the habitable world is equidistant from the equator in a southerly direction as the parallel through Meroe is distant in a northerly direction.
Yet this Ptolemaic theory was later mysteriously a€?re-interpreteda€? by Martin WaldseemA?ller in 1507 (see monograph #310 in Book IV) and again by Gerard Mercator in 1569 as a belief by Ptolemy in an all encircling great ocean.
Yet this Ptolemaic theory was later mysteriously a€?re-interpreteda€? by Martin WaldseemA?ller in 1507 (see monograph #310) and again by Gerard Mercator in 1569 as a belief by Ptolemy in an all encircling great ocean. 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. While his proofs of the sphericity of the earth are still accepted today as valid, Ptolemy rejected the theory of the rotation of the earth about its axis as being absurd. To represent the known parts of the southern hemisphere on the same sheet, he describes an arc of a circle parallel to the equator, and at the same distance to the south of it, as Meroe [MA¦roe] is to the north, and then divides this arc in parts of the same number and size, as on the Parallel of Meroe. That paradox notwithstanding, though, Ptolemya€™s depiction of a southern Afro-Asian continent and a land-locked Indian Ocean provided little comfort during the intervening 1,300 years to those early explorers, and later the Portuguese, in their attempts to find an all water route to India. 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. These usually are paid functions that can provide unlisted and cell phone numbers for the person, as well as other personal information. However, Marinusa€™ treatise on geography, with its maps, should still be ranked among the most important of the lost documents of the ancients, if for no other reason than that it was the foundation upon which Claudius Ptolemy built.
The network is then obtained by joining the intersections to corresponding points on the equator. The twenty-one parallels are spaced at equal lineal intervals and each one is designated by (1) the number of equinoctial hours and fractional hours of daylight on the longest day of the year and (2) the number of degrees and minutes of arc north of the equator. 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. If you want these services, you can pay for each search individually or pay an annual fee for unlimited number lookups.
For example, the first parallel of latitude north of the equator was distant from it a€?the fourth part of an houra€? and a€?distant from it geometrically about 4A°15a€™a€?. 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. One other parallel is added south of the equator, identified with the Rhaptum promontory and Cattigara and about 8A° 25a€™ distant from a€?The Linea€?.
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.
All of the parallels north of the equator are located theoretically with the exception of three: Meroe, Syene and Rhodes.
The same year Agrippa was given charge of all the eastern parts of the Empire, with headquarters at Mitylene. The first one, Clima I per Meroe, (so called because it passes through Meroe, near modern Shendi, a city of Africa at 17A° N latitude) was established traditionally as 1,000 miles below Alexandria and 300 miles from the torrid zone; it was also known as the royal seat and principal metropolis of Ethiopia [Africa]. Dear Friend , on sacred Pilgrimage we visit 14 countries and holy sites, chanting the karma avoiding mantra. The creek was rising and the fish were a bit sluggish, but I was able to tempt a few wild browns to hit my Yozuri stick bait. In INDIA we meditate at Bodhgaya Mahabodhi temple & Bodhi tree, sacred space of Buddha´s Enlightenment. At sacred lake Tso Pema we pray to the Lotus-born Padmasambhava & to female Buddha Mandarava. I don't question why, but I will say that the Berkley Trout Worm in a PINK or ORANGE color will usually get you a few bites. In SRI LANKA we pay homage to Sri Pada at Adam´s Peak, to Kandy Tooth temple, to Mihintale stupa and other temples.
With that being said, I have created my own Pink Worm that has enabled me to land many trout, both wild and stocked. So, I am sorry for that.A Now, when the power is out for 7 days and the clean-up effort at your house is over, you need a few hours to unwind. A few local streams were scheduled to be stocked with trout-- Manatawny Creek, Hay Creek and Tulpehocken Creek. I should be in very good company this year with my best friend Mark and a college buddy named Mark joining in the fun.
I managed a few smallmouths and had a nice brown follow my 3-inch stickbait for about 15 yards. It was pretty cool, the water was clear and you could see the fish slash and slash at the stickbait. Can't wait to fish all the local streams, as they all will have a new look and feel to them. I have no idea what Erie will look come late October, early November, but I am hoping they get some serious rain up there. All in all we landed 8 species of fish: Largemouth Bass, Smallmouth Bass, Rock Bass, Redbreast Sunfish, Bluegill, Green Sunfish, Fallfish and a Crappie. She looks at me with a absolutely no freakn way look and goes, so daddy, How much money do I have to pay you. There is no better way to cool down in the summer heat than wet wading and catching some fish. Smallies, Largemouth Bass, Redbreast Sunfish, Bluegill and a White Perch were the fish I brought to hand. The temps during the day were brutal and the skeeters made me pay for attempting to fish Cherry Run. I only fished where some cool tributary water emptied into Penns.Saturday was tricky with a few bugs in the air. Sunday evening was reverse fashion -- Isos then BWOs.I got a half-decent picture of a Iso stuck in the shuck.
The fish took a CDC Sulphur pattern -- it was DARK, no light at all when the fish took the fly. I stayed off Penns during the heat of the day-- it was 90 degrees in the afternoon on both days.
I made an attempt to fish Cherry Run and landed 2 brookies in short order on my Moth pattern. The sportsman then proceeds to tell me that he is going to cross the creek and kick my BLEEPITY BLEEP. Spoke to the gentleman again, with Ronnie explaining that the area is posted and the signs are on the road.
They are easy to see too, especially when the wings are made of CDC.A I won't be out fishing again any time soon.
If you want to wet a line--give me a shout and I'll do my best to put you on some fish.A Trout fishing locally will cease with water temps hovering around 70 degrees. Big Spring Creek, Letort, Yellow Breeches, Big Fishing Creek or Spring Creek are some of the streams that are fishable in the summer. We can also hike along some cool mountain creeks in search of native brook trout or wild brown trout.
Vinny caught a Smallmouth Bass on a worm and Zoe landed a nice-sized Brown Trout on a crayfish lure. I'll probably be fishing with a friend on Sunday evening or taking the rugrats to drown some worms!!! A Sunday, I was able to fish a local Class A water and noticed many Blue-Winged Olive spinners. I managed one fish landed, one fish missed and one fish lost before I had to run to the truck. Best trick tonight was to cast down and across and inch an emerger back to the shore, pausing it at spots were a fish just rose. I made my cast---the fish slid out from under the brush---he sat in a lane with his mouth open waiting for my fly---with ease, he swallowed the fly. No wild trout today, but the Rainbows were very colored up with beautiful pink fins and the Browns looked like they have been living in the stream for years.
Thursday was brutal where I saw creeks that were in perfect shape one minute, turn into Willy Wonka within' two hours. I volunteered a few hours Sunday morning with the A Great Day Outdoors fellas, Roger and Bob who help put together the Bob and Jeff Miller Trout Fishing Clinic, which is a mentoring program for the Big Brothers and Big Sisters.The fish were provided by Mike's Tattoo and Body Piercing that is located in Reading, PA. I helped a few kids land some trout and was able to see many folks that I have not seen in a few years.
We had a great time and found some really neat critters and managed to catch a fish or two. We caught a good number of wild brown trout and missed many more.The slower pools had fish sipping in Little Yellow Stoneflies. Plenty of yardwork to make the little woman happy, drive happy little woman to her mother's house and call your best friend to go fish a stream you have not fished in about 15 years. Saw a huge Barred Owl fly up the stream and hang out in a tree for a little bit before he flew elsewhere. He launched them up out of the water and onto the dirt bank like the bass fisherman do on tv. After I saw him boot his 4th fish in about 20 minutes, he goes: That's what I came here for. Two-- a stickbait--a Yozuri Pin's Minnow is my favorite-- is also tough to beat during cold, high and dirty water conditions.
Three -- My favoritefor fly fishing is a 2 fly rig that consists of a bigger and brighter glowbug with a Green Weenie dropped off of it. If there are rainbows around, they will hammer a nicely presented egg pattern pretty much any time of the year.
Local Class A waters are running at agood rate and are still on the cold side.Trout season opens next weekend for SE PA waters. Headed to the Little Lehigh and when I got there the lot was full and anglers were top to bottom. Fished the quarry hole and managed toland a few bluegill and a good number of smaller Largemouth Bass. Most ofthe bass were taken on smaller ice spoons tipped with waxies.With the heatwave we are in, not sure how much longer the ice will be around.
Drilling through the ice with my Nils 8 inch ice auger was too much for my shoulders.Hey, I have an 8 inch Nils Ice Auger for sale !!! The PFBC was on the ice and it was the first time in over 10 years that I had my license checked. We started the day using tungsten jigs, then switched to shrimpos and did some sight fishing. I don't question why, but I will say that the Berkley Trout Worm in a PINK or ORANGE color will usually get you a few bites.
Can't wait to fish all the local streams, as they all will have a new look and feel to them.



Dual voltage dc to dc converter
Cancer horoscope 6 march 2014
Horoscope for today my birthday status


Comments

Seytan_66604.04.2014 at 18:17:59
And have an innate understanding of structure, design and this time i'm a successful business the.

IlkinGunesch04.04.2014 at 16:12:34
Monetary and financial points, and permit the angels this number is believed to be extraordinarily favorable quantity is compatible.

kursant00704.04.2014 at 10:40:23
Calculate the Astrology, Numerology and Birth fairly a number of years the 9, 6, 6, the rather bold.

QaraBasma04.04.2014 at 11:32:30
Systemic danger in worldwide markets some numerologists would even.

anceli04.04.2014 at 18:56:37
Great benefit to everyone around the Chaldean or Pythagorean the.