Practical christian dating advice,microsoft publisher hack free zp gp,dating website statistics australia,how to make things out of duct tape instructions - Plans On 2016

Published 14.10.2014 | Author : admin | Category : What A Man Wants From A Woman

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. 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 Cotton Tiberius is the richly illuminated 11th century manuscript in the Cotton collection of the British Library and contains one of the oldest and most excellent world maps.
In its presentation of the world as a whole, this map adopts a roughly square form measuring 21x17 cm, and in this one respect it recalls some of the less desirable aspects of examples of the Beatus Ashburnham derivative Book IIA, #207). The marvels promised by the inscription above the poem are represented on the map by the Cinocephales (dog-heads), the gens Griphorum (a conflation of griffins and people), Gog and Magog, the burning mountain and the mountain of gold, the last two located in remote corners of Asia. In geographical content, it does follow the medieval European convention of orientation with East at the top and somewhat centered on Jerusalem. Of purely inland geography, unconnected with the coast, there is not much in the European region of this map: the Huns, Dalmatia, Dardania, Histria, and Tracia, all circling around Pannonia. However, this is apparently the first map to add to the knowledge of Ptolemy with regards to northwestern Europe.
Greece the name Macedonia seems to be written over Morea; Athens and Attica are widely separated.
It is sometimes claimed that the association of Armenia with Mount Ararat and Noaha€™s Ark appeared on maps only after the First Crusade. In the map mountains are shown green; red is used for the Persian Gulf and the Red Sea, as well as the Nile and some other rivers. This is one of the few medieval maps that shows divisions of provinces and countries, indicated by straight lines, though the general T-O shape is still preserved by the dominant body of the Mediterranean, here filled with a multitude of islands, complemented by the Nilus in Africa and Tanais [Don] at the center left of the map, with its source in the green mountain.
In Asia there is much more inland geography, chiefly connected with the Twelve Tribes and Biblical history. A lost Roman province map may have been the source of the divisions so clearly marked in Asia Minor, in Central and Southeastern Europe, and in North Africa. There are several names and features which show striking independence of any other known map authority of the earlier Middle Ages.
The comparative excellence of the Cottoniana is perhaps due to its being the production of an Irish scholar-monk living in the household of the learned and traveled Archbishop Sigeric of Canterbury (992-994), with whose Itinerary, from Rome to the English Channel, the present design has several curious resemblances.
Considering the 11th century Anglo-Saxon mappamundi, the oldest such English map surviving, as a form of a virtual world more analogous to a digital environment than physical geography can reveal much about this famous mapa€™s cultural mechanics and meaning.
In past discussions, the cultures of medieval worlds such as Anglo-Saxon England have been understood to lack the veneer of ideological unity that comes with later examples of more modern and overtly ratiocinated expressions of national identity. The Cotton Map certainly appears to fulfill Gellnera€™s formula: it contains, on the whole, a rather fractured and jumbled version of the known world, crossed by lines and marked by inscriptions drawn from a skein of classical, Christian, legendary and local traditions of cartography, and, on the face of it, refuses a€?a single continuous, logical spacea€™. However, the Cottoniana map also encodes a certain cultural unease with this represented and sacral order, a discomfort revealed by how the mapa€™s virtual nature allows what is edge and what is center to fluctuate over its surface, and how this fluctuation articulates an Anglo-Saxon challenge to its homelanda€™s traditional place in the geographical order of the world. In addition, Melaa€™s use of finibus for a€?landa€™ may also contain a further joke at the expense of Britaina€™s remoteness; finis commonly carries connotations of limits, ends or borders. Three hundred years later, the Roman historian Solinus repeats this sentiment, noting that for all practical purposes, the coastline of Gaul stood as the edge of the known world, while Britain represented a land beyond the periphery a€“ paene orbis alterius [a€?almost an other worlda€™]. As Nicholas Howe has recently argued, native writersa€™ positioning Brittania in the north-west demonstrates the historical influence of the Roman vantage point, but, in the shift from imperial Rome to medieval Rome, this distantiated perspective assumes Christian as well as geographical significance. The Cotton Map makes a sure statement of the Anglo-Saxon geo-historical paradox: a major part of Anglo-Saxon identity is particularly rooted in Christian authority, whether shaped by fears of pagan conquest or a desire to prove ethnic superiority by converting others, but this ideology historically has in turn viewed England, literally, as the edge of nowhere. From a literary, if not literal standpoint, then, the Cottoniana map remains centered on its inheritance of Roman geography.
Again, one of the most striking features of the Cottoniana map is that, unlike most other mappaemundi, its shape is rectangular rather than round. Fitting the world to the world of the page also allows the mapmaker more space in the lower left-hand corner to depict a€?the angle of Englanda€™; as Howe has demonstrated, the doubled meaning of a€?anglea€™ and a€?Anglea€™ was not unknown in contemporary descriptions of Anglo-Saxon England. Not surprisingly, the British Isles are rather well represented in the map a€“ the one cartographic detail that has occasioned critical comment in the past. Less discussed, however, is the mapa€™s use of water to relate England to the rest of the world.
Since the center of the Cottoniana mapa€™s world presents the general impression of empty space, rather than of a loci medii, the center of Europe likewise appears largely vacant, prompting Patrick McGurk to hazard that the confused jumble of regions and tribes thrown into Central Europe represents the attempt to break up a€?the largest blank area in the mapa€™. In classical and early medieval definitions of Britannia, the territory was long defined as a cosmographic and cultural a€?othera€? to continental lands.
What remains most startling about the mapa€™s treatment of Europe, though, is the sole inscription allowed to border England, sudbryttas, presumably meant to represent Brittany.
Rejecting classical Otherness, the map denies the geography of the pre- and early Anglo-Saxon literary history that was invested with what Homi Bhabha has termed a€?colonial mimicrya€™ a€“ the desire of the colonized to present itself as a€?a reformed, recognizable othera€™. The Scandinavian elements of the Cottoniana map are not surprising, of course, given the sustained presence and development of Anglo-Scandinavian culture in the second half of Anglo-Saxon Englanda€™s history. Such classical revisionism is an arguable reading, of course, but like the Cottoniana map, the interpolations in the Old English Orosius also present a cultural perspective that centers Anglo-Saxon England, and offers up other regions to be marginalized in its place.
In addition, though these pagan insertions do qualify the original intent of Orosius, Stephen Harris has argued that other Old English alterations to Orosiusa€™ history do not refute Christianity, but rather present a€?a sense of Germanic community [that] shapes the Latin into an Old English story of the origins of Christendoma€™. The Old English Orosius, in effect, de-centers Rome from a distinctly Roman history of the world.
In the 11th century a€?real timea€™ of the Cottoniana map, the imperial glory of Rome is no more real than that of Babylon. The Cottoniana map has not been dated more surely than the first half of the 11th century, and possibly may be even slightly later; see McGurk and Dumville, pp. The 'Anglo-Saxon world map' contains the earliest known, relatively realistic depiction of the British Isles.
Foys, M., a€?The Virtual Reality of the Anglo-Saxon Mappamundia€?, Literature Compass 1, 2003.
In geographical content, it does follow the medieval European convention of orientation with East at the top and somewhat centered on Jerusalem.A  The bulbous projection of land on the coast, north of Jerusalem, is perhaps meant for Carmel.
DESCRIPTION: This is the largest map of its kind to have survived in tact and in good condition from such an early period of cartography. These place names are in Lincolnshire (Holdingham and Sleaford are the modern forms), and this Richard has been identified as one Richard de Bello, prebend of Lafford in Lincoln Cathedral about the year 1283, who later became an official of the Bishop of Hereford, and in 1305 was appointed prebend of Norton in Hereford Cathedral. While the map was compiled in England, names and descriptions were written in Latin, with the Norman dialect of old French used for special entries. Here, my dear Son, my bosom is whence you took flesh Here are my breasts from which you sought a Virgina€™s milk. The other three figures consist of a woman placing a crown on the Virgin Mary and two angels on their knees in supplication. Still within this decorative border, in the left-hand bottom corner, the Roman Emperor Caesar Augustus is enthroned and crowned with a papal triple tiara and delivers a mandate with his seal attached, to three named commissioners. In the right-hand bottom corner an unidentified rider parades with a following forester holding a pair of greyhounds on a leash.
The geographical form and content of the Hereford map is derived from the writings of Pliny, Solinus, Augustine, Strabo, Jerome, the Antonine Itinerary, St. As is traditional with the T-O design, there is the tripartite division of the known world into three continents: Europe, Asia, and Africa. EUROPE: When we turn to this area of the Hereford map we would expect to find some evidence of more contemporary 13th century knowledge and geographic accuracy than was seen in Africa or Asia, and, to some limited extent, this theory is true. France, with the bordering regions of Holland and Belgium is called Gallia, and includes all of the land between the Rhine and the Pyrenees.
Norway and Sweden are shown as a peninsula, divided by an arm of the sea, though their size and position are misrepresented. On the other side of Europe, Iceland, the Faeroes, and Ultima Tile are shown grouped together north of Norway, perhaps because the restricting circular limits of the map did not permit them to be shown at a more correct distance.
The British Isles are drawn on a larger scale than the neighboring parts of the continent, and this representation is of special interest on account of its early date.
On the Hereford map, the areas retain their Latin names, Britannia insula and Hibernia, Scotia, Wallia, and Cornubia, and are neatly divided, usually by rivers, into compartments, North and South Ireland, Wales, Cornwall, England, and Scotland.
THE MEDITERRANEAN: The Mediterranean, conveniently separating the three continents of Asia, Africa and Europe, teems with islands associated with legends of Greece and Rome. Mythical fire-breathing creature with wings, scales and claws; malevolent in west, benevolent in east. 4.A A  For bibliographical information on these and other (including lost) cartographical exemplars, see Westrem, The Hereford Map, p. 10.A A  For bibliographical information for editions and translations of the source texts, see Westrem, The Hereford Map, p. 11.A A  More detailed analysis of these data can be found in my a€?Lessons from Legends on the Hereford Mappa Mundi,a€? Hereford Mappa Mundi Conference proceedings volume being edited by Barber and Harvey (see n. 16.A A  Danubius oritur ab orientali parte Reni fluminis sub quadam ecclesia, et progressus ad orientem, . 23.A A  The a€?standarda€? Latin forms of these place-names and the modern English equivalents are those recorded in the Barrington Atlas of the Greek and Roman World, ed. From the time when it was first mentioned as being in Hereford Cathedral in 1682, until a relatively short time ago, the Hereford Mappamundi was almost entirely the preserve of antiquaries, clergymen with an interest in the middle ages and some historians of cartography. FROM THE TIME when it was first mentioned as being in Hereford Cathedral in 1682, until a relatively short time ago, the Hereford Mappamundi was almost entirely the preserve of antiquaries, clergymen with an interest in the middle ages and some historians of cartography.
Details from the Hereford map of the Blemyae and the Psilli.a€? Typical of the strange creatures or 'Wonders of the East' derived by Richard of Haldingham from classical sources and placed in Ethiopia.
Equally important work was also being done on medieval and Renaissance world maps as a genre, particularly by medievalists such as Anna-Dorothee von den Brincken and Jorg-Geerd Arentzen in Germany and by Juergen Schulz, primarily an art historian, and David Woodward, a leading historian of cartography, in the United States. The Hereford World Map is the only complete surviving English example of a type of map which was primarily a visualization of all branches of knowledge in a Christian framework and only secondly a geographical object. After the fall of the Roman empire in the 5th century, monks and scholars struggled desperately to preserve from destruction by pagan barbarians the flotsam and jetsam of classical history and learning; to consolidate them and to reconcile them with Christian teaching and biblical history.
There would have been several models to choose from, corresponding to the widely differing cartographic traditions inside the Roman Empire, but it seems that the commonest image descended from a large map of the known world that was created for a portico lining the Via Flaminia near the Capitol in Rome during Christ's lifetime. Recent writers such as Arentzen have suggested that, simply because of their sheer availability, from an early date different versions of this map may have been used to illustrate texts by scholars such as St.
Eventually some of the information from the texts became incorporated into the maps themselves, though only sparingly at first. A broad similarity in coastlines with the Hereford map is clear in the Anglo-Saxon [Cottonian] World Map, c.1000 (#210), but there are no illustrations of animals other than the lion (top left).
The resulting maps ranged widely in shape and appearance, some being circular, others square. A few maps of the inhabited world were much more detailed, though keeping to the same broad structure and symbolism. Most of these earlier maps were book illustrations, none were particularly big and the maps were always considered to need textual amplification. From about 1100, however, we know from contemporary descriptions in chronicles and from the few surviving inventories that larger world maps were produced on parchment, cloth and as wall paintings for the adornment of audience chambers in palaces and castles as well as, probably, of altars in the side chapels of religious buildings.
A separate written text of an encyclopedic nature, probably written by the map's intellectual creator, however, was still intended to accompany many if not all these large maps and one may originally have accompanied the Hereford world map. These maps seem largely to have been inspired by English scholars working at home or in Europe. The most striking novelty, however, was the vastly increased number of depictions of peoples, animals, and plants of the world copied from illustrations in contemporary handbooks on wildlife, commonly called bestiaries and herbals. Mentions in contemporary records and chronicles, such as those of Matthew Paris, make it plain that these large world maps were once relatively common. At about the same time that this map was being created, Henry III, perhaps after consultation with Gervase, who had visited him in 1229, commissioned wall maps to hang in the audience chambers of his palaces in Winchester and Westminster. The Hereford Mappamundi is the only full size survivor of these magnificent, encyclopedic English-inspired maps. An inscription in Norman-French at the bottom left attributes the map to Richard of Haldingham and Sleaford. DESCRIPTION: This highly controversial map has only recently been uncovered (1957) and therefore has only a short history of scholarly analysis. THE MANUSCRIPT: First brought to the publica€™s attention in 1957 by an Italian bookseller, Enzo Ferrajoli from Barcelona, the document now known as the Vinland map was discovered bound in a thin manuscript text entitled Historia Tartarorum (now commonly referred to as the Tartar Relation). The Tartar Relation, in essence, is a shortened version of the more well-known text entitled Ystoria Mongolorum, which relates the mission of Friar John de Plano Carpini, sent by Pope Innocent IV to a€?the King and People of the Tartarsa€™, which left Lyons in April 1245 and which was away for 30 months. The fate of the Speculum Historiale was very different, for Vincenta€™s work became a standard reference book on the shelves of monastic libraries and was constantly multiplied during the next two centuries in manuscript form. According to these same scholars, the Tartar Relation text does have some significance in its own right as an independent primary source for information on Mongol history and legend not to be found in any other Western source.
That the map and the manuscript were juxtaposed within their binding from a very early date cannot be doubted. The association of the map with the texts is reinforced by paleographical examination, which has enabled the hands of the map, of its endorsement, and of the texts to be confidently attributed to one and the same scribe. The map depicts, in outline, the three parts of the medieval world: Europe, Africa, and Asia surrounded by ocean, with islands and island-groups in the east and west.
In the design of the Old World the map belongs to that class of circular or elliptical world maps in which, during the 14th and 15th centuries, new data were introduced into the traditional mappaemundi of Christian cosmology. Written in Latin on the face of the map are sixty-two geographical names and seven longer legends. Before proceeding to analyze the geographical delineations of the map in detail, we may briefly survey the antecedent materials, cartographic and textual, to which comparative study of it must refer. As noted above, the representation of Europe, Africa, and Asia in the map plainly derives from a circular or oval prototype.
Variations of this basic pattern were introduced to admit new geographical information, ideas, or new cartographic concepts.
The circular form of the medieval world map, in the hands of some 14th and 15th century cartographers, is superseded by an oval or ovoid; and even in the 14th century rectangular world maps begin to appear, mainly under the influence of nautical cartography. Most of these variations in the form and design of world maps were adapted from the practice of nautical charts and, in the 15th century, of the Ptolemaic maps. If the Vinland map was drawn in the second quarter of the 15th century, and perhaps early in the last decade of that quarter, it would take its place after that of Andrea Bianco and would be contemporary with the output of Leardo, whose three maps are dated 1442, 1448, and 1452 or 1453. As previously noted, the outlines of the three continents form an ellipse or oval, the proportions between the longer horizontal axis and the vertical axis being about 2:1.
It is not necessary to assume that the prototype followed by the cartographer was also oval in form.
If the model for the Vinland map corresponded generally in form and content to Andrea Biancoa€™s world map, then the variations introduced by its author are not less significant than the general concordance. Comparison of the geographical outlines of the Vinland map with those of Bianco suggests that its author, while generally following his model, was inclined to exaggerate prominent features, such as capes or peninsulas, and to elaborate, by fanciful a€?squigglesa€?, the drawing of a stretch of featureless coast. EUROPE: With the reservations made in the preceding paragraph, the cartographera€™s representation of the regions embraced by the a€?normala€? portolan chart of the 15th century, the Mediterranean and Black Seas, Western Europe, and the Baltic, closely resembles that of Bianco in his world map, which reflects his own practice in chart making. Scandinavia, as in all maps before the second quarter of the 16th century, lies east-west in both maps; but there is a conspicuous divergence in their treatment of its western end, which both cartographers extend into roughly the longitude of Ireland. In its delineation of the British Isles, the Vinland map again diverges from that in Biancoa€™s world map. These differences seem too great to fall within the limits of the license in copying which the author of the Vinland map evidently allowed himself in those parts of his design which agree basically with Biancoa€™s rendering and may derive from a common prototype. In the Vinland map, Europe is devoid of rivers, save for a very muddled representation of the hydrography of Eastern Europe.
The twelve names on the mainland of Europe are, with two exceptions, those of countries or states. AFRICA: The general shape and proportions of Africa, extending across the lower half of the Vinland map, also correspond to a type followed, with variation, in most circular world maps of the 14th and 15th centuries, and deriving ultimately from much earlier medieval and classical models. Alike in the general form of Africa (with one major variation) and in the detailed outlines of the continent, the Vinland map agrees with Biancoa€™s circular map of 1436 (which itself has, in this part, close affinities with the design of Petrus Vesconte). The hydrographic pattern of the African rivers in the Vinland map is a somewhat simplified version of that drawn by Bianco, with the Nile (unnamed) flowing northward from sources in southern Africa to its mouth on the Mediterranean and forking, a little below its springs, to flow westward to two mouths on the Atlantic; the western branch is named magnus [fluuius]. The African nomenclature of the Vinland map, some fourteen names, is conventional, over half the forms corresponding to those of Bianco.
Africa is the continent in which we have noted some striking links between the Vinland map and Biancoa€™s world map of 1436. The great advance in the knowledge which, from the second half of the 13th century, reached southern Europe about the interior of West Africa and the Sudan was reflected in many maps, from the information collected by merchants on the Saharan trade routes and in the markets of Northwest Africa. ASIA: If we are justified in supposing the cartographera€™s prototype to have been circular, he, or the author of the immediate original copied by him, has adapted the shape of Asia, as of Africa, to the oval framework by vertical compression rather than lateral extension. It is in the outline of East Asia that the maker of the Vinland map introduces his most radical change in the representation of the tripartite world which we find in other surviving mappaemundi and particularly (in view of the affinities noted elsewhere) in that of Andrea Bianco. This version of East Asian geography is found in no other extant map, and its relationship to the prototype followed for the rest of the Old World is best seen by comparison with Biancoa€™s delineation, which itself descends from an ancient tradition.
It is a striking fact, and one which perhaps does credit to his realism, that, in order to admit into his drawing of the Far East a representation derived from a new source under his hand, he has gone so far as to jettison the Earthly Paradise from the design.
The concentration of interest on the Greenland sector has led to the comparative neglect of the Asian section, which has topographical features at least as unusual. The remaining islands of Asia are drawn in the Vinland map very much as by Bianco, with some simplification and generalization, and may be taken to have been in the prototype.
Within the restricted space allowed by his revision of the river-pattern and of the coastal outlines, the author of the Vinland map has grouped the majority of his names in two belts from north to south, on either side of the river which runs from the Caspian to the ocean. For Asia the compiler of the Vinland map shows the same conservatism in his use of sources as for Africa; and, apart from the modifications introduced from his reading of the Tartar Relation, this part of the map could very well have been drawn over a century earlier. To the north of the British Isles, the Vinland map marks two islands, presumably representing either the Orkneys and Shetlands or these two groups and the Faeroes. To the west of Ireland the Vinland map has an isolated island, also in Bianco; and to the southwest of England another, drawn by Bianco as a crescent. Further out, and extending north-south from about the latitude of Brittany to about that of Cape Juby, Biancoa€™s world map shows a chain of about a dozen small islands, drawn in conventional portolan style. Further south, the Vinland map lays down the Canaries as seven islands lying off Cape Bojador, with the name Beate lsule fortune. ICELAND, GREENLAND, VINLAND: In the extreme northwest and west of the map are laid down three great islands, named respectively isolanda Ibernica, Gronelada, and Vinlandia Insula a Byarno re et leipho socijis, with a long legend on Bishop Eirik Gnupssona€™s Vinland voyage above the last two. The three islands are drawn in outline, in the same style as the coasts in the rest of the map; and there can be no doubt that the whole map, including this part of it, was drawn at the same time and by a single hand.
The land depicted to the west of Greenland in the northwest Atlantic has the following legend (in translation): Island of Vinland discovered by Bjarni and Lief in company. The question a€?what kind of map is this?a€? the answer must be: a very simple map, simple both in intention and in execution. In finding cartographic expression for the geography of his texts, the maker of the map has practiced considerable economy of means. Examination of the nomenclature has suggested that the Vinland map, in the form in which it has survived, is the product of a stage of compilation (the work of the author or cartographer) and a subsequent stage of copying or transcription (the work of a scribe who was perhaps not a cartographer). The process of simplification described above was presumably carried out in the compilation stage. These considerations must govern our judgment of the date and place of origin to be ascribed to the map. The Map was interesting to historians as apparent evidence that Norse voyages of the 11th and 12th centuries were known in the Upper Rhineland in the mid-15th century, and consequently that some continuity of knowledge existed between the early discovery of what we know as America and the rediscovery of western lands in the later 15th century. As a world map the Vinland map does not fit into the framework of medieval cartography as conceived in Western Europe. SOURCES: Analysis of the nomenclature and of its affinities with other maps or texts suggests some general remarks about the Vinland map and about its mode of compilation. In those parts of the map in which (as noted above) the influence of O1 predominates, there are very few names which cannot be traced to it or to the common stock of toponymy found in contemporary cartography (and therefore perhaps in O1).
On this assumption, some other names (if they were not in O1) and all the legends (which can hardly have been in O1) must be attributed to the compiler of the map, i.e. Whether the novelties in the nomenclature of the Atlantic island groups were in O1 or were introduced by the compiler of O2 cannot be determined; the affinities between their delineation in the Vinland map and in surviving charts suggest that the names also may have been found by the compiler in maps which have not survived. At each stage of derivation, from O1 to O2, and (less probably) from O2 to the Vinland map in its present form, there must have been a process of selection or thinning out of names. The representation of the Atlantic, with Iceland, Greenland, and Vinland, was almost certainly not in the prototype used for the tripartite world, but was added to it by the cartographer from another source or other sources. The world picture of the 14th century, which was taken over into the mappaemundi of the next century, including the prototype used in the Vinland map, owed its general form and plan to geographical concepts of classical origin, confirmed and modified by the authority of the Christian Fathers. On this pattern were to be grafted geographical facts derived from experience and unknown to the creators of the model. 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. 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!
Called the Cottoniana or Anglo-Saxon map, it dates from 995-1050, just before the Norman Conquest, and does not appear to belong to any one of the identifiable a€?familiesa€? of medieval maps, as described by M.C. However, though of small size, it is one of the most unique of all medieval world-pictures.
At the top left, behind the Lion we see the Taurus Montes, where the Tigris and Euphrates have their sources.
One reads Mons Albanorum [Albanian Mountains, possibly the Caucasus] and the other is regio Colchorum, the region of Colchis, located northeast of the Black Sea. As not merely a measurement, but as a creation of the world known to Anglo-Saxon England, this mappamundi charts a number of struggles between the two realities of Englanda€™s marginal locus in the historical record of the known physical world, and of the Anglo-Saxon impulse to re-center the world on their own island.
Ernest Gellner, for instance, uses explicitly spatial figures to describe such conflicting realities; for Gellner, a€?pre-modern and pre-rationala€™ visions of the world lack a€?a single continuous logical spacea€™, and instead consist of a€?multiple, not properly united, but hierarchically related sub-worldsa€™, and a€?special privileged facts, sacralized and exempt from ordinary treatmenta€™.
Anglo-Saxon writers inherited a long historical tradition of Britaina€™s peripheral status as a remote corner of the world.
The people of Britain, therefore, were rich only in livestock and their own place on the margins. Such views continue through early medieval writers such as Isidore, and early native writers remained substantially invested in such views of their home.
In Gildas, one finds a striking example of spiritual calibration, as the historian initially refers to the island as divina statera [in the divine scales] and then describes the conversion of Brittania as the suna€™s warming of glaciali frigore rigenti insulae et velut longiore terrarum secessu soli visibili non proximae [an island frozen with lifeless ice and quite remote from the visible sun a€“ recessed from the world].
At least on the surface, English cosmography does not, in the words of one commentator, a€?develop strategies for recuperating auctoritasa€™ until well into the 13th century. However, it is not uncommon for critics to assume that, as a mappamundi, the map also theo-graphically depicts Jerusalem as its physical center. Church writers long agreed that the earth was spherical, but also had a tough job reconciling the circular form of the earth and the scriptural concept of the worlda€™s four corners.
Cornering the world, though, also adds space that the Anglo-Saxon artist did not know quite how to accommodate. The coastline and shape of the islands are pretty particular for the time; they contain icons of three named cities (London, Winchester and Armagh), and a number of delineated regions, including named regions for Ireland (Hibernia) and Scotland (Camri). In keeping with classical convention, the map circumscribes the earth with a grey wash of ocean that in effect presents a third frame inside the double-lined border and then the manuscript page.
In Europe, notably, major cities appear only on its periphery: Constantinople in the east, and Rome and a number of other Italian cities in the south. In his Etymologies, Isidore of Seville, in language closely matching Orosius, explains that Britain is an island within sight of Spain, but literally opposite Gaul: Brittania Oceani insula .
The very form of the inscription reveals much about the Anglo-Saxon attitudes behind it; sudbryttas contains a unique use of the Anglo-Saxon a€?A?a€?, one of the only distinctively Old English characters in the text of the map. Instead, the version of the Anglo-Saxon world celebrates the origin of Anglo-Saxon culture, and in turn highlights northern, not southern continental connections. Accordingly, these elements compare to substantially older examples of Anglo-Saxon literature. Harrisa€™ chief example of this reshaping, namely how the Old English version substantively alters the Goth sacking of Rome, holds particular interest with regard to the discussion of the Cottoniana map. In a similar manner, the Cottoniana map shifts the focus away from two traditional centers of the spiritual and geographic worlds on whose margins Anglo-Saxon England existed. As a virtual world, its temporal aspects are no more rooted in the primary world than are its spatial aspects. It was created, probably at Canterbury, between 1025 and 1050 but is probably ultimately based on a model dating from Roman times. Nevertheless the British Isles (bottom left) are immediately recognizable and the Orkneys, the Scillies, the Channel Islands and the isles of Man and of Wight are shown.
Edson, a€?The oldest world maps: classical sources of three VIIIth century mappaemundia€?, The Ancient World, 24, 1993, pp. The circle of the world is set in a somewhat rectangular frame background with a pointed top, and an ornamented border of a zig-zag pattern often found in psalter-maps of the period (#223). Show pity, as you said you would, on all Who their devotion paid to me for you made me Savioress.
Olympus and such cities as Athens and Corinth; the Delphic oracle, misnamed Delos, is represented by a hideous head. James (Roxburghe Club) 1929, with representations from manuscripts in the British Library and the Bodleian Library, and a€?Marvels of the Easta€?, by R. The upper-left corner of the Hereford Map, showing north and east Asia (compare to the contents on Chart 3). 1), however, call attention to a remarkable degree of accuracy in the relationship of toponymsa€”for cities, rivers, and mountainsa€”both in EMM and in Hereford Map legends.A  On the Asia Minor littoral, for example, one passage in EMM links 39 place-names in a running series, 23 of which are found in Chart 4 (and visible, in almost exactly parallel order, on Fig. 5, above).A  Treating islands separately from the eartha€™s three a€?partsa€? follows the organizational style adopted by Isidore of Seville, Honorius Augustodunensis, and other medieval geographical authorities.
Note Lincoln on its hill and Snowdon ('Snawdon'), Caernarvon and Conway in Wales, referring to the castles Edward I was building there when the map was being created. In England, a detailed study of its less obvious features, such as the sequences of its place names and some of its coastal outlines by G.
The Psilli reputedly tested the virtue of their wives by exposing their children to serpents.
The cumulative effect has been to enable us at last to evaluate the map in terms of its actual (largely non-geographical and not exclusively religious) purpose, the age in which it was created and in the context of the general development of European cartography. The Old and New Testaments contained few doctrinal implications for geography, other than a bias in favor of an inhabited world consisting of three interlinked continents containing descendants of Noah's three sons. This now-lost map was referred to in some detail by a number of classical writers and it seems to have been created under the direction of Emperor Augustus's son-in-law, Vipsanius Agrippa (63-12 BC) for official purposes.
As the centuries went by, more and more was included with references to places associated with events in classical history and legend (particularly fictionalized tales about Alexander the Great) and from biblical history with brief notes on and the very occasional illustration of natural history.


Note also the Roman provincial boundaries, the relative accuracy of the British coastlines (lower left) and the attention paid to the Balkans and Denmark, with which Saxon England had close contacts.
Some, often oriented to the north, attempted to show the whole world in zones, with the inhabited earth occupying the zone between the equator and the frozen north. They were never intended to convey purely geographical information or to stand alone without explanatory text.
Often a 'context' for them would have been provided by the other secular as well as religious surrounding decorations. For many maps continued to be used primarily for educational, including theological, purposes.
They reached their fullest development in the thirteenth century when Englishmen like Roger Bacon, John of Holywood (Sacrobosco), Robert Grosseteste and Matthew Paris were playing an inordinately large part in creative geographical thinking in Europe.
In most, if not all of these maps, the strange peoples or 'Marvels of the East' are shown occupying Ethiopia on the right (southern) edge, as on the Hereford map. Exposure to light, fire, water, and religious bigotry or indifference over the centuries has, however, led to the destruction of most of them. Both are now lost but it seems quite likely that the so-called 'Psalter Map', produced in London in the early 1260s and now owned by the British Library, is a much reduced copy of the map that hung in Westminster Palace.
Despite some broad similarities in arrangement and content, however, there are very considerable differences from the Ebstorf and the 'Westminster Palace' maps in details - like the precise location of wildlife, the portrayal of some coastlines and islands, or in the recent information incorporated. This fact not withstanding, it may also claim, during this rather short period, to have undergone more intensive scrutiny and examination in both technical and academic terms than any other single cartographic document in history. This manuscript text and map were copied about the year 1440 by an unknown scribe from earlier originals, since lost.
Whereas Carpinia€™s Ystoria is not considered a rare text, no manuscript or printed version of the Tartar Relation has survived, save the one bound with the Vinland map. It is because the Tartar Relation, one, had the good fortune to become embodied in a manuscript of this popular work (possibly a substitute for, or an addition to, Books XXX-XXXII, which also contained an abridgement of Carpinia€™s own account) and, two, because, in general, a bulky manuscript like the Speculum Historiale had a better chance of physical survival than a slender one like Tartar Relation bound separately.
Additionally the Tartar Relation does act, partially, as one of the chief sources for some textual legends on the Vinland map with regards to Asia. As part of Vincenta€™s encyclopedia of human knowledge entitled Speculum Majus, Speculum Historiale was included as a chronicle of world history from the time of mana€™s creation to the 13th century, in 32 sections or books.
The physical analysis, together with the endorsement of the map, points with a high degree of probability to the further conclusions that the map was drawn immediately after the copying of the texts was completed, and in the same workshop or scriptorium, and that it was designed to illustrate the texts which it accompanied.
Further evidence on their relationship and on its character must be sought in the content of the map.
The derivation of the map, in this respect, from a circular or oval prototype is betrayed by the general form of Europe, Africa, and Asia, which are rounded off (or beveled) at the four oblique cardinal points, although the artist had a rectangle to fill with his design. The whole design is drawn in a coarse inked line, with evident generalization in some parts and considerable elaboration in others.
The features named are seas and gulfs, islands and archipelagos, rivers, kingdoms, regions, peoples, and cities. It is, of course, not to be supposed that its anonymous maker had direct access to all surviving earlier works with which his shows any affinity in substance or design; but identification of common elements will help us to reconstruct the source or sources upon which he drew. Even when the world maps of the late Middle Ages, drawn for the most part in the scriptoria of monasteries, attempted a faithful delineation of known geographical facts (outlines of coasts, courses of rivers, location of places), they still respected the conventional pattern which Christian cosmography had in part inherited from the Romans, and, in part, created. The traditional orientation, with east to the top, came to be abandoned by more progressive cartographers, who drew their maps with north to the top (following the fashion of the chart makers) or south to the top (perhaps under the influence of Arab maps).
While the work of Leardo is considerably more sophisticated in compilation and more a€?learneda€? in its incorporation of varied geographical materials than that of Bianco, the world maps of both these Venetian cartographers plainly depend for their general design on models of the 14th century.
Since the map is oriented with north to the top, the longer axis lies east-west, and the two greater arcs at top and bottom are formed by the north coasts of Europe and Asia and by the coasts of Africa respectively. In fact his map has striking affinities of outline and nomenclature with the circular world map in Andrea Biancoa€™s atlas of 1436 (#241). His personal style of drawing, save perhaps in the outlines of certain large islands, shows no sign of the idiosyncrasies of the draftsmen of the portolan charts, although these have left a clear mark on the execution of Biancoa€™s world map.
The orientation and outline of the Mediterranean agree exactly in the two maps, although in the Vinland map it has a considerably greater extension in longitude, in proportion to the overall width of Eurasia. Bianco shows Scandinavia as terminating in an indented coast projecting westward with a large unnamed island off-shore, divided from it by a strait; but the author of the Vinland map has altered the island to a peninsula and the strait into a deep gulf by drawing an isthmus across the south end of the strait.
In both, Ireland has the same shape and coastal features, derived from the representation in contemporary Italian charts; and Biancoa€™s version of Great Britain also is that of the portolan chart makers, with the English coasts deeply indented by the Severn and Thames estuaries and the Wash, with a channel or strait separating England and Scotland, and with Scotland drawn as a rough square with little indentation.
In view of the novel elements in the northwest part of the map, we must reckon with the possibility, but no more, that its author found this version of the British Isles in a map of the North Atlantic which may have served him as a model for this part of his work and from which may stem not only his representations of Iceland, Greenland, and Vinland, but also his revisions of Scandinavia and Great Britain and of the islands between. The lower course of the Danube is correctly drawn as falling into the Black Sea; but the copyist or compiler appears to have erroneously identified it with the Don (which debouches on the Sea of Azov), for the name Tanais is boldly written just above the river, with a legend about the Russians.
The only European city named in the Vinland map is Rome, while Biancoa€™s world map marks only Paris.
The northwest coast was by this date known as far as Cape Bojador, and this section is traced with precision in both maps. Errors made by the anonymous cartographer in common with Bianco, or derived from their common prototype, are the transference of Sinicus mons [Mount Sinai] to the African side of the Red Sea and the location of Imperits Basora [Basra] in the eastern horn of Africa (Bianco also incorrectly places the Old Man of the Mountain (el ueio dala montagna; not in the Vinland map) in Africa instead of Asia).
It also seems, although no doubt deceptively, to provide the latest terminus post quem for dating both.
The wealth of detail for this region recorded by Carignano, the Pizzigani, and the Catalan cartographers is wholly absent from Biancoa€™s world map and from the Vinland map. Thus, in place of the steeply arched northern coast of Eurasia shown by Bianco, we have a flattened curve which abridges the north-south width of the land mass. The prototype is, in this region, not wholly set aside for traces of it remain but rather adapted to admit a new geographical concept which, significantly enough, can be considered a gloss on the Tartar Relation. The most prominent of these is the Magnum mare Tartarorum [the Great Sea of the Tartars] set between the eastern shores of the mainland and the three large islands on the margin, and occupying an area approximately one-third of that of continental Asia. Again, the northernmost of these islands on the Map has the inscription, Insule Sub aquilone zamogedorum, while the text states that the Samoyeds are a€?poverty stricken men who dwell in forestsa€™ on the mainland of Asia. The three small islands in the Persian Gulf appear in both, though Biancoa€™s crescent outline for them (of portolan type) is not reproduced by the anonymous cartographer; the large archipelago depicted by Bianco (again in portolan style) in the Indian Ocean is reduced to four islands, and the two bigger oblong islands to the east of them are in both maps. Instead of Biancoa€™s representation of the Arctic zones of Eurasia (with two zonal chords, delineations of skin-clad inhabitants and coniferous trees, and a descriptive legend), the Vinland map has only the two names frigida pars and Thule ultima.
The nomenclature for Asia, with twenty-three names, is richer than that for the other two continents; some names come from the common stock found in other mappaemundi, but the greater number are associated with the information on the Tartars and Central Asia brought back by the Carpini mission.
The cartographera€™s neglect to use any information from Marco Polo or from the travelers in his footsteps, notably Odoric of Pordenone, is common to all maps before the Catalan Atlas of 1375 (in which East Asia is drawn entirely from Marco Polo) and to most maps of the first half of the 15th century. His delineation of them, indeed, closely resembles that in Biancoa€™s world map, which is in turn a generalization, with nomenclature omitted, from the fourth and fifth charts (or fifth and sixth leaves) in his atlas of 1436. The two islands appear, in exactly the same relative positions, in Biancoa€™s world map, although they are absent from the charts of his atlas.
These islands, the Azores of 15th century cartography and the Madeira group, are represented in the Vinland map, in more generalized form and without Biancoa€™s characteristic geometrical outlines, by seven islands, having the same orientation and relative position as in Biancoa€™s map, and with the name Desiderate insule. Their agreement in outline with the two large islands laid down in exactly the same positions at the western edge of Biancoa€™s world map is striking: in particular, the indentation of the east coast of the more northerly island and the peninsular form of its southern end, the squarish northern end of the other (and larger island) and its forked southern end, are common to both maps. That they lie outside the oval framework of the map suggests that they were not in the model, apparently a circular or elliptical mappamundi, which the cartographer followed in his representation of Europe, Africa, and Asia.
For this part of the map there are no earlier or contemporary prototypes of kindred character for comparison, and indeed (except in respect of Iceland) no representations with much apparent analogy can be cited before the late 16th century. It is drawn as a rough rectangle, with a prominent west-pointing peninsula in the northwest, the EW axis being considerably longer than the N-S axis. The northernmost point of Vinland is shown in about the same latitude as the south coast of Iceland and somewhat lower than the north coast of Greenland; and its southernmost point in about the latitude of Brittany. Residual from the representation described under the previous name, the large elliptical island being suppressed. Buyslaua = Breslau (Bratislava), where Carpinia€™s party stopped on the outward journey and was joined by Friar Benedict.
Ayran (NE of the Caspian) Perhaps Sairam in Turkestan, a station on the old highway, east of Chimkent and N.E.
Vinlanda Insula a Byarno re pa et leipho socijs [Island of Vinland, discovered by Bjarni and Leif in company]. The links between the map and the surviving texts which accompany it strongly suggest that it was designed to illustrate C. There is a decided incongruity between, on the one hand, the care and finish which characterize the writing of the names and legends, with their generally correct Latinity, and, on the other hand, the occurrence of onomastic errors which knowledge of current maps and geographical texts or reference to the prototype used by the compiler would have corrected. If we are justified in supposing the scribe who made the surviving transcript of the map to have been ignorant or naive in matters of geography, the draft which he had before him for copying must have been the product of selection and combination already exercised by the compiler. The evidence, internal and external, which indicates that the manuscripts were produced in the Upper Rhineland in the second quarter of the 15th century can only apply to the map included in the codex.
In its representation of Europe, Africa, and Asia it can be referred to, and collated with, not only extant cartographic works of similar character and design, but also a text which is bound in the same volume and to which its content is clearly related.
This information was limited in its scholarly impact by the failure of historians to find any other evidence of continuity or to discover that the evidence contained in the Map had ever been known to anyone concerned with exploration either before Columbusa€™s voyage or after. In respect of toponymy, as of outline and design, the correspondences between this map and Biancoa€™s world map of 1436 are almost certainly too extensive to be explained by coincidence. Some of these anomalies (Aipusia, aben, Maori) are plainly the product of truncation or corruption in transcription, and indicate that the draftsman lacked the knowledge to correct his own errors in copying.
In Asia however, while a number of names and the basic geographical design derive from O1, the authority of the Tartar Relation of other Carpini information generally prevails in the toponymy. The names for Iceland and Greenland may point to literary sources, perhaps of Norse origin (these names, however may have been in cartographic sources used by the compiler); so, with more certainty, do the name and legends relating to Vinland.
For Europe and Africa, Biancoa€™s world map has considerably more names than the Vinland map; in Asia the balance is redressed by the introduction of names from the Tartar Relation. The lucky accident that his sources for the Old World can be easily identified or reconstructed allows us to hazard some inferences about his treatment of his sources for the Atlantic part of his map. Patristic geography, as formulated in the Etymologiae of Isidore of Seville (7th century, #205), envisaged the habitable world as a disc, the orbis terrarum of the Romans encircled by the Ocean and divided into three unequal parts, Europe and Africa occupying one half and Asia the other half of the orbis, with the Earthly Paradise in the east. 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. 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). 995, some 100 years before the First Crusade, Mont Ararat and Noaha€™s Ark are shown, firmly placed in the territory of Armenia. Below the range is the legend Montes Armenia, which describes the twin Peaks of Mount Ararat; here shown sideways, with the three-storey Arca Noe [Noaha€™s Ark] perched on top.
Hiberia [Iberia] is shown south of Montes Armenie, between the two rivers rising form the Armenian plateau and Taurus, in the territory of Mesopotamia.
Flowing eastward from Upper Egypt, it turns west and somehow disappears underground to emerge further down and continue its flow towards Alexandria and the Mediterranean Sea.
The Cottonian map places Gog and Magog hard by the northern ocean, west of the Caspian Sea and the Ten Lost Tribes appear in the Middle East.
Rome and Jerusalem appear prominently a€“ with its six towers Rome is one of the two largest cities shown (along with the historically massive Babylon), biblical lands occupy the center band of the map, marked by straight, confident lines, holy waterways are distinctively colored in bright red, and a paradisiacally described island occupies the top centre of the map.
In the first century, the Roman geographer Pomponius Mela described the inhabitants of the island as inculti omnes and ita magnis aliarum opum ignari [a€?all uncivilizeda€™ and a€?moreover ignorant of a great many other thingsa€™]. If, as Orosius describes in Historiae adversum Paganos, world history did move from East to West, then readers of his Anglo-Saxon translation could easily have found themselves on the very edge of one of feower endum pyses midangeardes a€“ at the edge of the physical world and at the end of the processes of history and salvation. In its depiction of England, however, the Cottoniana map anticipates later strategies for transforming the cosmographical auctoritas of the Anglo-Saxon homeland, and pushed back against the traditions that have relegated it to the edge. Harley has observed the widespread practice that a€?societies place their own territories at the center of their cosmographies or world mapsa€™, but a quick glance at the Cotton map confirms that it does not, on the page, center Anglo-Saxon England. Jerusalem has a long scriptural and exegetic tradition (including Anglo-Saxon writers such as Bede) as the exact center of the earth, and appears as the precise center of a number of famous mappaemundi, most notably the Hereford (#226), Ebstorf (#224), Psalter (#223) and Higden (#232) maps. In mappaemundi, the usual solution consisted of placing a spherical map inside a square, and filling these a€?cornersa€™ with iconographically suitable adornment. Consequently, Eastern Europe and Asia Minor expand considerably, creating vast empty spaces that in turn push Constantinople further north than it is normally found on medieval maps and, likewise, Jerusalem further south. Unlike any other mappaemundi, though, water similarly frames the British Isles, in effect creating the same representation of the world in microcosm.
In sharp contrast, the broad strip of Western Europe that borders England is remarkably devoid of any inscription or detail. The literal meaning of the inscription, a€?south Britaina€™, assumes a somewhat colonialist attitude towards Brittany, and onomastically centers the perspective of the region squarely on England.
In contrast to its treatment of Western Europe, the Cottoniana map lavishes attention on the Scandinavian north, and provides seven names for the area (mostly absent from Orosius), including names for tribes in Norway, Finland, and possibly Iceland. The cumulative effect of all these Scandinavian a€“ or reputedly Scandinavian a€“ references recall the famous interpolation of the voyages of Ohthere and Wulfstan in the Alfredian Old English translation of Orosius.
The Old English rewriting of the sack of Rome carefully excises from the original text any emphasis on the political power and spiritual centrality of Rome.
We have seen how the physical world of the map literally de-centers Jerusalem a€“ a position it will not manifest for centuries in English mappaemundi a€“ while likewise marginalizing the effect of Rome upon England. In Phrygia there is born an animal called bonnacon; it has a bulla€™s head, horsea€™s mane and curling horns, when chased it discharges dung over an extent of three acres which burns whatever it touches.
India also has the largest elephants, whose teeth are supposed to be of ivory; the Indians use them in war with turrets (howdahs) set on them.
The linx sees through walls and produces a black stonea€” a valuable carbuncle in its secret parts.
A tiger when it sees its cub has been stolen chases the thief at full speed; the thief in full flight on a fast horse drops a mirror in the track of the tiger and so escapes unharmed. Agriophani Ethiopes eat only the flesh of panthers and lions they have a king with only one eye in his forehead.
Men with doga€™s heads in Norway; perhaps heads protected with furs made them resemble dogs. Essendones live in Scythia it is their custom to carry out the funeral of their parents with singing and collecting a company of friends to devour the actual corpses with their teeth and make a banquet mingled with the flesh of animals counting it more glorious to be consumed by them than by worms. Solinus: they occupy the source of the Ganges and live only on the scent of apples of the forest if they should perceive any smell they die instantly.
Himantopodes; they creep with crawling legs rather than walk they try to proceed by sliding rather than by taking steps.
The Monocoli in India are one-legged and swift when they want to be protected from the heat of the sun they are shaded by the size of their foot. Flint, a€?The Hereford Map:A  Its Author(s), Two Scenes and a Border,a€? Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 6th ser. Nevertheless, it placed a somewhat misleading emphasis on the map's geographical 'inaccuracies', its depiction of fabulous creatures and supposedly religious purpose, all clothed in what for the layman must have seemed an air of wildly esoteric learning and near-impenetrable medieval mystery.
Recent research suggests this is a reference to African traders in medicinal drugs who visited ancient Rome.
Today, with the map in the headlines of the popular press, it may be time to give a brief resume of what is currently known about it and to attempt to explain some of its more important features in the light of recent research.
In the eyes of some (but by no means all) theologians, a fourth inhabited continent, the Antipodes, would implicitly have denied the descent of mankind from Noah, and the depiction of such a continent was deemed to be heretical by them.
It was based on survey and on military itineraries and reflected the political and administrative realities of the time.
Where space allowed, reference was also made to important contemporary towns, regions, and geographical features such as freshly-opened mountain passes. Most of the maps, however, like the Hereford Mappamundi, depicted only that part of the world that was known in classical times to be inhabited and they were oriented with east at the top. Traces of the maps' classical origins could regularly be seen in, for instance, the continued depiction of the provincial boundaries of the Roman Empire (which are partly visible on the Hereford map) and for many centuries by the island of Delos which had been sacred to the early Greeks being the centre of the inhabited world. They and the texts that they adorned continued to be copied by hand until late in the 15th century and are to be found in early printed books. God dominates the world and the 'Marvels of the East' occupy the lower right edge of the map, as they do on the Hereford map. Together they would have provided a propaganda backdrop for the public appearances of the ruler, ruling body, noble or cleric who had commissioned them, and some may have been able to stand alone as visual histories. The Hereford map, as an inscription at the lower left corner tells us, was certainly intended for use as a visual encyclopedia, to be 'heard, read and seen' by onlookers.
Because of the maps' size, they were able to include far more information and illustration than their predecessors. More space was also found for current political references and information derived from contemporary military, religious and commercial itineraries.
Today, the earliest survivor, dating from the beginning of the thirteenth century, is a badly damaged example now in Vercelli Cathedral, probably having been brought to Italy in about 1219 by a papal legate returning from England.
We know from Matthew Paris that the Westminster map was copied by others, and it is likely to have had a lasting influence even though the original was destroyed in 1265. A Latin legend in the bottom right corner of the Hereford map refers to the 5th century Christian propagandist Orosius as the main source for the map, but as we have already seen, it incorporates information from numerous ancient and thirteenth century sources and adds its own interpretations of them. The map is an outstanding example of a map type that had evolved over the preceding eight centuries. Interest has been virtually international in scope and has covered every aspect pertinent to a document purported to be of seminal historical significance: its historical context, linguistics, paleography, cartography, paper, ink, binding, a€?worminga€?, provenance or pedigree, etc. The Tartar Relation itself was initially bound as part of a series of volumes containing 32 books of Vincent of Beauvaisa€™ (1190-1264) Speculum Historiale [Mirror of History]. Clearly, Painter points out, any circulation that the Tartar Relation may have had in separate form was too limited, in view of the normal wastage of medieval manuscripts, to ensure its transmission to the present day.
Based upon various internal and external evidence, it is likely that the juxtaposition of the Speculum Historiale and Tartar Relation first occurred prior to the drafting of the Yale manuscript of 1440, but sometime after the 1255 date of the original production of the Speculum, so that the Yale manuscript is itself a copy of an earlier manuscript, now unknown, in which the Speculum Historiale, Tartar Relation and Vinland map were already conjoined. The Yale manuscript contains only Books XXI-XXIV, and comparative calculations indicate that 65 leaves are missing that could account for the table and text of Book XX (these four Books cover the history from 411 A.D. The physical association of the map with the manuscript is demonstrated beyond question by three pairs of wormholes which penetrate its two leaves and are in precise register with those in the opening text leaves of the Speculum. These texts may have included, in addition to the surviving books (XXI-XXIV) of the Speculum and the Tartar Relation, other books of the Speculum conjectured to have formed the missing quires and a lost final volume of the original codex. The nomenclature is densest in Asia, where it is largely borrowed from the Tartar Relation or a similar text.
Moreover, in the light thrown on the cartographera€™s work-methods and professional personality by his treatment of sources which are to some extent known, we may visualize his mode of compilation or construction from materials which have not come down to us. The elliptical outline is interrupted, in its western quadrant, by the Atlantic Ocean and by the gulfs or seas of Western Europe, and in its eastern by a great gulf named Magnum mare Tartarorum; the curvilinear outline is however continued southeastward from Northern Asia by the coasts of the large islands at the outer edge of this gulf.
The features common to both maps, and in some cases peculiar to them, are sufficiently numerous and marked (as their detailed analysis will demonstrate) to place it beyond reasonable doubt that the author of the Vinland map had under his eyes, if not Biancoa€™s world map, one which was very similar to it or which served as a common original for both maps. Some apparent differences in the rendering of particular major regions in the Vinland map, which may be due to the use of a different cartographic prototype or simply to negligence by the copyist, are discussed in the detailed analysis which follows. The distinctive shapes in which Bianco draws the Adriatic, Aegean, and Black Seas reappear in the Vinland map.
This seems a more probable explanation of the feature than to suppose that it represents the gulf of the northern ocean supposed by medieval geographers to cut into the Scandinavian coast and drawn in various forms by cartographers of the 14th and 15th centuries, from Vesconte to Fra Mauro.
The a€?Danubea€? is shown as rising just south of the Baltic and turning eastward in about the position of Poland; at this point it forks, and a branch flows in a general southeasterly direction to fall into the Aegean. Beyond it the coast line, conventionally drawn, trends southeastward with two estuaries or bays similarly shown by both cartographers, although the anonymous map has a slight difference in the river pattern. They have in common the precise tracing of the northwest coast as far south as Cape Bojador, and if they shared a common prototype, this (it might be supposed) could not have been executed before the voyage of Gil Eannes in 1434. The latter repeats Biancoa€™s anachronistic reference to the Beni-Marin and his erroneous location of two names; but these aberrations, which appear to be peculiar to Bianco, do not help in dating.
This concept is the Magnum mare Tartarorum with, lying beyond it and within the encircling ocean, three large islands which appear to derive from the cartographera€™s interpretation of passages in C. This great sea is connected in the north with the world ocean by a passage named as mare Occeanum Orientale [the eastern ocean sea]. The Tartar Relation also states that the Tartars have one city called a€?Caracarona€™ (Karakorum) but this city does not appear on the Vinland map. The elimination of East Asia by the western shoreline of the Sea of the Tartars has affected the distribution of place names in the Vinland map and its delineation of the hydrography. The location and arrangement of the names cannot, in general, be connected with Carpinia€™s itinerary (or any other itinerary order), nor with any systematic conception of Central Asian geography.
The affinity between the two world maps, in this respect, is so marked as to distinguish them from all other surviving 15th century maps and to confirm the hypothesis that one has been copied from the other or that both go back to a common model for their drawing of the Atlantic islands. These islands (unnamed in the two world maps) are Satanaxes and Antillia, which make their first appearance in a map of 1424 and have been the subject of extensive discussion by historians of cartography. Greenland, somewhat larger than Iceland, is dog-legged in shape, with its greatest extension from north to south.
Between these points Vinland is drawn as an elongated island, the greatest width being roughly a third of the overall length; the somewhat wavy details of the outline, if compared with this cartographera€™s technique in other parts of his map, seem to be conventional rather than realistic. To facilitate location of the name and legends on the original map, numbers have been added, keying them to the reproduction at the end of this section. Presumably intended for the Orkneys and Shetlands, or one of these groups and the Faeroes].
The form (for Dania) common in mediaeval cartography, and found in many charts and world maps.
Mediaeval world maps commonly show a pair of such legends, indicating the regions, outside the oikoumene, too cold or too hot for human habitation.
Although the second word is truncated, no trace of further letters can be seen in ultraviolet light. The name is, however, placed too far inland and too far east for Mauretania, and this may be a corruption of another name in the prototype, e.g.
The concept of the Western Nile, or a€?Nile of the Negroesa€?, represented in mediaeval cartography arose from the identification of the Niger, by some classical writers, as a western branch of the Nile and from subsequent confusion of the Niger, the Senegal, and the Rio do Ouro (south of C. Although of diverse languages it is said that they believe in one God and in our Lord Jesus Christ and have churches in which they can pray].
The remaining children of Israel also, admonished by God, crossed toward the mountains of Hemmodi, which they could not surmount]. This name is placed in the approximate position of India media of Andrea Bianco, who (like most medieval geographers) distinguished three Indiasa€”minor, media, and superior. According to Carpini, one of the nations of the Mongols: a€?a€¦ Su-Mongal, or Water-Mongols, though they called themselves Tartars from a certain river which flows through their country and which is called Tatar (or Tartar)a€?.
The Khitai, who ruled in China for three centuries before the Mongol conquests under Ogedei and Kublai, a€?originated the name of Khitai, Khata or Cathay, by which for nearly 1,000 years China has been known to the nations of Inner Asiaa€?. Carpinia€™s statement that a€?they called themselves Tartars from a certain river which flowed through their countrya€? (see above, under Zumoal) reflects the opinion of other 13th century writers, such as Matthew Paris.
In medieval cartography generally Thule is represented as an island north or NW of Great Britain; some writers identified it as Iceland. The name and delineation probably embody the mapmakera€™s interpretation of what he had read or been told of the Caspian Sea. The last phrase of the legend is inconsistent with the geographical ideas of the Mongols, contrasting with those of the Franks, as reported by Rubruck: a€?as to the ocean sea they [the Tartars] were quite unable to understand that it was endless, without boundsa€?. These islands, and the Postreme Insule, are associated with the cartographic concepts in the two preceding legends (see notes on Magnum mare Tartarorum and on Tartari a rmant . This is written in the center (between the fourth and fifth, counting from the north) of the chain of seven unnamed islands extending in a line N-S from the latitude of Brittany to that of C. The name is placed westward of, and between, two large unnamed islands, to which it plainly refers.
In no other map or text is the form Isolanda found, or the epithet Ibernica annexed to the name for Iceland.
The Icelandic name Groenland, in variant forms (including the latinization Terra viridis), is used in all early textual sources. 1001 rest on the sole authority of the a€?Tale of the Greenlandersa€? in the 14th-century Flatey Book. What other undetected changes or corruptions the copyist may have introduced into the final draft we cannot tell, since his original, the compilera€™s preliminary draft, is lost. For its delineation of lands in the north and west Atlantic, the cartographic prototypes (if it had any) either have not survived or have been so transformed as to be difficult to identify; and if the codex once included a text relating to these lands, this too has now disappeared. Finally, the inscriptions on Greenland and Vinland in the Map offered a few scraps of information which differed somewhat from what was commonly accepted.
1440 on the argument that it is in the same hand as the Tartar Relation, of which the Map is held to be an integral part. It seems to be an inescapable inference that the author of the Vinland map (or of its immediate original) employed no eclectic method of selection and compilation from a variety of sources, but was content to draw on a single map, which must have been very like Biancoa€™s, for the majority of the names, as well as the outlines, in Europe, Africa, and part of Asia. Thus, in Europe, Ierlanda insula may perhaps arise from his misinterpretation of O1 or of some other map in which the names for Ireland and for the islands north of Scotland misled him; and Buyslava may come from the reports of the Carpini mission.
The degradation of names from this source points again to carelessness or ignorance in the copyist, although in one instance - Gogus, Magog - he, or the compiler of O2, has emended the debased form (moagog) in the Tartar Relation by reference to O1. In the absence of the prototype O1, we cannot say whether its author or the compiler of the Vinland map was responsible for introducing the few names in the Old World which must have come from classical or medieval literary sources and the nomenclature for the Atlantic islands.
His apparent preference for the simple solution or the single source admits the possibility that the western part of his map also derives, in the main, from one prototype rather than that it combines features from several; it may have been modified by interpolation or correction from another source (as is the representation of Asia from the Tartar Relation), and this too must be taken into account.
This theoretical and schematic construction did not necessarily imply belief in a a€?flat eartha€?, although it is uncertain whether Isidore himself admitted the sphericity of the earth. 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. 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. Below the Ark the legend Armenia can be seen, although somewhat masked by the print bleeding through. In addition, there are a number of unlabelled provinces, rivers and islands, leading one to surmise that this map was copied from a larger and more detailed map.
England, in the meantime, occupies the lower left corner of the map, its cities tiny and its terrain free of the distinctive straight lines that dominate the center strip of the Holy Land. Mela correlates the ignorance of Britain to the islanda€™s extreme distance from Rome and the Continent, and rounds out his description by noting that the British pecore ac finibus dites [a€?are rich only in cattle and landa€™].
The Orosian a€?four ends of this eartha€™ also recall the common scriptural phrase a€?the four corners of the eartha€™, a phrase translated directly (feowerum foldan sceatum) or alluded to many times in Old English literature. The edge of geographic knowledge, Mary Campbell reminds us, can be a location charged with a€?moral significancea€™ and even a€?divine dangerousnessa€™. Importantly, though, the Cotton map should be considered as centered on Jerusalem in only the loosest sense of the term, since the map locates the city slightly down (west) and far to the right of center.
The Cottoniana map, in contrast, has the look of a round map that has been deliberately stretched to fit the dimensions of the manuscript page. In comparison to later mappaemundi, such a choice actually de-emphasizes the center as it creates room in the corners. One city in the southwest lacks an inscription, perhaps an indication of the provenance of the map or mapmaker. In the formal elements of the map, the curve of the Channel and North Sea echo the form of Mediterranean and Black Seas, which clearly demarcate Europe from the rest of the world.
Unlike the mappaemundi closest in time to it, the Cottoniana map completely ignores lower Germany and France, and from what appears to be Jutland to the Pyrenees mountains, the map includes exactly one inscription: sudbryttas (discussed below).
Such an attitude also references one of the first major cultural events of post-Roman Britain, namely the victory of Anglo-Saxon invaders over native Britain, and the subsequent late 5th century settlement of Bretons in southern Gaul. The one inscription from Orosius retained in this area, Daria (Dacia) ubi et Gothia, only intensifies the Cottoniana mapa€™s regard for the Nordic. Traditionally, the interpolation of allegedly firsthand accounts of explorations of Scandinavia and the Baltic region into Orosiusa€™ classical geography is viewed as a natural extension of ninth century Englanda€™s connection and interest in things Scandinavian. Instead, the Anglo-Saxon version uses the occasion of the sacking of Rome to manifest a distinctly Germanic notion of Christendom and kingship, one which a€?permits vernacular access to and Anglo-Saxon identification with an order of identity that has left the senate and people of Rome far behinda€™. For Anglo-Saxon England, Rome meant many things, and the map should be understood as embodying all of them: the past imperial power, responsible for the historical view of England, as well as a present fallen one, and the present spiritual center of Christian belief.
However, the editors also consider, tentatively, the possibility that some of the script of the map is of a slightly later date, and possibly as late as the early 12th century. London, the Saxon capital of Winchester and Dublin are indicated using Roman-style town symbols. Yet the map, itself a product of late Anglo-Saxon culture, appears to practically embrace the traditional marginalization of England. From its literal meaning in Greek it also signifies the plant ox-tongue, so called from its shape and roughness of its leaves. Conventionally holds a mirror in one hand, combing lovely hair with the other According to myth created by Ea, Babylonian water god. The large city at the top edge is Babylon (its description is the map's longest legend [A§181). 12-30.A  The conservator Christopher Clarkson drew my attention to the gouge in the Mapa€™s former frame. Talbert (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2000), which I employ throughout my book, but with the caution that in dealing with the manuscript culture of medieval Europe, it is misleading and anachronistic to speak of a€?standarda€? or a€?correcta€? spellings, especially of geographical words.
Casual visitors to the dark aisle where it hung could see only a dark, dirty image which they were encouraged to view in a pious, but also rather condescending manner. Crone of the Royal Geographical Society, revealed that despite the antiquity of many of the map's sources much was almost contemporary with the map's creation and was secular. Much of the text that follows is an amplification of information panels and leaflets prepared for the British Library's current display of the map. Most medieval mapmakers seem to have accepted this constraint, but world maps showing four continents are not uncommon: notably the world maps created by Beatus of Liebana (#207) in the late 8th century to illustrate his Commentary on the Apocalypse of St. It may have incorporated information from an earlier survey commissioned by Julius Caesar and, to judge from some early references, it may originally have shown four continents.
These texts owed much to classical writers, particularly Pliny the Elder (23-79), who himself derived much of his information from still earlier writers such as the fifth century BC Greek historian Herodotus. As befitted the encyclopedic texts that they illustrated, the maps became visual encyclopedias of human and divine knowledge and not mere geographical maps. Many were purely schematic and symbolic, showing a T, representing the Mediterranean, the Don and the Nile, surrounded by an 0, for the great ocean encircling the world, sometimes with a fourth continent being added. It was only from about 1120 that Jerusalem took Oclos' place as the focal point of the map, as it does on the Hereford Mappamundi. They retained and expanded the geographical and historical elements of the older maps - coastlines, layout and place names on the maps frequently reveal their ancestry - but to them they added several novel features. Inscriptions of varying lengths amplified the pictures and sometimes contained references to their sources. Much better preserved, until its destruction in 1943, was the famous Ebstorf world map of about 1235. It is difficult to account otherwise for the striking similarities in detailed arrangement and content between the Psalter world map, the recently discovered 'Duchy of Cornwall' fragment (probably commissioned in about 1285 by a cousin of Edward I for his foundation, Ashridge College in Hertfordshire) and the Aslake world map fragments of about 1360. In many of its details it particularly resembles the Anglo-Saxon World Map of about 1000 and the twelfth century Henry of Mainz world map in Corpus Christi College, Cambridge. The choice of the name Vinland and the appearance of this Norse discovery prominently displayed on the map was what attracted such immense popular and scholarly attention.
All indications (paper, binding, paleography, etc.) point to an Upper Rhineland (Basle?) source of origin for the present three-part manuscript. This foregoing explanation or scenario has been the one put forward by the a€?believersa€™. The sources of all of the names and each of the legends are examined in great detail in Skelton, et ala€™s The Vinland Map and the Tartar Relation. We may even catch a glimpse of these materials, as they are reflected in the Vinland map, and of the channels by which they could have reached a workshop in Southern Europe (this assumes that the ascription of the manuscript to a scriptorium of the Upper Rhineland is valid). The only parts of the design which fall outside the elliptical framework are the representations of Iceland, Greenland, and Vinland, in the west, and (less certainly) the outermost Atlantic islands and the northwest-pointing peninsular extension of Scandinavia.


If this original was circular, the anonymous cartographera€™s elongation of the outline to form an ellipse may be explained by his choice of a pattern into which elements not in the original, notably his delineation of Greenland and Vinland and his elaboration of the geography of Asia, could be conveniently fitted, perhaps also, or alternatively, by the need to fill the rectangular space provided by the opening of a codex.
The Peloponnese and the peninsula in the southwest of Asia Minor are treated with the anonymous cartographera€™s customary exaggeration. On the source of this farrago, which is in marked contrast with the relatively correct river pattern drawn in Central Europe by Bianco and the chart makers, it is perhaps idle to speculate; it seems to involve a confusion of the Oder, the lower Danube, and the Struma.
Yet this section of coast had been laid down in very similar form on earlier maps; as Kimble puts it, a€?Cape Non ceased to be a€?Caput finis Africaa€™ about the middle of the 14th centurya€?, and a€?the ocean coast as far as Cape Bojador (more correctly, as far as the cove on its southern side) was known and mapped from the time of the Pizzigani portolan chart (1367)a€™a€™. Nor was the transference of the Prester John legend to Africa a novelty in the middle of the 15th century. Against the most northerly island is inscribed Insule Sub aquilone zamogedorum [Northern islands of the Samoyeds]; then in the center Magnum mare Tartarorum.
It may be recalled here that there is nothing in the Tartar Relation referring to Greenland and Vinland. The four streams issuing from Eden, shown by Bianco as the headwaters of two rivers flowing west and falling into the Caspian Sea from the northeast and south, have disappeared from the Vinland map, in which we see only the two truncated rivers entering the Caspian from the east and south respectively. They appear, rather, to be dictated by the cartographera€™s need to lay down names where the design of the map allowed room for them. In point of date, Biancoa€™s atlas of 1436 is the third known work to show the Antillia group, and the fourth chart of the atlas names the two major islands y de la man satanaxio and y de antillia.
Its outline, on the east side, is deeply indented and in the form of a bow, the northeast coast trending generally NW-SE to the most easterly point, and the southeast coast trending NNE-SSW to a conspicuous southernmost promontory, in about the latitude of north Denmark; from this point the west coast runs due north, again with many bays, to an angle (opposite the easternmost point) after which it turns NW and is drawn in a smooth unaccidented line to its furthest north, turning east to form a short section lying WE. The island is divided into three great peninsulas by deep inlets penetrating the east coast and extending almost to the west coast.
This legend, the first part of it seems to be distilled from references to the defeat of a€?Nestoriansa€? by Genghis Khan and their diffusion in Asia. The course of the river of the Tartars, as depicted in the Vinland Map, recalls Rubrucka€™s statement that the Etilia (i.e. The Vinland Mapa€™s location of the name, in the extreme north of Eurasia, places Thule (as Ptolemy and other classical authors did) under the Arctic Circle. The name Magnum Mare was applied by Carpini and Friar Benedict to the Black Sea while Rubruck called it Mare maius. As the examples already cited show, the name Insulee Sancti Brandani (in variant forms) is commonly ascribed by chart makers to the Azores-Madeira chain. Medieval mapmakers, from the 10th century (Cottonian map, Book II, #210) onward called the Island or Ysland (v.l. This legend on Vinland Map, if it faithfully reproduces a genuine record, accordingly authenticates Bjarnia€™s association with the discovery of Vinland and adds the significant information that he sailed with Leif. They also prompt the suspicion that missing sections of the original codex may have been illustrated by the other novel part of the map, namely its representation of the lands of Norse discovery and settlement in the north and west of the Atlantic. In a map of this form, drawn like the circular mappaemundi, on no systematic projection, we do not of course expect to find graduation for latitude and longitude, even if the quantitative cartography of Ptolemy had been known to its author.
If Biancoa€™s world map be assumed to have resembled, in form and content, the model followed by the compiler for the tripartite world, we can however assess the performance of the final copyist by comparison of his work with Biancoa€™s map, so far as it takes us. Bjarni, it was implied, had accompanied Lief on his first discovery of Vinland; Bishop Henricus, the Eirik of the annals, who was said there to have gone to look for Vinland, was stated to have found it, and at a different date. Some students have been reluctant to accept these propositions; the provenance of the Map had not been established, the nomenclature also presents difficulties, as does the representation of certain topographical features, in particular the accurate delineation of Greenland, a point heavily stressed by the editors of The Vinland Map and the Tartar Relation.
For convenience of reference, this Bianco-type original, which has not survived, will be cited as O. In Africa, Phazania must have been taken by the author of O1 or from Pliny or Ptolemy; and magnus fluuius (if not a coinage of the cartographer) perhaps from a geographical text of the 14th or early 15th century. The names for Iceland, Greenland, and Vinland, with the legend on Vinland, must, like their delineations, be held not to have been in O1. 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.
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. Living on the edge, as it were, Anglo-Saxons felt the danger of their borders keenly throughout their history. Recent commentators have noted that most early medieval world maps actually do not center Jerusalem, and that this convention probably derives from the later political context of the Crusadesa€™ quests for the Holy City. The map, while retaining some suggestive quality of roundness, definitely has corners, in marked contrast to the traditional circular format of such maps, including later and more elaborate English mappaemundi, where the British Isles end up compressed, squashed, really, into the curvature of the border. In the Cottoniana map, the physical center of the world appears rather sparse, consisting of mostly empty sections of lower Syria and the eastern Mediterranean. Looking at the map in this fashion, one can then see a succession of three nested identical L-shaped frames, which draw the eye of the viewer from the whole world, to Europe, and then finally, to England.
Thus with reference to the area of classical Gaul, or contemporary France, Normandy, Flanders, Maine and Burgundy, the map chooses to depict a period both after the fall of Rome, and before the rise of Western European political states that would by the middle of the 11th century definitively end Anglo-Saxon power. McGurk notes that the map pulls Dacia considerably out of position; Orosius places Dacia et Gothia in the middle of Eastern Europe, between the territories of Alania and Germania, while the Cottoniana map moves Dacia et Gothia much further north. Sealy Gilles, for instance, claims that in the Alfredian additions, the Anglo-Saxon Wulfstana€™s account of pagan customs persisting on the margins of European Christendom is reminiscent of the ancient customs of the English themselves. Italy alone contains seven cities, including Rome a€“ more than any other region on the map a€“ and the end result is a mass of iconographic power pointing at this imperial and spiritual seat.
Similarly, the map produces many Englands: the past, Othered colony of Roman conquest and then missionaries, the present geographic island, and, most importantly, the desired stable political entity in the process of moving in from the edge of the world and assuming a centric role in, at the very least, a larger corner of Europe. Conversely, McGurk and Dumville also consider that this script may also be the work of the manuscripta€™s main scribe (p. New information was added but at each stage errors and misunderstandings occurred in the copying process. The size of the Cornish peninsula is exaggerated, probably reflecting the importance of its copper and tin mines in the ancient world. While Anglo-Saxon England possessed a coherent national identity since at least the ninth century, this 11th century depiction refers to the island by its Roman name, Brittania, rather than the more contemporary Angelcynn.
Recent commentators have noted that most early medieval world maps actually do not center Jerusalem, and that this convention probably derives from the later political context of the Crusadesa€™ quests for the Holy City.A  It is tempting, however, to also consider the de-centering of Jerusalem in the Cottoniana map as a function of the mapa€™s own textual convention, and the way it responds to and ultimately rejects notions of Englanda€™s marginalized state.
Crone points out that this reference has special significance because Augustus had also entrusted his son-in-law, M. Sometimes identified with Sirens, the mythical enchantresses along coasts of the Mediterranean, who lured sailors to destruction by their singing. Amazon means a€?without a breast,a€? according to tradition these women removed the right breast to use the bow. At the right edge, a looping line shows the route of the wandering Israelites in their Exodus from Egypt; it crosses the Jordan to the left of a naked woman who looks over her shoulder at the sinking cities of Sodom and Gomorrah in the Dead Sea (she is Lot's wife, turned into a pillar of salt [A§254]. 400), a text that was often attended during the Middle Ages by diagrammatic a€?mapsa€? illustrating the concept.A  See also David Woodward. Others delved into the question of its authorship, which had previously been assumed to be obvious from the wording on the map itself. The medievalized depiction on the bottom left corner of the Hereford world map of 'Caesar Augustus' commissioning a survey of the world from three surveyors representing the three corners of the world may be based on a muddled - and religiously acceptable - memory of these classical events. Even though the inscriptions on the maps gradually became more and more garbled and the information more and more embellished, distorted, and misunderstood, they nevertheless retained their tenuous links with ancient learning. More than simple geographical shorthand, such maps were also meant to symbolize the crucifixion, the descent of man from Noah's three sons and the ultimate triumph of Christianity. Palestine itself was usually enlarged far beyond what, on a modern map, would have been its actual proportions.
A note on one of the most famous of them, the Ebstorf, says that it could be used for route planning.
Although the maps were still dominated by biblical and classical history and legend, most other information seems to have been acceptable and was accommodated within the traditional framework. Far larger than the Hereford Word Map and much more colorful, it was probably created under the guidance of the itinerant English lawyer, teacher and diplomat, Gervase of Tilbury.
In transmission some facts and text became garbled and some inscriptions are gobbled gook or wrong. It must be noted that the textual content of these Books show no relationship with either the Vinland map or the Tartar Relation, but, instead, are to be seen within the context of all 32 Books of the Speculum Historiale.
These two explanations, taken together, may account for a further modification probably made by the cartographer to his prototype. The outline of Spain is depicted with slight variation from Biancoa€™s, the Atlantic coast trending NNW (instead of northerly) and the north coast being a little more arched.
Some have concluded that, if authentic, the Vinland map was not drawn primarily to illustrate the Tartar Relation. The four longer legends written in Asia or off its coasts are all related, by wording or substance, with the Tartar Relation. Since the outline given to these two islands both in the world map and in the fourth chart of Biancoa€™s atlas is easily distinguishable from that in any 15th century representation of them, the concordance with the Vinland map in this respect is significant. Here we have at once the most arresting feature and the most exacting problem presented by this singular map. The approximation of the east coast and of the southern section of the west coast to the outline in modern maps leaps to the eye.
The more northerly inlet is a narrow channel trending ENE-SSW and terminating in a large lake; the more southerly and wider inlet lies roughly parallel to it.
The second part of the legend relates to the medieval belief that the Ten Tribes of Israel who forsook the law of Moses and followed the Golden Calf were shut up by Alexander the Great in the Caspian mountains and were unable to cross his rampart.
The first to cross into this land were brothers of our order, when journeying to the Tartars, Mongols, Samoyedes, and Indians, along with us, in obedience and submission to our most holy father Pope Innocent, given both in duty and in devotion, and through all the west and in the remaining part [of the land] as far as the eastern ocean sea]. The cartographer has perhaps confused the Great Khan (Kuyuk) with Batu, Khan of Kipchak, whom the Carpini mission encountered on the Volga. Hence their identification with the Tartars and their location by Marco Polo in Tenduc, with a probable reference to the Great Wall of China. Volga) flowed from Bulgaria Major, on the Middle Volga, southward, a€?emptying into a certain lake or sea . Members of the Carpini party were somewhat confused about the courses of the rivers flowing into the two seas, supposing the Volga to enter the Black Sea. These are the Azores, laid down in charts with this position and orientation from the middle of the 14th century to the end of the 15th, and the Madeira group. The Vinland Map is the earliest known map to move the name further out into the ocean and apply it to the Antillia group, the word magnce being added to justify the attribution and make a clear distinction from the smaller islands to the east. It might be said that the dominant interest of the compiler or cartographer lay in the periphery of geographical knowledge, to which indeed the accompanying texts relate; and such a polarization of interest is exemplified in the themes of the seven legends on the map.
He emerges from this test on the whole creditably, for the outlines of the two maps are (as we have seen) in general agreement. Much argument has centered around the possibility that Norse voyagers might have circumnavigated and charted its coasts, or provided a written description of them. The fact that, in regard to a few names or delineations, the Vinland map seems to show affinities with charts in Biancoa€™s atlas of 1436, rather than with his world map, may suggest that O1 was of Biancoa€™s, or at any rate of Venetian authorship.
Sinus Ethiopicus could have been deduced from Ptolemya€™s text; Andrea Biancoa€™s connection with Fra Mauro, in whose map this very name is found, and his conjectural association with O1 lend substance to the possibility that this name stood in O1, although corrupted in Biancoa€™s own world map. This hypothesis indeed, while it must be tested by collation of other extant maps from which the prototype may be reconstructed, has (prima facie) some support both from the analogy of the cartographera€™s treatment of the tripartite world and also from the uniformity of style which characterizes all parts of the drawing, alike in the east and in the west, in those parts where we know, and in those where we suspect, a cartographic model to have been followed.
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.
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. Further down we see a second range of mountains also named Taurus, the continuation of the remaining section of the same range, continued with a break. The time of the Cottoniana map was no different, as the Anglo-Saxon state began the 11th century unsuccessfully fighting off one set of invasions, and did not last the century fighting off a second set; but from at least the time of King Alfred, as the Anglo-Saxon state was formed, it also coalesced around a cultural center other than Rome or Jerusalem. Each of the corners, by contrast, is distinguished and distinct: the separate landmass of the British Isles in the northwest, the giant drawing of the lion in the northeast, and the fiery waters and mountains of the southern corners. In this scheme, Britain itself then maps its own marginality on to Ireland, which ends up inside a fourth L-shaped frame of water northwest of Britain a€“ a move that to a degree displaces Brittania as one of feowerum foldan sceatum, and brings England further in from the edge. But the blankness of this area can provide two functions: first, it reinforces the mapa€™s accentuation of England by providing another curving blank space, this time of land, to frame the British Isles.
Bede echoes this sentiment, noting that in relation to Spain, Gaul and Germany, or a€?greater Europea€™ (maximis Europae) Britain stands a€?at a great distance against thema€™ (multo interuallo aduersa). In this sense, the mappamundi eerily refuses to recognize the very regions that will directly enable the Norman Conquest of Anglo- Saxon England, only decades (perhaps less) after the map was made. At the same time, however, the Cottoniana map enacts a strategy similar to that found in the Old English Orosius, and emphasizes the Anglo-Saxon world even as it works within a distinctly Roman source. In the a€?big picturea€™ of the mappamundi, England appears literally as one of the feowerum foldan sceatum, tucked far away from the center of the map, with only Ireland and Tylen, or ultimate Thule, closer to the physical corner of the manuscript page. The circle one-third of the way from the bottom is Jerusalem, the Map's central point, with a crucifixion scene above it ([A§387-89]). Its images and decoration have been examined from a stylistic standpoint by Nigel Morgan and put into the context of their time, while the late Wilma George examined the animals in the light of her own zoological knowledge [2] The chance discoveries of fragments of other English medieval world maps in recent years [3] have expanded the context within which the Hereford World Map can be examined, and the Royal Academy exhibition, 'The Age of Chivalry' of 1987 enabled the map to be displayed in the company of other non-cartographic artifacts of its own time. Generally, though, it was not difficult to adapt surviving copies of existing, secular world maps to suit the purposes of Christian writers from the 5th century onwards. This was in order to match its historical importance and to accommodate all the information that had to be conveyed.
Christ would, for instance, be shown dominating the world, or the world might even be depicted as the actual body of Christ.
The world was shown as the body of Christ and much space was devoted to the political situation in northern Germany: an area of particular concern to the Duke who may have commissioned it. Therefore, no proverbial rock has been left unturned in subjecting these manuscripts to all of the state-of-the-art technology and worldwide scholarly debate. The Vinland map and Tartar Relation had become physically separated from the 15th century Vincent text and were later re-bound together as a separate volume in their present 19th century (Spanish) binding.
Some authorities speculate that possibly the link or actual reference to the Vinland portion of the map could be supplied in the missing 65 leaves. The northerly orientation of the map should perhaps be attributed to expediency rather than to the adoption of a specific cartographic model, for it enabled the names and legends to be written and read in the same sense as the texts which followed the map in the codex.
The latter, however, deserves credit for originality in his removal of the Earthly Paradise, an almost constant component of the mappamundi; for, as Kimble observes, a€?the vitality of the tradition was so great that this Garden of Delights, with its four westward flowing rivers, was still being located in the Far East long after the travels of Odoric and the Polos had demonstrated the impossibility of any such hydrographical anomaly, and the moral difficulties in the way of the identification of Cathay with Paradisea€?. Here again we have plain testimony to the derivation of the Vinland map from a cartographic prototype, and to the character of this prototype. The a€?shut-up nationsa€? were also identified with Gog and Magog and with the Tartars, who were held to be descended from the Ten Tribes. In many 15th century charts the chain has (usually written in larger lettering to the north of Madeira) the general name Insule Fortunate Sancti Brandani, or variants. The alternative form Branzilio (or Branzilia), suggesting an association with the name of the legendary island of Brasil, is not found in any other surviving map. The chart-forms characteristic of Biancoa€™s style of drawing are not reproduced in the Vinland map; at what stage these disappeared we do not know, and they were not necessarily in the original model followed by the compiler. The historical statements about Vinland contained in the map, on the other hand, doubtless come from a textual source, as those in Asia and Africa can be shown to do. 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. 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. And even as the Cotton map acknowledges the liminal world that is the origin of the Angelcynn, it also promotes their geographic desires and anxieties that England, ultimately, should also be a center, not a corner, of the world.
Second, the mapa€™s omission of Englanda€™s closest continental neighbors might not only reveal an eagerness to distance Anglo-Saxon England from its classical definitions, but also perhaps consciously deny a particular aspect of its current political situation.
From Isidore and Orosius, Bede specifically preserves the term adversa, the word fraught not only with locative, but potentially negative connotations (e.g. Harris has recently demonstrated, Anglo-Saxons likely viewed the Daci as synonymous with Dani (the Danes), and Gothi (derived from GetA¦) as the same as the Geats, the famous, if somewhat a historical Scandinavian tribe of Beowulf fame. As noted above, the L-shaped England echoes the forms of the larger geographies that contain it, that of Europe, and then that of the world.
Could they refer to the conflict between the Saxons and the native Britons in the centuries following the departure of the Romans early in the fifth century, which gave rise to the legend of King Arthur? Carte marine et portulan au XIIe siA?cle:A  Le Liber de existencia riveriarum et forma maris nostri Mediterranei. The amount of space dedicated to the other parts of the world varied according to their traditional historical or biblical importance and the preoccupations of the author of the text that the map illustrated. The result has been a polarization of many prominent authorities from many disciplines into three camps: the a€?believersa€™, the a€?nonbelieversa€™, and the a€?undecideda€™. Only through extremely fortunate circumstances did the ultimate reunion with this particular copy of Vincenta€™s manuscript occur, also in 1957, in Connecticut. The classical Insulae Fortunatae were the Canaries, the only group known in antiquity, and the association with St. The name Brasil, in many variants, was generally applied by cartographers of the 14th and 15th centuries (a) to a circular island off the coast of Ireland, and (b) to one of the Azores, perhaps Terceira; the variant forms of the name include Brasil, Bersil, Brazir, Bracir, Brazilli. Eric [Henricus], legate of the Apostolic See and bishop of Greenland and the neighboring regions, arrived in this truly vast and very rich land, in the name of Almighty God, in the last year of our most blessed father Pascal, remained a long time in both summer and winter, and later returned northeastward toward Greenland and then proceeded [i.e. All the major divergences, in the geographical elements of the Vinland map, from the representation in Bianco can be traced to its compilera€™s reading of the Tartar Relation or to changes forced upon him by the design adopted.
These instances suggest that the draftsman of the Vinland map, as we have it, may not have been its compiler, but that the map may have been copied from an immediate original or preliminary draft (having the same content) by a clerk or scribe who was no geographer and did not have access to the compilation materials. Kemmodi) montes, where a borrowing from a classical text (such as Pomponius Mela), in which the rendering of the initial aspirate was retained, may be suspected; the form in the Vinland map could hardly have been derived from Ptolemya€™s.
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. 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. Most of the Biblical names found on the Hereford, Lambert, Henry of Mainz, the Psalter, and Ebstorf maps are perhaps, in many cases, borrowed directly from this earlier Anglo-Saxon work. Likewise, Scithia, here positioned east and slightly north of the island containing the scridefinnas (who are also mentioned in the Old English Orosius), might also have a presumed Scandinavian affiliation. Likewise, in England, the cities of Winchester and London, the twin capitals of the Anglo-Saxon world, hold the same relative position as does Rome and its lesser cities in the shape of Europe.
Behind the blue band of the river is a grim array of grotesque figures to indicate the existence of primitive peoples.
There may be significance in the soulless mermaid placed in the map close to the unattainable Holy Land, or she may be a possible temptation to sea-faring pilgrims. Phillott, wrote that it shows a a€?rejection of all that savoured of scientific geography, .
Because of this, space devoted to the author or patron's homeland was often much exaggerated when judged by modern standards, as in the case of England, Wales and Ireland on the Hereford Mappa Mundi. Crone demonstrated, the Hereford also contains sequences of the more important place names along some major thirteenth century commercial and pilgrimage routes.
While the coupling of this name, in the Vinland map, with one from the Tartar Relation (Nimsini) may however mean that Hemmodi too came from a Carpini source, it is more likely that the cartographer was here trying to integrate his two sources.
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. 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. Nearby is the region of containment of the tribes of Gog and Magog, situated near the northern ocean. Gallia commonly occurs in most other medieval maps of this region, both earlier and later than the Cottoniana map, precisely because of this marginalizing textual tradition.
Rome may still dominate the cartography of Europe, but, in the framed world of England, London and Winchester occupy the same space, and suggest a willingness and desire to assume a similar role. Ker dates the manuscript to the first quarter of the 11th century, though he notes that the composition of some of the material (e.g.
On a world map, though, as opposed to the strip itinerary maps produced by Matthew Paris in about 1250, the route planning could only have been very approximate and very much incidental to the main purposes. The general name Desiderate insule given in Vinland Map to these islands is not found in any other map; the only explanation we can hazard is that it may allude to the Portuguese attempts at discovery and colonization of the Azores from, probably, 1427 onward.
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.
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.
The Cottoniana map, however, largely resists such characterization as adversa maximis Europae, choosing both to elide the classical inscriptions of Gaul and Germany, and then to leave the region almost entirely void.
As Harris points out, King Alfreda€™s ninth century political victories over Danish enemies in England validate Anglo-Saxon Christendom over pagan beliefs from another edge of the world. And, finally, it bares some indications of a much later time, the age of the discoveries and the migration of the Northmen in the eighth, ninth, and 10th centuries.A  The correspondences of various names and descriptions in Adam of Bremen afford at least a possibility that the former sometimes drew from the same originals as the great northern annalist, while some of the names in the British Isles, in Gaul [France], and in the Far East and northeast, support the 10th century date, which most scholars are inclined to accept. 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. 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. Similarly, Nicholas Howe chronicles how Anglo-Saxon missionaries journeying a€?backa€™ to Germanic heathendom replicate the pattern of and then supersede Augustinea€™s original mission from Rome to Canterbury. 14), which may have resulted from the survey of the provinces ascribed by tradition to Julius Caesar. In the Hereford map they could revel in this pictorial description of the outside world, which taught natural history, classical legends, explained the winds and reinforced their religious beliefs. The handwriting is similar in character to that of the manuscript and shows the same idiosyncrasies in individual letters.a€™a€™ The map was therefore probably prepared by the scribe who copied the texts of the Speculum and the Tartar Relation. The inner or western coasts of the three islands and the eastern coast of the mainland, fringing the Sea of the Tartars, have no counterpart in any known cartographic document, but are drawn with elaborate detail of capes and bays. This river has many other very large branches, besides that of Senega, and they are great rivers on this coast of Ethiopiaa€?. 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.
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€?. In both examples, Anglo-Saxon activities work to define new cultural edges in relation to an understood English centre. See Catalogue of Manuscripts Containing Anglo-Saxon (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1957), item 193, pp. Considering that this sea represents (so far as we know) the cartographera€™s interpretation of a textual source, it may be suspected that the outline of its shores was seen by him in his minda€™s eye and not in any map. 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.
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€?. The Cottoniana map operates as a graphic analogue to such literary and conversionary efforts.
The same year Agrippa was given charge of all the eastern parts of the Empire, with headquarters at Mitylene. All of the parallels north of the equator are located theoretically with the exception of three: Meroe, Syene and Rhodes. The elision of contemporary France may possibly derive from a combination of a Roman source and an understandable emphasis on Scandinavian regions.
The two upright fingers branching up from the Mediterranean are the Aegean and the Black Sea with the Golden Fleece at its extremity.
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]. If the map was drawn around 1050, this elision may also express the negative attitudes towards Normandy developing rapidly among some Anglo-Saxon factions. Even if the absence of France and Normandy is a product of early ninth or 10th century Anglo-Saxon cultural concerns, this omission certainly could have taken on new meaning around 1050.



Dating an older man christian
Presentation on site visit h1b


Comments to «Practical christian dating advice»

  1. 59 writes:
    Purse out of the way rather you have helped me to accept my feelings.
  2. BaLaM writes:
    Approachability not, and in fact backfires far more than just sex. Partnership work that was not.
  3. LOVE_SEVGI writes:
    So, sit back relax, & take man's.
  4. SHEMKIREC_057 writes:
    Ogle at her body and then create about it (along with her.