From pazarli at topo.auth.gr  Tue Jan  3 10:22:15 2017
From: pazarli at topo.auth.gr (pazarli at topo.auth.gr)
Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2017 11:22:15 +0200
Subject: [ISHMap-List] New issue: e-Perimetron, Vol.11, No.4 (2016)
Message-ID: <20170103112215.Horde.c77-nFXXcMOT2GmPEqjkM-3@webmail.auth.gr>


Dear colleagues

The new issue of e-Perimetron, the international web journal on  
sciences and technologies affined to history of cartography and maps,  
is now on-line:

http://www.e-perimetron.org

e-Perimetron, Vol.11, No.4 (2016)

E. Novotn? (Prague) Cartographic culture heritage belongs to UNESCO;

S. Appel, M. Bidney (Milwaukee) Geodex 2.0: saving a legacy map series  
cartobibliography;

M. van Egmond (Utrecht) Mapping early Utrecht printers and publishers:  
experiences with building a geographical interface;

M. Mastronunzio, E. Dai Pr? (Trento) Editing historical maps:  
comparative cartography using maps as tools;

B. Rystedt (Glumsl?v) Swedish mapping in the Baltic Countries

Our best wishes to all for a Happy New Year!

Maria Pazarli

__________________________
Archaeologist, Msc, PhD History of Cartography
Hellenic General State Archives ? Cartographic Heritage Archives
Dem. Poliorketou 37, 54633, Thessaloniki, Greece
Email: pazarli at maplibrary.gr, pazarli at auth.gr
Tel. +30 2310 243120
Fax. +30 2310 243121
www.maplibrary.gr



From tonycampbellockendon at gmail.com  Fri Jan  6 16:41:33 2017
From: tonycampbellockendon at gmail.com (Tony Campbell)
Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2017 15:41:33 +0000
Subject: [ISHMap-List] 'Maps & Society' lecture - confirming the time
Message-ID: <978ca2ec-76c7-0cb8-e48b-8115c9f8dbec@gmail.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lazarus.elte.hu/pipermail/ishm/attachments/20170106/767dc4fe/attachment.html>

From rnicolai at xs4all.nl  Wed Jan  4 09:53:20 2017
From: rnicolai at xs4all.nl (Roel Nicolai)
Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2017 09:53:20 +0100
Subject: [ISHMap-List] Cartographic innovations by the early
	portolan	chartmakers
In-Reply-To: <87380f35-ec7a-bd30-0004-0e843a80d0a0@gmail.com>
References: <87380f35-ec7a-bd30-0004-0e843a80d0a0@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <000901d26668$00c9c1e0$025d45a0$@xs4all.nl>

Tony,

Thank you for making this work available online. Cartographic innovations on portolan charts constitute an interesting aspect of these charts. Your list establishes useful reference material. 

You invite comments and I am happy to oblige. Let me begin with the very first sentence. You state that ?agreement is needed as to when those documents originated, before any cartographic innovations can be confidently attributed to portolan chartmakers?. This invites two comments.  Firstly ?agreement? and ?consensus? are desirable, but should not be the end goal of any researcher, who ought to aim primarily at delivering scientific or scholarly proof. Secondly, regarding the need to know the origin of portolan charts, the connection you propose between cartographic innovations and the charts? origins is conjectural, not factual. Nevertheless, a good case may be made for a large number of innovations on the charts being medieval, but this is regardless of the question of the origin of the accurate coastal outlines.

In the last paragraph of the first chapter (?Introductory Notes?) you invite comments, but you exclude:
1.	speculation about portolan chart origins, and
2.	findings based on cartometric analysis
Excluding the first category is fully understandable and acceptable; the more so as your statement ?The aim of this online Note is to bring together, in a summary form, scattered facts from portolan chart history? flies like a banner over the entire web page and note. It is therefore very odd that you exclude results from cartometric evidence. No method can ever deliver fully objective evidence ? every method has its limitations and results are subject to interpretations, as I have tried to explain in Lisbon ? but good cartometric evidence is as close as one can get to factual evidence about the charts. Excluding unwelcome facts is not a permissible action in anyone?s definition of the scientific method. You have professed not to understand the mathematics of my analysis, to me personally and in the September 2015 issue of Maps in History (page 27), accessible on http://www.bimcc.org/uploads/newsletters/nl53.pdf, but not understanding cartometric methods is no valid reason to exclude their results.

In the same paragraph you assert that ?the following claims for innovations [?] are unlikely to be challenged on factual grounds ??, a curious statement when one considers that you begin the new chapter not with an unchallengeable fact, but with the claim that ?single largest innovation is undoubtedly an idea, the concept of a portolan chart?. The implication of this statement is that portolan charts would be original medieval creations. That is by no means a proven fact; it is, however, the premise of much research work on this subject, including, it appears, your own. You proceed to cite my own position, but I need to supplement this with some additional clarification. My position is not that they ?have been passed down in their completed form?, that is, as complete charts of the Mediterranean, but that they were passed down as partial charts from an earlier period, which indeed has not been identified yet. I have proposed that these partial charts were copied and pasted together in medieval times to create a mosaic chart of the Mediterranean, the Black Sea and the Atlantic coasts. That alone would be a major cartographic innovation. Cartometric evidence is even available to suggest how that might have been done.

You claim that ?if the [?] cartographic novelties on Carte Pisane might be able to co-exist with that <Nicolai?s> argument, the major hydrographic improvements and the significant inventiveness [?] during the few decades that followed evidently contradict it.? By using the word ?evidently? you seem to suggest that the matter is so straightforward that no factual evidence needs to be presented. However, if the matter of the origin of portolan charts were so straightforward and self-evident, the debate on this subject, which has been going on for more than a century, would not have been there in the first place. Moreover, there is no factual connection between medieval cartographic innovations and the origin of the charts. You claim there is, but in the absence of clear proof, this is speculative. There is no conflict at all between those innovations and my conclusions, unless one insists that the accurate coastlines are an inalienable part of those innovations, which is exactly what I dispute.

In the next paragraph you express the hope that the ?growing sophistication of cartometric methods may lead to a single understanding of the charts? underlying geometry, around which an explanation of how they were constructed could coalesce both with the limited historical data available to us and the evidence drawn from the documents themselves?. This is a strange statement for someone who rejects such methods. My own cartometric analysis of five charts is arguably the most sophisticated one to date, but it led to conclusions that cannot find favour with you. My results also ?coalesce with the evidence from the charts themselves? and with available historical evidence and better so than existing explanations, but the cited sentence suggests that you are calling for a cartometric analysis that will confirm your views on the origin and construction method of the charts! So, please explain what is incorrect in my cartometric analysis. If you do not understand how it works, how can you then reject my analysis or even suggest in a veiled manner that it is not sophisticated enough? Alternatively, if you believe my analysis to be correct but my conclusions to be wrong, we can start discussing how to interpret results such as: the division into subcharts, the overlaps and gaps between them, the scale and rotation angle differences and the analysis of the length of the portolan mile. This is highly relevant to the discussion on chart origins; you cannot therefore ignore this information.

In your list of innovations on the charts you do not mention two innovations in cartography which I consider to be the most significant ones, viz. the scale-truthfulness of the charts and the presence of the wind rose. Before the advent of portolan charts no known map was drawn to a consistent scale (neither was any map for a considerable period after that). Furthermore most medieval art distinguishes itself by its lack of a consistent scale, so scale-truthfulness is innovative in the Middle Ages. The wind rose itself was a major innovation, because it didn?t exist before (the naming system of winds probably did, but not the diagram). It allowed directional measurements to be made across the chart, a novel usage of a map. The innovation to the wind rose by Petrus Roselli you mention is actually a minor one, but you misunderstand its meaning. Roselli indeed drew 16 more lines through the centre point of the wind rose from about 1456 onwards, but this does not increase the number of distinct directions to 64, as you claim. This number remains 32, as the new lines do not constitute new directions; they were already present in the (old) wind rose but do not run through the centre.

I will limit myself to one more comment, one that has already been brought up by Luis Robles, viz. your claim of ?a significant underestimation of its [the Mediterranean?s] length? on portolan charts.  Is this statement based on any factual information at all? As it happens the statement is completely false. The remarkable thing about the length of the Mediterranean on portolan charts is not its error, but the exactness of its value, as all cartometric analyses to date have demonstrated. When one rejects or mistrusts cartometric evidence and then makes a statement that is as factually incorrect as the one cited above, one really ought to reconsider the basis of one?s trust and mistrust in research methods.
 
A portolan chart is not a single coherent cartographic document, but a mosaic of partial charts. The length of the entire Mediterranean is therefore not a meaningful indicator of the accuracy of the charts. That subject has to be approached with more sophistication, through proper cartographic analysis. Then it will become evident that the western and the eastern Mediterranean on a portolan chart not only have their individual scales but also their individual anticlockwise rotation angles. Therefore any measures for quality cannot be taken across the extent of these two component charts unless their individual characteristics are taken into account.

Your list of cartographic innovations constitutes useful new information about the charts, but not all are beyond challenge. Regrettably your statements on the origin of portolan charts are no more than a regurgitation of the elements of the (near-)consensus hypothesis of a medieval origin, which is based on conjecture, but on no factual evidence. You characterised available origin hypotheses yourself as ?creation myths? in your 1987 contribution to The History of Cartography Project. You have not added any facts about the origin of the charts, but only more conjecture, despite your resounding claims. In several places in your online Note you demonstrate that you either have not read my contribution to the question of the origin of the charts, or you have read it and have decided to ignore it completely. Either option is, frankly, unacceptable. It would benefit all researchers interested in this fascinating subject if you would come out in the open and discuss exactly what you think is wrong with my methods and my analysis results. Only after that discussion has taken place might we have a fruitful dialogue on whether those results indeed lead to my conclusions or whether alternative conclusions fit the facts better.

Roel Nicolai
University of Utrecht

-----Original Message-----
From: ishm-bounces at lazarus.elte.hu [mailto:ishm-bounces at lazarus.elte.hu] On Behalf Of Tony Campbell
Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2016 1:04 PM
To: ISHMap-List
Subject: [ISHMap-List] Cartographic innovations by the early portolan chartmakers


The following new online publication might be of interest to some on this list:


    *Cartographic innovations by the early portolan chartmakers*

*(and subsequent developments)***

*focusing through the centuries on the traditional medieval coverage:
*

*the Mediterranean and Black Seas, the North Sea and Baltic, and 
north-west Africa***



http://www.maphistory.info/PortolanChartInnovations.html

Abstract:

Since the medieval portolan charts were the earliest systematic and 
dedicated cartographic aids for marine navigation, it is inevitable that 
various hydrographic features will be appearing there for the first 
time.But, beyond that, the inventiveness of successive chartmakers led 
to the introduction of a number of conventions into cartography /as a 
whole/.Indeed, it is not unreasonable to claim that those charts, in the 
form they had achieved by the end of the developmental period (around 
1330), embodied more cartographic inventions than /any other map type/.

A list of the specific innovations found on the earliest survivors is 
followed by an itemising of the contrivances introduced on the work of 
Pietro Vesconte (1311-c.30) and those who came after him.

A number of the introductions, particularly the documenting of offshore 
hazards, were clearly designed as practical aids for mariners.Overall, 
what the charts offered seamen was unparalleled in its complexity and 
practical usefulness compared to anything made for landsmen.

The extended geographical coverage up to 1500 is described, along with 
the charts? geometric and toponymic developments.A few were still being 
produced in the late 17^th century, which means that this visually 
distinctive genre of marine charts had a life of some 400 years.Such 
longevity, for a largely unchanging format retained for its practical 
utility, may well be unprecedented in cartography.

Comments are invited.

Tony Campbell

tony at tonycampbell.info
tonycampbellockendon at GMAIL.COM
info at maphistory.info

'Map History':http://www.maphistory.info
Academia:https://independent.academia.edu/CampbellTony
Twitter:https://twitter.com/portolanchart01


_______________________________________________
ISHM mailing list
ISHM at lazarus.elte.hu
http://lazarus.elte.hu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ishm



From tonycampbellockendon at gmail.com  Sun Jan  8 15:35:52 2017
From: tonycampbellockendon at gmail.com (Tony Campbell)
Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2017 14:35:52 +0000
Subject: [ISHMap-List] 'Cartographic innovations by the early portolan
	chartmakers'
Message-ID: <21ff824b-c591-a895-aacc-db0ba93951a4@gmail.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lazarus.elte.hu/pipermail/ishm/attachments/20170108/097e354e/attachment.html>

From lorraine.sherry at comcast.net  Mon Jan  9 17:12:30 2017
From: lorraine.sherry at comcast.net (Lorraine Sherry)
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2017 09:12:30 -0700
Subject: [ISHMap-List] Reminder:  Next RMMS meeting is January 24th,
	5:30 PM at Denver Public Library
Message-ID: <003e01d26a93$2f4f7940$8dee6bc0$@comcast.net>

 



The Rocky Mountain Map Society is a non-profit organization 

dedicated to the study and appreciation of maps and other items 

of cartographic interest. The Society was formed in 1991 and is 

based in Denver, Colorado.

 


January 24, 2017 ? Dr. Donald L. McGuirk: 


?The journey of the ?Yazoo Mingo? Moncacht-Ap? and its 


possible influence on the Lewis and Clark Expedition?


 




 

Dr. Don McGuirk

 

5:30 PM at Denver Public Library, 5th Floor, Gates Room

 

This program is free and open to the community.

	
Moncacht-Ap? was a Yazoo Indian interviewed by an early citizen of the
Louisiana Colony, Antoine-Simon Le Page du Pratz, sometime between 1718 and
1734. Moncacht-Ap?  told him of completing travel to the Pacific Ocean and
back, likely in the late 17th or early 18th century, 100 years before Lewis
and Clark. On his return to Paris, Le Page du Pratz published a book that
included the story of this Yazoo Indian. How this account affected the maps
of North America and perhaps the very route of Lewis and Clark will be the
subject of this PowerPoint presentation.

Dr. Donald L. McGuirk Jr. is a retired physician with a keen interest in
early world maps, cartographic myths, and early exploration of the New
World. He is a founding member and former president of the Rocky Mountain
Map Society. He has been a member of the Philip Lee Phillips Map Society
since its inception and a member of the Society for the History of
Discoveries for over thirty years. Dr. McGuirk is a member, in long
standing, of the Texas Map Society and the Washington Map Society. A summary
of his cartographic publications can be found at:

https://independent.academia.edu/DonMcGuirk 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lazarus.elte.hu/pipermail/ishm/attachments/20170109/acc18b93/attachment.html>

From rnicolai at xs4all.nl  Tue Jan 10 22:38:01 2017
From: rnicolai at xs4all.nl (Roel Nicolai)
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2017 22:38:01 +0100
Subject: [ISHMap-List] 'Cartographic innovations by the early portolan
	chartmakers'
In-Reply-To: <21ff824b-c591-a895-aacc-db0ba93951a4@gmail.com>
References: <21ff824b-c591-a895-aacc-db0ba93951a4@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <009b01d26b89$d242f220$76c8d660$@xs4all.nl>

Tony,

 

Thank you for your comments in reply to my post. I think this is a useful discussion and although we will not be able to come to an agreement on the origin of the charts, I would like to bring up a few more things (with apologies for being so verbose). I will start with your last remarks, which contain the most important comment regarding my work, and after that I will add replies on some specific issues you mentioned.

 

1.         A key comment you make is that my analysis method is not understood well enough and therefore not endorsed by many other researchers. That is only partly true, viz. where it concerns the mathematical aspects of that analysis and that was indeed very evident during the workshop in Lisbon. I discussed it at the time with Evangelos Livieratos and indicated I intended to write a few articles to explain cartometric analysis techniques and my results in ?laymen?s terms? in e-Perimetron. I have actually begun with the first article, at least with the analysis work. 

 

I used the term ?partly true? in the previous paragraph and I will explain in this paragraph what I consider to be the ?partly-not-true?-aspect of the criticism that my methods are poorly understood. A significant part of my thesis and my book do not deal at all with cartometric analysis, although the latter is a distinguishing feature of my work.  Only two chapters of twelve plus some scattered sections in others contain fairly heavy mathematics; I cannot blame anyone without the right background for not understanding the details of that. However, the rest of my work can be understood easily enough by people without a mathematical background. It contains, for example, an analysis of medieval navigation methods and tools, of medieval ships and shipping, and of meteorological and oceanographic aspects. These are all relevant for the discussion on the origin of portolan charts and yet I have hardly seen any discussion on them.

 

I believe there is a far more fundamental layer of disagreement underlying, i.e. below the arguments that I just described. In citing my position you only mention my conclusions; not my arguments. I object to that because it makes it appear as if my position for a non-medieval origin of portolan charts is a ?claim? stated up-front. That is not the case. However, this does expose a fundamental difference in the approach to my work and to the work of many others, including yours. Most other research work considers the medieval origin as a departure point and seeks to corroborate that by finding supporting evidence or arguments. From the perspective of the scientific method that approach is less than desirable. As the 20th-century science philosopher Karl Popper pointed out, a hypothesis or theory can never be verified fully by focusing exclusively on supporting evidence. It easily leads to ?confirmation bias? (?only seeing what one wants to see?). Popper therefore introduced a method aimed at trying to disprove a hypothesis, rather than to prove it, because a single piece of disproving evidence is much more powerful than multiple pieces of supporting evidence. This is indeed the approach I followed:  I approached the problem from the perspective of hypothesis testing and described the hypothesis of a medieval origin as having four aspects, which I test separately. That led to a conclusion that the medieval origin needs to be rejected, and not merely to a claim of a non-medieval origin, even less so to new hypothesis. Confirmation bias is pretty much everywhere in science. Sometimes scientists fall in love so much with a hypothesis or theory that they try to ?protect? it against contrary evidence, to prevent what Thomas Huxley (father of Aldous) called: ?the great tragedy of science - the slaying of a beautiful hypothesis by an ugly fact.?

 

So, to sum up, by ignoring the contrary facts (or arguments) that my work has produced, you are opting for a lopsided discussion, which I am not prepared to conduct. The excuse that you do not understand my methods is too convenient, as not all my arguments depend on those methods. Moreover, you probably don?t understand either how your smartphone derives its GPS-based position, but I doubt that will lead you to mistrust that position. Also the results of much of my cartometric analysis are easy enough to understand even if you don?t understand the method I used to derive them. You might place word of caution with those results when you cite them, but, as I wrote earlier, to ignore them completely is unacceptable, that is, if you aim to practice science.

 

My methods have been checked and vetted by 2 mathematicians, an astronomer, 2 geodesists, a statistician, 2 map historians and a cartographer in the process running up to the award of my PhD. I hardly think they require the additional approval of mathematically-inclined map historians before they are deemed acceptable. But I do agree additional explanations in more or less ?laymen?s terms? would be very helpful. 

I am also convinced that mathematically-inclined and humanities-inclined people should not be treated as two separate groups. That would bring the risk of two separate discussions, with opposite conclusions. 

Now the specific comments.

 

2.         You have conceded the point, but still leave me puzzled on how you arrived at the idea that portolan charts show the length of the Mediterranean as too short.

 

3.         Regarding the Atlantic coastlines; these innovations are unsuitable for distinguishing between the hypothesis of a medieval and the one of a non-medieval origin, because both can provide an explanation for the phenomenon. Furthermore, by only providing your own argument in support of a medieval origin you make the discussion lopsided, which is reinforced by the tendentious formulation that it ?? evidently contradicts it [Nicolai?s ?claim?]?.  Your own arguments may be more plausible to you, but don?t forget that mine are more plausible to me. This subject is perhaps better left to a separate discussion, which, I am sure, both of us will be keen to have.

 

4.         Regarding my statement on ?no scale-true maps before portolan charts?, you are right to point out that Ptolemy?s maps were designed to scale. I was talking about medieval maps, but I should have made that clear.

 

5.         Regarding the wind rose; I distinguish the eight-wind system (which indeed predates portolan charts) from the diagram on portolan charts, whereas you appear not to. The diagram is rather more than the eight-wind system in that it uses an ingenious way to generate 32 directions out of 16 points on a circle. So, while portolan charts cannot be said to have invented the eight-wind system, the wind rose diagram is entirely new.  At least, I have not come across any map with that same diagram.  

 

5.         Regarding my comment on the wind rose on the Roselli 1456 chart; you write that you didn?t say that Roselli?s innovation created 64 directions, but I cite from your note (11th entry in your bullet-pointed list in the chapter ?The Innovations?):

?there is a systematic network of 32 wind or compass directions, based around one or two large hidden circles (for the doubling of that number see below under 1456 Petrus Roselli).?

Your mention 32 directions; doubling that number would yield 64 in my books. 

And, in the section ?Can a ?portolan chart? be defined or merely recognised from its characteristics??, third bullet point:

?? has a systematic 32- or 64-line network of compass directions (colour-coded in black, red and green)??.

I think there is only one way to read your text and that is what I described in my previous post. If you feel it the wind rose only shows 32 unique directions, I suggest you modify the above descriptions accordingly.

 

Best regards,

Roel

 

 

From: Tony Campbell [mailto:tonycampbellockendon at gmail.com] 
Sent: Sunday, January 08, 2017 3:36 PM
To: ISHMap-List; Roel Nicolai
Subject: re: 'Cartographic innovations by the early portolan chartmakers'

 

Roel,

I am grateful to you for a number of useful comments on my 'Cartographic innovations by the early portolan chartmakers' (http://www.maphistory.info/PortolanChartInnovations.html).  [For the full text of Roel's post see: http://lazarus.elte.hu/pipermail/ishm/2017-January/000536.html.]

This is precisely what I was hoping for, and it would be excellent if others contributed as well.

As a result I have made some additions and corrections to the online document:

1. I have corrected, at the beginning of 'The Innovations' section, the 'passed down as partial charts' comment

2. I have suppressed the comment about the length of the Mediterranean, which, as you say, Luis A. Robles Macias had already pointed out.

However, we do have continuing areas of disagreement and, without repeating what has already been said, I include a few brief comments here.

While I fully take your point about the need to distinguish hydrographic outlines from toponymy in a consideration of the charts' origins - and there are indications that they may have had separate developments anyway - I do not see how any kind of pre-medieval origin can be proposed for the Atlantic coastlines.  So, even if we agree that the toponymy is medieval, the Atlantic coasts, which were charted, up to about Bruges, either side of 1300, cannot be included in any hypothesis about the ancient coastlines of the Mediterranean and Black Sea.

You write: "Before the advent of portolan charts no known map was drawn to a consistent scale (neither was any map for a considerable period after that)".  What about Ptolemy?

You write: "The wind rose itself was a major innovation, because it didn?t exist before (the naming system of winds probably did, but not the diagram). It allowed directional measurements to be made across the chart, a novel usage of a map. The innovation to the wind rose by Petrus Roselli you mention is actually a minor one, but you misunderstand its meaning. Roselli indeed drew 16 more lines through the centre point of the wind rose from about 1456 onwards, but this does not increase the number of distinct directions to 64, as you claim. This number remains 32, as the new lines do not constitute new directions; they were already present in the (old) wind rose but do not run through the centre."

The portolan charts cannot claim to have invented the wind rose.  Ancient navigators had at least a mental compass, with 8 or 12 named wind directions, assumed to blow equidistantly from their respective points around a circle. Standard texts used those in contexts where we could cite a compass direction, and the House of the Winds in Athens physically demonstrates the 8-point version.  

As to the number of compass lines on the Roselli charts, we are not saying different things. I did not claim that the number of direction lines had been increased.  Indeed, in The History of Cartography (1987) I, p.396 (which I reference), I wrote that "in duplicating existing compass directions, the added lines serve no obvious practical function."

Your main concerns are of course cartometric ones.  First of all, it is incorrect to say that I 'reject' cartometric analysis. 

What I had hoped for from the Lisbon meeting last June was that it would attract a number of participants who looked at the charts from geometric and mathematical angles. The ensuing debate could then have demonstrated how much unanimity there was among those who were coming from a different direction to the traditional historians. Would different analytical techniques produce different results?  Would the necessary choices made by two different people working with the same technique produce an identical result?

Unfortunately, that did not really happen and what discussion there was did not help to convince the historians in the audience that the startling interpretation to which you felt your research led you was one we were forced to follow. You were well aware of that. 

If I might make a suggestion, which I hope is thought helpful.  Since I have commented, here and elsewhere, only on the implications of your claim for a pre-medieval original, and have said nothing about your methodology, my own views as to your cartometric evidence are of far less worth than would be those of your fellow practitioners.  What did not happen in Lisbon - perhaps from an understandable feeling among cartometric specialists that they would be heavily outnumbered by historians - could be achieved by a special meeting, or possibly a joint publication, devoted to cartometric analysis of the portolan charts.  

If, by that or some other means, your methods and results were endorsed by those well qualified to make such judgements, your case would be immeasurably strengthened.  But your work really needs that endorsement, which was not evident to me in Lisbon.

Good wishes,

Tony Campbell

 

 

 





 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lazarus.elte.hu/pipermail/ishm/attachments/20170110/c7669658/attachment.html>

From tonycampbellockendon at gmail.com  Thu Jan 12 12:48:50 2017
From: tonycampbellockendon at gmail.com (Tony Campbell)
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2017 11:48:50 +0000
Subject: [ISHMap-List] Information for the Imago Mundi 'Chronicle'
Message-ID: <183b8d77-10f5-61a8-5df1-03fe4518e0fc@gmail.com>


This is my annual request for information that might be relevant for the
'Chronicle' section in /Imago Mundi: the International Journal for the
History of Cartography/.

Please send me any information that you think /might/ be of interest to an
international audience.  It should be news relating to the past twelve
months [though I can store future information for use next year] and it 
should
be of direct concern to the /history of cartography/. I should already have
any news contained in ISHMap-List and lismaps messages.

We are seeking information relating to the following headings:

1. *Personal News* - deaths, significant appointments, prizes & awards,
research fellowships, and doctorates

2. *Conferences & Meetings *- obviously I use John Docktor's listing
(http://www.docktor.com/ 
<imap://tonycampbellockendon%40gmail%2Ecom at imap.googlemail.com:993/fetch%3EUID%3E/ARCHIVE%20%28ex%20Claranet%29/Chronicle%3E3>) 
but there are always some events that are never
publicised. Individual talks are _not_ listed, nor, generally, are 
lecture series.

3. *Institutional & General News
*
4. *Exhibitions* - again, I use John Docktor's listing  
(http://www.docktor.com) 
<imap://tonycampbellockendon%40gmail%2Ecom at imap.googlemail.com:993/fetch%3EUID%3E/ARCHIVE%20%28ex%20Claranet%29/Chronicle%3E3>

5. *Notable Acquisitions* by institutions, "featuring only collections,
manuscript material, and rare, significant or bibliographically 
important printed
atlases, maps, charts and globes".

6. *Unusual items that have come up for sale*. This section is compiled by
Kate Marshall [katem260 at hotmail.com] and Nick Trimming 
[nick(at)crouchrarebooks.com].
Please send information directly to them.

??????????????????????????????????????
For further details and sample entries, please see
http://www.maphistory.info/chronicleletter.html 
<imap://tonycampbellockendon%40gmail%2Ecom at imap.googlemail.com:993/fetch%3EUID%3E/ARCHIVE%20%28ex%20Claranet%29/Chronicle%3E3> 

??????????????????????????????????????

'Chronicle' is the official record of what has happened in our field over
the previous year.  Its completeness depends, to a considerable extent, on
what is supplied by others.  If you have any information that you think
might be relevant, please send it to me, and I can decide if it is
appropriate or not. Do not worry if you think I may already have the
information.  It is better if details are sent to me four times than not at
all.

Information about publications, for the Bibliography, should be sent, 
please, to
Stephanie Cyr [scyr(at)leventhalmap.org] and David Weimer 
[dweimer(at)fas.harvard.edu].

To meet this year's deadline, I need information *as soon as possible 
*please.

Thank you.

Tony Campbell
Editor of the /Imago Mundi/ 'Chronicle'
****************************************
tony at tonycampbell.info 
<imap://tonycampbellockendon%40gmail%2Ecom at imap.googlemail.com:993/fetch%3EUID%3E/ARCHIVE%20%28ex%20Claranet%29/Chronicle%3E3>

For further information please see:
http://www.maphistory.info/imago.html 
<imap://tonycampbellockendon%40gmail%2Ecom at imap.googlemail.com:993/fetch%3EUID%3E/ARCHIVE%20%28ex%20Claranet%29/Chronicle%3E3> 
[journal homepage]

http://www.tandfonline.com/toc/rimu20/current 
<imap://tonycampbellockendon%40gmail%2Ecom at imap.googlemail.com:993/fetch%3EUID%3E/ARCHIVE%20%28ex%20Claranet%29/Chronicle%3E3> 
[information, subscriptions and sales -
Routledge (Taylor & Francis/Informa)]

http://www.jstor.org/journals/03085694.html 
<imap://tonycampbellockendon%40gmail%2Ecom at imap.googlemail.com:993/fetch%3EUID%3E/ARCHIVE%20%28ex%20Claranet%29/Chronicle%3E3> 
[back issues via JSTOR subscription]
*******************************************






From tonycampbellockendon at gmail.com  Thu Jan 12 16:34:11 2017
From: tonycampbellockendon at gmail.com (Tony Campbell)
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2017 15:34:11 +0000
Subject: [ISHMap-List] 'Cartographic innovations by the early portolan
	chartmakers'
Message-ID: <83f933d5-f2a0-86cc-03ab-954a707378ee@gmail.com>

Roel,

I will respond briefly to your latest post.  Given the distance between 
our two positions I think it unlikely we will be able to find much 
agreement, and I question how long this exchange can usefully continue.

First of all, though, thank you for pointing out the internal 
contradiction in my text about the nature of the increase in the number 
of compass lines through the centre of his later charts. I have removed 
the careless and incorrect statements about '64 directions'.

I now comment only on what I consider to be one or two major issues.

The first is your supposed conviction that portolan chart historians 
assume a medieval origin. I don't think most of us are committed to that 
view.  We have looked for whatever evidence there might be, whether 
documentary or in the charts, but have found no convincing evidence for 
an earlier origin. Nor I think have you, beyond extrapolation from 
cartometric findings.

Where I would argue that there *is* a 'departure point' is in your 
dismissal of the possibility that the medieval mind and its technology 
were capable of creating the portolan chart. It is surely unwise, given 
examples from indigenous wayfinding and mapping techniques, to place a 
theoretical limit on what less advanced societies were capable of. 
History depends on documentation, and we would not expect to find a 
description of the devising and construction of a portolan chart.

What we *do have* is actual evidence of the process of creation in the 
charts themselves, although it is dismissed by you thus in a Delphic 
sentence :

"Regarding the Atlantic coastlines; these innovations are unsuitable for 
distinguishing between the hypothesis of a medieval and the one of a 
non-medieval origin, because both can provide an explanation for the 
phenomenon."

On the contrary, I consider this to be crucial evidence because we here 
see - by degrees, involving different chartmakers and presumably 
different informants - the gradual emergence of a recognisable coastline 
from Cape St Vincent to Bruges, along with a parallel expansion in the 
toponomy. All this occurred between perhaps c.1280 and c.1320. If the 
sailors of that period were capable of such an achievement, why not 
those from a century before?

The general assumption that seems to have been made - perhaps there are 
exceptions - is that the portolan charts are the result of some kind of 
surveying operations (or of a process we can recognise as that).  Where 
is the evidence for that?  As you know, in Lisbon I asked that 
consideration be given to the hypothesis that the charts might never 
have been consciously 'mapped' at all, but rather have emerged from the 
sharing and adjustment of the mental maps that any experienced mariner 
must have had in their head. The Black Cab drivers' mental map of every 
London street, and the ability to get between any pair of those, is a 
far more impressive feat.

  I do not think that two related questions have ever been properly 
asked - and if you have done so please accept my apologies and point me 
to the relevant part of your book. How did mariners find their way 
around and across the Mediterranean for millennia before the appearance 
of the portolan charts; and what advantage did the charts offer them?  I 
am not sure how cartometric analysis can help here.

Best regards,

Tony



From Rose.Mitchell at nationalarchives.gsi.gov.uk  Fri Jan 13 10:56:34 2017
From: Rose.Mitchell at nationalarchives.gsi.gov.uk (Mitchell, Rose)
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2017 09:56:34 +0000
Subject: [ISHMap-List] J B Harley Research Fellowships in Cartography
	announced
Message-ID: <0ea0d2fbfc5a472d8961b8d80f8d033c@NA-EXCHANGE1.in.tna.local>

************************************
Please excuse cross-posting. Conversely, please pass on to others who might be interested.
**********************************************************************************
ANNOUNCING THE TWENTY- FOURTH SERIES OF J B HARLEY RESEARCH FELLOWSHIPS IN THE HISTORY OF CARTOGRAPHY
The Trustees of the J B Harley Research Fellowships Trust Fund are pleased to announce the twenty-fourth series of awards, offering support to assist research in the map collections of the United Kingdom.  Awards have been made to:

Nathan Braccio (University of Connecticut) Clashing New Englands: Identity and the Parallel Geographies of Algonquian and English New England, 1600-1730  (2 weeks)

Radu Leca (Research Fellow, International Institute for Asian Studies, University of Leiden) A Comprehensive Analysis of Collections of Japanese Maps Related to Philip Franz von Siebold (1796-1866) (2 weeks)

Caroline Marris  (Columbia University, New York) 'The Silver Sea' and the Nation-State: The Multifaceted Geopolitics of the Early Modern English Channel  (3 weeks)

Gion Wallmeyer (University of G?ttingen) The function of cartography in the making of thirteenth- and fourteenth-century crusading experts   (2 weeks)

For details of past awards, numbers of applicants, and extracts from previous Fellows' reports, see http://www.maphistory.info/harlflws.html [part of the 'Map History' gateway site]. This also contains information about applying for a Fellowship (closing date 1st November each year).
Ms Rose Mitchell, Hon. Sec., Harley Fellowships
January 2017

 ******************
Statistics for website -
Number of applications and awards:  6  and 4

Details of new fellows:
by country: America 2, Germany 1, the Netherlands 1
by discipline: History 3, Asian studies 1

Doctoral students: 3
Postdoctoral Fellow: 1
 *****************************

Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 
National Archives Disclaimer
 
This email and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the use of the 
individual(s) to whom they are addressed. If you are not the intended recipient and 
have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete the email. 
Opinions, conclusions and other information in this message and attachments that do 
not relate to the official business of The National Archives are neither given nor 
endorsed by it.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lazarus.elte.hu/pipermail/ishm/attachments/20170113/a9e67077/attachment.html>

From rnicolai at xs4all.nl  Fri Jan 13 22:02:54 2017
From: rnicolai at xs4all.nl (Roel Nicolai)
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2017 22:02:54 +0100
Subject: [ISHMap-List] 'Cartographic innovations by the early
	portolan	chartmakers'
In-Reply-To: <83f933d5-f2a0-86cc-03ab-954a707378ee@gmail.com>
References: <83f933d5-f2a0-86cc-03ab-954a707378ee@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <003101d26de0$69b5a6e0$3d20f4a0$@xs4all.nl>

Tony,

It appears we have indeed reached the natural end of this discussion.
I see little point in a repetition of the arguments I raised against a
medieval origin. I describe them extensively in my book, which, I will
repeat for the last time, contains considerably more than just cartometric
analysis.
I can only wish you the best in finding evidence that is able to demonstrate
the feasibility of charting based on mental maps only. This goes so much
against my knowledge and against 38 years of experience in mapmaking and
geodesy that I am unable to give serious consideration to that hypothesis.

Best regards,
Roel


-----Original Message-----
From: ishm-bounces at lazarus.elte.hu [mailto:ishm-bounces at lazarus.elte.hu] On
Behalf Of Tony Campbell
Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2017 4:34 PM
To: ISHMap-List
Subject: [ISHMap-List] 'Cartographic innovations by the early portolan
chartmakers'

Roel,

I will respond briefly to your latest post.  Given the distance between our
two positions I think it unlikely we will be able to find much agreement,
and I question how long this exchange can usefully continue.

First of all, though, thank you for pointing out the internal contradiction
in my text about the nature of the increase in the number of compass lines
through the centre of his later charts. I have removed the careless and
incorrect statements about '64 directions'.

I now comment only on what I consider to be one or two major issues.

The first is your supposed conviction that portolan chart historians assume
a medieval origin. I don't think most of us are committed to that view.  We
have looked for whatever evidence there might be, whether documentary or in
the charts, but have found no convincing evidence for an earlier origin. Nor
I think have you, beyond extrapolation from cartometric findings.

Where I would argue that there *is* a 'departure point' is in your dismissal
of the possibility that the medieval mind and its technology were capable of
creating the portolan chart. It is surely unwise, given examples from
indigenous wayfinding and mapping techniques, to place a theoretical limit
on what less advanced societies were capable of. 
History depends on documentation, and we would not expect to find a
description of the devising and construction of a portolan chart.

What we *do have* is actual evidence of the process of creation in the
charts themselves, although it is dismissed by you thus in a Delphic
sentence :

"Regarding the Atlantic coastlines; these innovations are unsuitable for
distinguishing between the hypothesis of a medieval and the one of a
non-medieval origin, because both can provide an explanation for the
phenomenon."

On the contrary, I consider this to be crucial evidence because we here see
- by degrees, involving different chartmakers and presumably different
informants - the gradual emergence of a recognisable coastline from Cape St
Vincent to Bruges, along with a parallel expansion in the toponomy. All this
occurred between perhaps c.1280 and c.1320. If the sailors of that period
were capable of such an achievement, why not those from a century before?

The general assumption that seems to have been made - perhaps there are
exceptions - is that the portolan charts are the result of some kind of
surveying operations (or of a process we can recognise as that).  Where is
the evidence for that?  As you know, in Lisbon I asked that consideration be
given to the hypothesis that the charts might never have been consciously
'mapped' at all, but rather have emerged from the sharing and adjustment of
the mental maps that any experienced mariner must have had in their head.
The Black Cab drivers' mental map of every London street, and the ability to
get between any pair of those, is a far more impressive feat.

  I do not think that two related questions have ever been properly asked -
and if you have done so please accept my apologies and point me to the
relevant part of your book. How did mariners find their way around and
across the Mediterranean for millennia before the appearance of the portolan
charts; and what advantage did the charts offer them?  I am not sure how
cartometric analysis can help here.

Best regards,

Tony


_______________________________________________
ISHM mailing list
ISHM at lazarus.elte.hu
http://lazarus.elte.hu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ishm



From tonycampbellockendon at gmail.com  Mon Jan 16 13:16:27 2017
From: tonycampbellockendon at gmail.com (Tony Campbell)
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2017 12:16:27 +0000
Subject: [ISHMap-List] Recently awarded doctorates relating to the history
	of cartography
Message-ID: <a3527446-14fa-23dd-94c3-80fa8fbda2c5@gmail.com>

Can you help, please, in connection with the Imago Mundi 'Chronicle', 
whose annual text I am now completing.

For many years I have included brief details of recently awarded 
doctorates relating to the history of cartography.

I am aware of the following recent awards, which will also be included 
in the cumulative listing (from 1995) on 'Map History' 
(http://www.maphistory.info/phd.html):

Michael Albert *Blaakman*
Dean W. *Bond
* Stephanie *Casha Vida
* Valentina *De Santi*
Hannah *Fitzpatrick
* Matthew E. *Franco
* Primo? *Ga?peri?
* Monica A. *Hoffman
* Jonathan Felix Ribeiro *Lopes*
Toma? *Nenartovi?
* Katherine A. *Parker*
Soetkin *Vervust
* Timothy R. *Wallace*

This is a fair shorter list than usual. What is that telling us about 
our subject or academia as a whole?

My thanks as usual to Matthew Edney. Do you know of any others?

Besides those named above, other people have given me details of their 
dissertation in progress. If you are one of those, I may have tried to 
contact you recently but, if you have completed (and therefore moved), I 
will not have your correct email address, so do please write to me.

I am also aware of a number of other current PhD students who are 
working with early maps, but whom I have been unable to contact. If this 
applies to you, or you know somebody in that position, this would be a 
good time to email me, so that I can include those details on
(http://www.maphistory.info/futurephd.html).

Finally, I am always interested in adding doctorates from several years 
ago, which I had missed, even if these are too late for this 'Chronicle'.

Thank you for any help.

Tony Campbell

tony at tonycampbell.info
tonycampbellockendon at GMAIL.COM
info at maphistory.info

'Map History': http://www.maphistory.info
Academia: https://independent.academia.edu/CampbellTony
Twitter:  https://twitter.com/portolanchart01







From tonycampbellockendon at gmail.com  Wed Jan 18 19:38:32 2017
From: tonycampbellockendon at gmail.com (Tony Campbell)
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2017 18:38:32 +0000
Subject: [ISHMap-List] Seventh Imago Mundi Prize awarded
Message-ID: <99347531-87ce-6de8-e1ff-e4fabdbdd1f6@gmail.com>

*Seventh Imago Mundi Prize Awarded*


    The Directors of Imago Mundi Ltd are delighted to announce that the
    seventh /Imago Mundi /Prize has been awarded toFederico Ferrettifor
    ?A new map of the Franco-Brazilian border dispute (1900)? which
    appeared in /Imago Mundi/ 67:2(2015):229-241. Dr FedericoFerretti is
    a lecturer at the

School of Geography, University College, 
Dublin.federico.ferretti(at)ucd.ie <mailto:federico.ferretti at ucd.ie>

This article is a novel contribution to the history of cartography of 
the early twentieth century in the service of diplomacy between Brazil 
and France over the border between French Guiana and Brazil. The border 
dispute was arbitrated by Swiss scholars in 1900. The author examines 
the political usefulness of maps in such deliberations and also provides 
evidence of the challenge some geographers made to the prevailing 
European view of imperialism and colonialismof the time. As such the 
discussion broadens our understanding of the role of maps and their 
makers in Europe in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century; it 
draws attention to their use in a more subversive role rather than in 
exemplifying the power of the state.

The author focusses on a newly discovered map drawn by the explorer 
Henri Coudreau (1859-1899) and given by him to the geographer Elis?e 
Reclus (1830-1905) which has been recently discovered in the Public 
Library in Geneva amongst Reclus?s maps. The author has carefully 
investigated the extensive Reclus archive there and also other archives 
and collections, including those of the Swiss Federal Council relevant 
to the Border dispute. He has argued lucidly and convincingly, based on 
his examination of the maps, archives and personal papers, that the 
Coudreau map of Brazil was critical to establishing the boundary between 
Brazil and French Guiana to the satisfaction of the Brazilians. Although 
both Coudreau and Reclus were French, their attitudes were anti-colonial 
as is evident from Reclus?s writings on French Guiana and thus they did 
not follow the expected government line. The author points out that the 
same could be said of some contemporary cartographers in Eastern Europe 
who promoted, by their mapping, the idea of nationhood rather than the 
political /status quo/ - as being part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire.

The author widens the discussion to consider more fully the wider 
purpose of the history of cartography and concludes that it is essential 
to take account not only of the production of maps but also the context 
of the maps concerned and the uses to which maps were put, which in this 
case was demonstrating Coudreau?s and Reclus?s sympathies and attitudes 
and their challenge to the French colonial view.

The prize is offered every two years. This award covered Volumes 67 
(2015) and 68 (2016). The winning article is the one judged ?to have 
made the most significant contribution to the discipline?. Only 
full-length articles, which are automatically subjected to the 
(anonymous) external refereeing process before acceptance for 
publication, are eligible for the prize.

The prize is $1000 and qualifies for a J. B. Harley Travel Award to the 
biennial International Conference on the History of Cartography (Belo 
Horizonte, Brazil, 9-14 July 2017 - http://www.ichc2017.ufmg.br/).

The Imago Mundi Prize is generously sponsored by Kenneth Nebenzahl.

By courtesy of our publishers, Routledge Journals (Taylor & Francis), 
the Ferretti article will in due course be made available free of charge 
at: http://www.tandfonline.com/toc/rimu20/current

Tony Campbell

Chairman, Imago Mundi Ltd




From federico.ferretti at ucd.ie  Mon Jan 30 09:56:20 2017
From: federico.ferretti at ucd.ie (Federico Ferretti)
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2017 08:56:20 +0000
Subject: [ISHMap-List] Seeking a PhD candidate in history of maps/history of
	geography
Message-ID: <CABSUXeLB8qCnXHEFW5gzMRL473wv0fRk9u7OjH_6DaX5ncSdjg@mail.gmail.com>

Dear colleagues,

In the context of an ongoing project of restoring and enhancing the
historical map library at UCD (containing an important collection of
historical maps, mainly of Ireland and Britain, whose inventory is still
ongoing) I am seeking a (very good) student willing to start a PhD on a
project concerning the geographical and cartographic construction of
Ireland's image between the nineteenth and the twentieth century, and the
related international circulation of geographic and cartographic knowledge.
Mobility and archive skills are required, linguistic skills (such as
reading French) might be a plus.

There is the possibility to create a scholarship, but its amount and
duration shall be negotiated considering the final project to be agreed
with the candidate, her/his profile and specific requirements etc. If you
know any suitable candidate, please encourage her/him to get in touch with
me at the address below for an informal discussion.

Thanks to all and best wishes

Federico

Dr. Federico Ferretti
Lecturer in Human Geography
School of Geography
H015 Newman Building - UCD
Belfield - Dublin 4, Ireland
federico.ferretti at ucd.ie
+353 1 716 8176
http://www.ucd.ie/research/people/geography/drfedericoferretti/
https://ucd.academia.edu/FedericoFerretti


*Secretary* for the IGU Commission on History of Geography - mandate
2016-2020 http://web.univ-pau.fr/RECHERCHE/UGIHG/


*School Director *for Global Engagement and member of the College
Internationalization Committee


*Recent papers:*

2016: ??The murderous civilization??: anarchist geographies, ethnography
and cultural differences in the works of Elie Reclus?, *Cultural
Geographies* [early view], http://cgj.sagepub.com/content
/early/2016/08/09/1474474016662293.full

2016: ?Geographies of peace and the teaching of internationalism:
Marie-Th?r?se Maurette and Paul Dupuy in the Geneva International School
(1924-1948)?, *Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers*,
[early view] http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/tran.12143/abstract

2016 ?Anarchist geographers and feminism in late 19th century France: the
contributions of Elis?e and Elie Reclus?, *Historical Geography* 44, 68-88
https://ejournals.unm.edu/index.php/historicalgeography/article/view/3533

2016*, *?Organisation and formal activism: insights from the anarchist
tradition?,* International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, *vol.
36, n. 11-12, http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1108/IJSSP-11-2
015-0127

2016: ?Reading Reclus between Italy and South America: translations of
geography and anarchism in the work of Luce and Luigi Fabbri?,* Journal of
Historical Geography, *Volume 53, July 2016, Pages 75?85,
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305748816300445
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lazarus.elte.hu/pipermail/ishm/attachments/20170130/48405231/attachment.html>

From lorraine.sherry at comcast.net  Wed Jan 25 18:33:40 2017
From: lorraine.sherry at comcast.net (Lorraine Sherry)
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 10:33:40 -0700
Subject: [ISHMap-List] Announcing our March 21 RMMS Meeting at DPL
Message-ID: <004d01d27731$2c705d70$85511850$@comcast.net>

 

Note: This is also our annual RMMS meeting, so membership dues will be due.

 



The Rocky Mountain Map Society is a non-profit organization 

dedicated to the study and appreciation of maps and other items 

of cartographic interest. The Society was formed in 1991 and is 

based in Denver, Colorado.

 


 


March 21, 2017 - Professor John Kessell:  


"Whither the Waters: Mapping the Great Basin 


from Bernardo de Miera to John C. Fremont"


 




 

5:30 PM at Denver Public Library 

Fifth Floor, Gates Room

 

This program is free and open to the community.

	
A Professor Emeritus of History at University of New Mexico, John Kessell
founded the Vargas Project, something of a Southwestern Adams Papers to
publish the Journals of don Diego de Vargas, New Mexico's refounding father
in the late seventeenth century (6 vols., UNM Press, 1989-2002).  His most
recent book is Miera y Pacheco: A Renaissance Spaniard in Eighteenth-Century
New Mexico (U. of Oklahoma Press, 2013).  He lives near Durango within sight
of a Miera campsite dating from August 1776.

 

"When first asked what influence Miera's famed 1778 map of the
Dominguez-Escalante expedition had on subsequent cartography of the region,
I hadn't a clue.  A great deal, it turns out, resulting especially from
Miera's faulty hydrography.  The likes of Humboldt, Pike, and Tanner, all
contributed to the myth: just get yourself to the Great Salt Lake, choose
your river, and paddle to California.  Such a delusion!"

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lazarus.elte.hu/pipermail/ishm/attachments/20170125/9b6295cd/attachment.html>

From nick.millea at bodleian.ox.ac.uk  Thu Jan 19 13:43:04 2017
From: nick.millea at bodleian.ox.ac.uk (Nick Millea)
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 12:43:04 +0000
Subject: [ISHMap-List] Friends of the Bodleian maps lecture: 7 February
Message-ID: <e605311c-7b4b-4ce0-a6df-3d2ed82e4621@HUB05.ad.oak.ox.ac.uk>

Dear All,

Possibly of interest?

With best wishes,
Nick

_____________________________________________________

Nick Millea

Map Librarian, Bodleian Library, Broad Street, Oxford, OX1 3BG
Tel:      01865 287119
Email:  nick.millea at bodleian.ox.ac.uk

Web: http://www.bodleian.ox.ac.uk/maps

Libguide ?
http://ox.libguides.com/finding-maps
Map Room blog ?
http://blogs.bodleian.ox.ac.uk/maps/
_____________________________________________________







Tuesday 7th February 1?1.45pm

Debbie Hall, Bodleian Libraries, Oxford

Treasures from the Map Room: a journey through the Bodleian collections
The stories behind 75 of the Bodleian?s extraor?dinary maps are captured in the recent Bodleian publication Treasures from the Map Room. It explains the significance of famous cartographic treasures, beautiful decorative early maps, and some lesser known maps with stories to tell, from the 14th to the 21st century. Debbie Hall, the book?s editor, will give a virtual tour of some of its highlights, includ?ing the famous Gough Map of Great Britain and the earliest surviving map of Oxford.


Visit the Friends of the Bodleian?s Events page to reserve your place online: www.bodleian.ox.ac.uk/bodley/friends/events
Or contact the Administrator: tel. 01865 277596
Or email fob at bodleian.ox.ac.uk
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lazarus.elte.hu/pipermail/ishm/attachments/20170119/161bc879/attachment.html>

