This is a MapHist list message (when you hit 'reply' you're replying to the whole list) o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o +
Hi Peter, dear maphisters: Some final comments on my side regarding these later topics - specially because I am not used to make of scientific topics an area of personnel fight and lack of some required elegance in addressing other people. > > I do not know the provenance of the Green globe except for a > connection to a prior owner known as Quiri but I suppose Chet van Duzer > has sorted > all that out as best can be done. > > Could you Peter tell us why you keep calling the globe of Quiri when elsewhere always (as far as I know) appears as Quirini? If this globe was found or came from Venice - is there any connection with being owned by the much later cardinal Quirini? > > > Nordenskiold (who died just 4 weeks after Fischer's discovery in > 1901) was not alone in questioning von Wieser's defense of the Orthodoxy > about a Balbao-Magellan primacy regarding when the Europeans first saw and > sailed on the Pacific Ocean. On this there is no doubts that it was surely not Balboa - at least Antonio de Abreu was already sailing in 1511 at the border of the nowadays Indian-Pacific oceans and inside the Pacific along the island of Timor and beyond. > > > This goes to show the extent to which these cartographic creations in > the 1505-1520 period (See Table A in my book) have not been studied > closely by scholars for years, decades, even for more than 100 years in > some > cases. My discovery of Rosselli's depiction of a cone-shaped new southern > continent in his 1508 world map is another big bombshell -- and there are > four > such copies of Rosselli's map the market value of which each is much > higher > after I pin-pointed this feature in early 2009. > > I am sorry Peter - your "bomb-shell" "discoveries" (???) are typically a bit outdated and already done by someone before. Is there a bit of too much of an ego here?? Jean Fontaine mentions exactly that again below: the "bomb-shell" is old news. Someone already wrote a book about it, etc. You wrote a great article into Mercator's World magazine (if I remember the name correctly) a couple of years ago - finally putting into black and white what many others never dare to publish, just speculating instead in silence. Namely the possible knowledge of the future-to-be Magellanic Strait many years before by the Portuguese and even a possible navigation towards the West coast of South America. Other than that being a bit more humble would not hurt you Peter - I figure... As well as doing your homework properly. If, as you say, even a non-serious blind nationalist history-amateur like me could teach you a few things based mostly on what he learned on many years of Portuguese high-school and reading in his free time...to the point of surprisingly being in the inside cover of your book...then I would say that you depended too much on amateurs like me. Humble at least in your book acknowledgments...but boy, your emails bolster your ego like I never saw anything alike... Perhaps the French National Library did not decide to suggest that the Green-Quirini globe was done by Waldseemueller after reading or reading not your book Peter - as you sadly speculate in one of your early emails. Perhaps someone in St. Die already considered that way before - as the 2008 message of T. Campbell to this list alludes to. The world does not revolve around your book and your "bomb-shells" Peter. You may be right in a couple of items - but you have a terrible non-diplomatic way of presenting your arguments...and indeed an over-ego... sorry to have to state that...but this is first about science and not egos or "I am right, you are wrong"... This is about history and not a ring of English boxing. I apologize to the other readers to have to enter personnel matters when this should be about science. You can have all your glory and debates and challenge (??) whoever you want Peter. I got enough of this way of working with others... >From your other msg: > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2011 19:41:03 EST > From: [email protected] > Subject: [MapHist] The Bombshell Green-Quiri Globe: Gallois, > Pelletier, Schoener & Florida > To: [email protected] > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > > > Pelletier has published at least two essays that deal with the > Green-Quiri globe in whole or in part and I gather or assume that she was > the key person who pushed the Bibliotheque Nationale to consider an > earlier > date than 1515 (Gallois' date) and an attribution to Waldseemueller rather > than Schoener. Is this correct, how it happened? > Read T. Campbell message from 2008 to this list Peter - there is a possible answer to this question other than the possible role of Pelletier you mention. Here copied in its relevant part again: " booklet by Dr. Albert Ronsin, the late curator at St. Die, which described a so-called "Green Globe" that had been made by Waldseemuller and which now resides in the Bibliotheque Nationale in Paris." Seemingly Ronsin was the director of St. Die Library at some point of his life. > > The Spanish Flag on Florida in the Green Globe does not prove > that the Green globe had to be post-1512 (post-Ponce de Leon) for the > simple > reason that the Spanish knew about Florida long before 1512 -- > -- see the Cantino/Caverio maps and Waldseemueller -- where you can > clearly see a peninsula pointing to the south -- like a dagger pointing at > the > heart of Cuba (then known as Isabella). > You have to prove that statement Peter - that the Spanish did know about Florida before 1512. Other than that the Cantino/Caverio map is of Portuguese origin essentially as are many of the names on such old maps of Florida. Further more - even if the Spanish (for the sake of the argument) knew about Florida before 1512, they did not so revealed to the world. So how could a Spanish flag be over Florida before it was officially discovered by Spain? Fair enough - nobody can totally prove the Portuguese also had a secret base in Andros Island in the Bahamas, from where Florida was probably mapped not long after Columbus first voyage. In any case your statement lacks evidence. > > The Ponce de Leon story is another myth like the Bishop Las Casas > when he claimed that the Spanish did not know that Cuba was an island > until 1508. This is rubbish as you can clearly see Cuba/Isabella as an > island > with the distinctive shape that it has in the maps I just mentioned. > > The other myth is that Balboa was the first European to see the > Pacific. He might have been the first Spaniard but he was not the first > European as my book The Magellan Myth demonstrates. > Sure - Antonio de Abreu was sailing on the other side of the Pacific already in 1511, before Balboa therefore. Everyone knows that "bombshell" as well... > > Paulo Afonso is not a serious scholar about Florida and all these > matters. > I am the first to say that I am an amateur. As to be serious I resent that kind of non polite comment and would kindly therefore ask you to remove my name from your book counter-cover acknowledgments...if you ever manage to spell it correctly, that is...in future editions of it... I am a scientific researcher in astrophysics. Surely I am not a genius or the best astrophysicist in the world, perhaps. However you can check some of my peer-reviewed published papers online. I do not think it is proper of you to judge how serious I am or not in history matters. > > He clearly he swallows the Ponce de Leon myth hook, line and > sinker because it gives him pleasure. You are so funny Peter - now you dare to know what gives me pleasure. Boy, talking about delusion... Again I believe the readers of this list deserve better. On my side this is my last message where I felt the need to reply to such personnel matters instead of discussing facts and science. About Ponce de Leon and Spain knowing Florida before 1512 - at least in an official way: the onus is on your side Peter, you to prove that statement. If you do not prove it - then we will have to question who is serious or not. Mutatis mutandis all your statements about Pinzon and Spanish explorations to the extreme SW - that never happened except in your mind. Prove Peter - where are the proves?... Because it justifies in his mind his low > opinion of and contempt for the Spanish as explorers compared to his > ancestors the Portuguese navigators. All this on Afonso's part is just > anti-Spanish prejudice that colors his mind, his thoughts and his > scholarship which > in the process has become flawed. I keep my openly assumed historically anti-Spanish posture, because indeed historically Portugal was always punished by Spain. There is no secret on that. Neither does it blinds me - much the contrary..."know your enemy, closely"...one could say... Very polite of you however to describe what colors my mind based on your assumptions of my prejudice - which you essentially ignore. > Then he asks us all to embrace a > Vopelius map from the 1440s to prove what the Portuguese did or knew by > 1499. I > am sorry. This is nationalism not serious scholarship. > > This is ignorance on your side Peter - as you were ignorant for too long about the Lenox globe, maps showing the Magellan Strait called as Martim Behaim, etc., etc. Wouu...even a non-serious blind nationalist could teach you about those. By the way healthy patriotism is different from nationalism - in my dictionary. Also Vopelius has more than one map and it is not from 1440!!! I guess that was your typo meaning 1540's. I am not asking you or nobody else to embrace Vopelius - I am just following a discussion that others had before, namely cartographers as F. Monacus and J. Girava. In this case there is prove, there are maps and globes showing 1499 as the year Terra Australis Incognita was found. Surely scarce, surely not much is known about the sources of Vopelius - but it exists...that is all what this blind non-serious nationalist is saying... Maybe one day you will come up with another "bomb-shell" about Vopelius. Yes, because you are a serious scholar who does the homework properly, yet ignores books as the one mentioned by Jean Fontaine. Enough indeed...you can keep your ego for yourself Peter... > In any case, the Green-Quiri globe might date to 1515-1518 but > that would not be because we can see a Spanish flag on Florida. I hope to > locate Pelletier's line of analysis that she advanced as early as 2000. > > Of course the big question here is: was she the first person to > observe the name "America" FOUR TIMES on the Green-Quiri globe or was that > someone else? Perhaps Jean Fontaine? Fontaine first noted this feature > in > at Maphist post the other day presumably knows the answer to this > question. > > Man - you call yourself serious? You question how serious are other people??? Do you even read the emails properly Peter??? Jean Fontaine clearly stated in his first message that he got his photo of the Green-Quirini globe from a book about the mapping of America. This is old news... Boy - talking about bad work...read the emails to start with. Jean Fontaine makes you another favor - he wrote again to this list stating the obvious...the book is from 1980!! This could even be a bit comic actually...for someone so sure about himself, his book and challenging everyone... But it is sad instead!... > In any case, this deeper look at the Green-Quiri globe gives us > another powerful indicator of the sophistication of the European > perception > of reality which is clearly signaled by that placement of the name > "America" FOUR TIMES on the New World -- even on what we know as North > America > roughly 25 years before Mercator did that. > > All this makes the recent Magellan-related exhibition at > Princeton's Firestone Library look bad, horribly inadequate as I tried to > underscore > 4-5 months ago. Again, he who laughs last -- laughs best. > > Here I agree with you if Princeton did not go further back in time addressing these matters. However I am sure they may have better manners than yours. On Jean Fontaine msg: Message: 6 > Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 02:35:59 -0500 > From: Jean Fontaine <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [MapHist] The Bombshell Green-Quiri Globe: Gallois, > Pelletier, Schoener & Florida > To: Discussion group for map history <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Peter Dickson wrote : > > > In any case, the Green-Quiri globe might date to 1515-1518 but that > > would not be because we can see a Spanish flag on Florida. I hope to > > locate Pelletier's line of analysis that she advanced as early as 2000. > > Of course the big question here is: was she the first person to observe > > the name "America" *_FOUR TIMES_* on the Green-Quiri globe or was that > > someone else? Perhaps Jean Fontaine? Fontaine first noted this feature > > in at Maphist post the other day presumably knows the answer to this > > question. > > My so-called "bombshell revelation" is old news. As I mentioned in my > post, the close-up image that I put online* was scanned from the 2001 > edition of the book "The Mapping of America", by Seymour I. Schwartz and > Ralph E. Ehrenberg (Wellfleet Press). I should have added that the date > of the book's first edition is 1980. > > Hey Peter - did you read it finally? Got it now!!! Many other people have been writing me and alerted me in the past for your personality and how nasty you can get. I start seeing unfortunately now why such people had problems with you... * http://pages.globetrotter.net/jfontain/Green_Globe.jpg > > Here is what the authors have to say about the globe: > > -------------------------- > [Photo legend, p. 35] PLATE 9: Cartographer unknown. "Paris Globe" > (detail). 1515. Wood, hand painted; diameter 24 cm. Bibliothèque > Nationale, Paris. Also known as the "Green Globe," the outlines and > colorings are artistically presented, continent and islands having the > appearance of being raised above the seas. Area of water painted dark > green, giving globe one of its common names. The name America appears in > four places, and it is placed for the first time on the North American > continent. > > [Main text, p. 32-33] A 1515 globe by the German mathematician, > atronomer and geographer Johannes Schöner, in the Landesbibliothek in > Weimar, presented the two continental masses of North and South America > separated by a sea. The name America appears only on the southern > region. Another globe, also ascribed to the year 1515, is the "Paris > Globe" (Plate 9). This diminutive sphere, now in the Bibliothèque > Nationale in Paris, is quite similar to the Schöner globe. The name > America appears four times, but most striking is its placement, for the > first time, on the North American continent. The first printed map that > applied the name America to both the North American and the South > American continent was drawn in 1538 by Gerard Mercator and published in > the same year (see plate 16B). > -------------------------- > > > Jean, one comment here below if I may, > > 4. About the name America being all over the place: on one hand, it > looks like the mapmaker wanted by that to insist that all those lands > make a single continent, thus worthy of a single name. But on the other > hand, he draws one or two imaginary straits passing through Central > America, thus creating two or three separated landmasses. Why would he > give the same name to what he presents as two or three separated > continents? > > If the sources for the globe have at least some Spanish influence (like in Florida), no surprise the imaginary Veragua Strait is still present in such globes. Spain was stuck in Gulf of Mexico too long for a country searching for India and the Spice islands...this much many authors concluded and not just a non-serious nationalist like Peter so kindly describes me... > Jean Fontaine > > > *************************************** > Regards, Paulo Afonso
_______________________________________________ MapHist: E-mail discussion group on the history of cartography hosted by the Faculty of Geosciences, University of Utrecht. The statements and opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the University of Utrecht. The University of Utrecht does not take any responsibility for the views of the author. List Information: http://www.maphist.nl Maphist mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.geo.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/maphist
