I emailed my ranger and now have his reply, which I have attached to this missive. I hope it is not considered too long for this list, but I think some of you will find it as interesting and helpful as I did. There were two main issues bothering me. One was how Cabrillo could still believe the Pacific was small even after Magellan had sailed across it. There were, of course, many factors, but basically the cartographers of the day believed the North Pacific was much narrower than the South Pacific. The other issue was the conflict between the ranger's claim that the eclipse measurement in Mexico City was off by 25 degrees and Jim Morrison's claim that the error was only a single degree. It turns out there was an early, inaccurate measurement in 1541, just before Cabrillo set sail, and a later, accurate one in 1577.
Thank you all for the various insights. --Art Carlson P.S. A few months ago there was an extended discussion here on the green flash. I stumbled on some good web sites explaining the phenomenon and showing some good photos: http://mintaka.sdsu.edu/GF/ From: "George Herring" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Terry DiMattio" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: A Question of History -- related article Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 16:55:30 -0700 Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Importance: Normal Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Mr. Carlson Below is the draft-article I refer to and promised in my response to your e-mail. Again, if you would like to see the maps mentioned please send a mailing address and I'll see that a copy of the newsletter containing the article is sent to you. George _____________________________________ Not Far To The West Christopher Columbus was lost to his dying day. In fact, between 1492 and 1542, all Europeans in the New World, in a sense, were lost. Why? Because most Renaissance mapmakers accepted the classical belief that China existed approximately 180 longitudinal degrees east of Europe1.. It's actually 120 degrees east. In this article I hope to convince you with early 16th century maps why Columbus, Juan Rodriguez Cabrillo, and others thought Asia lay just beyond the western horizon. Let's begin with this 1503 woodcut-map, drawn by Gregor Reisch, is based on the work of Claudius Ptolemy, a Roman-Egyptian geographer of the 2nd century AD2.. Ptolemy collected the geographic work of other scholars and the tales of travelers to fill in the details of this map. A 1478 version of the exact same map is known to have been in an Atlas owned by Christopher Columbus. The important feature of this map to note relative to our story is the extent of it's eastern extreme. Asia is depicted as extending more than 180 degrees to the east of Spain! Why does the map depict Asia extending so far to the east? Because Ptolemy said so, that's why. Renaissance scholars had no means with which to measure longitude and only crude estimates of distance covered by ships. They had no reason, or evidence, to refute the knowledge of Ptolemy. Columbus, like most explorers after him for 100 years, accepted Ptolemy's estimate3.. And, like many amateur scientists, he manipulated his data. Columbus interpreted the writings of Marco Polo to indicate that the mainland of Asia extended east 253 degrees, and he cited Polo's accounts of a large island named Zipango (Japan)4. said to lay an additional 30 degrees east of China. This left, in his estimates, about 77 degrees of ocean to cross from the Canaries to Japan5.. When Columbus bumbled into the West Indies he had traveled about 60 degrees, but he estimated he'd traveled about 75 degrees. Far enough, he thought, to have reached the eastern fringes of the Indies. Since the people he encountered appeared to be "Indian," it was natural for him to conclude he was in the "Indies". He maintained that Cuba and the other islands of the Caribbean were the East Indies until his death in 1506. Scholars and explorers throughout the early 16th century argued about just what Columbus had found and how it fit with the writings of Ptolemy and the beliefs of the Church. Consistently they persisted in the belief that China lay less than 180 degrees west of Spain (60 degrees or less west of Mexico.) Furthermore, according to the Bible the apostles had spread the gospel to all the peoples of the world. For this to be feasible it was necessary for mapmakers to depict the America's as accessible from Asia. Virtually all maps from the 16th century, therefore, depicted Asia and the America's as connected or separated by only a narrow strait of water (the Straits of Anian) somewhere in the North Pacific6.. This map, probably by Giorgio Callapoda in 1550, is typical of such mid-16th century maps. The tip of the Baja California Peninsula is shown as 245 degrees east (115 degrees west) of Spain - 15 degrees to far to the west7.. The eastern most regions of China (Mangi) are shown as 210 degrees east of Spain. Japan is shown midway between them. Only 40 degrees separates New Spain from China! Assuming Asia to be relatively close, the Cabrillo Expedition set out from New Spain in 1542 with high hopes. They sought an east-west trade route to the Indies along the Pacific coast, which in Central American Coast appeared tended toward the west8.. Since China was thought to be only 40 degrees to the west it seemed a good gamble9.. Even after return of the Cabrillo expedition in 1543, which found that the coast tended north in California, the belief that China was close still persisted. Now, however, most maps depicted Asia and North America to by joined at a latitude of 45 degrees north or greater (above the 42 degrees of latitude the expedition reported reaching.) This can be seen in both the Callapoda map, and in this map, by Paulo Forlani and Bolognini Zaltieri dated to about 1556. Besides continuing the myth that China was relatively close to New Spain, I find this map particularly interesting because it clearly portrays knowledge of the Cabrillo expedition. Look closely at the West Coast of North America and you will see Cabrillo's place-names applied to the West Coast of North America. The names are in Old Italian: P.de.S. Michel for Puerto de San Miguel - Cabrillo's name for San Diego. Galera for Galena - Cabrillo's name for Point Conception; And Sierra Nevada - the same name Cabrillo provided for the Coast Ranges of California. Other familiar Cabrillo place-names on the map - reports of the Cabrillo's voyage obviously reached the map-makers of Europe! Not until the Manila Galleons began regularly crossing the North Pacific in the late 16th century did Europeans maps begin reflecting the true dimensions between Asia and North America. This 1587 map by Gerhard Mercator is the first I am aware that began to portray the true distances involved in an east-west crossing of the North Pacific. Between 1492 and 1542 European explorers foundered on an important geographical question - how far is it to Asia from Europe? Relying on classical and Biblical sources, their worldview tended to place Asia much farther to the east, and therefore much closer to the west, then it actually is. Because of this, early explorers in the New World didn't really known where they were - they were lost. To Columbus and Cabrillo the Asian spice trade always seemed to be just over the western horizon. With this motivation drawing them onward 16th century Europeans pushed back the unknown until, at last, they came to realize the true dimensions of their world. Footnotes: 1. As you look at the maps, please note that in the early 16th century 0 degrees of longitude is drawn through the Canary Islands which is 9 degrees west of 0 degrees on a modern map. 2. Early in the 15th century the works of Ptolemy and many other ancient Greek writings were translated from Greek into Latin by Byzantine scholars fleeing the crumbling Byzantine Empire. This, combined with the invention of the movable type printing press, helped fuel the Renaissance. This in turn led to the wide publication of maps such as the ones printed in this article. 3. I have yet to find a historian or geographers authoritative opinion of how many miles each Ptolemic degree represents. Nonetheless, they appear to be close in distance to modern maps. Presumably Ptolemy accepted and continued the estimate of Erastathenes (276-196 BC) that the earth's circumference is 252,000 stades. A stade (one stadium length) is believed to have been 148 to 158 meters, making Erastathenes estimate at about 38,000 kilometers - which was remarkably accurate. The earth's circumference at the equator is 40,076 kilometers, which is slightly wider than the planet's north-south circumference which Erastathenes measured. Erastathenes made his estimate by triangulating the shadows created by the sun off of statues and in wells at different latitudes, at high-noon, on the same day. 4. Zipango is Marco Polo's mispronunciation of the Chinese word, Jih-pAn kuo, meaning "land of the rising sun." Marco Polo was correct that Japan is about 30 degrees from Peking, but it is to the north-north east, not east. 5. Columbus wildly under estimated the distance of a longitudinal degree at 28 degrees north latitude to be 62 kilometers (it is actually about 90 kilometers). Columbus' estimated would have made his crossing from the Canaries to Japan to be about 4300 kilometers. No Classical or Renaissance scholar believed Japan could be that close. Paolo dal Pozzo Toscanelli, using numbers from Greek sources before the time of Erastathenes, estimated the distance might be little as 5200 kilometers and said so in a letter to the Portuguese king Alfonso II in 1478. This letter had a strong influence upon Columbus, but Toscanelli's estimate was regarded as foolishly optimistic by most contemporary scholars. 6. They were not, after all, wrong. Only 48 miles separates Alaska and Siberia, but this strait is far to the north and west of their projections. Any view which differed greatly from that of the establishment might have drawn the attention of the Inquisition in this time period, which may have reinforced the view that modern Korea and British Colombia were close together or a single land mass. 7. Many maps after 1541 depict Mexico City as 115 degrees west of Toledo Spain. This was based, inaccurately, on a scholarly guess. To estimate longitude scholars needed an astrolabe, which they had, and a means to know the exact time where they were relative to the point from which they were measuring their distance from. No clock at that time could keep accurate time during a ship crossing. Thus people in the America's had to guess how many hours behind Europe they were. By observing two lunar eclipses from both Mexico City and Toledo, scholars hoped to calculate the exact time difference between both locations. They calculated wrong and subsequently estimated the distance between the two cities as 115.5 degrees. It is actually 90 degrees, a difference of 25.5 degrees, which is an error of about 2400 kilometers! 8. Compass needles point at magnetic north, not true north. Most early 16th century explorers on the Pacific Coast of the New World failed to adjust for this for compass declination error. This greatly influenced maps of the period. At the tip of Baja California this error is 12 degrees, which explains why the first maps of the peninsula depict it tending northwest to southeast. Likewise maps of the Pacific Coast of Central America depict it as tending east-west, leading to the designation of "South Sea" being applied to the Pacific Ocean south of it. In their minds this east-west orientation helped compensate in the northern latitudes for the vast east-west distance covered by Magellan in the Southern Pacific. 9. Careful reading of An Account of the Voyage of Juan Rodriguez Cabrillo on page 81 reveals that Bartolom_ Ferrelo, on his second attempt to get around Point Conception, sailed "southwest" from the Channel Islands about 100 leagues (400 miles) before running north and east. Might he have been looking for Japan? Maybe, maybe not, but interesting to think about. Suggested Bibliography: Thomas Su«rez's Shedding The Veil contains an excellent collection of world maps from the period and his commentary on how these maps evolved is fascinating. Samuel Eliot Morison's The Great Explorers is a good general introduction to the navigational assumptions and accomplishments of Columbus and other explorers in this period. To learn more about Cabrillo's place names and for an excellent modern translation of the account of this expedition see An Account of the Voyage of Juan Rodriguez Cabrillo, published by The Cabrillo National Monument Foundation. From: "George Herring" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Terry DiMattio" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: A Question of History Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 16:44:59 -0700 Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Importance: Normal Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Dear Mr. Carlson, I remember speaking with you quite well. Frankly I am pleased to hear from a person who is inspired to follow up on an interest in the subject. As I read through your e-mail I see five general questions and/or areas of interest: 1.) How was the nocturnal used? 2.) How did they estimate Mexico City's longitude relative to Spain in Cabrillo's time? 3.) Why do mid-16th century maps depict North America and Asia as only being separated by about 40 degrees of longitude ("a hop, skip and a jump") at a latitude of 30 degrees north when in fact they are separated by 120 degrees of longitude at that latitude? 4.) Why hadn't the Magellan voyage corrected this belief? 5.) What happened to the Villa Lobos expedition that left Mexico at the same time as Cabrillo and sailed directly across the Pacific? Let me address each in order. 1.) As you suggest, the nocturnal measured the position of specific stars, usually the Big or Little Bear, relative to Polaris in order to ascertain month, day, and local time. Day and month were important to know in order to compare with predicted tides and tidal currents that affected sailing conditions. Tides and currents could be predicted locally by observation-they tend to peak at approximately the same time of day relative to time of year (sun-earth alignment) position and the current phase of the moon from year to year. 2.) My Mexico City-25 degrees west source for 1541 comes from Samuel Eliot Morison in the "Great Explorers." In chapter 19, "The Mariner's Day", under the subtitle "Navigation" Morison writes, "Regiomontanus's Ephemerides and Zacuto's Almanch Perpetuum gave the predicted hours of total eclipses at Nuremberg and Salmanca respectively, and by comparing those with the observed hour of the eclipse by local sun time, multiplying by 15 to convert time into arc, you could find the longitude west of the almanac-maker's meridian. This sounds simple enough, but Columbus with two opportunities . . . muffed both, as did almost everyone else for a century. At Mexico City in 1541 a mighty effort was made by the intelligentsia to determine the longitude of that place by timing two eclipses of the moon. The imposing result was 8h 2m 32s (120 degrees, 38 minutes) west of Toledo; but the correct difference of longitude between the two places is 95 degrees, 12 minutes. Thus the Mexican savants made an error of some 25 ½ degrees, putting their city into the Pacific!" 1541 is just one year before the departure of Cabrillo. Morison goes on to say that even in the late 17th century no one was wholly certain they could plot longitude with accuracy. Most maps I have seen from this period tend to place Mexico City and the Mexican-Pacific coast approximately 10 to 25 degrees too far to the west. 3.) Conversely, the predominant world view of renaissance Europe placed the Mulocca (Spice) islands at about 180 degrees, and the east coast of China as 200 to 220 degrees, (not at 120 degrees that we know it to be today.) This left approximately 40 degrees from the tip of Baja California to China - a "hop skip and a jump" in relative terms, with the island of Japan somewhere in the middle. As it happens I recently wrote an article discussing how Europeans had come to the world view for the Cabrillo National Monument Foundation's newsletter, "The Explorer." I will send a current draft as a separate e-mail immediately following this one. Unfortunately our e-mail doesn't handle graphics very well, so if you would like to see the maps that accompany the article please send me your mailing address and we'll send you a copy of this edition of "The Explorer" when it comes out. 4.) As for the Magellan expedition - the simplest answer to this observation is to look at any mid-16th century map of the Americas. First, the Pacific coast, especially that of Central America, is typically depicted as a long east to west (not SE to NW) coast. This is because early navigators did not adjust for a strong easterly compass declination error in the region (12% at the tip of Baja California). This appears to cover about 25 degrees of the longitudinal distance covered by Magellan in the south. Second, again, they believed the East Coast of Asia to be 210 +/- degrees east of Spain at 30 degrees north (see #3 above). Magellan sailed in the Southern Hemisphere. They placed the East Coast of China as extending over the top of Magellan's route. Third, Magellan's survivors estimated their longitudinal distance covered and this represented just an estimate. The general consensus after the voyage of the "Victoria" (which, by the way, surrendered to the Portuguese in the Azores before reaching Spain) was that the Pacific basin was shaped like a wide up-side-down "V". If one went far enough north the distance between America and Asia decreased on their maps, with "Giapan" somewhere in the middle. It may interest you to know that three ships and their crews survived at the time of Magellan's death in the Philippines. After reaching the Moluccas one ship had to be abandoned, but the other two ships parted company in order to increase the chances that one would return with the news (and ½ the wealth) of the expedition. One, the famous "Victoria", managed to return to Europe via the Portuguese-westerly route. The other ship, "Trinidad", already in poor shape, fared a worse fate. Her commander took her north hoping to catch a westerly wind in the northern latitudes and sail to Spanish-Panama (they didn't know of Cortes' conquest of Mexico yet). She never got a chance to try because a storm off of Japan nearly wrecked her and forced her to the south. Eventually the crew was rescued and imprisoned by a Portuguese ship. 5.) Finally, regarding Villa Lobos, in a nutshell he sailed one month after Cabrillo with the intention to sail SW from Mexico to the Philippines (a place whose position was not well understood by him.) By the time the ships arrived scurvy was rampant in the crew, who ultimately mutinied and killed Villa Lobos. Eventually they surrendered to a Portuguese garrison in the Moluccas. Not until the time of Legaspi's successful crossing from Acapulco to the Philippines and subsequent colonization in 1563 (20 years after the Cabrillo expedition) did Europeans begin to truly appreciate the immense dimensions of the North Pacific. I hope this has been of use to you. If I had to recommend a few books on the subject these are the three I'd go with: - Thomas Suarez's "Shedding The Veil" - Samuel Eliot Morison's "The Great Explorers" - Harry Kelsey's "Juan Rodriguez Cabrillo" Yours, George Herring Park Ranger Cabrillo National Monument (619)523-4565 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
