« PrejšnjaNaprej »
and probably printed.* The map found by himself he thinks is one of these. As to the large map spoken of in the Introductio, there was no proof that it was ever printed until Fischer announced his discovery. For reasons to us unknown, the edition of Ptolemy ready to be printed in 1505 was not then published, t in fact did not appear till 1513, and then not at St. Dié, but at Strassburg, brought out by other editors. Is it not likely, asks Mr. Soulsby, that the world map prepared for the work in 1505 was also delayed? Soulsby is of this opinion, and regards the map Stevens has found as a proof-sheet of the map of 1505. It may be remarked here that some copies of a map of the newly discovered lands, engraved wholly or in part by Waldseemüller at the bidding of Duke René of Lorraine, were sold as early as 1507. I
It is Soulsby's opinion that the great size of the Wolfegg map speaks for the priority of Stevens' map. As Waldseemüller was engaged in preparing an edition of Ptolemy, it was but natural that he should first engrave a map of the usual size for the work before undertaking a map of unusual size. Besides, Soulsby thinks that the printing-presses of the time could not print so large a map. In putting forth the last argument Mr. Soulsby seems to have overlooked the fact that the Wolfegg map was printed in sections.
Dr. Franz Ess in a paper to be found in the New York Staats-Zeitung of Sunday, June 22, 1902, to which we have been indebted for many particulars, publishes a letter of Father Fischer referring to the Stevens claim. We translate the text as found in the Staats-Zeitung : “Soulsby ascribes to von Wieser views regarding the expression in solido which are precisely the reverse of what Wieser says. Soulsby seems not to be an impeccable German scholar. The opinion that there was an older map bearing the name America is based
* Is one of these the printed map mentioned by the Abbot Trithemius in a letter of August 12, 1507, showing the discoveries of Vespucci? Cf. Justin Winsor, Christopher Columbus, p. 412. † In 1508 Duke René, the patron of the St. Dié scholars, died Winsor, Christopher Columbus, p. 540,
on the mistaken hypothesis contained in the following words of Soulsby: "The map discovered by Fischer which was to accompany the Introductio (that appeared on April 25, 1507) '; while, according to the express and repeated statements of Waldseemüller, the map was completed on April 25th, and the book was written to accompany the map entitled Cosmographia. The argument from analogy also, at the end (of Soulsby's paper], is correct only if the 1507 map of Stevens, which measures about one-twelfth of Waldseemüller's map, is posterior to the latter. My conviction is that Stevens' certainly interesting map should be ascribed to the year 1508 or 1509. Decisive as regards this point is the fact that the correct position of Greenland, which appears to be one of the features of the Stevens map, corresponds with the representation of Greenland in the Strassburg Ptolemy of 1513. ... Heretofore Stevens thought he had found the map which I have now discovered; this contention he has of course abandoned now."
Until both maps are published it is difficult to form an opinion on the merits of the claims on both sides. So much we may say now, that Father Fischer seems to have misunderstood at least a part of Soulsby's and Stevens' arguments. As we understand Soulsby, he does not contest the fact that the Wolfegg map was published with the Introductio, but holds that an earlier map existed, prepared for the edition of Ptolemy of whose preparation we have traces as early as 1505, but which was afterwards abandoned. Nor is this opinion new and suggested by the present controversy, for we find it suggested in Winsor's Christopher Columbus, pp. 540 ff., which dates back to 1891. It seems to us plain that the map to explain which was the purpose of the Cosmographic Introductio must have been published with it. Any other supposition seems to be unsatisfactory. The fact that the Wolfegg map is a wallmap explains both the issuing of an Introduction and the total disappearance of the map subsequently. Schoener's (the Wolfegg) copy was saved because it was folded and bound. Again, it appears plain to us that even if Mr. Stevens' contentions are true and his map is older than Father Fischer's, the spread of the name America cannot be ascribed to the single proof of the supplement of the projected Ptolemy of 1505, but rather to the wall-map, of which, according to von Wieser, Father Fischer's copy is also a proof.
In conclusion we must add an observation of von Wieser. It had long been a problem whence Johannes de Stobnicza had drawn the two maps of the Old and the New World found in his Introductio in Ptholomei Cosmographiam (Cracovia, 1512). Von Wieser teaches us that they are copies of two accessory maps of the Old and the New World found on the Wolfegg Map. The same map explains why H. Glareanus in his reduced copy of the Waldseemüller map of 1507 agrees absolutely with Stobnicza in his design of the Western Hemisphere. Both are copies of the same original.
P. S. The reader will find a reproduction of part of the Wolfegg map facing p. 14. We are indebted to Father Fischer and the Messrs. Herder of Freiburg i. Breisgau for permission to republish it here.
THE GLOBE OF POPE MARCELLUS II. AND ITS RELATION TO THE VOYAGE OF VERRAZANO, WITH NOTES ON THE DISCOVERY OF THE HUDSON.
BY DR. BENJAMIN F. DE COSTA.
THE Obelisk in Central Park proclaims the fact that New York is already well advanced in the work of enriching itself with treasures of Egyptian antiquity. Nineveh marbles, with inscriptions that may have met the eye of Jonah, attest the success of American exploration in the valley of the Tigris. Greece, Italy, Palestine, Cyprus, and Asia Minor have also made rare contributions to both public and private collections. We boast the possession of many of the rarest books and choicest literary monuments. Annually we have brought to our shores collections illustrating the past and its glories, which Europe and the East do not surrender without a pang.
Many of these treasures are well known and fairly appre. ciated by a very considerable portion of our citizens; yet there is one deeply interesting and important relic of the past that is known to comparatively few outside the small circle of historical students who have given this relic due consideration. Reference is here made to a terrestrial globe, once the property of Pope Marcellus II., and now preserved in the Museum of the New York Historical Society. This globe forms the most important geographical monument in America. It was made in Rome by one Vlpius, in the year 1542, and has a greater value for America than the celebrated globe of Martin Behaim, which antedates the voyage of Columbus. It was found in Madrid by Buckingham Smith, who brought it to New York, when it was purchased by the donor of the Nineveh marbles, John David Wolfe, and placed with the Historical Society. This globe is fifteen and one-half inches in diameter, and is