Connected Cartographies
Addenda and Corrigenda: Ortelius, Velasco and Herrera
Errors can occur in historical writing. Connected Cartographies brings together maps and texts in several languages, which presents particular challenges of transcription, identification and attribution. I regard acknowledging and correcting errors as part of an author’s continuing responsibility to readers and to the scholars whose work the book discusses.
The caption to Figure 2.3 on page 65 of Connected Cartographies incorrectly identifies the reproduced map as Velasco’s manuscript. The image is Herrera’s printed Descripcion de las Yndias Ocidentales (1601), held by the John Carter Brown Library, Brown University, shelfmark B601 H564h /1-SIZE, accession 01808. I thank Ricardo Padrón for drawing attention to this error.
The relationship between Herrera’s map and Velasco’s cartography nevertheless remains important to the discussion. The John Carter Brown Library describes Velasco’s manuscript maps as “copied and enlarged here by Herrera y Tordesillas.” Its manuscript collection includes the [Demarcacion y nauegaciones de Yndias.], catalogued as [1575], shelfmark Codex Sp 7 / 1-SIZE, accession 17000. There is therefore a documented basis for discussing Herrera’s map in relation to Velasco’s geographical work, although the printed map and the manuscript must be distinguished. Herrera catalogue; Velasco catalogue
There is also evidence connecting Ortelius’s Maris Pacifici with Velasco’s cartographic information. Bronwen Douglas traces New Guinea place-names recorded in Velasco’s regional map and geographical description into later cartography, including Ortelius’s Pacific map. Separately, Plantin’s correspondence documents Montano’s role in supplying geographical materials to Ortelius. Together, these provide grounds for considering Montano’s network a plausible context for the circulation of Velasco-related information. My account should have distinguished more clearly between these documented connections and the inferred identification of the particular materials and route of transmission. Douglas, figs. 9–10 and notes 104–109; Plantin correspondence, vol. VI
The contexts of cartographic exchange explored in the chapter nevertheless remain relevant to its central subject: Ortelius’s printed map of China and the circulation of the geographical knowledge on which it drew.
Archival references for the correspondence
The following locations are those cited in J. Denucé, ed., Correspondance de Christophe Plantin, vol. VI (1916):
- Plantin to Arias Montano, 22 August 1579: Archives Plantiniennes, X, fol. 4; letter 833, pp. 74–75. Requests maps of America and China. Scanned reference
- Plantin to Arias Montano, 1 July 1580: Archives Plantiniennes, X, fol. 18v; letter 882, especially pp. 170–171. Discusses geographical materials from Montano to be forwarded through Mofflin and Goossens. Scanned reference
- Plantin to Arias Montano, 15–18 September 1581: Archives Plantiniennes, X, fol. 33v; letter 947, especially p. 306. Records Ortelius’s receipt of geographical descriptions of the Indies and China, his thanks to Montano, and his intention to publish them. Scanned reference
Report an error
A useful precedent is Tonio Andrade’s public errata page for The Gunpowder Age, which also invites readers to report errors.
I welcome corrections and clarifications from readers. Please include the page number, the passage concerned, your proposed correction and, where possible, a supporting source.