Publications
For articles in
journals see http://www.orteliusmaps.com/ort_background.html#essays
Books:
Ortelius Atlas Maps,
an illustrated guide
Hardcover, 308 pages.
Marcel P.R. van den Broecke
Price: Euro 57 ISBN 90 6194 308 6, 1996
HES Publishers B.V.,
The Netherlands
You can read book reviews on this first edition.
For autographed
copies contact the author at info@orteliusmaps.com.
This book is
meanwhile sold out and is out of print.
A completely rewritten second edition of this work,
containing 708 pages, has been published by Hes & de Graaf publishers on
June 9, 2011.
See also: http://www.hesdegraaf.com/Book/Detail/ortelius-atlas-maps-an-illustrated-guide-second-revised-edition
Review of this book
in Brussels International Map Collectors’Circle (BIMCC) no. 42 of January 2012
For collectors of
Ortelius maps and all those interested in the subject, the first edition of
this book dating from 1996
has been a most valued companion these past 15 years. As demand fir it
continued from the time it went out of
print a few years ago, the publishers thought of a reprint, but the author, having
accumulated an enormous amount
of new material since then, proposed a significantly revised and enlarged new
edition, which is now before us.
Let us see how the original editorial outline of the guide’s first edition has
been adapted for this one. The previously
established identification number of maps appearing in the first (1570) and
later editions of the Theatrum Orbis
Terrarum (until 1641), also called the ‘vdB’ number in reference literature
by antiquarians and others, has obviously
been kept. It had been allocated by the author to maps in the order usually
presented by Ortelius in his atlas. If more
than one map of an area occurs in the course of later editions, then these maps
are presented consecutively, to allow
comparison. As before, each map is illustrated with a small black and white
photograph measuring about 7.5 x 10
cm. This is followed by the title of the map, together with a transcription and
English translation of all the text entries
found on the map – a most welcome addition. Next come the familiar items of
plate size, and approximate scale.
Attached to the Ortelius identification number are the habitual coded
references to cartobibliographies by Koeman,
Meurer and Karrow, plus a new reference to Peter van der Krogt’s revised
edition of Koeman’s Atlantes Neerlandici
Volume IIIA that became available in 2003.
The next entry is ‘Occurrence in Theatrum
editions and page numbers’.
Whilst this was previously given in a few lines, it has been significantly
augmented here. In addition to the listing of
all editions in which a given map appears by year, language and page number, we
now find end-lines of text on verso
quoted which permit positive identification of as given map. The estimated
number of copies has been updated from
recent research, as was the number of states on record (previously 372, at
present 524), and their cartographic sources.
Most entries now end with newly added bibliographical remarks and, where
available, with references to publications
on that particular map.
All this may seem rather technical, but it is the fruit of many years of intensive
research by the author, presented in a
compact yet user-friendly form. It allows the map enthusiast and specialist to confidently
identify the origin and date
of any of the 229 loose Ortelius map sheets described, as it is in this format
that they are usually acquired by the
collector. Those in possession of an entire volume of the Theatrum
are referred to van der Krogt’s above mentioned
cartobibliography which, in addition to the Theatrum
editions, also records the smaller-size versions called Epitome,
not addressed here.
Observant readers might now wish to argue about the number of 229 plates
mentioned, since the first edition
enumerated 234 plates. The explanation is that van den Broecke’s research has
shown six of the plates previously
listed to be later states of existing plates. Their identification numbers have
been skipped, so as not to change the
numbering sequence. One new plate (of the Americas) has turned up – a fascinating
story to read – and this has been
given a ‘bis’ number, so that the total number of single sheet maps considered
here is indeed 229.
Needless to say, the introductory chapters about Ortelius as a person, his
concept for the creation of the Theatrum,
its history, and corresponding overview tables, the indices of maps by area and
by title, as well as advice on how to
use this guide have all been brought in line with new findings and contents. Collectors
will also appreciate the inclusion
of title pages and portraits preceding the corpus of maps.
In connection with text quotations from the Theatrum,
the reader should be referred to van den Broecke’s recent
publication Ortelius’ Theatrum Orbis Terrarum
(1570-1641)- Characteristics and development of a sample of on
verso texts,
Utrecht, 307 pp., which was reviewed in BIMCC Newsletter no. 35, September
2009. Much more on this specific
subject may be found on the authors website www.orteliusmaps.com
Obviously, in the handling of such a vast volume of data the occurrence of the
one or other slight mishap is
understandable. The author mentioned one to me, which is the inadvertent
replacement of the photograph of map
Ort 103 (Silesiae Typus, new plate) by the one of Ort 104 (Moraviae…). Personally
I find the map photographs
lack a bit of the contrast they offered on the glossy paper of the first
edition, but they are still entirely adequate
as a means of identification. One may also find it a little difficult to recognize
at a glance the rather small print of
the map reference number at the top of the right hand page, much less visible than
in the first edition. But this is
simply a question of getting used to.
The dust jacket of the first edition revealed the decorative splendour of the
map of the Pacific (Ort 12). This time
the binding shows, in exquisite colour, the most appealing map of the coast of
cartouches serve to frame the publisher’s designs. Both images bring home a
point that remains much alive in our
circles: a certain fascination with Ortelius. His work continues to animate map
enthusiasts’ discussions and research
endeavours. This new edition has taken shape akin to that of a bible – a form
which admirably matches its
cartobibliographic mission as a guide to the appreciation and understanding of
all the maps created by Ortelius.
Wulf Bodenstein.
=============================================================
Abraham Ortelius and
the First Atlas
Essays
commemmorating the Quadricentennial of his death 1598-1998
Editors: Marcel van den Broecke, Peter van der Krogt, Peter Meurer. hardcover,
430 pages.
Numerous illustrations, also in colour.
Price: Euro 169 . ISBN 90 6194 388 4, 1998
HES Publishers B.V.
The
Reviews have appeared.
You can view the table of contents.
For autographed
copies contact the author at info@orteliusmaps.com.
====================================================================================
Ortelius’ Theatrum Orbis Terrarum (1570-1641).
Characteristics and development of a sample of on verso map texts.
Dissertation. Softcover, 304
pp., with CD-Rom.
Marcel van den Broecke
Price: Euro 30, including postage. ISSN 0169-4839 ISBN 978-90-6809-423-7
KNAG-NGS volume 380
Access: http://igitur-archive.library.uu.nl/dissertations/2009-0204-201006/UUindex.html
For autographed copies, for Euro 30, contact the author
at info@orteliusmaps.com
Reviews:
In Cartographica
Helvetica, Heft 40, 2009, p. 54:
Das in zahlreichen Auflagen ab 1570 in Antwerpen publizierte Theatrum Orbis Terrarum von Abraham
Ortelius (1527-1598) gilt als der erste Atlas, der die wesentlichen Merkmale
zur Definition dieser Schriftengattung in sich vereinigt. Zu den
kartographiehistorischen und kartenbibliographischen Aspekten dieses Themas
gibt es inzwischen eine reiche Literatur. Ein weiteres, für mehr als als ein
Jahrhundert bis um 1700 zum Typus Atlas gehörendes Merkmal findet sich
ebenfalls erstmals bei Ortelius. Alle Karten des Theatrum haben auf der Rückseite einen erläuterende Text. Dieser
weite Bereich war bisher vollständiges wissenschaftliches Neuland, in das die
vorliegende Utrechter Dissertation eine breite Schneise der Exploration
schlägt. Marcel van den Broecke kann hierfür eine akademische Qualifikation als
Linguist und eine 25jährige aktive Leidenschaft für die Ortelius-Forschung
verbinden.
Aus den knapp 230 Karten, die im Laufe von 35 Jahren im Theatrum erschienen sind, hat der Autor
zehn für die Darstellung einer extensiven Analyse der Rückentexte ausgewählt.
In der Verbindung von kartenhistorischer Fragestellung und linguistischer
Methodik ist hier ein Flut von neuem Wissen entstanden. Aus den Ergebnissen
seien die folgenden Punkte herausgestellt:
- innerhalb des Gesamtkonzeptes sind die Texte den Karten eindeutig
nachgeordnet.
- im Inhalt geben sie Zuzatsinformationen zum topographischen Inhalt der Karte,
vor allem zu historischen Fakten.
- bis um 1573 gibt es klare inhaltliche Unterschiede zwischen den akademischen
Ausgaben in Latein und den volkssprachigen Ausgaben in Niederländisch, Deutsch
und Französisch.
- die lateinische Basisfassungen der Texte hat Ortelius bis zu seinem Tode
laufend erweitert und aktualisiert. Ihnen folgten dann die späteren
Übersetzungen.
- bei den Quellen für seine Texte hatte de Autor Ortelius eine eindeutige
Präferenz für antike Autoren gegenüber zeitgenössischen Darstellungen.
- die vielen Ausgaben der gleichen Texte in unterschiedlichen Sprachen sind
eine Fundgrube für die heutige geographische Namen- und Begriffsforschung.
- die detaillierte typographische Analyse kommt hinsichtlich der Auflagen der
Kartendrucke zu teilweise anderen Ergebnissen als die Betrachtung kompletter
Atlasbände nur nach dem Impressum.
- Konzept und Inhalt der Rückentexte bei Ortelius haben die späteren Atlanten
von Hondius und Blaeu, hingegen nicht die Atlanten der Zeitgenossen De Jode und
Mercator beeinflusst.
Insgesamt hat Ortelius im Laufe der Jahre knapp 2000 Werke von ertwa 1300
Autoren zur Kompilation der Rückentexte benutzt. Ihre genaue Bibliographie und
damit die Rekonstruktion seiner Handbibliothek - gegebenenfalls sogar mit
Nachweis konkreter Exemplare – sind ein interessantes Thema der künftigen
Ortelius-Forschung.
Die vorliegende Arbeit von Marcel van den Broecke stützt sich auf eine Analyse
von etwa 10 000 unterschiedlichen Texten beziehungsweise Textfassungen, von
denen nur ein Bruchteil exemplarisch dokumentiert werden kann. Dies reicht aber
aus, um das angezeigte Buch für das Thema zum Mass aller Dinge zu machen.
Peter H. Meurer,
Heinsberg.
(in English translation):
The Theatrum Orbis Terrarum which was
published by Abraham Ortelius
(1527-1598) in
From the almost 230 maps which have appeared in the Theatrum in the course of 35 years, the author has selected 10 to
present an extensive analysis of their on
verso texts. The context of historical-cartographic research questions and
linguistic methodology has resulted in a flood of new knowledge. We choose from
these the following aspects:
-
within the overall concept, the on verso texts
refer to the maps, not the other way around.
- the contents of the texts support the topographical content of the maps,
mostly with historical facts.
- until 1573, there are outspoken differences between the texts in editions for
academics in Latin, as compared to the texts in the vernacular Dutch, German
and French editions.
- the Latin text versions have been expanded and updated by Ortelius until his
death. Translations from Latin follow this pattern.
- in the choice of sources for his texts, the author Ortelius has a clear
preference for ancient authors as compared to contemporary text sources.
- the numerous editions in various languages containing similar texts are a
treasure grove for current research in geographical names and concepts.
- the detailed typographical analysis arrives as concerns the editions in which
maps appeared, at partly different conclusions than those simply based on the
impressum of complete atlases.
- the concept and contents of on verso texts
in Ortelius have influenced those in later atlases by Hondius and Blaeu, but
not those by his contemporaries De Jode and Mercator.
Altogether, Ortelius
has in the course of time utilized almost 2000 works by about 1300 authors to
compile his on verso texts. Their
precise bibliographies and therefore the reconstruction of his library, in some
cases leading to references of concrete copies, are an interesting theme for
future Ortelius-research.
The present study by Marcel van den Broecke is based on about 10,000 different
text versions, about which a selection has been documented in an exemplary
manner. This is sufficient to characterize the book about on verso texts discussed here as the Measure of All Things.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
In
After reading Marcel
van den Broecke’s book, one wonders how he could ever summon enough courage and
perseverance to struggle through the mountain of material confronting him. The
basic idea was to understand why the texts on the verso of maps by Ortelius in
the several editions of the Theatrum
Orbis Terrarum published between 1570 and 1641 have been so seldom studied,
in contrast to the abundant literature on the maps themselves. Van den Broecke
even states, somewhat incorrectly, that they have never been studied. Granted,
there is not yet a general research work done on them, but several papers (some
to be found in the author’s bibliography!) are careful to include information
provided by the text on verso. The author’s claim is to prove that loose maps
can be identified from the several editions more accurately through the
evolution and modification of the texts over the years than by the signature
(the approach generally taken by most researchers) or through possible changes
on the map itself.
For this purpose, ten
maps were chosen among the 226 (Africa, Scotland, Low Countries,
Como-Rome-Friuli, Hungary, Northern Regions, Russia, East Indies, Ancient
Sicily, Ancient Greece), selecting items which represent interesting areas, and
do not have unduly long texts, which appeared in all editions. The question
arises as to why, after stating on page 139 that ‘it would have been preferable
to use maps, which all start (and end) with the same edition’ the author
preferred to use a different approach, apparently to introduce more sources.
The exceptions to justify this aim are
The CD-ROM presents a
reproduction of the ten maps together with all the relevant texts to show the
discrepancies in presentation, typesetting, and, of course, contents. For the
elaborate discussion in the book itself, the author chose what he calls two templates: a general translation in
English based on the first edition with, in brackets, indications of changes in
later publications; one template after the Latin text, one for the vernacular
versions. It was, of course, impossible to transcribe in the book the full
content of the texts without reaching monstrous proportions. Nevertheless, this
procedure is open to question from linguists adept in the internationally
accepted mode of rendering correctly and accurately a given text, even when
indicating briefly the diverse origin of the variations. These changes often
occur in the Latin versions, much less in the vernacular ones.
The numerous and
extremely detailed tables set forth the editions, the number of modifications
for the scholarly version, the increase in cartobibliographical sources, the
differences in toponyms and names of persons according to language, and their
occurrences in the relevant context with appropriate discussion. As this
painstaking study was originally defended as a doctoral thesis, with an
introduction, presentation, discussion, comparison of versions and lists of
words, summaries of chapters and a general conclusion, there are repetitions.
For example, the text for the two representations of
Although Ortelius
owned a large library, it is perhaps an overstatement to advance the hypothesis
that all his references and quotations came from his own books and codici. He
could certainly have used the libraries of his numerous friends, first of all
that of Plantin. To check the accuracy of Ortelius’ quotations from Plinius,
referring to the volumes of the Loeb Classical Library seems a very strange
procedure. Ortelius could only use what existed in his lifetime!
Marcel van den
Broecke compares the text on the verso of Ortelius’ maps with those of other
cartographers. Some were inspired by him, others hardly or not at all. Mercator
cites fewer sources and chiefly contemporary ones, Ortelius mostly classical
ones. For the map of
In comparison with
texts on Blaeu’s wall map of the Low Countries, van den Broecke curiously makes
tiny errors in the translation, for instance ‘comté’ becoming ‘duchy’ instead
of ‘county’, and he is not consistent in the rendering of city names, some
translated, others not; he even introduces Dutch names where the original is
French. Some printing mistakes occur, such as Cosmas Indicopleustes or Robert Karrow. Pinpointing these slips can
serve to emphasize the quality of the research done by the author of this
scholarly work.
The conclusion is
that Ortelius’ texts on the verso of maps were pretty well innovations and
helped to popularize academic knowledge, a real novelty.
Lisette
Danckaert
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
In
IMCoS no. 119, Winter 2009
On
our way to the IMCoS weekend in
The plain paperback cover, adorned by a rather stern portrait of Ortelius together
with his last letter superimposed on to his “Typus Orbis Terrarum” gave nothing
away about the sheer brilliance of this work. The book is well-constructed and
in the Introduction van den Broecke
explains the reasons for his research into a sample of on verso texts.
As he explains, the texts on the back of the maps, and not just those by
Ortelius, is a neglected field of research by both cartographic historians and
by scholars of the Renaissance. So, dedicating time, energy and expertise, he
translated all 226 map texts and set out to make a detailed study of them.
Among the questions he asked were just what principles governed Ortelius in
writing them; what is the relation between the texts on the map and the text
printed on the verso; what is the nature of additions and changes made to the
text in the various editions; why did Ortelius distinguish between his readers
by producing “scholarly” and “vernacular” versions [not a universally popular
idea as revealed in a surviving letter written by Claes Govaertszoon to
Ortelius (Hessels No. 241) in which he bitterly complains about “the great
disadvantage to us Dutch” to which I failed to spot a reference]; what
bibliographical sources did Ortelius use for his classical references, either
from his own library or from other sources; and just what influence did
Ortelius’ map texts exert on contemporary and successive cartographers. To find
the answers, van den Broecke selected a carefully chosen “random” sample of ten
maps (having the total text corpus of an estimated 6 million words included in
the study would have been an almost impossible task): Africa, Scotland, the Low
Countries (Germania Inferior), Como, Rome, Friuli (Lacus Comensis), Hungaria
(by Lazius), the Northern Regions (Scandia ..), Russia, East Indies (India
Or.), Ancient Sicily (Sicilia ..), and Ancient Greece (Graecia …).
The author, being a linguist, also explains the difficulties encountered in
translating texts into or from other languages when no exact equivalent
meanings exist. He gives credit to Ortelius for the innovative way he managed
to handle cultural, political and social differences between countries with
different languages. This reviewer, himself a sometime translator and
interpreter, experiences similar problems when handling medieval texts.
In Chapter 2 all editions of the Theatrum
are listed, including year, language, number of map sheets, the estimated
number of copies printed, provenance and location of the work used for
translation (16 copies in the author’s own possession!). Also, the number given
to it by van der Krogt, and finally the number of versions (variants) for each
edition. Estimated number for atlases printed (about 8,175) and copies in
existence (2,200) are also given which is a useful, but sometimes contentious
indicator of surviving atlases (a survival rate of nearly 27%).
Amongst other topics, the author enquires into Ortelius’ quite formidable
knowledge of languages, sets out his own translation procedure and examines the
textual developments in the editions which appeared after Ortelius’ death in
1598. A two-page section is devoted to the subject of identifying a loose map.
Chapter 3 contains the translations of the title of all 10 selected maps with
plate size and scale. This is followed by the listing of the editions, each
with page number, estimated number of copies printed (in brackets), and “last
line” characteristics for each edition. The main characteristics of the various
states of the map in question are also described and the references given will
guide readers to the relevant literature. This is followed by the translation
of the main on verso text (both
“scholarly” and “vernacular” versions) with a list of bibliographical sources
occurring in them.
Chapter 4 deals with relation of the text on the map itself and its relation to
the text on the verso. The shortest, but nonetheless important chapter in which
the author introduces scientific methods for identifying and comparing some
significant text on the face of the map to that of the on verso text, thus establishing that Ortelius was the first to use
text to support the information contained on the map, and not visa-versa!
Chapter 5 is for the purists, linguists and micro analysts. I found the
comparison between the “scholarly” and the “vernacular” text, and the number of
changes introduced in each edition most interesting, although others may and
will find different aspects of this chapter to their liking.
Chapter 6 deals with Ortelius’ sources through books, his large circle of
correspondents, and the number of learned and influential friends, like Carolus
Clusius, the botanist, and Justus Lipsius, humanist, historian and philosopher,
(and of course his nephew, Jacobus Colius Ortelianus) with whom he kept in
constant contact. Ortelius’ own considerable library of books and manuscripts
is considered as the main source of his information (a library admired by many,
including his friend Lipsius). It was inherited by his nephew, Colius, who
donated both the library and the letters of his uncle to
In Chapter 7 the author turns his attention to the influence or otherwise of
Ortelius’ map texts on the texts written by his contemporaries and successors
like De Jode, Bouguereau, Mercator, Hondius, Janssonius and the Blaeu family.
Each is closely examined in detail. For those who find such detailed study
daunting, Van den Broecke provides a help-line in the next chapter.
However, I am perplexed by the omission of an index of names in this work as it
would have greatly helped in locating references to individuals. However, this
could be the result of an editorial knife, rather than the author’s reluctance
to include one. Apart from this, a bracketed misquote on page 290 regarding the
Lászlo
Gróf,
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
ORTELIUS
– THE WORDS BEHIND MAPS
Reviewed by Fredric Shauger in The Portolan, December 2009.
In his
latest work, Marcel van den Broecke begins to fill a void that has existed for
440 years. Scholars began studying maps in Abraham Ortelius’ Theatrum Orbis Terrarum almost from
their debut in 1570. The texts on the reverse side of the maps (“on verso”) however,
were basically ignored. Peter van der Krogt noted “It is remarkable that so
little attention has been devoted to these texts. Brandmaier (1914) is the only
author who devoted systematic research to these texts and their sources. After
him, only Van den Broecke paid attention to texts”. Van den Broecke himself
acknowledged that the on verso texts had been “neglected” in 1996 when he
published his iconic Ortelius Atlas Maps,
an Illustrated Guide.
This
book is actually a dissertation that Van den Broecke recently defended at
Van
den Broecke’s commercial website, www.orteliusmaps.com contains all
226 maps from the various editions of the Theatrum
and all on verso texts translated into English. Ortelius, who wrote the
original texts, divided them into either “scholarly” languages (Latin, Spanish,
Italian and English) or “vernacular” tongues (Dutch, French and German). The
vernacular editions were designed to attract a less educated audience and
thereby, a broader market. The vernacular editions were rarely changed during
his life time.
Ortelius
explains that he created the on verso texts “because we thought it to be
unpleasant for the reader to poke his nose at them being completely white, we
have about each map, (as far as we knew about it) written something which may
represent a place of rest or recreation, where he (tired from all the
traveling) may regain his breath before he resumes his travels” (translation by
Van den Broecke). Despite that explanation, Van den Broecke opines that the
real reason for the text was to convey the history of the mapped area. Van den
Broecke notes that Ortelius did not consider himself a cartographer or a
geographer. In his own eyes, he was an historian and he projected that passion
onto others saying: “Everyone is interested in history, because everyone has a
history of his own”.
The Theatrum has long been considered the
first modern atlas. Van den Broecke validates that statement. By comparing the
“text blocks” on the ten maps, to the on verso texts he notes that the vast
majority of the text blocks rarely correspond to the on verso texts.
Conversely, the on verso texts constantly refer to the maps and are dependent
on them. The Theatrum therefore is
the first book of maps with supporting text – not a treatise with supporting
maps.
The
Herculean task of translating and analyzing all the texts in seven languages (a
total of 1,582) explains why Van den Broecke tackled only 10 of the 226 maps.
He notes that the comparison and translation of 400 year old languages into
modern English is a “near impossible” task. To further complicate the process,
Ortelius himself wrote the on verso texts in Latin, Dutch and French. The
Spanish translation was made by Balthasar Vincentius, the Italian by Filippo
Pigafetta, and the English version by William Bedwell – the last two after Ortelius’
death in 1598. The German text was written by a Personae Incognitae. Because of cultural differences and the
difficulty of transposition, Van den Broecke concludes that a fair amount of
the information contained in the on verso texts has been lost in translation.
Throughout
the book, Van den Broecke uses charts and lists to illustrate his points about
the on verso texts. For example, table 5.1 demonstrates how the word count of
the texts increase over the years; chart 6.4, beginning on page 190 and continuing
to page 215, lists all of the source authors whose names appear anywhere in the
10 texts. From pages 148 through 176, Van den Broecke compares the varying
translations among the seven languages and the various editions. He compares
place names and notes that on the maps they are usually toponyms, whereas
exonyms usually appear in the texts. By analyzing the list of source authors
and references in the 10 maps, Van den Broecke is able to conclude that the
books and manuscripts that Ortelius consulted came primarily from his own
library. As Ortelius added to his library, he revised the texts.
Despite
the fact that the Theatrum was the
first to include on verso texts, Van den Broecke compares them with some of
Ortelius’ contemporaries and successors. In doing so, he gives vignettes of 16th
century
There
is a CD inserted into the back cover that contains photos of the ten maps and
all the various on verso texts analyzed. Van den Broecke warns his readers that
“the quality of these photographs varies per photograph, depending on the
circumstances and the equipment used”. However, he states that the purpose of
including the CD is to allow “the reader to check the accuracy of the
translations given …” That goal would be better served were it not for the fact
that many of the photographs are dark and blurry, while others are completely
illegible. Some of the photographs show bowed pages that appear clear in the
center but grow increasingly blurry toward the edges. Many photos are taken too
far away and a significant number of the texts are so small as to be
unreadable. Professionally taken photographs would have helped.
Marcel
Van den Broecke is the preeminent Ortelius scholar of our age. Anything from
his pen is a welcome addition to our understanding of this truly innovative man
and his monumental work – the Theatrum.
One can only hope that Van den Broecke will analyze and publish all of the on
verso texts. Ultimately, however, Van den Broecke recognizes that he may never
be able to complete the task. He concludes by repeating Ortelius’ oft quoted
comment: “I did what I could, not what I wanted to”.
Fredric (Fred) Shauger is a map collector
living in
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
In:
Imago Mundi, Volume 62, part 1, 2010, pp. 116-117.
Marcel
van den Broecke has already placed his mark indelibly on Ortelius scholarship
with a series of articles and his invaluable 1996 handbook Ortelius Atlas Maps: An illustrated guide. With the book reviewed
here, he directs his attention on the other side of the sheet, to the textual
matter printed on the versos of the maps in all editions of the Theatrum. He summarized this topic in
2008 in an article in the pages of this journal (60:2: 202-210), but his
concern here is to provide a detailed examination of a sample of ten texts,
analyzing their language, content and sources, their relationship to the maps
on which they are found, and comparing them with comparable texts in atlases by
Ortelius’ contemporaries and successors.
His
ten sample texts are well selected to provide a good cross-section of the Theatrum in terms of geographical area,
chronology of publication and modern versus historical maps: Africa,
A
brief fourth chapter analyzes whatever blocks of texts appear on the map proper
and compares them with the on verso text and concluded that they were largely
independent; that is, the texts on the map proper and the on verso texts for
the most part relate different information.
Chapter
5 is devoted to “Characteristics, Developments, and Transparence of Translated
Map Texts”. Van den Broecke’s task, in brief, is “to compare similar texts
across languages”. One finding is that the scholarly texts were more likely to
grow over time, while the vernacular texts showed no increase in size. Clearly,
Ortelius had different readers in mind for these editions, something that no
other study has recognized. Another thing revealed by van den Broecke’s
analysis is that the number of references to sources increased in each
successive scholarly edition, sometimes markedly: the texts of the 1570 Latin
edition referred to almost 100 books, that of the 1595 Latin edition (the last
to be published during his lifetime), to nearly 250 books.
The
final, and longest section of the chapter studies the nature of the
translations, using the linguistic technique of “difference measure” to express
“the amount of transparence between words and expressions intending to mean the
same thing”. Van den Broecke concludes from this that “most translations
analyzed here are a fair approach to Ortelius’ original scholarly Latin or
vernacular Dutch example in terms of preserving meaning, if not form.
Chapter
six presents an analysis of the sources cited by Ortelius in his on verso
texts. The results are enlightening about the depth of Ortelius’ reading, the
value he put on the various texts, their availability in the sixteenth century,
and the accuracy of Ortelius’ citations of those texts. I confess I was
surprised to learn that, among other things, “the library that Ortelius built
in the course of his life must have been the largest private library, not only
of
Having
just read Denis Wood and John Fels’s The Natures of Maps, entirely devoted to
twentieth-century cartography, I have a new appreciation for the importance of
what they call the “paramap”, defined as “everything that surrounds and extends
the map in order to present it”. Van den Broecke’s careful and painstaking
analysis provides a fine model for future investigations of the “paramap” in
history.
Robert
W. Karrow, Jr. The Newberry Library, Chicago.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Web
recensie BMGN 126.2 (2011) by Dirk Imhof, Museum Plantin-Moretus Antwerpen,
translated from the Dutch original:
In
1570 the first atlas in history appeared: the Theatrum Orbis Terrarum of Abraham Ortelius. Ortelius ordered the
best maps which were available at that time in
Van
den Broecke studies the relation between the Latin texts and the texts in other
languages, how texts developed in subsequent editions and the sources Ortelius
used. The texts are an interesting topic for research. Not only is the addition
of texts to accompany maps a novelty that Ortelius devised, but also did he
extend the texts in subsequent Latin editions, adding new information,
replacing obsolete information with novelties which he had meanwhile found.
His Latin texts were largely based on his thorough knowledge of classical
authors and contemporary historical works. As one of few authors of his time,
he referred systematically to his sources, and even included in his atlas a
“Catalogus Auctorum” with a clear listing of all authors and geographers whose
work he had used. In contrast to his Latin texts, his texts in Dutch, French
and German are not intended for the learned reader, but for a public that could
do without quotes from classical authors. These text express personal views on
the countries depicted “which provide a
resting place for the reader, tired as he is from scanning the maps, so that he
can regain his breath” as Ortelius puts it. The Spanish, Italian and
English editions are all translations from the Latin editions. For his
research, Van den Broecke selected ten texts out of a total of 226. Research on
all texts would go too far. The ten texts he selected belong to maps that
appeared in the earliest as well as the latest editions and which appeared in
all languages mentioned. In his book Van den Broecke presents these texts in
English translation extensively, indicating what was added, removed, or
replaced in subsequent editions. These texts are analyzed statistically in
great detail. In spite of the interesting subject of this study, Van den
Broecke has a few serious shortcomings. The author presupposes that the ten
texts selected are representative but this presupposition also has risks.
Replacement of an entire text by a different text is not discussed. Nor is the
book always sufficiently accurate about the exact evolution of the various
editions of Ortelius’ atlas. Nowhere is made clear that the composition in
French editions, always attributed by the author to Ortelius himself, in the
course of time begin to contain texts from different origins. Thus, the French
edition of 1598, the last one to appear in Ortelius’ lifetime, contains next to
texts from the first French edition also about ten texts which are in fact
translations from Latin, made by typesetter of Jan Moretus called François
Bellet. That Ortelius differentiated between texts in Latin for a educated
public, and texts in Dutch, French and German for other interested readers is
something which Van den Broecke might have tested with the help of ledgers that
have been preserved in the archive of the Plantin bookshop, where a large
number of Ortelius’ atlases were sold. The buyers and their particulars are
mentioned there by name, so that the author could have tested his
presupposition that these atlases were intended for “merchants, high ranking
civil servants and dignitaries.
In
his sixth chapter Van den Broecke researches Ortelius’ sources. If Ortelius
indeed effectively possessed all the 2000 books which he mentions as a source
in his texts, he must have possessed a very rich library for the time. Van den
Broecke supposes incorrectly that this library has ended up in
In
his last chapter, Van den Broecke compares the texts of Ortelius’ atlas with those
in other atlases: those of his contemporary Gerard de Jode, the Frenchman
François Bouguereau, Gerard Mercator, Judocus Hondius and Jan and Willem Blaeu.
The author concludes that Ortelius’ historical texts represent a unique
position, whereas the remaining texts are more directed at geographical
information. Ortelius historical map texts turn out to have had followers for a
long time afterwards.
It
is questionable that Van den Broecke completely ignores Ortelius’ pocket atlas
or Epitome which first appeared in 1577, followed by sequels for some decennia,
containing accompanying texts.
Postcript by marcel van den Broecke:
I agree with all that Dirk Imhof, an
excellent Ortelius scholar whom I often cite as a source with due
acknowledgements, says here, except for his last remark. The first Epitome was
made by Heyns and Philip Galle during Ortelius’ lengthy absence from
=========================================================================================
For
comments or questions concerning this page, please send an email to info@orteliusmaps.com.