The voyage of Verrazzano

by Henry Cruse Murphy

But in restricting his discoveries to latitude 38 Degrees N. on the south, this map essentially departs from the claim set up in the letter ascribed to Verrazzano which carries them to fifty leagues south of 34 Degrees; and on the other hand, in limiting them, in the north, to the land discovered by the Bretons, it conforms to its Portuguese authorities, upon which, as will be seen, it was founded, but, in so doing, contradicts the letter which extends them to the point where the Portuguese commenced their explorations to the Arctic circle, which this map itself shows were on the east side of Terra Nova. Verrazzano the navigator, therefore, could not have been the author of the letter and also the authority for the map.

That this map did not proceed from him is also proven by the representation upon it of a great ocean, called Mare Occidentale, which is laid down between the parallels within which these discoveries are confined. It lies on the west side of the continent but approaches so near the Atlantic, in latitude 41 Degrees N., that is, in the vicinity of New York, that according to a legend describing it, the two oceans are there only six miles apart, and can be seen from each other. This isthmus occurs several hundred miles north of Dieppa, and therefore at a point absolutely fixed within the limits of the Verrazzano discoveries, and where the navigator must have sailed, according to both the letter and the map, whether the latitudes on the map be correctly described or not. This western sea is thus made by its position a part of the discoveries of Verrazzano, and is declared by the legend to have been actually seen; and as he was the discoverer, it must be intended to have been seen by him. As, however, there is no such sea in reality, Verrazzano could never have seen it; and therefore, he could not have so represented; or if he did, then the whole story must for that reason alone be discredited. There is no escape from this dilemma. Verrazzano could not have been deceived and have mistaken some other sheet of water for this great sea, and so represented it on any chart, or communicated it in any other way to the maker of this map; for he makes no mention of the circumstance in his letter to the king to whom he would have been prompt to report so important a fact; as it would have proved the accomplishment of the object of his voyage,—the discovery of a passage through this region to Cathay, or if not a passage, at least a way, which could have been made available for reaching the land of spices and aromatics, by reason of its low grade, evident by one sea being seen from the other, and its short distance.

The unauthentic character of this map, and the manner in which its representation of the Verrazzano discoveries was produced, distinctly appear in its method of construction. Cape Breton and Terra Nova are represented as they are laid down on the charts of Pedro Reinel and the anonymous cartographer,—reproduced on the first and fourth sheets of the Munich atlas and unquestionably belonging to the period anterior to the discovery of the continuity of the land from Florida to Cape Breton. They bear the names which are found on those maps, importing their discovery thus early by the Bretons and Portuguese. In the south, the designation of Florida as a Spanish discovery, with its southerly coast running along the parallel of thirty-three and a half of north latitude, eight degrees north of its actual position, is precisely the same it as it is shown on the anonymous Portuguese chart just mentioned. These representations of the country, in the north and the south, were thus adopted as the basis of this map. But as there were not seven hundred leagues of coast between latitude 38 Degrees and Cape Breton, which is the distance it indicates as having been explored by Verrazzano, that extent could be obtained only, either by changing the latitude of Florida or Cape Breton, or prolonging the coast longitudinally, or both. The latitude of the northerly limit of Florida having been preserved for the commencement of the discoveries, Cape Breton had therefore to be changed and was accordingly carried five degrees and a half further north and placed in latitude 51-1/2 instead of 46, and by consequence the whole line of coast was thrown several degrees in that direction, as is proven by the position of the island of Louise, which thus falls in 46 Degrees N. instead of 41 Degrees, the latitude assigned to it in the letter. Nothing could more conclusively show the factitious origin of this delineation and its worthlessness as an exposition of the Verrazzano discovery.

Some importance, however, attaches to this map in its assisting us to fix approximately the time of the fabrication of the Verrazzano letter. If it were constructed in 1529, as some would infer, with the portions relating to the discovery upon it, then it is the earliest recognition of the CLAIM to this discovery yet produced, irrespective of the letter. But it is by no means certain that it was originally made in that year. Nothing appears on the map itself giving that date in terms; but it is left to be inferred exclusively from the language of the legend, which states that the discovery was made FIVE YEARS AGO, without any indication, either in the legend itself or elsewhere on the map, to what time that period relates; and leaving the discovery, therefore, to be ascertained from extraneous sources. If the discovery be assumed to have been made in 1524, then indeed the map, according to the legend, would have been constructed in 1529. But no person, unacquainted with the letter, can determine from this inscription, or any other part of the map, the date either of the discovery or map; and this precise difficulty Euphrosynus Ulpius apparently encountered in attempting to fix the time of the discovery for his globe, as will hereafter be seen. Why the time of the discovery should have been left in such an ambiguous state, compatibly with fair intentions, it is difficult to understand. The year itself could and should, in the absence of any date on the map, have been stated directly in the legend, without compelling a resort to other authorities. It is not unusual, it is true, for valuable maps and charts of this period to be left without the dates of their construction upon them; but when, as in this case, a date is called for, there seems to be no reason why it should not have been given. This circumstance creates the suspicion that the legend did not belong to the map originally, but was added afterwards, as it now appears on the copy in the Vatican; or if it were upon it then, that it was intended to mislead and conceal the true date of the map. But whatever may be the secret of its origin, this legend furnishes no positive evidence as to the time when the map was made, or pretended to have been made; and we are left to find its date, if possible, by other means.

A fact which indicates that this map could not have existed as late as 1536, in the form in which it is now presented, if it existed then at all, is that the western sea is delineated upon a map of the world, made in that year, by Baptista Agnese, an Italian cosmographer, without any reference to the Verrazzano discoveries, under circumstances which would have led him to have recognized them if he knew of them, and which would have required him to have done so if this map were his authority. This sea is laid down by Agnese in the same manner as it is shown on the Verrazzano map, approaching the Atlantic, from the north, along a narrow isthmus terminating at latitude 40 Degrees, with the coast turning abruptly to the west; the ocean being thus represented open thence from the isthmus to Cathay. A track of French navigation, not a single voyage, expressed by the words: el viages de France, is designated upon it, leading from the north of France to this isthmus, referring obviously to the voyages of the fishermen of Brittany and Normandy, to the coasts of Nova Scotia and New England. No allusion is made to the voyage of Verrazzano, or to the discoveries attributed to him by the Verrazano map. The Atlantic coast on the contrary, is plainly delineated after the Spanish map of Ribero, as is shown by the form, peculiar to that map, of the coast, at latitude 40 Degrees, returning to the west. It is apparent, therefore, that the two maps of Agnese and Verrazano, both representing the western sea in the same form, must have been derived from a common source, or else one was taken from the other; and that the map of Agnese could not, in either case, have been derived from a map showing the Verrazzano discovery, and must consequently have been anterior to the Verrazano map in its present form.

It militates against the authenticity of the Verrazano map and the early date which it would have inferred for itself, that there is not a single known map or chart, either published or unpublished, before the great map of Mercator in 1569, that refers to the Verrazzano discoveries, or recognizes this map in any respect before that of Michael Lok, published by Hakluyt, in 1582; or any before Lok, that applies the name of the sea of Verrazano to the western sea. The unauthenticated and until recently unnoticed globe of Euphrosynus Ulpius, purporting to have been constructed in 1542, of which we will speak presently, is the only evidence yet presented of the existence of the Verrazano map, as it now appears, beyond the map itself. The whole theory of the early influence of the Verrazzano discovery, or of the Verrazano map, upon the cartography of the period to which they relate, and its consequently proving their authenticity, as advanced by some learned writers, is therefore incorrect and is founded in a misconception of fact.

This mistake relates to a map which is found in several editions of the geography of Ptolemy printed at Basle, supposed to represent the western sea shortly after the Verrazzano discovery, and consequently as derived from that source. Mr. Kohl, [Footnote: We are indebted entirely to Mr. Kohl for our knowledge of the map of Agnese, which he produces, on a reduced scale, in the Discovery of Maine, (chart XIV), with an account of the map and its author (p. 292).] in a chapter specially devoted to the consideration of charts from Verrazzano, reproduces one (No. XV, a) which he describes as a sketch of North America, from a map of the new world, in an edition of Ptolemy printed in Basle, 1530. And he adds: "the map was drawn and engraved A FEW YEARS AFTER VERRAZANO'S EXPEDITION. The plate upon which it was engraved, must have been in use for a long time; for the same map appears both, in EARLIER and much later editions of Ptolemy. The same also reappears in the cosmography of Sebastian Munster, published in Basle." Mr. K. finally observes in regard to it: "this map has this particular interest for us, that it is probably the first on which the sea of Verrazano was depicted in the form given to it by Lok, in 1582. I have found no map PRIOR to 1530, on which this delineation appears." [Footnote: Discovery of Maine, pp. 296-7.] There is a little confusion of dates in this statement. Mr. K. states, however, that he had not seen the map of Hieronimo de Verrazano, and evidently derives his information, in regard to the sea of Verrazano, from the map of Lok, who alone gives the western sea the name of Mare de Verrazana, no doubt because he found the sea laid down on the map presented by Verrazzano to Henry VIII, to which reference will presently be made. Had Mr. K. seen the Verrazano map with the absurd legend upon it, in effect declaring the western sea to have been observed by Verrazzano, he must have arrived at different conclusions, notwithstanding the map in Ptolemy of the supposed early date. Mr. Brevoort, in his notes on the Verrazano map, probably relying on the authority of Mr. Kohl, says, "that the first published map containing traces of Verrazano's explorations, is in the Ptolemy of Basle, 1530, which appeared FOUR YEARS BEFORE THE FRENCH RENEWED THEIR ATTEMPTS AT AMERICAN EXPLORATION. It shows the western sea without a name, and the land north of it is called Francisca." [Footnote: Journal of Am. Geog. Soc. of New York, vol. IV, p. 279.] The inference left to be drawn is that, the presence of the French in this region, as denoted by the name, Francisca, four years before the discoveries in that quarter, by Jacques Cartier, and by the delineation of the western sea upon the Verrazano map, establish the authenticity both of the voyage of Verrazzano and the map.

All this is erroneous. There was no edition of Ptolemy published in 1530 at Basle, or elsewhere, known to bibliographers. The map to which reference is made, and which is reproduced by Mr. Kohl, was first printed in 1540 at Basle, in an edition of Ptolemy with new maps, both of the new and old world, and with new descriptions of the countries embraced in them, printed on the back of each, accompanied by a geographical description of the modern state of the countries of the old world by Sebastian Munster. [Footnote: Geographia Universalis, vetus et nova, complectens Claudii Ptolemai Alexandrini enarrationis libros VIII. * * * Succedunt tabulos Ptolemaice, opera Sebastiani Munsteri nto paratos. His adjectos sunt plurime novae tabulae, moderna orbis faciem literis & pictura explicantes, inter quas quaedam antehac Ptolemao non fuerunt additae. Sm. fol. Basiteae apud Henricum Petrum Meuse Martio Anno MDXI.] In all the editions of Ptolemy, containing maps of the new world, before the year 1540, North America was represented according to the mistaken ideas of Waltzemuller on that subject in 1513, and without regard to the discoveries which took place after his edition. The maps of Munster constituted a new departure of the Ptolemies in this respect, and were intended to represent the later discoveries in the new world. They were reprinted several times at Basle by the same printer, Henri Pierre (Lelewell II. 176, 208). In the first edition, which is now lying before us, the map in question, number 45, bears the title of Novae Insalae XVII. Nova Tabula. It is an enlarged representation of the portion relating to the new world of another map, No. 1, in the same volume, called Typas Universalis, a map of the whole world, which appears here also as a new map, and represents, for the first time in the Ptolemaic series, the straits of Magellan in the south, New France in the north, and the coast running continuously, north and NORTHEAST, from Florida to Newfoundland.

Upon this map a deep gulf is shown, indenting America from a strait in the north, which leads from the Atlantic to the Pacific, in the region of Hudson's straits, in latitude 60 Degrees N. This gulf runs southerly into the continent as far as latitude 40 Degrees N., approaching the Atlantic coast, and in that respect, alone, conforms to the representation of the western sea on the maps of Verrazano and Lok. It differs materially, however, from that sea, and indicates an entirely different meaning and origin. It is simply a gulf, or deep bay, like Hudson's bay, but reaching further south, being land-locked on all sides, except the north, as high as latitude 60 Degrees N.; whereas the western sea, on the other maps, is, as already observed, an open sea, extending westerly from the isthmus in latitude 40 Degrees, without intervening land, uninterruptedly to India. The intention of the delineation of this portion of the map, is not equivocal. For the first time, on any map, there is found upon it the name of Francisca, which is placed above the parallel of 50 Degrees N. latitude and above that of C. Britonum, designated thus by name, in the proper position of Cape Breton. It is placed between the river St. Lawrence, which also is represented but not named, and the gulf before mentioned. This name, Francisca, [Footnote: Called Francese in the discourse of the French captain of Dieppe.] or the FRENCH LAND, and the position, indicate the then recent discoveries in that region, which were due to the French under Jacques Cartier, and which could properly belong to no other exploration of the French. The gulf, no doubt, relates to the great lakes or fresh water sea of which Cartier had heard from the natives, as he himself mentions. (Hakluyt, III. 225.)

With the correction, therefore, of the date of the Munster map, the argument in favor of the authenticity either of the Verrazzano discovery or of the Verrazano map, based upon the recognition by the Munster map, of that discovery immediately after it is alleged to have taken place, or after the alleged construction of the Verrazano map, in 1529, and before any other voyages were made by the French to that region, falls entirely to the ground. And with the actual representation upon it of the discoveries of Cartier, without any allusion to the alleged discoveries of Verrazzano or the pretensions of the Verrazano map, while giving the latest discoveries in America, it is fairly to be concluded that both were unheard of, or utterly discredited by the author of the Munster map.