Talk:Early world maps

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

1 Piri Reis map
2 Waldseemuller map
3 Beatus Mappa Mundi (1050 CE)
4 Oronteus Finnaeus map
5 Hadji Ahmed map?
6 "ancient"
7 Kangnido POV shift?
8 The direction of the maps
9 Madaba Map
10 Genoese world map (1457)

[edit] Piri Reis map

Shouldn't the Piri Reis map be included? 11 February 2006

[edit] Waldseemuller map

Shouldn't the Waldseemuller Map be added? Swissbanker 09:58, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Beatus Mappa Mundi (1050 CE)

The age of the map does not correspond to Beatus of Liébana age (730 - 798). 1050 is the time of the surviving copies. - fnielsen 13:03, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Oronteus Finnaeus map

Hello there. Just wondered if the Oronteus Finnaeus world map could/should be included in this article. Thanks, Steph

[edit] Hadji Ahmed map?

Hello there. Does anyone know much about the Hadji Ahmed map, prepared circa 1559? I have a picture of it from a old book - it even depicts the west coast of America. Thanks, Steph

[edit] "ancient"

we are missing a lot of ancient and medieval maps, while listing 15th and 16th cenrtury specimens which are by no stretch "ancient". There should maybe be articles or categories by century, such as 15th century cartography, 16th century cartography? dab (ᛏ) 16:59, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Maybe there should be ... once we have enough material to fill them out. Right now the article stands at only 13,668 bytes: not quite big enough even to split in two (i.e. ancient vs mediæval). I'm moving it to Historical world maps. J i m p 17:39, 24 April 2007 (UTC) ... on second thoughts, says the article "Cartography or mapmaking ... is the study and practice of making maps or globes." and a significant part of this article deals with this study and practice thus Historical cartography seems the best title. J i m p 17:47, 24 April 2007 (UTC) The problem, of course is that this is quite similar to History of cartography which already exists and is kind of biggish (44,400 bytes). Perhaps the best approach would be to merge this article there then split along ancient vs mediæval lines. J i m p 17:59, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kangnido POV shift?

The latest edit of the section on the Kangnido (and the main Kangnido article too) has shifted the thematic emphasis to the influence of Islam via the Mongol Empire. While such an influence self-evidently does exist, the article seems to give the impression that it was more significant than Chinese cartographic ability, which I find myself doubting. Also in this context, no mention is made of the India Problem. I know little about far Eastern mapping, so I won't make immediate changes myself- but I will try to find out more if nobody with more expertise has anything to say. David Trochos (talk) 08:08, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

In my understanding, this article summarize the relative position of each map in cartographic history. As for the Kangnido, the most important improvement from earliar Chinese maps is that it incorporated Islamic knowledge. I think that the real problem is that earlier Chinese maps are not introduced in this article although they may not necessarily be regarded as world maps.

Also, what do you mean by "India Problem"? I briefly explained in the main article how India is depicted. See also Talk:Kangnido#Errors on Image:645px-KangnidoCaption.jpg. --Nanshu (talk) 02:18, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Nanshu, I think you are being extremely rude and uncivil. In the Kangnido article, you have deleted a whole bunch of properly cited information and citation needed tags, and re-added uncited, irrelevant sections without explanation. Actually, you called it "vandalism" and gave me a vandalism warning on my talk page, which feels like a personal attack.

Please stop reverting other people's work and do not accuse me of "vandalism" for adding balanced, cited information to mitigate the Mongol-centric bias, in the Kangnido article and here. Kangnidofan (talk) 06:33, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Kangnidofan, don't lose your temper. The edition you try to keep is off the mark and erroneous. Keep in mind that this is an article about "ancient world maps". Its relative position in cartographic history should be described. And we cannot confirm that Arabic map(s) were directly referred to create tha map.

Also this is a summary, so references are not required. --Nanshu (talk) 12:01, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The direction of the maps

Is there any good reason for that all the pictures of the maps are positioned north upwards? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sinse (talk • contribs) 21:12, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Ermmm- they aren't.... David Trochos (talk) 20:57, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

those reconstructed from Greek geographers are. It is true that they might more 'authentically' be drawn with east to the top. But they are reconstructions anyway. --dab (𒁳) 14:45, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Madaba Map

Although in mosaic, Madaba Map will make nice addition as it dates from the 6th century --89.253.154.62 (talk) 19:03, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

not a "world map", but definitely worth a "see also" link. dab (𒁳) 20:04, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Genoese world map (1457)

Genoese world map 1457.

Here's an image of the 1457 Genoese world map. Again quite interesting for its rather precise contour of Africa, before Europeans actually rounded the Cape. Could someone include the map in the article? For reference, a book where the map is discussed, and a large portion of the map shown: New Found Lands, Peter Whitfield, ISBN 0415920264. A Genoese world map article would also be quite justified. Thank you PHG (talk) 06:17, 24 April 2008 (UTC)