I noticed a similarity between the encircled part of the Schoner map and a bedrock map of Antarctica. Although the relative position is incorrect, could it be possible that SChoner had a description of part of the coastline, but did not know where to integrate this into his TA map?

I'm assuming you are asking why he transitioned from his 1515 and 1520 C-shaped world maps—which are nearly identical except that Spain has been adjusted to better represent Spain—to his 1524 solid landmass resembling Antarctica.

Side Note

By the way, you may want to ask why the 1520 globe portraying a near identical C-shaped continent to his 1515 design, drastically rotates the region you believe represents New Zealand. My theory allows that Agrippa's original map took on a few modifications once it spread throughout Europe. The 1520 Globe having been based on a modified version of Agrippa's map that moved a bit away from the original 'designer' map to embrace a more realistically portrayed Iberian Peninsula with its correct orientation. Of course we know the ultimate modification was the medieval mappae mundi.

In answering this it is important to point out the documented methodology of another early 16th century cartographer, Piri Reis.


An inscription on the 1513 Piri Reis World Map openly boasts scaling old maps—some claimed to have been composed in the 4th century BC during the reign of Alexander the Great—to new maps:

• So the first thing we notice is that he references both recent and very ancient maps to piece together his 1513 map. Meaning in 1513 Reis had access to a collection or library of many various maps.
• Some of Reis' source maps may not have been charted using "mathematical principals." Some maps like the mappae mundi and early Greek maps likely were not delineated with latitude and longitude.
• Various features from multiple source maps, many of which were likely lacking delineations which would have proven a useful guide for scaling, would have been aligned and scaled by approximation together into one map.

Okay so fast forward JUST TWO YEARS to 1515. Schöner is building a custom globe and is tasked with incorporating a purported strait discovered in 1508. This actually would turn out to be a bay, but those who reported it engaged in a little hyperbole suggesting it was far more than a bay and the southern shore of this supposed strait was a wide ranging coastline similar to North Africa's Barbary Coast. This over exaggerated report may be the sole reason large renditions of Terra Australis Incognita suddenly appear at the turn of the turn of the 16th century, including Schöner's depictions.

Like Piri Reis, we know Schöner, a highly educated mathematician and skilled cartographer, had access to many source maps. He perhaps rummages through some ancient maps and stumbles upon a set of very similar maps (source maps for his 1515 and 1520 designs) without delineations of longitude and latitude, because Roman maps like Agrippa's did not require them. One of the maps, perhaps a map in the early stages of completion, still has visible circular guidelines—similar to the image in my post above—showing its concentric nature.

Schöner is searching for a large continent and here he finds a map drawn around a central point and grid that shares a similarity with the southern projection of a globe. Even more compelling, the map depicts the English Channel which to Schöner meets his need for a strait. Like Reis he scales the landmass onto his globe, in this instance by centering its concentric design over the South Pole while placing Britain so as to represent the tip of South America and the English Channel becoming Magellan's strait. Five years later, 1520, he makes another globe and opts for the alternate design, not certain which one is the more accurate depiction.

Jump ahead again, this time to 1524, and Schöner is creating another globe, but this time his earlier versions of the continent are no longer the perfect match. Magellan's voyage discovers a deep bay in the midst of his new found strait, a feature not present on the strait depicted on either of Schöner's previous source maps. Magellan's voyage also introduces two other new discoveries, a pair of islands the crew names the Unfortunate Islands.

Carrying  over the now common misconception of a large continent lying beneath South America based on the earlier purported find, Schöner, apparently following the same methodology previously utilized by Reis and himself, searches again for a map of an unidentifiable land that could possibly match these latest discoveries.

In his search he comes across the map of a landmass with two small lone islands set off its coast, perhaps setting off an alarm. He is now thrilled to have found a possible ancient representation of the Unfortunate Islands nestled alongside a large landmass. Unfortunately the large landmass does not have a depiction of the South American continent butting up against it to form a strait, but there is a depiction of Atka Bay that could correspond to the bay within the strait.

The ancient map of Antarctica, lacking any delineations or any that Schöner was familiar with, was subsequently aligned and rescaled to place the islands high in the Pacific to represent the Unfortunate Islands and Atka Bay at the tip of South America to form Magellan's strait complete with a large southern bay. You may have already seen the image below which portrays modern Antarctica sitting alongside a combination Finé/Schöner. Perhaps most amazing and lending credibility to my theory is the fact that Schöner's depiction is virtually identical to Carney and Siple Island lying along the flattened end of Western Antarctica, but looks very little like the actual Unfortunate islands which were much much further apart both vertically and laterally. He apparently opts for the source map's design over the description provided by Pigafetta and others who logged the voyage.



Most interesting and perhaps a bit ironic, you of all people should be able to accept the possibility of Schöner retrofitting ancient maps to modern maps, for you have used virtually the same methodology in realigning and rescaling Schöner's southern landmass to fit Australia, New Zealand and as your last post points out, Antarctica.

-Doug

You present a good argument of how TA as a misconception may have come about - not that I entirely agree, of course. Nevertheless, one can only assume that many more ancient maps existed than what we are aware of today. Maybe one day, in a forgotten attic of an old monastery, we'll find something.... Let's hope!

Thanks Riaan and I could not agree more, there are obviously many maps and globes just from the 16th century on that are missing. An old monastery might well be the most likely location. Too bad the ancient inhabitants of Qumran were not into map collecting. Caves would have preserved the maps very well.   

-Doug

Hello Riaan,

When I posted this image earlier:

Which clearly shows the lateral feature flowing out from an opening in the mountains, I wondered why the same clarity was not applied to the lake at the other end.  In fact the mountains are clearly drawn fully enclosing the lake. It seemed significant, but I chose not to dwell on it at the time.

Anyway, today the significance of this distinction became clear, or at least in line with my theory that Schöner's 1515 southern continent was based on a Roman world map. The Romans believed a lake in Mauritania was the Nile's source, but a point in Ethiopia was the final destination before flowing underground. The waterway would then surface one last time as the Nile we all know that flows northward to the Mediterranean.

Most mappae mundi, unlike the Hereford map, clearly rendered the distinction of these two lakes accordingly much like the attached Ebstorf mappa mundi. I've inset the lakes from Schöner's design for comparative purposes.


Note that both clearly show an open flow from the source in Mauritania, while both truncate the waterway at or within the eastern lake. My best guess would be that Schöner's map is depicting the waterway disappearing underground at the base of the mountains before surfacing again as a lake.

-Doug

Am I the only one noticing a striking similarity in shape between Antarctica and Australia?

Could there be some sort of a current that similarly shapes land masses over time when those land masses are at the south pole?

Hi Doug,

In my opinion the similarities between TA (1515) and Zealandia etc cannot be ignored. Your theory that TA was actually a map Africa/the Mediterranean requires a greater stretch of the imagination (why did Schoner place his map at the South Pole?) than my theory. I however don't think either of us will be able to convince the other! 

Well perhaps it is a stretch, but as I pointed out earlier I believe the concentric design was Schöner's inspiration. Do you have any opinions on the map's perfectly concentric interior and related geometry:


-Doug

Currents would not have that extreme an impact. Southern Australia still fits almost perfectly against the side of Antarctica, so 60-70 million years has had little effect at least on those portions of the continents.

-Doug

If they were conjoined plates that broke apart, that seems to be evidence right there against them having been part of a ring- or horseshoe-shaped land mass as described of the Terra Incognita.  The breaking apart and slippage trajectory shouldn't have given time nor conditions for forming the other elements of the semicircle of land, I would think, and their present absence would be more than conspicuous.