This is a MapHist list message (when you hit 'reply' you're replying to the whole list) o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o +
Sorin, sorry for being so pedant. When you state that you "did find a lot of other variants" are you referring to the locations in the maps or to the text coordinates. In sum, are your working with text or maps? I fear they have different traditions (I mean we may have a "family" for text and another "family" for maps) and for that reason you may find differences in the same (so called) "family". According to me, on one hand you have to find the line for the different traditions of the two sets of coordinates (looking for text), and on the other hand, the different locations on the maps. The intersection of these sets of data may suggest you some solutions, or a further line of research. For texts (written coordinates), have you checked the critical edition by Wilberg, Nobbe, Müller and Stückelberger? It seems to me that Ziridava is a correct transliteration while Ziridana comes from an incorrect interpretation of Ζιριδανα for Ζιριδαυα, I mean the misreading of ν for υ. The same might have happen for the coordinates; it seems to me that 49° 1/2 and 46° 1/3 are the correct coordinates whilst 45° 1/2 might be a misreading of greek numerals. Anyway a nice job for you! Good luck, and let's know your conclusions. Ciao. vladimiro Il giorno 22/set/2011, alle ore 14.57, Sorin Fortiu ha scritto: > This is a MapHist list message (when you hit 'reply' you're replying to the > whole list) > o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + > Dear Vladimiro; > In Ptolemy's text (III, 8) exists only ONE Ziridava but the spelling may > differ as Ziridava / Ziridaua / Ziridana. > There are 2 main sets of coordinates (49 30 / 46 20 and 45 30 / 46 20) but I > did find a lot of other variants (with huge differences!) in the 27 > manuscripts and 50 printed editions of Ptolemy's Geographia I did checked > until now. > Best Regards, > S o r i n > > ----- Original Message ----- From: Vladimiro Valerio > To: Discussion group for map history > Sent: Thursday, September 22, 201 > Subject: Re: [MapHist] RE:Re: Dacia in the Ptolemaic maps > Dear Sorin, > You say you are studying the position of Ziradava in the Ptolemaic IX Map of > Europe, and you found that in the Roman Edition of 1478 the place appears > twice on the same map, and you are trying to found the source of this > mistake, am I right? > Well, you never mention in your posting the coordinates of the place (by the > way some transliterate from Greek Ziridava others Ziridana) that occur in the > text. Have you had a look at the text? How many Ziridava/na appear in the > text and which place in the related map is correct according to the > coordinates? > > with the best of wishes > vladimiro > > Il giorno 21/set/2011, Sorin Fortiu ha scritto: > Dear Doug; > Quite interesting your findings! As far as I know, there was a period of time > when in the mind of the scholars DACIA = DANIA (roughly, today, Denmark). You > can find at http://www.dacia.org/lundius/Summary/summary.html something about > it. > For Ptolemy, DACIA was in the N up to the Carpathians Mountains (on the Tisza > river/ roughly, today, the N border of Romania). At N from the Carpathians > Mountains was Sarmatia. But in the N the Carpathians are going up to Poland! > So, it is possible that Gastaldi had the impression that not the first line > of the Carpathians (the one on Tisza river) was the border of Dacia BUT the > second line (the one going trough Poland) / see at > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Carpathians-satellite.jpg > Germany was bordered in the SE corner by the Iazyges > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iazyges > > I am studying now the Ziridava problem (after I finished Zurobara and before > moving to Singidava). This is one of the 44 ?poleis? Ptolemy lists for Dacia > and he is the only one that mentioned Ziridava. The mistake I was talking > about is the representation of this Ziridava twice on the same map. I knew > that the roman edition from 1478 had this mistake and I was interested to see > if this is also in the Codex Ebnerianus?s family of manuscripts done by > Donnus Nicolaus Germanus knowing that the maps from the 1478 editions were > done after a codex from this family. And I did find the same mistake in Codex > Ebnerianus. So, I know that this mistake occurred in the work shop of Donnus > Nicolaus Germanus around 1460-?66. > What is very strange (and without answer(s) in this moment!) is why Donnus > Nicolaus Germanus change the position of Ziridava on his maps during the time > (there are 3 different locations and the differences are huge!). It had > something to do with the manuscripts he used during his 4th recessions but I > doubt that there is an answer given by somebody yet to the question: which > manuscripts Donnus Nicolaus Germanus used during the time in working his own > manuscripts? > I would love to know the longitude/latitude of Ziridava as is given by the > Gastaldi?s map for Dacia. > > Best regards, > S o r i n
_______________________________________________ MapHist: E-mail discussion group on the history of cartography hosted by the Faculty of Geosciences, University of Utrecht. The statements and opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the University of Utrecht. The University of Utrecht does not take any responsibility for the views of the author. List Information: http://www.maphist.nl Maphist mailing list Maphist@geo.uu.nl http://mailman.geo.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/maphist
