Maps drawn by Chinese or Ottoman cartographers would probably have the same traits, but instead portraying their own countries or empires as the most important. The Chinese might not have such a good idea of what Europe or America looked like, and therefore these would be off to the side, smaller, and "less important." The same goes for a cartographer of the 16th century in any country. Nowadays our maps are generally the same in all countries.
Sunday, September 13, 2009
Comparing 16th-century maps to modern-day maps
The main difference between the two maps was the accuracy, because in the 16th century there was still not a solid idea of what North America looked like. Asia was also a little fuzzy, however Europe was almost completely accurate because, for one, the European cartographers would have a clearer idea of what the land looked like in their own homeland, simply because it was the closest. Second, the Europeans might have been biased in making the map, because Europe is portrayed as one of the largest continents, and it is placed directly in the center. The map on page 379, although it does not show the entire world, is drawn much more to scale and, as far as we know, it does not exaggerate the size of the empires or show favoritism to a certain one.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree with you that the Waldseemuller map shows european bias because they have europe in the very middle and they have detailed europe very well but not the rest of the world. I also agree with you that the Chinese or Ottomans would show their own different bias by making China or the Middle East the center of the map. In this time period, the people who made the maps, or anyone else, didn't know much about the rest of the world, so the maps that were made would have they would make a very detailed map of their own country but the rest of the world would be small and irrelevant.
ReplyDelete