Slide #215
TITLE: World Map of Henry of Mainz
DATE: 1110 A.D.
AUTHOR: Henry of Mainz [Mayence]
DESCRIPTION: This medieval world map apparently belongs to a family
of cartographical works which may be compared with the more closely-knit
members of the Beatus genealogy (Slide #207 ).
This family or group, besides Henry's map, includes the tiny Psalter
map of about 1230 A.D. and the Hereford and Ebstorf examples
of the later 13th century, huge wall-pictures which represented, in size
though not in execution, the possible 11th century original more closely
than their elder but smaller brethern or cousins (for reproductions of these
other 'family members', see Slides #223, 224 and 226). Lastly, the so-called
Jerome maps of about 1150 A.D. may be collaterally referred to the
same family, through the medium of the Mainz design.
The map shown in this monograph is to be found in the De imagine mundi
of a certain Henry, probably the same person as Henry [Heinrich], a
Canon of the Church of St. Mary in Mayence [Mainz], who in 1111 A.D. appeared
before the Episcopal Court of Mainz; possibly he is the same as the Archbishop
Henry, who ruled this church between 1142 and 1152. In any case, the map
accompanies a work which was written about 1110 A.D., and was dedicated
to the famous and unfortunate Matilda, wife of the Emperor Henry V, daughter
of Henry I of England, and mother of Henry II. This work, also known as
the Imago Mundi de dispositione orbis, a compendious encyclopedic
description of the world, also containing a short chronicle of universal
history in seven books, was copied and interpolated, but not originally
composed, by Henry of Mainz; it was really the work of a contemporary, Honorius
of Autun and was the most widely read book of its type. In fact the copy
of Imago Mundi that was produced by Henry, which this world map illustrates,
is older than any surviving work by Honorius himself. The map, however,
is apparently the addition of the scribe Henry, and is not derived from
Honorius, although Beazley and others suspect that it is based on another
and older design of possibly the 11th century. The general character of
the compilation is illustrated by a remark at the close of the dedicatory
letter: "I place nothing in this work except that which is approved
by the best authorities". According to Wright, the main source of the
geographical chapters was the Etymologiae of Isidore, though the
author also drew directly from Orosius. It seems likely, indeed, that the
geographical chapter of Orosius served as a basis for the entire compilation
and provided an outline which was embellished by copious excerpts of detail
from the more elaborate writings of Isidore, Augustine, and Bede. Furthermore,
it is even probable that the unknown author had a map before him. He appears
to have borrowed directly from the Collectanea rerum memorabilium
of Solinus his account of the marvels of India, though elsewhere he taps
Solinus at second hand through the medium of Isidore.
Though indirectly made from the sources that the writers of the De imagine
mundi and other medieval cosmographies utilized, it was probably not
compiled directly from the De imagine mundi but rather from a large
wall map. Its affinities to the immense late 13th century world disk in
Hereford Cathedral make it seem possible that both had a common source.
In addition to the older nomenclature, about a dozen more modern place names
are to be found upon it.
The world map, preserved in a late 12th century manuscript copy in Cambridge
College, England, is oval in form, of small size (about 29.5 X 20.5 cm),
and contains 229 legends or inscriptions, together with a large number of
unnamed cities, mountains and rivers, whose titles can for the most part
be ascertained with the aid of its younger relatives, the Ebstorf, Psalter,
Hereford and Jerome plans. Although the present world-scheme
is apparently intended to illustrate the Imago Mundi copied by Henry,
the connection between the two is but slender; for (as in the case of the
Cottoniana and the text of Priscian it accompanies, Slide
#210) the peculiarities of the chart are often not in the manuscript,
nor are those of the manuscript usually represented in the map. In reference
to this lack of correspondence between Henry's map and the Imago,
one may notice the former's selection of European cities is not represented
in the latter, and that the interchange of Thile and Tilos which
is found in the Imago is not on the map. As for Henry's use of colors, he
is in line with the traditional medieval customs: the seas are colored green,
the Red Sea is red, the rivers violet, and the relief shows red-lobed chains
of mountains. Major settlements are indicated using cathedrals, double towers
and ramparts.
According to scholars such as Beazley, Santarem and Miller, the Mainz design
is obviously related to the Hereford map, as an elder to a younger
brother; and the similarities of detail in these two works may be traced
in almost every part of the world and in nearly every important feature
of the draftsmanship. Santarem has well pointed out, and Beazley seems to
agree, that the Hereford scheme was a working up of Henry's design.
As to this, we may compare the varied outline of the coast, on the north
of Europe and Asia, and the position and outline of the Baltic Sea, of the
Scandinavian peninsula, of the Caspian, and of the lands of the Gog-Magog,
the Hyperboreans and the Dog-headed folk. The coastline near
Paradise may also be compared, and the islands adjoining this coast, such
as Taraconta, likewise the position and outline of the Persian Gulf,
the Red Sea and the island of Taprobane. The peninsular form of Italy
is more developed on Henry of Mainz than in the Hereford, but the delineation
is not dissimilar. Thus both maps have the same widening of the Mediterranean
at its eastern extremity, the same projecting horns to represent the angles
of the Levant, the same elongation of the Black and Azov Seas, the same
approximation of the last to the Northern Ocean.
The Nile of Henry of Mainz resembles the Cottoniana map, as well
as the Hereford in adopting the theory of three sections, (a) a short
one springing from a lake (Nilidis Lacus) near the Atlantic; (b)
a long stretch from a larger lake (Lacus Maximus) running parallel
to the Southern Ocean, to a second point of submergence (hic mergitur);
(c) the Nile of Egypt, springing from a Fons Fialus near the Red
Sea, penetrating the Montes Nibiae [i.e., Nubia], and thence flowing
in a southwest direction to the Mediterranean. Both Hereford and
Henry of Mainz also introduce a Lake and River of Triton flowing
into the Middle Nile (in a southwest direction) from the Altars of the
Phileni, which are wrongly placed, far from the Mediterranean.
In Central Africa Orosius is probably the source of Henry of Mainz' (and
Hereford's) Euzareae Montes. To the east of these are the
Montes Ethiopiae, Mount Atlas being near the Atlantic, and Mons
Hesperus further south. Henry of Mainz also agrees with the Hereford
in the mountains of Syria, East Asia and Bactria and in the Caspian Gates.
The rivers of Asia also agree closely, for example the Hydaspes, Acesines
and Hypanis (drawn as independent of the Indus); the Ganges, on the other
side of Paradise, towards the north, flowing due east); the Acheron
and Oxus, flowing into the Caspian); the two unnamed rivers on the
west side of the Caspian; the Pactolus, flowing into the Euxine;
and the Cobar [Chebar ?], flowing into the upper Euphrates.
Among other coincidences are: (a) in Asia - the wall shutting off the peninsula
of the Gog-Magog and the description of the same people as unclean;
of the Hyperboreans as untroubled by disease and discord; of the
Gryphons, Griffons, or Griffins as most wicked; and of the
Dog-headed folk as adjoining the Arctic Ocean; also the notices of
Amazonia, the Golden Mountains (reference the Cottoniana map),
the Port of Cotonare, Mount Sephar on the Indian Ocean, and the Tower
of Enos just outside Paradise; (b) in Africa - the Burning
Mountain and the Seven Mountains (here also reference the Cottoniana
map); the Troglodytes near the Middle Nile; the River Lethon
near Cyrene; St. Augustine's Hippo; the Basilisk between Triton
and the Nile; the horseshoe-formed Temple of Jupiter-Ammon; the
Monasteries of St. Antony, near the end of the Middle Nile; and the
Pepper Wood near the Red Sea; together with other oddities which
are common in medieval cartography, i.e., the Pyramids as barns, etc.; (c)
in Europe - the Church of Santiago at Compostella, and near it a Pharos
[of Brigantia ?]; the Danus, tributary of the Ebro, unnamed
in ancient geography; the boundary of the Danes and Saxons;
and the heart-shaped town of Cardia near Constantinople.
As to islands, Taraconta, Rapharrica and Abalcia, on the north
coast of Asia, are from Aethicus; Ganzmir [for Scanza or Scandinavia]
is a remarkable misreading, also in the Hereford. Hister, Asia
Minor, Galilea, Sinus Persicus and some other names, wanting on Hereford,
but supplied by Henry of Mainz, are probably from the common original.
Once more, in summary, both the Hereford and Henry of Mainz maps
have practically the same Nile system and the same representation of African
mountains, Asiatic rivers and oceanic islands; both give the boundary between
Asia and Africa in much the same way; both omit to specify any definite
boundary between Asia and Europe; both agree in their arrangement of the
surrounding sea, in their drawing of the chief parts of the continental
coastline, and in many other details.
Various peculiarities of nomenclature, i.e., Mene Island, Jabok,
etc., are also common to both works; but of course the Hereford map
is far larger, and contains much more detail, especially in relation to
classical material. The 229 legends of the one are overshadowed in the 1,021
of the other. In the same way, among the other relatives of Henry's map,
Ebstorf (a work on the scale of Hereford) dwarfs its elder cousin
of Mainz with 1,224 legends; Jerome supplies 407; while the
little Psalter map, Henry's younger brother, in spite of all its
crowding, can only supply 145. One may notice that, among other works of
a similar nature, the Cottoniana map gives us 146 legends; Lambert
of St. Omer, 180; Matthew Paris' world map, 81; the Beatus
group, 477; while the vast scope of the Peutinger Table offers 3,400
inscriptions (Slides #120, #207, #210, #217,
and #225).
It is plain from the great number of nameless rivers, mountains and cities
in the Mainz example, that the work may well have been taken from a larger
original, probably a great wall map of the 11th century. Of this original,
Henry's transcript is more accurate but less complete due to size constraints.
There is, however, another proof of the same in the eight half-circles which
occur (apparently without reason) along the oval margin of Henry's ocean;
from other works we may recognize these as representing the places of the
eight intermediate winds.
The Hereford, fuller but considered less 'true' and 'scholarly' by
Beazley, probably departs from the original, as well as Henry of Mainz,
in making Jerusalem the center of the world, and in adopting an absolutely
circular instead of an oval form.
The relationship between Mainz and the so-called Jerome maps is almost
as close as that between Mainz and the Psalter. Only the eastern
part of the Orbis antiquus in the Jerome examples survives,
but here the likeness is marked; while the treatment, in the Mainz design,
of the Twelve Tribes and their settlements corresponds with the well supported
tradition that the celebrated and sainted editor of the Vulgate, who passed
so many years in Syria, himself composed a separate treatise and map upon
the subject.
In the draftsmanship of Asia Minor, the Gulf of Issus, and the Black Sea,
the most striking analogies may be found between Henry and Jerome;
and from a study of these particulars we may feel practically certain that
some correspondence may be assumed. The agreement of the two maps is only,
of course, partial, even in the eastern world; but it is far closer than
the likeness between Jerome and the other members of the 'family' - the
Hereford, Psalter or Ebstorf maps; and Beazley believes it to
be a true and conscious relationship.
The details in the Mainz design which are foreign to the Jerome tradition
may be divided into three classes, respectively based upon Aethicus of Istria,
upon Solinus and upon the contemporary knowledge of the central medieval
period. Among these last we may notice the references to the Turks, the
Danes and the Saxons; the mention of the Lake of Nile; and the names of
Rouen, Pisa, Iceland, Lombardy, Frisia and the Mare Veneticum
[Gulf of Venice, unique in medieval maps]. Among these names the first
three are in Aethicus; the fourth in Solinus; the last six belong to Henry's
own time more especially.
In the four corners, instead of winds or wind-blowers, are four angels,
whom Santarem regards as pointing to Gog-Magog land and to Paradise,
and blocking the way through the Straits of Gibraltar perhaps too elaborate
an explanation. However, the angel in the left-hand top corner is certainly
pointing to Gog and Magog, an unclean race. All of these angels have
golden halos, and are variously colored in green and red; while the figure
on the upper left hand carries something which has been variously interpreted
as a cube or die, a box, or a church. His clothes are green, except for
an upper loose cloak, which is red like the wings. Exactly the opposite
arrangement of color is adopted with the angel that fronts him on the right.
All of the seas, save the Persian and Arabian Gulfs, are light green; the
Red Seas, the mountains and certain of the more important names, are rubricated.
Excluding the Jerome maps, this is perhaps the richest in content
and the best preserved among the 12th century examples of European cartography.
However, the Chinese, during the same century were further developing their
scientific tradition while Europe was still basically dominated by religious
cosmography (see Slide #218).
LOCATION: Corpus Christi College, MS. 66, p. 2, Cambridge, England.
REFERENCES:
*Beazley, C., The Dawn of Modern Geography, volume II, pp. 563 - 567; 614
- 617.
*Destombes, M., Mappemonde: A.D. 1200-1500, #25.3
*Harley, J.B., The History of Cartography, Volume One, pp. 312, 327-28,
340-41, 349, Figures 18.42, 18.59.
Wright, J.K., The Geographical Lore of the Time of the Crusades, pp. 103,
124-125.
*illustrated