Studying historical maps is fascinating. Currently, if we want to see a map, we look for it in the images section of a search engine, or even easier: we open Google Maps and we can even explore other planets. Its usefulness has almost been reduced to situations where we need GPS to guide us, but until recently maps were vital when traveling. Modern techniques have allowed us to have very detailed maps, but… what happened hundreds or thousands of years ago?

We have maps like Herodotus’ from 2,500 years ago, the first map of America created by the Vikings, or Urbano Monte’s impressive world map from 1587. We also have beautiful maps of Spain that they forgot about for years. One important thing: the whole of Northern Spain. And this is something that determines the choice of the capital of Spain.

Map of Corsulensis, 1551

Italians and Flemish. The map we left just above these lines is one of the most representative maps of the 16th century, and one of the most copied in Spanish cartography. This is the map created by Vicenzo Paletino Corsulensis in 1551 and formed the basis for many later maps depicting the Spanish peninsula.

Cartography in the Renaissance was an art because many different sciences were applied, but also because trade was vital to states and everything had to be very detailed. Therefore, Germans, Flemish and Genoese started working to make maps of different countries, and Spain was one of the most important.

Spain was busy with other things. Why weren’t the Spanish cartographers the ones who made the maps of their country? They would be the ones to outline the geography of the country a few years later, but Columbus’s arrival in America was not that long ago and Spanish cartographers were more interested in other regions.

What about the north? One thing that can be seen is that, with more or less projections, the Mediterranean coast and even the coast of Cadiz and Portugal have quite a lot of detail. Of course there will be errors if we put the map next to the existing map, but the profile is quite recognizable. This makes sense if we consider that these were the main points of trade with Flanders and Italy and were the most important regions for cartographers of both regions.

This map, dated 1570, is much later and the map of the north is even worse. The problem is that it is so famous because it belongs to Ortelius, published in the famous Atlas Orbis Terrarum.

But the north is completely blurred with inlets and exits everywhere and has a much lower level of detail than the other coasts.

copy of copy. The problem arises when it becomes clear that this Corsulensis map was the map used by other later cartographers and became the “official” profile of Spain for the next few years. Some added more detail, others added ‘bite’ to some coastlines, but in the Mediterranean and Portugal the trend remained to be big details, but a far north from reality.

Forlani map, 1561

An example is the 1560 map created by Forlani Veronese, but there are other very famous maps such as Gallo or Luchini that suffer from the same thing.

Philip II. Madrid became the capital in 1561. This is King Henry II. It was a decision by Philip and was influenced, of course, by the importance of the geographical position occupied by the city, among other fundamental considerations. Establishing the capital of a country is of great importance for political, cultural and social reasons, but what is vital is that it has a good geographical location that can easily transport materials between different parts of the country.

And maps were used to determine the capital at the time, and that was the case if those with maps suggested that one point was best, but in reality the decision might have been different if the maps had been different. more precise. A team of Spanish researchers analyzed this a few months ago.

The Forlani map is on a grid showing the deformations of different areas when compared to a current map.

And the math says… This image shows the mathematical analysis of the Forlani map. In the study, they compared the 1560 map with the current map to see errors in a distorted grid. And the truth is, there is no doubt: the north and southwest (to a lesser extent) are a complete disaster.

Its image at the time was completely distorted and contrasted with a central region (Castilla) and a very detailed and faithful Mediterranean coast. In fact, this analysis also serves to appreciate the precision in capturing these areas, as it is only marginally distant from the current profile created with much more advanced tools.

After all, it is clear that they were based on the cartographic representation of the Iberian Peninsula that they had at that time, and it is easy (and unfair) to evaluate this from our point of view almost half a millennium later, but at the same time it is interesting to know the tools that led them to make such important decisions at the time.

Of course, we should not ignore other circumstances, such as the fact that Valladolid (which was already the capital) was disabled due to social rebellion and the influence of the clergy was very high in Toledo. It led Philip II to establish Madrid as his capital.

in Xataka | Philip II insisted that Madrid have a port. So he devised a crazy plan to bring it to the Atlantic.