It is interesting that a young Francis Drake piloted one of the ships that left Ingram on the shores of Mexico. It is also interesting that Ingram was rescued and returned to England by a French ship.
The more I read about Ingram, the more it seems like a fabrication.
Thevet mentions in his book that his information regarding the new world came from two books given to him as a gift. Obviously, because the "Codex Mendoza" was stolen from the Spanish by French privateers, Thevet could not reveal this but still wished to publish the information he had.
Hakluyt would have faced the same problem once he received the Codex from Thevet. What better way to protect his source than to fabricate a story about English sailors that walked across the new world. The fact that the account was written down by Walsingham, (a man with lots of information obtained from sources he could not reveal), IMO lends credence to this idea.
It also makes me curious about Thevet's consistent lack of citing his sources. Better to be thought of as someone who lacks credibility, than a spy or a traitor. Imagine for a minute the political consequences of the French Royal Cosmographer selling a stolen Spanish document to the English.
-------------------- One is never completely useless. One can always serve as a bad example.
IP: Logged |
posted
thanx for sharing that NR, i like your thought process on how they made up cover stories to 'splain away possossion of stolen information/stuff... that does make sense and is still practied even today in politics...
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.
IP: Logged |
This scenario seems even more likely if one considers another manuscript of which Thevet had possession.
Most of Thevet's descriptions of the native Timucauns of Florida came directly from a narrative written by Rene de Laudonniere, the leader of the French settlement at Fort Caroline, of which Thevet had the only copy. It is believed that Thevet suppressed publication of the manuscript and copied much of it word for word in his book, in order to pose as an expert on Florida.
Thevet "loaned" the manuscript to Hakluyt in 1586, who then published it in Paris the same year with the help of French mathematician Martin Basanier and gave full credit to Laudonniere. Thevet of course was livid, and had the following to say:
"There is a little history of them, printed last year, which I had in confidence and good faith loaned to a certain Englishman named Richard Hakluyt, in manuscript. He, having communicated this to a young Parisian named M. Basanier, held it out on me for four months or thereabouts, at the end of which time they had it printed in Paris. I have here to seek condolence with my friends against these plagiarists and impostors, who unable to put anything over on me through their sinister enterprises that they had hatched up in their hearts, thought they could take away the credit and authority which my peregrinations had acquired via the reports I had made in my Cosmographie and my book of my Singularities. These two characters having committed such a villainy against me, the both of them brought me one of the books they had printed thinking to please me with my well-written copy, which book they dedicated to a great English milord named Walter Ralegh."
It is clear from Thevet's rant, that he did not think kindly of Hakluyt after this incident, so the question I find myself asking is why would Thevet have sold the "Codex Mendoza" to Hakluyt in 1587, a year after he was slighted by Hakluyt?
Was the "Codex Mendoza" purchased from Thevet or was it "loaned" to Hakluyt in good faith, then never returned?
-------------------- One is never completely useless. One can always serve as a bad example.
IP: Logged |
posted
Hakluyt probably had the money from the selling of the publication to pay enought ot make it worht while to sell it?
i see this all the time in science- my wife discovered an important and valuble enzyme in the saliva of a bug.
she isolated the gene respinsible, cloned it and sent to another lab to be transferred itno yeast for mass prodcution and use- the fermnetation people never published, my wife suddenly could not get sequences form the computer folks, and her boss took the bugs rearing program away from her.
THEN the sequencing of the bugs trascriptome (thats the protein expression genes) was given to another scientist and sequenced, my wife worte that proposal for review by those scientists.. since my wife is a gene hunter you'd think she'd be happy to have the transcriptome right? so she goes to run what we call BLAST search which is the act of picking genes out of a gazillion strings of ATGC's on computer pritnout...
well the bashturds pulibished it in Japanese. on your tax dollars no less...
niether of us being fluent in Japanese means she still cannot access the sequence. now why would that bother us? i mena she already got this whole project going, published first fasted and made tall the rest of it happen... what is there to complian about? well thers a handfull of other genes she kept to herself that she wants even more than the last one and they want thm for nothing. this happens every day in science to all scientists, they are not picking on her, they are just being who they are....
the discoverer of DNA was NOT watson and crick. it was woman.. i forget her name right now... how bad is that? it was woman who took the picture and she was asking for verufication of hr theories when either watson or crick glooked at it and those two actaully said she was cluelss, when she was trying to seek peer support...
the noble prize for the MRI dod not go the people who made the most significant contributions..
when we lived at UCR? we hung with a bucn of neurosience people, in fact teh colorado shooter was the student of close friend there (odd huh?) this case will make you sick, the research there in th elate 90's clearly showed that human nerve cells in vitro (glass) were being changed dramtaically by cell phone energy. it plain and simple and clear... i beleive that rather than publish, the dept. leverage that itno some bigger funding... it's not funny.
it happens every day to all of 'em...
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.
IP: Logged |
posted
Possibly. Hakluyt was operating in France with the support of Walshingham, so Hakluyt would have had whatever funding he needed if Walshingham felt it was warranted. According to most sources, the Codex was purchased for 20 French Francs, (which at the time were made of solid gold), so it was quite a substantial amount.
However, no account that I have found thus far cites how it is known that Hakluyt purchased the codex, so I am unsure where this information came from. I did find one reference by Samuel Purchas, (who obtained the Codex from Hakluyt's collection after he passed away), that the Codex was purchased by Hakluyt AFTER Thevet's death in 1592. This would make much more sense considering how Thevet felt about Hakluyt after the "Laudonniere Incident" in 1587.
This however, conflicts with the contemporary accounts that the Codex was purchased from Thevet and in Hakluyt's possession, in England, in 1587. It is also worth pointing out that Hakluyt was only operating in France from 1583 to 1588.
I'll update if I find anything more on this subject.
-------------------- One is never completely useless. One can always serve as a bad example.
IP: Logged |
posted
The more I look into this, the more I am convinced that the Codex is the "source" that made Andre Thevet's lake credible to other cartographers of the period.
The lake is featured on maps by Richard Hakluyt in 1587, and then by Samuel Purchas in 1625, both of which had possession of the Codex Mendoza prior to publishing. As best I can tell, (I am still working on this lead), all other maps of the period that feature the lake, were either made by friends of Hakluyt or Purchas, or were made using information from Hakluyt's or Purchas's map.
I am still puzzled however, by the accurate placement of said lake. While the account of a lake to the north, (homeland of the Aztecs), is obvious, there is nothing in the Codex Medoza that give any sort of location of the lake, other than a general direction of the migration, and the amount of time taken to migrate from said lake, without any references to distances traveled during those time periods.
The placement of the lake is far too accurate to have been drawn from anything in the Codex Mendoza, and almost too accurate to even have been measured directly, given the difficult in determining longitude and crude methods and tools used at the time. There is still the possibility that it's location on Thevet's map was purely a very luck guess.
Anyhow, I am still working on this one, and actually have a bit more time these days to pursue this and try and get something done.
-------------------- One is never completely useless. One can always serve as a bad example.
IP: Logged |
posted
Completely unrelated, but the Codex Mendoza shows an Aztec couple getting married, and may be the earliest "written" reference of the expression "tying the knot".
JSTOR is allowing limited access to it's online articles. You can now select up to 3 items to put on your "shelf" to read for free, provided you sign up for an account and keep it on your "shelf" for at least 14 days. If you need more access you can pay 20$ per month for unlimited items on your "shelf", no institutional credentials needed.
I have at least 50 JSTOR articles related to this project I have bookmarked starting back in 2008 that I will finally have access to. Looks like I will be doing a lot of reading over the next few weeks/months.
"Archaeologists on the trail of a little-known ancient culture have found a cache of clues that may help unlock its secrets: a cave containing hundreds of children’s moccasins.
The cave, on the shore of Utah’s Great Salt Lake, was first excavated in the 1930s, but the artifacts found there — and the questions that they raised — were largely forgotten until recently.
Dr. Jack Ives of the University of Alberta and his colleagues resumed excavations in the cave in 2011 to better understand its occupants, some of whom Ives believes may have been part of one of the greatest human migrations in the continent’s history."
...
"But it was the staggering amount of footwear in the caves that captured the attention of archaeologists, past and present.
With soles made from a single piece of bison leather, lined with fur, and sewn together at the heel, the moccasins are made in a style typical of the Canadian Subarctic, Ives said, a fashion his team describes as being “decidedly out of place in the eastern Great Basin.”
These moccasins and other cues have led some experts to theorize that the caves’ inhabitants were part of a great migration from the far north, a wave of people who moved into the Great Basin in the 12th and 13th centuries, and eventually gave rise to cultures that include the Apache and the Navajo."
I'll have to look into this. Not only is this "mystery" culture in the right place, (shores of the GSL), it is also from the right time period, (12th and 13th century).
This seems to fit well with the Aztec migration from the "north" and also with my own ideas about the regarding the GSL being the mythic homeland of the Aztecs.
-------------------- One is never completely useless. One can always serve as a bad example.
IP: Logged |
posted
Still throwing this one around for anyone who cares...
Re-reading this thread to get a new perspective. Will try to update some things sometime soon. In the mean time here is a fascinating read about more work from Dr. Jack Ives of the University of Alberta about the Promontory Culture of Utah. If you like part one, be sure to read parts two and three, the links are at the bottom of the page.
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
