![]() Kuening criticised this entrenched view as early as 1955. The first projection is referred to here as a "simple conical projection", the second projection on the other hand as a "pseudoconical projection" (Berggren and Jones 2000, p. However, a terminological distinction was not always made as clearly as by Berggen and Jones. The second projection derived from the first projection has been considered a modified cone projection in some studies. The following examples outlines the time frame of the prevalence of this view: Mollweide ( 1805), Tissot ( 1881/ 1887), Kubitschek ( 1935), Hopfner ( 1938), Neugebauer ( 1959), Polaschek ( 1965) and Stückelberger and Grasshoff ( 2006). The view that Ptolemy's first and second projections are cone projections was present in the literature for a very long time. et Graßhoff, Mittenhuber and Rinner 2017 as well as Stückelberger and Rohner 2012) and including the present contribution. These editions initiated further publications concerning Ptolemaic geography (cf. The facsimile edition of the Codex Seragliensis was published in 2017 (Stückelberger, Mittenhuber, Fuchs and Şengör 2017). The previous complete edition was published in 1843/45 (Nobbe 1843–1845). The importance of these editions is that they contain the complete text of Ptolemy's “Geography” with an excellent commentary. Mittenhuber (Stückelberger and Mittenhuber 2006). This edition was complemented in 2009 with a supplement volume edited by A. This edition is based on the manuscript from the Sultan's Library (Codex Seragliensis GI 57), which was rediscovered in 1927 and is kept in the Topkapi Museum in Istanbul. The last complete edition of the “Geography” was published in 2006 (Stückelberger and Grasshoff 2006). This was mainly caused by the great similarity of the first two projections to cone projections. The true character of the Ptolemaic projections nevertheless remained unrecognised. However, it only became really well known at the beginning of the fifteenth century, after it had been translated into Latin. The theory of Ptolemy was rediscovered in the thirteenth century. In the last centuries, numerous studies have dealt with Ptolemy's projection theory, for example Mollweide 1805, Wilberg 1834, Schöne 1909, Schnabel 1930, Kubitschek 1935, Hopfner 1938, Neugebauer 1959, Polaschek 1965, Hövermann 1980, Dürst 1983 and Dilke 1987. Ptolemy described in detail how to construct the projections he developed, but he gave no explanation for what method he used to conceive his first and second projections. This term could thus be interpreted as referring to the world known in the age of that time. ![]() ![]() Stückelberger pointed out that Ptolemy often used the expression "he kath' hemas oikumene" ("the oikumene concerning us") (Stückelberger and Mittenhuber 2009, p. Mostly it is understood to mean the inhabited area of the earth (cf. The term "oikumene" is interpreted in different ways. However, only the first two projections were used for the cartographic representation, as they were optimised for the representation of the oikumene. The highest level of the principle of similarity is achieved in his third projection, which is based on a perspective representation of the globe. In his second projection, both the latitude circles and the meridians are designed as circular arcs. In his first projection, the latitude circles are rendered as circular arcs for the first time. It thus made a significant contribution to the development of theoretical cartography. This treatise contains instructions on the construction of map projections. The “Geography” ("Geographike hyphegesis"), written by Klaudius Ptolemy around 150 AD, is the oldest completely preserved theoretical treatise on cartography. Thanks are due to Frank Dickmann for the suggestion to elaborate this study in this detailed form.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |