![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
|
What does "No direct extracts from the document have been discovered" mean? We do have the Cnoyen/Mercator extracts (long quoted passages) preserved in Dee's extant manuscript.
Those are extracts from what Cnoyen was told about the Inventio, not from the Inventio itself. David Trochos ( talk) 15:24, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
I have here some news and material on the IF. The "in the 1490s, the Inventio had gone missing," seems wrong now because Best read it. It may be lost soon after 1578.
"Cnoyen... neither he nor the priest having actually seen the Inventio." This is very right. The only persons we know who read the IF were Columbus and Best.
IF "only known through a summary in a second text, the Itinerarium" That is right. But is "summary" a good choice? Usually it implies that the book was read. But that was not the case like the article later explains. I would suggest: "mainly known through a description in a second text, the Itinerarium"
What we know from the Cnoyen Itinerarium seems based on the priest with the astrolabe who reported in 1364 the King of Norway. I think there is some scholarly consensus now that this priest was probably Ivar Bardsson. That Columbus' son Fernando and las Casas mentioned the IF seems worth to mention too. -- Portolanero ( talk) 12:38, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
I dont fully understand your reply. On note 14 I wrote:
Now "Best (1578), pp. 34f." is at Google books, see note 13. The crucial sentence: "Hee reporteth that the south-weast parte of that lande is a fruitfull and a holesome soyle." is not in the letter by Mercator. This everyone able to read Taylors Imago Mundi paper (given in this article here) can check. So you can belive me or check what I said if you doubt. What is the problem? -- Portolanero ( talk) 15:26, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
":"...In the midst of the four countries is a Whirlpool into which there empty these four Indrawing Seas which divide the North. And the water rushes round and descends into the earth just as if one were pouring it through a filter funnel. It is 4 degrees wide on every side of the Pole, that is to say eight degrees altogther."
Is "altogether" correct? 66.74.176.59 ( talk) 17:03, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Inventio Fortunata. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:29, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
What does "No direct extracts from the document have been discovered" mean? We do have the Cnoyen/Mercator extracts (long quoted passages) preserved in Dee's extant manuscript.
Those are extracts from what Cnoyen was told about the Inventio, not from the Inventio itself. David Trochos ( talk) 15:24, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
I have here some news and material on the IF. The "in the 1490s, the Inventio had gone missing," seems wrong now because Best read it. It may be lost soon after 1578.
"Cnoyen... neither he nor the priest having actually seen the Inventio." This is very right. The only persons we know who read the IF were Columbus and Best.
IF "only known through a summary in a second text, the Itinerarium" That is right. But is "summary" a good choice? Usually it implies that the book was read. But that was not the case like the article later explains. I would suggest: "mainly known through a description in a second text, the Itinerarium"
What we know from the Cnoyen Itinerarium seems based on the priest with the astrolabe who reported in 1364 the King of Norway. I think there is some scholarly consensus now that this priest was probably Ivar Bardsson. That Columbus' son Fernando and las Casas mentioned the IF seems worth to mention too. -- Portolanero ( talk) 12:38, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
I dont fully understand your reply. On note 14 I wrote:
Now "Best (1578), pp. 34f." is at Google books, see note 13. The crucial sentence: "Hee reporteth that the south-weast parte of that lande is a fruitfull and a holesome soyle." is not in the letter by Mercator. This everyone able to read Taylors Imago Mundi paper (given in this article here) can check. So you can belive me or check what I said if you doubt. What is the problem? -- Portolanero ( talk) 15:26, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
":"...In the midst of the four countries is a Whirlpool into which there empty these four Indrawing Seas which divide the North. And the water rushes round and descends into the earth just as if one were pouring it through a filter funnel. It is 4 degrees wide on every side of the Pole, that is to say eight degrees altogther."
Is "altogether" correct? 66.74.176.59 ( talk) 17:03, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Inventio Fortunata. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:29, 15 November 2017 (UTC)