map, of the coast, at latitude 40 Degrees, returning to the west. It
is apparent, therefore, that the two maps of Agnese and Verrazano,
both representing the western sea in the same form, must have been
derived from a common source, or else one was taken from the other;
and that the map of Agnese could not, in either case, have been
derived from a map showing the Verrazzano discovery, and must
consequently have been anterior to the Verrazano map in its present
form.

It militates against the authenticity of the Verrazano map and the
early date which it would have inferred for itself, that there is
not a single known map or chart, either published or unpublished,
before the great map of Mercator in 1569, that refers to the
Verrazzano discoveries, or recognizes this map in any respect before
that of Michael Lok, published by Hakluyt, in 1582; or any before
Lok, that applies the name of the sea of Verrazano to the western
sea. The unauthenticated and until recently unnoticed globe of
Euphrosynus Ulpius, purporting to have been constructed in 1542, of
which we will speak presently, is the only evidence yet presented of
the existence of the Verrazano map, as it now appears, beyond the
map itself. The whole theory of the early influence of the
Verrazzano discovery, or of the Verrazano map, upon the cartography
of the period to which they relate, and its consequently proving
their authenticity, as advanced by some learned writers, is
therefore incorrect and is founded in a misconception of fact.

This mistake relates to a map which is found in several editions of
the geography of Ptolemy printed at Basle, supposed to represent the
western sea shortly after the Verrazzano discovery, and consequently
as derived from that source. Mr. Kohl, [Footnote: We are indebted