Sunday 19 November 2017

Was America named after an Italian or a Welshman?



The traditional view is that America takes its name from the Italian explorer Amerigo Vespucci, who sailed to South America in 1499. However, a Welshman based in Bristol has at least an equal claim to the honour.

Amerigo Vespucci and America
Amerigo Vespucci was born in Florence (Italy) in 1454. He became a merchant and businessman who worked on behalf of the ruling Medici family. Having been sent by his employer to Spain, he became involved in the provisioning of ships sailing to the recently discovered West Indies.

Vespucci was invited by the King of Portugal to sail as an observer on several voyages to the New World and it was on the first of these (in 1499) that his ship sailed south to visit the coast of what is now Brazil.

On returning from his final voyage (in 1502) he wrote about his explorations; his accounts inspired a German cartographer named Martin Waldseemüller to produce a world map in 1507 on which the name America was used for the area that Vespucci had explored. He later wrote that he used the name in honour of “Americus Vesputius” – using a Latinized version of his name.

In later versions of his map Waldseemüller removed the name and marked the area “Terra Incognita” (unknown land). However, there were enough copies of the original edition of the map in circulation for the name to be generally adopted by other map-makers and publishers.

The claims of Richard ap Meryk

Richard ap Meryk was a late 15th century Welshman; “ap” is a Welsh name element that is similar to “Mac” in Scotland and “O” in Ireland. He set up business in the English port of Bristol and anglicized his name to Amerike. His trade was mainly in fish, with ships being sent to the cod-rich waters off Newfoundland.

Amerike supported the voyage of John Cabot in 1497 with a large financial contribution. Cabot, like Vespucci, was Italian, but he was commissioned to sail to the coast of North America by the English King Henry VII (who was notably tight-fisted) and therefore set sail from Bristol. He would doubtless have been extremely grateful to a local wealthy merchant who made up the shortfall in funding that he had been left with by King Henry.

When Cabot returned he drew a map, and it is known that both Columbus and Vespucci possessed copies of this map. It is entirely possible that Cabot used the name Amerike on his map, in honour of his Bristol sponsor, but no copy of it has survived.

Which claim is to be believed?

One thing that has always puzzled me is why, if Vespucci is the person after whom the name America was taken by Waldseemüller, the name was not given as “Vesputia”. I cannot think of any other place that is named after a first as opposed to a family name, except in cases of royalty.

It is an interesting coincidence that two people who had a direct interest in exploring the Americas at roughly the same time should have had such similar names. One possibility is that Cabot’s map had the name Amerike (or possibly Amerika) on it, which struck Amerigo Vespucci as a neat way of getting his own name, literally, “on the map”. Seeing Amerike on the land far to the north of his own area of exploration, could Vespucci have scribbled “Americus” on the southern part of Cabot’s map as a way of indicating that the two areas belonged to the same landmass, and that he was responsible for establishing this fact?

Could it be that Waldseemüller was not being entirely truthful when he claimed to be naming the continent after Vespucci, given that Vespucci had already used the name?

Of course this is mere speculation, but it sounds like a distinct possibility to me!

© John Welford

Sins of the World





On 13th May 1981 Pope John Paul II was shot four times as he was being driven across St Peter’s Square in Rome. His would-be assassin was a Turk named Mehmet Ali Agca, who appeared to be part of a gang working on the orders of a foreign government, possibly the Soviet Union.

 Despite severe blood loss, the Pope made a full recovery and continued his reign for another 24 years.

 As might be imagined, the story made front-page news across the world, with much speculation as to the motives behind the attack and discussion over how the Pope’s personal security could be improved.

 At the time of the assassination attempt I was working as an assistant librarian at a teacher training college in West Sussex. The library subscribed to a wide range of journals, and the custom – as at most libraries – was to display the current issues on sloping shelves and remove them when the next issues came along, so that they could be placed in storage.

One of our subscriptions was to The Economist, a weekly magazine that was and is a highly trusted source of news, comment and opinion on a wide range of subjects.

The issue following the assassination attempt naturally featured it as the main news item, with a photograph of the event on the front cover and a headline that read “The Sins of the World” – this being a quotation from the text of the Catholic Mass: “O Lamb of God, that taketh away the sins of the world, have mercy upon us”.

However, the library assistant who prepared the issue for display appeared to have another message in mind when she placed the library stamp on the front cover. It now read: “The Sins of the World. Not to be Taken Away”.

© John Welford

The genetic basis of left-handedness



The incidence of left-handedness in people is about 10%, and that appears to be fairly constant across the world. It is also known that left-handedness runs in families, which might seem to indicate that there is a gene that influences whether a child will turn out to be left-handed. The only problem is that nobody can identify the gene that might be responsible.

Where does left-handedness comes from?

A study carried out at Nottingham University conducted detailed genetic analyses of 2,000 pairs of twins, because it is known that identical twins tend to share handedness more strongly than non-identical twins. This suggests a genetic link because identical twins have identical DNA.

However, the conclusion is that there is no single gene that causes left-handedness, so it might be a combination of genes that does the trick. The same is apparently true for other human characteristics such as height and cognitive abilities. It is therefore improbable that it will ever be possible to predict whether a new-born baby will turn out to be left-handed by analysing its DNA.

However, the study does appear to have identified a gene that determines how strongly handed one is, whether left or right, and this confirms other research done elsewhere. It is rare to find someone who is entirely left- or right-handed, and there is apparently a genetic reason for this.

Being left-handed

This is an area that interests me because I am left-handed (reasonably strongly so); however, because I was adopted I cannot trace any left-handedness in my natural family, which is unknown to me. The only person I know who is a blood relative is my son, who is right-handed!

Incidentally, one thing I cannot do right-handed (apart from writing) is operate a computer mouse! I haven’t switched the buttons round because my index finger naturally wants to go to the left-hand button, and right-clicking is no problem. People know when I’ve been using a computer because of where I leave the mouse!
© John Welford