Maps were printed intaglio from copperplates on which the information was engraved by mirror image. Plates were inked, then wiped clean and the ink remaining in the copper grooves was transferred to the damp paper by applying high pressure from a roller. The resulting prints or pulls were hung up to dry. Texts were composed by setting individual letters in reverse order into rows forming the printed lines, and putting these one beneath another until the text of an entire page had been set. These rows of letters were then fixed on a page block, inked, and the block pressed on to the paper at relatively low pressure. In principle there is no reason why either text or map should be printed first but in practice there is a big difference: type could be removed from the page block after use and reused for composing new texts whereas a copperplate is a more fixed, permanent medium. Individual letters used for typesetting represented a considerable investment for the printer and were always in high demand and short supply which is the reason it was not feasible to typeset an atlas in one go. Instead, typeset pages were broken up as soon as enough copies had been drawn from it in order to re-use the type for subsequent pages of text. Therefore, it was in the printer's interest to print the text sheets in sufficient numbers, and only to print the maps on verso as needed. An exception to this is the 1606 English edition.

The chance of there being an exactly equal number of sheets in one print run is small, particularly as some pulls would fail in quality and be discarded. This means that a new edition may contain old sheets that were left over from a previous printing with old texts and old plates, or with old texts and new plates. To complicate matters further, it might also contain new texts and old plates; in spite of the arguments above it was not uncommon to print some map plates on sheets without text in order to sell them individually. Some 5% of the loose Ortelius maps in my possession are without text on the verso. Once a new edition was being prepared, old stockpiles of such sheets might be provided with texts and included in the new edition for economic reasons.

It is unlikely, in view of this, that all exemplars of a single issue of the Theatrum are exactly alike as regards plates and texts. When two versions of a plate were available side by side it is still possible that a mix up could occur and that an earlier issue appeared with the later plate or vice versa. This is what happened with the 1592 Latin which has the new Abraham plate (25P/I) with the background hachuring between the medallions going from lower left to upper right, whereas the 1595 edition still has the old plate with the hachuring going from lower right to upper left. Similarly plate 2 and 3 of the world map (112/I and 113) co-existed for some time. 112/I occurs in the 1588 Spanish edition but also in the 1589 German edition in its first and second state, with a bulge in South America. The bulge was corrected on this plate but the impressions not included regularly in atlases. Plate 113, in which the bulge has been corrected and which features medallions rather than clouds in the corners, occurs in the 1587 French and 1589 German editions and is from then on used as the only world plate. For text, too, variations may also be expected to be the rule rather than the exception.

The physical characteristics of a printer's shop at this time must also be taken into account in this argument. Even Blaeu's well-known premises at the Bloemgracht in Amsterdam, a century after Ortelius, produced its monumental output from premises measuring only 160 sq. metres (approx. 1600 sq.feet). Ortelius' 1595 Latin edition of the Theatrum was produced from the famous Plantin printing presses in Antwerp along with many others.[10] The 300 or so piles of map and text sheets, each at least 200 sheets high, would be waiting to be bound in cramped conditions. The chances of mistakes being made when these sheets were collated for binding were high and this is what we found. In addition, atlases were often left unbound until the buyer had been consulted about the binding required. All this contributes to the instability of an edition.

On the basis of our findings we do not agree with Koeman's premise that an atlas edition may be regarded as the standard by which to compare other copies. Each copy of these manually produced atlases is unique and each edition will display a certain degree of instability in respect to other exemplars of that edition. The degree of instability of each Theatrum edition and of other early atlases produced in a similar manner (Meurer reports a similar instability amongst atlases by Sebastian Münster) can only be determined by comparing many exemplars of each edition. Fortunately, enough exemplars of each edition of the Theatrum still exist in order for us to do this.

References:

1. Marcel P.R.van den Broecke, "How rare is a map and the atlas it comes from? Facts and speculations on production and survival of Ortelius' Theatrum Orbis Terrarum and its maps" in The Map Collector 36, pp.2-12.
2. Peter H. Meurer, "Fontes Cartographici Orteliani: das 'Theatrum Orbis Terrarum' von Abraham Ortelius und seine Kartenquellen', (Weinheim: VCH, 1991).
3. Robert W. Karrow, Mapmakers of the sixteenth century and their maps (Winnetka, Chicago: Speculum Orbis Press, 1993).
4. Jan Denucé, Oud-Nederlansche kaartmakers in betrekking met Plantijn, (Amsterdam: Meridian Publishing Company, 1912).
5. László Gróf, "Magyarország térképei az Ortelius atlas zokban" in Cartographica Hungarica 1 (1992) pp.26-36.
6. Rodney W. Shirley, Early printed paps of the British Isles 1477-1650 (East Grinstead: Antique Atlas, 1991).
7. Rodney S. Shirley, The Mapping of the World: early printed world maps 1472-1700 (London: Holland Press, 1993).
8. C. Koeman, Atlantes Neerlandici Vol. 3 (Amsterdam: Theatrum Orbis Terrarum, 1969).
9. Personal communication.
10. A. Ortelius, Theatrum Orbis Terrarum Facsimile of the 1595 edition (Firenze, Giunti, 1991).
11. Peter H. Meurer, "De verboden eerste uitgave van de Henegouwen-kaart door Jacques de Surhon uit het jaar 1572 in Caert Thresoor 13 (3), 1994, pp.81-87.

Acknowledgements:

This paper, which will also appear in a shortened form in Dutch in Caert Thresoor, has benefited from comments by C. Koeman, D. de Vries, P. Buijnsters, R. Shirley, A. Kelly, L. Grof, F. Gittenberger, P. Meurer, G. Ritzlin, and R. Karrow.

---

COPYRIGHT September 1995 Marcel van den Broecke, All rights reserved.
No portion of this article nor the accompanying illustrations can or may be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.

---