|1|
The Moniteur of the 11th contains a long letterto the Editor from M. De Humboldt, in which hebrings a charge of plagiarism against Mr. Arrow-smith, a well-known English Geographer.
After some prefatory observations, M. De H.proceeds as follows:—
“I was engaged during four years in the con-struction of a map of Mexico, which was publishedat Paris, in September, 1809, in two large sheets, inmy ‘Geographical and Physical Atlas of theKingdom of New Spain.’ I had first drawn it upin Mexico, in 1803, and it was engraved at Parisby M. M. Aubert and Barriere: it was entitled,‘General Map of the Kingdom of New Spain,drawn up from astronomical observations, and thewhole of the materials which existed in Mexico, atthe commencement of the year 1804, by AlexanderDe Humboldt.’ The astronomical observations,the geodesic surveys, and the barometrical admea-surements of heights which I made in the course ofmy travels in the equinoctial regions of the NewContinent, from 1799 to 1803, are to be found inthe second volume of my ‘Collection of Astrono-mical Observations,’ published conjointly with M.Oltmanns. The numerous and unpublished ma-terials which assisted in the construction of the 20maps contained in the Mexican atlas, are indicatedand discussed in an analysis prefixed to my PoliticalEssay on the kingdom of New Spain.
“All these long and painful labours, howeverimperfect they appear to me, Mr. Arrowsmith hasentirely appropriated to himself; he faithfullycopied my general map of Mexico, and publishedit in London, before the appearance of the Englishtranslation of my Political Essay; and he substi-tuted his own name instead of mine, under the titleof “New Map of Mexico, compiled from originaldocuments, by Arrowsmith.” The positions of thetowns, of the villages and mines, the boundaries ofthe intendances, the ranges of mountains, the indi-cations of the heights in toises, the notes on themigrations of the Azteques, and on the history ofnavigation, the small arrows annexed to a numberof rivers, every thing, in short, is to be found inthe copy of Mr. Arrowsmith. I was obliged toemploy several new signs; for instance, two ham-mers placed crosswise to denote the chief station ofa provincial council of the mines; and Mr. Arrow-smith, in adopting my signs, has also adopted theirexplanation; he has copied without translation, andwithout changing a single word; on his Englishmap he has engraved my explanations in French,always leaving out the sign pointing to the placeswhere I made astronomical observations. If myname is looked for in the copy of the great map, itis only to be found in one of the three squares whichcontain the same number of sketches borrowedfrom my Mexican Atlas. These small squares pre-sent hydrographic plans of the ports of Vera Cruzand Acapulco, and the chart of the valley ofMexico. To the words “Valley of Mexico,” Mr.Arrowsmith has thought fit to annex the followingwords, “from M. Humboldt’s Map.” But the onlything which Mr. Arrowsmith choses to ascribe to
|2||Spaltenumbruch|me is not my own; it was a plan drawn up by D.Louis Martin, in 1804.
After a variety of other observations, M. de Hum-bolt adds, “This silence with regard to the sourcesof their information is become too common withgeographers, particularly with those who do notaccompany their maps with analytical memoirs onthe subject of their construction, though a verydifferent example has been given by the most dis-tinguished of that class of literary men, such asd’Anville, Dalrymple, Fleurieu, and Rennell.”
M. d. H. concludes with expressing his hope,that the reclamations of a traveller will meet withsome attention, when he proves that mere copies ofhis labours are disseminated under the name ofanother person. The letter itself is written withevery appearance of candour, and deserves the at-tention of those whom it concerns.