Brazil, America, and Baccalhauland

(or how the gringos stole Brazil's name)

This story is true, and tragic. It is about Brazil and how it got its name. In fact there are two stories here: 1. Brazil, the name and idea, existed long before the country, and 2. How America was originally Brazil and how Brazil (Called America for the first 50 years of European discovery) losts its name (sort of) to what is now popularly termed America, but was originally known as Flowerland or Codfishland. Think of it this way... the good old US of A could have become the United States of Codfishland. It doesn't have a same ring to it...

I have heard it said that "Brazil" was a good name looking for a nice place. That is basically true. The concept of Brazil began in the 1300s and slowly grew in the minds of Europeans. The origin of the myth is unclear, but in simple terms Brazil was a small island (or several islands) in the Atlantic Ocean. The legendary Isle of Brazil was not just an orinary place -- it had a little bit of Eden, Shangri-la, Brigadoom and Utopia. According to the Irish legend, Brazil was a mystical island with fabulous cities covered in gold. A real paradise. The trouble was that it was either always covered in myst or it would only appear above the waters every seven years. Bummer. There is a book by Donald Johnson, Phantom Islands of the Atlantic, that devotes a great chapter to the mysterious Hy-Brazil. According to Johnson, early Christian writers also got into the act, identifying Hy-Brazil with the Garden of the Hesperides, where "the sadness of life could be escaped" or "the Promised Land of the Saints" which the Irish monk St Brendon had searched for. Thus, in some way, these two names - Hesperides and Brenden - also become associated with Brazil, either as Brazil itself, or as companion lands. It gets worse. The idea of "Promised Land" became Tir Fo-Thruin (Land under the Waves), Tir Tairngiri (Land of Promise), Magh Mell (Land of Truth), Hy Na-Beatha (Isle of Life), Tir Na-M-Buadha (also Land of Promise)and Terra Repromissionis Sanctorum (Promised Land of the Saints).

More commonly, however, it was called by the simple name Brazil, or one of its many variations: Brasil, Brasile, Hy-Brazil, Brasylie, O'Brazile, Brasylle, Braçir, Brazir, Berzil, Prezil, Breasail, Brasilie, Brasilia, etc....

Not only was Brazil hard to describe and hard to name, it was also hard to find. It was nowhere and it was everywhere. It was usually west of Ireland, but sometimes was to be found south of Ireland, near Greenland, close to the mid-Atlantic and as part of the Azores Island chain (the Insola de Brazil is now called Terceira Island). Sometimes Brazil was one island, sometimes two close together, and again it could be several islands, or two different Brazils on the same map. Johnson says that the Irish Brazil is entirely different from the Azore Brazil, at least in terms of etymology, the first may be derived from the word breas, meaning noble or fortunate, or from Saint Bresal (or Bressalius), a person involved in 7th century seafaring. Basically this Brazil was an Irish and English thing. The naming of the "Azores" Brazil island, on the other hand, was a 100% Portuguese initiative, based on the link to the wood used to make red dye. It was at this time that many Portuguese sailors began exploring the Northwest Atlantic, mostly because of the abundance of the great cod fish. The demand was such all over Europe that nearby parts of the unexplored continent were labeled Bacalar or Baccalhareum on many maps. More about this later.

There is a third Brazil, one that I have never seen mentioned anywhere. On some old maps parts of the Antartic are labeled Brazil, Regio Brasile (Brazilian region), or with some of the many variations of this word. I have no idea why and I have never seen any comments as to the reason for this. There is a story here, but it is probably lost in old ships logs of forgotten voyages in the 17th century.

Before we talk about the fourth and final Brazil, and how it got and lost its name, one must try to understand the mentality of European explorers in the late 15th century (1400s). They knew two things: China and Asia were out there to the west, and there were a lot of islands before one got there. Well, the facts were that Asia was a lot farther away that the 2000 kilometers estimated by some explorers and without proper navagation instruments, islands are easy to lose. So, as the 1400s rolled by, and as decade after decade passed, new technologies evolved and new and wonderful discoveries were made. Anything was possible. The Spice Islands existed. China was as Marco Polo described. So why should there not be an Isle of Brazil, or a Brandon Island or even the Island of the Seven Cities (or Antillias) to where, according to legend, seven Portuguese bishops led a group of refugees to an island with seven cities after the Muslims overtook Portugal in the 8th century. Many of the great navagators, including Prince Henry, Christopher Columbus, and John Cabot, not only knew of these stories and considered them credible, but even participated in voyages searching for these islands.

For all practical purposes, the real story (at least the European story) of Brazil begins in 1500 when Pedro Alvares Cabral, on his way to Africa, sights the coast of Bahia. He greets the natives and takes possession of the land for Portugal (without consulting the natives, of course) and sails off. The name given to the "new" land is Vera Cruz (True Cross). Some researchers contend that the Portuguese knew Brazil was there, maybe based on the travels of Martin Behem in 1484. Remember the Portuguese were very secretive about their discoveries, so this may be true. This may explain why they insisted that the line for the Treaty of Tortessilos (?) be placed much farther west than initially proposed by the Pope (this was a 148? treaty dividing the world between Spain and Portugal). There is also evidence that the Portuguese possessed maps of the entire world by 1480, based upon the same sources as the Piri-Reis map. Anyway, when the Portuguese figured out there was no gold or silver, they pretty much ignored Brazil except for shipments of wood and parrots. There is a story that it was king Emanual that started refering to his new territory as "Brazil".

Soon after Cabral sails off, Americo Vespucci arrives on the continent and sails into Bahia's Bay of all the Saints (Bahia de Todos os Santos, now Salvador). When he returns to Europe he writes a report, like all good explorers. Columbus also had written reports of his voyages, and they were good, technical documents (We sailed 15 leagues, repaired the canvas on the outboard sail, the cook got sick, we saw two fish, and so on...). Boring! About ten people actually studied the Columbus report, of which only 3 were able to stay awake and finish reading it. When Americo got back to Europe he also wrote a paper on his voyage, filling it with lurid accounts of sex, naked people, cannibals, gold, monsters and wild animals. Thousands of copies were made and circulated all over Europe and even to the East. This was interesting stuff! Vespucci also did something else that was fundamental -- he categorically stated that these strange lands were a NEW WORLD, not just parts of China or Asia, but something unexpected, special and very different.

The question of the names given to places in the New World is fascinating. As reports were analyzed and maps were drawn, many hours and days were given to the discussion of what was true and what could be included and what should it be called. Mapmakers were continually copying each other's works, using some information and discarting other. Many names were tried out, some more lasting than others. Because of Vespucci's notoriety and good contacts with a few key mapmakers, his name began appearing on maps - a few at first, then more often, so much that by the mid 1500s is was pretty much established that the name of the new Southerm continent was "America". Actually in the first maps, including the rarest and most expensive of all (Waldseemuller's 1507 map), America was Brazil, and Brazil was America. Period. Slowly, as information flowed in and maps were circulated around the old continent, certain naming conventions were adopted, some rather quickly (Cuba, Peru and Mexico almost immediately) while others took longer (Brazil, Chili, Paraguay). Even the use of "america" for the new world was not a sure thing -- after an initial strong showing in early 1500s, it kind of slowed down, even being dropped from Waldseemuller's later maps of the 1530s. It was basically Ortelius in the late 1560s that reinvigorated its usage and insured that the New World would be called America. This brings us to North America, which was not really part of "America" until about 1570. Prior to that it was either unknown or given other names, such as Terra Florida and in a few cases, Baccalhauream. These names appear for North America in dozens of early maps. Fortunately for us, I guess, there was no concensous. However, imagine if one or more of the great cartographers of the late 1500s had labeled the landmass north of Cuba as "Florida" or "Baccalhaurem" in large letters instead of "America Septimentrale". It could have happened. Anyway, in my opinion, North America became "America" mostly because of the great maps of Ortelius. Mercator (the man of Mercator projection fame, who set the common map standard for 300 years), and who was certainly the other most important mapmaker of his age, didn't really like "America", instead he pushed for "Nova India". After about 20 years, in an early version of Beta vs VHS dispute, Mercator gave in and started adding the word "America" to his map of the new world.

So that it it. Brazil was America, could have been Vera Cruz or Santa Cruz, but became Brazil -- a very good name for a very nice place. And the United States, because of the good sense of many long forgotten cartographers, became the United States of America, instead of the United States of Codfishland.

Oh yes, the Isle of Brazil (the one near Ireland) stayed on some maps until the 1870s, when it and its fabulous cities sank beneath the waves forever.

Here are some of the maps relevant to this story:

The 1474 Ptolemy map. The world as it was prior to Columbus.

1502 Cantino map. First real map with the "New World". Mentions "Rio de Sao Francisco, Baia de Todos Santos, Porto Seguro, Rio de Brasil, and of course, cannibals (twice).

There are also maps by Nicolo Caveri (1503) and Contarini (1606) that mention the land of "Santa Cruz"

1505 Lenox globe. South America as "Mundvs Novus", "Terra Sanctae Crucis" and "Terra de Brazil"

1507 Waldseemuller map. Rarest of all and worth $10 million. First to use word "America".

Detail of Waldseemuller map. Notice that "America" is really "Brazil".

1507 Ruysch map. Brazil is now "Terra Incognita".

Another Ruysch map. South America as "Terra Sancte Crucis sive Mundus Novus" (1708).

The Inscription reads: At different places this region is inhabited, and it is supposed by many to be another world. Women and men appear either entirely naked or clad with interwoven leaves and the feathers of birds of various colors. They live together in common without any religion or kin. They are continually at war among themselves. They eat the human flesh of captives. They exercise so much in the salubrious air that they live more than one hundred and fifty years. They are rarely sick, and then they cure themselves only with the roots of plants. There are lions here, and serpents and other terrible monsters are found in the forests. Very large quantities of pearls and gold are in the mountains and rivers. From here brazilwood, or verzini, and cassia are carried away by the Portuguese (www.henry-davis.com)

The Piri-Reis map A great Turkish contribution compiled from Portuguese, Arabic and Chinese sources. Has detailed description of new lands and the doings of the "Portuguese infidels"

Map from Da Vinci's libray. Notice "America" and the small "Brazili". North America is shown in two spots: "Terra Florida" and "Bacalar"

Waldseemuller again, 1513. Notice that "America" is absent.

Ribeiro's 1529 map. By the 1520s the Mapmakers began to understand the shape of Eastern North America.

Grynaeus and Munster They go overboard with very graphic details of cannabalism. South America is "America Terra Nova" e "Prisilia".

Fryies, 1939. Another banquet. Brazil is "Terra de Papagalli" (Land of Parrots)

Munster and his Cannibals again. North America is "Terra Florida" and "Baccaleurum"

Apian's 1544 map. All of North America (US) is "Baccalearrem"

Detail of Munster's 1544 map.

Ortelius first great world map. All Western hemisphere is titled "America", but not labeled as such on continents.

Orontius Finaeus map of 1566. America is South America. Notice "Brasilie" in Antartica.

Gerard Mercator's famous projection of World. No "America", instead he labels the hemisphere as "India Nova"

Ortelius, 1573. Both continents are finally labeled as North and South America.

It was mostly Ortelius that pushed the term "America" for both North and South America. Mercator, his main rival, evidently couldn't bring himself to use it. Instead he ignored the word, using regional labels (Peru, Mexico, Cuba, Brazil).

J. Myritius, 1590. But not everyone catches on. South America is America, North America is Mundus Novus. There is a "Brasilie Regio" in Antartica.

Mercator surrenders, 1595. It is "America", but he has to add "or India Nova"

Page updated: June 2004