Cornwall Removed From The Map By English Forgery.

• Cornwall Not England
• Conspiracy of the Celtic Cornish cover up.

  With Thanks to Cornish World for this recent article

Downoad this as a word document

This process was never more in evidence than with the state-funded 'Historical Atlas of South West England' distributed free to all comprehensive school in Cornwall. Here, when genuine maps showing Cornwall as one of the four nations of Britain were censored and replaced with fake ones depicting early medieval Cornwall as a county of England

Although most users look upon maps as being simply a means to communicate geographical information, some view the production, and distribution of any particular map as an opportunity to both create and impart a political message.

This is certainly the case for state cartographers within the UK, and state-funded historians/educationalists who wish to remain as such are expected to endorse the given world view. Yet the term 'United Kingdom' describes a multi-nation state, which is itself a remnant of England's failed attempt over many centuries to create by warfare, repression, cultural assimilation and political absorption, a greater England.

So the UK is actually an English Empire, and as with mapmaking, the creation and promotion of the more benign term 'United Kingdom' is itself a product of the imperial powers ability to manufacture, and then promote, political concepts that serve their cause.

In any empire it is essential for the imperial power to control the production and distribution of maps. In a Britain controlled by an English-dominated Westminster Parliament, state-funded cartographers, educationalist and historians produce and distribute maps because this powerful form of imaging is used to represent, and advance, the imperial powers political agenda.

The naming of disputed territory lying off the coast of South America provides us with an example of politicised map-making. Whereas Anglo-British maps refer to the islands as The Falklands, Argentinean maps label them The Malvinas. In this instance, both parties use cartographic imaging to assert a territorial claim. Such maps remind a world audience of this claim and ingrain the claim into the consciousness of domestic public opinion - which over time will suggest to the populace that the claim is both historic and justified.

This is not a new idea. Imperialists operating out of London have always used maps as a way of suggesting, or asserting, sovereignty over other lands. Nineteenth century Anglo-British cartographers were a particularly busy breed. After first informing the monarch that he/she was the new owner of some distant mineral-rich or strategically important territory, the next task was to produce a world map that showed the territory in question coloured pink - the colour allocated to those areas portrayed as forming the Anglo-British Empire. It mattered not that the, now repressed, indigenous population might dispute this claim. It was coloured pink and they, and the rest of the world, were told that London now owned it. If the natives resisted, forces were dispatched to 'instil order', execute 'traitors' and end a 'rebellion'. Once physical domination was achieved, pretensions to ownership are maintained by constantly projecting the new political order in seemingly innocuous maps.

The United Kingdom is a relatively new concept constituted in its present form in 1922. In order to promote, and clearly establish in the mind of the observer, the concept of this geopolitical entity forming an autonomous state, the state authorities expect the complete unified entity to be portrayed in schools, libraries and the media at every opportunity. Such activity makes the political concept known as the United Kingdom appear not only familiar, but natural.

Whether depicting an English Empire in Britain, or an Anglo-British empire worldwide, when distributed to the communities of subjugated peoples the imperial powers maps not only discredit the previous localised understanding of borders and territory but also help ensure that subsequent generations grow to accept London as their administrative, economic, cultural and spiritual capital. This is one way by which sovereignty over other people is maintained, and the results of such a policy can be seen in Cornwall today.

For when an imperial power imposes a new concept of ownership on a territory, it must take steps to ensure that those who have lost their independent status remain unaware of what existed before. Today, all officially approved school history books reveal to pupils only 'revised' maps of pre-16th century Britain - maps that seemingly depict Cornwall as being part of England from the 10th Century. Very few people know that the small band of state-endorsed historians/educationalist responsible for producing this curriculum material have only recently drawn these maps, and that they form part of the mechanism by which the current historical deception is maintained.

Because genuine medieval maps show Cornwall as something other than a county of England, they fail to conform to the revisionists' version of Anglo-Cornish history. As such, they must be vetted out of school history books and replaced with these newly devised maps - maps that substitute the geopolitical reality of pre-Tudor Cornish semi-autonomy with the political pretensions of today's neo-imperialist. In Cornwall, the production and distribution of maps, and the history they represent, is a device of social control. In such circumstances the interests of the native population are subordinate to the will of the state-funded/endorsed educationalist.

This process was never more in evidence than with the state-funded 'Historical Atlas of South West England' distributed free to all comprehensive school in Cornwall. Here, when genuine maps showing Cornwall as one of the four nations of Britain were censored and replaced with fake ones depicting early medieval Cornwall as a county of England, the editors knew exactly what they were doing. For when writing in another cartographic publication, Professor Roger Kain, joint editor of the Atlas, wrote:

"We are concerned with the practical and political purposes for which maps were used, about the symbolic and ideological roles of maps in history, and about the ways in which map evidence can be used to retrieve facts about the past for use in the writing of history."

Despite the expression of high ideals, and despite the availability of an abundance of supporting documentary and cartographic evidence, people like Professor Kain refuse to accept, let alone acknowledge the fact, that only after the Tudor phase of imperial consolidation was Cornwall cartographically depicted as a subdivision of England.

In such situations I am reminded of the circumstances in the former Soviet Union where, for example, drafts of the Armenian Atlas and the Armenian Encyclopaedia were, before printing, sent to Moscow for final approval. In our circumstances, while the imperially-funded English Atlas tells children that it "reveals Cornish history through maps", maps that really tell Cornish history are, in true Soviet style, vetted out.

Take Richard of Haldingham's 700 year old Hereford World Map. Carl Moreland and David Copeland, joint authors of the publication 'Antique Maps', inform us that the map shows how "Britannia Insula is composed of Anglia, Cornubia, Scotia and Wallia". In other words, four centuries after Athelstan's day, Cornwall was still looked upon as being one of the four nations of Britain. Yet because this map conflicts with the state-revised version of Anglo-Cornish history, it is censored from the curriculum.

Although little in the way of domestic map-making occurred immediately after the Hereford World Map, the middle decades of the 16th century saw a marked increase in cartographic effort - most notably in centres of learning throughout continental Europe. In 1540, Professor Sebastian Munster of Basle University published one of the first truly separate maps of the British Isles [plate 1]. Here we see ANGLIA and SCOTIA depicted in large upper case letters with the remaining constituent nations of WALLIA and CORNUBIA depicted in smaller upper case characters. This method of determining relative importance was, and still is, a common feature of cartographic interpretation. Sebastian Munster's 1550 version [plate 2] shows eight of the most important features of Britain, four of these are England, Scotland, Wales and Cornwall.

Englishman George Lily was a Catholic exile to the Papal Court of Rome. Via usage of large upper case letters his 1556 map entitled Britannie Insulae or British Isles [plate 3] reveals the constitutional significance of both WALLIA and CORNUBIA. Lily's earlier map of 1546 also included a discussion of social aspects of Britain. Included in the passage is the reference "Cornubicum quo Cornubiens, Wallicum quo Wallia, Anglicum quo Angli et bons parte Scotia" or "The Cornish live in Cornwall, the Welsh live in Wales, the English live in England and some of Scotland".

It is worth mentioning that Lily relied on Polydore Vergil as an important source of information. Vergil was an Italian government official who gained royal favor after settling in England in 1502. It was Henry VII who encouraged Vergil to write his Anglica Historia [History of England] first published in a number of volumes in 1534. Within this series Vergil, historian to the royal court, confirmed that: Britain is divided into four parts; "whereof the one is inhabited by Englishmen, the other of Scots, the third of Welshmen and the fourth of Cornish people . . . and which all differ among themselves either in tongue, either in manners, or else in laws and ordnances".

In the days when those who drew royal disapproval met deadly retribution, this stark acknowledgement of Cornwall's unique status can be no flight of fantasy. Yet historical 'revisionists' on the pay roll of the English Qualifications and Curriculum Authority refuse to come to terms with these factual accounts of history. This is why they censor all these maps and documents from the forcibly imposed [statutory] school curriculum.

Do not let the rudimentary nature of these maps deceive you into thinking they have no value. In their day, the people that made these maps were held in the highest of royal esteem and worked at the cutting edge of technological know how. We should also not lose sight of the fact that the object of the exercise was the same as today - to convey to the reader who owned what and where. In other words, London's will came to be expressed not only in written documents, but also in the maps the King and his Parliament commissioned.

Girolamo Ruscelli had a studio in Venice. His 1561 map entitled Anglia et Hibernia [plate 4] is but one example of his work. Here, once again, we see the nations of HIBERNIA, SCOTIA, ANGLIA, WALLIA and CORNUBIA delineated in upper case characters. Standard practice dictates that all other features, as befitting their constitutional insignificance, were presented in lower case characters.

Another map of the same year exhibiting similar features to the above was published by Johannes Honter [plate 5]. This image, taken from an updated edition of his earlier Atlas, featured a map of Britain. Here we see a large upper case ANGLIA taking cartographic precedence over the remaining smaller, but still upper case, nations of SCOTIA, WALLIA and CORNUBIA.

In determining what reaction there is today to medieval Cornwall being depicted as a nation of Britain we need to examine how this map, and another from Sebastian Munster in 1538 [plate 6], are dealt with in conventional, education authority approved, books.

It is said that the foremost authority on medieval maps of Britain is Rodney W.Shirley. His 'Early Printed Maps of the British Isles 1477-1650' provides us with the perfect example of how academics sympathetic to the state line routinely deselect the Cornish dimension from British history.

When analysing the detail of Sebastian Munster's 1538 map, Shirley refers to every single river, town and nation depicted except Cornwall.9 Although written across the map in the same explicit way as Wallia [Wales], the author refuses to draw attention to Cornubia [plate 6].

When dealing with the 1561 map by Johannes Honter, the retired civil servant {whose cartographic knowledge enabled him to become a world renowned map historian] once again completely ignores the Cornish dimension. And even though the word CORNUBIA is carved across the map in huge letters, and it is obvious that Honter is stating that CORNUBIA, ANGLIA, WALLIA and SCOTIA formed the four constituent parts of Britain, Rodney Shirley can only bring himself to say, "In this edition [of the Rudimentorum Cosmographicorum] there is a new map based on Lily, but showing England, Wales and Scotland only" [plate 5].

In their desire to appeal to the sensibilities of those who today suggest that this Cornish Duchy never existed as a constitutional component of the British Isles, the cream of Anglo-academia can discuss the historic Principality of Wales while resolutely refusing to draw attention to the equally historic Duchy of Cornwall. This is only one example of self-censorship. There are countless other de-selections in all spheres of print. For instance, when examining links between politicised cartographers and state-approved historians we often come across an unspoken 'gentlemen's agreement' to eradicate the Celtic-Cornish dimension by retrospectively backdating English history.

How many times have we heard tales, and seen maps, of the Spanish Armada sailing up the 'English' Channel? The fact is that in the days of the Armada there was no English Channel, there was only a Mare Britannia, or British Sea. Yet because state-approved historians speak of a situation that never existed, politicised cartographers feel obliged to produce maps of a situation that never existed. These are highly politicised actions. For in depicting this 16th century stretch of watery real estate as English, English longevity in Britain is embellished and English cultural domination justified. Likewise with the waters lying to the north of Cornwall. Once known, and depicted on early maps, as the Celtic or Hibernian Sea, it is now shown on most maps as St.George's Channel [St.George being the Patron Saint of England].

Although there was a time lag between the expressed political will of London and changes to political representation within cartographic imagery, it is possible to chart the cartographic emasculation of Cornwall after the Tudor Conquest [and to a certain extent Wales after being annexed to England a little earlier].

It is noticeable that up until the Tudor period, mapmakers used the international language of Latin. After the rise of English nationalism under the Tudor regime, maps produced for domestic consumption began to use English as the medium. We have also seen that up until the Tudor Conquest, most maps showed Cornwall as a nation of Britain with Mare Britannia, or British Sea, to the south and Mare Hiberni, or Celtic Sea, to the north. Gerard Mercator's 1564 twin maps portraying firstly Anglia, and then Cornewallia et Wallia, were probably the last to depict Cornwall as a nation of Britain.

We have seen that up until the mid-sixteenth century, maps portrayed Cornwall as a nation of Britain. Yet twenty-four years after the military disaster of 1549, Humphrey Lhuyd and Abraham Ortelius produced Angliae Regni Florentissimi Nova Descripto. This New Description of the Kingdom of England portrayed Cornwall and Wales as distinct regions, not of Britain, but of England. Christopher Saxton worked under the patronage of Thomas Seckford, a wealthy lawyer who worked in turn for Lord Burghley - The Lord Treasurer. Commissioned by Queen Elizabeth to make maps of their newly expanded domain, Saxton's 1579 'Anglia' portrayed England as encompassing Wales and Cornwall, with the whole subdivided up into administrative areas equating to today's counties.

There were still aberrations. Humphrey Lhuyd and Abraham Ortelius's repeated their 1573 version in 1595, and Norden's well known map of 'The Duchy of Cornwall' was produced at about the same time. These proved to be the exception. If mapmakers failed to conform to the political will of government, government in turn failed to offer commissions. Gerard Mercator soon discarded his previous view of Britain and followed Saxton with his Anglia Regnum of 1595.

From about 1600 onwards, maps [now produced in English] begin using the word County on maps - hence 'County' of Cornwall starting to appear. At the same time Mare Brittania was being replaced by the British Sea, which was in turn replaced by English Channel. At about the same time an expanded Bristol, or St.Georges Channel, largely replaced the Celtic Sea. The whole shift in perspective took approximately a century to complete. Although different maps now show different combinations of these new terms, this is roughly how the situation stands today.

It is now possible to see how a cartographic coup de grace enabled the state to symbolically throttle the independent Celtic life-blood from Cornwall. As indicated earlier, imposition of new names for old places is a means of expressing imperial ambition - an attempt to both reinforce [in a psychological sense] Anglo cultural dominance in Cornwall and backdate English longevity in Britain

It should now be understood that maps are not simply a means to transmit benign information. Like the design and flying of officially sanctioned flags, the development, funding and promotion of state-sanctioned culture or the manufacture and teaching of the state's version of history, the production and distribution of state-approved maps is a means to shape public opinion, a tool at the disposal of the imperial power. Maps are, in essence, a means by which the imperial power both reflects and sustains its power. Where once, not so long ago, the Tamar was shown on maps as a border between countries, now it is shown by the imperial power as a border between counties.

John Angarrack

This is an edited version of a chapter on maps in Angarracks "Our Future is History" available from Ottakers Bookshop Truro.

in order for readers to understand why censorship is happening can you mention in the article that the school curriculm is "designed to provide for the cultural comfort and political security of the English people