Amerigo: The Man Who Gave His Name to America

Amerigo: The Man Who Gave His Name to America

by Felipe Fernández-Armesto

View All Available Formats & Editions

In 1507, European cartographers were struggling to redraw their maps of the world and to name the newly found lands of the Western Hemisphere. The name they settled on: America, after Amerigo Vespucci, an obscure Florentine explorer.

In Amerigo, the award-winning scholar Felipe Fernández-Armesto answers the question “What’s in aSee more details below


In 1507, European cartographers were struggling to redraw their maps of the world and to name the newly found lands of the Western Hemisphere. The name they settled on: America, after Amerigo Vespucci, an obscure Florentine explorer.

In Amerigo, the award-winning scholar Felipe Fernández-Armesto answers the question “What’s in a name?” by delivering a rousing flesh-and-blood narrative of the life and times of Amerigo Vespucci. Here we meet Amerigo as he really was: a sometime slaver and small-time jewel trader; a contemporary, confidant, and rival of Columbus; an amateur sorcerer who attained fame and honor by dint of a series of disastrous failures and equally grand self-reinventions. Filled with well-informed insights and amazing anecdotes, this magisterial and compulsively readable account sweeps readers from Medicean Florence to the Sevillian court of Ferdinand and Isabella, then across the Atlantic of Columbus to the brave New World where fortune favored the bold.

Amerigo Vespucci emerges from these pages as an irresistible avatar for the age of exploration–and as a man of genuine achievement as a voyager and chronicler of discovery. A product of the Florentine Renaissance, Amerigo in many ways was like his native Florence at the turn of the sixteenth century: fast-paced, flashy, competitive, acquisitive, and violent. His ability to sell himself–evident now, 500 years later, as an entire hemisphere that he did not “discover” bears his name–was legendary. But as Fernández-Armesto ably demonstrates, there was indeed some fire to go with all the smoke: In addition to being a relentless salesman and possibly a ruthless appropriator of other people’s efforts, Amerigo was foremost a person of unique abilities, courage, and cunning. And now, in Amerigo, this mercurial and elusive figure finally has a biography to do full justice to both the man and his remarkable era.

“A dazzling new biography . . . an elegant tale.”
Publishers Weekly (starred review)

“An outstanding historian of Atlantic exploration, Fernández-Armesto delves into the oddities of cultural transmission that attached the name America to the continents discovered in the 1490s. Most know that it honors Amerigo Vespucci, whom the author introduces as an amazing Renaissance character independent of his name’s fame–and does Fernández-Armesto ever deliver.”
Booklist (starred review)

From the Hardcover edition.

Read More

Editorial Reviews

Mary Hollingsworth
Fernandez-Armesto, a history professor at Tufts University, tells this complicated story with verve and skill, likening his own journey through its facts, forgeries, myths and prejudices to Vespucci's voyage of discovery. His lively style is effective in evoking the flashy and violent world of Renaissance Europe, and his wide-ranging knowledge of the period illuminates the boundaries of the Eurocentric mindset as it attempted to come to terms with a New World.
—The Washington Post
Nathaniel Philbrick
…wonderfully idiosyncratic and intelligent new biography of the explorer…Fernandez-Armesto's previous books about world history and exploration—The Americas, Civilizations and Pathfinders, among them—are must reading in these globally minded times. But even a historian of Fernandez-Armesto's learning and reach might have chosen to ignore the fact that 2007 marks the 500th anniversary of the naming of America. Except for a few brief narratives and letters, the record is maddeningly slight when it comes to Vespucci. But Amerigo: The Man Who Gave His Name to America is much more than an occasional throwaway. Using the bare bones of what is known about Vespucci to expatiate on subjects as diverse as the brutal world of Renaissance Italy, the importance of trade winds to world history and the poetics of travel writing, Fernandez-Armesto has written a provocative primer on how navigators like Columbus and Vespucci set loose the cultural storm that eventually created the world we live in today.
—The New York Times
Publishers Weekly

In a dazzling new biography, noted historian Fernández-Armesto (Columbus) captures the exploits of the now mostly forgotten adventurer for whom the New World was named-a man the author characterizes as a self-promoter lacking in talent and accomplishment. Born into a Florentine family, the young Amerigo Vespucci (1454-1512) entered the seagoing life to make his fortune; his earliest expeditions were in search of pearls. As a result of his later voyages, however, Vespucci presented himself as a celestial navigator and "master of the art of reading latitude and even longitude." As Fernández-Armesto points out, Vespucci's own accounts of his voyages were largely colored by his readings, so that he exaggerated the physical beauty of the new worlds and the new peoples he encountered, and he promoted himself as an expert in cosmography when his skills were far more modest. Although Vespucci claimed to have navigated beyond the Pole Star and to have measured longitude by lunar distances, Fernández-Armesto shows that these claims were false. But Vespucci promoted himself so well that mapmakers in 1507 chose to name America after him. Fernández-Armesto weaves an elegant tale of Vespucci's ability to transform himself from a merchant into an explorer and conqueror of new worlds. (Aug. 7)

Copyright 2007 Reed Business Information
Library Journal

Five hundred years ago, America was named by means of a map that referred to the newly explored Western Hemisphere with that label. The cartographers were printing it to honor the Italian explorer Amerigo Vespucci (1454-1512). In this fascinating biography, Fernández-Armesto (history, Tufts Univ.; Millennium: A History of the Last Thousand Years) writes that the mapmakers of St. Dié, France, were "suckered" by misleading publications written by or attributed to Vespucci. How did this happen? The author analyzes Vespucci, his voyages, and his times, taking into account existing scholarship to understand this geographic tribute. A master of reinvention, Vespucci went through a number of careers: jewel dealer, supplier of New World fleets and settlements, navigator (he did voyage to South America), astronomer, author, and chief pilot. Fernández-Armesto's mastery of previously published research and his expertise in addressing the many concerns raised by Vespucci's writings (many of which are excerpted in the text) are intriguing and sometimes amusing. The mapmakers retreated from their labeling of America as an honor to Vespucci, but the popularity of the publication made later efforts at renaming unsuccessful. Highly recommended for all libraries.
—Margaret Atwater-Singer

Kirkus Reviews
Far from being the innovative navigational genius of legend, Vespucci emerges here as salesman extraordinaire. Although Fernandez-Armesto (History/Tufts; Pathfinders: A Global History of Exploration, 2006, etc.) gallantly attempts to make him appear otherwise, Amerigo Vespucci is the historical equivalent of a great trailer for a lame movie. In summation, he's an undeniably compelling figure, as evidenced by the book's opening salvo: "Amerigo Vespucci . . . was a pimp in his youth and a magus in his maturity." It's hard not to be intrigued by a man who was on intimate terms with both Columbus and the Medici family, a man who enjoyed an almost mystical reputation as a navigator. Readers will quickly find, however, that broad descriptions of his exploits are far more compelling than the actual events of his life. Vespucci is a shadowy figure; he left behind little original writing, and a number of works attributed to him are of dubious authenticity. He was also a mercenary hack who sold his services to the highest bidder-though, to be fair, this was no egregious offense at the time. Unlike Columbus, from whom he drew heavily in his descriptions of his voyages and the lands he encountered, Vespucci was a passive traveler, not the commander of an expedition. He claimed expertise with a variety of instruments, but in actuality the showy, authoritative manner he employed when flourishing them in front of bewildered seamen was inversely proportional to his ability to use them correctly. The mapmaker who named South America in Vespucci's honor later regretted that decision and sought to rechristen it "Terra Incognita"; by then, however, historical inertia had taken hold. More likely to makereaders petition for a continental name change than sing Vespucci's praises. Agent: Phyllis Westberg/Harold Ober Associates
From the Publisher
"Dazzling…. An elegant tale" —Publishers Weekly Starred Review

Read More

Product Details

Random House Publishing Group
Publication date:
Sold by:
Random House
Sales rank:
File size:
4 MB

Read an Excerpt

Chapter One


Florence, c. 1450–1491 Ú Launching the quest for “honour and fame”

Heroism and villainy shade into each other. So do salesmanship and sorcery. Amerigo Vespucci was both hero and villain—but I expect readers of this book already know that. My purpose is to show that he was also both salesman and sorcerer. He was a merchant who became a magus.

This book tells the story of how that strange mutation happened and tries to help readers understand why. The naming of America was a by- product of the story: a measure of the success of Amerigo’s self- salesmanship, an effect of the spellbinding nature of his sorcery. Salesmanship and sorcery require some of the same qualities: quicksilver tongue, featherlight fingers, infectious self-confidence. Vespucci began to acquire those qualities in the city of his birth and education. In Renaissance Florence, where life was fast-paced, flashy, competitive, consumerist, and violent, prestidigitators’ skills came easily. That was just as well, because you needed them to survive.

The Magical City

In this city of forty thousand people, as much wealth was concentrated as in any spot in Europe. Florentine prosperity was a triumph against the odds, a classic response to a challenging environment. The city became a great riverside manufactory of fine wools and silks, despite having an unreliable river that habitually ran dry in summer. Florence became a great international trading state, with its own fleets, despite its location fifty miles from the sea, where enemies could easily control outlets and approaches. Fifteenth-century Florentines took pride in their peculiarity: They retained a republican constitution in an age of encroaching monarchies. The elite were unashamed oligarchs who celebrated the nobility of wealth rather than birth. In Florence, a prince could be a merchant without derogation.

In an age that worshipped antiquity, Florence had no historic pedigree, but most Florentines nourished their identity with myths: Their city was a sister of Rome, founded by Trojans. Closer to the truth was the origins narrative that Florence’s historians proposed: Florence was a “daughter” of Rome, founded by Romans, “of the same stuff,” only more faithful to republican traditions.1 Florentines asserted their superiority over older, self-proclaimedly nobler neighbors by investing in civic pride: an ampler dome than any rival cathedral’s, more public statuary, higher towers, costlier paintings, richer charities, grander churches, more sumptuous palaces, more eloquent poets. They claimed Petrarch as their own because he had Florentine parents, even though he hardly ever visited the city.

In consequence, Florence valued genius and was prepared to pay for it. Like classical Athens or fin de siècle Vienna or the Edinburgh of the Enlightenment or the Paris of the philosophes, the city seemed to breed talent, nurture genius, and deserve renown. The greatest age was over by the mid–fifteenth century, at about the time of Amerigo Vespucci’s birth. The generation of Brunelleschi (d. 1446), Ghiberti (d. 1455), Fra Angelico (d. 1455), Donatello (d. 1466), Alberti (d. 1472), and Michelozzo (d. 1472) was aging, dead, or dying. The institutions of the republic had fallen under the control of a single dynasty, the Medici. But the tradition of excellence in arts and learning lived on. The sculptor Andrea del Verrocchio rented his home from one of Amerigo’s cousins. Sandro Botticelli lived next door to the house where Amerigo Vespucci was born. In Amerigo’s parish church, Botticelli and Ghirlandaio worked on commissions from his own family. At the time Machiavelli was an unknown twentysomething. Machiavelli’s rival as an historian and diplomat, Francesco Guicciardini, was a small boy. Florence’s fertility in the production of genius seemed inexhaustible. By the time Amerigo left the city in 1491, Leonardo da Vinci had already departed for Milan, and the revolution that was to overthrow the Medici in 1494 caused a temporary loss of opportunities for patronage. But the careers of the next generation—including that of Michelangelo, who was Ghirlandaio’s apprentice—were already under way.

Could any of the greatness with which he was surrounded have rubbed off on young Amerigo? The opportunity was certainly there. His tutor was his uncle Giorgio Antonio Vespucci, who was one of the city’s best-connected scholars.2 From the mid-1470s at the latest, Giorgio Antonio belonged to a group of students and patrons who called themselves the “family of Plato.” They made a kind of cult of the philosopher’s memory, reenacting his symposia and burning a never- extinguished light before his bust. The group included the effective ruler of Florence, Lorenzo the Magnificent himself. Its focal leader —“father” of the “family”—was Marsilio Ficino, who was also priest and physician to the Medici. He called Giorgio Antonio “dearest of friends” and in letters to him used the language of “divine love” that was privy to the members of the circle.3 Other members were with Luigi Pulci, Florence’s most renowned poet at the time; Agnolo Poliziano, the leading scholar and no mean versifier; Pico della Mirandola, expert in the esoteric and even the occult; and Paolo dal Pozzo Toscanelli, the geographer who helped to inspire Columbus.

This atmosphere clearly had some—albeit slight—effect on Amerigo. The subject of one of the drafts jotted into his schoolboy exercise book is a letter explaining that the student has bought a text of Plato’s for ten florins, as a present for his tutor; the writer begs pardon for the expense, as the book was worth only three florins.4 Plato can hardly be said to have taken hold of Amerigo’s young mind, which was not particularly well adapted to academic work. And the allusion in the notebook occurs in what may be an exercise rather than a real incident. It would be rash to infer that Vespucci ever read a line of Plato, but the mention places his education in the context of the intellectual interests common in his uncle’s circle.

Because of the extraordinary constellation of talent in the city, which contributed so much to subsequent ways of looking at and thinking about the world, Renaissance Florence evokes sympathy and, in turn, a range of misleading assumptions in people who think back to it today. The city’s popular image is as a place of enlightenment where antiquity was revived and modernity anticipated with classical taste, secular priorities, humanist habits of mind, and a high place for science and reason in the system of values. But every generation likes to spotlight its own modernity against the darkness of the past. We scan the past for signs of Europe’s awakening to progress, prosperity, and values that we can recognize as our own. So we respond to the excitement with which Western writers around 1500 anticipated the dawn of a new golden age. As a result, if you are a product of mainstream Western education, almost everything you ever thought about the Renaissance is likely to be false.

“It inaugurated modern times.” No: Every generation has its own modernity, which grows out of the whole of the past. “It was revolutionary.” No: Scholarship has detected half a dozen prior renaissances. “It was secular” or “It was pagan.” Not entirely: The Church remained the patron of most art and scholarship. “It was art for art’s sake.” No: It was manipulated by plutocrats and politicians. “Its art was unprecedentedly realistic.” Not altogether: Perspective was a new technique, but you can find emotional and anatomical realism in much pre-Renaissance art. “The Renaissance elevated the artist.” No: Medieval artists might achieve sainthood; wealth and titles were derogatory by comparison. “It dethroned scholasticism and inaugurated humanism.” No: It grew out of medieval “scholastic humanism.” “It was Platonist and Hellenophile.” No: There were patches of Platonism, as there had been before, and few scholars did more than dabble in Greek. “It rediscovered lost antiquity.” Not really: Antiquity was never lost, and classical inspiration never withered (though there was an upsurge of interest in the fifteenth century). “The Renaissance discovered nature.” Hardly: There was no pure landscape painting in Europe previously, but nature got cult status in the thirteenth century, when St. Francis of Assisi discovered God outdoors. “It was scientific.” No: For every scientist there was a sorcerer.

Even in Florence, the Renaissance was a minority taste. Brunelleschi’s designs for the Baptistery doors—the project widely held to have inaugurated the Renaissance in 1400—were rejected as too advanced. Masaccio, the revolutionary painter who introduced perspective and sculptural realism into his work for a chapel in the church of Santa Maria del Carmine in the 1430s, was only ever the assistant on the project, supervised by a reactionary master. The most popular Italian painters of the age were the most conservative: Pinturicchio, Baldovinetti, and Gozzoli, whose work resembles the glories of medieval miniaturists—brilliant with gold leaf and bright, costly pigments. Michelangelo’s design for the main square of the city —which would have encased the space in a classical colonnade—was never implemented. Much of the supposedly classical art that inspired fifteenth-century Florentines was bogus: The Baptistery was a sixth- or seventh-century building. The church of San Miniato, which the cognoscenti mistook for a Roman temple, was actually no earlier than eleventh-century.

So Florence was not really classical. Some readers may think that is too easy to say. After all, one could claim by similar logic that classical Athens was not classical, for most people there had other values. They worshipped Orphic mysteries, clung to irrational myths, ostracized or condemned some of their most progressive thinkers and writers, and favored social institutions and political strategies similar to those of today’s silent majority: straitlaced, straight- backed family values. The plays of Aristophanes, with their lampoons of louche aristocratic habits, are a better guide to Greek morality than the Ethics of Aristotle.5 Florence, too, had its silent majority, whose voice was heard at about the time Vespucci left the city, in the blood-and-thunder sermons of the reforming friar Girolamo Savonarola, and in the bloodcurdling cries of the street revolutionaries his words helped to stir a few years later. They made a bonfire of Medici vanities and outlawed the pagan sensuality of classical taste. After the revolution, even Botticelli gave up painting erotic commissions and reverted to old-fashioned piety.

Savonarola’s Florence was not classical but medieval. Amerigo’s was not classical but magical. I use the word advisedly, to mean a place where magic was practiced. There were two kinds of magic. Florence, like everywhere else in the world at the time, as far as we know, was full of popular spells and superstitions. Three nights before the death of Lorenzo the Magnificent, lightning struck the cathedral, sending stones from the famous dome crashing to the street. People said Lorenzo had a demon trapped in his ring and had released it as he sensed his impending death. In 1478, when Jacopo de’ Pazzi was hanged for his part in a conspiracy against Medici rule, heavy rains threatened the survival of the cereal crop. Popular wisdom was that it was Jacopo’s fault: His burial in consecrated ground had offended God and disjointed nature. He was dug up and dragged stinking through the streets, while rioters battered his remains before flinging them into the Arno.6

Superstition was not just a vulgar error. There was learned magic, too. The notion that nature could be controlled by human agency was a perfectly rational one. Promising approaches included techniques we now classify as scientific, such as observation, experiment, and the exercise of reason. Astrology, alchemy, conjuration, and sorcery had not yet proved to be false leads. As occultists in Renaissance Florence acknowledged, the difference between magic and science is narrower than most people think today. Both are attempts to explain and therefore to control nature. Western science of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries grew, in part, out of magic. The vocations of scientists overlapped with those of magi—wielders of magical techniques for mastering nature. In the circles in which young Amerigo moved, magic was a common passion.

One of the long-abandoned or dormant notions the Renaissance recovered was that ancient people had possessed magic formulae that worked. In pharaonic Egypt, priests had supposedly brought statues to life with arcane talismans. At the dawn of Greece, Orpheus had written incantations that could cure the sick. The ancient Jews had a method of manipulating signs—the kabbalah—to invoke powers normally reserved to God. Renaissance research inspired these claims by supposedly unearthing magical texts from antiquity, which the piety of the Middle Ages had condemned as nonsensical or demonic. Marsilio Ficino argued that magic was good if it was used for healing or for gaining knowledge of nature. Some ancient magical texts, he contended, were lawful reading for Christians.

The most influential text of all was the work supposedly written by an ancient Egyptian known as Hermes Trismegistus, though actually

it was composed by an unidentified Byzantine forger. It arrived in

Florence in about 1460 among a consignment of books bought from Macedonia for the Medici library. It caused a sensation; the translator, who was a devotee of Plato, even gave it priority over the job of translating Plato’s works.7 Renaissance magi felt inspired to pursue “Egyptian” wisdom in search of an alternative to the austere rationalism of classical learning—a fount of older and supposedly purer knowledge than could be had from the Greeks or Romans. The distinction between magic and science as means of attempting to control nature almost vanished in the shadow of Hermes’s influence.

As well as astrology, or instead of it, Florentine magi believed in and practiced astral magic—an attempt to control the stars and therefore to manipulate astrological influences. They also engaged in alchemy and conjuration with numbers. Pico della Mirandola added techniques based on the kabbalah, invoking divine power through spells with numbers. Astrology and astronomy were inseparable disciplines, commonly confused. When Pico turned against astrology in 1495, he had to begin by pointing out the difference between “the reading of forecoming events by the stars” and “the mathematical measurement of stellar sizes and motions.”8 Letters to Lorenzo di Pierfrancesco de’ Medici, Amerigo’s schoolboy companion and future patron, are full of stellar imagery. Ficino wrote him characteristically gushing, faintly homoerotic professions of love, strewn with allusions to the young man’s horoscope. “For anyone who contemplates the heavens, nothing he sets his eyes upon seems immense, but the heavens themselves.”9

Ficino wrote a follow-up letter on the same subject to Giorgio Antonio Vespucci, urging him to explain that the influence of the stars works alongside free will—“the stars within us.”10 An astrolabe, an instrument Amerigo Vespucci later used, or at least brandished, as a navigator, hangs in the background of a painting of St. Augustine that Giorgio Antonio commissioned from Botticelli.11 Paolo dal Pozzo Toscanelli, who influenced Vespucci’s geographical ideas, was a believer in astrology.12 The study of the secrets of the world, the mathematical order of the universe, the relationship between the earth and the stars: These were the common ground of cosmography and magic. Magical thinking and practices surrounded young Amerigo Vespucci. Amerigo’s education was, in a sense, the making of a magus.

From the Hardcover edition.

Read More

What People are saying about this

From the Publisher
"Dazzling…. An elegant tale" —-Publishers Weekly Starred Review

Customer Reviews

Average Review:

Write a Review

and post it to your social network


Most Helpful Customer Reviews

See all customer reviews >