Empty Spaces Across Asia
Leaving the subcontinent behind and returning to Ataide and Teixeira’s 1630 map of Asia, we see that the littoral reality of the Portuguese navigators and cartographers extends much further than just the Portuguese mainstay of India. Of the map, the bottom half is riddled with Portuguese trade routes and ports; Southern Asia is so busy that it is initially jarring for the viewer before they establish their bearings.
This stands in complete contrast to the northern half of the map, comprised mostly of Central and Northern Asia and almost completely empty. For instance, Ataide drew in rolling hills and trees in Siberia. These watercolors, while aesthetically pleasing, do not add any information to the map. In fact, they act mostly as a mechanism to distract the viewer from realizing that the cartographers have no information for this huge part of Asia.
Similarly, in the Central European area around the Caspian Sea, in a truly littoral Portuguese fashion, we see that this geopolitically minor water system is accurately and carefully described in crisp detail. The shores of the Caspian Sea are just as detailed and well-marked as the shores of India. Nevertheless, in the areas immediately surrounding the Caspian Sea there is literally nothing detailed on the map besides the names of some major sociopolitical nations.
Persia, a significant global state, is not cartographically described at all because it is inland. However, the Philippines, a relatively insignificant island nation at this point in history, is drawn by Ataide in striking detail. This is a good example of the seventeenth century Portuguese attitude of littoral reality. Nations with coasts and cities on shores are paid much more heed than even comparatively more significant nations or cities that are inland. The maritime focus of the Portuguese allowed for the creation of some truly beautiful and accurate coastline maps of Asia, but it did not allow room for any information that was contained within the nations.