I found on the Internet quite an interesting map of the world in 1690, the author of which is Nicolaus Visscher, who was a representative of the third generation of an outstanding family of cartographers who lived and worked at the height of the golden age of Dutch cartography. Vishers were known throughout Europe for the accuracy of their maps and the boldness of the ornaments used in their works.
What is so interesting about this map? Yes, because it seems that, unlike the late maps of G. Mercator and A. Orelius, as well as from their "world's first atlases", it is not a "remake" of falsifiers. About the characteristic "jambs" left by these falsifiers, I have already written in the relevant posts and even showed their "brand name". But N. Visher's world map seems to be a real map of the post-Flood world. And it was he who first used the division into the western and eastern hemispheres, and also depicted in the form of circles the circumpolar regions of both new poles.
Why do I think so? Because, not only the new (post-Flood) equator is plotted on it, but also its position before the very disaster that shifted the poles, which, according to my calculations (based on the study of various maps), occurred somewhere in the period from the second half of the 16th century to half of the 17th century. Just the presence of this old equator on the map immediately catches the eye.
But not only that. If we look at North America, we can see that California is still depicted as an island. We also see that the cartographers of that time did not yet know the outlines of Alaska and the northern tip of Greenland. Hyperborea is no longer on this map. And all that remains of it is Greenland, Spitsbergen and Novaya Zemlya. It is there that you need to look for artifacts of the arctic ancestral home. By the way, the post-Flood outlines of Novaya Zemlya are also not fully shown.
But we do not see the image of Antarctica near the South Pole. And this fully corresponds to the official version about the discovery of this continent by the Russian naval expedition only in 1820. It also proves that this map is not a late "remake". But at the same time, Drake Passage, which was discovered in 1578, is already indicated on the southern tip of South America.
Promotional video:
On the map of the Eastern Hemisphere, the image of the territory where the Sahara Desert is now is striking. We see many rivers and cities there. This confirms the guesses of some alternatives that the Sahara desert was formed as a result of a later catastrophe associated with the destruction of a certain celestial body in the Earth's atmosphere - either a comet, or one of the Earth's satellites that existed in those days besides the Moon.
Also, of interest is the image of the many islands between the island of Madagascar and the Indian subcontinent, which apparently existed in the Indian Ocean at that time. But the coasts of Australia and New Zealand have not yet been fully explored. But, surprisingly, Australia is designated New Holland on this map. So, maybe before Britain this territory was owned by Holland?
Considering that the Dutch owned the nearby Indonesia, and also had their own fortresses in Ceylon and the coast of India, this version does not look fantastic. Indeed, the name of New Zealand, located next to Australia, was clearly given by the Dutch, for it is in the Netherlands that there is a province called Zealand.
By the way, do you know that New York was originally called New Amsterdam and also belonged to the Dutch. O. Pavlyuchenko has an interesting version of these very "Gauls" who built fortresses-stars, described in his videos on the ASPIK channel. This version explains more logically than the official history, the transition of many Dutch star fortresses under the control of the British Empire. And this actually happened, most likely after the catastrophe of the middle of the 19th century, when a new redistribution of the world was carried out by "new masters" from the British Isles, who suffered less from this catastrophe than others.
Kamchatka is not yet on this map, but some of the territories that are now at the bottom of our northern seas are still depicted as part of the land. At the same time, there are many cities in Siberia, including in its northeastern part such cities as Tartarus and Mongul, which explain to us where the falsifiers of history invented their mythical "Tatar-Mongols", which in fact have nothing to do with the Tatars, nor to the Mongols. This is also confirmed by the inscription in the region of the Southern Urals - "Cossacks Tartars". There is also Lukomorye praised in A. Pushkin's poems on this map. But it is possible that the cartographers of Europe did not yet know about the destruction in the Flood of most of Tartary, along with many of its cities in Eastern Siberia. Although, of course, there was no such name as Siberia then.
By the way, the border on this map between Europe and Tartaria runs a little east of the Volga, and Moskvia is already depicted as part of Europe or the “Holy Roman Empire” according to O. Pavlyuchenko, A. Kadykchansky and some other alternative researchers. This confirms and logically explains A. Kadykchansky's version that after the illegal usurpation of power by the Romanov dynasty (A. Pyzhikov's research confirmed that after Mikhail Romanov was elected tsar in 1613, he had no right to transfer power by inheritance) it was the foreign regiments that helped the Romanovs hold on to power and not let the real heirs to the Moscow throne. But official historians call this war "the uprising of S. Razin", linking these events with one of the Cossack generals from the army of the true heirs of the Moscow tsars.
It seems that just at the time of the "great turmoil" after the death of I. Grozny, the Moscow kingdom fell into dependence on the Vatican, or rather, the Holy Roman Empire. That is why the henchmen of this empire received the surname "Romanovs". But in Russia from the earliest times the Romans were called "novels". Well, the surname “Romanovs” just points us to their true owners.
All in all, this map is really interesting and I recommend its careful study to anyone interested in the true past. Personally, I had no doubts about its authenticity, unlike those maps and atlases by G. Mercator and A. Ortelius, which date back to 1570-1590, i.e. a whole century earlier than N. Visher's world map.
By the way, you can read my posts for May 2020 entitled "Real and Fake Maps of G. Mercator" and "Strange" inconsistencies "on A. Ortelia's atlas" and you will understand many of their differences from this map and obvious inconsistencies with the era that they are dated by official historians. And one more thing: did everyone notice that N. Visher uses plots of ancient, and not Christian, mythology as pictures? So wind up this fact on your mustache and reflect on it at your leisure.