• 1 Van Duzer 2023, p. 130. For the Sanson family, see Pastoureau 1984, pp. 387-436.
• 2 Tooley 1990, p. 40.
• 3 Skoutari 2003, p. 203.
• 4 De la Croix, Zanardello 2022, p. 1.
• 5 Pastoureau 1994, p. 53.

1The Sanson family, a distinguished lineage of French cartographers, began with the father of French cartography, Nicolas Sanson d’Abbeville (1600-1667).1 Nicolas Sanson laid the foundations of the French school of cartography during a period when the center of mapmaking and production had shifted from the Low Countries to France.2 The foundation of the Académie des sciences in 1666 by Jean-Baptiste Colbert (1619-1683), a minister of King Louis XIV, was of paramount importance, since it provided institutional support and legitimacy to scientific endeavors, including cartography,3 and led to the advancement of knowledge and the encouragement of the practical application of research, thus constituting the forefront of intellectual developments in France.4 Colbert’s efforts ensured that talented scholars and scientists received state pensions, provided that their work served the monarchy. This support for scientific endeavors led to the creation of roles such as the géographe du Roi or ingénieur du Roi.5

• 6 Hofmann 2020, pp. 1286-1287.
• 7 Davis-Allen, Reinhartz 1990, p. 94.

2Nicolas Sanson was a geography tutor to Louis XIII and Louis XIV, and was the first person to hold the title of géographe du Roi from 1630.6 He published, in collaboration with renowned engravers, general maps of all parts of the world. Over the course of his career, he created more than 300 maps, which were highly esteemed not only by his contemporaries but also by his successors.7

• 8 Cabourdin 1969, p. 293.
• 9 Tooley 1990, p. 40; Stefoff 1995, p. 126.

3Born in Abbeville in December 1600, Nicolas studied history, and is believed to have turned to cartography merely as a means of visualizing historical knowledge. He exhibited a keen interest in historical geography, and in 1627 he published a map of ancient Gaul (Galliæ antiquæ descriptio geographica) and two treatises (Britannia and Portus Itius) on the origins of Abbeville and Boulogne.8 His first atlas (Cartes generales de toutes les parties du monde), consisting of 100 maps, was published in 1654.9

• 10 Stefoff 1995, p. 246.
• 11 Ibid.

4Nicolas had three sons: Nicolas II (1625-1648, died during the Fronde, a series of civil wars in France), Guillaume (1633-1703), and Adrien (1639-1718). All three were apprenticed to their father, receiving the highest quality training and education in mapmaking, ensuring the continuation of the family’s prominence in French cartography.10 Nicolas Sanson is widely regarded as the founder of the French school of geography and cartography not only due to his and his sons’ significant contributions but also because he educated others in the field, including the notable L’Isle family.11

• 12 Shirley 1993, p. 567.
• 13 Ibid.

5The Sanson cartographic legacy continued with Pierre Moullart-Sanson (1659-1730), the son of Françoise Sanson (Nicolas’s third child) and Pierre Moullart, grandson and sole heir of Nicolas Sanson d’Abbeville. Our knowledge of Pierre Moullart-Sanson is limited and specific details about his life and career remain scarce. In 1692 he inherited the map plates of his grandfather and in 1695 he added the Sanson suffix to his own name.12 In the same year, Moullart-Sanson was granted the official title of géographe ordinaire du Roi by Louis XIV, thereby formally introducing the third generation of the Sanson family into this esteemed role. Upon the death of his uncle Guillaume, in 1704, he ensured intellectual property rights thus receiving a royal privilege to continue publishing the works of Nicolas and Guillaume Sanson. Due to advancements in scientific cartography spearheaded by the Académie des sciences Sanson’s maps became obsolete and efforts by Moullart-Sanson to continue their publication were ultimately unsuccessful.13

• 14 Pedley 2022, p. 31.

6Continuing the work initiated by his grandfather and continued by his uncles, he upheld the professional standards and maintained the cartographic traditions of the Sanson family until his death in 1730, when he was succeeded by his nephew Gilles Robert de Vaugondy and his son Didier.14

• 15 Harley 2018, p. 7.
• 16 Ibid., p. 8.

7During the European Renaissance, particularly from the 16th century onward, a discernible increase in systematic attention to the maps of preceding centuries was observed. This emerged as a function of a genuine historical appreciation for maps as independent documents, a general surge of interest in classical geographical maps, and the fact that classical sources were recognised not only as valuable contemporary tools but also as esteemed monuments of antiquity.15 The discovery, translation from Greek to Latin, and publication (as a printed book) of Claudius Ptolemy’s Geography (in the late 15th century AD) were of pivotal importance for the flourishing of cartography in Renaissance Europe. Ptolemy’s contribution to the cartographic boom that followed in subsequent centuries was so profound that the term ‘Ptolemaic Renaissance’ was adopted. The Renaissance also established the groundwork for an intellectual climate that favored the recovery, preservation, and more systematic study of the cartographic past, the growth of systematic map collecting, and the formation of map collections.16

• 17 Stylianou, Stylianou 1980, pp. 98-100 (entry 129 and figs. 130, 131a); Skoutari 2003, pp. 202-203 ( (...)
• 18 Stylianou, Stylianou 1980, p. 99; Iacovou 2000, p. 79; Iacovou 2004, p. 263.

8In 1718, Pierre Moullart-Sanson produced a highly intriguing map of ancient Cyprus, the map of the nine (9) Cypriot kingdoms (hereafter abbreviated as MOT9CK; fig. 1).17 This map names and meticulously outlines nine ancient kingdoms on the island, with their borders and territorial extents clearly demarcated. The cartographer’s attempt must have been a laborious and daring endeavour, given that no literary sources or archaeological evidence has emerged to date that could definitively and irrevocably establish the number, the names, and the borders of the island’s ancient kingdoms.18

• 19 Oberhummer 1903.
• 20 Masson, Hermary 1992, p. 24.
• 21 Stylianou, Stylianou 1980, pp. 99-100 (entry 129, fig. 131).
• 22 Ibid., pp. 34-35 (entry 39, fig. 42).
• 23 Iacovou 2000, p. 80; Iacovou 2004, p. 265.
• 24 Stylianou, Stylianou 1980, p. 99.

11The map has escaped the attention of historians, and even of Oberhummer,19 who conducted an in-depth study of Cypriot cartography.20 It was not until 1980 that Andreas and Judith Stylianou brought it to scholarly attention.21 The island’s outline is derived from Paolo Forlani’s design22 (which by that time was considered out-of-date),23 albeit with some alterations in its delineation. At the same time, its orientation aligns more closely with Nadal Bonifacio’s version, while the accompanying descriptive notes on the map are written in Latin.24

• 28 Stylianou, Stylianou 1980, p. 100 (entry 130, fig. 132).
• 29 Ibid., p. 100.

15In 1720 Moullart-Sanson produced another map of Cyprus identical in dimensions and again based on Forlani’s design. This later map depicts the eleven Ottoman Beylerbeylik districts of Cyprus, indicating these as the administrative divisions during the period of Ottoman rule.28 This map represents the only surviving evidence that the Ottoman Empire preserved the Franco-Venetian administrative districts that had existed prior to their conquest of the island.29 Intriguingly, this later map of Cyprus published two years after the MOT9CK, features a cartouche and a legend written in French.

• 30 Verdier, Besse 2020, pp. 295-296.

18The mapmaker utilized dotted lines to define the boundaries of the nine kingdoms, carefully considering natural geographic features, such as mountain ranges (orographic lines) and rivers, that form physiographic borders. When rivers served as natural boundaries, dotted lines were omitted. This approach affected three key borders: the western limit of the kingdom of Kourion – eastern boundary of Paphos, the western limit of the kingdom of Salamis – eastern boundary of the kingdom of Malum, and the northern limit of the kingdom of Kition – southern boundary of the kingdom of Chytroi. For instance, the western boundary of the kingdom of Kourion is indicated with dotted lines along mountain ridges extending southward, interrupted where the river’s course meets them (fig. 2). Similarly, the western boundary of the kingdom of Salamis is marked by dotted lines extending from the northern coast to the mouth of the Pedieos River, where the lines end, recognizing the river as a natural border (fig. 3). In the case of the kingdoms of Kition and Chytroi, their common boundary is defined entirely by the course of the river corresponding to the Gialias River; notably, no dotted lines are drawn along the river to indicate the boundary (fig. 4). This absence of clear demarcation discouraged many enlumineurs (typically unskilled and amateur individuals)30 from colouring these borders, with only one known copy displaying them coloured.

• 31 Stylianou, Stylianou 1980, pp. 98-100 (entry 129 and figs. 130, 131a).
• 32 Masson, Hermary 1992, p. 28 (pl. 1).

20At least twelve extant copies of the MOT9CK have been identified; however, this list is not exhaustive, and of course additional copies may yet exist. The first copy is illustrated in black and white in Stylianou and Stylianou,31 who, however, did not disclose the source/holder of the map (most probably from a private collection). This same copy seems to be included in an article by Masson and Hermary.32 It is unique in that it is the only one to depict the borders of all nine kingdoms in colour (in black and white, colours are expressed in terms of brightness and lightness), including the shared boundary between the kingdoms of Chytroi and Kition. In all other known copies, this feature is absent.

• 33 Sanderusmaps 2024.

21The second extant copy was identified in the Sanderusmaps online catalog (item number: 28632).33 This coloured copy is notable for its unique feature of marking major cities in red, though the city of Lapithos, the seat of a kingdom, was omitted by the enlumineur. The borders of the kingdoms of Salamis, Amathus, and Paphos are highlighted in yellow; those of Lapithos, Kourion, Chytroi, and Kition in green; and the borders of Malum and Soloi in red. Additionally, groves are depicted in green, and the cartouche outline is coloured in blue. The borders between Chytroi and Kition, however, are left uncoloured.

• 34 Cypriaauctions 2024.

22The third copy was located on the website of Cypria Auctions (item number: AA 138).34 The map’s description notes that it was previously owned by Taylor Garrison Belcher (1920-1990), U.S. ambassador to Cyprus from 1964 to 1969. This copy depicts the administrative borders of the kingdoms of Lapithos and Kourion in green, while those of Chytroi and Kition are rendered in a yellow-green shade but without a delineation between them, thus presented as a unified administrative area. No colour is used to indicate the territorial extents of other Cypriot kingdoms.

• 35 Europeana 2024a.
• 36 Europeana 2024b.

23The fourth and fifth copies, identified as GE BB-565 (15,15) (see fig. 1)35 and CPL GE DD-2987 (10115),36 are housed at the Bibliothèque nationale de France and are accessible via the European Digital Library, Europeana. Both copies lack colour, with the fifth copy bearing two stamps and the fourth showing discoloration in the middle.

• 37 Reiss & Sohn 2018.

24In 2018, the auction house Reiss & Sohn auctioned a copy of the MOT9CK (lot number 3376, 15-16/5/2018).37 In this copy the cartouche remains uncoloured, while the kingdoms’ boundaries are highlighted with four distinct watercolours: Paphos, Chytroi, and Kition (the latter two as a unified area) are depicted in red; Soloi and Malum in turquoise; Lapithos and Kourion in light green; and Salamis together with Amathus in yellow.

• 38 Information retrieved from LotSearch 2024.

25Another copy of the MOT9CK, the seventh, was identified at an auction by the French Auction House Audap & Mirabaud (now Audap & Associés) in Paris on 28/10/2016 (lot number 4008).38 This copy is similar to the previously described map but features different colours for kingdom borders: yellow for the kingdoms of Paphos, Amathus, and Malum; light green for Kourion, Chytroi, and Kition (the last two marked as a unified area); red for Lapithos; and turquoise for Soloi and Salamis.

• 39 Papavassilis 2007, pp. 98-99 (no. 77).

26The eighth copy, as documented by Papavassilis,39 exhibits a rich application of colour. The interior of the map is adorned with shades of yellow and green, the cartouche is filled with a reddish hue, and its outline is highlighted with tones of yellow and green.

• 40 Zacharakis 2009, no. 2409.

27The ninth copy was published by Zacharakis.40 Owing to the reduced scale of the maps in this edition and their black-and-white production, precise observations are challenging. Nevertheless, in its grayscale presentation, the map displays marked shading over kingdom territories, indicating that this specific copy likely featured colour-filled areas for the kingdoms rather than solely coloured borders, distinguishing it from other copies.

• 41 Alteagallery 2024.

28The tenth copy was found in the online catalog of the Altea Gallery (map no. 19178),41 with the borders of Paphos, Amathus, Lapithos, and Malum shown in yellow; Soloi and Salamis in green; and Kourion, Kition, and Chytroi in red (the latter two as a unified area).

• 42 Sylvia Ioannou Foundation 2024a; Skoutari 2003, pp. 202-203 (fig. 74).
• 43 Sylvia Ioannou Foundation 2024b.

29The eleventh (M.0010)42 and twelfth copies (M.0872)43 are part of the Sylvia Ioannou Foundation collection. On M.0010, the enlumineur used yellow for Salamis, Amathus, Soloi, and Paphos; turquoise for Lapithos, Chytroi, Kition, and Kourion; and red for Malum. Notably, the twelfth copy (fig. 6) is considered the “holy grail”, as it uniquely preserves the two lines in the cartouche that have been methodically erased. This discovery resolves longstanding scholarly questions and offers fresh insight into Pierre Moullart-Sanson’s attempt to establish a distinct identity within the field of cartography.

• 44 Reiss & Sohn, Königstein, Auktion 66/1 (29.10.1998), item 2771, in Iacovou 2004, pp. 266-267, 285.

30One last copy is mentioned by Maria Iacovou as part of the auction by Reiss & Sohn, Königstein, Auktion 66/I (29/10/1998).44 It has not been possible to locate it to determine if it matches any of the other copies in terms of identifying features.

• 45 The map of Asia Minor and Cyprus (Asia Minor in epitonem contracta, magnas regiones, seu provincias (...)

34Firstly, it is noteworthy that, in 1704, Moullart-Sanson obtained the exclusive right to publish works of his predecessors.45 This exclusive right, however, did not absolve him from the obligation to acknowledge their contributions. His decision to omit such references on the map may reflect an intent to assert greater personal authorship. In the competitive field of cartography, presenting a map as entirely one’s own could enhance professional stature. By omitting the names of Nicolas and Guillaume Sanson, Moullart-Sanson might have sought to dissociate his work from his family’s legacy, signaling a fresh approach or suggesting updated geographical insights unavailable to his predecessors.

• 46 Europeana 2024c.

36In the earlier stages of his career, however, Moullart-Sanson demonstrated due respect for his predecessors’ work. For instance, on the map of Asia Minor and Cyprus,46 he explicitly credited the drafts of Nicholas and Guillaume Sanson, using the term editio altera in the cartouche (editio altera ex schedis Nic. et Guliel Sanson Christianissimi Regis Geographorum auctior), thereby acknowledging his reliance on their foundational work while likely incorporating his own contributions. This early balance of humility and respect for his predecessors’ work appears to have shifted over time, giving way to a desire for personal recognition and independence, which in turn led to a more self-focused approach in his later work.

• 47 Heffernan 2014, p. 8; Heffernan 2021, p. 9.
• 48 Stefoff 1995, p. 127.

37Was Moullart-Sanson’s desire for recognition sparked by a specific event? Although speculative, it is notable that 1718 (the year of publication of MOT9CK) was a transformative year in Parisian cartography, marked by the creation and awarding of the title of premier géographe du Roi. Guillaume Delisle or de L’Isle (of the de L’Isle family), whose father Claude had been a pupil of Nicolas Sanson, rose to this prestigious position. Delisle’s role as royal geography tutor brought him acclaim, especially in his lessons with maps designed specifically for the young Louis XV, who ascended the throne in 1715 at the age of five following the death of Louis XIV. In recognition of his contributions, Delisle was awarded the title of premier géographe du Roi by the Maison du Roi in 1718 – a title created especially for him – which set him apart from the smaller group of géographes ordinaires du Roi, who supplied maps, globes, and other geographic resources to the royal library.47 Delisle’s distinct approach, marked by his dedication to accuracy and source verification, positioned him as the leading figure in French cartography until his death in 1726.48

• 49 Hofmann 2020, pp. 1287-1288.
• 50 Ibid.

38This pursuit of up-to-date knowledge, along with a commitment to superior geographical accuracy, contrasted with the Sanson workshop, which had come under criticism for its reliance on outdated data and its tendency to reprint maps without incorporating advancements from the Académie des sciences.49 Despite their popularity, particularly through pirated editions published by Pieter Mortier in Amsterdam, the Sanson heirs’ reputation suffered among scholars due to these perceived lapses. The French cartographic community of the early 18th century was, therefore, split between defenders of the Sanson’s legacy, such as Moullart-Sanson and later the Robert de Vaugondy family, and reformists who rallied behind Guillaume Delisle, the premier géographe du Roi and a member of the Académie des sciences. After Moullart-Sanson’s death in 1730, his successors Gilles Robert de Vaugondy and his son Didier revised and expanded approximately forty Sansons’ maps, producing them throughout the century while balancing scientific precision with aesthetic appeal.50

• 51 Stylianou, Stylianou 1980, pp. 27-28 (entry 23a, fig. 29a).
• 52 G. Xylander, Strabonis Nobilissimi Et Doctissimi Philosophi Ac Geographi Rerum Geographicarum Comme (...)
• 53 Stylianou, Stylianou 1980, p. 68 (entry 74, fig. 77).
• 54 Ibid., p. 28 (entry 24, fig. 30).

41One such map of Cyprus appears in Ioannis Honterus’s Cosmographia published in Basle, in 1561,51 that was republished by Wilhelm Xylander in the Strabonis Nobilissimi Et Doctissimi Philosophi Ac Geographi Rerum Geographicarum Commentarii Libris XVII Contenti.52 This map portrays Cyprus with ancient places and Hellenistic districts complemented by the inclusion of the medieval towns of Nicosia, Famagusta, and Limiso.53 Around the same time, the Cypriot chronicler Florio Bustron produced a map of Cyprus to accompany his chronicle Historia overo commentarii de Cipro, written in Italian prose, ca 1560, in which he intriguingly included the eleven districts of the late Lusignan and Venetian periods, along with ancient places.54

• 55 Ibid., p. 82 (entry 97, fig. 100).

42Another major influence would have been Ptolemy’s Geographia, which circulated widely in multiple map editions from the late 15th century onward. Of these, Gerard Mercator’s map of Cyprus, in Tab. IV Asiae in Qua Mesopotamia, Syria, Arabia Petrea ac Deserta (published in Utrecht in 1695), is particularly noteworthy.55

• 56 Ibid., pp. 62-66 (entry 67, figs. 69-70); Papavassilis 2007, p. 35 (no. 17).

43In the late 16th century, Abraham Ortelius made a notable effort to map the geography of ancient Cyprus (Insular Aliquot Aegaei Maris Antiqua Descriptio) in his work Additamentum III, 1584 and thence in his Theatrum Orbis Terrarum (Parergon section), Antwerp 1584,56 the first modern atlas of the world. Drawing upon the works of Strabo and Claudius Ptolemy, Ortelius provided a convincing portrayal of the island during antiquity. However, in the map’s cartouche, he acknowledged his limitations by listing among others the names of nineteen cities, two rivers, and one mountain found in ancient texts that he was unable to locate accurately. By marking these as uncertain, he consciously avoided making speculative claims, underscoring his commitment to accuracy. This gap left by Ortelius can be viewed as an implicit challenge to future cartographers, urging them to uncover additional sources or evidence to position these geographical features precisely. Ortelius’s transparent approach and his “open invitation” to address these ambiguities may have been a motivating force behind the mapmaker’s cartographic endeavor, encouraging him to take on this “strenuous challenge”.

• 57 See above n. 45.
• 58 The geographic names are preserved in their original form as they appear on the map.

44Moullart-Sanson was undoubtedly well-versed in historical and religious cartography. In 1697, he republished a map of Asia Minor during antiquity, originally created by Nicolas and Guillaume Sanson.57 In addition to Asia Minor, this map includes a depiction of Cyprus, documenting twenty-three cities/towns in Latin: Alexandria, Amathus, Aphrodisium, Arsinoe (east coast), Arsinoe (north coast), Carpasia, Cerania, Chythrus, Citium, Curium seu Curias, Dionia, Epidarium, Lapathus, Ledrum, Limenia, Malum, Mariu, Paphos, Salamis, Soli, Throni, Tremithus, and Cresium. Moreover, eleven promontories are recorded: Acamas, Callinusa, Cromnium, Curias, Dadei extrema, Dinaretum, Olympus, Pedalium, Tegessus, Throni, and Drepanum. The Olympus Mountains (in Carpasia) and the Curias Peninsula are also named and depicted (fig. 9).58 The outline of the island also appears to closely resemble Forlani’s design. It is hardly coincidental that all of the aforementioned cities / towns, without exception, are depicted in identical locations on the MOT9CK.

• 59 Stylianou, Stylianou 1980, p. 100. On the Tabula Peutingeriana the cities are presented as follows: (...)
• 60 Stylianou, Stylianou 1980, pp. 1-2 (entry 2, figs. 1-2).

47The only source explicitly acknowledged by the mapmaker (as indicated in the rectangular frame) is the Tabula Peutingeriana (Peutinger’s Table), a Roman itinerarium depicting the extensive network of the cursus publicus, the state-run road system of the Roman Empire. The Tabula Peutingeriana recorded twelve major cities in Cyprus during the Roman period: Salamis, Kition, Amathus, Kourion, Palaepaphos, Paphos, Soloi, Lapithos, Cerinia, Chytroi, Tremithus, and Tamasus.59 All twelve cities are depicted on the MOT9CK, though with some alterations to the road network. For instance, the MOT9CK shows (a) Arsinoe, (b) Tremithus connected to Kition instead of Amathus, and (c) a link between Tremithus and Chytroi without specifying the distance.60

• 61 Hamilton, Falconer 1857, p. xxiii (preface).
• 62 Pavo-López, Amaro-Mellado 2024, p. 2.

48The cartographer relied heavily on the works of the foremost ancient geographers, Strabo and Claudius Ptolemy. Their writings, accessible in Latin, and the resurgence of maps during the Renaissance reflecting their ancient worldview, as previously mentioned, were indispensable to the mapmaker’s efforts. The initial publication of Strabo’s work appeared as a Latin translation by Guarini of Verona and Gregorio of Tiferno. This translation saw thirteen editions, with the earliest printed in either 1469 or 1471, followed by the twelfth in 1559, and the final edition in 1652. The first printed edition of the Greek text was produced by Aldus Manutius in Venice in 1516, based on a highly corrupt manuscript. The first critical edition with a commentary was published by Isaac Casaubon in 1587.61 The first printed edition of Ptolemy’s Geography, the unrivaled geographical authority, was published in Vicenza, Italy, in 1475, though it did not include maps. The earliest edition to feature maps appeared in Bologna in 1477 but it was of poor quality. The 1478 edition from Rome is of particular importance due to the exceptional quality of its engravings and the innovative use of metal punches for inscribing letters on the plates.62

• 63 Meursius 1675.
• 64 Skovgaard-Petersen 2002, p. 63.

51In 1675, the three-volume treatise Creta, Cyprus, Rhodus sive De nobilissimarum harum insularum rebus et antiquitatibus was published in Amsterdam. The second volume, devoted to Cyprus, bears the title Cyprus, sive, De illius insulae rebus, & antiquitatibus, Libri II.63 The treatise was compiled by the Dutch scholar and classicist Johannes Meursius (van Meurs) (Latin: Ioannes Meursius, 1579-1639). During his fourteen years as a professor at Leiden, his contributions as both an editor and writer on Greek antiquities were remarkable. He has published more previously unpublished Greek writers than all other professors combined have managed since the university’s establishment in 1575.64

• 65 Meursius 1675, p. 28.
• 66 Stylianou, Stylianou 1980, p. 257, (entry 66, fig. 68).
• 67 Ibid., p. 92, (entry 112, figs. 114, 114a).

54For the placement of cities and towns, the mapmaker likely relied on additional sources, such as earlier maps, using a correlational approach. A notable example is the town of Asine, referenced by Stephanus of Byzantium, as one of the towns of the island. Meursius includes this reference65 without offering further details or clues about the town’s location, and Asine is absent from earlier maps depicting ancient Cyprus. Confronted with this challenge, the mapmaker of the MOT9CK likely consulted earlier maps of Cyprus like the Cypri Insulae Nova Descript. 1573 by Abraham Ortelius,66 or the Cyprus Insula by Willem Jansz. Blaeu,67 both of which record a town named Asimi. By recognizing a potential correlation, the mapmaker placed Asine on his map at the very location where Asimi appeared in sixteenth- and seventeenth-century cartographic representations of Cyprus.

• 68 Iacovou 2000, pp. 82-88; Iacovou 2004, pp. 270-274.
• 69 Pliny V 35.

55The issue of the literary sources used by the mapmaker in determining the number of Cypriot kingdoms has been thoroughly analyzed by Maria Iacovou.68 Iacovou concluded that the names of all nine Cypriot kingdoms cannot be traced to any single ancient source. Claudius Ptolemy makes no mention of the Cypriot kingdoms, while Strabo admits his ignorance on the subject of their number. Pliny the Elder, although claiming that there were nine kingdoms, does not list their names. Instead, he provides the names of fifteen towns,69 not all of which were incorporated into the MOT9CK (Corinaeum and Epidaurus are notably absent).

• 70 Diod. Sic. XVI 42, 4.

56Diodorus Siculus asserts that there were nine important cities ruled by a king70 but only provides the names of seven of these kingdoms. These are Kition, Marion, Soloi, Salamis, Amathus, Paphos, and Lapithos. Assuming Diodorus was the source for the reference to nine kingdoms, this leaves Chytroi and Kourion unaccounted for.

• 71 Steph Byz. s.v. “Xύτροι”.
• 72 Meursius 1675, pp. 128-129.

57Regarding Chytroi, Stephanus of Byzantium, in his Ethnica, provides a few excerpts from the now-lost book On Cyprus (Περί Κύπρου) by Alexander. One such excerpt states: “Eurynoe was married to the king of Chytroi”.71 This is actually the only reference that can be linked to the existence of the kingdom of Chytroi. This unique information about an unnamed king of Chytroi was also detected by Meursius,72 whereas Chytroi is also marked on the Peutinger’s Table, thus signifying the importance of the city in the Roman period.

• 73 Herodotus V 113, 1. See Iacovou 2004, pp. 273-274.

58Kourion also appears on the Peutinger’s Table, whereas Herodotus provides the earliest Greek reference to Kourion as a Cypriot kingdom in his account of the revolt of Onesilus.73 This naturally invites consideration of whether the cartographer appears to have engaged with Herodotus’ narrative. For any reader familiar with Herodotus’ description of the uprising, the prevailing impression would seem to be that the kingdom of Salamis held a preeminent position among the Cypriot kingdoms, particularly with respect to leadership, decisiveness, and initiative during the revolt. This observation, in turn, raises a further issue: how might a scholar of Herodotus interpret the events of the Cypriot revolt and yet arrive at such an unorthodox delineation of Salamis’ territorial extent on the MOT9CK map? In this rendering, the boundaries of Salamis appear confined to the Karpasia Peninsula, thereby excluding both the fertile Mesaoria plain and the routes to the copper-rich Troodos region, which were arguably of considerable economic, political, and strategic importance.

• 74 Meursius 1675, p. 34.
• 75 Ibid., p. 26.
• 76 Ibid., p. 118.

59This discrepancy – indeed, a paradox – strongly implies that the cartographer may not have engaged directly and thoroughly with Herodotus’ account. It is therefore reasonable to argue that the mapmaker relied selectively on Meursius’ references. Given the nature of Meursius’ work, arranged in discrete entries, targeted retrieval of information was facilitated; yet, this approach may have resulted in certain omissions. For instance, in his entry on Kourion, Meursius makes no mention of Onesilus’ revolt. He does cite Herodotus regarding the city’s colonization by the Argives and the betrayal of its king, Stesenor (Stasanor), but without providing the full historical context.74 In fact, a comprehensive account of the revolt is absent from all entries. Only scant references to the revolt appear in the entries on Amathus75 and Gorgus,76 which, however, are insufficient to reconstruct the full scope of events as described by Herodotus.

• 77 Μasson, Hermary 1992, p. 24.
• 78 Iacovou 2000, p. 87; Iacovou 2004, pp. 275-276.

60The erroneous identification of Marion as Malos is sufficiently discussed by Masson77 and Iacovou.78 Masson clarifies the issue, tracing the mistake to an early edition (Greek codex) of Diodorus’ Library, where “Marion” was misrepresented as “Malon” (in the accusative form), possibly due to confusion with Malos in Cilicia. The error was identified and corrected in later editions of Library.

• 79 Meursius 1675, p. 41.
• 80 Ibid., p. 42.
• 81 Ibid., p. 28.

61Johannes Meursius likely relied on this flawed edition, as he distinguished “Malum”79 (noting it in the neuter accusative form as “Malum,” similar to Citium and Curium) from “Marium”,80 thus resulting in two distinct entries. Simultaneously, based on a reference from Stephanus of Byzantium, he associated Marium with Arsinoe.81 Consequently, any cartographer drawing from this source would depict these as two distinct geographic entities. After compiling these sources, the next step involved positioning this information on the map. Fortunately for the mapmaker, a detailed investigation was deemed unnecessary. Both Marium (written as Mariu) and Malum were already located on the Sansons’ map of Asia Minor and Cyprus. Even if the mapmaker faced uncertainties or conflicting information about the kingdom’s precise location, he could not overlook a map from his family’s cartographic tradition or diminish the value of its data, as this would be seen as a significant oversight. It seems that Moullart-Sanson’s decision to identify Malum (Marion) as one of the ancient kingdoms was strongly influenced by the details provided in this particular map. To justify its inclusion, the mapmaker awkwardly expanded the kingdom’s borders north, east, and south, granting it substantial coastal access and incorporating the fertile Mesaoria plain, while significantly reducing Salamis’ territory.

• 82 Cobham 1908, p. 3.

62In addition to Diodorus and Pliny, the ancient writer Pomponius Mela (1st century AD) also referenced the nine kingdoms of ancient Cyprus in his work Chorographia.82 Drawing upon these early sources, writers from the 15th to the 17th centuries subsequently preserved and disseminated this information. Key examples include:

• 93 Meursius 1675, pp. 98-99.

63Meursius upheld the tradition of the nine ancient kingdoms by drawing on references to Pliny, Diodorus, and Mela.93 In addition to citing these sources, he put forward his own observation, identifying the nine cities that he believed were the capitals of these kingdoms: Solοi, Amathus, Chytroi, Kition, Kourion, Lapithos, Palaepaphos, Nea Paphos (Paphus utraque), and Salamis. Notably, he states, Urbes vero, ut observo istae errant (translated as, “Indeed, the cities, as I observe, were those”), indicating that his conclusion relied solely on personal observation, without explaining the reasoning or evidence behind it.

• 94 Dapper 1703, p. 27.

64Dapper also engaged in the “search for the nine ancient kingdoms”, assuming that the nine kingdoms were Aipeia (the predecessor of Soloi), Amathus, Chytroi, Kition, Kourion, Lapithos, Palaepaphos, Nea Paphos, and Salamis.94

• 95 Cobham 1908, p. 251.
• 96 Ibid., p. 87.
• 97 Ibid., p. 271.
• 98 Ibid., pp. 316, 318.

65Consequently, building on the works of Diodorus, Pliny, and Mela, a notion of nine ancient kingdoms in Cyprus emerged prominently in 16th- and 17th-century literature, particularly among travelers and travel writers who visited the island. This concept became so embedded in the historical narrative, and ingrained in the common historical perception that references to a chronologically undetermined period of existence of the nine kingdoms were widely circulated and perpetuated. Over time, this information solidified into an accepted historical fact, part of the historical memory, consistently recorded and repeated without question, as it represented the sole numerical reference concerning Cyprus’ ancient kingdoms. The idea of the nine ancient kingdoms remained unquestioned and continued to be incessantly reproduced in the 18th and 19th centuries in the writings of Richard Pococke (1743),95 Giacomo Diedo (1751),96 Alexander Drummond (1754),97 and Constantius, Archbishop of Sinai (1819).98