The Linear League in North America

Author(s): Roland Chardon

Source: Annals of the Association of American Geographers, Vol. 70, No. 2 (Jun., 1980), pp.
129-153
Published by: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. on behalf of the Association of American Geographers
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2562946 .
Accessed: 15/02/2011 17:39

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at .
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=taylorfrancis. .

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Taylor & Francis, Ltd. and Association of American Geographers are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,
preserve and extend access to Annals of the Association of American Geographers.

http://www.jstor.org
 ANNALS of the
Association ofAmerican Geographers
Volume 70 June, 1980 Number 2

THE LINEAR LEAGUE IN NORTH AMERICA*

ROLAND CHARDON

ABSTRACT. Seven different linear leagues-five land and two marine-were

used as eithercadastral or distance measures in colonial NorthAmerica. French
land leagues includedthelieue commune(4.4445 km),grande lieue ordinaire(ca.
4.9 km), and lieue de poste (3.8981 km). The Spaniards used the legua legal (ca.
4.2 km) and legua comun (5.5727 km). The fiveland leagues maintainedremark-
able linearconsistencyat officiallevels despite variationsin applicationforland
subdivisionand itinerarypurposes. The marineleagues, however, "lengthened"
between the early 1500s and mid-1600s,as increasinglyaccurate knowledge of
the earth's dimensionsevolved. Thus the Spanish marineleague of 17.5 per lat-
itudinaldegree, in reality6.3504 km,was consideredto be 4 Roman miles (5.9260
km) in the 1500s. Similarlythe lengthof the Anglo-Frenchmarineleague of 20
per degree was thoughtto equal 3 Roman miles (4.4445 km) in the mid-1500s,but
was recognizedat its truelength(5.5566 km) afterthe mid-1600s.Historicalanal-
ysis of these and other geographic measures offersintriguinginsightsinto the
origins,diffusion,and modificationsof man's perceptionof the earthat various
scales.

HISTORIANS and historical geographers describingdistances and the locations of in-

often find it difficultto determinethe dividual places-the latter frequentlyidenti-
precise value of linearand areal measures that fiedas a specifiednumberof linearunitsfrom
were applied in a given place and at a given one or anotherreferencepoint. Former mea-
time.1These measures formedthe bases for sures survivein presentlandscapes where old
propertylines, establishedduringtimes when
Dr. Chardonis ProfessorofGeographyat theLouisiana earliercadastral surveysfollowedthen-extant
in Baton Rouge, LA 70803.
State University linear metricsystems,stillinfluenceland-use
patterns. Since all measures can be defined
* I am deeply indebtedto Patricia Chardon and to Drs. only in comparativeterms,any successfulat-
WardJ. Barrett,JohnFischer, Fred B. Kniffen,and Rob-
ert C. West for theircritical reading of the manuscript
bocker Press, 1911), p. viii; Samuel Eliot Morison, The
and valuable suggestions.I also appreciate the financial
European Discovery of America. Vol. 1: The Northern
support provided by the Louisiana State University Voyages, A.D. 500-1600 (New York: Oxford University
Council on Research duringthe summerof 1978. Press, 1971), pp. 288n, 387; and Conrad E. Heidenreich,
"Some General Observationson Canadian 17thCentury
1 See for example: Woodbury Lowery, The Spanish Maps as Travel Literature," Revue de l'UniversitW
Settlements within the Present Limits of the United d'OttawalUniversityof Ottawa Quarterly,Vol. 48 (1978),
States. Florida, 1562-1574 (New York: The Knicker- pp. 6-11.

ANNALS OF THE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICAN GEOGRAPHERS Vol. 70, No. 2, June 1980
? 1980 by the Association of AmericanGeographers. Printedin U.S.A.

129
130 ROLAND CHARDON June

temptto reconstructpast landscapes, deter- tance estimatescould be veryfaulty,because

mine the locations of places no longerfound the usual errorsintrinsicin navigationby dead
on maps, or interpret the developmentof land- reckoning were often compounded by un-
use patternsin certain areas must establish knowninfluences,such as currents,tides and
modern equivalents for whatever measures fogs (e.g. eastern Canada), storms,and lack
were in use at that time. One of the more of notable landmarks(e.g. Florida and Gulf
prominentlinear measures applied in colonial coasts). Even later, when surveyingbecame
NorthAmericawas the league, a unitthatwas a muchmoreprecise art,one could not always
variously defined. This paper provides a expect officialand othersurveysto be carried
sketchof the league's historyand its applica- out to a uniformlyhigh degree of accuracy.
tionsand equivalentsin thispartof the world. With reference to North America, docu-
For several centuriesthe league was one of mentarysources which mentionleagues usu-
theprincipalmensuralunitsused as indicators ally referto one of fiveland and two sea lea-
of both linear distance and area. Introduced gues, dependingon the context. While other
intothe New Worldby Europeans, the league leagues were used in North America, these
also became a partial basis for land subdivi- seven persistedthe longestand had the widest
sion in manyof the newlydiscovered and set- application. Their importancewas greatestin
tled regions.Since a wide varietyof European those areas explored and settledby the Span-
"leagues" existed at the time of initialEuro- iards, French, and, in some cases, English.
pean settlementin the New World, it is easy Other comparable measures, such as the
to understandwhy sometimes arbitrary(and Dutch myl or mijl, the Danish miil, the Swed-
even erroneous)definitions of theleague could ish mil, and the Russian werst, are mentioned
be applied in New World geographical and in this paper. But they,like some of the less
historical research. In South America the frequentlyused leagues of the sixteenthcen-
greatdiversityof league evaluations is bewil- tury,were applied onlyoccasionally or in very
dering,buthappilythe situationis not as com- restrictedareas.
plicated for North America. In this region,
definedfor our purposes to include most of THE LINEAR LEAGUE IN EUROPE

CentralAmericaand the Caribbean area, only The league has meant many things from
a few differentleagues were employed and place to place and over time. Dourstheriden-
most were applied fairlyuniformlyover large tifiesover fortydifferent leagues in use during
territories.It is thus possible to provide rela- or shortlybefore 1840, almost all of them in
tively precise league equivalents covering Europe.2 Writingabout France prior to its
wide areas for most of North America's co- adoption of the internationaldecimal metric
lonial history. system in 1795, Tarbe states that it was im-
One must recognize, however, that these possible to defineall oftheleagues in use with-
equivalents are only relativelyprecise. The in his own country.3In my research I have
numericalvalues presentedin this paper tend come across more than 100 specific and dif-
to be idealistic where itineraryunits are con- ferentdefinitionsof the league; undoubtedly
cerned,especially in the earlycolonial period, therewere more. This is not the place to pre-
when these units-even at sea-were not re- sent a detailed examinationof the originsand
garded withthe precisioncharacteristicof our developmentof the league in Europe, but ifa
own age, bur ratheras roughindicatorsof dis- perspective is to be obtained on the North
tance. Attemptswere made to apply itinerary American league, a briefreview of its Euro-
measures accurately,but this was not always pean and otherantecedentsis in order.
possible. Distances cited in early exploration Problems involvingevaluations of the Eu-
reportscould usually onlybe estimatedby the
navigatorsor explorers,who generallyhad no 2 Horace Doursther,Dictionnaire Universeldes Poids
otherchecks than a specificallyselected base et Mesures Anciens et Modernes (Bruxelles: 1840, re-
point, such as a notable landmark. If there printedby Meridian PublishingCompany, Amsterdam,
were good observerswithproperinstruments, 1965), pp. 209-11.
3M. Tarb6 des Sablons, Manuel Pratique et EMmen-
latitude could sometimes be surprisinglyac- taire des Poids et Mesures, des Monnaies, et du Calcul
curatelydetermined,but oftenit was not. If Decimal, 12thed. (Paris: Roret, Libraire, 1826),pp. 382-
a coast was being reconnoiteredby sea, dis- 83.
1980 THE LINEAR LEAGUE
ropean league stemprincipallyfromtwo caus-
es. First, the historyof the league in Europe
is complicated, though somewhat less so if
limitedto those leagues also used in North
America. Second, it seems thatthe league, as
an itinerarymeasure, came to be viewed as
havingbeen conceptuallyderivedfromone or
anotheroftwo quite distinctmetricbases. The
firstwas a time-distanceconcept by whichthe
league was definedin termsofdistancewalked
in an hour (or other temporalunit), and be-
came linearlymanifestedin standardsof hu-
man movement,such as the foot, step, and
pace; fromthese were created stades, miles,
and leagues. The second basis was geodetic,
wherein itinerarymeasures were defined in
termsof a certainnumberto the degree of the
terraqueousgreat circle. There is sharp dis-
agreementas to whetherthese two conceptual
bases were originallyintegrated,but a discus-
sion of this fascinatingtopic lies outside the
scope of this paper. Sufficeit to say that ef-
fortswere made to mergethe two sets of mea-
sures into officialunitarynational metricsys-
tems duringthe 1500s and 1600s, usually with
less thansatisfactoryresults.
Such problemsare not unique to the league
in Europe; they also arise when other men-
4The time-distance,which may also be called anthro-
pometric,basis is thoughtto be the older of the two.
Among specialists who argue for geodetic originsof an-
cientlinearmeasuresare A. E. Berriman,Historical Me-
trology(London: J. M. Dent & Sons, 1953), p. 1 and
passim; and Salvador Garcia Franco, La Legua Ndutica
en la Edad Media (Madrid: InstitutoHist6ricode Marina,
1957),passim. Those opposed maintainthatancienttech-
nologies were unequal to the task of measuringthe earth
precisely, pointingto the differinglengths observed in
those remainingstandardspurportingto delineate equal
linearunits.They also cite the mensuralnomenclatureof
antiquitythatidentified these unitsin termsof digit,palm,
foot,etc. V. Vdzquez Queipo, Essai sur les SystemesM&t-
riques et Monetairesdes Anciens Peuples depuis les Pre-
miers Temps Historiques jusqu'd la Fin du Khalifat
d'Orient (Paris: Chez Dalmont et Dunod, 1859), Vol. 1,
p. 540. The controversyis not resolved, but insofaras it
pertainsto the league in North America I follow tradi-
tional thought.The league may also have had its origins
in agrarianpractices,as suggestedby Frederic Seebohm,
CustomaryAcres and theirHistorical Importance (Lon-
don: Longmans, Green and Co., 1914), passim (but es-
peciallypp. 20-63 and 201-02), and by J. B. P. Karslake,
"Silchesterand its Relationto thepre-RomanCivilization
of Gaul," Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries in
London, 2nd Series, Vol. 32 (1920), pp. 197-98, among
others. In this case the time-distanceconcept involves
nonitinerary activities,and may be related to the use of
the league as a linear basis for land subdivision in the
New World.
131
sural unitsare examined. The league's history
is not simplifiedby the factthatits lengthwas
influencedby extra-Europeanitinerarymea-
sures, such as the Middle Eastern parasang.
Nor are mattershelped muchwhen the league
becomes confusedand even interchangedwith
the mile and German stunde (an hour's trav-
el)-a situationdatingback to Roman times.5
Many scholars have triedto sortout the com-
plexities of itinerarymeasurementwith vary-
ingdegrees of success, and a fewhave refused
even to try,butperhapsthefollowingwillpro-
vide sufficient backgroundforthe league as it
was used in NorthAmerica.6
The word league is derived fromthe Gallic
leig or one of its closely relatedCeltic terms.7
5Doursther states thatthe stunde was sometimestrans-
lated as league in French (op. cit., footnote2, p. 510) and
gives some league equivalentsin termsof stunden(idem.,
pp. 209-11). Similar measures, such as the hora de ca-
mino, lieue horaire, and heure de chemin, were used in
Spain and France (and even occasionally in the New
World). For the Spanish equivalents, see InstitutoGeo-
graficoy Estadistico (Spain), Equivalencias entrelas Pe-
sas y Medidas Usadas Antiguamenteen las Diversas
Provincias de Espaia y las Legales del Sistemo Metrico-
decimal (Madrid: Imprentade la Direcci6n del Instituto
Geogrifico y Estadistico, 1886), pp. 25, 30, 50. For
French equivalents see A.-J.-P. Paucton, Metrologie
(Paris: Chez la Veuve De Saint, Libraire, 1780), pp. 175,
737, 788-92 passim.
6 The literatureon historicalmetrologyis voluminous
and scattered.Most works are nationallyorientedor lim-
ited to specific aspects or periods of measurement.In
additionto pertinentarticlesin various encylopedias, the
more useful general treatmentsinclude: J.-B. d'Anville,
Traite des Mesures ItinerairesAnciennes et Modernes
(Paris: ImprimerieRoyale, 1769); Paucton, op. cit., foot-
note 5; Berriman,op. cit., footnote4; and Garcia Franco,
op. cit., footnote4. In his work on metricsystems,Vdz-
quez Queipo (op. cit., footnote4, Vol. 1, pp. 34-35) de-
clines to discuss itinerarymeasures except in passing,
citinglack of sufficientdata.
7Perhaps meaning a certain distance, time, or stone
marker;see FriedrichDiez, EtymologischesWorterbuch
der Romanischen Sprachen (Bonn: Adolph Marcus,
1878),pp. 190-91; A. Ernoutand A. Maillet,Dictionnaire
Etymologiquede la Langue Latine-Histoire des Mots,
4th ed. (Paris: LibrairieC. Klincksieck, 1959), Vol. 1, p.
352; and Denis Diderot, Encylopedie (Neufchastel,Switz-
erland: Chez Samuel Faulche et Cie., Libraires & Impri-
meurs, 1765), Vol. 9, p. 445. There is littlereason to be-
lieve that the league is directlyderived fromthe Greek
word leukos (= white,light,brillant),as suggestedin D.
Roque Barcia, Diccionario General Etimol6gico (Bar-
celona: Francisco Seix, Editor, 1879), Vol. 3, p. 360, for
thereis no hintthat this word signifiedeitherstone or a
linearunitin classical Greek times(cf. PierreChantraine,
DictionnaireEtymologiquede la Langue Grecque-His-
toire des Mots (Paris: Editions Klincksieck, 1974), Vol.
3, pp. 632-33.
132 ROLAND CHARDON
As an itinerarymeasure, however, its origins
are stillunclear. There seem to have been sev-
eral "Gallic leagues" whose values ranged
from2,338 to 2,475 m, but whichthe Romans,
firstrecordingthe measure as the leuga, stan-
dardized at 11/2Roman miles.8Thoughthe Ro-
man mile was the basic itineraryunit of the
Empire, the Gallo-Roman leuga was also of-
ficially adopted, in the early third century
A.D., as the commonitinerarymeasure of the
continentalCeltic areas occupied by the Ro-
mans untilwell afterthe Germanicinvasions.9
Since both the Gallo-Roman league and the
Roman mile are fundamentalto the historyof
the NorthAmericanleagues, a briefreview of
theirequivalents is essential.
The officialdesignationof the Roman mile
was mile passus, meaningthatit consisted of
1,000 Roman double-step paces. Since each
passus comprised5 Roman feet,the mile also
consistedof 5,000feet.It should be added that
the passus also equalled 2 gradus, or single-
step paces of 2.5 feet apiece, so that the Ro-
man mile comprised 2,000 gradus as well as
1,000 passus. In modern measure, assuming
a Roman foot of 296.3 mm, the Roman mile
is consideredto have been 1,481.5 m + 1%.1o
8 Ernest Desjardins, Geographie de la Gaule Romaine
(Paris: 1893; reprintedby Culture et Civilisation,Brux-
elles, 1968), Vol. 4, p. 23; Raymond Chevallier, Roman
Roads, translatedby N. H. Field (London: B. T. Batsford
Ltd., 1976), p. 41; and Doursther,op. cit., footnote2, p.
210.
9 Chevallier, op. cit., footnote8, p. 42; d'Anville, op.
cit., footnote6, pp. 101-07; Desjardins, op. cit., footnote
8, Vol. 4, passim.
10This is thelong-acceptedequivalent,based on a large
number of measurementsbetween existing towns and
milestones.See GerhardRadke, "Viae publicae Roman-
ae," Paulys Realencylopidie der Classischen Altertum-
swissenschaft, Supplementband 13 (Munich: Alfred
DruckenmillerVerlag, 1973), col. 1447; also Desjardins,
op. cit., footnote8, Vol. 4, pp. 23-25. However, some
disagree. In parts of Spain there seems to have been an
Ibero-Roman mile of 1,670 m: Antonio Bldzquez, "La
Milla Romana," Boletin de la Sociedad Geogrdfica(Ma-
drid), Vol. 39 (Supplement) (1897), pp. 1-14. In Britain
the Roman mile is cited by Margaryas being about 1,680
yards (1,536.2 m); Ivan D. Margary, Roman Roads in
Britain, 3rd ed. (London: JohnBaker, 1973), p. 524. My
own analysis of the data fromwhich Margaryderives his
estimates(pp. 524-33) suggestsrathera Britanno-Roman
mile of about 1,600m. Thus thereare questions as to the
precise lengthof the Roman mile and whethera single
lengthwas uniformthroughoutthe Empire. These ques-
tionsreflectto some extentvariationsin the Roman foot
and the possible adoption of local itinerarymeasures by
the Romans, as in the case of the Gallo-Roman league.
Though regionalitineraryvariationsclearly occurred, at
June
The Gallo-Romanleague's conversionratio
of 1.5 Roman miles means thatthe leuga also
equalled 1,500 passus and 3,000 gradus. The
numerals 1,000, 2,000, and 3,000, describing
linearunitsgreaterthanthe foot,figureprom-
inentlyin later evaluations of the league and
mile, and were at times used in North Amer-
ica. The modernequivalent of the Gallo-Ro-
man league is, followingthe above, 2,222.2
m + 1%.
The breakup of the Roman Empire in west-
ern Europe was accompanied by repeated in-
cursionsof Germanicpeoples, manyof whom
broughtalong their own itinerarymeasures.
In what is today France, the Franks of the
fifthcenturyA.D. introducedthe rast, an iti-
nerary unit widely used by the Germans.
While the rast more properly means a rest
while travelling,or a station,it also was ap-
plied to a certaindistance, and is probablyre-
lated to the stunde mentionedearlier.In much
of present-daynorthernFrance and most of
Belgium,the rast was earlyaccepted as equal
to 2 Gallo-Roman leugae, but in the process
of its adoption its Germanname was lost and
eventuallyreplaced by eitherthe term leuga
or, later and much more commonly,the term
lieue, or French league." As in the case of
the Roman conquest in earlierdays, the Celtic
peoples tenaciously held on to theirown iti-
nerary mensural terminologyafter the Ger-
manic invadershad settledamong them.
There thus arose in westernEurope an iti-
nerary measure whose name and numerical
structure,thoughancient, was modifiedwith
time. First adopted in northernFrance and
Belgium,the lieue laterdiffusedto the rest of
France, England, and Spain. Over the centu-
ries followingFrankish settlementin France
two processes affectingthe originallengthof
the new lieue played a large part in the pro-
least around the end of the second centuryA.D., the
overwhelmingmajorityof classical scholars feel the true
Roman mile was 1,481.5 m, or very nearly that length.
WhereI feelitineraryquantitativevalues representreality
as well as the ideal, I have indicated themwith my esti-
mate of these values' percentageor otherdeviation. The
Romans themselvesrecognized that theirdistances were
not always accuratelydescribed,formanywere indicated
as mpm (milia plus minus); Desjardins, op. cit., footnote
8, Vol. 4, p. 38.
11D'Anville, op. cit., footnote6, pp. 101-10; Dours-
ther,op. cit., footnote2, p. 464; Oskar Viedebantt:"Ras-
ta," Paulys Real-Encyclopddieder Classischen Altertum-
swissenschaft(Zweite Reihe), Vol. 1 (1920), col. 257.
1980 THE LINEAR LEAGUE
liferationof a great many different leagues in
westernEurope, and notablyin France itself.
The firstinvolved two different interpreta-
tionsofthe lieue in termsof its basic subunits,
for the evaluation of the new lieue as twice
the Gallo-Roman leuga also made it equal to
3 Roman miles, or 3,000 passus. The double
equivalency led to the concept of the lieue,
and hence the league, as consistingof either
2 or 3 thousandsof unitsgreaterthanthefoot.
This ambiguitywas furtheraggravatedby the
commonpractice, even in late Roman times,
of confusingthe Roman mile with the Gallo-
Roman leuga, withthe latteroftenmistermed
a mile.
The second factoralteringthe lengthof the
originalFrankishlieue was the political frag-
mentationof westernEurope for some 1,000
yearsfollowingthe fall of Rome. This permit-
ted the developmentof a mosaic of small, lo-
callyautonomousterritories, whose rulershad
the power to establish,maintain,and enforce
mensuralstandardsover theirown, frequently
tiny,domains. Despite effortsat widespread
metricstandardizationby such men as Char-
lemagne,it was not untilthe reemergenceof
centralizedpower on a national scale, thatis,
fromthelate fourteenth to the nineteenthcen-
tury, that uniformmeasures were applied,
even if imperfectly, over extensive areas. By
thattimethe formerRoman and otheritiner-
ary measures had slowly evolved into innu-
merablevariants,and the Frankishlieue was
no exception.
Established,as noted, at 2 leugae or 3 Ro-
man miles, the lieue was thereforeequal to
4,444.5 m + 1%. This lengthremained vir-
tually unchanged, however, only in parts of
northernFrance and Belgium,includingNor-
mandyand the area around Paris. Eventually
this lieue became accepted, at its original
length,as the lieue commune of France.12The
lieue commune used in North America was
also theprototypeforthe later statuteleagues
of France, England, and fora time,Spain, as
well as for the French and English marine
or nautical leagues. While all of these later
12
Paucton, op. cit., footnote5, pp. 789-91; and Vie- Charlemagne had similar problems effectingmetric re-
debantt,op. cit., footnote11, p. 257. In most of northern formsthroughouthis realms.
France and Belgiumthe lieue commune varied less than
0.5% regionally.One may or may not consider it a coin- in Egypt sometimes confused with the schoinos, was
cidence thatthe lieue communeequals, also within0.5%,
l/25thoftheaverage degree(111,132 m) oftheterraqueous league in ancient times, but this connection has not yet
greatcircle.
133
leagues differedin length,they were estab-
lished on the basis of either 2 or 3 (usually
local) miles, or 2 or 3 thousand extra-foot
units; most leagues were legalized as 3 miles
or 3,000 paces of varyinglengths.
An additionalfactoraffectingthe league in
Europe was the Arabs' substantial,and often
dominant,influencein the western Mediter-
ranean area for several centuries duringthe
Middle Ages. Arab militaryexpansion intro-
duced into this region a number of Middle
Eastern measures and metricconcepts, some
of which had been used in parts of the Medi-
terraneanbasin since ancienttimes.
The rapidityand nature of the Arab con-
quests in North Africa and southernEurope
duringthe seventhand eighthcenturiesA.D.
resultedin an Arabic metricsystemthat was
partly composed of non-Arabic metricunits
locally derived fromthe conquered regions.
There was thus littlestandardizationthrough-
out the entirearea underArab control.None-
theless,the Arabs had had theirown itinerary
measures which at least nominallyhad been
standardizedfor some time. For example, the
Arabic mile, like the Roman, was definedas
containing 1,000 double-step paces, called
kathouah. The Arabic mile also officially
equalled either3,000 or 4,000 cubits,however,
dependingon the cubitand the particulararea
and time. In the late eighthand early ninth
centuriesthe Caliphs of Baghdad, Harun-al-
Rashid, and Al-Mamun undertookextensive
metricreforms,includingthe establishmentof
the Arabic mile at 4,000 "black" cubits, but
the reformswere notaccepted in all Arab-con-
trolledterritories.13
The Arabs also employedthe parasang, an
itinerarymeasure of Persian originlong used
in the Middle East. But theparasang, like the
league, had several accepted equivalents. The
parasang of Persia and Arabia equalled 3 Ar-
abic miles, while the ancient parasang of
Egyptand Syriawas definedas 4 local miles.14
These concepts of the Arabic mile as com-
13 The "black" cubit equalled c. 540 mm, makingthe
Arabic mile of Al-Mamunabout 2,160 m (Doursther,op.
cit., footnote2, pp. 114-84, 279). At about thissame time,
14 Doursther,op. cit., footnote2, p. 378. The parasang,
probably connected in some way with the European
been satisfactorilyexamined.
134 ROLAND CHARDON
prising 3,000, and especially 4,000, specific
linear unitslongerthan the foot (e.g. cubit or
pace), and theparasang's similardefinition as
either3 or 4 miles, were transferred to south-
ern Europe with Arab expansion, and incor-
porated into several medieval European met-
ric systems. The concept of the league was
therebyexpanded to include a lengthconsist-
ingof 4 miles, or 4,000 extrapedalsubunits,in
additionto the aforementionedequivalents of
2 and 3 miles,or of 2,000 and 3,000 extrapedal
subunits.
The consequence of all these developments
was thatthe validityof the league as a single
measure of uniform definition and length
throughoutwestern Europe was prettywell
shatteredby thefourteenth century,and prob-
ably much earlier,even if the league was the
most common itinerarymeasure, along with
the mile. If the league's originalpurpose was
to delineate an hour's travel on foot, an esti-
mationwhich seems never to have been fully
discarded, this delineationcould as easily be
satisfiedby a league consistingof two, three,
or even fourmiles,dependingon the definition
of the mile in termsof its subunits.t5The wide
diversityof leagues in western Europe was,
by the 1500s, an unfortunatefact of lifefor a
Europe whose men of learningwerejust start-
ing to develop a relativelyprecise idea of the
world's true dimensions-a development in
which nautical science, and especially celes-
tial navigation,thoughit provided geographic
locations and distances in degrees of latitude
and longitude,played a significant role.
The Linear League in France
The league was documented earliest in
France, the countryin which the firstlieue
was established,and where the greatestnum-
ber of variantsdeveloped. It is also a country
in whicha nationalstatutoryleague was never
established. One or more pre-Roman Gallic
leagues led to the formalGallo-Roman leuga
of 1.5 Roman miles, which was subsequently
transformed into the Frankishlieue (rast) of 2
leugae, 3 Roman miles, 3,000 passus, and
15,000 Roman feet. This lieue became the
lieue communeof France, lateralso knownas
the lieue de terre(land league) and the league
of 25 to the degree of the great circle.16 The
15
Paucton, op. cit., footnote 5, pp. 174-79; and
Doursther,op. cit., footnote2, pp. 209-11, 510.
16
Lexis-Dictionnaire de la Langue Francaise (Paris:
June
conceptionof the lieue commune as compris-
ing 2 leugae and 3 miles or 3,000 paces led to
the creation of three other French leagues
whichwere employed,in additionto the lieue
commune,in NorthAmerica.
One of the new leagues seems to have
evolved froma measure of unknownantiqui-
ty-a royalfootcalled thepied de roi. No one
knows how the lengthof this new foot was
established.Traditionhas it thatCharlemagne
formallydecreed thisfoot,afterthe Caliph of
Baghdad sent him diplomatic gifts, among
them a standardof the royal hashemic cubit
of thatcity,in 801 A.D. If so, both the length
and name of the new French foot directlyre-
flectMiddle Eastern influences,for the pied
de roi, equal to 324.84 mm + 0.01%, is almost
exactly one halfof the Baghdad cubit. On the
otherhand, alternativeoriginsforthe pied de
roi have been suggested, includinga Gallic
foot(320-325 mm) and a Belgic or Drusic foot
(330-335 mm). One thingis certain: the pied
de roi was not determined from Charle-
magne's own corporeal foot.17
Whatever its source, the pied de roi (also
knownas the pied de Paris) formedthe basis
for all subsequent French royal linear, and
most itinerary,measures until well into the
nineteenthcentury.As a result,a new, longer
French league came into use. Whereas the
lieue commune consisted of 3,000 Roman
LibrairieLarousse, 1975),p. 997; d'Anville, op. cit., foot-
note 6, p. 109; Doursther,op. cit., footnote2, p. 210.
17 Doursther,op. cit., footnote2, p. 414. The tradition
is cited in Chambers's Encyclopedia (London: Interna-
tionalLearningSystemsCorp. Ltd., 1973),Vol. 9, p. 178,
in which the royal hashemic cubit is also given as 649
mm. I have not yet foundsure documentaryevidence for
thistradition,whichis not mentionedin any knownAra-
bian source and so has sometimesbeen considered apoc-
ryphal.On the otherhand, this explanationprovides one
of the closest equivalents forthe pied de roil,and is sup-
portedby a historicallink,forHarun-al-Rashidis known
to have sent emissaries with gifts,some of which still
exist today, to Charlemagnein the early ninthcentury.
An equally plausible originfor the pied de roi lies in a
"Gallic" footof about 322-325 mm,as measured on sev-
eral monumentsin southernFrance; thisfootalso appears
veryclose to a Britannicfootas deduced froma late sec-
ond or early thirdcenturyitinerary[cf. below on the En-
glish mile, as well as A. Aures, "Note sur le Systeme
M6triquedes Gaulois," Revue Archeologique, Nouvelle
S6rie, 7e Annee, Vol. 14 (1866), pp. 183-99]. For a Belgic
or Drusic prototypefoot, see Robert Mowat, "Origine
Germanique du Pied de Roi," MWmoiresde la Socihte
Nationale des Antiquairesde France, Vol. 68 (1908), pp.
130-58, in whichMowat also disproves a corporeal basis
forthe pied de roi.
1980 THE LINEAR LEAGUE 135

paces, the new lieue contained 3,000 pas, or to be employedat its originallengthof 4,444.5
Frenchpaces, each of 5 pieds de roi. Known m, but this "sea league" was thereafterre-
as "la grandelieue ordinairede 3,000 pas," I ferredto generallyas the petite lieue marine,
preferto call it the 3,000-pas league for the or littlesea league.19Thus the pre-1635lieue
sake of clarity.18It was only sporadicallyused marine of France usually, though unfortu-
in France, but it became one of the principal natelynot always, means the lieue commune
Frenchstandardsformeasurementofland and of 4,444.5 m; after 1635 this same mensural
distance in North America. This league's unitis oftenknownas the petite lieue marine.
modernequivalentis 4,872.6 m. After this date also, the lieue marine of
A second variationof the lieue commune's France almost exactly assumes its true value
3,000-pace, or 3-mile, equivalence emerged of 5,556.6 m as well as l/2othof a degree.20
from its use as a marine league along the AnotherFrench league employed in North
coasts of Normandy and Flanders. Dating America was one whose originsare obscure,
fromat least the 1400s, this sea league was thoughit was clearlyderivedfromthe concept
called the lieue marine. The historyof sea of the lieue commune as comprising2 Gallo-
leagues in westernEurope is, however, fur- Roman leugae rather than 3 Roman miles.
thercomplicatedbecause at sea the lengthof The league and mile were oftenconfusedwith
leagues was usuallyrelated,in additionto cus- each other duringlate Roman times and this
tomaryland measures, to the circumference confusion,which persistedinto the twentieth
of the earthexpressed in degrees of the great century,was reflectedin the fact that several
circle-a circumference whose real dimension itinerarymeasures, including leagues, were
was not generallyknownuntilabout 1635 and composed of 2 miles-that is, of 2,000 sub-
even 1671. Though the lieue marine was 3 units whose lengthwas greaterthan the foot.
miles long, as was the lieue commune, and One such league was used in North America;
also equal to 4,444.5 m, the lieue marine was it equalled 2,000 toises, each of which mea-
also thoughtto be theoreticallyequal to l/2oth sured 6 pieds de roi. The use of the toise
of the degree of the greatcircle or 5,556.6 m. as an official measure may have begun in
Clearly the discrepancywas substantial,and Charlemagne's reign, and it subsequently
dangerous at sea. As measurementsof the expanded withroyal power in France. Even-
globe became progressivelymore accurate, tually, 1,000 toises came to be considered a
the concept of the sea league of 20 to the de- French "mile," withtwo of these comprising
gree was retained, so that the lieue marine a league. The league of 2,000 toises was
had to be "stretched," with its length in- known by other names, including lieue de
creased proportionately.A reasonably accu- Paris, lieue Parisienne, and petite lieue de
rate measurementof the earth's circumfer- France.21 It also became the officiallieue de
ence was made in 1633-35, and an evaluation
of the lieue marine at 20 to the degree of the 19 Morison, op. cit., footnote 1, pp. 288n, 387.
greatcircle, very close to today's true equiv- 20 The exact value of the lieue
marine became more
alentof5,556.6m, was officially declared. The accurate in later years. Since the earth is a slightly lumpy
lieue marine contained 3 miles of 60 per de- oblate spheroid, the 5,556.6 m represent '/2oth of an av-
gree, so thatthe concept of the 3-mileleague, erage degree evaluation of 111,132 m. Though the pre-
1635 lieue marine usually refers to a unit of 4,444.5 m, in
thoughobviously no longer 3,000 Roman or 1585 the French apparently measured a nautical mile
French paces long, was retainedand applied (mille marin) in terms of a degree for the firsttime, con-
at sea. cluding that this mile was 1,620 m [cf. M. Denoix, "Les
It should be added that after1635, the ma- Problemes de Navigation au D6but des Grandes Decou-
vertes," in Michel Mollat, ed., Le Navire et l'Economie
rine version of the lieue commune continued Maritimedu Nord de l'Europe du Moyen-dgeau XVIIIe
Sikcle (Paris: S.E.V.P.E.N., 1960), pp. 131-42; reference
18
Adrien Favre, Les Origines di Systeme Me'trique on p. 137]. This figure is virtually identical to the mile of
(Paris: Presses Universitairesde France, 1931),p. 28. The 5,000 pieds de roi, or 1,624.2 m; 3 of these miles equal
"grande lieue ordinairede 3,000 pas" should not be con- the 3,000-pas league discussed above. Unfortunately, De-
fusedwithanother"grande lieue" of 2,853 toises (5,560.6 noix's statement is undocumented but, though I find no
m), often shown on bar scales of eighteenth-century other reference to a French measurement in 1585, the
French maps [e.g. N. Bellini, "Carte du Cours de la Ri- elevation of their nautical mile to 1,620 m (yielding a
viere de Saguenay . . , 1744," in Marcel Trudel, Atlas league of 4,860 m) is supported by examination of Cham-
de la Nouvelle-France (Qu6bec: Presses de l'Universit6 plain's reports (see below).
Laval, 1968), p. 108]. 21
Paucton, op. cit., p. 789; Favre, op. cit., p. 28.
136 ROLAND CHARDON June

poste (postal league) of France in the latter Meanwhile, the league had become accepted,
1600s, and was the officialleague in all North by the 1500s, to equal 3 English miles; it was
American French colonies duringthe 1700s. thus modifiedaccordinglyto equal 15,840En-
Though official and represented on many glishfeet,or 5,280 yards-a standardstilllegal
French and other documents dealing with today, but virtuallynever used.24Indeed, the
North America, the lieue de poste of 2,000 Englishland league of 3 statutemileswas rare-
toises was in practicerarelyused on the main- ly employedin NorthAmerica.
land of the continent,but it was used in the The Britishnautical league, however, does
French Antilles. This league's modernequiv- appear on a greatmanymaps of the continent,
alent is 3,898.1 M.22 and the historyof this league parallels thatof
the French lieue marine so closely that both
The Linear League in England should more properly be called the Anglo-
The historyof the league in Englandis quite French sea (marine,nautical) league. Like the
similarto that in France, but with some no- lieue commune, the English sea league was
table exceptions. As in France, there was a about 4.4 km,or 2.4 n.m. (nauticalmiles) long,
syncretionof Celtic, Roman, and Germanic and it, too, was thought to be l/20thof a degree
metrologies. The Britanno-Roman mile of of the great circle.25Of course, both evalua-
1,000 paces (5,000 feet) and the Celtic leuga
(or leig) of 1,500 paces (3,000 steps) formed 33. This mileseems to have been calculated as 1,000paces
the foundations for English itinerarymea- @ ca. 1.6 m, or 5 feet @ ca. 320 mm-very close to the
sures. These units slowly evolved into local pied de roi of 324.8 mm. Harley's analysis of Ogilby's
road segmentssuggeststhatthe English mile of 1675, by
itinerarymeasures afterRoman legions with- "vulgar computation,"was about the same lengthas the
drew fromBritain.The later Anglo-Saxon in- Gallo-Roman leuga; see J. B. Harley, "Biographical
vaders did not introducenew itinerarymea- Note," in John Ogilby, Britannia (London: Printedby
sures; they preferredto adopt (or saw no the Author,1675; reprintedby TheatrumOrbis Terrarum
reason to alter) those of the Britons. Ltd., Amsterdam, 1970), pp. xxi-xxiii. See also Sir
Charles Close, "The Old English Mile," Geographical
There seems to have been as much confu- Journal, Vol. 76 (1930), pp. 338-42; J. B. P. Karslake,
sion between league and mile in England as in "FurtherNotes on the Old EnglishMile," Geographical
France, but in England the mile emerged as Journal, Vol. 77 (1931), p. 359; Wm. Flinders Petrie,
the dominantitineraryunit,perhaps reflecting "The Old English Mile," Proceedings of the Royal So-
of Edinburgh,Vol. 12 (1883-84), pp. 254-66; and G.
closer Germanic ties. The mile/leagueconfu- ciety
B. Grundy,"The Old English Mile and the Gallic Lea-
sion is evidenced by the sharply different gue," Geographical Journal,Vol. 91 (1938), pp. 251-59.
equivalentsgiventhe "English" milesince the A recent article [I. M. Evans, "A CartographicEvalua-
time of Christ.There was what can be called tion of the Old English Mile," Geographical Journal,
the Britanno-Romanmile of ca. 200 A.D., Vol. 141, Part 2 (1975), pp. 259-64] adds littleto the his-
toryof the Englishmile,and is marredby an introductory
whichI estimateas veryclose to 1,600m long; summaryapparentlytaken, withoutcredit, almost ver-
it was apparentlyderivedfroma "Britannic" batim fromKarslake. The "old London mile" of 5,000
foot of about 320 mm. In 1675 A.D., what feetwas 1,524 m and 1,666.67yards long (Doursther,op.
some have called a "customary mile" seems cit., footnote 2, p. 279). The English statute mile, of
course, equals 1,609.344m-almost identicalin lengthto
to have been about the same length as the the Britanno-Romanmile of ca. 200 A.D. The furlongwas
Gallo-Roman leuga. Then there was an "old a land-based linear unit to which Britishfarmerstena-
London mile" of 5,000 feet-a rather local ciously adhered,but it had no exact relationshipto either
mile-which was changed around 1470 A.D. the footof 12 inches or the mile of 5,000 feet(Petrie, op.
to one of 5,280 feet,therebyexactly equalling cit., footnote 23, p. 264); it may however have been re-
lated to the league (cf. footnote4 above).
8 furlongs.This "new" London mile was de- 24 Prior to the 1500s the English league, like that in
clared the statute(i.e. legal) milein 1593A.D., France, had had varying (at least 8 different)lengths
but only slowly became accepted throughout [Ronald E. Zupko, English Weightsand Measures from
England; it finallyacquired statutoryforce Anglo-Saxon Times to the 19th Century(Madison: Uni-
over the entire United Kingdom in 1824.23 versityof WisconsinPress, 1968), p. 106]. Petrie(op. cit.,
Bacon as
footnote23, p. 265) cites Roger thatthe
writing
English league contained two English miles, and that it
22
Doursther,op. cit., footnote2, p. 210. was about as long as the French lieue de 2,000 toises
23
My estimate of the Britanno-Romanmile is derived described above. By 1595, however, the "Lege contey-
froman analysis of the distances given in the Iter Britan- neth iii. Englysshemyles," each mile composed of 8 fur-
niarum(BritishportionoftheAntonineItinerary)as given longs (Zupko, op. cit., p. 99).
in Margary,Roman Roads in Britain, op. cit., pp. 527- 25 In 1574 Bourne identifiedthe
English mile as con-
1980 THE LINEAR LEAGUE 137

tionscould not simultaneouslybe correct,and entlyintroducedinto Spain fromFrance. In

it was not until1635, when RichardNorwood the mid-thirteenth century,King AlfonsoX, a
quite accuratelymeasured the lengthof a de- man much interestedin science and history,
greeof latitudein Englandand in Englishfeet, and probablyalso wishingto reinforceChris-
thatthe Britishnautical or geographicalmile tian (or at least non-Moorish) values within
began to be established very nearly at its his realm, decreed that the Castilian statute
henceforthtraditionalBritish equivalent of league was to comprise, among other units,
l/60thof a degree and 1,854 M.26 This nautical 3,000 pasos or 15,000 Castilian feet. This
mile, today recognized as an international "new" 3-mileleague was called the legua le-
mensuralunit,is now standardizedat 1,852.0 gal, and was employed especially in judicial
m ? 0o. The correspondingnautical league matterspertainingto the Crown.27
contains 5,556.0 m + 0o, and its post-1635 The simultaneoususe of two leagues cre-
historicalvalue is virtuallythe same. ated such disorder,however, that the legua
legal was eventuallyabolished in 1587,leaving
The Linear League in Spain the 4-mile legua comtin as the officialland
In the Middle Ages the Portuguese and league of Castille formost purposes.28During
Spaniards had to fittraditionalitinerarymea- thetimethe legua legal was the statuteleague
sures, definedin humanterms,into the celes- the Spaniards had discovered the New World,
tial navigationthey were developing as a re- foundedmanyof theirmajor settlements,and
sult of their oceanic discoveries in the establishedtheirland policies. So, thoughrel-
fifteenth and sixteenthcenturies.In addition, ativelyshort-livedin Castille itself,the legua
a new culturalelementhad been injectedinto legal of 3 miles, or 3,000 pasos of 5 Castilian
the European concept of the league by Arab feet each, formedthe basis for the Spanish
invaders,and this,added to slow local differ- land league in North America.
entiationover time,resultedin much regional Unfortunately, there was a furthercompli-
metricvariationwithinthe Iberian peninsula. cation in that a different linear unit was also
Further,therewas also some difficulty in re- used to definethe legua legal. This unit was
solvingthe lengthof the land league in Castille the vara (literallya stick, rod, pole, or staff)
itself.This last problemis of special concern of 3 Castilian feet. Thus the legua legal con-
to NorthAmerica. sisted not only of 3,000 pasos of 5 Castilian
In Roman times, and for some centuries feet apiece, but also of 5,000 varas of 3 feet
thereafter,Iberian itinerarydistances were each. Justwhen the vara began to be used,
measuredin miles ratherthanleagues. By the along withthe paso, as the legal basis forthe
eleventh century,probably due to centuries Castilian league is not known, but it appears
of Arab influencesin the peninsula, a 4-mile to have been well before the thirteenthcen-
league had become traditionalin many areas. tury.
This measure became later known in Castille So faras the legua legal was concerned,the
as the legua comdn,and it equalled 4,000pas- substitutionof the vara for the paso in Cas-
sos (pasos), or 20,000 Castilian feet. As the tilian (and Spanish American) league defini-
Spanish Reconquista againsttheMoors gained tion posed no problem in theory, because
momentumin the eleventh and twelfthcen- either way this league was 15,000 Castilian
turiesa "new" league of 3 miles was appar- feetlong. Whatdid make a differencewas that
the officialCastilian vara, known as the vara
sistingof 1,000 paces, or 5,000 English feet. But on the
same page he wrote "that we in-England should alowe 27
Garcia Franco, op. cit., footnote4, pp. 72-75, 134-
.60. mylesto one degree, thatis afterthreemiles to one 35; Bldzquez, op. cit., footnote10, pp. 10-11; Doursther,
leage of our Englishleages, therefore.20. of our English op. cit., footnote2, p. 210; and Paucton, op. cit., footnote
leages shouldaunswereto one degree." [WilliamBourne, 5, p. 165.
A Regimentfor the Sea (London: Thomas Hacket, 1574; 28 Garcia Franco, op. cit., footnote4, pp. 72-75; Bliz-
editedby E. G. R. Taylor and republishedby the Hakluyt quez, op. cit., footnote10, pp. 10-11. Doursther(op. cit.,
Society, Second Series, No. 121, UniversityPress, Cam- footnote2, p. 210) is incorrectwhen he states the legua
bridge, 1963), p. 90]. legal was abolished in 1568. Other leagues, such as the
26 RichardNorwood, The Sea-mans Practice (London: legua espalola, legua de posta, legua de 8,000 varas
George Hurlock, 1637), pp. 5-9. Norwood did not, inci- (used, after1766, forroad-buildingpurposes), and legua
dentally,call his "new" remeasured mile of 6,120 feet de 2,000 varas existed in Spain, but to my knowledge
(1,865.35 m) eithera sea or nautical mile, to differentiate were not used in North America. The Spanish league of
it fromthe "usual" land mile of 5,000 or 5,280 feet. 171/2 per degree of the greatcircle was used, however.
138 ROLAND CHARDON
de Burgos or vara castellana, had two (and
after1568three)supposedlyexactlyequal, but
in fact slightlyunequal, standards; one was
kept in Burgos, anotherin Madrid, and, after
1568, a thirdin Avila. The total differencebe-
tween these varas was less than 2%, but the
discrepancy affected measures in North
America because the league, definedin both
varas and pasos in both Spain and New Spain
in the early sixteenthcentury,was later iden-
tifiedsimplyin varas.29
Though the legua legal was to be the only
legal land league employedin colonial Spanish
America, many people in practice outlined
distances in the more familiarlegua comudn,
at least throughoutthe 1500s. Also, official
documentssometimesprovidedinformation in
terms of the legua comudn,as Edwards, for
example, points out for the Relaciones Geo-
grd'ficasof Yucatan in 1581.30 Nevertheless,
the legua legal is the league generallyused in
land surveyingand most documentsconcern-
ing Spanish colonial North America.
It is thusnot possible to give precise equiv-
alents of the legua legal valid for the entire
Spanish colonial period, but we can give its
range withsome confidence.The legua legal
of 3 miles and 5,000 varas varied between
4,175.0 and 4,239.8 m. The legua comuinof 4
miles, 4,000 pasos, 20,000 feet, and 6,666.67
varas, was 5,572.7 m long.3t
29
Garcia Franco, op. cit., footnote 4, pp. 68, 75-76;
Vdzquez Queipo, op. cit., footnote 6, Vol. 1, pp. 282-83;
Doursther, op. cit., footnote 2, pp. 567-68. Even as late
as 1886, the vara de Burgos and the vara de Madrid
equalled 835.905 and 843.0 mm respectively (Instituto
Geogrdfico y Estadistico, op. cit., footnote 5, pp. 16, 31).
See also Manuel Carrera Stampa, "The Evolution of
Weights and Measures in New Spain," Hispanic Ameri-
can Historical Review, Vol. 29 (1949), pp. 2-24.
30 Clinton Edwards, "Mapping by Questionnaire: An
Early Spanish Attempt to Determine New World Geo-
graphical Positions," Imago Mundi, Vol. 23 (1969), pp.
26-27. See also Roland Chardon, "A Quantitative Deter-
mination of a Second Linear League Used in New
Spain," Professional Geographer, Vol. 32 (1980) (forth-
coming).
31 Doursther, op. cit., footnote 2, pp. 210, 567-68,
though his values are slightly smaller than mine, which
are based on the vara of 835.9 mm (Instituto Geogrdfico
y Estadistico, op. cit., footnote 5, passim.). Actually, the
legua comrnnwas also considered equal to 6,600 varas or
19,800 Castilian feet (Doursther, op. cit., footnote 2, p.
210), but this value (equal to 5,516.94 m) was used much
less frequently than the one above. While differences in
the legua legal are, as we shall see, important in North
America, the legua comtin can, ironically enough, be
June
Much has been writtenabout the geograph-
ical, also often called nautical, leagues em-
ployed by the Portuguese and Spaniards be-
tween the late 1400s and early 1800s.32These
leagues were defined in terms of a certain
numberto the degree of the terraqueousgreat
circle, so thatnavigatorson the highseas, us-
ing celestial navigationas guidance, could es-
timate their positions and marine distances
more accurately, and in familiarunits. Here
again, however, the distinctions between
types of leagues were not always clear. For
example, the land league traditionallycon-
tained 3 miles, while the sea league had 4
miles.33But the Anglo-Frenchmarineleague
of 20 to the degree was composed of 3
miles,whilethe legua comdin,definitely a land
league, contained4 miles. So it is perhapsbest
to use the term"geographical" forthe league
defined in the context of the degree, even
thoughthistypeofleague was mostfrequently
applied in maritimeor cartographicsituations.
Whetherone believes in anthropometric or
geodetic originsof ancientitinerarymeasures,
in the 1400sand 1500sthe attemptsto combine
customaryland measures with the sexagesi-
mal earth grid system of degrees of latitude
and longitudewere fumblingto say the least.
The accurate resolution of the problem of
how manyleagues thereshould be to a degree
was not helped by Columbus' repeated fif-
teenthcenturystatementsthattherewere 142/3
leagues per degree of latitude,a value he used
to enhance his pre-1492transoceanicpropos-
thoughtof as virtuallyidentical in lengthto the Anglo-
French marineleague, or 5,556.6 m.
32 Among the best summariesare: Garcia Franco, op.
cit., footnote4; D'Avezac, "Les Voyages d'Am6ric Ves-
puce au Compte de l'Espagne, et les Mesures Itineraires
Employ6espar les Marins Espagnols et Portugaisdes XVe
et XVIe Siecles . . . ," Bulletin de la Soci&te' de Ge'ogra-
phie (Paris), 4e Serie, Vol. 16 (1858), pp. 258-92; Luis
Mendonga de Albuquerque, 0 Livro de Marinharia de
Andre'Pires (Lisbon: Juntade Investigac6es do Ultramar,
1963), pp. 111-18; and Hermann Wagner, "Zur Ge-
schichteder Seemeile," Annalen der Hydrographieund
MaritimenMeteorologie, Vol. 41(1913), pp. 393-413 and
441-50. For a briefand valuable, thoughundocumented,
review of the developmentof the nautical mile in English
see Alton B. Moody, "Early Units of Measurementand
the Nautical Mile," Journal of the Instituteof Naviga-
tion, Vol. 5 (1952), pp. 262-70.
33 Garcia Franco, op. cit., footnote4, p. 74; see also
Peter MartyrDe Orbe Novo (Alcalk: Michaele de Eguia,
1530; republishedin facsimileby AkademischeDruck-und
Verlagsanstalt, Graz, Austria, 1966), 5th Decade, 7th
Chapter,fol. 78 verso (p. 190 of the 1966 edition).
1980 THE LINEAR LEAGUE 139

als, since thisleague portrayedthe earthas a
thirdsmaller than it really was.34 Columbus
himself,of course, knew betterthan to apply
thisleague in his own navigation,but his state-
ments reinforcedthe concept of a smaller-
than-actualearth and delayed the findingof
the truevalue of the degree, definedby com-
monlyemployedlinearor itineraryunits.
This problemwas solved in the seventeenth
century,but the confusionconcerningthe di-
mensions of various leagues continued to
plague navigatorsand cartographersfor more
than a century after Columbus landed in
America. Where the French and English in-
creased the number of feet in their mile or
league to have each fit, respectively,as 60
miles or 20 leagues to the true degree of lati-
tude, the Portuguese and Spaniards both in-
creased the numberof subunitsto each "geo-
graphical" league and increased the number
of leagues themselves, so that these would
also fitinto theirslowly emergingrealization
of the truelengthof a degree. Thus we findin
various documents referencesto leagues of
15, 155I8, 162/3, 171/2, 18, 19, and 222/9, and
eventually20 to the degree of latitude(or lon-
gitudealong the equator). But so faras North
America is concerned,the league of 162/3and
171/2 per degree were virtuallythe only ones
applied thereby the Spaniards, and by thelate
1500s only the latter,usually called the legua
geogrd'fica, was employed for most nautical
and cartographicpurposes.35
The league of 162/3per degree was widely
used only in the 1400s and early 1500s. Its
generallyaccepted immediatederivationis a
division,by 4 miles to the league, of the 662/3
Arabic miles considered to equal one degree,
34 Columbus arrived at his league, which actually
should be 14'/6 per degree, by dividing562/3 Arab miles league would equal 6,680 m, and these multipliedby 162/3
to the degree, as measuredby orderof Caliph Al-Mamun give a latitudinaldegree 111,333.6 m, an incrediblyac-
in the 9th century,by the 4 Roman miles commonlyas- curate (201 m, or 0.18% too large) measurement!
signed to the nautical league by many westernMediter-
as measured by Arab scientists in the thir-
teenthcentury.36This league may also have
been derived fromPtolemy's estimateof the
global circumference at 180,000stades. These,
divided by 10 Roman stades to the mile, re-
sult in 18,000Roman miles which,divided by
3 milesper league, yield6,000 leagues; in turn,
these divided by 360? equal 162/3 per degree.37
Anothersuggestedoriginis Ptolemy's 500 sta-
des per degree divided by 7.5 "great" or
"Asiatic" stades per mile, which also yield
162/3leagues (i.e. 662/3
miles dividedby 4 miles
per league).38
It has also been recentlysuggestedthatthis
league may have originated with a "mile"
equal to the Gallo-Roman leuga of 1.5 Roman
miles-a result of the confusinginterchange-
abilityof the term leuga with "mile," cited
above.39 Since there are 50 leugae to a de-
gree of latitude,these 50 divided by 3 such
"miles" (of 2,222.2 m each) per league equal
162/3leagues per degree. This rathercircular
explanation would establish the league at its
correctlengthwithrespect to the average de-
gree of latitude,but, while the relationshipof
50 miles per degree is mentionedin Portu-
guese and Spanish sources of the fifteenth and
sixteenthcenturies,I have foundno evidence
of thattimelinkingthe Gallo-Roman leuga to
the league of 162/3per degree.40The same is
36
Garcia Franco, op. cit., footnote4, pp. 59-60; un-
fortunately we do not know what kindof miles these sci-
entists used, and though it was generallyassumed that
these miles were the same as Roman miles, this is far
fromcertain(cf. Keuning, op. cit., footnote35, p. 30), if
we mean Roman miles of 1,481.5 m. Under such an as-
sumption,each league would equal 5,926.0 m, but 162/3of
these leagues give a latitudinaldegree only 98,766.9 m,
about 11% short of its true average value. If, however,
we used Blkzquez' (op. cit., footnote 10, pp. 11-12)
Ibero-Roman(i.e. Drusic) mileof 1,670m, thena nautical
37 E. G. R. Taylor, "The Measure of a Degree," in E.

ranean navigators,and especially the Portuguese.For an G. R. Taylor,ed., A BriefSumme of Geographie byRog-

examinationof Columbus' use of thisleague, in whichhe er Barlow (London: The HakluytSociety, Second Series,
is treatedmore kindlythan by some other scholars, see No. 69, 1932), pp. 186-87. But this explanation simply
George E. Nunn, The Geographical Conceptions of Co- revertsto the lieue commune of 4,444.5 m as the basis
lumbus,AmericanGeographicalSociety Research Series, forthis league, givinga latitudinaldegree only 74,075.15
14 (New York: American Geographical Society, 1924), m, 33% shortof its actual value.
pp. 1-30. 38 Garcia Franco, op. cit., footnote4, p. 59; Keuning,
35 Garcia Franco, op. cit., footnote4, pp. 42-86 passim; op. cit., footnote35, pp. 29-30; Doursther,op. cit., foot-
see also J. Keuning,"Anschauungenuiberdie Grosse der note 2, pp. 279-80.
Erde im Zeitalterder Entdeckungund ihre Beziehungen 39 Garcia Franco, op. cit., footnote4, pp. 59-60. The
zu den alteren Gradmessungen," Comptes Rendus du "mile" referredto in this case is 2,222.2 m long, the Ro-
Congres Internationalde Geographie Amsterdam 1938 man mile being 1,481.5 m.
(Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1938), Vol. 2, pp. 25-32. 40 A. Teixeira da Mota, "Bartolomeu Dias e o Valor do
140 ROLAND CHARDON June

trueforthisleague's originas being composed seaman and explorerthanChamplain,forhigh

of 4 Drusic miles,whichalso give it its correct seas navigationup to at least 1632.43It also
geodetic lengthin itineraryterms.41 Nonethe- altered the Italian mile so that this last was
less, all these hypotheses argue for a single often considered as I/70th,rather than l/60thor
ultimatesource forthisleague, probablyin the l/75th,of a degree.44This league, along with
Middle East-easternMediterraneanarea some the Anglo-Frenchof 20 and the Dutch of 15
time beforethe time of Christ.Used only oc- per degree, was representedon the scales of
casionally in North America, the league of a verylarge numberof non-Hispanicmaps of
162/3 to the degree, though it may sometimes parts or all of colonial NorthAmerica and the
referto a distance of 4.4 or 5.9 km, and even world.
to 5.5727 km ifone assumes it to be the legua Despite this broad acceptance, the origins
comun, should equal 6,666.7 m + 0.2%, ifde- of the league of 171/2 per degree are not clear.
finedgeodetically,or as 3 leugae, or 4 Drusic No one seems to knowjust how it came to be
miles. established,nor why it replaced the league of
If the league of 162/3 per degree has too 162/3to the degree, and at least one contem-
manyapparentorigins,the league of 171/2 has porarywritersaw no sense in using it at all.45
too few that are definitelydocumented. This The most logical explanationis thatit was de-
league seems to have been used firstin the rived directlyfromEratosthenes' calculation
mid-fifteenth century, and recorded by the of the degree at 700 stadia which, divided by
Portuguesebetween 1494and 1502. It was em- 10 sea stadia per mile, yield 70 Roman miles
ployed more and more frequentlythereafter and (these divided by 4) 171/2leagues. But
by Portugueseand Spaniards. Duringtheearly thereis some question as to whichcame first:
part of the sixteenthcenturyit was used to- the league of 17? or the Roman mile of 70 per
getherwiththe league of 162/3 per degree, but degree. Wagnerfeels the mile came first,but
in 1528,aftera controversyover the lengthof his documentaryevidence suggestsotherwise,
a degree to decide who, according to the and he is uncertainabout his conclusions; so
Treaty of Tordesillas, should own the spice- is Garcia Franco, who cites several different
rich Moluccas, the league of 17?2 per degree mile equivalents for this league in sixteenth-
became the more or less "official" league of centurysources.46
Spain. It eventuallydisplaced the league of
162/3per degree completely,and continuedas 43 Sieur de Champlain, "Traitte de la Marine et du De-

Spain's legua geogrdficauntil it in turnwas voir d'un Bon Marinier," in C. H. Laverdiere, ed.,
Oeuvres de Champlain, 2nd ed. (Quebec: UniversiteLav-
replaced by the oft-calledlegua maritimaof al, 1870), Vol. 5 (last section), pp. 22, 45. The Traittewas
20 to the degree, in the eighteenthcentury.42 publishedin 1632.
The influenceof Spanish and Portuguese 44 Keuning,op. cit., footnote35, p. 32. The Italian mile

maritimeexploits was such thatthe league of of 60, and the Roman of 75, to the degree were more
17?2 per degree was accorded much prestige generally utilizeduntilthe mid-16thcentury(Garcia Fran-
co, op. cit., footnote4, pp. 195-96).
throughoutthe i500s, and even the 1600s. It 45 Garcia Franco (op. cit., footnote4, pp. 47-58) and
was adopted, for example, by many French A. Fontourade Costa A Marinhariados Descobrimentos,
mariners, including no less an experienced 2nd edition(Lisbon: Divisao de Publicac6es e Biblioteca,
Agencia Geral das Col6nias, 1939), pp. 210-16) examine
the question closely, as does Wagner (op. cit., footnote
Grau Terrestre," Actas do Congresso Internacional de 32, pp. 443-45), but none comes to any special conclu-
Hist6ria dos Descobrimentos (Lisbon: Comissdo Execu- sion. Peter Martyr(op. cit., footnote33, fol. 78 verso)
tiva das Comemorac6es do V Centendrioda Morte do writesin helplessness: "Vnde, qua figantingeniumin his
InfanteD. Henrique, 1961), Vol. 2, p. 301. computationibusnon intelligo.Gradum prisci philosophi
41 See footnote36 above, and Garcia Franco, op. cit., sexaginta milliaribusItalis, quae mille passus dimensos
footnote4, p. 59. includant singula, constare volunt. Leucam isti dicunt
42 Wagner,op. cit., footnote32, p. 444; A. Fontoura da milliariaex illis continerequattuormari, terravero tria.
Costa, "La Lieue Marine des Portugaisaux XVe et XVIe Si computationemleucarumsumpserimus,nautarumHis-
Siecles," Comptes Rendus du Congres Internationalde panoru more, quindecimcontinetquisque gradus leucas:
Geographie Amsterdam1938 (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1938), ipsi vero contraomniuopinionem,aiuntgradumcontinere
Vol. 2, pp. 3-12; Teixeira da Mota, op. cit., footnote leucas septemdecimcum dimidia. Intelligantipsi se, quia
40, pp. 300, 309; and Garcia Franco, op. cit., footnote illos ego non intelligo."
4, pp. 48, 202. The equivalent of 171/2 leagues per de- 46 Wagner,op. cit., footnote32, p. 445, says: "Ich be-

gree is firstofficiallyrecorded in the sale of the Moluc- merkeaber ausdriicklich,dass die Frage der alterenEnt-
cas by Spain to Portugal, at Zaragoza, October, 1528 wicklungder spanischen Seemeile noch wenig aufgeklart
(Garcia Franco, op. cit., footnote4, p. 48). ist." Garcia Franco, op. cit., footnote4, pp. 53-54.
1980 THE LINEAR LEAGUE
In view oftheseuncertainties,as well as the
use of conflicting and confusingclassical and
latermetricterms,and the lack of documents
linking ancient measures with this league,
much of its historymust for the momentre-
mainin therealmofintelligent speculationand
conjecture.One provocativesuggestionis that
theleague of 17? per degreewas derivedfrom
theconversionof the geographicalmile of one
minuteof the great circle (i.e. one nautical
mile of 1,852m) to a longitudinalmile specif-
ically designedforapplicationat the latitudes
of the predominantly east-westtrendingMed-
iterraneanSea.47 Garcia Franco, who empha-
sizes thatthisis only a hypothesis,states that
the "equator" of virtuallyall classical and
medieval maps in Europe was the parallel of
Rhodes-a line whichmoreor less dividedthe
known classical world in half. This parallel,
passing throughthe island's major port at
roughly36.5? N Latitude, reflectedthe strong
influenceof Rhodian precepts in Mediterra-
nean navigationand maritimelaw, in much
the same way thatthe presentPrimeMeridian
reflectstoday the Britishmaritimeprimacyof
thenineteenthcentury.The parallelof Rhodes
was a usefulmedian line fromwhich to draw
marinemaps of the Mediterraneanarea since
it was, as Garcia Franco puts it, the "axis of
navigators" (eJe de navigantes) of that sea,
and linear distances identifiedalong this line
could adequately be applied to the entire
waterbody.
Garcia Franco suggests that not only were
the dimensionsof the geographical mile and
its decimal subdivisions(e.g. the Attic stade
and Egyptiandigit)knownto the ancients,but
that the resultantitinerarydimensions were
transferredand applied to the longitudinal
orientationof the Mediterraneansea for itin-
erarypurposes,simplyby multiplying thegeo-
graphicalmile (or league) by the cosine of the
parallel of Rhodes. Thus, one minuteof the
arc of the great circle, or one minuteof lon-
gitude at the equator (1,852.0 m), multiplied
by 0.80 (i.e. cos 36.5?), would provide Medi-
terraneannavigatorswithan accurate nautical
mile for theirpurposes, in a body of water
orientedeast to west. By this procedure the
ancientRoman mile, today accepted at about
1,481.5m, is roughlyequal to 1,852.0 m times
cos 36.5?. The true result is 1,488.74 m, but
47 Garcia Franco, op. cit., footnote4, pp. 54-56.
141
this is certainlyvery close to the accepted
Roman mile.
If one accepts Eratosthenes' evaluation of
a degree of latitudeat 700 stades and assumes
that 8 stades equal a Roman mile, then the
latitudinal degree comprises 87.5 Roman
miles; these, divided by 4 miles to the sea
league, provide 21.875 leagues per latitudinal
degree. ApplyingGarcia Franco's hypothesis,
21.875 multipliedby cos 36.5? equals 17.5
leagues per longitudinaldegree at the parallel
of Rhodes. It was only after the Spaniards
crossed the equator in theirworldwideexplo-
rations that their legua geogrdfica, initially
designed for Mediterraneanmaritimepurpos-
es (as were the definitionsof longitude and
latitudeas lengthand breadthrespectively-a
traditionstill maintainedtoday), was used on
a global scale, even thoughit did not fitinto
any trulygeodetic system.48
The difficultiesin fully accepting Garcia
Franco's imaginativeand quite possibly valid
hypothesisare that there are no known doc-
uments supportingit, and that the lengthof
the stade used by Eratosthenes in his calcu-
lationis open to question. It seems certainthat
this stade was not one of 185.2 m, as it would
have to be to equal Pithof a Roman mile, and
some have gone so faras to denytheexistence
of any "stade of Eratosthenes," saying that
his, like those of Posidonius and Ptolemy,was
"entirely manufactured" and "imaginary."49
There are, however, otherpossible solutions
to the "Eratosthenean stade" problem, but
this is not the place to examine them.50
Regardless of its originsand evolution,the
legua geogrdfica of 17?2 to the degree was
48
Garcia Franco, op. cit., footnote4, pp. 54-56.
49 Jacob Skop, "The Stade of the Ancient Greeks,"
Surveyingand Mapping, Vol. 10 (1950), pp. 51-52. Sim-
ilarly,the primacyof Rhodes in classical maritimelaw
has been challenged[RobertD. Benedict, "The Historical
Position of Rhodian Law," Yale Law Journal, Vol. 18,
(1909), pp. 223-42]. But even ifthese criticismswere val-
id, an importantpointto be made is that,ifthe Spaniards
believed Garcia Franco's assumptions,as well they may
have, theycould have establishedtheirlegua geogrdifica
accordingly.
50 A briefsummaryis in Aubrey Diller, "The Ancient
Measurementof the Earth," Isis, Vol. 40, (1949), pp. 6-
9. For a much fullerdiscussion see Oskar Viedebantt,
"Eratosthenes, Hipparchos, Poseidonios-Ein Beitrag
zur Geschichtedes Erdmessungsproblemsim Altertum,"
Klio, Vol. 14 (1914), pp. 207-56; and 0. Viedebantt,
"Poseidonios, Marinos, Ptolemaios-Ein weiterer Bei-
tragzur Geschichte des Erdmessungsproblemsim Alter-
tum," Klio, Vol. 16 (1919), pp. 94-108.
142 ROLAND CHARDON
real enough to be used for centuries. Once
again, its perceived length varied. First, it
contained 4 Roman miles, and it was erro-
neously believed that there were 171/2such
leagues to a degree. As such, thisleague, like
thatof 162/3 per degree, equalled 5,926.0 m-
a value also undoubtedlymeant for much of
the navigation during the 1400s and 1500s.
This evaluation of the league (i.e. at 5,926.0
m), multipliedby 17?2, gives the latitudinal
degree 103,705m, only 6.7% shortof its true
value, and clearly representeda substantial
improvementfor navigationalaccuracy. Sec-
ond, if this league were based on 4 Spanish,
as opposed to Roman, miles, then the league
of 171/2per degree equalled 5,572.8 m-the
same as the leagua comuin.5' If so, then 17?2
of these leagues yield 97,510 m per degree,
12.25% shortof its actual value. In bothcases,
theleague of 171/2was moreaccurate thanthat
of 162/3per degree, especially if Roman miles
were used, and may have gained practicalac-
ceptance on thisscore alone. Geodeticallyde-
fined,however,as it was in the late 1600s and
early 1700s, the league of 17?2 per degree
equalled 6,350.4 M.52
The NorthEuropean "Leagues"
In continentalnorthernEurope, the word
"league" was not officiallyused per se, and
had not been part of the local nomenclature.
In fact, in most of northern Europe, one
should not really speak of any league as a
unit of length,but for some years the north
European "miles" were oftentransliterated as
leagues in much western European writing
and on many maps. Of course, both "mile"
and "league" were, as linear concepts, intro-
duced to north European peoples from the
south or west, forthereis a good deal of evi-
dence thatthese peoples used temporal-or at
least nonlinear-itineraryconcepts exclusive-
ly at the timesof the Roman conquests.53And
51
One Spanish mileequals 1,393.2m (i.e. 5,000 Spanish
feetof 278.64 mm each).
52 This
value is very close to one of the values given
the Middle Eastern parasang, sometimesconfused with
the Egyptian schoinos (which I happen to believe to be
the originof the sea league of 4 miles), and consideredto
be around6,393 m (Viedebantt,"Eratosthenes," op. cit.,
pp. 246, 249).
53 Such as the stunde and rast mentionedabove, but
also including,forexample, a day's journey; thislast was
used by the Norse explorersto America in the tenthand
eleventh centuries. Another example is the kenning,a
June
so it may be that the acceptance of itinerary
concepts utilizing precise linear units mea-
sured on the ground may have been accom-
panied by confusionbetween mile and league,
aside fromthe persistentidea that the league
was about an hour's walk.
In any case, as noted, the Germanicequiv-
alent of "mile" was, fromabout the fifthcen-
turyand quite possibly earlier, expanded to
mean "league." Furtherevidence may be cit-
ed. The Dutch "league" was definedas either
20,000 Amsterdamor 20,000 Rhine feet, but
despite its obvious connectionwiththe legua
comun of Castille, neithermeasure was called
a league-the termwas myl(Flemish) or mijl
(Dutch).54In similarfashion,the Danes estab-
lishedtheirmii as consistingof 24,000 Danish
feet, a measure also used in 1840 in Prussia,
Holstein, Hamburg,and adjoiningcoastal dis-
tricts,but where it was called the meile. In
Sweden the mil equalled 36,000 Swedish feet,
whereas in Bavaria and Switzerlandthe meile
was equal to 2 stunden.Clearly,in these parts
of Europe therewas littleRoman legacy so far
as itinerarymeasures were concerned; even
the mile was no longer 1,000 of anything!
There remains the Dutch-German myl or
meile. This was littleused in NorthAmerica,
but, along withthe Spanish league of 171/2 and
the Anglo-Frenchleague of 20 per degree, is
widelyrepresentedon the scales of many co-
lonial maps. The Dutch myl (there virtually
never was a trulyGerman Seemeile) was sup-
posedly equal to 15 to the degree, based on
the evaluation of a degree at 60 Italian miles
divided by 4 miles per sea league.55
The myl of 15 per degree has a very com-
plicated historywhich is brieflysummarized
by Wagner.56This mylwas apparentlyinitially
established, in the 15thcentury,as a myl of
18,930 formerAmsterdamfeet (5,358 m) but
was changed successively to one of 20,000
Amsterdamfeet(5,662.1 m, only slightlylong-
er thanthe Spanish legua comtin), then20,000
Rhenishfeet (6,277.1 m), and 22,800 Rhenish
feet,or 7,155 m (thislast theresultof Snellius'
measure still in use in seafaringin the sixteenthcentury
in the North Sea area; the kenning was definedas the
distance which could be seen on a very clear day, or
around 20-21 miles (about 7 leagues).
54 All equivalents in this section are derived from
Doursther,op. cit., footnote2, pp. 209-11.
55 Wagner,op. cit., footnote32, pp. 446-49.
56
Wagner,op. cit., footnote32, pp. 446-49.
 1980 THE LINEAR LEAGUE
measurementof thelatitudinaldegreeas 1,900
Rhenish rods in 1615).57 All these measures
were thoughtto be simultaneouslyequal to 15
to the degree of latitude,with the myl being
"stretched,"as had the Anglo-Frenchleague,
to fitthe emergingrealityof the lengthof the
degree. The earliestmeasure was about 28%,
and the one based on Snellius only about 3%,
too shortof the true latitudinaldegree. The
finaland correctevaluation of the myl of 15
per averagedegreewas 7,408.8 m, determined
in the early eighteenthcentury,but shortly
thereafter theDutch, like the Spaniards, aban-
doned theirmyl of 15 per degree in favor of
a myl(league) of 20 to the degree.58
Summaryof the Linear League in Europe
The foregoingdiscussion of the European
league portrays a disconcerting picture of
complexityand chaos, but that was the situ-
ation duringthe time leagues were employed
as itinerarymeasures duringthe European co-
lonial period in North America. For our pur-
poses here the measures of pertinence to
NorthAmerica are summarized,and include
two equivalents for the Russian werst sup-
plied by Doursther(Table 1). Though I have
carriedthe equivalents to the fourthdecimal
point,it should be stressedthatthisprecision
is deceptivein thatit representsin most cases
only "official" or theoreticalequivalents.
LAND IN
THE LINEAR LEAGUE
NORTH AMERICA
Of the measures discussed, five leagues
were fairlywidely used in North America:
threeFrench and two Spanish. Two of these
leagues-one French and one Spanish-each
had slightlylarger variants. While it is true
that other leagues and equivalent units were
sometimesused by the French and Spaniards
themselves,as also by the Dutch (New York-
New Jersey),Swedes (Delaware Valley), Rus-
sians (northwestern North America), and
Danes (VirginIslands), these other measures
were of such localized and temporaryinflu-
ence thattheyare not examined furtherhere.
They are, however,of some importancein ca-
dastralsurveysand a few explorationreports.
Since the dominantpowers in NorthAmerica
57 Doursther,op. cit., footnote2, p. 210.
58
Wagner, op. cit., footnote32, pp. 446-49; Moody, Wiley & Sons, 1957), p. 180. The depictionof an English
op. cit., footnote32, p. 266; Doursther,op. cit., footnote land league of 2.84 English statutemiles (4,570.5 m) on
2, p. 210.
143
were England, France, and Spain, the land
leagues withwhichwe are concernedhereare:
the English league (seldom used); the French
lieue commune,lieue de 3,000 pas (along with
a slightvariantdescribedbelow), and lieue de
poste; and the Castilian legua legal (with
another version of it which sometimes went
by the name of the "old" league of Burgos;
see below), and the legua comuin(Table 1).
The Englishland league seems to have been
rarelyapplied in NorthAmerica. I have found
only one referenceto it in my research, and
that appears to have involved a transference
fromSpanish land grantmeasures to those of
the United States in the early 1800s.59From
the time of earliest English settlementin the
New World, the basic unitsgenerallyused to
describe distances and land grantboundaries
were the English statute mile or, for many
areal purposes, the acre. The VirginiaCom-
pany in 1606, for example, laid out its pro-
posed settlementson the basis of 100-mile
square districts.60I have seen no mentionof
Englishland leagues in thiscontext.It may be
that these were used to describe early land
explorationsin parts of Canada or elsewhere
in North America. But if the English land
league was applied, it had alreadybeen clearly
and preciselydefinedas 3 Englishstatutemiles
of 5,280 English feet apiece, long before any
serious English settlementor administration
in the New World. The United States adopted
English and the internationaldecimal metric
measures, also recognizingFrench and Span-
ish metricunitsin those areas whereprevious
settlementmade this advisable. But in new
cadastral surveys withinthe United States,
measures were made in miles, chains (@ 66
feet,or 80 to the mile), and links (@ 7.92 En-
glish inches, or 100 to the chain).6'
59 The grant, later disallowed by the U.S. Supreme
Court, was in southeasternFlorida and involved a tract
four leagues square, or "a square of land 12 English
miles"; however,the tracthad been grantedby the Span-
iards duringtheperiodoftheirpossession of Florida [U.S.
v. JosephDelespine, 15 Peters, 320, 334 (1941)].
60 Amelia C. Ford, Colonial Precedents of our National
Land System as it Existed in 1880, Bulletin of the Uni-
versityof WisconsinNo. 352, HistorySeries, Vol. 2, No.
2 (Madison: Universityof WisconsinPress, 1910; reprint-
ed by PorcupinePress, Inc., Philadelphia, 1976), passim;
referenceon p. 10.
61 Charles Breed, Surveying,2nd ed. (New York: John
some Canadian maps is suggested by Heidenreich (op.
144 ROLAND CHARDON June

TABLE 1.-SELECTED EUROPEAN LINEAR MEASURES AND THEIR MODERN EQuIVALENTSa

Modem equivalents
English
Basis Nautical statute
Land league, or "mile" (local linear unit) Kilometers miles miles

AncientGaul-lev, le, leig 3,000 local steps? 2.3380- 1.2624- 1.4528-

2.4750 1.3364 1.5380
Roman Gaul-leuga 3,000 gradus @ 2.5 feet or 2.2222 1.2000 1.3808
1,500passus @ 5 feet
France-lieue commune 3,000 passus @ 5 feet or 4.4445 2.4000 2.7617
3 millia or 2 leugae
France-lieue de 3,000 pas 3,000 pas @ 5 pieds de roi 4.8726 2.6310 3.0277
France-lieue marine 1 lieue commune or 3 millia 4.4445 2.4000 2.7617
(pre-1635)
France-lieue marine 20 per degree 5.5566 3.0000 3.4527
(post-1635)
France-petite lieue marine 1 lieue commune 4.4445 2.4000 2.7617
France-lieue de poste 2,000 toises @ 6 pieds de 3.8981 2.1048 2.4222
roi
England-statute league 3 statutemiles @ 5,280 4.8280 2.6069 3.0000
feet
England-nautical league 1 lieue commune or 3 millia 4.4445 2.4000 2.7617
(pre-1635)
England-nautical league 20 per degree 5.5566 3.0000 3.4527
(post-1635)
Spain-Castilian legua legal 3,000 pasos @ 5 feet or 4.1750 2.2543 2.5942
5,000 varas @ 3 feet
Spain-Castilian legua legal 3,000 pasos @ 5 feet or 4.2398 2.2893 2.6345
("old" league of Burgos) 5,000 varas @ 3 feet
Spain-legua comlin 4,000 pasos @ 5 feet or 5.5727 3.0090 3.4627
6,666.7 varas @ 3 feet
Spain-"legua ndutica" 4 millia @ 1,481.5 m 5.9260 3.1998 3.6822
Spain-legua de 162/3
por grado 162/3per degree 6.6667 3.5997 4.1425
Spain-legua geogrdfica 171/2per degree 6.3504 3.4289 3.9460
Spain-legua maritima 20 per degree 5.5566 3.0000 3.4527
Holland-myl 18,930Amsterdamfeet 5.3580 2.8931 3.3293
20,000 Amsterdamfeet 5.6621 3.0573 3.5183
20,000 Rhenishfeet 6.2771 3.3894 3.9005
22,800 Rhenishfeet 7.1550 3.8634 4.4446
15 per degree 7.4088 4.0000 4.6036
20 per degree 5.5566 3.0000 3.4527
Denmark-miil 24,000 feet 7.5325 4.0672 4.6806
Prussia, Hamburg-meile 24,000 Prussian feet 7.5325 4.0672 4.6806
Sweden-mil 36,000 Swedish feet 10.6872 5.7706 6.6408
Russia-werst (pre-1826) 1,500 archines @ 718 mm 1.0770 0.5815 0.6692
Russia-werst (post-1826) 1,500 archines@ 711.2 mm 1.0668 0.5760 0.6629
This table is intendedas a summaryguide of the measures described in the text; the equivalents and dates, as noted in the text,
a

may vary considerablyfromthose identifiedin this table.

The French Land Leagues in NorthAmerica ed in the leagues used in NorthAmerica. The
The French land league underwentnumer- firstto be employed was the lieue commune
ous changes in France, and these were reflect- of 4,444.5 m. This league, it will be remem-
bered, was usually identical in lengthto the
cit., footnote 1, p. 9), but his statementand evaluation
lieue marine prior to 1635, even though the
are undocumented,and I knowof no league ofthatlength; lieue marine was incorrectlyassumed to be
perhaps the lieue commune (4,444.5 m) is meant. equal to '/20thof a degree. The lieue commune
 1980 THE LINEAR LEAGUE
was thereforealso equal to the petite lieue
marine, since this was the name given, after
1635,to the pre-1635lieue marine in orderto
distinguishthe two. Several scholarlyevalu-
ations suggestthiswas the league used by ex-
plorersworkingin the name of France during
the 1500s and early 1600s, includingVerraz-
zano, Cartier,Roberval, and, where he de-
scribesdistancesin the interior,Champlain.62
It seems to have been the only league used by
Frenchexplorers,except forChamplain,prior
to 1635.Afterthatdate it was stillextensively
employed in exploration, and appears on
many French maps of North America, even
into the nineteenthcentury.63Despite this
wide usage, the lieue commune de France
neverseems to have been officiallysanctioned
forcadastralor othersurveys.
The league most extensively applied in
French North America, particularlyfor land
surveys,was based on the 3,000-pas league
(grande lieue ordinaire),each of whose paces
was 5 pieds de roi (Table 1). This league, quite
similarin lengthto the English land league,
accompanied officiallysponsored French set-
tlementand administration in NorthAmerica.
First used in Canada, its introductionthere
was probablyin accordance withChamplain's
wishes,but was effectedby his land surveyor,
Jean Bourdon. On December 2, 1635, as
62
Marcel Trudel, The Beginnings of New France,
1524-1663, translated by Patricia Claxton (Toronto:
McClelland and Stewart Ltd., 1973), pp. 49, 79; W. F.
Ganong, "Jacques Cartier-the Itineraryand Cartogra-
phy of his three Voyages," Transactions of the Royal
Society of Canada, 3rd Series, Section 2, Vol. 28 (1934),
pp. 171, 174,291; Morison,op. cit., footnote1, pp. 288n,
*387; Samuel Eliot Morison, Samuel de Champlain-
Father of New France (Boston: Little, Brown & Co.,
1972),p. xiii. Over his lifetimeChamplainused threedif-
ferentleagues: the Spanish nautical league of 5.926 km
(theoreticallyequal to 17.5 per latitudinaldegree, but in
fact not so), the French grande lieue (i.e. 3,000-pas
league) of 4.8726 km (which later became the 84-arpent
league), and the French lieue commune of 4.444 km. The
use of these leagues does not,of course, mean thatactual
distances thus identifiedwere accurately measured; in
manycases thereis a substantialdeviationfromthe ideal.
For an interestingquantitative examination of Cham-
plain's league lengthsbased on his maps, see Conrad E.
Heidenreich,"An Analysisof Champlain's Maps in terms
of his Estimates of Distance, Latitude and Longitude,"
Revue de l'UniversitWd'Ottawa/Universityof Ottawa
Quarterly,Vol. 48 (1978), pp. 12-45.
63 Marcel Giraud,A Historyof French Louisiana. Vol.
1: The Reign of Louis XIV, 1698-1715, translatedby J.
C. Lambertbut revised and correctedby the author(Ba-
ton Rouge: Louisiana State UniversityPress, 1974), p. 4.
145
Champlain lay paralyzed and near death,
Bourdon, conformingto instructionsgiven by
the companyin chargeof settlingCanada, of-
ficiallyadopted the measures of Paris (not of
France) in the distributionof land grants.64
The 3,000-pas league was part of the Pari-
sian metricsystem,and so it, too, was utilized
in Canada. But therethe league primarilyde-
lineated seigneurialland grantswhich were to
be later subdivided among small farmers,so
it was modifiedaccordingly,and redefinedin
termsof an agrarianmeasure of considerable
antiquity-the arpent. This land unit also
dates back to Celtic Gaul, was formallyquan-
tified by the Romans, and subsequently
evolved intoa wide varietyof "arpents" with-
in France.65But the one introducedin Canada
was the arpent de Paris, an areal measure of
100 square French perches of 18 pieds de roi
each.66It should be reiteratedthatthe arpent
was an old French measure of area, but, while
it seems never to have been used directlyas
a linear measure by officialintent,tracts of
land were often described in length and
breadthin termsof arpents,the unitintended
beingthe lengthof the side of a square arpent.
This practice existed wherever there were
French settlementsin mainlandNorth Amer-
ica, and the arpentof NorthAmerica was, as
a linear unit, equal to 10 perches, or 180
French feet.67
The linear arpentof mainlandNorthAmer-
ica was, in modern equivalent, 58.47109 m.
The French league of 3,000 pas was equal to
4.8726 km (3.0277 English statutemiles) (Ta-
ble 1). This league was transferred to Canada
64 Marcel Trudel,
Les Debuts du Regime Seigneurial
au Canada (Montr6al: Editions Fides, 1974), p. 156 and
an unnumberedpage near the front,entitled"Table des
Mesures." See also footnote62 above.
65 Doursther(op. cit., footnote2, pp. 24-28) lists a very
large numberof arpents and comparable agrarian mea-
sures in use in 1840.
66 Trudel, op. cit., footnote64, "Table des Mesures";
Doursther,op. cit., footnote2, pp. 26-27, 392; and John
W. Hall, "Louisiana Survey Systems:TheirAntecedents,
Distribution,and Characteristics,"unpublisheddoctoral
dissertation,Louisiana State University,Baton Rouge,
1970, pp. 24-25.
67 Trudel, op. cit., footnote64, "Table des Mesures";
and Hall, op. cit., footnote66, pp. 24-25. See also An-
drew H. Clark, Acadia-the Geography of Early Nova
Scotia to 1760 (Madison: Universityof Wisconsin Press,
Madison, 1968), p. 87n. Some moderncadastral maps of
Quebec contain scales showing a certain numberof ar-
pents to the inch.
 146 ROLAND CHARDON June

TABLE 2.-THE FRENCH LAND LEAGUES USED IN NORTH AMERICA

Modern equivalents
English
French land league Region Kilometers statutemiles

Lieue commune North America 4.4445 2.7617

Lieue de 3,000 pas France (Paris) 4.8726 3.0277
3,000-pas league
@5 feet(pieds de roi)
League of 84 arpents Quebec, urban Louisiana 4.9116 3.0519
@180 feet
League of 84 arpents Rural Louisiana, Mississippi, 4.9157 3.0544
@ 180 feet Alabama, northwestern Florida
League of 84 arpents Arkansas, Missouri 4.9286 3.0625
@180 feet
Lieue de poste Saint-Domingue (North America) 3.8981 2.4222
@2,000 toises
Sources: Doursther,op. cit., footnote2, pp. 20-21, 379, 392, 414; Hall, op. cit., footnote66, pp. 24-25; Reasonover, op. cit., footnote
69, pp. 1-7, 28, 30, 35; and Breed, op. cit., footnote61, p. 180.

and French Louisiana (at thattimemuchlarg- came to equal 192.500Englishfeet(58.674 m).

er than the presentstate of that name), but it The Quebec arpent was also used in a few
underwenta slightchange in the process. The French land grants made along the Detroit
Frenchleague of mainlandNorthAmericabe- River in Michigan and the Fox River in Wis-
came definednot as 3,000 paces (pas), but as consin, among a few other places, before
84 lineararpents,the reason being that84 ar- 1763.70
pents de Paris most closely approximatedthe It is clear thatthe French 3,000-pas and 84-
3,000-pas league in the more familiar (to arpent leagues used in mainlandNorthAmer-
farmer-settlers) agrarian terms of arpents.68
Thus, the Frenchleague as applied in main- 70 Reasonover, op. cit., footnote69, pp. 1-7, 28, 30, 35;

land North America should, allowing for mi- Breed, op. cit., footnote61, p. 180. Though Clark (op.
nor errors in actual surveying,be the one cit., footnote67, p. 87n) writesthatthe size of the linear
based on 84 arpents,and this modifiedleague arpent was uncertainat the time of initialFrench settle-
mentin Canada in the 17thcentury,thereis no reason to
may be called the "arpent league" of North believe that its officiallengthwas very far from58.5 m
America. In fact,therewere some very slight at any timeafterthe sixteenthcentury,and it is extremely
parts doubtfulthat it was meant to equal 200 English feet, as
variationsin its application in different
of the continent(Table 2). For surveyingand Clark asserts. Any indicationthatthe arpentequalled this
legal purposes, the linear arpenthas come to last figurewould have to have been the result of other
factors,such as erroneous surveyingin the field.
be accepted as equal to 191.835 English feet 71 In the 1600s and early 1700s two pas agraires were
exactly(58.4713 m) in Quebec and urbanLou- employed in the Lesser Antilles by the French: one of
isiana, withthe arpentleague correspondingly "trois pieds et demi de Paris" on Martinique,and another
modified.69In rural Louisiana, Mississippi, of "trois pieds" on theotherislands [Jean-BaptisteLabat,
Alabama, and northwesternFlorida, the ar- Nouveau Voyage aux Isles de l'Amerique (The Hague:
Chez P. Husson & Cie., 1724), Vol. 1, pp. 27, 37]. Later,
pent is considered equal to 191.994 English however, the pas agraire was 31/2feet long (Doursther,
feetexactly(58.5198 m). And in "Upper Lou- op. cit., footnote2, p. 379). The originsof thepas agraire
isiana," that is, Arkansas and Missouri, it are obscure; it may be relatedto a local measure of Bor-
deaux or perhaps to the gaule, thislast an areal measure
found in Brittany and other coastal areas of France
68
To be precise, the numberof arpents should have (Doursther,op. cit., footnote2, pp. 90, 157). For a brief
been 83.3333+, but this would have been a cumbersome comparisonof the initialcolonization of Canada and the
measure, and the 84-arpentleague was adopted instead. French Lesser Antilles in the early and middle seven-
69 J. Roy Reasonover, Land Measures-French, Span- teenthcentury,see M. Desportes, Le Regime des Terres
ish and English Land Measures of the UnitedStates and aux Isles du Vent: la Martinique, Annales des Antilles,
Canada, withUnits,English Equivalents, Reduction and No. 16 (1972), pp. 9-20; and Nicole Nimar, Proprieteet
ConversionFactors (Houston: privatelyprinted,1946),p. Exploitationde la Terreen Martiniqueet en Guadeloupe
28. (Bordeaux: Biscaye Freres, 1971), pp. 27-30, 44-46.
 1980 THE LINEAR LEAGUE 147

ica varied less than 1% fromeach other,and walks of lifeinhabitedTortugaIsland and ad-
thateven the Upper Louisiana league varied jacent western Hispaniola, in today's Haiti,
fromthe originalFrench 3,000-pas league by but theirsettlementswere strictlycoastal or
only 1.1% (Table 2). In other words, the 84- very temporary.It was not until late in the
arpentleague ofNorthAmericacan be viewed seventeenthcenturythat the French under-
as a virtualapplication of the French 3,000- took effectiveagriculturaldevelopmentof the
pas land league (or grande lieue ordinairede interior of their Greater Antillean colony,
3,000pas) in the New Worldwithremarkably called Saint-Domingue,and it was then that
smallerror;however,due to the change in lin- the league became a locally usefullinear mea-
ear basal unitsfrom3,000 paces to 84 arpents, sure. By that time, the league introducedin
the North American version was about 1% Saint-Dominguewas not the 3,000-pas league
longer. used in Canada, but the then-official lieue de
Quite differentwas the situation in the poste of 2,000 toises.73 This league, equal to
FrenchAntilles.Though on paper the coloni- 3.898 km or 2.422 English statutemiles, con-
zation of the Antilles was to be the same as tinuedto be utilized, along withthe carreau,
that of Canada, in fact a sharplycontrasting forover 100 years afterHaiti's independence
set ofcircumstancessurroundedthe initialset- fromFrance.74
tlementof the FrenchCaribbean islands in the This same lieue de poste was, duringalmost
seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, and all the eighteenthcentury,the officialleague
otherbases were used to definethe linearand of French North America, mainland includ-
areal measures in the islands. While the pied ed.75 If this league was used at all for other
de roi was, as in mainlandNorthAmerica,the thanpostal services, it is not oftenmentioned
basic unitoflength,therethe similarity ended. in travelreports,nor is it indicatedin theland-
The pas used in the Antilles,instead of being scape or on cadastral surveys. It does, how-
the 5-footpace of Paris, was a pas agraire, 3 ever, appear rather frequentlyon maps-in
or 31/2Paris feetlong.7'Further,land was sub- particularlyofficialones-of parts of North
divided,not intoarpents,but into carreaux or America duringthis period.76
carres (squares), whose antecedents lay in
some of the coastal regionsof France. In the The Spanish Land League in
French Antilles,a carreau was definedas a NorthAmerica
square of 100 pas agraires of 31/2Paris feet The most confusingof the land leagues in
apiece, or 113.69 m, to a side.72 North America, fromthe point of view of a
Nor did the carreau serve as a basis forthe single standard linear unit, is the one called
league, as the arpentdid in Quebec. At first, the legua legal, applied in the territoriescon-
theleague was rarelyused on the smallislands trolledby the Spaniards. The conceptual dif-
of the Caribbean where the French initially ficultiesaffectingthe establishmentof an of-
settled,but if one had to be used, it was usu- ficialland league in Castille also affectedthe
ally the lieue commune, as shown by many linear equivalence of the league in Spanish
French maps of these islands of the seven-
teenthand eighteenth(and even nineteenth) 73 Moreau de Saint-MWry, op. cit., footnote72, p. 15;
centuries. During most of the seventeenth and Doursther,op. cit., footnote2, p. 210.
74 James Redpath, ed., Guide to Hayti (Boston: Hay-
century,French and other individuals of all tian Bureau of Emigration,1861), p. 157; and Melville J.
Herskovits, Life in a Haitian Valley (New York: Dou-
bleday & Co., Garden City, 1937), p. 133.
72 Doursther,op.
cit., footnote2, p. 90; M.-L.-E. Mo- 75 Paucton (op. cit., footnote5, p. 789) says that the
reau de Saint-Mry, Description Topographique, Phy- "Lieue Parisienne de 2,000 toises" was the league used
sique, Civile, Politique et Historique de la Partie Fran- in Canada in his time (late 1700s); see also JohnFrancis
caise de lisle Saint-Domingue(Philadelphia: printedfor McDermott, A Glossary of Mississippi Valley French,
theauthor,1797; republishedin threevolumes by the So- 1673-1850 (St. Louis: WashingtonUniversity,1941), p.
ciet6 de l'Histoire des Colonies Frangaises et Librairie 93.
Larose, Paris, 1958),Vol. 1, pp. 14-15. The carreau was 76 Sometimes such maps show confusingterminology,
also employed in other Caribbean islands colonized by e.g. d'Anville, Carte de la Louisiane, par le Sr. d'Anville.
the French, such as St. Lucia, and was introducedinto Dressee an mai 1732 (Paris: 1752) (ms. map in the Ge-
Trinidad,where it was known as the quarr&, by French ographyand Map Division, Libraryof Congress, Wash-
immigrants in the late 1700s; see Linda A. Newson, Ab- ington),in whichthe scale indicates6 "lieues communes
originaland Spanish Colonial Trinidad(London and New et d'usage en ce pays, comme en Canada, 6valuees 2,000
York: Academic Press, 1976), pp. 195-99. toises" to the inch.
148 ROLAND CHARDON June

areas of North America; there were other been used as the officialvara de Burgos, and
problems as well. Yet even here, the differ- was sometimescalled, after 1751, the "old"
ences between the various league equivalents vara de Burgos.79These two lengthsare the
used, even in cadastral surveys, in these re- ones which became more or less the central
gions were relativelyminor-not more than measures of the vara in North America, and
1.8% in virtuallyall cases, aside fromerrors thus the bases for the Spanish North Ameri-
in fieldsurveying.The reasons forthese vari- can legua legal.
ations are not always entirelyclear, partlydue Anotherinfluencemay have had its origin
to thelack ofdocumentarycitationofaccurate in the illicittrade between some Spanish col-
and precise equivalents for various Spanish onies and other nations, notably England.
linear measures in other than Spanish terms This trade may have led to de facto accep-
priorto the mid-1700s.77 tance of somewhat differentmetric equiva-
One primarycause of linearvariationin the lents based on British usage, and seems to
Spanish North American legua legal appears have had some effecton specificSpanish col-
to have resultedfromdisparitiesbetween of- onies, among them Cuba, over a period of
ficial standards of the vara de Burgos, the time.80Quite possibly an explanationmay lie
basal unitby which,especially after1568,the in the political developments which trans-
league became legallydefinedin both Castille ferredlarge segmentsof territory fromSpan-
and NorthAmerica. At thattime,threeofficial ish or Mexican jurisdiction to that of the
and presumedidenticalstandardsof this vara United States. The resultantcomplexitiesof
de Burgos, also knownas the vara castellana, determining legal cadastral equivalentsforthe
were kept in Burgos, Avila, and Madrid for local measures led to some minorchanges in
easier local access. Despite thiseffortat stan- the measures themselves, especially in parts
dardization at the local level, problems in- of Texas and East Florida, where it appears
volvingtheprecise lengthof the Castilianvara the Spanish measures were "stretched"
continuedto arise in practice.Finally,in order somewhat.8' Indeed, one is temptedto pos-
to findout what was wrongand put an end to tulate a positive relationshipbetween British
this state of affairs,the King in 1751 ordered and/orAmericaninfluenceon adjoiningSpan-
all threevara standardsbroughtto Madrid for ish territories on the one hand, and the slightly
examinationand comparison.There, to every- increased lengthof Spanish linearunitson the
one's dismay,it was foundthatthe standards other: the more intimatethe Anglo-Spanish
were in fact not identical,and exhibiteddis- contacts, via trade, by geographicproximity,
crepancies ofjust under 2%.78 A new evalua- or throughpoliticalinfluenceor actual absorp-
tion of the vara, eventuallyequal to 835.905 tion, the longer the Spanish linear measures
mm, was established and became the official tended to be.
vara castellana; but the other evaluation, of The Castilian (later Spanish) legua legal
about 848 mm, had also at least sometimes was definedas 3,000 pasos of 5 Castilian feet
or 5,000 varas of 3 Castilian feet, with the
77 This problem is also mentionedby Doursther (op.
latter eventually becoming the officialbasis
cit., footnote2, p. 567) and, so long as it is not resolved,
for the Spanish NorthAmericanleague.82The
a trueexaminationof the factorsleading to regionalvari- question of the lengthof the Castilian vara is
ations in the lengthof the Spanish NorthAmericanleague thereforefundamentalin the determination of
cannot be made on other than somewhat speculative the Spanish league in North America. Unfor-
grounds.
78 Garcia Franco, op. cit., footnote 4, pp. 68, 76;
Vdzquez Queipo, op. cit., footnote4, Vol. 1, pp. 282- 79 Doursther, op. cit., footnote 2, p. 567.
83. This 2% discrepancyis very close to the 1.8% linear 80
Doursther, op. cit., footnote 2, p. 568.
league variationnoted forSpanish NorthAmerica. Spain 81
VirginiaH. Taylor, The Spanish Archivesof the Gen-
continued to experience difficultyin standardizingits eral Land Office of Texas (Austin, Texas: The Lone Star
vara-and indeed never did succeed; it is interestingto Press, 1955), pp. 69-79; and Breed, op. cit., footnote 61,
note that,even as late as 1886, the Burgos vara equalled p. 180.
835.9 mm, while that of Madrid was 843 mm (Instituto 82 It is true that 3,000 pasos were also officially rec-
Geogrdficoy Estadistico,op. cit., footnote5, pp. 16, 36). ognized as a league in parts of North America, especially
To make mattersworse, the vara also had slightlydiffer- the league of 3,000 pasos de salom6n (Carrera Stampa,
ent equivalents dependingon which foot was used; the op. cit., footnote 29, p. 10; and Taylor, op. cit., footnote
vara of 3 Spanish geometricfeet equalled 835.00 mm, 81, p. 79), but the Spanish North American league was
while that of 3 Spanish feet of Burgos was 835.905 mm. almost always considered to be 5,000 varas in length.
1980 THE LINEAR LEAGUE 149

tunately,since the vara was a rathervariable tographicgrounds (at scale 1:20,000), I esti-
unit, its applicationin the New World, like mated the vara in Yucatan to have been 836
thatof the French arpentwithrespect to the mm (oftenroundedto 840 mm) in 1671.87 For
French league, modifiedthe Spanish league Cuba, the vara seems to have been equal to
somewhat,in spite of the most faithfulinten- 848 or 847.33 mm.88In East Florida it appears
tions of local governorsand surveyors.It is to have been 847.65 mm,and in Texas 846.67
possible, however, to bracket the lengthsof mm.89
the vara and discuss brieflythe many sources Thus there seem to have been two basal
forthe different equivalents of this measure; varas which predominatedin Spanish North
the shortestlength I have seen for a valid America,fromwhichslightvariationsevolved
Spanish NorthAmerican vara is 833.32 mm; in practice. The firstwas the officialvara de
the longestseems to have been 848.36.83 Burgos, or vara castellana, at or very close
Two dimensionsare given for the vara de to 835 mm, and the other(the "old" vara de
Burgos by Doursther:one officialvara, in use Burgos of 1746,or perhaps simplyits standard
in 1840, of 835 mm, and an "old" vara de kept in Madrid) which measured at, or very
Burgos whose lengthin 1746 was 848 mm(ac- close to, 848 mm. The processes by which
tually847.96 mm). This lattervara is the one each was applied in North America, and
Doursthersays prevailedin Cuba and Mexico, which vara was the officialone employed by
among other areas, in 1840.84 In 1849 the a given governorin a given place at a given
Spanish vara was defined,officiallyand un- time, have not yet been determined.Within
officially,as being 835.9 mm, a lengthwhich the present limits of the United States, the
remainedunchangedthereafter.85 vara rangedfrom835 to 847.7 mm-almost the
In herdiscussionofthe "Texas vara," Tay- entirerange of thismeasure in NorthAmerica
lor says there was much confusionas to the as a whole.90This rangedoes notincludethose
exact length of this measure, and that the equivalentswhichwere or are extremedistor-
"awkward and elusive Mexican vara," on tions of the vara due to errorsin fieldsurvey-
whichthe Texas vara was based, was difficult ing, intentionalmisinterpretations, or individ-
to pin down precisely. She feels the Castilian ual idiosyncracies; these could and did
vara was between 834 and 835 mmlong in the
early colonial period, but adds that the Mex-
fromp. 74. Arnold Guyot, Tables, Meteorological and
ican vara in the 1820s was between 837 and Physical, 4th ed. (editedby WilliamLibbey, Jr.), Smith-
839 mmin length;Guyot says thatin 1884 the sonian Miscellaneous Collections, 538 (Washington:
Mexican vara was 838 mm.86 Largely on car- SmithsonianInstitution,1884), p. 458.
87 Roland Chardon, Geographic Aspects of Plantation
Agriculturein Yucatan, National Academy of Sciences-
83
Some surveyorsfeelthisrangeis too restrictive.Vara National Research Council Publ. No. 876 (Washington:
lengthsidentifiedin Texas surveys,forexample, are said 1961), pp. 22, 82, 84.
to have rangedfrom685.8 mm (27 inches) to 1,016.0 mm 88 Doursther,op. cit., footnote2, p. 567; Duvon C. Cor-
(40 inches) [cf. J. StuartBoyles, "Problems of the Texas bitt, "Mercedes and Realengos: A Survey of the Public
Surveyor," Surveyingand Mapping, Vol. 13 (1953), pp. Land System in Cuba," Hispanic American Historical
448-50]; these extremes were, however, clearly due to Review, Vol. 19 (1939), pp. 262-85; referenceon p. 266.
faultysurveying,errorsin convertingfroman American 89 Breed, op. cit., footnote61, p. 180. For Florida, see
to a Mexican metricsystem,or deliberate misrepresen- also Mitchel v. U.S., 15 Peters 57 (1841). For Texas, see
tation. Some early American surveyorsapparentlyused Reasonover, op. cit., footnote69, pp. 33, 36; Wattles,op.
the Englishyard of 3 feet(914.4 mm) forthe vara [E. L. cit., footnote83, p. 198; Harrington,op. cit., footnote83,
Harrington,"The Texas Vara," Surveyingand Mapping, p. 452. The Texas vara was legallyestablishedin 1919,by
Vol. 13 (1953), pp. 451-52], but thiswas obviouslya mis- the Texas legislature,as comprising33.3333+ inches. It
interpretationof the 3-footdefinitionof the vara. See also should be added thatmanyof the metricequivalentspre-
W. C. Wattles, "The Variable Vara," Surveyingand sented here are conversionsfromEnglishequivalentsfor
Mapping, Vol. 10 (1950), p. 198; and Doursther,op. cit., the vara; this is especially pertinentfor the vara in the
footnote2, pp. 567-68. presentUnited States and also in Cuba.
84
Doursther,op. cit., footnote2, pp. 567-68. 90Taylor, op. cit., footnote81, pp. 74-75; Reasonover,
85
Vdzquez Queipo, op. cit., footnote4, Vol. 2, p. 380; op. cit., footnote69, p. 24; Breed, op. cit., footnote61,
Garcia Franco, op. cit., footnote4, p. 200; InstitutoGeo- p. 180. Lowery uses the vara of 835 mmin his discussion
graficoy Estadistico,op. cit., footnote5, p. 7. The vara of early Spanish activitiesin the United States (Lowery,
de Burgos was officiallyevaluated at 0.835905 metersby op. cit., footnote1, p. viii); thoughhe is probablycorrect
royalorderin 1849,when Spain adopted the international forthe period he describes, it would seem thisevaluation
decimal metricsystem. is ratherrestrictedin time and area withinthe present
86
Taylor,op. cit., footnote81, pp. 70-79 passim: quote United States.
150 ROLAND CHARDON June

TABLE 3.-THE SPANISH LAND LEAGUES USED IN NORTH AMERICA

Modern equivalents
English
Vara statute
Land league of 5,000 varas base (mm) Kilometers miles Sources

Castilian legua legal 835.00 4.1750 2.5943 D(210)

L(viii)
Castilian legua legal 835.91 4.17955 2.5971 C(458)
VQ(II-380)
"Old" league of Burgos 847.96 4.2398 2.6345 D(567)
Mexican "surveyor's league" 835.90 4.1795 2.5970 CS(10)
(early colonial)
Yucatecan league (1671) 836.00 4.1800 2.5973 Ch(22)
Mexican league (mid-1800s) 838.00 4.1900 2.6035 G(458)
CS(10)
W(198)
Mexican league (legal, 1823) 848.01 4.2401 2.6346 D(567)
848.36 4.2418 2.6357 H(451)
Cuban league 848.00 4.2400 2.6346 D(567)
847.33 4.2367 2.6325 Co(266)
Florida (East) league 846.65 4.2332 2.6304 B(180)
W(198)
Texas league (early colonial) 834-835 4.1750 (835 mm) 2.5943 T(70)
Texas league (late colonial) 837-839 4.1900 (838 mm) 2.6035 T(71)
Texas league (1825) 848.36 4.2418 2.6357 W(198)
H(452)
Texas league (legal, 1919) 846.67 4.2333 2.6305 B(180)
W(198)
H(452)
"Alta California" league 838.02 4.1902 2.6036 R(24)
Californiaand southwest 838.03 4.1902 2.6036 R(24)
United States league

Land league of 6,666.67 varas

Castilian legua comuin (unofficial) 835.91 5.5727 3.4627
Sources: See textforfullreferences:B-Breed (1957); CS-Carrera Stampa (1949); Ch-Chardon (1961); Co-Corbitt (1939); D-
Doursther(1840); G-Guyot (1884); H-Harrington (1953); L-Lowery (1911); R-Reasonover (1946); T-Taylor (1955); VQ-Vazquez
Queipo (1859); W-Wattles (1950). Numbers in parenthesesin table entriesreferto source page number.

develop in some places, regardlessof the met- + 1%, or about 2.6 English statutemiles, in
ric systemused. North America (Table 3).
There is no need to discuss the different A second Castilian league-the legua co-
lengthsof the vara further.The Spanish legua mun-was frequentlyemployed, though for
legal varied accordingto which"5,000 varas" the most part unofficially, in North America.
were employed,but despite its discrepancies It is listed as the legua of Guatemala, Nica-
it was the league officiallyadopted in North ragua,and Costa Rica, butin generalthe legua
America by the Spaniards, and was the con- comun appears to have been used primarilyto
ceptual basis (along with lesser units, of describe itinerarydistances ratherthan pre-
course) for land subdivisionin those regions cise land measurements.As such, it tendedto
controlled by them. It should be reiterated representan hour's travel on foot, and there
that the legua legal's linear variations are is considerablymoredeviationfromits official
small, and thatfor most historicalgeographi- Castilian value of 5,572.7 m than there is in
cal purposes it is equivalentto around 4.2 km the case of the legua legal, withthe range of
1980 THE LINEAR LEAGUE 151

TABLE 4.-LINEAR LEAGUES USED IN NORTH AMERICA, WITH IDEALIZED MODERN EQUIVALENTS

Modern equivalents
English
statute
Type of league Kilometers miles

Land league
English-(seldom used) 4.8280 ? 0.0% 3.0000

French *lieue commune 4.4445 ? 0.1% 2.7616

*'arpent league" 4.9150 ? 0.3% 3.0542
*lieue de poste 3.8981 ? 0.1% 2.4222
Spanish *legua legal 4.2100 ? 1.0o 2.6160
?
*legua coman 5.5727 0.03% 3.4627

Interna-
tional
nautical
miles
Marine league
English-*nautical league (increases sporadically 5.5566 ? 0.5% 3.0000
French *lieue marine c. 1500-1635 from 5.5566 ? 0.5% 3.0000
4.4445-5.5566 km)

Spanish-"legua ndutica" 4 Roman miles 5.9260 ? 1.0% 3.1998

(15th and 16th centuries)
?
*legua geogrdfica 17.5 per degree 6.3504 0.5% 3.4289
(17th and 18th centuries)
legua maritima (19th century) 5.5566 ? 0.5% 3.0000
Dutch-inyl of 15 per degree (increases sporadically 7.4088 ? 0.5% 4.0000
ca. 1500-1650 A.D. from 5.3580-7.4088 km)
-myl of 20 to the degree (18th century) 5.5566 ? 0.5% 3.0000
* An asteriskindicatesthatthisleague was commonlyused in fairlywidespreadportionsof NorthAmerica; the Anglo-Frenchmarine
leagues are considered as one. The dates parentheticallysuggested are very approximate,and there was a great deal of temporal
overlappingin the use of specificleagues by various writers.
Source: See text.

legua comdinvalues (from3.5-7.0 km in ex- more successfully applied, as standardized

tremecases) oftenreflecting
terrainvariability
as much as differencesin the time estimates
of the travellers.91
CONCLUSIONS
The evolutionof the NorthAmericanlinear
league resulted froma complex interplayof
chance and logical developmentin the contin-
uously evolving historicalfabric of western
Europe and its NorthAmericancolonies. The
leagues (and miles) employedin NorthAmer-
ica in the main reflectthe centralizationpoli-
cies of the emergentnationalismof the home
country.The measuresof Paris, London, Bur-
gos, and Madrid,once these cities were estab-
lished as fixedcentersof government,tended
to prevailover othermeasures. Oftenthe mea-
sures decreed by European monarchs were
91 Francisco J. Santamaria, Diccionario General de
Americanismos(Mexico: EditorialPedro Robrado, 1942),
Vol. 2, p. 178; and Chardon,op. cit., Footnote 30.
measuresover wide areas, in the colonies than
at home, at least so far as North America is
concerned. At home, complete metric stan-
dardizationof itineraryunitsgenerallydid not
take place for centuries,and oftenonly as a
result of the establishmentof a royal postal
service accompanied by an officialpostal mile
or league.
The seven leagues used in North America
were related principallyto land and sea dis-
tances, but in some cases they also provided
the administrativeand legal frameworkfor
land subdivisionduringthe colonial settlement
process. Aside fromthe English mile and the
few instances in which Dutch, Swedish, Dan-
ish, and Russian measures were used, the
leagues describedin almost all reportsor doc-
uments concerning colonial North America
referto one of seven Spanish or French land
and sea leagues, or to a Britishnauticalleague
whichwas identicalto thatof the French(Ta-
ble 4).
For the five land leagues, equivalents are
152 ROLAND CHARDON June

providedwhichlie within1% of theiridealized standard)seems to have lengthened4-5 mm,

or officialvalues. The maritimeleagues of all or about 0.5%, over 300 years (Table 3).94The
the colonial powers underwent chronic ad- linear expansion of the Anglo-French and
justmentsuntilinternationalagreementestab- Dutch marine leagues (myl), and the varia-
lished the marine league at 3 nautical miles, tions in those of the Spaniards and Portu-
withthis last measure trulystandardizedonly guese, in the 1500s and early 1600s, were ad-
in the 1950s, at 1,852.0 m. Since the Dutch justments to reality, and should not be
myl appears on the scales of a great many considered in the context of Petrie's hypoth-
maps of colonial North America, I have in- esis.
cluded it here as well (Table 4). Used within In the 1530s, Rabelais noted thatthe length
proper historical and geographical contexts, of the league tended to increase withdistance
the equivalentsforthe seven leagues can pro- away fromits centerof origin.His explanation
vide valuable mensuraldata applicable to the forthisphenomenon-a ribaldbut bitingcom-
colonial historicalgeographyof North Amer- mentaryon the mensuraldisorderin western
ica. It mustbe rememberedthatthese league Europe at thattime-is a classic, but his thesis
equivalentsare idealized and that,in thefield, may be valid.95It is partlyconfirmedin the
theymay not always portraypreciselycorrect
groundor sea distances. 94Wm. Flinders Petrie, "Weights and Measures," En-
Beyond the specifichistoricalutilityof the cylopedia Britannica, 11thed., Vol. 28 (1911), p. 481.
95 Francois Rabelais, Ouevres de Francois Rabelais;
league values presented, several conclusions
Edition CritiquePubliee par Abel LeFranc et al. (Paris:
may be drawnfromthis study. First,thereis Librairie Ancienne Edouard Champion, Libraire de la
a remarkable constancy in the transferand Soci6t6 des Etudes Rabelaisiennes, 1922), Vol. 4, Pan-
application of individual land leagues to the tagruel, Ch. 23, pp. 246-49. The pertinentpassage de-
New World. Variations in North America, serves to be quoted in its entirety(from:Rabelais-the
wheretheyoccur, are more the resultof men- Five Books and Minor Writings.A New Translationwith
Notes by W. F. Smith(London: AlexanderP. Watt,1893),
sural variations in the home countrythan in Vol. 1, Ch. 23, pp. 318-89):
the colonies, withthe exceptionof the French
How Pantagruel set out from Paris . .. : and the Rea-
Antilles.92Second, the use of the Roman mile son why the Leagues are so shortin France.
as a major subunit of the marine league, Now as theywere journeying,Pantagruel,observing
though perhaps not wholly unexpected, is thatthe Leagues in France are verymuch shortercom-
nonetheless somewhat intriguingin that sea pared withthose of otherCountries,asked Panurgethe
Cause and Reason thereof; who told him a History
distances had almost always been given in which Marotus du Lac, monachus, sets down in the
stades at the timeof the Roman Empire itself. 'Gests of the King of Canaria,' tellinghow:
How this mile became a customaryunit of In old times the Countries were not marked out by
maritimedistance is, so far as I am aware, Leagues, Milestones, Stades or Parasangs, until King
unknown;its use at sea is probablyrelated to Pharamonddivided them;this was done in the Manner
following:He chose in Paris a hundredfair,young,jolly
Arab and Norman influencesin the Mediter- Companions, veryresolute,and a hundredfairWench-
ranean area.93 es of Picardy,and had themwell entertainedand highly
There tends to be some confirmation of two fed forthe Space of eightdays; then he called themto
hypotheses concerned with metric change. him,and to each one he assigned his Maiden, withstore
of Money forhis Expenses, givingthemhis Commands
Petrie's thesis thatlinear measures tend to in- Places in this Directionand that,and
to go to different
crease slightlyover the years appears to be at all the Places where they should biscot theirMaid-
supportedby the Texas vara which(discount- ens, they should set a Stone there,and that should be
ing the "old" vara de Burgos, apparentlyac- a League.
cidentally derived from a slightly different So the Companions set forthmerrily,and as they
were freshand afterRest, they amused themselvesat
the End of every Field, and thatis the Reason whythe
92
Initial settlement,despite officialregulations,was Leagues in France are so short.
generallynot well organized,and therewere, in addition But when theyhad gone a great Way and were now
to farmer-settlers and a few nobles, a large number of wearyas poor Devils, and therewas no more Oil in the
corsairs,freebooters,buccaneers, and similartypes who Lamp, they did not play the Ram so often,and con-
were influentialin establishingpolicies regardingboth tentedthemselves-I mean as regards the Men-with
land and society. a poor scurvey Bout in a Day. And that it is which
93 The developmentand use of Mediterraneanmaritime makes the Leagues of Brittany,Landes, Germany,and
measures has not yet been systematicallysorted out, otherdistantCountriesso long.
thoughthe best source remains Garcia Franco, op. cit., Others give other Reasons for it, but this seems to
footnote4. me the best.
1980 THE LINEAR LEAGUE
cases of the French leagues at home, and the
arpentleague in North America (Table 2). It
may also have supportfromthe legua legal,
but in this case so many factors could have
affectedits lengththatit is difficult
to use this
exampleas a testof Rabelais' observation.In-
deed, both Petrie's and Rabelais' hypotheses
are only roughlysupported by the evidence
presentedin this study. Much more rigorous
testingis needed beforetheycan be trulycon-
firmed.
A thirdhypothesis,advanced withina cen-
turyafterPicard's calculation of the earth's
circumference, is thatthe earthwas accurate-
ly measured some time in antiquity,and also
quite possibly again in the Middle Ages. This
thesis is rathertangentialto the focus of this
paper; I bringit up because an interestingde-
velopment,connected with the discovery of
NorthAmerica, affectedthe conceptions and
lengthsof those measures, especially leagues
and miles,designedto representgeodetic sub-
divisionsforpracticaluse at sea.
In everycase presentedabove, the prevail-
ing world view at the time of the discoveries
was apparentlyone in which our globe was
smallerthan it actuallyturnedout to be. Lat-
er, as a result,marineor "geographical" (or
"geodetic" or "geometric") leagues and miles
eitherhad to be lengthenedper se, as all co-
lonial powers did, or theirnumbersincreased
(as did the Portugueseand Spaniards), in or-
der to achieve the correctratio of traditional
leagues and miles to a degree of the greatcir-
cle. The process of adjusting these units to
marineor global requirementstook a century
and a half,fromabout the 1480sto 1635,when
Richard Norwood measured the degree with
less than 1% (actually0.7%) errorforthatlat-
itude. One cannot help but wonder why, in
view of thestateof knowledgein the sixteenth
century, this accuracy took so long to be
achieved, and even longerto be recognizedby
marinerswho, for almost 200 years prior to
1635, had known something was seriously
amiss withtheirleagues and miles in termsof
their"theoretical" ratios to the degree of the
greatcircle.
It is myopinionthatnavigators,and in par-
ticularthe Portuguese,were well on theirway
to establishingthe correctratio of leagues (of
4 Roman miles)to the degree,but thatColum-
bus' forceful personality and accomplish-
mentsset thisprocess back considerably,for
153
he persisted in saying and writingthat "the
world is not so large as the common crowd
saysit is1."96 Acknowledged
as an experienced
navigatorand having crossed the Atlantic in
1492,he had in a way "proved" his point,and
certainlyacquired enviable prestige.But as a
resulthe may well have postponedan accurate
geodetic measurementby more than a centu-
ry; his successes and insistencegave credence
to the inaccurate concept he espoused, and
pushed into the backgroundthe substantially
more correctviews of "the common crowd."
The relativelyhigh probabilitythat the di-
mensions of the earth had been fairlyaccu-
ratelyestimatedat the timeof the discoveries
(and quite possibly several times previously)
raises the tantalizing,and fromthe perspec-
tive of culture historyextremelysignificant,
question of the originsof mankind's custom-
ary linear and/or itinerarymeasures. Were
they derived geodetically or anthropometri-
cally, or both? We need to take a closer look
at the relationshipsbetween ancient, medi-
eval, and modern linear and itinerarymea-
sures. Recent studies suggest that we are
doing so.97 This paper, thoughprimarilycon-
cerned with one linear unit as it was applied
on one continent,is anotherstep in the same
direction.
96 Nunn, op. cit., p. 11: "digo que el
mundo no es tan
grande como dice el vulgo"; the translationis Nunn's.
Portuguese and other mariners had progressively in-
creased the numberof leagues to the latitudinaldegree
duringthe 15thcenturyas theiroceanic and celestial nav-
igationaltechniquesimproved,to the pointwhere Duarte
Pacheco wrote in 1505 that there were 18 leagues (@ 4
Roman miles) per degree [Duarte Pacheco Pereira,Esme-
raldo de situ orbis, translatedand editedby George H. T.
Kimble. Hakluyt Society, 2nd Series, No. 79 (London:
Printedforthe Hakluyt Society, 1937), p. 12]. This eval-
uation yielded a degree of 106,668 m, only 4% shortof
reality,a centurybefore Snellius' measurementand 130
years beforeNorwood's.
97 See Berriman,op. cit., footnote4; Garcia Franco,
op. cit., footnote4; and Heidenreich,op. cit., footnote1.
Thom's suggestion[A. Thom, "The Megalithic Unit of
Length," Journalof the Royal StatisticalSociety, Series
A (General), Vol. 125, Part 2 (1962), pp. 243-51] that a
standard "megalithic yard" (0.829 m) existed in Great
Britain has spurredthe application of refinedstatistical
techniques to the determinationof smaller linear stan-
dards as inferredfrommonumentalstructures,with,how-
ever, mixed results [D. G. Kendall, "Hunting Quanta,"
Philosophical Transactionsof the Royal Society of Lon-
don, Series A (Mathematicaland Physical Sciences), Vol.
276, No. 1257 (1974), pp. 231-66; and H. A. W. Burl and
P. R. Freeman, "Local Units of Measurementin Prehis-
toric Britain," Antiquity,Vol. 51, No. 202 (1977), pp.
152-54].