The Mercator projection, developed in the 16th century, has long been one of the most important features of world maps. It has significantly distorted how cultures perceive geographical relationships. This re-mapping was first intended to serve Western European mariners to plan their journeys to imperialism and trade. For over 300 years, it has quietly shaped international views. Its distortions have spurred intense public discussions. Congressional representatives are rightfully worried about the impact these representations have on entire continents, including Africa and South America.
The Mercator projection’s distinctive features make it ideal to portray straight lines as unchanging compass bearings. This aspect of it was what made it so indispensable for navigation during the age of exploration. It artificially alters the proportions of land masses, stretching out the higher latitudes and compressing the lands closer to the equator. Europe and North America are notable for the large, contiguous, and prominent plain. When it comes to Africa and South America, these continents are shown as extremely smaller than their real size.
This creates a common but inaccurate assumption when using maps—for example, that the Mercator projection puts Greenland and Africa at about the same scale with each other. In reality, Africa is closer to 14 times the size of Greenland. Yet, simultaneously, this misrepresentation becomes ingrained in educational material and public sentiment. Together, these distortions lead to misunderstandings about the importance of various states. Consequently, most people tend to view Africa as tiny and insignificant, despite its huge scale and tremendous promise.
The history of the Mercator projection gives an insight into European interests at a time when empires were laying claim to every corner of the globe. Some critics claim that this map is just a continuation of a tool of western imperialism. It continues to propagate a Eurocentric worldview, deflating the importance of other continents. It’s an assertion that cartographer Mark Monmonier takes a scalpel to. He admits that the projection has come under fire for its imperial overtones, explaining that while empire-building was indeed often driven by political and economic factors—not the atlases we use in our elementary schools.
In face of these justified criticisms, some people continue to argue that the Mercator projection is the most overrated tool of western imperialism. A well-known clip from the television show “The West Wing” (2001) illustrates its influence beautifully. In this short time frame, these characters illustrate that for too long the Mercator projection has tricked generations of people into thinking that Greenland has the same spatial importance as Africa does.
In response to these issues, other map projections have gained popularity in recent years. The Equal Earth projection, which was first released in 2018, offers a better fidelity to space and area while maintaining a visually intuitive format. Other options like the Goode homolosine and Peters projection are suitable. These equal-area map projections are intended to show landmasses in their true proportional size to each other.
Perhaps most importantly, these alternatives push back against the Mercator projection’s decades-long status quo. By depicting continents in a more equitable way, they push viewers to challenge their ideas about countries, continents, and people around the world. Such a change would increase awareness of Africa’s complexities and potential. It will also recast what social and political conversations about the continent look like.