Add it to the Wishlist: A Snapshot of North American History from 1762

I notice, as I build up my virtual wish-list, that many of the maps I'm choosing aren't from places I've been, but where I'm from, specifically Montreal, Quebec or Canada. That's why this 1762 map by Thomas Jefferys titled: "A Map of Canada and the North Part of Louisiana with the Adjacent Countrys [sic]" easily makes the list. The map is being offered for sale by Neatline Rare Maps of San Francisco for more money than I could ever hope to be able to afford to spend on a map!

Here's a picture of it:

I highly recommend visiting the Neatline site to get a much closer zoomable look at this map. Neatline has also provided a well researched background of the map and what it shows.

There are a couple of interesting points Neatline makes that are worth highlighting:

The reference to First Nations groups is interesting, not only in their identification on the map, but also in that part of this map seems to have been made possible by reports from a first nations explorer named Ochagach who himself produced a map useful for western exploration by the French. It's a significant detail that tends to be lost in more general pictures of first nations that we learn about in school.

The other is the map's "mythological" elements. To me, the coolest is the legend of Fou-Sang, shown on the west coast of the map. It's a place supposedly visited by the Chinese as far back as 219 BC. Wikipedia writes a bit more about it. It's a remarkable story, but may have been a popular myth at the time this map was made.

Finally, a few points that Neatline did not mention that are interesting to me, and possibly to most Canadians. For one, there was a New Britain and a New South Wales in Canada. These are not place names that are used today, and are now occupied by other provinces or territories in Canada. I had to do some searching on Wikipedia to learn a bit about their history. Especially interesting was that these place names were in use basically at the same time that Canada was being taken by force by the British from the French. It seems, therefore, that there was some, albeit sparse, English presence north of New France as well as to the south of it.

I also love the annotation to the east of Hudson's Bay that a supposed lake, which connect to the north Atlantic through Labrador and Northern Quebec was "very doubtful". I wonder why they even thought to put that there. What prompted the map-maker to think this possibly existed?

As a final point, this map gives a great sense of a moment in time in western expansion by the European powers. The eastern portions of the map are detailed, show political boundaries, towns and geological features and looks accurate to the modern viewer. As you look west, however, detail fades, gradually, until the vast blank expanse of the prairies and west coast. It goes to show, once more, that maps like this are historic snapshots.

Johnson's Upper and Lower Canada from 1863

There's a lot to love in these two maps of Upper and Lower Canada, parts of modern Ontario and Quebec, respectively as well as New Brunswick and bits of the United States. The maps come from Johnson's Atlas.

This map is an attractive one. It has a nice border, nice coloring (which I assume was done later and is probably not original), and that wonderful quality of spilling outside its borders. The map I have was taken from an atlas, and you can see the different page numbers and how the maps appeared. It's curious to have shown them this way, since the maps present contiguous regions, and it's not obvious why they wouldn't have been oriented differently to show one map that folds in half. This question becomes even more interesting when you consider that the two maps have only one legend, suggesting that they are meant to be viewed together.


The detail on the map is wonderful too. The counties/townships are noted in great detail, even though these sorts of geographic divisions are rarely used in any significant way in Canada these days. The seller of the map noted in the margin that this map is from 1863, which is before Canadian confederation. It is also just before Ottawa became the capital of Canada (1866) and at a time when Quebec City was the capital. Quebec is noted with a red dot on the map.

   The map shows a number of important rail lines, many canals and has three great insets, one of Montreal, one of the important Welland Canal and another of Wolf Island on the border of the United States. Wolf Island is noted as the start of the St. Lawrence river, and the inset shows a charming collection of buildings on the site of the town of Kingston, Upper Canada, a very important town at the time.

The Welland Canal, which was an important shipping route at the time that helped bypass Niagara Falls also gets its own inset, as does Montreal. Montreal's inset does not show much detail about the city, but identifies important towns on the island, shows the, now scenic, Lachine Canal, the historic Grand Trunk Railway, and has good detail about the surrounding region. At the bottom of the image of the Montreal inset, two different meridians are shown, one from Greenwich, and another from Washington.

 It's also interesting that while today Toronto is not only the largest city in Canada, but one of the top 5 in North America, on this map, it does not merit its own inset, though features which are today much less significant do draw that kind of attention from the map-makers.

Come From Away: Colton's New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Newfoundland and Prince Edward Island

In the Canadian Maritime and Atlantic provinces, someone who's from any place other than one of those four provinces is known as a CFA, a come from away: because that's where you're from, away.

A few years back, my wife and I went on a fabulous road trip through the Maritime and Atlantic provinces (Newfoundland and Labrador is an Atlantic province, not a Maritime one), had an amazing time, met some wonderful people, saw some great sights, ate some great food, got engaged and I bought a couple of maps!

The map I'll feature in this post is a gorgeous Colton, first published in 1855 of New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Newfoundland and Prince Edward Island. I bought this map at an art gallery in Halifax that also sold some maps called Zwicker's Gallery (a place that is itself an institution). They had some other beautiful maps of the region (Including a great one with images of some dogs this part of the world are famous for, notably the Labrador and the Newfoundland Dog), but this was the only one I could afford at the time.

 I love this map! There's so much about it that's appealing.

First, just look at it! The border is gorgeous. It has that wonderful element of spilling outside the border, showing every element of the land. It breaks up the provinces (colonies at the time) into counties, which I don't believe are particularly significant these days, and it's in excellent condition. Even the name plate of the map is appealing.

The way "Colton" is written, the various fonts of the names of the different places...I just find this map very pleasing to look at.

Second, the history represented on this map is wonderful. Nova Scotia and New Brunswick were among the first four provinces of Canada which came together for confederation in 1867. Prince Edward Island would only join Canada in 1873 (largely because of heavy debt from having built a railroad on the small island), and Newfoundland joined still later, in 1949, after a much debated referendum.

Third, the detail on this map is impressive. So many of the tiny bays, capes and coves on Newfoundland are named. Some of these places may have been, or were being settled for the first time around when this map was published. Other places, including some of Newfoundland's largest communities today are completely absent from the map, in some cases, like Gander, Newfoundland, because they didn't even exist until around 100 years later.

 A final thing I enjoy about this map, is that it presents another mystery to me. The map clearly says it's a Colton. It also says it was first published in 1855. That doesn't mean that the actual paper map I have is from 1855, it could be more recent. There's an annotation from the seller next to the page number (19) that shows the year 1864. The problem is, when I search, I can't find any Colton atlases published that year. Even when I go through the ever-useful Rumsey website, I can find very similar Colton maps, but none that are on page 19. Perhaps even more strange, there is an almost identical Johnson map that is printed on page 19 from 1865, but it is clearly not the same map I have. All I've been able to find is someone selling the identical map (in rough condition) on ebay. This person claims their map is from 1855, but they may simply be looking at the date of first publication, which could be quite different from the date of actual printing. I'm including a screen capture of the item for sale below.

Once more, another mystery to solve. Anyone with thoughts or insights is encouraged to let me know!