1764 Bellin map of Santa Marta, Colombia

My wife and I took our honeymoon in Cartagena, Colombia. I really wanted to try to find an antique map of the city before I left, but had a hard time locating anyone who had any selection to sell.

We found one antique dealer who had literally one antique map. It was not of Cartagena, so that one is still on the wishlist, but I did get my hands on something great. Behold my 1764 Bellin map of Santa Marta, Colombia.

As always, David Rumsey has a better zoomable version, and I note as well that the map is held in the collection of the National Library of Colombia.

I don't know too much about Colombia's history, and almost didn't buy the map because I had never heard of Santa Marta--Sainte Marthe on the map--had not visited it, and didn't want a map of a place that meant nothing to me. The seller told me a bit about the town and then, I had to have the map.

Santa Marta was the first Spanish colonial city in Colombia. It's also the oldest surviving city in that country and the second oldest in all of South America. It was founded in 1525, contrast that with the first attempt at founding Quebec City in 1535.

The map is also a Bellin. Many map collectors and historians, recognize Bellin as an important cartographer, producing a wide range of high quality maps in France in the mid to late 18th Century. That was another hook for me, as well as the map's age. This one was produced in 1764.

There are a few elements of the map that make it visually quite interesting. For one, at a glance, I find it looks as though the ocean is to the right of the town, when clearly, it's to the left, in the west. One reason I think my mind plays this trick is the contours around the hill make it seem to be an island.

I also really like the depictions of the small forts and "castles" along the coast. They are not given too much detail by Bellin, but are an attractive feature of the map.


Though it's not from a place I've been, this map is still of historic significance, and makes a souvenir of the adventures we went through, off the tourist path, to find and buy it. I'm proud that it's in my collection!

Wishlist Map: 5 Things About Montreal You Probably Never Knew

Next up on my wishlist: Bellin's Carte de L'Isle De Montreal et de Ses Environs (Map of the Island of Montreal and its Surroundings) from 1744. This map is available for purchase here, from Arader Galleries (who I have no affiliation or relationship with).

It seems typical of Bellin to show geographic features on his map, but to minimize man made elements. According to wikipedia, at the time this map was made, some 22,000 people lived in Montreal, yet the map does not make this obvious.

Here are five awesome facts about Montreal that we can learn from this map that probably all but the most die-hard Montrealers never knew.

1) Lachine was an island: Today Montrealers are familiar with the neighborhood of Lachine and the Lachine canal that borders it. The canal was built to bypass the rapids shown on the map (the "sault"). The Canal, however, was not all a new waterway. Instead, it was an expansion of Lac St. Pierre that was already separating Lachine from the rest of Montreal.

2) Yes, they really called it "La Chine" (China): La Chine, which evolved into the modern Lachine, was originally a derisive nickname. The explorer La Salle believed that China lay just beyond the impassible rapids upstream of Montreal. Of course it didn't, and what he returned to his home in Lachine from his failed efforts to reach China, he and his companions were mockingly called "Chinese".

3) Forts, forts, forts! There were forts all over the island of Montreal. It would be interesting for a real Montreal historian (i.e. not me) to indicate if any of these still exist, but there were lots of them. I see a fort Roland, fort De La Chine, even a fort Pointe Claire: today an important suburb of the city.

4) The island was crisscrossed by streams. This is not obvious in present day Montreal, and some of these have even been filled in. A modern map of the city, especially in the downtown area, shows no sign of some of the waterways on the map in 1744.

Downtown Montreal today. No streams.

5) Windmills. The city was dotted with them, and they help emphasize the rural nature of the city at the time. Windmills would have been an important part of rural life in the 18th century. There are only a handful of these left today, including the one in Pointe Claire. 

Pittsburgh in 1795 and 1876 and Forts!

My wife and I took a great road-trip from Washington D.C. to Pittsburgh where I stopped in at Shaw Galleries for some map shopping. I ended up buying what I think is the only reproduction in my collection, and yet, it's older than some of the originals I have.

This map shows a plan of Pittsburgh, and its fort from 1795. This, map, however, is almost 100 years more recent than the time it depicts. From what I can find, this map was published by Samuel W. Durant in the 1876 "History of Allegheny Co. Pennsylvania". It is a reproduction of the original map, which I'm pretty sure is this one, held in the University of Pittsburgh library's digital collection:

 The original is quite handsome, but the reproduction has a few interesting features. Forts are always fascinating, and this map provides considerable detail on the Fort at Pittsburgh. Today not much is left of the original fortification built by the British (on the site of an earlier French fort.)

In showing this fort the map almost reveals a kind of self-awareness, that is to say that the map-maker knew that his was a new vision of the city, but that there was a long history before him. The inset shows not only where the previous French fort had been, but also the site of a much smaller frontier fort (itself shown in another inset), but it also shows where roads have since been built passing through and over the site of an important historic feature that no longer exists.

The map also shows a number of Islands in the rivers around the city, including this one with the (in my opinion) charming notation "buckwheat grown in 1795". I note that this remark also seems to appear on the original 1795 map.

I notice, however, that this map shows a number of islands that seem to no longer exist. This well researched piece explains what happened to the islands, which was in most cases erosion. It makes the map even more wonderful as it shows not only man-made change and development over time but also natural changes to the geographic features of the area. Sure enough, a glance at a modern map of the same area shows no islands in the river at all; just bridges, lots and lots of bridges.