Map of the states of North & South Carolina. (with) Plan of Charleston. London, published June 1 by I.T. Hinton & Simpkin & Marshall. Engraved & printed by Fenner Sears & Co. (1832)

On a trip to Asheville, North Carolina I was keen to come back with a map as a souvenier, but couldn't find anywhere in town that sold them. My wife and I therefore embarked on a bit of a goose (map) chase to out of the way antique shops on back roads 'till we came across a barn full of antiques. None of it was really interesting to me, and some of it fell into the category of "who would buy that"? Somehow, however, tucked in a corner, on a wall on the barn I found this fascinating specimen which I have since learned is properly titled: "Map of the states of North & South Carolina. (with) Plan of Charleston. London, published June 1 by I.T. Hinton & Simpkin & Marshall. Engraved & printed by Fenner Sears & Co. (1832)"

As always, a much higher quality, zoomable image of the map is available through Rumsey, but the one on that site is coloured, while mine is not.

The map comes from an atlas, as is clear from looking at it on Rumsey. The copy I have shows some interesting signs of that. There are a few small tears in it, where the binding must have been. It was framed when I bought it, so I have not been able to examine what's on its reverse, but close inspection shows that it must have been in a closed atlas for a long time before anyone ever opened it up. Each side of the page is slightly stained with an image of the opposite side. Look at these examples:

 

You may need to look quite closely, but there is definitely some staining to the paper from having likely been closed in a book, and possibly under pressure, for an extended period.

There are a few other elements of this map I find interesting. The Outer Banks, today a highly popular tourist destination, is very low on detail in this map. With an important exception, Roanoke Island. 

There's not much on or around Roanoke Island at this time to merit a mention, especially when other smaller islands nearby have nothing on them. Roanoke, however, is the site of the lost colony, and would likely have been of interest to Americans and British (the map was published in London) alike. The Island still presents mysteries to historians and holds an important place in American, British and North American history, so its inclusion is logical.

Another place that is in the Outer Banks and which also plays an important historical role but which is absent from this map, is Kitty Hawk, site of the first powered flight in 1903. Even today it's not a big town, and at the time, may simply not have existed at all, but it's impossible to imagine any map showing the Outer Banks after 1903 not at least indicating it's location.

I also find the inset plan of Charleston to be quite curious.

Obviously, Charleston of today is much larger, but this inset is interesting because it lacks so much detail. Two rivers are named, but there are no street names, so sites of interest, no names for the inlets or canals, the harbour, nothing. It's not even clear if the city ends at the northernmost east-west street, or if it just fades out of sight because of the size of the inset. The inset gives the view a sense of the size of the city, but otherwise, tells very little about it. I'm not sure why that is. Similarly missing is Fort Sumter, whose role in the history of the U.S. Civil War would likely guarantee its inclusion on any maps after 1860. In doing some research on this map I have found that this plan of Charleston predates any to appear in any American published atlas, which makes it somewhat unique.

Another point: I tend to research my maps as much as I can to get a sense of whether there are others out there and how much they sell for. I have only found one vendor of this map. It gives me the sense that what I have is quite scarce and perhaps a real treasure. It makes it that much more interesting to own, and I'm honored to be able to have it and care for it.

The Land of Moriah, or Jerusalem

What place in the world has more meaning to people, or more historical significance than Jerusalem?

I bought this map of Jerusalem at M. Pollak's map store in Tel Aviv. I really like this one and was very excited to buy it.

The map is titled "Land of Moriah or Environs of Jerusalem". The map maker is Thomas Starling, and printed at the bottom is "London, Published for the proprietors. by Mr. Bull, Holles Street Cavendish Square". An inscription on the back from the seller indicates that the original date of publication was 1836. This date, however, does not appear on the map itself.

That's about all I know about the map. Research shows that Starling published a few atlases, including some in the U.S., but I can't figure out which one this would be from.

What I can point out are some of the really unique features of this map, starting with the name, Land of Moriah. The name alone is controversial as it's a biblical name about which scholars disagree. Some say that it refers only to the site in Jerusalem where the Temple of Solomon stood, while others say it may refer to a region, as shown on this map. There are differences based on religious belief as well.

The map is interesting as it shows how the land would have been divided between at least two of the 12 tribes of Israel, here, Judah is in the south and Benjamin in the north. It also has a great little plan of old Jerusalem with certain important sites pointed out.

To really get an appreciation for some of the more interesting details on this small map, one needs to look much more closely.

For example, there's a tiny cross on the Mount Calvary. A structure is simply identified as "the temple" and "the City of David" all appear in the small plan of Jerusalem.

The map also notes the site of at least two biblical battles between the Israelites and the Ammonites and the Philistines.

Bethlehem, and the road between it and Jerusalem are shown on the map, alongside "David's Cistern" and "Solomon's Fountains". All of these, are, of course, biblical sites.

There is also reference to sites of "idol worship" and a number of other specific places found in biblical reference.

This is a small, but attractive map that is meant to show not only a biblical history, but may also reflect an interest in such matters at the time. The effort that went into making such a map, must have some positive correlation to the contemporary demand for such a product.

I only wish I knew a bit more about this map and its origins, and I welcome insights from those who know more about this publisher and this cartographer than I do.