Maps > North America(556 items) > U.S. / South (7 items) 
Sort by: 
 
[CIVIL WAR] - [Amiel Weeks WHIPPLE (1818-1863)]

Copy of an Unfinished Map of a Portion of the Military Department of North Eastern Virginia and Fort Monroe compiled in the Bureau of Topographical Engineers War Department from the best and latest authorities ...

Washington: Bureau of Topographical Engineers, August 1861. Sun printed (i.e. photozincographed) map after the original manuscript, routes of railroads and canals hand-coloured, 44 x 51 1/2 inches, dissected into 24 sections and linen-backed as issued. Manuscript annotations in pencil [by J. J. Young?]. Modern blue morocco-backed box. Provenance: Descendants of Amiel Weeks Whipple.

Incredible Civil War map of Virginia, produced by the Corps of Topographical Engineers for use by Union officers in the field.

A highly important military map of Northern Virginia made for the use of the Union Army in the early days of the Civil War, by an important military cartographer. The present map depicts Virginia as far north as Fredericksburg, as far south as the North Carolina border, and as far west as Charlottesville, with detail including towns, roads, waterways, and railroads. A statement on the map cites the U.S. Coast surveys and the Boye map of Virginia as sources, in addition to surveys conducted by the Corps of Topographical Engineers. The map was completed within a month of the first major battle of the war, the Battle of Bull Run, fought on July 21, 1861. The failure of the Union forces there made it clear that the war was not going to be resolved easily and quickly.

Although not named as the cartographer, the present map can be attributed to Amiel Weeks Whipple. During the 1850s, Whipple became one of the most accomplished surveyors in the Corps of Topographical Engineers, leading explorations for the transcontinental railroad. Upon the outbreak of the Civil War, "Captain Whipple was immediately ordered to report to the Chief of Topographical Engineers in Washington. There was then a dearth of maps giving any but the most meagre of information concerning the State of Virginia, and to him as Chief of Topographical Engineers of the defenses of Washington, South of the Potomac, was entrusted the very challenging duty of making armed reconnaissances to collect the topographical details required. It was hazardous work, in a country thickly wooded in places, where small bodies of men could be concealed with absolute impunity; and the first skirmishes of the war, such as that at Fairfax Court House, were fought during its continuance. The work, however, was successfully and very quickly done, and reliable maps were soon in possession of the Union commanders" (Stoddard).

Attribution of this map to Whipple can also be determined by a very similar map, though focussed on Fairfax, Loudoun and Prince William Counties, which identifies Whipple as the source for the manuscript drawn by Civil Engineer J. J. Young (see Stephenson 536.6). That map is in essence the companion to the present map, i.e. showing the northern regions of Virginia not shown on this map. The handwriting of the manuscript used for that map and the present map are identical, suggesting both to have been drawn by Young. Interestingly, the present map includes pencil annotations, again in the same hand (see for example the naming of the branches of the Elizabeth River near Norfolk).

That this map was done specifically for use in the field is suggested by the hurried process of its production. Rather than taking the time to have the map lithographed or engraved, a sun print process was used to duplicate the original manuscript. Sun prints, also called photozincography, were developed in Great Britain in the mid-19th century to reproduce maps created during the Ordnance Survey. In this photographic process, a negative is made of the original using a wet plate collodion method, which is then exposed onto a thin sheet coated with a saturated potassium bichromate solution and transferred to a zinc plate, coated in ink and put through a press.

The present copy descended in the family of Whipple and includes a manuscript presentation below the cartouche, "To accompany letter to / dated Bureau of Topogl. Eng.s Augt 1861." The name of the recipient is not filled in, suggesting that Whipple kept this copy for himself.

The map is very rare, with OCLC citing but three known examples.

Stephenson, Civil War Maps, 451.6; Francis R. Stoddard, "Amiel Weeks Whipple" in Chronicles of Oklahoma, vol. 28 (Autumn 1950).

#26345$17,500.00
 
 
[CIVIL WAR] - W. E. MERRILL

Map of Northern Georgia, made under the Direction of Capt. W. E. Merrill

Chattanooga: 2 May 1864. Lithographed folding map, sectioned and linen-backed as issued. Original card covers, printed paper label. In a modern folding morocco-backed box. Sheet size: 39 x 35 inches.

A remarkable Union Army field map, printed for Sherman's operations in Georgia.

A highly detailed map of the northern part of Georgia, made under the direction of Capt. W. E. Merrill, Chief Topographical Engineer of the Army of the Cumberland. The map shows all the major roads and rail lines, in addition to natural topographical features, in northern Georgia. The map extends as far north as Chattanooga near the Georgia/Tennessee state line, and far enough south and east to include the northwest sixth of the state.

The capture of Chattanooga in November 1863 gave the Union the foothold they needed to cut off supply lines and advance into the deep South. In the spring of 1864 the forces under Gen. William T. Sherman were poised to strike. As soon as Chattanooga was taken, Sherman's chief topographical engineer, Capt. William E. Merrill, "the most innovative and conscientious exponent of mapping during the Civil War", began to compile a map of northwest Georgia.

Merrill had his own complete establishment for map production -- a printing press, lithographic presses, and draughtsmen. Equally importantly, Merrill's assistant Sgt. N. Finnegan developed an extraordinary body of intelligence, drawing on spies, prisoners, refugees, peddlars, itinerant preachers and scouts, what Merrill called "his motley crew". All of this information was digested by Merrill day by day, until he was notified that the campaign would begin within the week. At this point the topographers finished their work, and two hundred copies were produced, mounted on linen for field use, and distributed to field commanders down to the brigade level. In five months Merrill and his men had produced a remarkably accurate map of country that lay mostly behind enemy lines.

The Merrill map was a critical aid to Sherman's campaigns in Georgia. Five days after the map was completed, on May 7, Sherman's army left Chattanooga and began its hard-fought push to the southeast, slowly driving the Confederates back to the railroad hub of Atlanta (which is in the lower right quadrant of this map). In a campaign of continual attempts by both armies to outflank each other, the understanding of the ground it would have brought the Union commanders was invaluable. Sherman took possession of Atlanta in September, and used it as a base of operations for the next two and a half months while he raided in every direction, all within the boundaries of this map. On November 15 the Federal forces burned the city, cut loose from their rail communications with Chattanooga, and began the famous March to the Sea, heading east toward Savannah, burning and pillaging everything in their path. About a week later they moved off the east edge of this map.

An examination shows why this map would have been an invaluable aid to the Union commanders in the Georgia campaign. It details topography, rivers, existing roads and railroads, towns and other features on a very small scale of four miles to the inch. Conveying the latest in Union military intelligence and combining new and existing information, it would have guided Sherman and his officers through eight months of the hardest-fought campaigning of the entire Civil War. A triumph of coordinated intelligence and map-making, it is one of the most remarkable cartographic productions of the Civil War. Indeed, it might be called the "Holster Atlas" of the Georgia campaign.

Stephenson, Civil War Maps in the Library of Congress, S28-29; Miller, Great Maps of the Civil War, p.39.

#26136$13,500.00
 
 
[CIVIL WAR, Confederate] - [BUCHOLTZ, Lewis von].

Map of the State of Virginia containing the counties, principal towns, railroads, rivers, canals & all other internal improvements

Richmond: West & Johnson, 1862. Folding lithographed pocket map, ornamental border, inset view of Richmond. Sheet size: 27 1/2 x 37 inches. Folds into original dark blue and gilt card covers. (Minor candle wax stains). Provenance: David B. Langston, 3d Georgia Regiment, Company K (pencil signature).

Rare Confederate pocket map of Virginia, with provenance to an officer in the 3rd Georgia.

This impressive Confederate map of Virginia was originally based upon work done by Ludwig von Bucholtz, in connection with his updating the famed Herman Boye map of Virginia in 1858. Bucholtz was hired to re-engrave the copperplates for maps of Virginia originally made by Herman Boye in 1826. The ultimate products of his work were the very large maps of Virginia called the Boye-Bucholtz maps. Using knowledge from his work on this project, Bucholtz issued his own map in 1858, lithographed & published by Ritchie & Dunnavant in Richmond. This map was vastly superior in detail and accuracy to Bucholtz's revision of the Boye map.

In 1862, with the need of good maps of the region for use by Confederate officers, Richmond publishers West & Johnson re-issued the Bucholtz-Ludwig 1858 map of Virginia, reprinted from the original stone with minor alterations (including the removal of the cartographer's name). "There are minor geographic changes from Map 1 [the original 1858 Bucholtz map] on Map 2 [the West & Johnson issue]. For example, on Map 2 Jerusalem in Southampton Co. has been moved a little to the northwest of its Map 1 location near the Seaboard and Roanoke Railroad, and the road between the two points imperfectly erased (the remaining shadow is additional evidence that the Map 1 stone was involved). Still, for the most part, Map 1 and Map 2 are the same map" (Wooldridge, The Bucholtz-Ludwig Map of Virginia and its Successors"). A second edition of the West & Johnson issue would be published in 1864.

The map shows all of Virginia, West Virginia, Maryland, Delaware, and parts of Pennsylvania and New Jersey and includes an inset view of Capitol Square in Richmond. A chart below the view lists all the railroads with the length of each line. Interestingly, several additional routes winding from Fredericksburg to Gettysburg have been added faintly in pencil. The contemporary ownership inscription on the front pastedown reads: "D B Langston, Company K, 3rd Ga. Reg't, Anderson's Division." David B. Langston reached the rank of captain of the 3rd Georgia Infantry in the Confederate army, commanding its Company K, otherwise known as the Athens Guards. He was wounded at Chancellorsville.

"In stark contrast to the large, often colored maps pouring out of Northern presses, the Confederate imprints are few in number, modest in scale, and more often than not black and white, printed on poor paper. Long before the war was over, they weren't being printed at all" (Wooldridge).

Parrish & Willingham 6204; Swem 971; Wooldridge, "The Bucholtz-Ludwig Map of Virginia and its Successors" in The Portolan, 68 (Spring, 2007), pp.26-39; Stephenson 475.5; Wooldridge 254.

#27015$12,000.00
 
 
ELLICOTT, Andrew (1754-1820), and Pierre Charles L'ENFANT (1754-1825)

Plan of the City of Washington

Philadelphia: Thackara & Vallance, 1792 [but later impression printed on 19th century wove paper]. Engraved map by Thackara & Vallance. Sheet size: 21 3/4 x 29 inches.

A fine copy of the first of "official" plan of Washington, D.C.

First published in November 1792, this plan is the fifth recorded engraving of the L'Enfant/Ellicott city plan, three of the four earlier engravings were issued in periodicals, making the present large scale work only the second separately issued engraving of the planned lay-out of Washington. The first appearance of the plan (also engraved by Thackara & Vallance) was in March 1792, when it was produced to illustrate an article "Description of the City of Washington, in the territory of Columbia, ceded by the States of Virginia and Maryland to the United States, by them established as the Seat of their Government after the year 1800" which was included in the March issue (pp.155-156) of the periodical The Universal Asylum and Columbian Magazine (Philadelphia: William Young, March 1792). The first folio separately issued plan was engraved by Samuel Hill: it does not include the soundings in the Potomac that are included in the present map.

The national capital city, as depicted in the present plan, is laid out according to a plan originally proposed by Pierre Charles L'Enfant (1754-1825) and modified by Andrew Ellicott (1754-1820). L'Enfant "was born in Paris where he trained to be an architect. He came to America in 1777, and served George Washington as an engineer during the Revolutionary War. In 1791 President Washington asked L'Enfant to design the new capitol city in the District of Columbia. L'Enfant designed a city similar in layout to the then French capitol city of Versailles ... The Commissioners of the City of Washington wanted to have a printed copy of the plan when they began to sell building lots. L'Enfant irritated them by working slowly and releasing only sketchy plans . On instruction from President Washington, Thomas Jefferson on February 27, 1792 wrote a letter to L'Enfant dismissing him as city planner." (Washington Map Society, online). Ellicott " trained to be a mathematician and surveyor. He conducted several large surveys with David Rittenhouse, the Philadelphia astronomer, mathematician, and clockmaker. President Washington in 1791 asked Ellicott to survey the bounds of the District of Columbia. The following year Washington asked him to complete L'Enfant's plan for the city. Ellicott made some changes to L'Enfant's plan. He changed the alignment of Massachusetts Avenue, eliminated five short radial avenues, added two short radial avenues southeast and southwest of the Capitol, and named the city streets... A few months later Ellicott, like L'Enfant, found himself at odds with the Commissioners and resigned from the project."

"The authority to establish a federal capital was provided in Article One, Section 8, of the United States Constitution, which permits a 'District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States'. James Madison explained the need for a federal district on January 23, 1788 in the Federalist No. 43, arguing that the national capital needed to be distinct from the states, in order to provide for its own maintenance and safety ...The Constitution, however, does not specify a location for the new capital. In what later became known as the Compromise of 1790, Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and Thomas Jefferson came to an agreement that the federal government would assume war debt carried by the states, on the condition that the new national capital would be located in the South. On July 16, 1790, the Residence Act provided for a new permanent capital to be located on the Potomac River, the exact area to be selected by President Washington... Both Maryland and Virginia ceded portions of their territory to form the new capital. A new 'federal city' was constructed on the north bank of the Potomac ... On September 9, 1791, the federal city was named in honor of George Washington and the district was named the Territory of Columbia... Congress held its first session in Washington on November 17, 1800." (Wikipedia)

James Thackara (1767-1848) "was curator for the Pennsylvania Academy of Fine Arts from 1816 to 1828, and he is listed as an engraver in the Philadelphia City Directories from 1791 to 1833. His partnership with John Vallance [1770-1823] is listed in the 1794 City Directory. He and his son William formed the firm of Thackara and Son in 1832. Thackara was elected Commissioner of the District of Southwark Philadelphia in 1797, and served as clerk of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives from 1807 to 1810".

Burr The Federal City Depicted pp.69-70; Evans 24296; Stauffer II, 3153; Streeter Americana-Beginnings pp.35-36; Wheat & Brun 531; Reps, Washington on View p. 38

#13819$5,500.00
 
 
ELLICOTT, Andrew (1754-1820), and Pierre Charles L'ENFANT (1754-1825)

Plan of the City of Washington

Washington: U. S. Senate , [no date, originally 1792, but 1852]. Engraved by Samuel Hill. Originally folded, skilful repairs to separations at folds. Sheet size: 18 1/8 x 22 inches.

Issued in "Maps of the District of Columbia and city of Washington", this is a fine 19th century re-issue of the first separately published plan of Washington. It was published by the U. S. Senate in 1852.

The city's lay-out derived from a number of ideas , Washington's and Jefferson's most famously, but owes most of its initial configuration to Pierre Charles L'Enfant (1754-1825), who had served under Washington during the war as an engineer. Spreading out from the crux of the Potomac and its East Branch in a north-south grid, the city has superimposed upon it fifteen avenues (for the fifteen states as of 1792) that radiate from the White House or Capitol or parallel one of those radiant avenues. These, happily, violate the obligatory grid and that provide circles at the many-branched intersections and create broad axes from horizon to horizon.

The Federal City, as depicted in the present plan, was modified by Andrew Ellicott (1754-1820). Troubles between the Commissioners of the City and L'Enfant because they needed to have a printed copy of the plan in order to sell building lots. L'Enfant irritated them by working slowly and releasing only sketchy plans . On instruction from President Washington, Thomas Jefferson on February 27, 1792 wrote a letter to L'Enfant dismissing him as city planner." (Washington Map Society, online). Ellicott " trained to be a mathematician and surveyor. He conducted several large surveys with David Rittenhouse, the Philadelphia astronomer, signed from the project."

"The authority to establish a federal capital was provided in Article One, Section 8, of the United States Constitution, which permits a 'District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States'. James Madison explained the need for a federal district on January 23, 1788 in the Federalist No. 43, arguing that the national capital needed to be distinct from the states, in order to provide for its own maintenance and safety ...The Constitution, however, does not specify a location for the new capital. In what later became known as the Compromise of 1790, Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and Thomas Jefferson came to an agreement that the federal government would assume war debt carried by the states, on the condition that the new national capital would be located in the South. On July 16, 1790, the Residence Act provided for a new permanent capital to be located on the Potomac River, the exact area to be selected by President Washington... Both Maryland and Virginia ceded portions of their territory to form the new capital. A new 'federal city' was constructed on the north bank of the Potomac ... On September 9, 1791, the federal city was named in honor of George Washington and the district was named the Territory of Columbia... Congress held its first session in Washington on November 17, 1800." (Wikipedia)

Wheat & Brun 530; Reps, Washington on View, p.36-37;

#18675$1,500.00
 
 
KEULEN, Johannes van (1654-1715)

Pas kaart Van de Boght van Florida Met de canaal tusschen Florida en Cuba door C. J. Vooght geometra

Amsterdam: Johannes van Keulen, [1687]. Copper engraved map, period hand-colouring. Sheet size: 21 x 24 1/4 inches.

Van Keulen's excellent chart of Florida and Cuba with highly attractive period colour.

This very handsome chart of parts of Florida and Cuba was first published by Johannes van Keulen in his Zee-Fakkel in 1684, but can also be found in his Zee-Atlas. The present example is in Burden's second state with the page number '15' engraved in the lower left corner. The drawing was done by Claes Jansz. Vooght. Though not the first Dutch chart to be published of the region, this chart derives from entirely different, original sources. "It is the first sea chart of the eastern portion of the Gulf of Mexico detailing the west coast of Florida" (Burden).

The chart is oriented with north to the left hand side of the sheet. A good deal of the western coast of the peninsula and the western part of the region are depicted. As the title suggests, the "canal" between Florida and Cuba is demonstrated, and a good portion of the western half of Cuba is shown.

The chart includes three inset maps of Cuban harbors: Havana, Matanzas and what is called Baja Hondo, possibly Golfo de Guanahacabibes.

The cartouche is attractively decorated with Neptune, god of the sea, and one of the gods of the winds, probably Zephir.

Burden The Mapping of North America II, 591, state 2; Koeman, The Sea on Paper, 1972; Koeman Atlantes Neelandici IV, Keu109A, no.15 & p.380; Martin & Martin, Maps of Texas and the Southwest pp.84-85; cf Phillips Atlases nos. 530, 3444 & 3453.

#24793$4,500.00
 
 
KEULEN, Johannes van (1654-1715)

Pas Kaart Van de Kust van Carolina tusschen C de Canaveral en C Henry door C. J. Vooght geometra

Amsterdam: Johannis van Keulen, [1687]. Copper engraved map, period hand colouring. Sheet size: 21 1/8 x 24 1/4 inches.

An attractive map with an inset of Charleston Harbour, the mouths of the Ashley and Cooper rivers and showing the settlement before it was moved from the west bank of the Ashley. This copy in Burden's second state, with period hand colouring.

An excellent copy of Burden's second state with the number '18' engraved at the lower left corner. Burden notes that the cartographer C.J. Vooght draws on unpublished sources for this map, but that the "southern regions still call upon old Spanish nomenclature ... The immediate Carolina coastline is ... compressed on a northerly axis and does not utilise the advances made in the Second Lords Proprietors map of 1682 ... The more southerly of the Outer Bank sounds differ from earlier depictions and C. Hatteras is less prominent also. The soundings off more northerly Outer Banks are from an unknown but presumably English source" (Burden).

Burden The Mapping of North America II, 589, state 2; Cumming & De Vorsey 91; Koeman Atlantes Neelandici IV, Keu109A, no.18 & p.376; cf Phillips Atlases nos. 530, 3444 & 3453.

#24791$5,000.00
 
Copyright © 2002-2011 Donald A. Heald