Rare Maps and Prints
- World & Celestial
- North America
- West Indies, South & Central America
- British Isles
- British Isles
- English counties
- Large-scale
- Bedfordshire
- Berkshire
- Buckinghamshire
- Cambridgeshire
- Cheshire
- Cornwall
- Cumberland
- Derbyshire
- Devon
- Dorset
- Durham
- Essex
- Gloucestershire
- Hampshire
- Herefordshire
- Hertfordshire
- Huntingdonshire
- Islands
- Kent
- Lancashire
- Leicestershire
- Lincolnshire
- Middlesex
- Norfolk
- Northamptonshire
- Northumberland
- Nottinghamshire
- Oxfordshire
- Rutland
- Shropshire
- Somerset
- Staffordshire
- Suffolk
- Surrey
- Sussex
- Warwickshire
- Westmoreland
- Wiltshire
- Worcestershire
- Yorkshire
- Wales
- Scotland
- Ireland
- Western Europe
- Eastern Europe
- Middle East
- Africa
- Asia
- Australasia & Pacific
- Decorative Prints
- Title Pages
Mr. Philip D. Burden
P.O. Box 863,
Chalfont St. Giles, Bucks HP6 9HD,
UNITED KINGDOM
Tel: +44 (0) 1494 76 33 13
Email: enquiries@caburden.com
William Tunnicliff (fl.1784-96) was a land surveyor and cartographer. In 1787, he began publishing a series of ‘Topographical Surveys’ of individual counties. In that year, he was also advertising for employment and it seems that the series was a stop gap to further employment. His earliest maps are of Lancashire, Staffordshire and Cheshire, all smaller in size. Tunnicliff included much industrial information and focused on canals, a feature which was dramatically changing the landscape at the time. Later maps were focused more on the counties to the south and west as here. Indeed, the year of this publication 1791 marked the last and included in one volume the counties of Hampshire, Wiltshire, Dorset, Somerset, Devon and Cornwall. Offered here is the part of the volume on Cornwall.
We have had the Cornish map before and were surprised when referring to it to note that they were DIFFERENT STATES of the same plate. The most obvious difference is the position of the title, here lower right and in the other map upper left! Both are worded identically and dated 1791. In addition to this ‘The Eddistone’ was engraved horizontally on the other map, here it is angled. Notable also is the compass marker. On the other map, it is pointing directly to the top of the map, presumably true north. Here it is slightly west or magnetic north. We have determined that this example is in the second state. As far as I am aware this discovery is not recorded anywhere. Smith’s article specifically notes that in this work only that of Somerset had been previously issued. It is feasible that Tunnicliff began production of the 1791 ‘Topographical Survey’ following that of the counties of Somerset, Gloucester, Worcester, Stafford, Cheshire and Lancaster published in 1789. One theory might be that as with the earlier collection of counties they were made available individually. That might explain the different states. Fordham (1924) p. 41; Quixley (1966) no. 46; Smith, David (1989) ‘The Maps of William Tunnicliff, Reluctant County Map-Maker’, in IMCoS Journal 39 pp. 19-27; Upcott (1968) I p. xxvii.
We have had the Cornish map before and were surprised when referring to it to note that they were DIFFERENT STATES of the same plate. The most obvious difference is the position of the title, here lower right and in the other map upper left! Both are worded identically and dated 1791. In addition to this ‘The Eddistone’ was engraved horizontally on the other map, here it is angled. Notable also is the compass marker. On the other map, it is pointing directly to the top of the map, presumably true north. Here it is slightly west or magnetic north. We have determined that this example is in the second state. As far as I am aware this discovery is not recorded anywhere. Smith’s article specifically notes that in this work only that of Somerset had been previously issued. It is feasible that Tunnicliff began production of the 1791 ‘Topographical Survey’ following that of the counties of Somerset, Gloucester, Worcester, Stafford, Cheshire and Lancaster published in 1789. One theory might be that as with the earlier collection of counties they were made available individually. That might explain the different states. Fordham (1924) p. 41; Quixley (1966) no. 46; Smith, David (1989) ‘The Maps of William Tunnicliff, Reluctant County Map-Maker’, in IMCoS Journal 39 pp. 19-27; Upcott (1968) I p. xxvii.