This remarkable English manuscript map of North America was probably prepared circa 1650, in conjunction with a proposal to establish a colony in North Carolina (‘Carolana’). The fact that the manuscript was drawn on costly vellum, as opposed to paper, strongly suggests that it was prepared as an official document for some figure involved in the proposed settlement. The idiosyncratic detail of the map strongly suggests a connection with John Farrah, mapmaker, and former Deputy Treasurer of the Virginia company, who was very active in ‘Carolana’ affairs at this time.

The English colony ‘Carolana’ had its origin in a 1629 grant to Sir Robert Heath, Solicitor General of England (1621), Attorney General (1625), and member of the council of the Virginia company (to 1624). Heath was granted all that part of North America between 31 degrees and 36 degrees north latitude, extending west to include the English rights to all territory west of the Appalachian Mountains between those latitudes. In the original charter, King Charles I, the grantor, named the new proprietorship ‘Carolana’, after himself. Heath had no success in promoting settlement within his grant, and in 1638, he assigned his rights to Henry Frederick Howard, Lord Maltravers (the future Earl of Arundel). Lord Maltravers had wide interests in the American colonies. He was a member of the New England Company and had been among those who sought royal support for the English West India Company in 1637.

William S Powell (p. 11) notes that “Following the trial and execution of Charles I in January 1649, interest in the North Carolina region suddenly grew.” This burgeoning interest parallels the migration of former supporters of the King [the Cavaliers] to Virginia during the same period. On the 2 May 1649, a promotional track was published in a London newspaper, ‘The Moderate Intelligencer’, entitled ‘A Description of ‘Carolana’ by a ‘Well-Willer’:

“There is A Gentleman going over Governor into Carolana in America, and many Gentlemen of quality and their families follow him.” From the south side of the James [River in Virginia] two rivers, the Elizabeth and Nansemond, “convey you into Carolana, so that this river [the James] is a haven to both colonies … If this that hath been said give encouragement to any, let them repair to Mr. Edmund Thorowgood, A Virginia Merchant, living in White-Cross-Street [London] … He will inform the Governour, from whom you will understand when and how to prepare themselves …”

A second tract, William Bullock’s ‘Virginia Impartially Examined’, was passed for publication under the Commonwealth on 19 April 1649. It was dedicated to Lord Maltravers and Lord Baltimore. But by far the most important of the ‘Carolana’ promotional tracts was Edward Williams’, ‘Virgo Triumphans, or Virginia richly and truly valued; more especially the South part thereof: viz. The fertile Carolana …’ London: John Stevenson, 1650. In the address to the reader, Williams writes that “The whole substance of it (‘Virgo Triumphans’) was communicated to me by a Gentleman of merit and quality … Mr. John Farrar of Geding in Huntingdonshire.” John Farrar, formerly Deputy Treasurer for the Virginia Company, is best remembered today as the author of A Mapp of Virginia discouered to ye Falls’, 1651 (Burden 303). What is not commonly understood is that this rare map had its genesis in Farrar’s interest in the proposed colony of ‘Carolana’.

Farrar’s personal copy of the 1650 edition of ‘Virgo Triumphans’ is in the New York Public Library. Cumming notes that the copy is in fact filled with marginalia in Farrar’s hand, “which show how much more information [on ‘Carolana’] he had at hand than Williams used.” Farrar has also tipped in a manuscript map of his own making, entitled ‘Ould Virginia 1584 now Carolana 1650 (Cumming & De Vorsey 46). On page 1, Farrar has written in ink “… a map hath binn very proper to this Book For all men love to see the country as well as to heare of it …”

Farrar evidently suggested to Williams that subsequent editions of ‘Virgo Triumphans’ be supplemented with such a map, and the printed ‘A Mapp of Virginia discouered to ye Falls’ was especially prepared for inclusion in the 1651 edition. The map is also found in some copies of Edward Bland’s ‘Discovery of New Brittaine’, also published by Stevenson, London, 1651, which Cumming says, “described Bland’s expedition into ‘the fertile Carolana’.” This famous engraved map, which is a modified copy of the 1650 manuscript, is among the legendary rarities of southern cartography.

In the spring of 1654, but Virginian, Francis Yeardley, son of the late Governor, Sir George Yeardley, wrote in detail to John Farrar of an expedition the previous fall to “South Virginia or Carolana.” It is worth noting that in 1647, Francis Yeardley had married the widow of Captain Adam Thorowgood, of lower Norfolk County, Virginia, a kinsman of Edward Thorowgood, the London agent for Lord Maltravers proposed 1649 settlement in ‘Carolana’.

The Relationship between the Farrar Map and the English Manuscript Map

The promotional ‘A Description of ‘Carolana’ by a ‘Well-Willer’, does not identify the “Gentleman going over Governor onto Carolana” nor the “Knights and Gentleman” who were subscribers to the venture. But the evidence shows that if John Farrar was not directly involved in the colonisation effort, he must have been in close contact with his members in an advisory capacity. Cumming notes that Farrar’s 1651 now “is the only reference to Heath’s grant of 1629 found on an extent contemporary [printed] map.” In fact, Farrar’s map does not show Heath’s grant according to its limits as set down in original charter but applies the name ‘Carolana’ only to the region between the Roanoke and the Chowan Rivers, the exact area in which the 1649 settlement was to be established. Farrar’s map is most famous for its inclusion of a great ‘The Sea of China and the Indies’ immediately beyond the Appalachian Mountains. This detail would have been of great interest to Lord Maltravers, who held nominal title to all the land included in the original grant, which extended far beyond those mountains. Farrar’s map promotes the fact that any successful colony in ‘Carolana’ would have legal access to ports on this western sea, and thus the trade with “China and the Indies”. While the English manuscript map includes a much vaster area than Farrar’s map – virtually all of North America – it is the only other known 17th century English map which agrees with Farrar’s maps on these two crucial points.

However, on the Englishman manuscript, the great transappalachian sea is called ‘The South Sea’, not ‘The Sea of China and the Indies’. That these names were interchangeable to Farrar is proved by his comment ‘in A Perfect Description of Virginia’, a promotional tract which he wrote and published in 1649.

“… from the head of James River above the falls … will be found like rivers issuing into a south sea or a west sea … of this certainty Mr. Hen. Briggs, that most judicious and learned mathematician, wrote a small tractate [1623]” … where Master Briggs speaks of a South Sea “on the other side of the mountains beyond our falls, which openeth a free and fair passage to China.” (cited by Cumming & De Vorsey).

Equally important is the presence on both the Farrar and the English manuscript map of the little Nansemond River, in Southside Virginia. With the Elizabeth, the Nansemond was one of two rivers that ‘The Moderate Intelligencer’ tract identifies as the means of conveyance from Virginia “into Carolana”. The significance of the inclusion of the Nansemond (on the English manuscript, ‘Nansamun’) is given its proper perspective with the recognition that it is one of only four place names given for Virginia on the English manuscript (with ‘Chesapeake’, ‘Jamestown’, and ‘Accomack’). Like Farrar’s map, all the evidence points to the English manuscript as having been prepared in conjunction with the 1649 proposal to establish a permanent colony in ‘Carolana’.

Dating the English Manuscript Map

While the evidence suggests that the English manuscript map was drawn around the year 1650, specifically to promote the colony of Carolana, it is important to establish that the map contains no details that would nullify this theory. Does the map include any details that would preclude construction during the period in question?

The manuscript is a general map of that part of North America south of the St. Lawrence (‘The River of Canada’), and the Great Lakes. Three Great Lakes (east to west: ‘Lake St. Louis’, Mare Dulce’, and ‘La Grand Lake’), are shown, after the 1632 map of Champlain (Burden 237). An unnamed Lake Champlain is connected to the St. Lawrence by a ‘Riv. Champlain’. To the east of the latter is ‘New England’, where several place names are given, including ‘Salem’ (founded 1626), ‘Cape Cod’, ‘Nantucket’, and ‘Martha’s Vinyard’. There is no sign of the English colonies of New York and New Jersey (founded 1664) the entire region between the Hudson from the Delaware is labelled the ‘New Netherland’. ‘Fort Orange’ (founded in 1624), the ‘Hudson River’ and ‘Helgate’ are named. Long Island is shown divided by a channel and is similar in form to Sir Robert Dudley’s map of New England, 1647 (Burden 278).

Delaware (‘De la Warr’) Bay and River are given their present name, first introduced on the Lord Baltimore’s map, 1635 (Burden 240). The Delaware River is given the same form as on the figurative map of Cornelis Hendricks, 1616 (Stokes C.Pl. 24), and flows from a large unnamed lake in what is now upstate New York. On the Chesapeake, the English colony of ‘Maryland’, founded 1634, is named. In the southeast, two large mythical lakes appear. These were introduced by Jodocus Hondius in 1606 (Burden 151) and were a mainstay of American cartography until the 1650s. (see for example Burden, 318 & 319). The Appalachian Mountains are shown as a continuous unbroken chain and stretches from South Carolina to upstate New York. In this regard, the English manuscripts once again agree with Farrar. The interior of North America is devoid of detail, except for the vast ‘A Branch of the South Sea Not yet discovered’, which is joined to the Pacific by an undelineated passage. California appears with its upper parts also under undelineated.

Finally, there is the matter of name ‘Carolana’. William Cumming shows that prior to 1663, the name ‘Carolana’ was consistently used in England for the region south of Virginia. In that year, Heath’s old grant was superseded by a new patent issued by King Charles II, in which the region was called ‘Carolina’, a name that was henceforth universally used (Cumming & De Vorsey, p. 14). In summary, this detail suggests a date of no earlier than 1634, the date of the founding of Maryland, and no later than 1664, the date of the English conquest stop of New Netherland. Regarding the latter, it is difficult to believe that even the most retrograde post-1664 English man would neglect to show the transition of New Netherland to New York. The year 1650 falls midway between 1634 and 1664, indeed all the evidence points to this period.

The authorship of the English Manuscript Map

Philip Burden, the author of ‘The Mapping of North America’, has investigated the possible authorship of the English manuscript map. He believes that the map’s calligraphy was the work of ‘two distinct hands’:

“the character ‘a’ can be found in two distinct forms. The assumption is that one did the general outline of the map and regional names, the other did the more regional toponyms. This argues for a more major chart maker to have been its author, as a minor one would have been less likely to employ others to help with production.”

A “major chart maker” would have been a logical choice for such a seemingly important map, an importance which is confirmed by the choice of costly vellum as a medium as opposed to paper. A precedent for our manuscript is the so-called Virginia Company Chart (1606-1608), which I. N. Phelps Stokes (C. pl. 21A) believed to have been “issued, probably, by the Virginia Company.” The latter chart seems to have been prepared to show the claims of the Virginia Company, and the coastline of the territory included in the Patent of the Company is coloured green. Like the English manuscript map, the Virginia Company Chart is drawn in ink and watercolour on a roll of vellum. Vellum was the material of choice for the Thames School of Chartmakers. Burden says:

“A study of the Thames school reveals that it is not uncommon for charts to be unsigned or undated. Also, many of the chart makers of the so-called Thames school had apprentices which would explain the two different hands. There should be no question of the chart being drawn up along the banks of the Thames, and therefore falling into this school. Chartmakers tended to have geographical areas of expertise and a study of the time frame and region would tend to point to Nicholas Comberford. He was the only map maker identifiable during this time frame who produced charts of North America. There are similarities of lettering also, particularly noticeable with the ‘R’ and ‘a’. Comberford was however known for being decorative so this would not have been a major production of his. Indeed, it was later in time that these charts became more decorative. This can be seen by its size, and quite probably scale.”

One last feature the map deserves mention. On the back is the following notation in a 17th century hand:

“This vellam and paper I brought with me out of England as I remember about 18 yeares past the vellam decay’d through the moisture of the place.”

This we can see that after its construction, the map was taken “out of England”, probably by someone connected with the 1649 proposal to settle a colony in ‘Carolana’. One of England’s American colonies was the most probable destination; one in which “moisture”, or humidity, was a particular problem. Virginia or the Carolinas fit this description much better than the colonies to the north. Although the gentlemen involved in 1649 proposal remain anonymous, we can be certain that they were men of prominence, at least some of whom must have been prominent in Virginia affairs. We have seen, for example, that a member of the well-known Virginia family of Thorowgood acted as the London agent for the proposed colony. It is probable that one of these men emigrated to America in conjunction with the unsuccessful 1649 attempt, or shortly afterward.

In summary, the English manuscript map was prepared by a member of the well-known English school or chartmakers, the Thames school, for some person or persons involved in Lord Maltravers 1649 proposal to establish a permanent colony in North Carolina (‘Carolana’). The importance of the map is expressed in the use of vellum as opposed to paper, and the chartmaker based his configuration on the same sources as those used by John Farrar for his maps of 1650 and 1651. It is possible, even probable that Farrar had a hand in supplying these sources. The map’s express purpose was twofold:

1 – To show the site of the proposed colony of ‘Carolana’, on the Roanoke and Chowan Rivers in present-day North Carolina.

2 – To show the presumed accessibility of the colony to the great “South Sea” beyond the Appalachian Mountains, and from thence to the markets of China and the East Indies. At some time shortly after its construction, the map was brought to America, probably to Virginia, by individual who had been involved in the ‘Carolana’ project, and who may well have been a well-known official, merchant, or planter in late seventeenth century Virginia.

Burden (1996); Cumming & De Vorsey (1998) nos. 46, 47, 50, & 51; Kopperman, Paul E. (1982) ‘Profile of the Future: The Carolana Project 1629-1640’, in the ‘North Carolina Historical Review’ 59:1; Lefler, Hugh Talmage (1955) ‘A Description of ‘Carolana’ by a ‘Well-Willer”, in ‘North Carolina Historical Review’ 32:1; Powell, William S. (1974) ‘Carolana and the Incomparable Roanoke: Explorations and Attempted Settlements, 1620-1663’, in ‘North Carolina Historical Review’ 51:1; Stokes (1915-28).