![]() This page corrected November 1st, 1997. The old version is still available for consultation. |
John Mitchell's Map Cartographic Notes
There are several summaries of the different editions and
versions of Mitchell's Map, all of which are different! This page explains
how the different listings relate to each other. While I have seen many
different Mitchell Maps, I have not examined instances of all the
variations listed here; the identification of editions and issues is based on
the published data.
This listing includes only the London editions of Mitchell's Map. For
information concerning the Dutch, French, and Italian editions see Martin (1972, 110-13).
Contents:
|
| The Physical Artifact: Size, Storage, and Color |
The basic character of Mitchell's map is readily apparent. It
was engraved on eight sheets of copper, measuring 136 cm (4'5") high by
195 cm (6'5") wide when assembled. As with other wall maps, there are
relatively few surviving copies. As a large, expensive product, relatively
few copies would have been made. Furthermore, the act of hanging is
seriously destructive: maps fade with long exposure to light; they tear
under their own weight. Surviving maps fall into two categories. There are those which were never assembled into the whole but which were left as single sheets. Many of this group were bound into atlases factices; we might point for example to the two copies of the French editions of Mitchell's map in the Osher Map Library's Smith Collection, both of which are bound into atlases. The second group of surviving maps are those which were dissected into smaller pieces, mounted on coarse cloth, and folded for storage in a case. The National Archives has a third edition, second issue of the map (Record Group 76, Cartographic Series 27, Map 3; see Goggin 1968, item 18) each of whose sheets was dissected into 20 sections and mounted separately; small leather tags on the back of the sheets indicate that they were all folded and placed into a small box, the tags being used to pull out particular sheets from the tight mass. The Osher Map Library's fourth edition was dissected into 32 sections (each sheet being quartered), mounted on a single piece of cloth, and was stored in a large case (separately conserved). Like any map from the period, Mitchell's map was printed in black ink on white, hand-laid paper. Any color that appears on the map was applied with water-colors by hand. The surviving copies seem to be equally divided between uncolored, colored in outline (the political boundaries highlighted with thin ribbons of color), and washed color (each political unit entirely filled with color). Colors were generally applied at the time of printing -- publishers sold their maps both colored and uncolored -- but many maps have been given their color in the nineteenth century. The copy of the fourth edition of Mitchell's map on display at the Osher Map Library received a wash of water-colors probably between 1773/74 and the end of the eighteenth century (discussed elsewhere). The color wash was applied to each sheet separately, as the colors are not all continuous across the edges of the sheets; the sheets were dissected after coloring. |
| Printing from Copper: "States" and "Editions" |
The technology of printing from copper plates into which
an image has been engraved was in many respects rather limiting. It did
however permit the easy alteration of the images. An engraver needed
only to place the plate face-down and hammer out the section of the plate
to be changed; the plate could then be re-engraved. The importance of this
fact for the production of maps was profound. It allowed maps to be
updated with new data, and sometimes extensive areas of a plate would
be re-engraved. It also allowed plates to be traded between map
publishers; the publishers would add their own name and then re-issue
the plate. Plates could thus enjoy a long life -- sometimes more than a
century -- with both small and large changes to the images they bore. Cartographic historians have employed various terms to help them in their discussions of the changes which particular maps have undergone. When dealing with a map engraved on a single piece of copper, the terminology is straightforward. We refer then to "states" of "plates." Each set of changes made to a plate prior to a new printing constitutes a new state; each fresh engraving of the map image is a new plate. Multi-sheet maps, such as Mitchell's, present a far more complex situation. To be most precise, we should consider an entire map as being an assemblage of different plates, each of which has a specific history of states. The work necessary to track state changes in large maps means that such precision is difficult to achieve. Certainly it has not been achieved with respect to the Mitchell Map. On the other hand, multi-sheet maps have tended to be issued as a set, and changes in one plate have tended to be matched with changes on others. Cartobibliographers therefore tend to refer to "issues" or "editions" of the whole map. A greater sense of precision is attained by distinguishing between "editions" and "impressions," an "edition" being defined as a change in publisher or title, an "impression" being any other change. It is important to realize that the changes entailed in a new "edition" might easily be far less than those in a new "impression." The cartobibliographic listings for Mitchell's map have used this terminology in somewhat different ways. Mitchell himself distinguished a "second edition" of his map when he had made some alterations to the coastline of New England and Nova Scotia (in 1755-57). In contrast, Fite & Freeman (1926) used "second edition" to describe the 1775 change in the map's title. Stevens & Tree (1980, 86-87) in part use any change to the publisher's imprint, no matter how minor, to signify a new edition. This summary follows the numbering of "editions" defined by Martin (1972, 109-10). My reasons are: (a) I am of the opinion that Stevens & Tree (1980, 86-87) are just a bit too precise; and (b) I suspect that there might be an error in their listing (see below under Third Edition). I prefer the term "issue" to "impression" to refer to varients within an edition. |
| Concordance of Editions and Issues of Mitchell Maps | The following table lists the labels applied by different authors to the various versions of the Mitchell Map. For details, see below. |
| Stevens (1897) | Fite & Freeman (1926) | Martin
(1972), Sellers & Van Ee (1981) |
Stevens & Tree (1980) | ||
| 1st edition | 1st issue | Collation A | 1st edition | 1st edition 1st impression |
1st edition 1st issue |
| 2nd issue | 1st edition 2nd impression |
1st edition 2nd issue |
|||
| 3rd issue | 1st edition 3rd impression |
||||
| 2nd edition | Collation B | 2nd edition | 2nd edition | ||
| 3rd edition | ? issue | 3rd edition | |||
| 1st issue | Collation C | 3rd edition 1st impression |
|||
| 2nd issue | Collation D | 3rd edition 2nd impression |
4th edition | ||
| 4th edition | Collation E | 2nd edition | 4th edition | 5th edition |
|
1st Edition 1st Issue 1755 |
[title] "A Map of the British and French Dominions in North America with
the Roads, Distances, Limits and Extent of the Settlements, Humbly
Inscribed to the Right Honourable The Earl of Halifax, And the other
Right Honourable The Lords Commissioners for Trade and Plantations,
by their Lordships Most Obliged and very humble Servant Jno.
Mitchell." [inside bottom margin] "Tho: Kitchen Sculp. Clerkenwell Green." [outside bottom margin] "Publish'd by the Author Febry 13th 1755 according to Act of Parliament, and Sold by And: Miller opposite Katherine Street in the Strand."
Both "Miller" and "Katherine" in the imprint are
misspelled; Worcester, Mass., is improperly labelled "Leicester," in
addition to the town of that name.
Reproduced in Sellers & Van Ee
(1981, 12).
NOTE: Schwartz &
Ehrenberg (1980, 164) reproduce a very handsome example -- in
color -- of the Mitchell Map. They state that the reproduction is of the
map's "third edition" although the map's lack of the large text blocks
added with the second edition (below) would indicate that this is
incorrect. It is possible that they intended to mean the third issue (Martin's
"impression") of the first edition. Unfortunately, the reproduction is too
small for the issue (one to three) to be discerned. Some of the confusion
might have derived from the existence in the Public Record Office, Kew,
of a first edition that has been called "the red line map (so called)" (Stevens 1897) and "the English 'Red-Line' Map" (Martin nd); this has
a red chalk line marking a boundary. |
|
1st Edition 2nd Issue 1755 |
[title] as 1st edition, 1st issue [inside bottom margin] as 1st edition, 1st issue [outside bottom margin] "Publish'd by the Author Febry 13th 1755 according to Act of Parliament, and Sold by And: Millar opposite Katharine Street in the Strand."
The "Millar" and "Katharine" in the imprint are now
correctly spelled.
No changes are recorded in the geographical detail. Worcester, Mass., is
still improperly labelled "Leicester," in addition to the town of that name.
Such minor changes probably indicate tinkering to the eighth plate during
1755. |
|
1st Edition 3rd Issue 1755 |
[title] as 1st edition, 1st issue [inside bottom margin] as 1st edition, 1st issue [outside bottom margin] as 1st edition, 2nd issue
Again, only one minor change, indicating continued
tinkering in 1755. Specifically, Worcester is now correctly named in
Massachusetts.
NOTE 1: Stevens & Tree
(1980) make no mention of this issue, presumably because they paid
attention only to map titles, imprints, and gross geographical
changes. |
|
2nd Edition 1755-57 |
[title] as 1st edition, 1st issue [inside bottom margin] as 1st edition, 1st issue [outside bottom margin] as 1st edition, 2nd issue
The title and copyright dates have not been changed, but
Mitchell added two large text blocks in the
middle of the Atlantic Ocean, in the seventh sheet. (The two scale bars in
the Atlantic on the first edition were re-engraved -- as four bars -- above
the cartouche on the eighth sheet.) The upper text block, in three columns,
is a statement about the changes which Mitchell made to the coastal areas
of New England, Nova Scotia, and Newfoundland as a result of receiving
new data. In the first column, Mitchell explicitly refers to this map as the
"second edition." The lower text block, in seven columns, is a listing of the
data Mitchell used to structure -- and to restructure -- the map.
Other changes include the addition of observations of magnetic variations
off the Atlantic coast, labeled with Roman numerals. More importantly,
Mitchell redrew the northeastern coast because he redefined the positions
of two key headlands: Cape Race was shifted in latitude from 46°55'
to 46°35'; Cape Sable was shifted in longitude from 66°35' to
65°35'. A Maine-related detail: "Sagadahook," as on the first edition,
was respelled "Sagadahock."
NOTE 1: with respect to dating, the copyright date remains
unchanged. Stevens & Tree
(1980) give a date of 1757, citing the British Library's catalogue as
evidence; that catalogue is however uncertain, and dates the map to "1755
or 57?" The same catalogue's suggestions for dates of later editions are
incorrect. I tend to favor 1757 as a publication date for reasons discussed
in the narrative account. I nonetheless
go with a date range of 1755-57 to highlight the uncertainty.
NOTE 2: Fite & Freeman
(1926, 180) originally reproduced one of the third editions, as
referred to in the text (p.182); production problems meant that the 1969
Dover reprint (see p. vi) actually reproduces the second edition, although
the text has not been changed to reflect this. |
|
3rd Edition ? Issue 1773-75 |
[title] as 1st edition, 1st issue [inside bottom margin 1] "Tho: Kitchen Sculp." [inside bottom margin 2] "Printed by Jefferys and Faden, St. Martins Lane, Charing Cross, London." [outside bottom margin] "Publish'd by the Author Febry 13th 1755. This version of the map is recorded only by Stevens & Tree (1980, no.54, 86-87). My presumption is that this entry is the same as the following (first issue), but with an incorrectly transcribed imprint for Jefferys and Faden. The data recorded in this work began with notes which Henry N. Stevens began to collect in 1880; it is possible that an incomplete reference by him was later taken as accurate by Stevens & Tree. Indeed, Stevens & Tree are not as precise as they should have been: they fail to record the words "according to Act of Parliament" in the remains of the first imprint (outside the lower margin) that persist on the later versions of the map. Furthermore, I am very much taken by the failure of Lawrence Martin to record such a version in his extensive researches of the map in the early twentieth century (Martin 1972). Lacking any census of surviving copies of the Mitchell Map, I posted a request in April 1997 to maphist (the cartographic history listserv), asking historians and librarians to bring any copies of this issue to my attention. But none have; on the other hand, overall response to the question was quite slim. This question will have to remain unresolved until a comprehensive census can be undertaken. |
|
3rd Edition 1st Issue 1773-75 |
[title] as 1st edition, 1st issue [inside bottom margin 1] "Tho: Kitchen Sculp." [inside bottom margin 2] "Printed for Jefferys and Faden Geographers to the King at the Corner of St. Martins Lane Charing Cross London" [outside bottom margin] "Publish'd by the Author Febry 13th 1755 according to Act of Parliament"
The contraction of both the engraver's identification and the
copyright statement, and the addition of a new publisher's identification,
indicate several factors. In the first place, Thomas Kitchen had moved
from Clerkenwell Green to Holburn; furthermore, the plates had been
acquired by the firm of Jefferys and Faden, and had been updated, before
this publication. Stevens & Tree
(1980) note that the firm was first entered into the Rate Book in 1773.
This suggests that the change in ownership of the plates probably occured
after Mitchell's death in 1768.
In addition to the changes in the imprints, further changes have been
made to the geographical details. Some boundaries have been altered and
many new place-names added.
NOTE: with respect to dating, the map's copyright date of 1755
remains unchanged. The map would however have appeared between
1773, as just noted, and 1775 (see fourth edition, below). There is no real
reason why Stevens & Tree
(1980) dated this map to 1773 and the second issue of the edition to
1774. A possible reason for this new edition of Mitchell's map -- the
passing of the Quebec Act of 1774, with its redefinition of several borders -- is discussed in the narrative account; if
this was indeed the case, it would restrict the dates of both issues to 1774-75.
|
|
3rd Edition 2nd Issue 1773-75 |
[title] as 1st edition, 1st issue [inside bottom margin 1] as 3rd edition, 1st issue [inside bottom margin 2] as 3rd edition, 1st issue [outside bottom margin] as 3rd edition, 1st issue There are numerous changes, particularly in the realm of boundaries. For example, the straight line marked on earlier maps as the boundary between Canada and the Iroquois (running north of Lake Ontario) has been deleted; a new boundary has been engraved running through Lake Ontario, which for Martin (1972, 109-10) is a key to identifying this issue. Stevens & Tree (1980) also identify lines delimiting territorial claims by both New York and New Jersey as being deleted. NOTE: The imprecision of Stevens' & Tree's (1980) recording of the third edition, first issue means that they interpreted this issue as representing a new edition, because of the change in the imprint of Jefferys and Faden.
|
|
4th Edition 1775 |
[title] "A Map of the British Colonies in North America ..."
remainder as 1st edition, 1st issue [inside bottom margin 1] as 3rd edition, 1st issue [inside bottom margin 2] as 3rd edition, 2nd issue [outside bottom margin] as 3rd edition, 1st issue
Stevens & Tree
(1980) are of the opinion that the only change since the third edition,
second issue is the new title.
NOTE 1: given that the copyright statement still reads 1755, the
dating of this edition to 1775 is based on a 1778 catalogue of Faden's maps
which includes "A Map of the British Colonies in North America ... on 8
sheets, 1775, Mitchell." Goss (1990,
130) mistakenly dates this edition to 1785, an impossibility as the
map was used in the Treaty of Paris negotiations in 1782; he gives a good
color reproduction of George III's "red line" map.
NOTE 2: Fite & Freeman
(1926) were rather confused as to the meaning of "second edition": at
one place (p.182) they stated that the new edition was marked by the
change in imprint to Jefferys and Faden; but elsewhere (290-91) they use
the retitling of the map as an indication of a "second edition."
An uncolored copy of this edition is reproduced at full-size in North America (1974). |
|
Osher Map Library and Smith Center for Cartographic Education University of Southern Maine |