Philosophical Geographic Features

My original career path, oh those many years ago, was to become a professional philosopher. I was introduced to the world of antique maps and prints, and decided that a career in that field would be a lot of fun and offered more chances of actually earning a living. However, I have never lost my interest in and love of philosophy. Recently I was reading about an early map of the Carolina colony and came across a reference to one of my favorite philosophers, John Locke, who actually had an island named after him!

I have been able to find only two other geographic names which are taken from philosophers, Carla-Bayle in France, named after French philosopher Pierre Bayle, and Berkeley, California, named after Anglo-Irish philosopher George Berkeley. Unfortunately, though Locke did have an island named after him, none such exists today; the history of this makes an interesting story.

John Locke (1632-1704), was one of the great philosophers of the Enlightenment, especially in the fields of epistemology and political philosophy. After getting his degree at Oxford University, Locke stayed on there until 1666, when he met Lord Anthony Ashley Cooper, the 1st Earl of Shaftesbury. Lord Ashley went to Oxford to seek help with a liver infection and he was impressed with Locke’s treatment. (Later Locke persuaded the Earl to have an operation on his liver, which probably saved his life).

The Earl asked Locke to join his retinue, and in 1667, Locke moved to Exeter House in London, Lord Ashley’s home. Locke became an important part of the Earl’s household and he was appointed Secretary to two important bodies which Shaftesbury belonged to. One was the Lords of Trade and Plantation, which was a committee of the Royal Privy Council set up to advise on issues related to the newly established British colonies.

The other was the Lords Proprietors of Carolina. This was a body of eight nobles, including Lord Ashley, who had assisted Charles II in the restoration of the English throne in 1660, to whom Charles granted the rights to create a Province of Carolina in 1663. Their initial attempt at colonization failed, but they were finally successful, beginning with the founding of the Charles Town settlement in 1670.

Locke was heavily involved in this new colony, drafting the Fundamental Constitutions of Carolina, as well writing various instruction to the colonists on how to make sure their actions in the new colony were consistent with the document. This was not Locke’s shining moment, for though he elsewhere wrote against aristocracy and slavery, the Constitutions, enshrined both of these in Carolina.

The same year that the Charles Town settlement was established, John Ogilby, a Scottish dancing master and publisher, was preparing to issue an illustrated volume, America, containing a history and description of the New World. This was mostly a direct translation of a contemporary Dutch book by Arnold Montanus, who is not mentioned at all by Ogilby, and almost all the illustrations were those included by Montanus. However, in order to make his publication more attractive to his intended English audience, Ogilby sought the latest new information on the English possessions in America, adding fresh text and four new maps, of Maryland, Jamaica, Barbados, and Carolina.

As Carolina was just in the process of being settled, and by some very influential figures, Ogilby was keen to include information and a map of the colony. Thus he approached Peter Colleton, the brother of one of the Proprietors, John Colleton, who wrote to John Locke, as secretary to Lord Ashley, requesting a map he could use in his book.

To my honoured frend Mr. John Lock
Sr.
Mr. Ogilby who is printing a relation of the West Indies hath been often wth mee to gett a map of Carolina wherefore I humbly desire you to gett of my lord [Ashley] those mapps of Cape feare & Albermarlee that he hath & I will drawn them into one wth that of port Royal & waite upon my lord for the nominations of the rivers, &c.

First Lord Proprietors Map

Locke was able to provide a map to Ogilby, who used it to make a new map for his volume, commonly called “The First Lord Proprietors Map.” From Locke, the map includes many names taken from the Lord Proprietors, including Craven County, Colleton River, Berkeley County, Ashley River, Cooper River, Cape Carteret, and Albemarle County.

Another name which appears on the map is “Locke Iland,” located near the mouth of the Edisto and Ashepoo Rivers. Based on very early exploration of the region, the map shows only a single island there, whereas there are actually several. Later explorations revealed this to map makers, and so the single “Locke Iland” was removed, along with its name. There is a large island right in that spot, Edisto Island, which is actually shaped much like Locke Island on the map, but none-the-less, Locke’s brief claim to geographic fame was removed soon after it was introduced.

A few other maps, such as John Speed’s from 1676, showed the island, but it wasn’t long before the newer maps no longer showed this philosophical isle.

Creating Colorado Territory

In 1854, a two large territories, Kansas and Nebraska, were created in the previously unorganized lands lying between the Continental Divide and the states and territories lining the western side of the Mississippi River, extending from the 37th degree latitude to the Canadian border. Kansas Territory lay to the west of Missouri; at the western edge of the territory rose the Rocky Mountains, with the majority of the territory consisting of an undeveloped Great Plains. It was only the eastern parts of the territory, near the Missouri border, which were settled by Anglo-Americans, the rest of the territory almost exclusively inhabited by nomadic Indian tribes.

In 1858, gold was discovered along the foothills of the Rocky Mountains, near the confluence of the South Platte River and Cherry Creek. As thousands flooded into the area, in what was called the Pike’s Peak gold rush, settlements (such as Denver City) were established and the population boomed. This area was located well away from the Kansas territorial government far to the east, and the locals realized that their interests were not necessarily the same as the interests of those located in the eastern part of the territory. Besides there was no machinery available for the enforcement of law & order, a real concern to those who hoped to make their fortune. Thus these miners and other settlers wanted a new territory to be carved out of the western part of Kansas, to provide local government.

Colona

A delegation was sent to Washington for the creation of such a territory. On January 6, 1859, Schuyler Colfax, representative from Illinois, introduced a bill in Congress to organize a “Territory of Colona” along the eastern slope of the Rockies. The territory was to include the western-most parts of Kansas and Nebraska as far north as the 42nd parallel, as well as the northeastern part of New Mexico. This name was taken from the Spanish for Columbus and the New York Times stated that this name was favored by the settlers of the area.
This new territory lay north of the 36° 30’ latitude line, and by the Missouri Compromise of 1850 this meant that slavery would be prohibited there. In this period of great conflict in the country over the question of slavery, there was no way Southerners in Congress would allow the creation of such a new “free” territory, so there were not enough votes to support Colfax’s bill and the territory was never created.

Jefferson

The desire by citizens of the front range for a local territory continued however, and a group of prominent citizens met on April 15, 1859 in Uncle Dick Wootton's Tavern in Auraria, voting to try to organize a new, local government. A convention was held to draft a constitution for a state of Jefferson, but this was rejected in a popular referendum, many feeling that a state would prove to be too much of a financial burden. Proponents tried again, this time drafting a constitution for a territory of Jefferson, which was subsequently approved by referendum on October 24, 1859.
The constitution was adopted, government bodies established, including a territorial legislature that met and elected Robert W. Steele as provisional governor. Meanwhile, Beverly D. Williams was sent to Washington as a representative of the territory, but Congress refused his petition. Still, a Jefferson government did operate for about sixteen months, though it has been said to have "remained extralegal, factious, and semieffective." (Historical Atlas of Colorado) The territory as proposed would have been considerably larger than today's Colorado, encompassing more of Utah and much of Wyoming.

Governor Steele tried to reach an accord with the territorial government of Kansas to recognize Jefferson, as well as petitioning Congress to the same end, but neither effort succeeded. With the election of Lincoln in November 1860, all chance of Congress recognizing Jefferson ended, for Steele was a Democratic foe of Lincoln and the Republican Party.

However, after all the Southern Congressmen left the government with their state's secession in early 1861, Congress swiftly created a new, free state of Kansas out of the eastern part of the territory, leaving the western part unorganized. Shortly thereafter, Congress organized a new territory out of the lands, as well as part of southwestern Nebraska, eastern Utah and northeastern New Mexico. As Thomas Jefferson, a Southerner, was not popular in Congress in early 1861, the new territory was named Colorado.

Maps

Neither Colona nor Jefferson were ever recognized by the Federal government and so never officially existed. However, that does not mean that they did not appear on contemporary maps. Mapmakers hated to have their maps not up-to-date. Any map that did not include a depiction of a newly created territory would be considered out-of-date, and because there was a time delay between when the map was drawn and when it was published, mapmakers tended to jump the gun a bit with potential new territories. They kept their ears to the ground to learn as soon as possible about new territories that might be created by Congress, and if a mapmaker believed that such a new political entity was about to be approved, he would put it on the map even before the bill was actually passed. If the territory was created, his map would be amazingly current, ahead of his competitors, and if it never came into existence, the mapmaker just hoped no one noticed.

This happened to both Colona and Jefferson, which appeared in various forms on a number of maps, and in fact together on some maps. These are not the only American chimeric territories to appear on nineteenth century maps, and maps showing such are always popular with collectors. If you ever come across a map of the western U.S. from 1859 to early 1861, take a look to see if either of these territories appears. Click here to see maps with Colona or Jefferson Territories in the inventory of The Philadelphia Print Shop West.

Historic Maps of Spain

I was lucky enough to visit Spain this summer and in order to prepare for my trip, I read a history of the country. This history had a fair number of pictures in it, but no maps, which I found to be a great oversight. I think that maps are essential for any history. Not only do they give visual context for the events you read about, but maps contemporary to the history being read also let you see the places being described through the eyes of those alive at the time. As I read the history, I kept turning to look at period maps of Spain and found this really enhanced my understanding and interest in the topic.

Spain was, of course, a land known quite well in ancient times. The Phoenicians and Greeks settled along the coasts as early as the 9th century BCE and the Romans conquered what they called Hispania in 19 BCE. The earliest regional maps we have of Europe are those which were described by Claudius Ptolemy about 150 CE. We know of no examples of Ptolemy’s maps which were actually drawn before about the 13th century, but these maps—which were printed in great numbers from the late fifteenth through mid-sixteenth century—were at least based on Ptolemy’s original text and show us the Roman understanding of the places depicted. Thus, when we look at a Ptolemaic map of the Iberian Peninsula, such as this map of Hispania from 1542, we can see Spain as it was understood during the Roman Empire.

Munster Spain & Portugal

Of course, by the end of the fifteenth century, Europeans had better geographic information about their own continent than was included on the century and a half old Ptolemaic maps. It is interesting that in many of the same atlases which included Ptolemaic maps, the publisher also included a “modern” map of the same place. The map above, showing Spain as understood by Sebastian Munster—one of the greatest cartographers of his day—was issued in the same 1542 atlas as the previous Ptolemaic map. This map was issued when Spain was entering its period of greatest glory, not long after the Reconquista of 1492 and during the reign of Charles I, also ruler of the Holy Roman Empire.

As the sixteenth century moved on, Spain grew wealthier—from the richest pouring in from the Americas—and European cartographers began to produce better and better maps. In 1571, Carolus Clusius produced a large, six sheet map of the Iberian Peninsula, which included an amazing amount of detail of the many cities and towns throughout Spain. This was copied by Abraham Ortelius in a single sheet map (above). This shows Spain when it was the most feared nation in Europe, during the reign of Philip II and just before the defeat of the Spanish Armada in 1588.

With Philip II’s death in 1598, Philip III began his over two decade reign. Spain still was one of the most powerful nations in Europe, though it was weakened by its involvement in the Thirty Years’ War (1618-1648). The situation of Spain at the time is beautifully evidenced in this map from about 1610. It includes the Royal Crest, images of major cities, figures along the sides in typical dress of the period, and a portrait of Philip III at the bottom center. This map graphically conveys the power and glory of Spain in a manner no text can do. This, and the other maps above, are just a few examples of how maps can provide a rich texture to the history of any place in the world.

To see a selection of maps of Spain, visit The Philadelphia Print Shop West's web site.

Interesting use of a Currier & Ives print

In the 1844 Presidential election there were three candidates. The two main candidates, from the major parties, were James Polk and Henry Clay.

The third candidate was James G. Birney, who ran as the Liberty Party candidate. Birney initially became involved in the movement to solve the “negro” problem by joining the American Colonization Society, which proposed to send free blacks to Africa. In 1834, Birney repudiated the colonization movement, freed his own slaves, and dedicated himself to the cause of abolition. He was chased out of his hometown of Danville, Kentucky, for these views, moving to Cincinnati.

In 1840, Birney was nominated as the first Presidential candidate for the newly created Liberty Party. He received just over seven thousand votes out of the over two million cast. He was nominated again in 1844, this time receiving about 62,000 out of 2 and a half million votes cast. One of those 62,000 votes was by Clark Lane, who had just reached voting age in 1844.

Clark Lane came from a family which had settled in the old Northwest Territory in 1798, building a farm house and smithy just north of today’s Mt. Healthy, Ohio, located on the main route between Cincinnati and Hamilton. Clark’s father worked as a blacksmith, a career which Clark followed, working at the family smith until he reached the age of 21, when he moved to Hamilton to work for John H. Brown building fifty wagons.

In his “Reminiscential”—-written about 1890-—Clark Lane recalled what happened shortly thereafter, on election day 1844, “my vote—-the first of my life—-was cast for James G. Birney, and freedom of all slaves within the United States.” While Mt. Healthy had a strong anti-slavery population, Cincinnati just to the south was less welcoming to abolitionists, and it appears the same was also true of Hamilton, just to the north, for Clark goes on to recall: “Day following said election the smoke and flame and cursings of pro-slavery wrath burst about me with such threatening violence, and so much idiotic and inconsiderate feeling for the truth and of justice that my contract though half done, had to be abandoned and work for an ‘abolitionist’ in the Christian Town of Hamilton was ‘declared off.’”

Clark Lane moved to Dayton, but luckily for Hamilton, he returned within two years, still working as a blacksmith. Eventually he formed the company of Owens, Lane and Dyer, which manufactured wagons, mill parts, and agricultural machinery such as threshing separators. This business became very successful, one of the biggest in the Midwest, making Clark a rich man.

In 1866, Clark used part of his resulting wealth to donate the land and build a structure for a Hamilton public library. The library, the Lane Public Library, is celebrating its 150th anniversary this October.

Besides the fact that I am related to Clark Lane (he was the brother of my direct ancestor William Lane), the reason his story is appearing in this print blog is the interesting manner in which Clark memorialized the events related to the election.

Probably during the campaign of 1844, Clark acquired one of Nathaniel Currier’s just issued election prints of James G. Birney, “Nominated by the Liberty Party for, Eleventh President of the United States.” Currier issued similar prints of all the candidates and it seems typical that Clark might have acquired and prominently displayed his print of Birney. His pride in his vote is indicated by his use of this print many years later.

It is not clear why, but at some point the print was trimmed to just show the image of Birney, the background being cut away.

On the back of the print Clark wrote:

“Hamilton Co. Ohio. “Lane Place.” Novr. A.D. 1880. This will certify that 36 years ago this date I voted for James G. Birney, for President of the United States, the same being my first vote---And was deposited in the Ballet Box at the “Butler House’—then Rossville now the first ward of the City of Hamilton Butler County Ohio. And furthermore, that never afterward did I vote for any person or persons for Executive Officers of the United States or for either State, County, District, Town, or Municipal Offices, who were not known to be, (or at least professed and believed to be) “Abolitionists” of the then most offensive (and defensive) character, until every Slave of the country were proclaimed free. Witness my hand Clark Lane”

It is always good to remember that in the nineteenth century Currier & Ives prints were simply inexpensive pictures used by people for decoration, education, inspiration and many other purposes. They cost very little and generally were not treated with the care that we today use when handling these now-quite-expensive artifacts of our past. In all my years in the print business, and many thousands of Currier & Ives prints I have handled, I have never seen a use like the one Clark put this print to, and for that reason I find this a story worth passing on.

Life portraits of important Native American leaders

For many important American leaders of the eighteenth and nineteenth century, there was a ready market for quality, life portrait prints. The American public wanted to know what their Presidents, Congressmen, and military figures looked like, so for almost any such figure of note there were quality engraved or lithographed portraits made. Few such portraits, however, were made of important Native American leaders. There just wasn’t a big market looking for a picture of these individuals during their life-times and so not a huge incentive for printmakers to produce quality portraits.

One exception were the portraits done for Thomas McKenney’s History of the Indian Tribes of North America. For this work, 118 portrait prints, based on life-time portraits, were produced in lithography and issued between 1836 and 1844. Thomas McKenney, head of the United States Bureau of Indian Affairs for many years, was a champion of American Indians and fought throughout his tenure to preserve something of their culture, which he recognized as an integral part of the history of the United States.

McKenney took office in 1816 and shortly thereafter began to plan an archive which would house Indian memorabilia. In the winter of 1821-22, a large delegation of Indians including representatives of Pawnee, Sauk, Fox, Menominee, Miami, Sioux, and Chippewa tribes came to Washington to see President Monroe. McKenney took advantage of this opportune time to record their likenesses, commissioning Charles Bird King to paint their portraits. To these, more paintings were added in the years following, many done in the field. This yielded an impressive gallery of Indian portraiture which became the centerpiece of the War Department collection of Indian culture and history. In 1830, McKenney was dismissed by President Jackson and began to plan for the publication of a portfolio of prints of these portraits. Working with James Hall, he added text, making the project a true collaboration.

The results of years of struggle, McKenney’s folio was completed in 1836, after four years of printing. Although he was acutely aware that he was preserving a chapter in history, McKenney could not have known that, had he not undertaken this project, no record at all would remain: in 1865, a fire at the Smithsonian destroyed almost all the original paintings from which the lithographs were drawn. The prints, however, do survive, providing us with rare examples of life-portraits of 118 Native Americans, including a number of the most important Indian figures in American history.

Red Jacket

Red Jacket was a Seneca chief and orator who negotiated with the government of the United States after the American Revolution. The Iroquois had sided with the British during the war, so the government insisted that they give up much of their lands in New York. Red Jacket was instrumental in saving what he could of their lands, as determined by the Treaty of Canadaigua in 1794. Prior to the treaty, in 1792, Red Jacket had visited the then U.S. capital, Philadelphia, where Washington presented him with a “peace medal” which was engraved with an image of Washington shaking hands with Red Jacket. This print, after a portrait by Charles Bird King, shows Red Jacket proudly wearing this medal.

Black Hawk

Black Hawk was a war leader of the Sauk tribe in the mid-west. He fought against the U.S. during the War of 1812, hoping to drive white settlers out of Sauk territory. Much of that territory had been granted to the U.S. by some tribal leaders at the Treaty of St. Louis in 1804, but many of the Sauk and related Fox Indians contested the legitimacy of that treaty, so a group led by Black Hawk tried to reoccupy tribal lands in Illinois during the “Black Hawk War” of 1832. Captured by the U.S. military, Black Hawk ended up on a “tour” of the east coast, including a visit to Washington where this portrait was painted.

William McIntosh

McIntosh was a controversial Creek chief who supported the U.S. efforts to get the Creeks to give up their lands in Georgia. The son of a Scotsman and a Creek woman, he was raised by the Creeks, but was comfortable also in white Georgia society. His involvement in the controversial Treaty of Indian Springs of 1825 led to a sentence of death by the Creek Nation Council, which was carried out in 1825. This print, after another Charles Bird King portrait, shows McIntosh in his Scottish finery.

Sequoyah

Not a chief or warrior, Sequoyah was still one of the most influential Native Americans of the nineteenth century. A Cherokee blacksmith and silversmith, Sequoyah regularly had contact with whites and he saw how important their ability to write was. He decided to invent a way to write the Cherokee language, inventing the Cherokee syllabary from scratch. It took a while to convince his tribe, but by 1825 the Cherokee Nation adopted his writing system. This portrait after Charles Bird King shows Sequoyah with his alphabet. It was painted in 1828 when he visited Washington and he is shown wearing his peace medal.

Along with the regular Antiques Roadshow programs, which show the Roadshow stops from the previous summer, the program has been airing a series of "Vintage" shows, which rerun selected appraisals from the past. For each rerun appraisal, the folks at WGBH contact the original appraiser to see how the appraised value might have changed. Recently I got an email from the produces asking me about a map of the Mississippi River I appraised back in 2001 for between $4,500 and $5,000.

Now this sort of map is just the sort of map which has become "hot" in the last decade or so, so when they asked me for a value, I knew it would have gone up, but I figured that just to be sure I would do some digging to see if there was a recent price record on it. Boy am I glad I did! The map had sold at an auction in 2009 for $300,000! As this was such a big jump, I thought it would be worthwhile writing up a posting explaining why I thought this had happened. This blog is a copy of that article. The original appraisal and the article can be seen on the Antiques Roadshow web site. The article follows:

For a map to increase in value about 30 times in 15 years is a huge jump and the reasons for this are quite interesting. Some of it has to do with a change in the market and some with what I call "auction fever."

When I first got into the business of selling maps back in 1981, most collectors were looking for maps from the earliest days of printed cartography, particularly the beautiful Dutch maps from about 1570 to 1650. These were from the Age of Discovery and the maps had beautiful engraving, rich hand color, and lots of fun features such as sail ships, elaborate compass roses, and even sea monsters.

One of the biggest changes in the attitude of map collectors since those early days has been shifting their focus from the decorative appeal of maps to their historical significance. The latter factor has always been important for collectors, but in the late 20th century, collectors became more enamored with maps that focused on specific information about particular events in history — such as the first map to show the City of New Orleans, or a contemporary map of the American Revolution — even when those maps did not have a lot of color and their decoration was limited to their cartouches.

At the beginning of the present millennium, it was 17th- and 18th-century maps that were particularly sought after by collectors, and so were increasing significantly in value. In the years since then, collectors have begun to turn more and more to 19th-century maps — especially those that have some intriguingly direct connection with history. As the 2000s progressed, it was maps like the first to show a rebuilt Chicago, or one showing the results of a seminal exploring expedition to the American West, or a folding map of a newly built railroad, which became more and more sought after and thus more and more valuable.

The Norman 1858 map of the lower Mississippi River is a perfect example of the type of map which has become ‘hot’ in the last decade or so. It has an immediate connection with the history of the boom years of the plantations along the Mississippi — the artist, Marie Adrien Persac, traveling between New Orleans and Natchez on a skiff and recording all the plantations and landmarks he saw along the way. There really could not be a more significant historical document of this region in that period than this map. Combined with the fact that it was a separately issued map — extremely rare today — means that when the ROADSHOW producers asked me for an updated value while preparing the Vintage New Orleans show this spring, I knew it would have gone up a lot since 2001.

My initial reaction was that its current retail value would probably be somewhere between about $20,000 and $30,000, quite a big jump from my valuation of $4,500 to $5,000 in 2001. However, given the way this sort of map had risen so much in demand, I thought I ought to do some further digging to find out if any had come on the market recently.

And am I ever glad I checked. One had indeed come up for auction at the end of 2009 and sold for a huge price! The auction house’s estimate, $18,000 to $25,000, was similar to my initial thinking about this map’s current value — but when the bidding had finished in that 2009 auction, the map cost the buyer $316,000!

There are few American maps that have ever brought that amount, and though the Norman map is special, particularly for that region, to pay over $300,000 for it seems excessive. I can find no similar map for any other region of the United States that has ever sold for so much. So why did it go for so much? My guess is simple "auction fever." Auction bidders with deep pockets sometimes have large egos that lead them to believe if they really want something then they must win it no matter who else might bid against them. If you get two or more such bidders for the same item, those egos can sometimes override any prudent financial sense, leading to prices well above what would be considered a reasonable value. I think something like that may have happened for this map.

So, that brings up the question of what I think this map’s “real” value might be today, having appraised it for $4,500 to $5,000 in 2001. Certainly, the 2009 auction means that my initial thought of $20,000 to $30,000 is too low, but I do not believe that in any other circumstances — without the heat of auction fever — this map would bring over $300,000 again. Still, any potential buyer looking at that auction record would realize he or she would have to pay well above $30,000 for it. So I think that if this map appeared in a retail setting, it would probably be listed somewhere between $150,000 and $200,000. If it came up at auction and bidders were able to keep their egos in check, it might bring half to two-thirds of that price. But then again, fever could strike again at any time!

A.E. Mathews views of Colorado

I spend a lot of time in the summer driving or biking around the mountains of Colorado. Colorado is one of the most beautiful places in the world and I am constantly filled with awe looking at the scenes of the state. Early visitors to Colorado were often impressed by the view of the Rocky Mountains from the plains and a few early prints were made of that scene (cf. the view of Pike's Peak from John Frémont's 1842 expedition above), but these were quite scarce and other than some scenes from the Pacific Railroad Surveys in the 1850s, there were scant images of the state up to the end of that decade.

Things changed, of course, when the Pikes Peak Gold Rush brought thousands of miners, and those who made money off of the miners, to the front range. Now there was a significant population here, which both brought new interest in and opportunities for the marketing of images of Colorado.

The first artist to really take advantage of this opportunity was A.E. Mathews (1831-1874). Mathews was born in England, but came to the United States at an early age and ended up being raised in Ohio. He worked as a typesetter, itinerant bookseller, and school teacher, with a predilection for landscape sketching. During the Civil War, Mathews served in the Union Army with Ohio troops for three years, making topographical maps and views. He also produced a number of excellent first hand images of scenes of the Civil War for a number of Cincinnati print publishers.

After the war, Mathews moved to nascent city of Denver, the main entrepot of the Pikes Peak Gold Rush. Mathews arrived in Denver November 1865, when Colorado was in the process of becoming a thriving mining region. In less than a decade, Colorado had been transformed from a sparsely settled backwater to a dynamic economic powerhouse. In 1866, the towns, such as Denver, Central City and Black Hawk, were exciting communities, with a veneer of civilization only somewhat covering over the raw frontier hotchpotch of gambling dens, saloons, and brothels.

Mathews decided he could continue his artistic career by producing a series of prints of Colorado to be sold to the new citizens, and those back in the East who might be interested. This resulted in 1866 with his Pencil Sketches of Colorado. This was a portfolio of twenty-three prints (which were also sold separately) showing thirty-six scenes in Colorado. The prints were lithographed in New York by Julius Bien.

Mathews’ Pencil Sketches captures the gold rush era of Colorado, a transient and foundational moment in the history of the territory. Mathews had a keen eye and considerable skill—-likely aided by a camera lucida—-so his images are accurate, detailed and filled with a sense of the time and place that is remarkable. The variety of the views is comprehensive, showing scenes of mining and processing, the landscape, and town, especially Denver with the three street scenes of particular note.

One of the fun aspects of this series is that, in order to make more money than from just selling the prints, Mathews offered Denver business owners the opportunity, for a fee, to have their businesses named in the three street scenes of the city. It is interesting how many businesses did accept this offer, though the unnamed shops in the scenes also indicate that not all bought into this scheme.

I have always loved the way that antique prints capture a period of our history, letting us see our past through the eyes of those who were there then, and there are no better views of from the past of Colorado than those by Mathews.