# Augustine Herrman, Beginner of the Virginia Tobacco Trade, Merchant of New Amsterdam and First Lord of Bohemia Manor in Maryland/Chapter 5

Chapter V
PREPARING THE MAP OF VIRGINIA AND MARYLAND
Before we commit ourselves to the precise reason why Herrman cast his fortunes with the English after 1659, it will be necessary to trace the origin of his conception to prepare a map of Maryland. At an early age he had shown marked talents toward design and map-making. Did Herrman study design and drawing either in Prague or Amsterdam? Čapek suggests that Wenceslaus Hollar (1607–1677), a Bohemian exile, was Herrman’s early instructor.
“Might not have Herrman taken lessons in art drawing from his famous countryman? Hollar drew perspective views, costumes, insects, geometric figures, even maps. On page 38 of Vertue’s (George) biography we read that ‘Hollar drew an exact map of America.’ That these two, Hollar and Herrman—who were townsmen, born in Prague—knew each other is certain.”
The earliest view of New Amsterdam that has come down to us is from the pen of Herrman. It was first published as an embellishment to Nicholas Van Visscher’s map of New Netherland (1650) and later appeared in the second edition of Van der Donck’s “Beschryvinge van Nieuw-Nederlant.” In 1660 the view of the village was sent to Amsterdam, “to make it more public by having it engraved”. The engraving repre​sents New Amsterdam from the East River, showing the characteristic Dutch houses facing the river on Pearl Street. It is not unlikely, too, that Herrman may have rendered some aid to Visscher in preparing the map itself, the full title being, “Novi Belgii Novaque Angliae necnon partis Virginiae. Tabula multis in locis emendata a Nicolo Joannis Visschero”.
As early as October 1659 Herrman had seen the necessity of having an adequate map of Maryland. In a letter for that date he wrote to Peter Stuyvesant:
“But first of all, the South River (Delaware) and the Virginias, with the lands and hills between both, ought to be laid down on an exact scale as to longitude and latitude, in a perfect map, that the extent of country on both sides may be correctly seen, and the work afterwards proceeded with, for some maps which the English have here are utterely an imperfect and prejudicial to us. The sooner this is done the better, before Baltimoor whispers in the ears of the States of England, and thus make the matter much more difficult.”
This letter is of the utmost importance in a discussion as to why Herrman made his decision to become a British subject. The letter was apparently written some few days after the conference with Governor Fendall; and certainly expresses the greatest loyalty to the Dutch point of view. There is no reason to believe, however, that Stuyvesant was impressed with Herrman’s suggestion; nor can one easily understand how Stuyvesant could be of much aid in having a map of Maryland drawn other than proposing to Governor Fendall that such a map be made by a joint commission of the two provinces.
​Three months later Herrman was made a denizen of Maryland, preparing for his naturalization nine years later; and from that time on he was lost to New Amsterdam. In the denization of Herrman, reference is made to him, “hath drawn a map of all the Rivers, creeks and Harbours.” As it would have been utterly impossible for him to have drawn the map we now know in this short period, we can only infer from this statement that Herrman during the winter of 1659 traveled here and there in Maryland and Virginia, comparing his charts with previous maps, and submitting a rough draft to the Maryland authorities. We know that a few days before Herrman wrote to Stuyvesant, he had met Philip Calvert, brother of Lord Baltimore, at a dinner given in honor of the two Dutch envoys; but if we believe Herrman sincere in his letter to the Dutch governor—and there is no reason to think otherwise—Calvert had not at the time made much of an impression upon him, nor can we believe that at the time his mind was made up to become an English citizen. On all points of personal honor we have reason to believe Herrman to have been strict.
In the light of all this evidence it would appear that something very much as follows took place from the day he talked to Calvert to the time he decided to become a denizen of Maryland: Possibly the night Herrman met Calvert, or a few days afterwards, he discussed with the brother of the proprietor of Maryland the need of a new map of the province, no doubt hinting that he himself would be able to produce such a map. Calvert was interested but did not commit himself; nor did Herrman, for that matter, before he had time to write to Stuyvesant. When Stuyvesant gave either a negative or evasive reply or, what is more likely, no answer at all, Herr​man felt quite at liberty to withdraw from New Amsterdam and proceed with what arrangements he could make with Calvert.
Information relative to Herrman’s actual preparation of the map between the years 1660–1670, the date of his finishing it, according to an inscription, is scant. Although his name occurs at frequent intervals in the colonial records of Maryland during those years, it is usually in connection with some lawsuit or to some public office to which he had been elected. Up until 1662 he made frequent trips back to New Amsterdam to liquidate his business interests there. For his permanent residence he chose a place on the Bohemia River, so named by himself after his native land. In 1658 Dr. George and Anna Hack had acquired four hundred acres of land called “Anna Catherine Neck”, so named, perhaps, after their two daughters, in the upper headwaters region of Chesapeake Bay and in what is now Cecil County, Maryland. It is possible that the Hacks may have spent part of the winter of 1659–1660 here and that Herrman stopped with them a while after his mission at St. Mary’s was finished. Seeing the natural beauty and the fertility of the soil here, he decided to settle on an adjoining estate. Herrman’s house lay in latitude 39 degrees, 45 minutes. By 1661 he must have acquired a large amount of land there, as he refers to a colony and expresses a hope that people will come to settle there. During the next decade it is likely that the greater part of his time was consumed making constant trips to Virginia and the eastern side of Delaware Bay.
It took eight to ten years to gather the material for the map, with a total expenditure of some two hundred pounds of ​money (equivalent to about five thousand dollars in presentday currency; or possibly somewhat more since the devaluation of the gold dollar). Quite unfortunately Herrman left no written record of his travels during this period. Considering the vast amount of wild and only half-explored territory that he had to traverse, we can lament the fact that he did not keep some kind of diary, which today would be of incalculable worth, telling us so much about the people and conditions in the out-of-the-way places in Maryland and Virginia. The work was finished in 1670 by Herrman’s “only labour and endeavor”, as he himself states.
Probably the next three years were taken up with the placing together of all the many sketches and charts; and the map as we know it now plotted. The original drawing was sent to England in 1673 and engraved by an artist by the name of William Faithhorne. According to Thomas Čapek, William Faithhorne in 1654 was living in the same house near Temple Bar, London with Wenceslaus Hollar, the eminent Bohemian engraver and etcher. The Herrman map is said to be the only extant work of Faithhorne. The map was dedicated to King Charles II. The following advertisement appears in the London Gazette for 1674, No. 873:
“There is now extant a new map of Virginia and Maryland in four sheets, describing the Countries and the situation of the Plantations in the said countreys, with the Rivers, Creeks, Bayes, Roads and Harbors on the sea-coasts. Published by His Majesties especial License and are sold by John Seller, Hydrographer to the King at his shops at the Hermtage in Wapping and in Exchange Alley in Cornhill, London.”
The map, consisting of four sections, when put together measures thirty-seven and one-quarter inches in width by thirty-one and one-quarter inches in height.
Apart from its geographic significance, Herrman’s map has true artistic merit; and is to be regarded as a masterpiece of seventeenth century design and engraving. Added to this, the quaint phrasing of the descriptive annotations gives it high rank in the literature of the chronicles of that adventurous century. In the southeast section is a highly ornate inscription plate, standing on a pedestal with an acanthus on either side. On the pedestal is written the legend of the map. Indian houses and plantations, for instance, he represents by a curious diagram, resembling a covered wagon without the wheels and body. On either side of the inscription plate are the figures of two children, a boy and a girl some ten or twelve years of age, probably intended to represent Indian children, but certainly not with Indian facial characteristics. The figure on the left, the boy, is carrying a bow and arrow. The figure of the maiden on the right with the long, flowing hair, holding in her left hand what looks much like a doll or a small animal; and her right hand pointing to the inscription:
VIRGINIA AND MARYLAND
As it is Planted and Inhabited this present Year 1670 Surveyed and Exactly Drawne by the Only Labour and Endeavor of Augustin Herrman Bohemiensis
Surmounting the inscription plate is a highly ornamental shield in the center of which is a heart from which springs a trifoliate plant and beneath crossed arrows. On the top of the shield is a Neptune head. On either side resting obliquely on the top of the inscription plate are clusters of leaves and fruit, classic in design, but probably emblematical of the fertility of the soil of the two colonies.
On the left of the inscription is a mariner’s compass; on the right a mason’s compass. At the points are two scales, the upper line showing a scale of eight English leagues and the line below designating a scale of twenty-five English miles. In the northeast section of the map is an admirable engraving of Herrman, doubtless drawn by himself. He is represented as having a large, well-formed head, inclined to the oval, handsome and regular features, with sharp though sympathetic eyes. A small moustache together with a small growth of hair directly below his lower lip and his long flowing hair, apparently natural, inclined to curl over his shoulders, give him the characteristic Stuartesque and cavalier appearance of the late seventeenth century. This bust engraving of Herrman is set in an oval frame, bearing his name, Augustine Herrman ​ The Map of Virginia and Maryland. Drawn by Augustine Herrman and engraved by William Faithorne, London, 1673. From the original in the British Museum ​Bohemian. To the right of the portrait is a representation of an Indian canoe, paddled by seven men, but apparently not Indians, as can be noted by their European hats. Beneath is the inscription,
“An Indian canoe made out of a Tree with their Battles or Oares with Manner of Rowing over the Rivers.”
Directly beneath is the name of the engraver, W. Faithorne, Sculp. In the extreme southeast section of the map is the imprint:
“Published by Authority of his Ma.ties Royall Licence and particuler Priviledge to Aug. Herman and Thomas Withinbrook his Assignce for fourteen yeares from the year of our lord 1673.”
In the northwest section is the Coat at Arms of the Lords Baltimore, in the west central section of the map is the Great Seal of England with the familiar “Dieu et mon Droit”. Far toward the northwest, beyond the habitations, are depicted the mountains. To show how little informed were the most educated Englishmen of Virginia and Maryland of the seventeenth century of the vast size of the American continent, we quote the following description of these mountains that Herrman inserted at the top of the map:
“These Mighty high and great Mountains trenching N.E. and S.W. and W.S.W. supposed to be the very middle range of Northern America and the only Natural cause of the fierceness and extreme Stormy cold winds that come N.W. from thence all over the Continent and makes frost. And as Indians report from the other side westwards doe the Rivers take their origen all issuing out into the West Sea especially first discovered a very ​great River Called the Black Minequaas River (possibly the Ohio River) out of which the Sassquahana forte meets a branch some leagues opposite to one another (likely the Allegheny) out of the Sassaquahana River where formerly those Black Minequas came over and as far as Delaware to trade but the Sassaquahana and Sinnicus Indians went over and destroyed that very great Nation and whether the same River comes out into the Bay of Mexico or the West Sea is not known. Certain it is that as the Spaniard is possessed with great store of Mineralls at the opposite side of these mountains the same treasure they may in process of time afford also to us here on this Side when Occupyed which is Recommended to Posterity to Remember.”
In conformity with a custom used by early cartographers, spaces of territory about which little is known were described by brief annotations. As can readily be appreciated in the present instance such descriptions were confined mainly toward the western part of the map. But there are others, too:
“The land between James River and Roanoke River is for the most part Low Sunken Swampy Land not well passable but with great difficulty. And therein harburs Tygers Bears and other Devouringe Creatures.”
West of Henrico is another curious annotation:
“Here about Sr. Will Barkley conquered and tooke Prisoner the great Indian Emperor Abatschakin, after the massacre in Virginia Ano.”
The most westerly portion of Virginia Herrman calls Mount Edlo.
“This name derives from a person that was in his infancy taken Prisoner in the last Massacre over Virginia. And carried among others to the Mount, by the Indians which was their Watch Hill, the country there about being champion and not much Hilly.”
South of Mount Edlo is
“The Goulden or Brass Hill. With the fountain out of the Hill ​issued forth a glistermge stuff sand like unto the filings of Brass, and so continued downwards this Neck, that the very ground seemed to be covered with the Same Brassy stuff.”
Describing the sources of the York and Mattapanye rivers, Herrman says:
“The Heads of these two Rivers Proceed and issue forth out of low Marshy ground, and not out of hills or Mountains as other rivers doe.”
“The Great Sassaquahana River runs up Northerly to the Sinnicus about 200 miles with Divers Rivers and Branches on both sides to the east and west full of falls and Iles until about 10 or 12 miles above the Sasquahana fort then it runs cleare but south southwards not Navigable but with great danger with Indian canoes by Indian pilots.”
Fort Sasquahana is represented by a quaint drawing of low arched roofed houses surrounded by a palisade. Between the Sassaquahana and the Schuylkill rivers he inserts this annotation:
“Between the heads of these opposite Branches being swampy is but a narrow passage of Land to come down out of the main continent into the neck between the two great Rivers.”
New Jersey he designates as,
“New Jarsy Pars at present inhabited only or most by Indians. These limits between Virginia and Maryland are thus bounded by both sides Deputies the 27th. May Ao 1558 marked by dubble Trees from the Pokomoake East to the Seaside to a creek called Swansecut cr.”
The Carolinas are marked as Carolinae Pars, the Atlantic Ocean is described as the North Sea and in “the Great Bay of Chesepeake” Herrman draws two sailing vessels winding their way toward the “Potowmeck.”
​Attractive and beautiful as the map appears to us, Herrman claimed that the engraving did not do justice to his original drawing. He said his map “was slobbered over by the engraver Faithorne defiling the prints by many errors.” That the map was the most nearly accurate of the region up to that time no one pretended to deny and it has since been used for the basis of other maps. One of its defects was that the mouths of the James, York and Rappahannock rivers were drawn far out of proportion to Chesapeake Bay, but this could hardly be called a major error.
Regarding this map Lord Baltimore wrote that “Herrman hath taken great pains in order to the drawing and composing of a certain Mapp or card of our said Province. . . .” On another occasion Baltimore “Humbly refferrs for greater certaynty” to Herrman’s map. Washington in a more reserved but equally laudatory manner speaks of this map, “It was admirably planned and equally well executed.” In the license for its exclusive publication, King Charles II also speaks of the map in warm praise, “being a work of very great pains and charge and for the King’s especial service. . . .” But the principal encomium on the accuracy of Herrman’s map came nine years later when indirectly Sir Isaac Newton came into the argument during the historic Maryland-Pennsylvania boundary dispute between Lord Baltimore and William Penn. In ​1682 Newton had determined the exact width of a degree of latitude; and it was discovered that Herrman, having determined the fortieth degree latitude by means of a sextant, had placed it on his map at the exact location where Newton found that it should be.
Although Herrman’s map played a paramount part in this famous boundary controversy, first between Penn and Baltimore and later their heirs for nearly one hundred years, we can in this present work narrate only the part in which Herrman himself was concerned.
In determining the northern limit of Baltimore’s claim, Herrman, in plotting the map, used as a basis and authority Maryland’s charter which called for lands that “lie under the 40th degree.” Fort Sassaquahana lies on the fortieth parallel on Herrman’s map. Penn at first agreed that Fort Sassaquahana should be used as the southern boundary of his lands and his charter was written to read “North from the 40th degree”, instead of saying parallel, which was more precisely what he meant. A short time afterwards Penn, having consulted Herrman’s map, was surprised and chagrined to find that the fortieth parallel came north of the navigable part of the Delaware River. At once he gave notice that his former acceptance to the boundary was “merely a formal notice”. Penn, consulting the Maryland charter of 1632 found that his own lands should extend south “under the 40th degree”. Penn at once seized upon this technicality and declared that Charles I in his charter to Calvert could have meant only one thing, ​namely, that Maryland’s lands should begin from the end of the 40th degree, that is the thirty-ninth parallel. In this way the historic controversy arose.
It was in this way that Herrman was brought directly into the dispute: His estate, Bohemia Manor, was located about midway between the thirty-ninth and the fortieth parallels. In November 1682 William Markham, Penn’s deputy, made arrangements with Herrman to meet Lord Baltimore at Bohemia Manor and discuss with them the situation. When Baltimore arrived at Herrman’s house he learned that Markham was unable to keep his appointment on account of illness. Thereupon another interview was arranged, but Penn’s deputy did not keep even that. Shortly afterwards Penn most tactlessly wrote to Herrman and five of his neighbors, advising them to pay no more taxes to Baltimore because their lands would soon be included in the colony of Pennsylvania. This message was no sooner received than Herrman communicated it to his friend and benefactor, Lord Baltimore. After two years of fruitless endeavor, Baltimore finally tracked down Markham and insisted upon an interview. But neither Penn nor Baltimore could come to any satisfactory agreement; nor did their heirs or their children’s heirs. Finally the long drawn out controversy was settled in 1767 by the establishment of what has since been called the famous Mason and Dixon line at 39 degrees, 43 minutes and 26.3 seconds as the northern boundary of Maryland. Thus Maryland lost only 17 minutes of a degree of latitude of its original territory.
* ↑ Čapek, Thomas, Augustine Herrman. Praha, 1930, pp. 11—12.
* ↑ Brodhead, Hist. of N. Y., Vol. I. p. 561.
* ↑ Ibid. p. 674. What Brodhead here means no doubt is a larger engraving than what had appeared on the Visscher map or in Van der Donck’s History. Jasper Dankers speaks of the engraving on Visscher’s map in 1650. Memoirs Long Island Hist. Soc., Vol. I. p. 230.
* ↑ Maryland Archives, Vol. III (Proc. of Council), p. 398. See also, P. Lee Phillips, The Rare Map of Virginia and Maryland, 1911, p. 5. At this point, too, it is essential that we recall that in the Remonstrance it was stated that the boundaries of New Netherland be determined.
* ↑ Phillips, p. 5.
* ↑ Maryland Archives. Prov. Court; Proc. of Council; Proc of General Assembly. Index vols.
* ↑ Maryland Land Records, Annapolis, Liber Q. Folio 456.
* ↑ Phillips, P. Lee. Rare Map of Va. & Md. p. 5.
* ↑ The whereabouts of the orig. MS. map is not known.
* ↑ Čapek, p. 10, citing for his authority, p. 131 of George Vertue’s biography of Hollar.
* ↑ Attached to the original copy of the Herrman map in the North Library, British Museum is a small note apparently written in the late 17th century or early 18th century on fly leaf. “Virginia and Maryland, surveyed by Herrman, engraved by Faithorne. fo. 1673 with head of Herrman by Faithorne. This is the only map known to be engraved by Faithorne & is of the greatest rarity. It is so beautifully executed as to make one regret that there should be no other of the same hand.”
* ↑ Vincent, F. Hist. Delaware, 1870, Vol. I. p. 373.
* ↑ Phillips, p. 9. For many years it was believed that the copy of the map in the North Library of the British Museum was the only one extant. However, within the past decade another copy was discovered in the John Carter Brown Library, Providence, Rhode Island.
* ↑ We may suppose that Herrman was familiar with classical mythology.
* ↑ The name on the portrait is spelled “Augustine”; the one on the inscription plate, “Augustin”, showing vagrancies of 17th century spelling.
* ↑ The vagrancies in the spelling of proper names during the 17th century is truly astonishing. On the map Herrman spells both his first name and last name differently.
* ↑ The whereabouts of the original drawing of Herrman’s famous map is unknown. Likely it was destroyed, yet who knows but that some day it will be found. What a treasure it would be! See Phillips Rare Map of Va. & Md.
* ↑ Fite and Freeman, A book of old maps, Harvard Univ. Press, 1926. P. 151.
* ↑ Matthews, E. B. Maps and mapmakers of Maryland; and Phillips, p. 11.
* ↑ Maryland Archives, Proc. of Council (1671–75), pp. 18–19.
* ↑ Phillips, Rare Map of Va. and Md. p. 10.
* ↑ Fite & Freeman, p. 151.
* ↑ Great Britain, Cal. State Papers. Col. Am. & W. Indies (1669–74), p. 551.
* ↑ Tansill, Pa. & Md. Bd. Dis., pp. 43–47.
* ↑ Ibid.
* ↑ Thorpe, F. N. American charters, Vol. III. p. 1678. For a concise statement of facts of the Maryland Boundary Dispute, the reader is referred to the brilliant essay on the question by Tansill, Note 2.
* ↑ About eight miles north of the present city of Philadelphia.
* ↑ Tansill, p. 33.
* ↑ On the map Bohemia Manor is shown on the North Side of the Bohemia River in “Caecil C” (Cecil County). On the southern bank of the island formed by the Bohemia River and the Sassafracx River is shown Hackston, an estate acquired by the Hacks in 1662.
* ↑ Maryland Archives, Proc. of Council, Vol. V. pp. 376–78.
* ↑ Maryland Archives, Proc. of Council, Vol. 17. p. 472.
* ↑ Ency. Britannica, “Mason Dixon Line”. 11th ed.