Max McCullough:  2017 Carolyn A. Lynch Teacher Fellow

Historian Mark Kurlansky, in his book Cod: A Biography of the Fish that Changed the World, suggests that among the first Europeans to come to America may have been Basque fishermen from modern-day Spain and that they came in search of cod. Before them, exiled Vikings crossed the North Atlantic to Newfoundland, Canada, relying on cod they caught and cured along the way to sustain them. While these claims are difficult to conclusively prove, the earliest records we have of 16th and 17th century explorers of North America show they were stunned and delighted by the numbers of cod they encountered there. 

The opportunity to reap huge profits from exploiting cod stocks off the coast of New England and Newfoundland ignited intense competition for land in the New World. With knowledge of the geography so limited and borders deeply ambiguous, at various points England, France, Belgium, and the Netherlands dispatched fishing fleets to the American Northeast and claimed the region for themselves. As with any geographical dispute, cartography was deployed as a potent tool to advance national claims to the territory.

As this map set illustrates, mapmakers in the 1600s seemed interested in New England not only for potential settlement, but also (and perhaps foremost) as a lucrative fishing ground. This map set draws on maps with several national origins and displays the contentious nature of early cartography in North America. Even before the founding of Plymouth and Boston and the assertion of British control over large swaths of the region, the most prominent landmark on maps of the region, regardless of which country produced them, was also the most suggestively named: Cape Cod.

This map set was created to be used in conjunction with a lesson plan entitled "Cod and the Settlement of New England," which can be found on the next page of this map set. The map set can be used by teachers to acquaint themselves with documents and perspectives on the topic, or by students as a classroom or at-home preview/extension activity; it can also be used as a stand-alone resource at the discretion of teachers. The lesson plan and this map set were also created to be used in teaching Mark Kurlansky's book Cod: A Biography of the Fish that Changed the World, though both the lesson plan and the map set can be used without including additional lessons on the text.

The Cod and "Cape Codd": The Fishy Priorities of 17th Century Mapmakers map set includes five (5) maps, each featuring background information and zoom-in details. The Library of Congress has a Primary Source Analysis tool that can be used for student inquiry and discovery. In addition, each map has a Document Connection (some accessed via web link, others included in the map set) with extension questions comparing the map to another image or primary text source. The maps can be used on their own or compared with other maps in the set.

Essential Questions
What role did cod fishing have in motivating European exploration and settlement in New England?
How can cartography be a reflection of political competition for land between nations?

Objective
Students will be able to synthesize maps, other visual documents, and written primary sources to create a deeper understanding of the role cod fishing played in the early settlement of New England.

The following recipe comes from an anonymous French domestic guidebook for women and is quoted in Kurlansky's Cod: A Biography of the Fish That Changed the World. Even during the European Middle Ages, cod was already well-known as a preserved food that could be brought over long distances. Its usefulness on long voyages around the world would make it an important source of nutrition as European explorers began to spread out across the New World after 1492. The fact that it was still edible, delicious, and therefore valuable after long transportation made it an important commodity that could be harvested in the North Atlantic and then sold around Europe for a profit.

Item, when it [cod] is taken in the far seas and it is desired to keep it for 10 or 12 years, it is gutted and its head removed and it is dried in the air and sun and in no wise by a fire, or smoked; and when this is done it is called stockfish. And when it hath been kept a long time, and it is desired to eat it, it must be beaten with a wooden hammer for a full hour, then set in to soak in warm water for a full 12 hours or more, then cook and skim it very well like beef.
                                                                                                                                                                                                        - Author unknown
                                                                                                                                                                           Le Mesnagier de Paris, circa 1393

Neither of France's coasts, on the Mediterranean Sea or the English Channel, are anywhere near areas with cod fishing. How might cod have found itself into French homes in the 14th century? 

Why might preserving cod in the form of dried stockfish for up to 10 or 12 years be useful? Do you think being able to keep it so long makes it worth the 12 hours of preparation stockfish requires before it can be eaten?

In 1602, the English lawyer and explorer Bartholomew Gosnold led a crew along the coast of the New World from Maine down to Virginia. He was not the first European to explore these parts, following as he was the 1524 route of Verrazzano in reverse. In hindsight, however, we see he was more successful in naming the landmarks he encountered along the way. Modern maps still bear the names he gave the territory, including Cape Cod. Descriptions of abundant cod fish included in accounts of their voyage helped spark English interest in the region, and gave this "New England" its global reputation for cod production.

The fifteenth day we had again sight of the land, which made ahead... Near this cape we came to fathom anchor in fifteen fathoms, where we took great store of codfish, for which we altered the name, and called it Cape Cod. Here we saw sculls of herring, mackerel, and other small fish, in great abundance... From this opening the main lieth south-west, which coasting along we saw a disinhabited island, which so afterward appeared unto us: we bore with it, and named it Martha’s Vineyard... here we rode in eight fathoms near the shore which we took great store of cod,—as before at Cape Cod, but much better.
                                                                                                                                                                                                            - Gabriel Archer
                                                                                                                        Gosnold’s Settlement at Cuttyhunk, published 1625 [cite below]

Why might Archer have included these descriptions of abundant cod in his account of Gosnold's voyage? How might individuals around the world have reacted to the news of these large cod stocks?

The Herrera y Tordasillas map in this map set was created in 1601, a year before Gosnold's voyage. What effect do you think that map and this account had in the popular imagination of the New World?

Archer, Gabriel. Gosnold's Settlement At Cuttyhunk: The Relation of Captain Gosbnnold's Voyage to the North Part of Virginia, Begun the Six-and-twentieth of March,
     Anno 42 Elizabethæ Reginæ, 1602. [Boston: Directors of the Old South Work, 1902.]

In 1630, even as the Puritans of the Massachusetts Bay Company were striking out to settle New England, Sterling continued to drum up support for his efforts to colonize "New Scotlande." He published An Encouragement to Colonies that year in an effort to win colonists and investors to his side; this publication includes the map highlighted in this map set. He was ultimately unsuccessful, attracting a fair number of common laborers to settle but failing to win wealthy upper class backers with the cash necessary to sustain the colony. In any event, Sterling sunk much of his personal fortune into maintaining a small Scottish settlement, and he lost everything when the French regained Acadia in 1632. His enthusiasm, and perhaps a little naivety, show in his description of the land and abundant resources his colonists could expect to find in "New Scotlande."

... there is land fit to be labored lying between [the meadows] and the woods, which do compass all about with very fair trees of sundry sorts, as Oakes, Ash, Plaines, Maple, Beech, Birch, Cypress, Pine and Fir. The great River doth abound exceedingly in Salmon and Smelts during their season, and every little Brook in Trouts. One Lake within this Bay hath yearly a great quantity of Herrings, which by reason of a strict way which they pass, are easy to be taken, and all the year over they never lack shellfish, such as Lobsters, Crabs, Cockles, and Mussels. The chief beasts that inhabit the Woods there are Ellans, Hart, Hind, and fallow Deer, with store of other wild beasts, such as Wolves, Bears, Foxes, and Otters, but the most useful of all is the Beaver, both for his flesh that is esteemed to be very delicate for eating, and for the skin that is of good value; as for wild fowl, there is a great variety and store, of Partridges, Plovers, Woodcocks, Larks, Wild Geese, Wild Ducks, Heron, and Crane, with many other sorts peculiar to that part of the World, and not known here.
                                                                                                                                                                       - William Alexander, Earl of Sterling
                                                                                                                                             An Encouragement to Colonies, published in 1630

Though Sterling makes no explicit mention of cod in this excerpt, he does mention many other kinds of animals. What are some of the fish, beasts, and birds Sterling lists, and why might they have been useful for the colonists he wished to enlist?

Life in the New World was hard and often dangerous, but no mention of this fact is found here. Why might Sterling have instead so clearly outlined the richness of the land? Was he being dishonest with the supporters he hoped to find?

The British and the Dutch fought a series of wars from 1652 to 1674. The third of these Anglo-Dutch Wars ended with the Second Treaty of Westminster, which surrendered Dutch claims to the colony of New Netherland. The actual text of the treaty is in Latin, but the following excerpt is drawn from an introduction to the treaty found in the 1929 anthology European Treaties bearing on the History of the United States and its Dependencies. The subject of fishing rights was heatedly debated in 1674 by the negotiators from England and the Netherlands, indicating how important this resource was in the context of New World settlement politics.

Dissatisfied [...], the English government demanded three additional articles, [including] abstention of the Dutch from fishing on the British coasts without special permission. The terms of both parties having been thus set forth, their plenipotentiaries at Cologne, assisted by the Swedish mediators, strove to reach an agreement. But knowing that the English Parliament was on their side, the Dutch would not admit any mention of the fishery...

Notably the surrender of towns on the Zeeland coast and the rent for the fishery were omitted. From the point of view of this volume its chief importance lies in the fact that it stipulated the restoration of New Netherland to Great Britain.

                                                                                                                                                                                     - Frances Gardner Davenport
                                            from European Treaties bearing on the History of the United States and its Dependencies, published in 1929

No restrictions were placed on Dutch fishing off of English-controlled shores, even as the Dutch gave up the territory of New Netherland to the English. Why might the Dutch have favored this arrangement, despite losing their claims to Cape Cod?

The English permitted the Dutch to continue fishing the cod banks, and turned their attention to growing settlements across Massachusetts and New England. What does this indicate about the differing priorities of the Dutch and English in their approaches to colonization?

John Smith, most famous for his role in founding the colony at Jamestown, Virginia and for the aid he received from Pocahantas, later went on to explore and map New England. He traveled to America's northeast coast in search of whale, but his crew instead found rich stocks of codfish, notably hauling in 60,000 codfish in one month in 1614. In his account of the journey, he compared fishing in New England to recreation and claimed it was easy enough for a child to catch cod (and many other species of fish) in the fruitful waters.

Let not the meanness of the word fish distaste you, for it will afford as good gold as the mines of Guiana or Potosí, with less hazard and charge, and more certainty and facility... What pleasure can be more than to recreate themselves before their own doors in their own boats, upon the Sea, where man, woman, and child, with a small hook and line by angling, may take diverse sorts of excellent fish, at their pleasure?... If a man work but three days in seven he may get more than he can spend unless he will be excessive... Young boys and girls, savages, or any other, be they never such idler may turn, carry, and return fish without shame or either great pain; he is very idle that is past twelve years of age and cannot do so much; and she is very old that cannot spin a thread to catch them...

                                                                                                                                                                                                          - John Smith
                                                                                                                                                 Description of New England, published in 1616

In stark contrast to Smith's description of cod fishing as "without shame or either great pain," José de Acosta's account of the silver mines at Potosí, Bolivia reveals the brutality of the Spanish exploitation of native labor in their resource extraction efforts. By the time of Chatelain's map in 1719, more than two centuries of Spanish atrocities had decimated native populations, and the Spanish colonial administration had begun importing African slaves to replace Indian laborers.

The Indians labor in these mines in continual darkness and obscurity, without knowledge of day or night.  And as those places are never visited with the sun, there is not only a continual darkness, but also an extreme cold, with so foul an air contrary to the disposition of man, that such as newly enter are as they are at sea... Afterwards they carry up this metal upon their shoulders, by ladders of three branches made of leather twisted like pieces of wood, which are crossed with staves of wood, so that by every one of these ladders they mount and descend together...

                                                                                                                                                                                                   - José de Acosta
                                                                                                                               Historia natural y moral de las Indias, published in 1588
                                                                                                      English Translation: "The Natural and Moral History of the Indies"  1604

Slavery existed during the 17th century in both South America and New England, but the English never deployed slave labor on the scale of the Spanish. Why might English cod fishing have relied on the labor of free white Europeans, while Spanish mining operations exploited slave labor? 

 Smith's Description of New England was an attempt to convince new colonists to settle in the region, and de Acosta was a Jesuit missionary spreading Christianity among Native Americans. In these contexts, do you believe their accounts of conditions in New England and Potosí are reliable? Why should we trust or doubt their reports?