The painting is a modern interpretation based on nothing more than
what the artist thought it looked like. Is it a depiction of an
actual event? Is there documentary proof that George Washington
visited the Potomac IW while it was in blast when he was 10 years
old? He did visit one of the Principio facilities in 1756, but there
were a number of them, which one? My research has dealt primarily
with the Virginia industry, not that of Maryland.
In any event, I have been to the Potomac (Accokeek) IW site. It is
built into the side of a hill. See any hills in the picture? The
casting arch isn't bad. But as no excavation of the site has taken
place the location and construction of the building in the background
is entirely conjectural. And they are probably offloading supplies
(food, etc.) not iron ore. The storage sheds/buildings for charcoal,
flux, and iron ore would have been on the hill above the furnace
(there are a series of terraces). So that they could be loaded into
the top of the furnace via the charging bridge. It would make no
sense to offload it once at the foot of the hill and then move it up
the hill later (and John England who was responsible for the
construction of the blast furnace was very experienced). This is
pretty standard stuff for anyone who has studied early blast
furnaces, but not for artists.
Artist's depictions are often incorrect. For instance how many
depictions of a blond Jesus in medieval or renaissance clothing are
there? The same is equally true of depictions of historical
activities painted many years later. For instance I have seen
numerous depictions of blast furnaces with a short chimney or lip
around the top. This would have made charging (loading the furnace)
awkward, but it looks attractive. The finery forge at Saugus was
"reconstructed" with only one hammer, in spite of the fact that
archaeology showed there were two. The architects (same ones who did
Williamsburg, VA) decided one was more "aesthetically pleasing". As I
pointed out there lots of inaccuracies in the painting of the 1622
attack on Falling Creek. And there are some in the painting at
INTERMET of Accokeek (not the least of which is the fact that it was
named the Potomac IW).
James Brothers, RPA
[log in to unmask]
On Jun 18, 2007, at 17:29, Anita Wills wrote:
> The picture is a depication of an event, wouldn't you say? Do you
> believe he put slaves in the picture just for the fun of it? You
> and I both know that mining ore was not a white mans' job in
> Colonial Virginia.
>
> Anita
>
>
>> From: Mary Moyars-Johnson <[log in to unmask]>
>> Reply-To: Discussion of research and writing about Virginia
>> history <[log in to unmask]>
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: George Washington and Iron Ore
>> Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 04:44:07 -0400
>>
>> Note that the picture in the article is labeled "conjectured" and
>> is by Sidney King, a man noted for his careful research, but a
>> man who was born in the 20th century.
>>
>>
>> Mary Moyars-Johnson (MMJ)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Jun 18, 2007, at 1:29 AM, Anita Wills wrote:
>>
>>> Here is an interesting link to an article about George
>>> Washington, and the wealth he and his family enjoyed from Iron
>>> Ore. If you will notice on the picture, there are slaves in the
>>> background working the mines. When Augustine Washington Senior
>>> died, he divided his estate among his six sons.
>>>
>>> Anita
>>>
>>> George Washington and Iron Ore Wealth
>>> http://www.glue.umd.edu/~gdouglas/ironores/pages/georgew.html
>>>
>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>> Don’t miss your chance to WIN $10,000 and other great prizes
>>> from Microsoft Office Live http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/
>>> aub0540003042mrt/ direct/01/
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> PC Magazine’s 2007 editors’ choice for best Web mail—award-winning
> Windows Live Hotmail. http://imagine-windowslive.com/hotmail/?
> locale=en-us&ocid=TXT_TAGHM_migration_HM_mini_pcmag_0507
|
