Hampton Roads Port of Embarkation

Hampton Roads was a significant port for transporting supplies and personnel to various theaters during World War II. According to the historical marker located at West Ave. and 25th Street, 1.687 million people passed through HRPE between June 1942 and September 1945. To learn more, visit the other blogs on our website related to HRPE. Two of the images showcased in this blog were taken at Camp Patrick Henry. Camp Patrick Henry was in what is now the Denbigh area of Newport News, near the current site of the Newport News/Williamsburg International Airport. Camp Patrick Henry served as a staging area for troops and personnel going overseas.

He Saved the Bank

Among the many personnel that came through Hampton Roads were officers of the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), the first organized effort by the United States to implement a centralized system of strategic intelligence. Led by General William Donovan, the “Glorious Amateurs” (as Donovan called them) were involved in every theater of the war from Europe to Asia. Although their stories were previously hidden due to national security concerns, some are now being told. One of the stories is that of Irving H. Sherman.

Sherman was born and raised in New York. After graduating from Cornell University, he worked for A. G. Becker & Co., an investment firm out of New York, in the sales department. Sherman’s work would take him to pre-World War II Europe, where he assisted in Becker investments and opened Becker’s Berlin office in 1929. He left Berlin in 1939.

After returning to the United States, Sherman was recruited by General Donovan due to his activities in Berlin and his knowledge of the German financial situation. Sherman worked in Bern, Switzerland, under Allen Dulles, the first director of the Central Intelligence Agency. As the war was ending, Sherman embedded himself with a US Army unit that went into Berlin. Senior management of the Berliner Handelsgesellschaft Bank contacted Sherman, whom they had known from his time in Berlin, regarding their concern about the Soviets pillaging the gold in the bank’s vault. Sherman arranged for an Army caravan to go to the bank to retrieve the gold and take it to an undisclosed location west of Berlin. When the war ended, the bank retrieved its gold and was able to restart operations.

Sherman exemplified the caliber of an individual who passed through the HRPE. His actions helped the German banking system recover after the war. When he returned to Europe in 1967, the bank honored him like royalty, recalling how Irv Sherman had saved their bank.

Different Paths, Shared Purpose

This image caught my attention when I came across it in our online catalog. First, it is a cross-section of women supporting the war effort representing the United States, the American Red Cross, Canada, Free France, and China. Second, the title of the image, “Foreign Economic Administration,” was unfamiliar to me. Research revealed that the Foreign Economic Administration was responsible for wartime functions, including export control, foreign procurement, lend-lease, reverse lend-lease, participation in foreign relief and rehabilitation, and economic warfare (encompassing foreign economic intelligence). Finally, the HRPE photographers left the women’s names. Although the list of names does not specify who is who, is not in any order, and some names are misspelled, it did provide a starting point to uncover each woman’s story.

One of the first stories I found was that of Denise Abbey, who served with the Office of War Information. The mission of the Office of War Information was to formulate and execute information programs that promoted, in the US and abroad, an understanding of the status and progress of the war effort, as well as the war policies, activities, and aims of the US government. One of the first stories I found was that of Denise Abbey, who served with the Office of War Information.

The mission of the Office of War Information was to formulate and execute information programs that promoted, in the US and abroad, an understanding of the status and progress of the war effort, as well as the war policies, activities, and aims of the US government.

Abbey sat for an oral history interview in 1988, conducted by The Association for Diplomatic Studies and Training. Her oral history gave insight into one transport route and her wartime service. According to Abbey’s oral history, she arrived at Camp Patrick Henry on April 19. However, she had to wait two weeks for enough women to come for their transport across the Atlantic on the General Mann. The trip took nine days from HRPE to Oran in Algeria. After staying in Algeria for two weeks working with John Albert, Abbey traveled to Naples, Italy.

While some women, like Abbey, went to Europe, others went to a lesser-known theater: the China-Burma-India (CBI) theater. The China-Burma-India theater is often considered a forgotten theater of World War II, mainly due to the historical emphasis on the European and Pacific theaters. The CBI theater opened in March 1942 to transport supplies to the Chinese Central government forces who were fighting the Japanese.

Two of the women who went to the CBI theater were Joan Bondurant and Maureen Peterson. Bondurant and Peterson (to the left of Denise Abbey) were officers of the Office of Strategic Services. As mentioned earlier, it was the first organized effort by the United States to establish a centralized system of strategic intelligence. When they initially arrived in India, Bondurant and Peterson’s espionage efforts focused on the Japanese before shifting their focus to the Indian independence movement. After the War, Bondurant returned to India, where she met Mahatma Gandhi, whose life she described as “proof that the final power lies in good.”

Another story I found is that of Dr. Catherine Hsia-Ti Yeh Hu. I learned about Dr. Hu’s story by speaking with her grandson, Victor, and through an online copy of Ten Thousand Scrolls of Books, translated by Dr. Esther Hu of Boston University. Dr. Catherine Hsia-Ti Yeh Hu was born in Songyang, Zhejiang Province, China. Dr. Hu came to the United States from China after graduating from Guanghua University amid the Second Sino-Japanese War in 1937 (which eventually coincided with World War II).

She arrived in the United States aboard the President Cleveland, one of two sister ships (the President Coolidge was the other) built by Newport News Shipbuilding for Dollar Steamship Lines, which eventually became the American President Line. She continued her education at The George Washington University before matriculating at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, where she earned a Ph.D. After returning to China, Dr. Hu married Nationalist General Hu Zongnan

Dr. Hu’s story highlights the vital role that Newport News has played on the world stage. Newport News built ships that carried people across the seas and served as a gateway for travelers heading abroad. As the steward of Newport News Shipbuilding’s history, The Mariners’ Museum and Park preserves this connection and many other connections through ship models, such as President Cleveland in our Defending the Seas gallery, and archival pictures of her in our catalog. Through Dr. Hu’s journey, we are reminded that our stewardship extends not only to Newport News Shipbuilding’s history but also to the family stories that give these vessels enduring meaning.

Harbor Nights

In the last entry, I highlighted the China-Burma-India theater as a forgotten theater overshadowed by the European and Pacific Theaters. There is another theater outside of the previously mentioned three: the American Theater. The American Theater consisted of areas surrounding and including the American homeland. The men who served at the HRPE are considered to have served in the American Theater.

The information accompanying the photo above stated that it was taken during a boat ride aboard SS Mohawk for the 785th Sanitary Company and their guests. Providing entertainment and recreation for the soldiers was not uncommon. We have numerous pictures of the games and dances held at the HRPE. To determine if any articles have been written about boat rides on SS Mohawk, I researched the newspapers. I found an article in The Journal and Guide dated July 17, 1943.

The article mentioned that the men of the 277th from Camp Hill were entertained aboard US Mohawk with a boat ride (Journal and Guide, Saturday, July 17, 1943, page 3). Although this boat ride occurred a few weeks after the one where this picture was taken, it allows me to conclude that USS Mohawk was used to provide boat rides to the soldiers.

Along with telling of the event, the photographer also wrote the names of the women in the photograph. Unfortunately, only their last names were written. When I looked at the names, I saw one that stood out: Mrs. Kittrell. I wondered if Mrs. Kittrell was Dr. Flemmie Kittrell, who has a building named after her on Hampton University’s campus. As I researched the name, I soon discovered that it was indeed Dr. Flemmie Kittrell. Dr. Kittrell (second from the left, seated with her arms folded in a dark dress) was the dean of women at Hampton Institute (now Hampton University) at the time of the picture.

Dr. Kittrell, an alumnus of Hampton Institute, was the first African American woman to receive a Ph.D. in nutrition (Cornell, 1936). She returned to Hampton to teach nutrition and ultimately became head of the home economics department. She left Hampton to take a position at Howard University in Washington, DC. While at Howard, Dr. Kitrell travelled the world studying nutrition and created a model for preschool studies which served as the foundation of what became Head Start.

While I recognized Dr. Kittrell’s name, I did not recognize the other names. To identify the other women, I returned to the Norfolk Journal and Guide article for more information. In the July 17, 1943, article, it mentions that there were hostesses on the boat ride. There were a few last names in the article that resembled the last names listed on the image. When I searched for the names, I found numerous articles in the Journal and Guide that mentioned the name I was searching for. The repetition of names in multiple articles shows they moved in the same social circles.

One of the women I was able to identify, Rachel Watkins Cole, was listed in numerous articles in the Journal and Guide and The Daily Press. Rachel Watkins Coles graduated from Huntington High School in 1926. She was a classmate of Lawrence Palmer, featured in the YMCA basketball photo in the Hidden Histories: Portraits of a City blog, and Arquilla Bradshaw (seated to the left of Dr. Kittrell at the end).

Mrs. Cole then attended Virginia Union and eventually graduated from Morgan State College (now Morgan State University) in 1933. Cole was a member of First Church (Baptist) of Newport News and the Beacon Light Club (Naomi B. Urquhart, second to the right in the dark dress with her eyes closed, was also a member), the Belle Vies Bridge Club, and a charter member of the Alpha Beta Zeta chapter of Zeta Phi Beta Sorority, Inc.

How You Can Help!

The pictures presented here, as well as those in the first blog, are just the tip of the iceberg. Our catalog features numerous images taken by Ellis Parker Griffith and the photographers of the Hampton Roads Port of Embarkation, whose stories remain unknown. Where our research ends, your help begins. If you recognize anyone in these images or in our online catalog, please don’t hesitate to contact me at wfavor@marinersmuseum.org or 757-591-7747. By helping us identify those in the photos, you become part of the shared stewardship of memory that defines The Mariners Museum and Park.

The post Hidden Histories: Gateway to War appeared first on The Mariners' Museum and Park.

The most romantic time of day is arguably the golden hour as the sun sets. It is the perfect time to say your “I do’s.” You get that beautiful golden light surrounding your friends and family during your ceremony like a warm hug, and then a little bit is left for your pictures during cocktail hour and as you mix and mingle, celebrating your love. Then, just as it gets dark, you and your guests are ready to eat and dance! We were lucky to witness this perfect formula in action in October at the Aung Wedding!

Valerie and Chan celebrated their love for one another surrounded by their family and friends here with us at the Mariner’s Museum and Park on October 12th, 2024. Their colors were the perfect Fall palette with yellows, oranges, and reds. The warmth of their color palette perfectly represented the warmth these two had for each other and everyone around them. Every time we met to discuss the details of the day or exchanged an email to answer any questions, you could feel the love flowing through Valerie and Chan. You had the same feeling on their wedding day, but times ten! It felt like everything could’ve fallen apart or gone wrong, and the Aungs wouldn’t even notice because the most essential part of the day was that they were there to marry each other.

We were fortunate to witness their love in real time as they tied the knot in our South Courtyard, which was full of fall foliage. While they got those perfect golden hour shots, their guests chatted with each other under the collonades lit by the twinkle lights following our original arches. As the sunlight faded, the party moved inside to our Anna Huntington Room. Guests were greeted with adorable images of the Aungs’ dog as the table numbers! They dined on salads and bread as their starter while the couple shared their first dance, entirely in their own world. After enjoying some tasty food, heartfelt speeches, and cutting the cake, it was time to party! 

Guests danced the night away with the happy couple, took lots of pictures in the photobooth, and played a couple games before needing to refuel. Luckily, the Aungs thought of this and brought out late-night snacks to share! This gave everyone enough energy to get through more dancing before it was time for the send-off. Their guests lined up outside our iconic Bronze Doors with bubble wands, waiting for the couple’s arrival. When Chan and Valerie walked through the lines of their guests, giddy with the night’s excitement, you could feel the magic in the air!

As the night winded down to an end, it was hard not to want to hold on to this moment with the Aungs, but even though their celebration with us was over, their love will stay with our team and the story of the Museum for years to come. They shared hugs and incredibly kind words with us as we bid them farewell. It was encouraging to know we impacted their big day in such a positive way, similar to how they were able to affect us with their presence in our galleries. We are honored they felt so good about their experience with us that they agreed to let us share their story through this blog! If you would like to learn more about how to plan your next event with us, please email venueexperiences@marinersmuseum.org or check out the Venue Rentals tab on our website!

Thank you to all of the wonderful vendors who helped make the Aung Wedding a success!

Catering and Event Coordination: Gourmet Gang (now Groovin’ Gourmet)

DJ and Lighting: Colonial DJs

Photography: Virginia Wedding Company

The post Golden Vows: A Magical Fall Wedding Celebration appeared first on The Mariners' Museum and Park.

All of the recent technical changes in ordnance, motive power, and ship design were observed and acknowledged by several pre-war American politicians, naval leaders, scientists, and engineers. France and Great Britain had begun to build ironclads. When the Confederacy was initially organized, the new nation was fortunate to follow the forward thinking of Floridian Stephen Russell Mallory. Mallory was the former chairman of the U.S. Senate’s Naval Affairs Committee and was quickly named the Confederate Secretary of the Navy. The secretary immediately realized that the South could never match the North’s superior shipbuilding capabilities unless a new “class of vessels hitherto unknown to naval service” was introduced to tip the balance in favor of the Confederacy. Mallory knew that iron-cased warships armed with the most powerful rifled guns and rams could destroy the Union’s wooden navy.

When the U.S. Navy abandoned Gosport Navy Yard in April 1861, Mallory found the wherewithal to begin construction of ironclads. The scuttled USS Merrimack was slowly converted into the ironclad ram, CSS Virginia, and Mallory initiated the construction of four other ironclads to defend the Mississippi River. News of the Southern ironclad building program made its way north, prompting the Union to begin building iron-cased warships, particularly USS Monitor. The construction of these two ships would result in the first battle between ironclad warships and begin a revolution in naval warfare.

Monitor and Virginia influenced ship construction for the next 50 years. North and South concentrated on building more of their modified ironclad designs. Once ironclads appeared to be the key to naval success, the South’s agrarian society struggled to match Northern industrial strength. The two ironclads under construction at New Orleans typified the problems faced by the Confederate shipbuilding program. When Flag Officer David Glasgow Farragut attacked the masonry coastal forts, Fort St. Philip and Fort Jackson, defending the riverine approach to New Orleans, CSS Louisiana engines were not operational, and it could only serve as a floating battery. CSS Mississippi was still under construction. The ram CSS Manassas, privately converted from the tug Enoch Train, was an ill-conceived warship and covered by only one inch of iron plate. Nevertheless, it was the only functioning ironclad defending New Orleans. All three ironclads would be destroyed: Manassas, riddled by shot from Mississippi, ran aground and was burned, while Louisiana and Mississippi were scuttled by their own crews to prevent their capture.

Obviously, the Confederacy was unable to defend its harbors, coastline, and rivers in early 1862. February 1862 would witness the first major naval actions in the Western theater. Major General U.S. Grant relied upon Flag Officer Andrew Hull Foote to attack Middle Tennessee. Foote’s ironclads overwhelmed Fort Henry on the Cumberland River; yet, these ironclads were repulsed during an attack against Fort Donelson on the Tennessee River. The Federal casemated, rear paddle wheel ironclads, designed by Naval Constructor Samuel Pook, were found not to be shot-proof as they were protected by only 3.5 inches of iron.

Nevertheless, the Confederates did not have any vessel to counter these Union ironclads until CSS Arkansas emerged from the Yazoo River. Originally laid down at the Shirley Yard in Memphis, Arkansas was moved to Greenwood City, Mississippi, and completed under the direction of Lieutenant Issac Newton Brown. Only partially plated with railroad T-rails with an almost perpendicular casemate, Arkansas steamed through the entire Federal fleet above Vicksburg on July 15, 1862. The Confederate ironclad damaged the USS Carondelet and made it to Vicksburg. Arkansas was attacked at its mooring by the ironclad USS Essex and ram USS Star of the West. The melee failed to destroy the Confederate ironclad; however, Arkansas was eventually scuttled by its own crew due to engine failure.

The events of 1862 taught Union and Confederate leaders that ironclads were the key to naval victory. Naval Constructor John Luke Porter modified the Confederate ironclad into a smaller, lighter draft vessel more appropriate for riverine service and harbor defense. Nevertheless, the improved design could not resolve inherent problems: poor propulsion systems, construction delays, limited production of iron and machinery, an overtaxed transportation network, and the lack of skilled workers. Most of the ironclads laid down in 1862 would not be ready for service until 1864 as a result of Confederate shipbuilding challenges. Consequently, the South would only put 22 ironclads in the water. Likewise, Union ironclad production increased and evolved. USS Monitor may have been ‘the little ship that saved the nation,’ but there were numerous flaws in the design. Monitors were basically floating batteries, having to be towed from port to port. The ships were so unseaworthy that they had difficulty serving as blockaders. These monitors had limited firepower, inadequate gun elevation, and a slow volume of fire. John Ericsson and other designers strove to correct these problems with subsequent monitor classes. Two, three, and four-turreted ironclads, totaling 49 ships, would be produced in an effort to contest Confederate defenses and ironclads.

The new monitor and casemate ironclads were tested immediately in 1863. On January 31, 1963, CSS Chicora and Palmetto State struck at the blockading fleet outside of Charleston. These two ironclads damaged four Union vessels, but could not break the blockade. The only other Confederate to challenge the blockade in 1863 was the ill-fated venture of CSS Atlanta, which had been converted from the British blockade runner Fingal. The ironclad had excellent engines; however, the ship had a 16-foot draft, which limited movement through the shoals below Savannah. It was believed that Atlanta, armed with two 7-inch and 6.4-inch Brooke guns and a spar torpedo, could successfully encounter a Union monitor. On June 17, 1863, Atlanta made a foray into Wassau Sound below Savannah and ran aground as it approached two monitors, USS Nahant and Weehawken. These Passaic-class warships were armed with one XV- and one XI-inch Dahlgren’s. Weehawken approached within 300 yards of Atlanta. Four of the five shots struck Atlanta, breaking the Confederate ship’s casemate.

Although the XV-inch shell gun gave the Passaic-class the power to break through the six-inch iron plate shield of Atlanta, these guns did not give the Union ironclads the firepower to destroy well-organized coastal defenses. Nevertheless, Rear Admiral Samuel Francis DuPont took nine ironclads to attack Charleston, South Carolina. The fleet included seven monitors, the casemate CSS New Ironsides, and the tower ironclad Keokuk. General P.G.T. Beauregard had created an in-depth defensive system including torpedoes, two ironclads, and coastal forts mounting 77 heavy guns. Many of the Brooke rifles used armor-piercing Brooke bolts. On April 7, 1863, DuPont’s fleet attacked. Union ironclads managed to fire only 55 shots. In return, the Confederates struck the Federal armorclads over 400 times. Several monitors were severely damaged, and Keokuk sank. The engagement proved that monitors lacked the firepower to contest well-prepared coastal forts. The Federals now realized that the Federal fleet needed U.S. Army support to capture the remaining Confederate ports.

By 1864, the Confederates were able to launch several more effective ironclads, such as CSS Albemarle in the North Carolina Sounds and CSS Tennessee in Mobile Bay, Alabama. Albemarle did achieve success sinking USS Southfield off Plymouth, North Carolina, on April 19, 1864; however, the ironclad would eventually be destroyed by a spar torpedo on October 27, 1864. Meanwhile, Admiral David Glasglow Farragut organized an attack against Mobile Bay. Although one monitor, USS Tecumseh, was sunk by a torpedo, Farragut was able to pass the forts and then defeat the powerful Confederate ram, Tennessee. Tennessee was rammed three times; however, the monitors in Farragut’s fleet did the real damage to the Confederate ram. USS Manhattan came alongside and fired its XV-inch Dahlgren, which broke Tennessee’s casemate. The twin-turreted USS Chickasaw sent shot from its XI-inch Dahlgren’s at 50 yards, which rammed the port shutters, cut the exposed anchor chains, knocked the funnel over, and wounded and killed several men. Tennessee then surrendered.

The final ironclad engagement was a desperate attempt by the Confederate Richmond Squadron to destroy the Union supply base at City Point, Virginia. Federal shore batteries and the twin-turreted USS Onondaga blocked the path of CSS Richmond and CSS Virginia II. This last engagement was anticlimactic. Soon all of the Confederate ironclads in Savannah, Charleston, and Richmond were destroyed as the Confederacy collapsed.

Few facets of the Civil War more closely reinforce the technology and attrition themes than the war on the water. The war witnessed an overnight change to naval tactics. Boarding tactics and ‘Fighting Instructions’ became archaic and forgotten due to steam power, ironclads, revolving turrets, torpedoes, and rifled cannons. Secretary Mallory’s drive to create ironclads started the process that proved the power of iron over wood. The Union counterpunch, USS Monitor, resulted in a fleet of ironclads that helped to achieve victory while simultaneously creating a vision for future navies to follow.

The post Civil War Ironclads: An Overview appeared first on The Mariners' Museum and Park.

One of the key principles of photography is the way a photographer frames their subject. An intriguing facial expression can easily be misinterpreted if the cause for it has been cropped out of the image. However, carefully framing a subject can also help to simplify the creator’s intended message.

In this case, a lifeboat on a passenger ship has been turned into an abstraction of shapes and shadows. Otherwise, this is a straight photograph; the image is not manipulated in any other way.

This photograph was taken in 1958, during the post-World War II era of modern photography. Other modernist photographers, such as Harry Callahan, Minor White, and Edward Weston, were utilizing the medium’s qualities of crisp optics and full tonal range to deliver their imagery. 

Walker Evans (1903-1975) was best known for his work during the 1930s documenting rural America for the Farm Security Administration. Later in that decade, he travelled through the South “with his friend, the writer James Agee, who had been assigned to write an article on tenant farmers by Fortune magazine; Evans was to be the photographer.” The project focused on three families in Alabama and culminated in the publication of Let Us Now Praise Famous Men in 1941. Evans’ direct, unapologetic approach to these families and their lifestyles appeared to sum up the “whole tragedy of the Great Depression.”  [1] 

After years of working on assignments for Time and Fortune magazines, Evans was awarded a new title at Fortune. As Special Photographic Editor (1948-1965), he was able to create portfolios of his choosing and also design the magazine layout. [3]  

Creative control to this degree was unheard of at this time. In summing up this extraordinary opportunity, The Metropolitan Museum of Art said, “Using the standard journalistic picture-story format, Evans combined his interest in words and pictures and created a multidisciplinary narrative of unusually high quality.” 

Lifeboat was part of a 1958 spread [4] in Architectural Forum, a fitting example of Evans’ overall vision for the published work.

Sources:

1. “Walker Evans (1903–1975).” The Metropolitan Museum of Art online. Accessed October 23, 2025. https://www.metmuseum.org/essays/walker-evans-1903-1975.
2. “Farm Security Administration/Office of War Information Black-and-White Negatives.” Library of Congress online. Prints & Photographs Division, FSA/OWI Collection. Accessed March 4, 2025. http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/pp.fsaowi
3. “Walker Evans Timeline.” Florence Griswold Museum. Accessed October 23, 2025. https://florencegriswoldmuseum.org/exhibitions/online/the-exacting-eye-of-walker-evans/timeline/.
4. Architectural Forum magazine. October 1958. Accessed March 5, 2025. https://usmodernist.org/AF/AF-1958-10.pdf

The post Masters of Photography in The Mariners’ Collection appeared first on The Mariners' Museum and Park.

At first, my background in water sports naturally drew me to this exhibit and, of course, the giant boat that greets you when you walk in. I thought I knew a fair amount about sailing, but I quickly realized there was a whole world of innovation, athleticism, and engineering I had never imagined to be involved in this sport.

I learned that the America’s Cup isn’t just any race — it’s the world’s oldest international sporting competition, predating the modern Olympics. Started in 1851, the America’s Cup carries the name of the legendary yacht that started it all — America, built by George Steers, a New York boatbuilder. Originally called the Royal Yacht Squadron Cup or the Royal Yacht Squadron’s 100 Pound Cup, the race began in England in 1851 and has evolved into a widely loved and advanced sport. 

The exhibit brings this legacy to life in spectacular detail, but it was the 2013 America’s Cup story that really captivated me. In 2013, the Oracle Team USA staged what has been called “the greatest comeback in sports history,” overcoming an 8–1 deficit to beat Emirates Team New Zealand 9–8. And the very boat that carried them to victory — the AC72 catamaran — towers above you in the gallery. It’s the largest boat in the Museum’s Collection, and seeing it up close makes you appreciate just how massive and complex these vessels are.

Walking through the gallery, you don’t just learn about the catamarans — you experience the sport from every angle. You have the chance to learn how these high-tech catamarans “fly” above the water on hydrofoils, reaching speeds up to three times faster than the wind. You can touch materials like carbon fiber and Clysar film that keep the boats strong yet feather-light. You can step onto the same kind of netting the crew stood on during races, and even test your endurance on an arm bike like the grinders use to power the boat’s hydraulic systems.

The exhibit also dives into the crew’s world. Each of the 11 sailors has a specialized role — from the skipper steering the course, to the tactician reading wind and currents, to the grinders generating the hydraulic pressure that controls the sails and foils, and more. Their training regimen is as intense as any elite athlete’s: two to five hours a day of cardio, boxing, weightlifting, swimming, agility work, and/or mental exercises to sharpen decision-making under pressure.

And then there’s the technology — a blend of hydrodynamics, aerodynamics, materials science, and pure innovation. The AC72’s wing sails work like airplane wings, generating lift to push the boat faster than the wind. Hydrofoils lift the hulls completely out of the water to eliminate drag. Every component is a calculated balance of strength, lightness, and precision.

What makes the Speed and Innovation in The America’s Cup gallery so special is that it doesn’t just show you a boat — it immerses you in a story of history, human endurance, and engineering genius. Whether you’re a sailor, a sports fan, a tech enthusiast, or just curious, you’ll leave with a new appreciation for what it takes to race — and win — the world’s oldest international sporting competition.

The post My Favorite Gallery: Speed and Innovation in The America’s Cup appeared first on The Mariners' Museum and Park.

We start with simple questions: Who are the people in the photo? What were they doing? And why was this moment worth capturing? Sometimes, the photographer provided enough information for easy research. But more often, the clues are sparse, leaving a mystery to be solved. 

This blog is part one of a two-part blog series and will feature photos from the Ellis Parker Griffith Collection. Part two will examine images from the Hampton Roads Port of Embarkation Collection. With each story we find, we can piece together a fuller, richer portrait of our city and its people, one image and one story at a time. 

The Ellis Parker Griffith Collection

Ellis Parker Griffith was the Newport News Shipbuilding’s official photographer. His photographs, preserved in the Museum’s archives, provide a unique window into early 20th-century Newport News (which you can explore at any time in our online catalog). Most came to us without names or context. However, they contain clues that help us piece together what we are seeing through Griffith’s unique window on Newport News.

The Walter Reed Emergency Hospital

Dr. Clarence H. Waring. Dr. Waring (second row, third from the right, with arms crossed, wearing glasses) was part of the United States Public Health Service and served as the head of the Walter Reed Emergency Hospital.

Mr. Harold F. Norton (third row, standing fourth from the right in the tie over Dr. Waring’s left shoulder, identified by his obituary in the April 25th, 1952, edition of The Daily Press) was the chair of the Newport News Red Cross chapter. 

Mr. Carl G. Campbell (standing next to Norton, third row, third from right) was a faculty member of Walter Reed High School and later a professor at Marshall College, now Marshall University in Huntington, West Virginia.

Dr. Joseph G. B. Bulloch (first row, sitting, third from right under Dr. Waring) was Assistant Surgeon with the United States Public Health Service.

Other names appear in records, but I am unable to match the name to faces. An interesting fact, found in the Virginia War History Commission, mentioned that the African American Red Cross workers were from the Trinity Baptist (colored) Auxiliary. However, I compared the photos of the Trinity auxiliary picture in The Daily Press with the photo above, but I couldn’t tell if any of the women in the photos matched.

The Dictionary of Virginia does note that longtime Newport News Public School nurse Carrie Bolden worked in the hospital. However, her known image does not match that of any woman in this photo. Additionally, questions remain about other people in the photo. Are the African American men sitting in the chairs, Dr. Walter Foreman and Dr. Ezekiel Ezra Smith, both of Whittaker Memorial Hospital? Was one of the women Berta Winne? Could another be Edith Bowersox? The search continues.

YMCA Basketball

In 2021, I presented the original “Hidden Histories” program. During that presentation, I highlighted these pictures in the program and mentioned that these boys are associated with the YMCA. The clue was the YMCA triangle, which means “mind, body, and soul.” While the triangle was enough for me to know that they are associated with the YMCA, the confirmation was an article in the New Journal and Guide (February 19th, 1934, p. 4), where John Rupert Picott mentioned that the location of the old YMCA was on the corner of Marshall and 22nd Street, or 2200 Marshall Ave. 

With the YMCA identified, I sought to determine who the boys are in the photo. I was able to identify three of the boys using a picture of the 1925 basketball team in the book “Huntington High School, a symbol of community hope and unity, 1920-1971.” From that photo, I identified:

Hannibal Ridley (first picture, first on the left): Ridley is the son of John and Mary Ridley. 

Lawrence Palmer (second picture, third from right): Palmer is the son of Augustus and Annie B. Palmer. 

Aubrey Allen (second picture, second from right, next to Palmer). I found little about Allen. 

Many of the boys from the 1925 Huntington High School basketball photo are also featured in the pictures above and in another associated photo. Unfortunately, their names remained unknown. I did attempt to find a 1925 Huntington High yearbook, but was unsuccessful. I was able to find a 1923 Huntingtonian (which is a jewel in itself). While Ridley, Allen, Palmer, and others who appear in the Museum’s photos are all in the yearbook, they were all underclassmen and not named in the yearbook.

War Camp Community Service

These two pictures posed one of the greatest challenges of the Hidden Histories project. Each photo offers few clues beyond the signage on the buildings: “War Camp Community Service,” the circle and square, and “Girls Club and Headquarters: Girls Division.” So, what is the War Camp Community Service? Where was each building located? Who are the woman and the children in the first picture? Who are the three people in the second one? 

The War Camp Community Service (WCCS) was established in 1917 to provide soldiers with recreation and amusement in various communities. In 1918, the WCCS was established in Newport News with Mr. J. L. Einstein serving as director. Additionally, the WCCS Girls Division’s (shown on the sign of the first photo) goal was to band together girls in a common endeavor to raise their standards of personal efficiency in contributing to the promotion of the war. While finding answers about the overall WCCS and its establishment in Newport News was easy, the answers to the other questions were elusive. 

I did find various articles in The Daily Press that mentioned the WCCS. One article from March 21, 1919, noted the opening of the Girls Club on 25^th Street in a building leased by the WCCS as a club for the colored girls and the headquarters for the Girls Division. A few days later (March 29), another article mentioned a woman named Elizabeth W. Martin as the director of the Colored Girls’ Division, War Camp Community Service. The February 1920 edition of Southern Workman gave a few more details. It mentioned that the WCCS rented a building in July 1918 under the War Council of the YWCA, with Mrs. Julia W. Thomas, Miss Harriett E. King, and Miss Edith A. Ross taking over in February of 1919. After the war, the Newport News community house was staffed by Mr. James E. Scott, who served in France, Miss Harriett E. King, and Mrs. E. R. Simpson. With these details, I was sure that I would be able to identify the woman and girls in the photo. I looked in census records and other newspaper articles to see if any of the ladies mentioned were in the images above. Unfortunately, my search came up empty. 

Conclusion

The Walter Reed Emergency Hospital, YMCA basketball, and the War Camp Community Service photos are windows into early 20^th-century Newport News and into the lives of African Americans who called Newport News home. While we have an idea of what we are looking at through Griffith’s window, we need further investigation for a comprehensive view. 

That is where you, the reader, can help us. While our detective work in the various archives has been successful, it is not 100% successful. Please review the photos here, review the images in our catalog, and share this blog. If you recognize anyone in the pictures here, have information about Walter Reed Emergency hospital, the YMCA basketball teams, the War Camp Community Service in Newport News or Hampton, or any photo in our catalog, please let us know.

Contact me at wfavor@marinersmuseum.org or call us at (757) 596-2222. As we identify more of the men and women in the images and their stories become known, they are no longer faces in a photo but people who lived, loved, and worked in Newport News and elsewhere. You never know — the person you see in the image might not be a stranger, but your own ancestor.

The post Hidden Histories: Portraits of a City appeared first on The Mariners' Museum and Park.

We were thrilled to introduce Bilingual Wonder Wednesdays — an incredible addition to the program where stories and songs were shared in both English and Spanish. It was a fun and inclusive way for little ones to experience the joy of language and learn through play.

This free, educational program runs from June through August and is designed for children ages 2 to 4 and their caregivers. Each week, our Education Team gathers with guests in our Bumblebee Learning Garden to sing songs, read stories, and engage in hands-on activities that spark imagination and creativity.

Each session starts with singing from our Park Playlist. Everyone receives a booklet at the beginning so you can follow along. On bilingual days, we sing three songs in English and three songs in Spanish — and trust us, you’ll hear the children joyfully singing and dancing along!

Next up is storytime, where one of our educators reads a beautifully illustrated book that promotes imagination while building early literacy skills. On bilingual days, each page is read first in English and then in Spanish, allowing kids to hear and learn in both languages.

After the story, it’s time for an activity! These vary week to week and include arts and crafts, sensory play, and educational games — all designed to fuel creativity and keep those young minds active and curious.

Once the program ends, the fun doesn’t have to stop. Families are welcome to play in the Lil’ Mariners’ Play Zone, explore the Park, or even head inside the Museum with free admission for participants.

Whether you’re a Wonder Wednesday regular or planning your first visit, we’d love to see you next summer. With songs, stories, and hands-on fun, it’s the perfect midweek adventure for you and your little explorer!

The post Best Day of the Week: Wonder Wednesday! appeared first on The Mariners' Museum and Park.

I will admit that I had previously discounted the use of AI because I had seen what a complete mess it can make of genealogical studies.¹ Another drawback, one that seems insurmountable, is that the historical information curators and researchers typically use, things like rare books, documents, and manuscripts, aren’t available digitally and aren’t accessible to AI programs.² Worst of all, AI’s current reliance on the internet means it considers ALL the information it locates, whether factual, erroneous, or irrelevant. This means an AI program’s responses, at least to history-related questions, will more than likely contain factually incorrect information or false suppositions.

Despite these problems, I do see the potential of AI, so when the podcast host suggested starting the learning process by simply asking a question that mattered to me — one I didn’t think AI could answer — I was willing to give it another chance. At the time, I was researching several artworks in preparation for a tour with the Naval Order of the United States, so I decided to investigate how AI could help with that work. 

I had several goals for my first in-depth AI inquiry project — goals I assumed were simple. First, if I provided an AI program with a link to a web page that contained all of the information it needed, could it take in the information, distill it, and formulate a factually accurate response? My second goal was a little more abstract: could an AI program analyze an artwork and accurately describe the scene using the details provided by the artist, and, by extension, could it suggest a possible artist when an artwork was unsigned?

The AI program I chose to test was Grok3, mainly because it was getting a lot of positive reviews at the moment I decided to take another dive into the world of AI. With my first goal in mind (could AI provide a factually accurate response if I provided a link to a web page that contained all of the information it needed to answer my question), I asked Grok to tell me about a painting in our Collection. The result was an unmitigated disaster I can’t even begin to describe. The upside is that it uncovered a problem in the coding of our online catalog that prevents AI programs from reading our catalog pages.³

Knowing that Grok wouldn’t be able to meet my first goal until the problems with our online catalog were remedied, I moved on to my second, more abstract goal — can an AI program analyze and describe a painting and suggest the possible artist of an unsigned work? Naturally, I assumed Grok wouldn’t respond well to this question, but I ended up being pleasantly surprised. We had a fascinating and thought-provoking conversation that actually led to a change in the artist attribution of the painting we investigated.

The Victim

Historical Background of the Action⁴

During the early years of the American Revolution, the French clandestinely supported the American colonies. This changed on February 6, 1778, when the two countries signed a treaty of alliance. By April, the French had dispatched a fleet of 12 ships-of-the-line and five frigates under the command of Comte Charles Henri d’Estaing to support military operations in the United States. By early August, d’Estaing’s fleet and a British force under Admiral Richard Howe were maneuvering for battle off Narragansett, Rhode Island. That battle never occurred thanks to a hurricane that swept up the east coast and raged for several days.⁵ The stormy weather dispersed and jumbled the fleets together and severely damaged many vessels’ rigging.

As the fleets maneuvered to reform, enemy ships encountered each other and several single-ship actions occurred, including a battle between HMS Isis and Le César, the flagship of famed explorer Comte Louis Antoine de Bougainville. Approximately 70 miles northwest of Sandy Hook on August 16th, around noon, the two ships sighted each other, and a mutual chase began. The British had a real “oh s–t!” moment when they realized their quarry, and pursuer, was a French 74-gun ship. Isis only had 50 guns. The British captain, John Raynor, immediately tacked away, but Le César was a fast sailer and caught up with Isis about four o’clock that afternoon.

The French ship immediately hoisted a flag and fired a warning shot to leeward. When the British didn’t respond, Le César fired a broadside at the smaller vessel. Captain John Raynor described the broadside as “ill-served and ill-directed” (and possibly overcharged), so Isis escaped serious damage. When Le César passed Isis’s quarter, the French captain put the ship “in stays” (i.e., slowed down to change course) and Raynor responded by putting Isis’s helm hard to starboard. The British gun crews poured double-shotted cannon fire into the French ship as Isis maneuvered across its bow. The crew’s aim must have been effective because Raynor said the British fire “had an amazing effect” and caused the French to instantly stop “their huzzaing which they had been doing a great deal before.” 

Raynor’s maneuver placed Isis on Le César’s leeward side, which various sources report had not been prepared for the action, possibly because the rough sea state prevented the lower gun ports from being opened. Other sources reported that the leeward guns were blocked by stacks of lumber that hadn’t been thrown overboard when the ship beat to quarters. Whatever the situation, the British maneuver brought the two ships within “half a pistol shot,” and they began pounding each other with cannon fire. Captain Raynor believed the British were out-firing the French, but admitted that at one point the concentration of Le César’s fire on Isis’s bow “made the forecastle so hot there was no standing upon it.”

Roughly an hour and a half into the action, Le César’s wheel was shot away. Although the French believed they could compel the smaller British ship to surrender, the appearance of two English ships convinced the French captain, Joseph-Louis de Raimondis, or one of his lieutenants,⁶ to quit the action, and Le César sailed off before the wind. The extensive damage to Isis’s masts, yards, sails, and rigging prevented the British from pursuing the fleeing vessel. As evidence of the intensity of the action, the Caledonian Mercury reported that Isis had 400 shot holes in her main topsail, 130 in her mizzen topsail, and 120 shot holes in her mizzen staysail. Amazingly, Isis only had one man killed and 15 wounded.

The Action Depicted by the Artist

In the painting, the artist has created a sequenced narrative account of the engagement between HMS Isis and Le César. It shows three stages within the course of the action and reads from right to left, an interesting and important aspect of this painting that you don’t often see. At the right, both ships appear undamaged, and the fighting tops are crowded with men. Both ships are firing — Isis on the starboard side and Le César on the port. Isis’s position on the canvas indicates the British ship is in the act of crossing the French ship’s bow, which fits Raynor’s description of the opening stages of the battle. 

At the center, the artist depicts the ships in a running action, both close-hauled on a starboard tack. Both vessels have damaged sails and rigging, and there are shot holes and other damage visible to their hulls. In portraying the ships side by side, the artist may have wished to show the closeness of the action and the much larger size of the French vessel. A British blue ensign draped over the stern and a red ensign flying from the mizzen gaff places the action after 5:15, which is when the ensign staff of HMS Isis was shot away, and another flag was hoisted to the peak of the mizzen gaff to signal that the British ship had not surrendered.⁷

At the left, the position of Le César’s sails indicates the French ship is sailing before the wind. This appears to reflect the final stages of the battle after the wheel has been shot away and the French have prudently decided to retire from the action.

The Artist

The artistic quality of the painting is relatively high, although previous cleanings have dulled the crispness of the work. The ships and rigging are rendered beautifully, as is the water, which the artist has painted to suggest movement and the remnants of the departing storm. The artist has used a restrained color palette of muted yet harmonious colors. The sky and clouds have been rendered in soft, diffused pastel colors, and the light is natural-looking with no dramatic spotlighting or highlighting, which suggests the artist was focused on realism and documentation rather than theatricality. 

Unfortunately, the artist either didn’t sign the painting or it has been obliterated by past cleaning efforts. In 1979, Sotheby Parke Bernet & Company in New York attributed the painting to British artist Nicholas Pocock (1740-1821). The Keeper of Paintings at the National Maritime Museum in Greenwich, E. H. H. Archibald, felt “fairly certain” that the painting was a good early example of the work of British artist Thomas Luny (1759-1837). When the painting was accessioned, the Museum’s curators followed Archibald’s advice and have been attributing the painting to Luny ever since.

A Conversation with Grok3

As I mentioned earlier, I was studying/researching this painting in preparation for a tour when I became curious about how AI could assist with my job. To start the conversation and assess its abilities, I uploaded an image file and asked Grok3 to analyze the painting without providing any additional details about the work. While Grok didn’t analyze the subject well (it thought the painting featured four ships, not two in three different positions, and couldn’t identify the nationality of the French vessel), it did recognize the vessels were frigates or ships-of-the-line of the Napoleonic Wars or American Revolution engaged in “a battle or close maneuver on a choppy sea.” Grok also commented that the ships, one of which it recognized as British, were “framed by a calm sky with scattered clouds and a detailed rendering of the ocean, with waves adding dynamism to the composition.”

Grok also suggested several possible artists for the piece: Nicholas Pocock (1740-1821), Thomas Whitcombe (1752/1763-1824), Dominic Serres (1722-1793) and Robert Dodd (1748-1815). All of these suggestions are valid, but after considering the styles of each artist, Grok made its first conclusion:

Interestingly, Grok asked my opinion of its conclusion and wanted to know if I had any additional details that might help refine its response. I obliged by correcting Grok’s mistakes about the subject matter and provided the date of the action and the names and nationalities of the vessels depicted. I then made the mistake of telling Grok that the French ship could be identified by “the white flag on the stern.” 

It was at this point that Grok’s lack of historical knowledge and reliance on the internet failed spectacularly. In its analysis of the painting’s composition and subject, Grok stated: “The white flag on Le César’s stern suggests a moment of surrender or negotiation, consistent with historical accounts where the French ship, a 74-gun vessel, was captured by the British Isis (a 50-gun fourth-rate) after a fierce engagement.” Umm…nope, and umm….nope. The French naval ensign prior to 1789 was a solid white flag, and I’m pretty sure that no historical accounts state that Le César surrendered. Grok also incorrectly placed the scene of the action off Toulon rather than 70 miles off Sandy Hook, New Jersey. Unfortunately, these mistakes reinforced my opinion that AI, at least in its current form, is incapable of creating factually accurate responses to history-based questions.⁸

Since the historical facts of the battle weren’t the end goal of my current investigation, I corrected Grok and pushed the mistakes aside. As Grok and I continued our conversation, I realized that using AI does have an amazing upside for curators. Having a free-flowing, back-and-forth conversation or debate with an AI program can open your mind up to new ideas and possibilities you hadn’t considered before. In other words, AI helps curators think outside of the box. By the end of our conversation, Grok and I had developed a theory for a new, and highly likely, artist attribution for this painting–but it took both of us, working together, to do it. 

The movement towards the development of the new attribution began when Grok accepted my historical corrections and used the new information to reassess the four artists it had suggested. This time Grok leaned towards Dominic Serres as the artist of the painting. It provided justification for its belief, but once again I had to correct its historical mistakes and in its regenerated response Grok no longer seemed quite so confident of its suggested attribution. 

Again, Grok asked for my opinion, so I mentioned Archibald’s suggestion that Thomas Luny might be the artist of the painting. Intrigued, Grok reanalyzed the painting considering Luny’s “style, career, and how it aligns with this work, while critically assessing the idea [that Luny is the artist of the painting]” and came to the following conclusion:

Reading Grok’s response I didn’t get the impression it was confident Luny might be the artist of the painting of Isis and Le César. HOWEVER! In its response Grok had mentioned a name several times that piqued my interest: Francis Holman. Thomas Luny was Holman’s apprentice between 1770, when Luny was just 11 years old, and about 1780. I had recently researched a Holman painting in our collection and realized the style of the two paintings was very similar. I asked Grok if it thought Francis Holman might be the artist of the painting and it immediately went to work analysing his style against the other artists we had considered previously. 

Grok’s conclusion found that Francis Holman is “a highly plausible artist for this painting,” stating:

Like any self-respecting curator, Grok did place the caveat that “without a signature or provenance, it’s not definitive, but Holman’s signature technique gives him an edge over the others.” The “signature technique” Grok is referring to is Holman’s tendency to create paintings with a compositional narrative of his subject. In other words, he shows multiple views of the same vessel or vessels in different positions creating a narrative of movement over a period of time. As I researched Holman’s background I discovered several artworks dating from the same time period and location which reveals that Holman was aware of war events in the United States:

• Holman displayed a painting titled The attack upon the town of Newport, Rhode Island, by the French fleet under the command of Count d’Estaing in August 1778 at the Royal Academy of Arts in April 1779.
• The Paul Mellon Centre for Studies in British Art holds a photograph of a 1778 Holman painting titled British Men O’ War in a Rough Sea off the Coast. The 1778 date certainly makes one wonder if the scene depicts British ships caught in the August 11-13 storm that preceded the August 16 battle between Isis and Le César.

So, Grok’s conclusion and my conclusion (after I studied more of Holman’s work) align. We both believe it’s possible that Francis Holman is the artist of the sequenced narrative battle of Isis and Le César. Just for fun, I also had conversations about the painting with ChatGPT and Perplexity, and both came to the conclusion that Francis Holman was a strong candidate as the artist of the painting, though I do wonder if having to walk each program through the analysis of the painting tilted their conclusions in Holman’s favor. 

I did have a good laugh when ChatGPT stated: Painting B very likely belongs to Francis Holman, or at minimum to a painter strongly influenced by his narrative and technical approach. Oh, really? Do you mean someone like Thomas Luny?⁹ At any rate, I decided to update our catalog record and add Francis Holman as a potential artist of the painting, although I did leave the attribution to Thomas Luny intact for prudence’s sake. Research will continue and maybe someday a signature or other clue will reveal the true artist of the painting.

As for the goals I set for my AI investigation I now have an answer for both. Obviously the problem of AI programs not being able to see/read the records in the Museum’s online catalog will eventually be fixed so I can’t blame Grok for its inability to do what I asked (i.e. review a catalog record and spit my own research back at me correctly). You can rest assured that once our coding problem is fixed I will be testing this question again.

As for my second two-part goal, the answer to the first part (can an AI program analyze an artwork and accurately describe the scene using the details provided by the artist) is an emphatic NO. I asked Grok3, Perplexity and ChatGPT to analyze the painting and describe it and all failed miserably. I had to teach each program baby-step by baby-step to recognize the most basic artistic, maritime and historical facts but none of the generative AI programs progressed to the point of being able to produce an accurate description of the artwork.¹⁰ 

AI’s lack of understanding of maritime history, technology and terminology and its inability to think and see like a human — especially a human with the discerning and detailed eye of a trained curator — means I’m not going to be replaced by AI anytime soon (at least when it comes to analyzing art). This being said, AI has the wonderful potential of helping a curator or researcher think outside of the box when it comes to analyzing art. I’m not sure I would have ever considered Francis Holman as the potential artist of the painting on my own, and I don’t think Grok3 would have considered Holman without my suggestion. 

UPDATE!

As is typical with unsigned paintings, mysteries appear, questions are asked, a possible solution presents itself, another mystery appears in the process and another possible solution presents itself. This time AI had nothing to do with the research that presented the new mystery, it was just good old fashioned detective work. 

Just follow me here because this is a tough one.

If you read the footnotes of my post you’ll know that footnote 9 mentioned a sketchbook created by Thomas Luny between 1777 and January of 1780 in the collection of the National Maritime Museum (NMM) in Greenwich, England. In that sketchbook there were several pages of notes and sketches of HMS Joy. The data contained in NMM’s catalog record led me to believe that Joy was a mistranscription of Isis. I sent a message to NMM and recently I received a response from the curator of art, Katherine Gazzard. She stated that I was correct, the sketches and ship details do show John Raynor’s Isis. Before I responded to Ms. Gazzard’s message I did a quick search to see if Thomas Luny had painted a portrait of HMS Isis. I had already studied Luny’s catalog raissoné and hadn’t found one but I figured another search couldn’t hurt. I wasn’t wrong. What I stumbled across was an entry in the catalog of the 1891 Royal Naval Exhibition:

The catalog entry indicates that a painting with a similar description to ours was painted by a reverend named “J. Mitchell.” I began researching reverends named Mitchell in England (there were many!) to see if any were artists and found none. I did locate a British artist named J. Edgar Mitchell, but he primarily worked in watercolor and typically created rural scenes. The few images I found showing naval battles by Mitchell exhibited a completely different artistic style so I’m pretty sure J. Edgar Mitchell is not the artist of our painting.

Consequently, I don’t know what to think of the attribution of a painting of Isis and Cesar to a Rev. J. Mitchell. Could it be a mistake made by the lender (another reverend named Thomas Halliwell)? Ships and rigging are difficult to paint accurately and the quality of those things is good in our painting, certainly much better than those drawn by an amateur with no other artistic works to his name.

Whatever the case, when I looked at the sketches of Isis in NMM’s sketchbook they certainly look like the working notes for a painting of Isis. The ship had visited both Plymouth and Portsmouth in 1779 and 1780 while Raynor was still captain so Luny may have visited the ship. His notes are VERY specific. They include dimensions of many parts of the ship and even gives coloring notes for specific parts of the vessel — some of which match the coloring of our painting.  For example, on a sketch of the stern he states “all above the ballcona sable” and “window frames sable.” 

Another sketch shows a side profile of Isis’s stern carvings, a starboard broadside view including a line above the top rail that says “hammocks,” and color notes that match our painting (i.e. a sable stripe above the upper gun ports). All of these features are extremely similar to the view of Isis shown in the central scene of our painting.

Captain Raynor and Isis did participate in several other actions during the American Revolution, but the 1778 action with Le César appears to have been the most significant of his career. This makes one wonder if Raynor commissioned a painting of the battle when he returned to England in 1779 or 1780. The date of the sketch book certainly overlaps this time period. Unfortunately, Raynor died at the end of July 1780 (around the 28th?), so it’s possible he never saw or received the finished product.

Mysteries, mysteries, mysteries! As it turns out AI made exactly zero contributions to the research — in fact, it might have just led me on a wild goose chase away from E.H.H. Archibald’s initial hunch that Luny was the artist of the painting. Francis Holman certainly can’t be ruled out as the artist and neither can the Reverend J. Mitchell. At any rate, I still think the discussion with Grok was interesting and believe it can help curators and researchers think outside of the box, but, in the end, only good, old-fashioned detective work is a curator’s best option.

¹ For example, AI appears incapable of discerning between individuals with the same name. 

² Every book and document in every repository in the world would need to be digitized and made available on the internet for AI to do a comprehensive and effective search, but even then mistakes made in historical documents would have to be sorted out by a researcher to establish historical accuracy.

³ If you are interested in knowing what was causing the disaster I waded into, this is the response I received from our Director of Digital Transformation to my long and whiny email: “I think I see what’s happening. Our catalog pages open just fine in a regular browser but sometimes reports “blank” or missing when you ask an AI assistant. That’s because the site loads the item details with behind-the-scenes code that only runs inside a full JavaScript enabled browser. Automated tools that don’t run that code can’t see those details. We should be running pre-rendering that’s supposed to create a plain-text version of each page for search engines and AI tools…but this does not appear to be working currently. Until this is fixed, AI answers about our collection, even with a URL for reference, may be hit-or-miss. If an AI assistant seems confused, it’s probably guessing from an old snapshot or incomplete information.”

⁴ Just for clarification, all of the historical research used to create the description of the battle was conducted by me. No AI program I tried was able to contribute any relevant historical facts to the research.

⁵ Early American Hurricanes 1492-1870, David Ludlum, pages 27-28.

⁶ A report from Boston dated August 24 stated the French captain had lost his right arm in the action. The Public Advertiser of December 19, 1778 contained an article reported in Newport on October 8 that the captain of Cesar had died of wounds he received during the August action the previous week. 

⁷ The loss of the British ship’s flagstaff may be why the French believed the British ship had struck

⁸ Since everyone always discusses AI’s ability to learn, I always made sure to correct Grok whenever it made a mistake. It did incorporate those corrections into an updated response so maybe the next person that asks about the battle between Isis and Le César will get more accurate information!

⁹ I have not found anything to disqualify Luny as the artist of this painting. I did discover that Luny may have been traveling in France in 1777-1778 which is documented in sketchbooks in the collection of the National Maritime Museum: https://www.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/rmgc-object-123751 . Interestingly, two sketches in the same sketchbook give views of the bow and stern of a 50-gun ship named Joy under “Capt. Rayner.” There has never been a Royal Navy ship named Joy which makes one wonder if Joy is a mistranscription of Isis. If they do show Isis it may be indirect proof that Luny is the artist of the painting. https://www.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/rmgc-object-123769 

¹⁰ If you want to see how I described the painting here is a link to the online catalog record: https://catalogs.marinersmuseum.org/object/CL11172 .

The post Art, History and AI: Should Museum Curators and Researchers use AI? appeared first on The Mariners' Museum and Park.

They responded accordingly. On April 25, 1846, units of the Mexican army, commanded by General Marino Arista, attacked and captured a small US scouting party. Arista then besieged the American fort. Taylor then brought his 3,400-man army to the Rio Grande and defeated Arista’s army on May 4, 1846, during the Battle of Palo Alto and again on May 9, 1846 at Resca de la Palma. The Mexican army retreated. Upon hearing news of Taylor’s victories, Polk sent a message to Congress claiming Mexico had invaded US territory. A Declaration of War then followed. Taylor’s victories created a “war fever”’” throughout the nation, and many men volunteered to fight to expand the nation’s “rightful” boundaries to the Pacific Ocean.

These actions must have motivated John Worden to request to be detached from the USNO on May 26, 1846. Most young officers sought active service. With the war being fought along the Gulf and Pacific coasts, it appeared to be a grand opportunity for a naval officer to attain laurels which could surely advance their career. Worden requested leave until he was called for sea duty. His request was granted, and he moved his family to Quaker Hill, Dutchess County, New York. This leave allowed the Worden family to share quality time together. On October 10, 1846, Worden moved to New York City. Sadly, Worden’s grandmother, Lucretia Garrison Worden, died on November 15. (1)

While on leave, Worden was warranted a master, in line for promotion, on August 15. Worden had already been nominated to be promoted, on August 4, by President Polk, to be named a lieutenant along with Napoleon Collins and DeLancey Izard to fill the vacancies occasioned by the promotions of Henry Pinkney, William Glendy, and George Upshur. The Navy needed more officers to staff all the ships and crews necessary to blockade the Mexican coastline. Worden’s promotion was approved by the US Senate Committee on Naval Affairs on January 11, 1847, along with several other officers such as Henry P. Robertson, Randolph F. Mason, Issac N. Brown, and Joshua Huntington. 

Accordingly, Worden was promoted to lieutenant, to date from November 30, 1846, on January 18, 1847. He filled the slot vacated by the death of Lieutenant Charles Morris. Morris, who had been assigned to USS Cumberland, died due to wounds he received during the abortive attack on Tabasco, Mexico, on October 26, 1846. Morris was part of a 253-man landing force led by Cumberland’s commander, Captain French Forrest. The Navy’s ability to quickly move up and down the Mexican coast with no opposition gave the Americans a distinct advantage. Ships, whether steamers or sail-powered, could position bluejackets, Marines, and artillery anywhere, which enabled the blockade to be maintained and Mexican port cities captured. (2)

The newly minted lieutenant was detailed to the store ship USS Southampton, berthed at Gosport Navy Yard in Portsmouth across the Elizabeth River from Norfolk, on January 29, 1847. Worden traveled from New York City to Norfolk and reported to Gosport Navy commandant Commodore Charles W. Skinner on February 3. He assumed his position as executive officer of Southampton on February 5. The vessel was commanded by Lieutenant Robert D. Thornton. The ship remained at Gosport Navy Yard until Southampton stood out to sea on February 17, 1847. Contrary winds delayed the warship from clearing the Chesapeake capes until February 23. (3)

It was an uneventful cruise until the ship reached Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, on April 12, 1847. There they met the 50-gun frigate USS Columbia which was the flagship of Commodore George Washington Storer, commander of the Brazil Squadron. A 13-gun salute was given in honor of the commodore. Then Southampton hoisted the Brazilian flag at her foremast, which called for a 21-gun salute from the American warships. In return, the city fired a 21-gun salute. When the smoke cleared, the American minister to Brazil, Henry Alexander Wise of Virginia, toured Southampton without any fanfare. Worden coordinated the reconstruction of staterooms, which were in a “very leaky condition.” He also organized the receipt of fresh provisions and three cases of wine to be delivered to Valparaiso. While in port, several men deserted; nevertheless, Worden was able to recruit replacements. (4) 

While Southampton was en route to Rio de Janeiro, much had occurred back in the United States relating to Worden’s personal life. The memorial that had been submitted to by Worden to secure back pay for his service as acting master of USS Relief, even though he was just a passed midshipman. On March 3, 1847, the Committee of Naval Affairs discharged this memorial from further consideration. Nevertheless, Worden would eventually receive excellent news that his second son, Daniel Toffey Worden, was born on April 27, in New York City. (5)

Southampton left Rio de Janeiro on April 21, 1847, for Valparaiso, Chile. This Chilean port city was a common port of call for US naval vessels to resupply after or before rounding the Horn. Generally, rounding Cape Horn was often an extremely rough and dangerous voyage. Often, old sailors would say that they were crossing near the end of the earth. Fortunately for the storeship, as the vessel approached the cape on May 14, the weather was described as being “moderate breezes and cloudy with snow and rain.” When the store ship reached the Pacific Ocean on May 20, the conditions were described as being “light variable breezes and foggy damp weather.”

These six days of Southampton’s voyage were achieved quickly and without incident. Lieutenant Worden was standing watch as the warship stood in for the harbor of Valparaiso on June 17, 1847. The voyage had already taken four months, which is indicative of the communications problems associated with the operation of the Pacific Squadron. (6)

While in Valparaiso the port, Worden resupplied Southampton after the vessel’s long voyage from Brazil. From June 17 to 22, 1847, the store ship received fresh beef and vegetables as well as 4,000 gallons of water and 8,050 sticks of firewood. These goods were to supply the ship for the final leg of its journey. Crew members were permitted to go on liberty, which Worden oversaw, as Valparaiso was the last solid ground they could walk on for another two months. The storeship stood out from the Chilean port, with Worden serving watch, on June 24 en route to California.

When Worden’s ship arrived in Monterey, California, on August 17, 1847, much had occurred in Alta and Baja California. Commodore John Drake Sloat was the Pacific Squadron commander when the war erupted. Sloat did not learn about the war until July 7, 1846, and immediately captured Monterey. The same day, the sloop of war Portsmouth occupied Yerba Buena (today’s San Francisco). Secretary of the Navy George Bancroft dispatched Robert Field Stockton to command the Pacific Squadron. Bancroft wanted Stockton to act more aggressively and in conjunction with the explorer Captain John C. Fremont’s California Battalion.

Fremont had over 300 men. Fremont’s command, supported by Stockton’s ships and personnel, conquered all of Northern California. The Americans then focused on Southern California. While Los Angeles was initially abandoned by the Californios, they reorganized and forced Stockton’s forces back to their ships. Brigadier General Stephen Watts Kearny, USA, arrived on the scene after a hard march from Santa Fe, New Mexico, and joined forces with Stockton’s naval forces to defeat the Californios during the battle of Rio San Gabriel, January 8, 1847. The next day, all Californio resistance was crushed at La Mesa. These engagements ended the military conflict in Alta California, which was confirmed by the Treaty of Cahuenga on January 13, 1847. (7)

A new conflict arose between Commodore Stockton and Brigadier General Kearny. Even though Kearny’s orders entailed that he should assume the position of military governor of Alta California, the commodore disagreed. Stockton ignored Kearny and formed a government with John C. Fremont as military governor on January 16, 1847. The very next day, Fremont advised Kearny that he would only take orders issued by Commodore Stockton.

Kearny did not reply and awaited reinforcements. (8) Commodore William Branford arrived and replaced Stockton as commander of the Pacific Squadron. Kearny hastened to Monterey to meet Shubrick, and they agreed to work together. On March 1, Kearny and Shubrick issued a joint proclamation detailing that the Navy would be responsible for customs and port duties, leaving the Army in charge of the civil governance. Earny replaced Fremont as governor and placed him under arrest for insubordination. They returned east together for the trial. (9)

The Pacific Squadron was now on the move, and USS Southampton would soon play a very active role in Baja California. Meanwhile, the store ship had to perform its purpose. John Worden, as the storeship’s executive officer, did not have to stand watch often because he was responsible for the organization and management of the ship’s operation as well as the acquisition of supplies to the various ships of the Pacific Squadron. The storeship’s primary purpose was to supply the squadron’s warships as they worked away from a friendly port. 

As soon as Southampton arrived in Monterey, Worden organized the receipt of fresh beef and vegetables for the store ship’s crew as well as other supplies for distribution. The ship’s first receiver of supplies was the US frigate Independence. One barrel of butter was transferred to the frigate on August 19. On the same day, the executive officer ordered Carpenter’s Mate Anthony Woodhouse to boil linseed oil on the beach. Monterey, which was then California’s capital, had a large naval storehouse from whence Worden could re-supply his ship, enabling Southampton to provide provisions and other goods for the squadron warships.

At the end of August 1847, Worden was extremely busy with this duty. On the 28th, Southampton supplied USS Portsmouth with 12 barrels containing 431 gallons of whiskey and 933 pounds of rice, as well as providing Congress with two barrels containing 2,992 pounds of bread. The next day, Worden orchestrated the delivery of 11 barrels of rice and 27 barrels filled with 955 gallons of whiskey to the frigate. The following day, Southampton was sent 12 bags, “said to contain 1040 pounds of sugar,” as well as almost 600 gallons of water. (10)

In addition to his work providing goods to the Pacific Squadron and the Monterey storehouse, the executive officer had to ensure that the vessel completed essential maintenance. He secured the services of USS Warren’s sailmaker on August 25 and 31 to mend Southampton’s foresail. On September 7, Worden put the crew to work painting yards and mast heads. Later in September, he had the crew get-up a new main trysail gaff. Before sailing to its next destination, he obtained from the storehouse “25 lbs 4 & 5 nails and fifty gallons white paint” for future ship repairs. (11)

While a store ship, Southampton was also an active warship serving in hostile territory. Even though the vessel was armed with just two 42-pounder carronades, Worden mustered the crew at quarters to practice working the guns. After significant training operating these heavy, short-barreled guns, Worden had the guns secured. During the time spent in Monterey, he also trained certain crew members with small arms. Not only would this skill be rather useful in defending the ship, but also when crew members were assigned to shore excursions. (12)

Although many expected Southampton to soon head south, the loaded storeship instead set sail north to San Francisco on October 12, 1847. En route, the storeship encountered an unknown schooner on October 14. Worden had the ship’s colors raised and then fired a shot across the bow of the mystery ship. The schooner quickly displayed the French tricolor. The next day, Southampton arrived at San Francisco and anchored in Yerba Buena Cove. Worden immediately put the crew to work securing ordnance supplies for use in Baja California.

The executive officer assigned enlisted men to rig sheers (block and tackle) to haul artillery onto his ship. Commodore Shubrick, then with elements of the Pacific Squadron in the Gulf of California, had requested that Col. Richard Mason provide seacoast mortars to support the commodore’s operations. Two 10-inch mortars were loaded into the Southampton. It was extremely difficult work as each mortar weighed 5,775 pounds.

In addition to these huge guns, Worden guided the men loading other ordnance material on October 16, such as eight hand spikes, four wheel barrows, two water buckets, three boxes containing 72 spades, three boxes with pickaxes & handles, two boxes with 20 crowbars, two piercing wires, two gunners gimblets, two fuse saws, two fuse setters (wood), two fuse extractors, two fuse mallets, two sets of powder measurers, and two gunners quadrants. More gunnery supplies were loaded on the next day, including one box containing 200 mortar cartridges, 200 10-inch shells, and one box marked to contain 200 10-inch fuses. (13) Then Southampton stood out from San Francisco on October 19 and reached San Diego on November 5. The next stop would be the Gulf of California combat zone.

Once Alta California was completely controlled by US forces, Secretary of the Navy John Y. Mason had ordered Commodore Stockton, before his replacement with Shubrick, to occupy Baja California and blockade Mexican Pacific coast ports. One of Polk’s administration’s war aims was to annex Baja California and the Mexican state of Sonora. Stockton intended to ensure that these expansionists’ dreams were fulfilled. The commodore, believing that all of Alta California was completely under US control, proclaimed that “having by right of conquest taken possession of that territory by the name of Upper and Lower California do now declare it to be a territory of the United States under the name of the territory of California.” (14)

As Commander John B. Montgomery’s orders were to show an American presence also at San Jose del Cabo, La Paz, and Loreto, the sloop soon left Mazatlan. Portsmouth then sailed to San Jose del Cabo which was a small farming and fishing village located at the very tip of the Baja Peninsula. The town was captured on March 30, 1847. The sloop then moved up the coast and forced San Luca to surrender. Because he lacked sufficient manpower, Montgomery could not leave a garrison at any of these coastal Baja towns. Portsmouth reached La Paz on April 13.

The next day, Colonel Miranda surrendered La Paz. The local citizenry signed the articles of capitulation. This document had rather unusual provisions which granted them United States citizenship rights; yet, they were allowed to retain their own officials and laws. Not all Baja Californios accepted this collaboration. Loyalists gathered about 20 miles north of San Jose at Santa Anita. They declared that Miranda was a traitor and proclaimed Mauricio Castro as the new governor, with the volunteers placed under the command of Captain Manuel Pineda. (15) 

Meanwhile, General Kearny had been preoccupied with securing the safety of the American positions in Alta California. On April 23, Kearny received orders to send troops to occupy a portion of Baja California. He delayed this action because he had insufficient soldiers, and he wanted to confirm the political discord in Mexico. Just before Kearny headed east, the 1st Regiment of New York Volunteers arrived. This unit, also referred to as the New York Legion or the California Guard, had traveled from New York City around Cape Horn to Monterey in four vessels.

The unit had been recruited by New York state legislator Jonathan D. Stevenson. Stevenson had advised all of the volunteers that they would be mustered out of service, once their duty had been performed, in California. Stevenson was named colonel of the regiment, and his executive officer was Lieutenant Colonel Henry Stanton Burton. Burton graduated from West Point in 1839 and had previously served as 1st lieutenant, 3rd US Artillery Regiment. On April 30, 1847, Kearny ordered Col. Burton and Companies A and B of the First Regiment of New York Volunteers to embark on the store ship USS Lexington, commanded by Lieutenant Theodorous Bailey. The ship left Alta California on July 4, 1847. Lexington arrived at La Paz 17 days later. Burton’s men waded ashore and quickly established an outpost on a rise outlooking the town and harbor. (16)

Col. Burton reinstated civil government. His men certainly enjoyed their station at La Paz. Lt. E. Gould Buffom thought the village was the prettiest he had ever seen in California, noting that the “houses were all adobe, plastered white, and thatched with the leaves of the palm tree, and were delightfully cool. The whole beach was lined with palms, dates, fig, tamarind and coconut trees, their delicious fruit hanging down on them in clusters.” (17) While the occupation of La Paz seemed almost idyllic, there was serious trouble brewing to the north.

In the meantime, Commodore William Branford Shubrick sortied from Monterey with Independence, followed by Cyane. On October 29, These ships joined with Congress, and anchored off San Jose del Cabo. Shubrick wished to enforce American control over the peninsula. The commodore proclaimed on November 4 that the purpose of his campaign was to permanently conquer Baja California. Much of the local population was overjoyed by this announcement and actively supported the American occupation. A small garrison of Marines, commanded by Lieutenant Charles Heywood, was left in San Jose del Cabo to enforce US control. Heyward established his force in an old, run-down mission building and house overlooking the village. (18)

The commodore then moved his main force, Independence, Congress, and Cyane, to Mazatlan and demanded the surrender of the town on November 11. Lieutenant Colonel Telles commanded a defensive force of about 560 soldiers; however, he had not made any effort to build fortifications to protect the town from the Americans. Accordingly, he withdrew from the town when the American warships appeared to set up camp at Palos Prietos. Telles also refused Shubrick’s demand that his force surrender. On November 11, Captain LaVallette of Congress took a 730-man landing party ashore and quickly occupied Mazatlan. The American flag was raised, and LaVallette issued military regulations, including the collection of custom duties. He did not otherwise disturb the citizenry. Lieutenant Henry W. Halleck, an 1831 graduate of West Point, went ashore with the landing force and laid out fortifications. Four hundred sailors and Marines were left to garrison the town. (19)

Meanwhile, Southampton neared the Gulf of California on November 11, 1847. While at sea, Lt. Worden had drilled the crew in small arms techniques in preparation for duty in a war zone. Worden noted in the ship’s log on November 11, that the ship passed an American whaler and, while he was still on watch, met Lieutenant Allen Barlett of the brig Caroline. Barlett had been the first American alcalde (mayor) of Yerba Buena and had renamed the town San Francisco in January 1847. (20)

Southampton reached San Jose del Cabo on November 14. The store ship anchored in the harbor. Lt. Worden took the No. 2 cutter to the shore in order to communicate with Lt. Heywood’s garrison. Worden knew Heywood from his prior cruise aboard Cyane. Seeing that all seemed well, the storeship then upped anchor and stood out for Mazatlan on November 16. (21).When the storeship arrived in the port’s large anchorage, Worden immediately noticed the American flag flying over the Quartelle (barracks). All of Shubrick’s squadron was at Mazatlan, including Independence, Congress, Portsmouth, and Cyane. The commodore sent signals to Southampton, which Worden deciphered. He noted that the squadron had added several vessels, such as the brig steamer Scorpion (No. 90) and several bomb gun (mortar) vessels, such as the Vesuvius (No. 92) and Hecta (No. 93), as well as some smaller support vessels. (22)

Worden then organized the resupply of the squadron for the next 10 days. On November 17, Cyane received three boxes of 399 lbs of tobacco and three barrels of whiskey. Southampton delivered to the Congress over the next several days 10 barrels of bread totaling 998 lbs., two barrels of flour, 34 half-barrels and 34 full barrels of beef, 18 barrels of pork, 14 boxes containing 372 pounds of tea, 25 barrels of 7,047 lbs.

Of sugar, three barrels of flour, 713 pounds of butter, and 1144 lbs. of rice. These supplies were delivered separately to the frigate’s personnel serving in defensive positions: 431 gallons of whiskey, 25 barrels of beef, and another 25 barrels of pork. The frigate was given even more supplies on November 21, including 632 lbs. of butter, 1785 lbs. of rice, 352 gallons of vinegar, eight barrels of molasses, 16 barrels of pork, and four half barrels of beef. (23)

By November 23, Commodore Shubrick had learned about the uprisings on the lower Baja peninsula. Intelligence informed him that loyalist Californios had attacked Lt. Heywood’s position in San Jose del Cabo, The commodore detailed Southampton to return to that port to support  American control. Worden noted that as the storeship was being hauled out of Mazatlan’s harbor, it received eight Marines (one sergeant and seven privates) from Portsmouth as supernumeraries. The flagship, according to Worden, then supplied Southampton with a quantity of grape and canister shot, musket cartridges, and other ammunition to resupply the fort at San Jose del Cabo. As Southampton sailed south from November 25, 1847, to November 27, 1847, Worden exercised the crew with small arms on a few occasions. He also supervised the repair of the ship’s small arms. Worden knew that his ship was headed toward a possibly dangerous situation and wanted to have the crew ready for any circumstance that might occur. (24)

Southampton’s arrival off San Jose del Cabo on November 28, 1847, was a welcome sight by Lt. Charles Heywood. His fortified position within an old mission and house (referred to as Mr. Mott’s house) had been under great stress by the Loyalist Californios. The structure was on high ground overlooking the town. Heywood had one 9-pounder gun to enhance his defenses and a four-week supply of provisions. The garrison consisted of 28 Marines, four passed midshipmen, and 20 pro-American Californios volunteers.

Loyalist Captain Pineda decided to strike against the Americans at both San Jose del Cabo and La Paz. Pineda sent a force of 150 irregulars, under the command of Lieutenant Vicenta Mejia against the American position. On November 19, Mejia demanded that Heywood surrender, which he refused to do. The Mexicans attacked later that day and were forced to retreat. The next night Lt. Mejia led an assault to capture the 9-pounder gun position.

The assault failed, and Meija was killed. Mejia’s force had three more killed, and three American personnel were wounded. Pineda then decided to besiege the American position; however, two American whalers, Magnolia and Edward, appeared in the harbor. Pineda took these vessels as American warships. Since he knew that the heavy guns of the US warships made it impossible for Pineda’s command to capture American outposts. Consequently, the Mexican commander combined these troops with his effort to capture La Paz. (25)

Southampton had been sent to San Jose del Cabo to reinforce and resupply Heywood’s garrison. Immediately upon the storeship’s arrival in the harbor, Worden, with a pilot and eight men, took a cutter ashore to contact Lt. Heywood. The executive officer brought with him the ship’s surgeon, Dr. James McClellan. The doctor attended to the garrison’s sick and wounded as Worden assessed the situation.  He then organized an effort to support Heywood’s defenses.

He immediately sent 10 Marines to reinforce the American position. Worden then began the process of transferring to the mission a 12-pounder carriage gun, 29 12-pounder cartridges, 10 round shot, 10 stands of grape shot, five canister shot, rammers, spongers, powder horn, and priming wires. The lieutenant detailed Carpenter’s Mate Anthony Woodhouse ashore to properly mount the gun atop the Mott house and made other improvements to the American defenses. To further reinforce Heywood, Worden sent Passed Midshipman Henry K. Stevens with 60 bluejackets to add to the American on-shore force. The executive officer also provided food, candles, and other necessities, including 343 gallons of whiskey for Heywood’s command. (26)

Once the San Jose del Cabo situation had been stabilized, Southampton was detailed to resupply Lieutenant Colonel Henry S. Burton and two companies, A and B, of the 1st Regiment of New York Volunteers at La Paz. Burton’s troops were the first to arrive in the Gulf of California combat zone, and Commodore Shubrick had quickly assigned them to the defense of La Paz. Pineda’s forces were now pressuring the American position.

Southampton was loaded with additional supplies such as Paixhans shells, food, water, and whiskey. The supply ship left San Jose on December 6, setting sail for Guaymas, arriving there on December 20. With assistance from USS Dale’s boats, Southampton was towed into the harbor. Due to the heavy weather encountered en route to Guaymas, the storeship required significant repairs to its sails. Southampton then began its resupply of Dale, beginning on December 21. Simultaneously with Dale receiving supplies, the sloop sent several shells striving to strike enemy troops in the town. (27)

Meanwhile, Worden organized the transfer of two 32-pounder shell guns with equipment from Dale to Southampton. They were mounted on the port side of the storeship. Simultaneously, Worden guided the hoisting of a 10-inch mortar out of Southampton and onto one of the sloop’s launches. The mortar was then transported to Little Almagre Island (Isle Almagre Chico) near the entrance to Guaymas Harbor. All the supplies, equipment, and ammunition needed to operate this large siege weapon were also offloaded. When the bluejackets hauled the gun into position, it was test-fired, and one of the trunnions broke off. The broken trunnion was sent back to Southampton, and the second 10-inch mortar was taken out of the storeship and sent to the island. Under Worden’s command, Gunner William Myers managed the replacement mortar. It sent three shells into Guaymas on December 24, and three more struck the town the next day. (28)

On January 7, 1848, under a flag of truce, Worden, Passed Midshipman Henry K. Stevens, and Gunner William Myers went to deliver a communication to ‘Grnl. Commanding Sonora. On January 20, Worden was placed in command of the prize schooner Fortuna. It was his first ship command, and he armed it with a medium 12-pounder. Worden’s command included Purser’s Clerk M.D. Winship, a pilot, and a crew of ten well-armed bluejackets. Fortuna got underway for a brief cruise along the coast, towing Southampton’s third cutter. Worden then secured 430 gallons of water from the schooner Libertad. One week later, Worden, his command, and armaments returned to the storeship as Fortuna was left in a secure anchorage. (29)

John Worden was placed in command of a launch on March 2, 1848. Lieutenant Henry W. Halleck was attached to his command along with an eight-man crew. Their duty was to harass Mexican shipping. Worden soon captured the schooner Rosita and returned it to La Paz on March 10. From April 1-6, Worden commanded several expeditions from Southampton to defend La Paz and the American supplies stored there. This would be his last duty during the Mexican War, as he was admitted to the infirmary for gastric derangement. Commodore Shubrick ordered the transfer of Lieutenant John L. Worden, “in consequence of ill health,” from the storeship Southampton to the ship of the line Independence. (30)

Sources:

1. HR Report 1776.3. “Record of Service of Rear Admiral John L. Worden,” John Lorimer Worden Papers,  Lincoln Memorial Library and Museum; and Worden, Hydrographic Office, Washington, to Secretary of Navy George Bancroft, May 26, 1846. Officers Letters, Microfilm Publication, M148, Roll 174, NARA.

2. “The Naval Board Promotions,” ALEXANDRIA GAZETTE (VA), August 7, 1846; JOURNAL OF THE EXECUTIVE PROCEEDINGS OF THE SENATE, 1845-1846, p.160; and “Appointments by the President,” ALEXANDRIA GAZETTE (VA), JANUARY 18, 1847.

3. Worden, Quaker Hill, to Secretary  of Navy John Y. Mason, February 3, 1847, Office Letters, Microfilm Publication M148, Roll 178.NARA; Storeship SOUTHAMPTON-Secretary of the Navy, Register of the CommissiC. Alexander, 1847,121); and USS SOUTHAMPTON-US Ship Logs, RG 24 E118, vol. 3, Feb.9, 1847-April 11, 1849. 

4. USS Southampton Log

5. IBID.

6. IBID.

7. Cooke, Philip St. George, THE CONQUEST OF NEW MEXICO AND CALIFORNIA, AN HISTORICAL AND PERSONAL NARRATIVE, Albuquerque, New Mexico: Horn and Wallace, pp. 2648; CLark, KERANY, 249-53; Bauer, SURFBOATS AND HORSE MARINES, 196-9.

8. Kearny to Stockton, Jan 17, 1847, KLB, 90-1; Baynard, SKETCH OF STOCKTON, 147-8; Clark, KEARNY, 249-253. 

9.  Bauer, THE MEXICAN WAR, p.194-6.

10. USS Southampton Log

11. IBID

12. IBID

13. IBID.

14. Stockton Proclamation, Aug. 19, 1846, H.Ex Doc, 4, 2d Sess., 64701, Mason to CO Pacific, Dec. 14, 1846.

15. Richard W. Amero, “The Mexican War in Baja California,” SAN DIEGO HISTORICAL SOCIETY QUARTERLY, Winter 1984, Volume 30, Number 1, https://sandiegohistoryorg/hournal/1984/january/war Retrieved 17 May 2020, and  Peter Gerhard, “Baja California in the Mexican War, 18461847,” PHR, XIV (November 1945), 413.

22. DuPont to Stockton, Dec.1 1846, W.Radford et.al. to Hull, Sept. 11, 1846; Colton, THREE YEARS IN CALIFORNIA, 81-82; Sphia Radford de Meissner, OLD NAVAL DAYS, 138.

23. Bauer, 344.

16.  Francis D. Clark, THE FIRST REGIMENT OF NEW YORK VOLUNTEERS(New York; 1882), p. 24; MEMORANDUM OF CAPTAIN H.W. HALLECK CONCERNING HIS EXPEDITION IN LOWER CALIFORNIA, 1846-1848, BLIC, 11.

17 Amero.

18. John Haskill Kemble, (ed.), “Amphibious Operations of a Cruise in Gulf of California,” THE AMERICAN NEPTUNE V (April 1945)pp.122-125; 

Charles Belknap (ed.), “Notes from the Journal of Lieutenant T.A. M. Craven, USN, USS DALE, Pacific Squadron 1846-49,” USNIP, XIV (June 1888), 304-7; Bauer, SURF BOATS AND HORSE MARINES, 211-13. 

28 Kemble, “Amphibious Operations in the Gulf of California,” 125; Belknap, “Notes from the Journal of Craven,316; Gerhard, Baja California in the War,” 420; Bauer, Surf Boats and Horse Marines, 218-219.

29 Shubrick to Mason, Nov.4,Nov.5, Dec. 7,1847, H. Ex. Doc. 1, 30th Congress, 2d Sess, 1058.

19. Halleck, MEMORANDUM, 14-15, 38-39.

20. USS Southampton Log

21.IBID.

22.IBID.

23 IBID.

24. IBID.

25. K. Jack Bauer, THE MEXICAN WAR, 1846-1848. P. 348.

26. USS Southampton Log

27. IBID.

28. IBID.

29 IBID.

30. “Record of Service of Rear Admiral John L. Worden.” p. 2, John Lorimer Worden Papers, A80-1364, University Archives and Special Collections, Lincoln Memorial University, Harrogate, TN.

The post Worden and the Manifest Destiny appeared first on The Mariners' Museum and Park.

Perfect for students in grades 6–10, this program blends place-based learning and environmental conservation into one unforgettable experience.

The program begins outside, where students rotate through hands-on investigation stations to assess Mariners’ Lake’s overall health. One group investigates biotic factors — specifically, the presence of benthic macroinvertebrates, tiny critters that act as indicators of water quality.

Students are given containers of fresh Lake water filled with leaf packs where these species may be hiding. With tools and keen eyes, they sift through the debris to find snails, leeches, even the occasional baby dragonfly, and more. After identifying the species, students determine whether they are pollution-tolerant, moderately tolerant, or intolerant. Based on what they find and how many there are, the students are able to draw real scientific conclusions about the health of the Lake.

Every student group finds a few bugs to examine, and their excitement is contagious. You can hear shouts of “Look what I found!” echoing outside.

At another station, students measure the abiotic factors of the Lake: turbidity (how cloudy the water is), nutrient levels, pH, and temperature. They run tests, record data, and compare their results to what’s considered ideal for a healthy lake. Through this, they learn how abiotic factors affect the species living in the Lake and how changes in water quality can throw the entire ecosystem off balance.

Once the outdoor stations are complete, students head inside the Museum for the second part of the program. First up is a guided tour through the galleries, where an educator walks them through the history of Mariners’ Lake. They learn how the landscape has changed over time and how the Lake remains a vital part of the James River watershed today.

Next, students participate in interactive demonstrations exploring runoff and pollution. One activity involves simulating rainfall on different surfaces — concrete, manicured lawns, and forest — to observe which surfaces absorb water (permeable) and which do not (nonpermeable). Students then connect this runoff to real-world pollution, discussing how contaminants like oil, fertilizers, and litter can be carried into waterways.

In the final demo, various pollutants (represented with colorful food dyes) are added to a model water system. As each pollutant enters the “lake,” the water becomes cloudier and murkier. Students brainstorm ways to reduce or remove these pollutants from our environment, sparking some incredibly thoughtful and innovative ideas.

By the end of the day, students are excited about what they’ve learned. I had the chance to follow along with this program over the summer and saw firsthand how engaged the students were — eager to share their ideas, ask questions, and participate in every activity. I watched educators inspire curiosity, challenge students to think critically, and connect classroom content to the world around them.

More than one student said how much they enjoyed the program and how much they learned. And honestly? I learned a few new things, too.

Are you an educator with students ready to bug out with us? Learn more or book your field trip today at https://www.marinersmuseum.org/program/buggin-out-in-the-bay/ 

*This program is made possible through generous funding from the Dominion Energy Charitable Foundation Environmental Stewardship Grant.

The post Buggin’ Out in the Bay: Bringing Science to Life for Students appeared first on The Mariners' Museum and Park.