Dear Readers:
My book is now in print, but my research
on Edward Hitchcock continues. On this
page I will periodically pass along new
information,
insights, and anecdotes from my research
that I hope will be of interest.
Sincerely,
June 18,
2024
EDWARD HITCHCOCK AND THE GEOLOGY
OF CAPE COD AND THE ISLANDS:
Reflections on a 200th Anniversary
In April 1823, Edward Hitchcock wrote to
Professor Benjamin Silliman of Yale College
asking his friend and mentor for advice
as to a possible geological excursion for that
spring:
I have thought some of the
White Hills. But as the coast is better for
my constitution I have been thinking of the
islands of Nantucket & Martha’s
Vineyard. Can you tell me whether these
would be probably interesting spots or are
they all sand?
Silliman had no advice for his
friend on that subject. But Hitchcock made a
decision on his own, one that proved to be a watershed
event in his life, both as a geologist and as
a man of faith. And it may well have given him
his earliest inkling of a coming revolution in
American geology.
In early June, Edward Hitchcock visited Martha’s
Vineyard, and he quickly learned that it was far
from “all sand.” During his travels across the
island in a horse-drawn chaise, he made notes
for an article that would appear in the American
Journal of Science the following year,
the first detailed geological study of the
Vineyard ever to appear in print.
As he traveled around the
island, Hitchcock observed an “Alluvial
Formation” to the south and a “Plastic Clay
Formation” to the west. But the feature that
most attracted his attention lay atop the clay.
He wrote,
All the north western
extent of the island is hilly and uneven
with no abrupt precipices…but rising into
rounded eminences...
Strewn across that rolling terrain he observed a
jumbled mantle of pebbles and stones of granite,
gneiss, quartz, and mica. He named this the
“Diluvial Formation,” referring to material
deposited by flood waters. Hitchcock regarded
much of the surface geology of the earth as the
result of the Great Flood of Genesis, the flood
of Noah and his Ark. So when he assigned the
label “diluvium” to that detritus, he was
ascribing its deposition to that great biblical
cataclysm, a conclusion with which most
geologists of his day would concur.
Most striking of all to
Hitchcock was “the quantity of huge bowlder
stones, scattered over these hills on every
side,” some over 50 feet in diameter. At
first he assumed these to be outcrops of the
underlying bedrock. But the local inhabitants
soon set him straight—there
was, they assured him, no bedrock to be found
anywhere on the island of Martha’s Vineyard.
But if those huge boulders were
not derived from the underlying bedrock, where
had they come from? Here Hitchcock made a
telling observation, one that would resonate
among geologists worldwide over the coming
decades. Those boulders, that diluvium, he
asserted, must have been “derived from the
rocks that occur in place along the coast, on
the mainland.”
Seven years later, Hitchcock,
then Professor of Chemistry and Natural History
at Amherst College, received an appointment as
the first State Geologist of Massachusetts with
the goal of surveying the state’s untapped
mineral resources. In July 1830 he set out on
the first field excursion of that survey,
traveling in a rickety horse-drawn wagon
accompanied by one of his students. A month into
their travels, they arrived on Cape Cod.
Hitchcock's first observations, not
surprisingly, harked back to his earlier visit
to the Vineyard:
From Sandwich to Barnstable
12 miles diluvium all the way. In many
places the bowlders are enormously large
weighing 100 to 200 tons and very thick….In
short the face of the country and its
geological character appear to be precisely
like those of Martha's Vineyard and the
Elizabeth Islands. I doubt not but the same
remark will apply to the whole of Cape Cod.
On
the mainland Hitchcock observed two other
important features that reinforced his doubts
about the origin of that so-called diluvium.
Gouged in bedrock across New England he noted
deep furrows, nearly all with the same
orientation, from northwest to southeast. In
addition he observed sinuous trains of large
boulders, many extending tens of miles from
their origin, all with similar
orientations.
By 1833 Edward Hitchcock had
seen more than enough evidence to make him
skeptical of the “diluvial hypothesis.”
Making every allowance for
the reduction of the gravity of these
bowlders when in water, I confess I cannot
conceive how such a work could have been
effected by this agency [by
water].
Eight
years later, in 1841, Edward Hitchcock stood
before the members of the newly-formed
Association of American Geologists in
Philadelphia, and declared himself a convert to
a stunning new notion, continental glaciation. It was
not his theory—it was the work of Louis
Agassiz, Jean de Charpentier, and other
European scientists, and it had first appeared
in Agassiz’s landmark study, Etudes sur
les Glaciers. Agassiz put
forward the radical notion that ice, not water,
was the primary agent responsible for sculpting
much of the surface of the northern hemisphere,
that a huge ice cap had accumulated in the
northern polar regions, gradually expanding
southward over hundreds of thousands of years.
It was a glacier, or series of glaciers, of
massive extent, and it gouged, scraped, and
bulldozed the earth’s surface as it advanced.
Hitchcock’s ringing endorsement gave the theory
wide exposure and credibility among American
scientists, although there remained a good deal
of resistance in some quarters—Hitchcock
himself backpedaled and equivocated on the idea
repeatedly. Nevertheless, the evidence was
strong and compelling. By the 1860s the concept
of continental glaciation had been accepted and
embraced by most scientists in America and
worldwide.
As to non-scientists,
particularly theologians, members of the clergy,
and other people of faith who were suspicious of
new ideas in science, the fact that Reverend
Edward Hitchcock, well known as a devout man of
strict orthodox Christian views, was comfortable
with such a notion may well have given them
license to accept the theory.
Edward Hitchcock’s life was a
dual journey of faith, faith in God and faith in
science. That journey led him to question some
of the basic tenets of his religion as well as
some of the fundamental scientific ideas of his
day. And it all began with a visit to Martha’s
Vineyard in 1823 and the sight of those huge
“bowlders” scattered over a sandy Chilmark
plain.
In a sermon delivered to his
congregation in 1822, Reverend Hitchcock warned
his parishioners to pay heed to the world around
them.
Let the unbeliever then
remember that as he passes over our hills
the very stones cry out against him.
The stones did cry out to Edward Hitchcock that
day on Martha’s Vineyard, and the message they
bore was truly a revelation in stone.
==========
For more on Hitchcock’s studies of Cape Cod and
the Islands, please see my paper, “Revelations
in Stone: Edward Hitchcock and the Geology of
Cape Cod and the Islands.”
November 30, 2023
WAS EDWARD HITCHCOCK A GRINCH?
Reverend Edward Hitchcock often
preached on the fundamentals of orthodox
Christianity, subjects such as repentance,
resurrection, and morality. Occasionally his
sermons also addressed the great social issues of
his day, war, slavery, the abrogation of the
rights of Native Americans, and, of course, the
consumption of ardent spirits.
But in my reading and
transcription of Hitchcock’s sermons, I was
surprised to discover hardly a mention of one
topic central to Christianity then and now, the
birth of Jesus. In his more than 200 sermons, the
word “Christmas” appears exactly once, in a sermon
entitled “The Advent of Christ,” his only sermon
devoted to that topic.
Hitchcock first delivered his one
and only Christmas sermon in Conway,
Massachusetts, in January, 1823. According to his
records he reused it on four subsequent occasions
over the next thirteen years, all but one in the
month of January.
Why did the birth of the savior receive so little
attention from Reverend Hitchcock? And why did he
preach on the subject only once in the month of
December? The answers to both questions lie in the
very first paragraph of that sermon:
There is some probability
that this is about the season of the year when
the Saviour was born. A considerable part of
the Protestant Christian world regard the 25th
December as the time of his nativity; and
devote that day to a celebration of the
interesting event. The precise day however in
which the angel uttered the joyful words of
the text is probably unknown and will always
remain so to the inhabitants of this world.
He based this observation on
scripture. Had the exact date of that event been
important, Hitchcock reasoned, the Bible would
surely have stated as much. Why then was there no
such statement in Holy Scriptures? Likely, he
reasoned, it was “that men might not carry the
observance of such a season to excess as they
are prone to do in such instances.”
So it seems that Edward Hitchcock
was not inclined to make a great to-do about
Christmas Day, whenever it might be. But Reverend
Hitchcock did not mean to suggest that the birth
of Christ was unworthy of celebration.
…to commemorate the birth of
the Saviour in a religious manner is consonant
with scripture and reason. It called forth the
song of angels, glory to God in the highest -
peace on earth and good will to men, and
surely it ought to draw forth a responsive
song from the hearts of man.
And that is about all Reverend
Hitchcock ever wrote or preached about Christmas
Day. The remainder of that one sermon, some twenty
pages in its original form, was devoted to a
description of the world as it was before Christ’s
birth and the change wrought by the arrival of the
Christ child:
O what a joyful event is the
birth of such a Saviour! Good tidings of great
joy it is indeed to all people who have
received it. Break forth into joy, sing
together, ye waste places of Jerusalem: for
the Lord hath comforted his people, he hath
redeemed Jerusalem: for the Lord hath made
bare his holy arm in the eyes of all the
nations. Glory to God in the highest peace on
Earth good will to men.
Did the Hitchcock family celebrate
Christmas? If they did, there is no mention of it
in their letters. Thanksgiving, on the other hand,
was observed and its celebration was referred to
in a number of the family’s letters. Hitchcock
wrote two sermons specifically for Thanksgiving
Day, one entitled “The Works of God,” the other
“Prosperity the Ruin of Mankind.”
See
"Sermons of Edward Hitchcock 1819-1862," my
transcription of Hitchcock's sermons, to read the
full text of his one sermon about Christmas.
September 28, 2023
WHO DESERVES CREDIT FOR THE
VERMONT GEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF
1861?
In March 1857 Edward Hitchcock
received a letter from Vermont Governor Ryland
Fletcher offering him an appointment as State
Geologist with the charge of carrying out a
comprehensive geological survey of the Green
Mountain State. This was the second such request
he had received in that state, the first coming
some 13 years earlier from Governor William Slade.
Hitchcock actually accepted that first offer, but
days later was forced to withdraw when the Board
of Trustees appointed him third president of
Amherst College.
The
sixty-four-year-old Hitchcock had retired from the
presidency of Amherst College in 1854 and was
teaching only part-time when he received the
letter. In frail health and with an ailing wife to
care for, he might have been expected to decline
the appointment. But he accepted and immediately
began plans for the survey. It would be no
sinecure: Vermont was nearly as large as
Massachusetts with far more rugged terrain.
Shortly
before the beginning of the first field season of
the survey, Hitchcock made a wise move. He added
three younger, more fit men to his team, his sons
Edward, Jr., and Charles H. Hitchcock, and native
Vermonter Albert D. Hager, an experienced
geologist. But within weeks of embarking on the
survey, the senior Hitchcock returned to Amherst
exhausted, leaving the remainder of the field work
for the Geological Survey of Vermont to his sons
and Albert Hager.
Nearly
three years later, with all the field data before
him, Edward Hitchcock, Sr., began work on the
final report that would be submitted to the
Vermont legislature. By his own reckoning he spent
a year on that work. In many ways it was the
capstone of his career as a geologist, allowing
him to integrate what he had learned over a
lifetime about rock and mineral types, mountain
building, erosion, deposition, metamorphism, and
paleontology. The complete report, two volumes
totaling some 650,000 words, received critical
acclaim from scientists of his day and later.
Over
one-hundred-twenty years later, University of
Vermont geographer Harold A. Meeks published Vermont’s
Land and Resources (New England Press,
1986). Meeks was a highly regarded authority on
the state’s history. But in his book, he made a
surprising statement about that 1861 geological
survey:
Nearly a thousand pages were
devoted to an exhaustive compilation of all the
known knowledge of Vermont’s natural resources,
even to a discussion of the relative value of
human and cow manure for fertilizer. This report
was referred to often as Hitchcock’s Geology
of Vermont because three of the four
authors commissioned by the State Legislature
were surnamed Hitchcock. The report actually was
done under the direction of Mr. Albert D. Hager
who compiled the many reports, probably did the
editing, and saw to the publishing of the work.
Hager, of Proctorsville, Vermont, also wrote
much of the material, although his name is
seldom mentioned.
Was
Meeks correct in this startling assertion? Had
Edward Hitchcock been unfairly credited with the
bulk of the work and Albert Hager slighted? Should
the report have been called Hager’s Geology of
Vermont? The answer seems perfectly clear to
me.
First,
the State Legislature commissioned only Edward
Hitchcock, Sr., to carry out the survey in his
role as State Geologist. The act of the Vermont
legislature that created that position empowered
him to select his own assistants which he did
shortly before the field work began.
Second,
the field work was carried out primarily by
Charles Hitchcock and Albert Hager working as a
team over the course of three field seasons.
Third, Edward Hitchcock, Sr., and
Charles Hitchcock wrote about ¾ of the report.
Albert Hager authored two sections, “Economic
Geology” and “Scenery,” totaling about 20% of the
entire work. Of the 38 color plates in the report,
Charles Hitchcock executed 17, Albert Hager, 21.
Fourth,
Edward Hitchcock gave Albert D. Hager generous
credit for his role in the project, both in the
field and in the printing phase. Hager is cited
more than thirty times in the report and his
initials appear several hundred times next to data
collected by him.
What
might account for Professor Meeks’ conclusion that
Albert Hager deserved most of the credit for the
survey and the report? Probably the wording of the
foreword led Meeks astray. Hitchcock wrote, “The
Principal of the Survey desires to state, that the
publication of this Report has been entirely under
the direction of Mr. A. D. Hager.” Hitchcock was
referring to the printing of the report, not the
direction of the overall project nor the writing
and editing of the written report.
For
more information on Hitchcock’s geological survey
of Vermont, please see pages 286-7 of my Hitchcock
biography, All the Light Here Comes from
Above: The Life and Legacy of Edward Hitchcock
(Unquomonk Press, 2021).
I also
invite you to read my article, “Against
the Odds: Edward Hitchcock and the Vermont
Geological Survey,” in the Summer/Fall 2023
issue of the journal Vermont History, pp.
103-9.
December 30, 2022
HITCHCOCK’S DINOSAURS IN THE NEWS
One of the greatest
frustrations Edward Hitchcock faced in his fossil
footmarks research was the near total absence of
skeletal remains of the creatures that made those
tracks in stone. How was it possible to form
thousands of tracks in the sandstone of the
Connecticut River Valley, yet leave almost no
fossilized bones? Such relicts would have helped
Hitchcock describe the trackmakers with more
confidence and perhaps dispel some of the
skepticism his findings met in the popular media
of his time.
The
search for skeletal remains of New England
dinosaurs went on after Hitchcock’s death and
continues to the present day. And some of the
results have been exciting.
Professor Mignon Talbot
(1869 - 1950) and the skeletal remains of
Podokesaurus holyokensis
In
1910, nearly half a century after Hitchcock’s
death, Mount Holyoke College geologist Mignon
Talbot made a spectacular discovery. While walking
barely a mile from campus, she came across remains
she immediately recognized as a fossilized
dinosaur skeleton. Podokesaurus holyokensis,
as Professor Talbot named it, was a three-foot
herbivore that was likely one of Hitchcock’s
trackmakers. In October 2022, in a
ceremony at the Massachusetts State House in
Boston, that very skeleton was unveiled and
a declaration read by Governor Charles Baker
establishing Podokesaurus holyokensis as
the Bay State’s official State Dinosaur. As I gaze
on that photo of Governor Baker and others
gathered around the specimen, I cannot help but
imagine the spirit of Edward Hitchcock hovering
over the proceedings, smiling.
Photo: Ashley McCabe, CNN
While
Edward Hitchcock is often associated with
Massachusetts, he did much of his footmark
research in Connecticut – in fact, there are more
known localities for dinosaur tracks in the Nutmeg
State than in the Bay State. And just over fifty
years ago, Connecticut had the foresight to
preserve hundreds of tracks unearthed at a
construction site in a former quarry in Rocky
Hill, now known as Dinosaur
State Park. In 2017 one of the creatures
from the Rocky Hill site, Eubrontes giganteum,
was chosen as the Connecticut State Dinosaur. The
tracks were among those reported by Hitchcock in
his very first paper on the subject in 1835. He
originally designated it Ornithichnites
giganteum, but changed the generic name to Eubrontes
a decade or so later.
These
relatively recent findings are great news for
21st-century dinosaur enthusiasts. For all we
know, there may be more dinosaur remains lying
right beneath our feet as we explore the New
England countryside nearly two centuries after
Professor Edward Hitchcock made his earliest
discoveries.
April 19, 2022
THE BATTLE OF
THE TITANS
or
"The Agassiz and the Ecstasy"
The lives of Edward Hitchcock
(1793-1864) and Louis Agassiz (1807-1873)
intertwined again and again from 1840 to 1864.
Between these two titans of American science there
was mutual respect and admiration, to be sure, but
there were stark differences as well, differences
in interests, philosophies, and public personas.
The pair seemed to circle each other in those
years, like two boxers in a ring, ready at any
moment to receive or deliver a blow.
Edward
Hitchcock lived his entire life in western
Massachusetts–his formal education was limited to
six years at Deerfield Academy. He taught for more
than thirty years at Amherst College where he was
appointed President in 1845. He is best known for
his pioneering research in ichnology, the study of
fossilized tracks, a discipline he named and
single-handedly elevated to respectability in
paleontology.
Jean
Louis Rodolphe Agassiz was a Swiss native who
studied natural science at universities in
Switzerland and Germany before earning an M.D.
from the University of Munich. He is best known
for his 1840 landmark work, Études sur les
Glaciers, in which he proposed that much of
the earth’s surface had been covered with
continental glaciers during the Pleistocene Era.
In 1841 Agassiz emigrated to America and spent the
rest of his life at Harvard University where he
carried out exhaustive anatomical studies of sea
creatures, fishes and mollusks in particular. Late
in life he devoted much of his energy to the
development of Harvard’s natural history
collections, preserved today as the Harvard Museum
of Comparative Zoology.
For
Hitchcock, reading Agassiz’s treatise on glaciers
was nothing short of an epiphany. By his own
admission his eyes were open by Agassiz’s thesis,
and much of the surficial geology of Massachusetts
that he had been studying and surveying at last
made sense to him. Hitchcock was generous in his
praise of Agassiz, citing the man and his works at
least eighty times in his major geological
writings. Agassiz on the other hand cited
Hitchcock only six times in all his works, and
almost exclusively in footnotes or bibliographies.
Louis
Agassiz spent much of his life in the limelight.
His work, his travels, his personal life, were
subjects of constant interest in the newspapers of
his time. Agassiz did everything he could to
thrust himself into the public eye. He wrote
letters to editors full of humor and vitriol
toward other scientists. He paraded around in
public, wining and dining, often to excess. And he
built up his collections at Harvard as much it
seems as a monument to himself as a contribution
to science.
Agassiz
seemed to revel in controversy, taking every
opportunity to speak out on a range of subjects,
knowing that for many both in the scientific
community and in the public, his word was gospel.
He claimed to be deeply religious, employing
arguments based on Holy Scripture and what he
regarded as Christian fundamentalism. But he was a
racist and bigot, adapting Bible passages to fit
his prejudices about human origins.
By
contrast, Edward Hitchcock seems bland in
personality and in public persona. He lived a
quiet life, he valued home and family, and he wore
his Christianity on his sleeve, living out the
principles of his faith. Agassiz was flamboyant,
often crude, a drinker and a womanizer, while
Edward Hitchcock was a soft-spoken,
self-deprecating teetotaler, utterly devoted to
his wife and children. Not that Hitchcock was
uninterested in his standing in public opinion,
but he quietly accepted criticism and even scorn
from non-scientists, trusting that his research
and writings could speak for him (although his
conflict with Dr. James Deane may be an exception,
the one time in his life when it might be said
that he “lost it”).
Agassiz
has long stood on a high pedestal in the history
of science. But a recent biography by Christoph
Irmscher (Louis Agassiz: Creator of American
Science, Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2013)
suggests that much of the credit Agassiz has been
given for some of his works, particularly Études
sur les Glaciers, is undeserved, that he
largely repeated the views of others, happy to
take credit for it as original to him.
And
despite his vast knowledge of animal anatomy and
paleontology, Agassiz fought Darwinism tooth and
nail, largely on religious grounds, contending
that, “The connection of faunas…is not material,
but resides in the thought of the Creator.”
It is
true of course that Edward Hitchcock also recoiled
at Darwin’s hypotheses on natural selection. He
wrote forcefully of his objections to those
notions, both religious and scientific. And yet,
late in life, Edward Hitchcock seemed to admit the
possibility of a crack in his defenses against
Darwinism, even suggesting in his last year that
natural selection might be a part of God’s
creation, like any other law of nature.
Louis
Agassiz, on the other hand, never even hinted that
he could accept Darwinism on any level. And
Agassiz lived more than a decade after Hitchcock’s
death, in a time when Charles Darwin and his
revolutionary ideas had become widely accepted in
science.
In
a list of the foremost scientists of 19th century
America, Louis Agassiz would no doubt rank very high,
perhaps number one, with Edward Hitchcock well behind.
But Agassiz’s reputation has taken more than a few
hits in recent times amid questions about his personal
life, his racial attitudes, and his scientific
integrity. By contrast, Edward Hitchcock’s character
has never been in question and his star as a scientist
has only risen in the late 20th and early 21st
centuries.
See
Chapters 14, 24, 25, and 29 of All the Light
Here Comes from Above: The Life and Legacy of
Edward Hitchcock for further discussion of
the sometimes contentious relationship between
Edward Hitchcock and Louis Agassiz.
October 22, 2021
FLATTENED PEBBLES CLEFT BY
TITAN’S SWORD
Purgatory Chasm, Middletown, RI
(Source: Picturesque
America, 1872)
On the 13th of May, 1832, Edward Hitchcock
stepped from a hired carriage along the
rockbound seashore at Middletown, Rhode
Island, a few miles east of Newport. He was
immediately enthralled by the wild scene
before him, wind whipping off the Atlantic
driving waves into several wedge-shaped
fissures in the ledge resulting in a virtual
explosion of seawater and foam. He wrote of
the site,
In one spot, in a high
rocky bluff, two of these fissures
occur not more than 6 or 8 feet
asunder; and the waves have succeeded
in the course of ages, in wearing away
the intervening rock, so as to form a
chasm about seven rods in length, and
60 or 70 feet deep; the sides being
almost exactly perpendicular. This
chasm is called Purgatory; and the
waves still continue their slow but
certain work of destruction.
While that dramatic rock
formation and the wild seacoast setting were
naturally of great interest to Professor
Hitchcock, what especially whetted his
curiosity on that day was the rock that made
up those ledges. It went by the very apt
name of “puddingstone,” for it consisted of
a dense substrate much like pudding, but
pudding containing many lumps. The lumps
were smoothed pebbles ranging from a few
inches to a foot long and displaying a
variety of colors suggesting different
mineral compositions. Those pebbles were set
in a matrix of fine-grained rock much as
stones are set in mortar in a wall or
foundation. Furthermore, the pebbles were
flattened just as if some great weight had
been placed on top of the rock, compressing
them as well as the surrounding “pudding.”
Talcose schist
(Source: Hitchcock et al.,
Report on the
Geology of Vermont, 1861)
Also of great interest to the professor were
vertical cracks that passed through the
rock, piercing both the pebbles and the
surrounding cement, separating them cleanly.
Hitchcock wrote, “The cross seams of
this rock have divided the pebbles as
completely as if cloven asunder by the
sword of some Titan–and an end view of the
rock thus divided presents a quite
singular appearance.” The
professor was sufficiently impressed that he
wrote of that “most remarkable” rock in
three reports on his geological survey of
Massachusetts, adding, “No one can view
this phenomenon without enquiring
immediately into its cause.”
For a long while Hitchcock seemed to have
lost interest in those “flattened
pebbles cleft by the sword of Titan.”
But a quarter century later in 1859 the full
significance of what he had observed on the
coast of Rhode Island began to come into
focus. Edward, his sons Charles and Edward,
Jr., and geologist Albert D. Hager had
undertaken another geological survey, this
one for the state of Vermont. Much to his
surprise, they found rocks in the Green
Mountains very similar to those on the coast
of Rhode Island. To be certain Edward and
Charles returned to Newport to reexamine
those curious puddingstones at Purgatory
Chasm.
What those flattened pebbles and sharp
clefts in the Purgatory puddingstone
revealed, he concluded, were fascinating and
important details on how rocks are modified
by heat and pressure over millennia. Those
pebbles, he now realized, were formed much
earlier, perhaps millions of years before
the puddingstone. Each was composed of
minerals present in some ancient lake or
sea, rolled and abraded to a spherical or
elliptical shape, then deposited on the lake
or sea floor surrounded by fine sand, silt,
or mud. And then, perhaps millions of years
later, that sedimentary rock was compressed
under enormous heat and pressure, probably
from hundreds of feet of rock accumulated
above it. Finally, the newly created rock
was fractured, possibly during cooling. The
result was a metamorphic rock known as
gneiss.
What Professor Hitchcock had stumbled upon
that day in May of 1832 was what we know
today as metamorphism, a term referring to a
variety of effects that have occurred over
the millennia, effects that deform, abrade,
and often reshape rocks.
Hitchcock was not the first to describe
metamorphism. Many earlier geologists such
as James Hutton, Abraham Werner, and William
Maclure had recognized the effects of heat
and pressure on rock formations. Englishman
Sir Charles Lyell, the most influential
geologist of Hitchcock’s day, seems to have
been the first to use the term “metamorphic
rock” in its modern sense in his 1833
Principles of Geology. But Edward
Hitchcock is often credited as the first
scientist to infer the details of the
process from simple observation of gneiss in
the field.
In 1861 Edward Hitchcock published his most
detailed account of the phenomenon in the American
Journal of Science in an article
entitled “On the Conversion of Certain
Conglomerates into Talcose and Micaceous
Schists and Gneiss by the Elongation,
Flattening and Metamorphosis of the Pebbles
and the Cement.” To many geologists of his
day and later, that paper represented a
milestone in the understanding of
metamorphosis. Geologist J. Peter Lesley, in
his memoir for Hitchcock read before the
National Academy of Sciences in 1866 wrote,
…Hitchcock's
theorem—that gneiss is nothing more nor
less than metamorphosed old
conglomerates, wherein the pebbles have
been pressed into laminae composed of
sections of the original matrix,
themselves also pressed flat and thin…is
a bold assertion [that] will demand
abundant proof…It is consistent with the
now accepted view of metamorphism by
pressure, under the conditions of a
moist, low heat…its ample discussion and
copious illustration by Dr. Hitchcock
and his son, in the pages of his report
of the Geology of the State of Vermont,
will remain a part of the classics of
our science.
Nearly thirty years later Charles L. Whittle
of the U. S. Geological Survey referred to
Hitchcock’s “…revolutionary ideas
concerning the production of gneisses from
conglomerates by metamorphism” as a “…most
valuable contribution to the science of
geology.” In 1906, George P.
Merrill, an early curator at the
Smithsonian, wrote of Hitchcock’s 1861
article, “This paper, as a whole, marks
a long stride in advance along the line of
metamorphism…”
How does a 21st century geologist regard
Hitchcock’s views on metamorphism formulated
more than a century-and-a-half ago? Tekla
Harms, Professor of Geology at Amherst
College, argues that Hitchcock was right in
some respects, wrong in others. She believes
he was correct when he suggested that
conglomerates like the Purgatory
puddingstone could be transformed by heat
and pressure into schists and gneisses. But
as to the exact mechanism of that
transformation, she argues, on that score he
was mistaken. The pebbles in that
conglomerate were not subject to simple
mechanical flattening and elongation as
Hitchcock suggested, but to a process called
pressure solution in which particles migrate
from areas of high concentration to low
concentration. Furthermore, while Professor
Harms admires Hitchcock’s observational
skills, she takes issue with his assertion
in that 1861 article that metamorphosed
rocks undergo compositional change. She
writes, “…Hitchcock’s observations and
the conclusions he draws directly from
observations are almost unfailingly sound
and stand the test of time. His ideas in
this paper regarding compositional change
during metamorphism are not based on
observation but rather are hypothetical.
Here, he is less successful.”
Early in his career in a discourse before
scientists in Pittsfield, Massachusetts,
Edward Hitchcock warned against “extravagant
theories” based on mere conjecture. He
added,
But the
present constellation of
European geologists are men
of a very different
stamp—men whose grand object
is the collection of facts,
and who are extremely
cautious of hypothesis;
adopting none, except such
as seem absolutely necessary
to explain appearances.
Edward Hitchcock was just such a “collector
of facts” who was normally careful not to
get too far ahead of the facts, not to
tinker with vague theories insufficiently
supported by observation. Perhaps in the
matter of those fascinating puddingstones,
he should have taken his own advice.
* * *
I wish to thank Professor Tekla Harms of
the Department of Geology, Amherst
College, Amherst, Massachusetts, for
sharing with me her expertise and insights
regarding Hitchcock’s views on
metamorphism.
September 1,
2021
THE HITCHCOCK LEGACY LIVES ON
Robert McMaster,
Emily Hitchcock, and Sawyer Hitchcock
I am not as a general rule a
believer in the supernatural. Nevertheless, on a
recent August day on the campus of Smith College
in Northampton, Massachusetts, I could have sworn
I saw before me an emanation of the spirits of
Edward and Orra Hitchcock. Maybe the near record
heat was responsible, but the vision quickly
passed, and what at first appeared as an effusion
from a wormhole in the space-time continuum turned
out to be a close encounter of a more conventional
kind with Emily Hitchcock and Sawyer Hitchcock,
great-great-great-great grandchildren of Edward
and Orra.
Emily Hitchcock, daughter of
Valerie Walton and Edward Hitchcock of Methuen,
Massachusetts, graduated from Smith in 2019. An
Environmental Science and Policy major, she is
currently working as an intern at Nasami Farm in
nearby Whately, a nursery of indigenous plants
operated by the Native Plant Trust. Pride in their
Hitchcock forebears runs deep in Emily's family.
While she shares her name with a noted Hitchcock
forebear, Emily
Hitchcock Terry, her parents actually had
another Emily in mind, Emily Dickinson. Her
sister, Sharlow, was named after their great
grandmother and 1920s opera star, Myrna Sharlow
Hitchcock. Emily first became interested in her
Hitchcock forebears when she and her family
attended the 2011 opening of an exhibit of the
artwork of Orra White Hitchcock at the Mead Art
Museum at Amherst College celebrating the
publication of Orra White Hitchcock: An
Amherst Woman of Art and Science by Daria
D'Arienzo and Robert L. Herbert.
Emily's cousin, Sawyer
Hitchcock, son of Daniel and Janice Hitchcock of
Fishers, Indiana, graduated from Ithaca College in
2016, majoring in English while also starring on
the college's cross-country team for four years.
He is currently working on an organic farm in
Indiana. He has two siblings, Evan and Amanda.
While visiting with his cousin, Sawyer traveled
around the Connecticut Valley to some Hitchcock
landmarks including Memorial Hall Museum in
Deerfield, the original Deerfield Academy building
where Edward and Orra first met. I guessed that he
was named after his great-great uncle, Dr. John
Sawyer Hitchcock, but Sawyer wasn't sure how he
came by the name.
The two young Hitchcocks
wanted to know what had drawn me to study the
lives of their forebears, so I described my
meandering career path. I wanted to hear about
their educational and career pursuits, and how
they came to their similar interests in
agriculture, sustainability, and natural science.
While reading All the
Light Here Comes from Above, Sawyer had
wondered what his famous nineteenth century
forebears would think if they could travel through
time to visit the world of 2021. We agreed that
Edward and Orra would likely have been amazed at
the technological progress all around them, but
worried by the perilous state of Planet Earth.
To Edward Hitchcock science
and technology were essential tools of human
progress, full of promise, untainted by risks or
dangers. The fruits of those endeavors he
witnessed in his lifetime—expansion of the
railroads, improvements in manufacturing, advances
in agriculture and medicine—were in his mind
unambiguous goods. Words like "environmental,"
"conservation," "pollution," and "sustainability"
were not in his or anybody's vocabulary. In all
Hitchcock's writings I find not so much as a hint
that he saw any possible downsides to science and
technology, not in the mining and burning of coal,
nor deforestation, nor air or water pollution, nor
species decline and extinction. The only
reservation he ever expressed about science was
its possible effects on faith in God, on trust in
religion, on morality. One of his principle
objections to Darwin's theories on evolution and
natural selection was that they threatened to
diminish the importance of God's creative power in
the minds of people of faith.
If the spirits of Edward and
Orra Hitchcock were hovering above us on that
sweltering August afternoon, I feel certain their
worries about the state of the planet would have
been balanced by the realization that their sixth
generation descendants were as passionate and
committed to forging a brighter future for
humankind in the twenty-first century as they were
in the nineteenth.
See also The Hitchcock
Progeny: Three Generations and The Descendants of
Edward and Orra White Hitchcock.
GO TO TOP
July 15, 2021
CARS
READY: THE ARRIVAL OF THE
RAILROAD
AGE IN AMHERST
Edward and Orra Hitchcock grew
up in a time when horse, buggy, and wagon were
the main modes of local transport. For longer
journeys stages ran between major cities,
although travel was slow and schedules sometimes
inconvenient.
"The
earliest I can remember about travelling
facilities was the stage route through Amherst
between Hartford & Hanover," wrote
Edward Hitchcock, Jr., in his memoir. In the
1830s there was one stage a day, he recalled,
alternating northbound and southbound. Horses
were changed at Boltwood's Tavern. The journey
to Hartford took 12 hours, to Hanover some 18
hours with an overnight stop. The stage to
Worcester departed from Amherst at 2:00
am, arriving in Worcester at 2:00 pm.
The arrival of the railroad
soon made intercity travel considerably faster
and more convenient. In 1839 the Western
Railroad began operation from Boston to
Springfield; three years later it was extended
to Albany. In the same year the Hartford and New
Haven Railroad began providing service to
Springfield; by 1842 it was extended northward
to Northampton. According to a published
schedule, the trip from Springfield to Boston
ran to three hours and fifteen minutes.
Despite an outcry from some
of its citizens, Amherst was bypassed by both
lines. Thus a trip to Springfield or Hartford
began with a stage ride to Northampton; a trip
to Boston required a stage from Amherst to
Palmer to connect with the railroad. In his
memoir Edward, Jr., writes of going the latter
route on his first rail trip to Boston with
Professor Charles B. Adams, probably in the
1840s.
Amherst finally saw the
arrival of direct rail service in May 1853 with
the completion of the Amherst and Belchertown
Railroad from Palmer to Amherst. The arrival of
the railroad was anticipated with considerable
excitement. In 1852 Jane Hitchcock, then 19,
wrote to her brother, Edward, Jr., "The
railroad is progressing...it will, in all
human probability be finished as soon as next
autumn. Perhaps by the time you get settled
off in Michigan or California we shall have a
great town here."
The trip to Palmer on the
new line took about an hour and a quarter, the
tracks passing just to the east of the Amherst
College property. The depot constructed off Main
Street (see the start of Chapter 26) stands to
this day; the Amtrak "Vermonter" continued to
travel that line until 2014.
With the completion of the
Massachusetts Central Railroad in 1867 direct
rail service was finally available from Amherst
to Boston. But it was never competitive with the
Western Railroad and ceased operation in 1917.
Most of the track is gone, but the right-of-way
still exists. The section through Amherst, now
the Norwottuck Rail Trail, forms the southern
boundary of the Amherst College campus today.
Edward Hitchcock, Sr., was a
vocal advocate for expansion of rail service in
the Connecticut Valley. He wrote several
newspaper articles and letters to editors on the
subject. And he was outspoken in support of the
construction of the Hoosac Tunnel which by 1875
was providing rail service across northern
Massachusetts.
Edward Hitchcock, Sr.'s
first extended rail journey was to Washington,
DC, in 1844. His anxiety about that trip was
apparent in a letter written to his daughters
Mary and Catherine in which he tried to reassure
them that he was alive and well despite riots
and murders in Philadelphia and a rail collision
on that line just a few days earlier. Six years
later he was an old hand at rail travel. In June
1850 as he and Orra journeyed through Europe, he
wrote to his brothers from Dublin, "I have
traveled a good deal by railroad and sometimes
fast enough—53 miles in 53
minutes!"
In December 1855 Edward
embarked on a lecture tour in the Midwest,
traveling by rail some 3000 miles in six weeks
(see Chapter 23). He wrote to Orra on January 2,
1856, from Chicago, "I reached here before
10 o'clock this evening in safety having
traveled 210 miles since noon. Most of the
road all the way from Cincinnati is very rough
and the cars rock about almost as much as our
steamer did in crossing the ocean."
Edward's rail travel
experience evoked a different sort of commentary
in an 1848 sermon published by the American
Tract Society entitled "Cars Ready." He
described the scene at Union Station in
Springfield as travelers waited anxiously for
the arrival of their train, prepared to board
and start their journey as soon as they heard
the announcement, "Cars ready." But is the
traveler ready for a far more consequential
departure? wondered Hitchcock. "As he hears
the summons, 'Cars ready!', 'Boat ready!',
'Stage ready!', let him be reminded how soon a
more startling summons will break upon his
ear: 'Prepare to meet thy God.'"
May 1, 2021
HITCHCOCK'S
BASALTICK COLUMNS
Edward Hitchcock was only 22
years old when he published his first scientific
paper, a short article appearing in the North-American
Review entitled "Basaltick Columns." It
describes in just a few sentences a remarkable
rock formation at the foot of Mount Holyoke in
Hadley, Massachusetts, consisting of a series of
vertical columns of basalt:
"These pillars are
uniformly hexagonal prisms, varying in
regularity, their sides being from eight to
thirty inches wide. They form the side of the
mountain for a distance of ten or twelve rods,
and vary in height from sixty to more than a
hundred feet. Their course inclines a little
from the perpendicular, sloping gently towards
the mountain."
Some years later Hitchcock
dubbed this formation "Titan's Piazza"; another
a short distance away on the shores of the
Connecticut River he named "Titan's Pier." (It
is said that the local names were previously the
Devil's Piazza and Devil's Pier, but Hitchcock
renamed them lest the Prince of Darkness be
credited unjustly for part of God's Creation.)
Such geological curiosities
are not unusual in volcanic rock; they occur
frequently in the traprock ridges up and down
the Connecticut Valley. Similar structures make
up the famous Giant's Causeway in Northern
Island. But the basaltic columns of Mount
Holyoke are particularly well preserved and are
rendered even more dramatic by the billowing
tongues of basalt above that appear much like
waves crashing on a beach.
s
The explanation of those
curious hexagonal columns has to do with the
cooling process in molten lava. Some parts of a
lava flow cool before others. As they cool the
rock contracts and fractures. Those fractures
often radiate along parallel lines. When cracks
meet they often form 120 degree angles which
results in hexagonal or six-sided shapes,
although five-sided and seven-sided columns are
also common. As to the overhanging billows, they
are likely the result of lava that cooled more
slowly, allowing gravity to shape the mass, not
unlike molten wax oozing down the sides of a
candle.
I visited "Titan's Piazza"
recently and was astonished at how beautifully
those structures were preserved, just as
Hitchcock saw them. The site is easily accessed
from route 47, just a half mile or so south of
the entrance to Skinner State Forest. But I
could not help wondering how many visitors to
Mount Holyoke ever got to see this remarkable
formation. Then I read Hitchcock's description
from his 1841 report on the geology of
Massachusetts and realized I wasn't the first to
have that thought:
"While the summit of
Holyoke attracts crowds of visiters, but very
few I have reason to believe go to this
Piazza: yet I have never known any one visit
it who was not highly gratified."
Then Hitchcock gave credit
where he believed it belonged for this marvel:
...How
can one, who has any taste for Nature
in
her most curious aspects,
remain uninterested as he stands there...
gazing, and takes into his mind and heart,
With undistracted reverence, the effect
Of
those proportions, where the Almighty hand
That made the worlds, the Sovereign
Architect,
Has deigned to work as if by human art.
GO TO
TOP
March 8, 2021
ROBERT
L. HERBERT
1929-2020
One of the first
sources I came across when I began my research
on Edward Hitchcock was The Complete
Correspondence of Edward Hitchcock and
Benjamin Silliman, 1817-1863. I was at
once awed by the scope of the manuscript that
included transcriptions of some 250 letters
between the two scientists. Equally impressive
was the seventy-page introductory essay that
placed Hitchcock and Silliman in the context
of nineteenth century American science,
tracing the evolution of their friendship and
their views on science and religion over
nearly half a century. The document was
supported by no fewer than 670 footnotes,
striking testimony to the thoroughness and
attention to detail of its author, Robert L.
Herbert, retired professor at Mount Holyoke
College. At the time I was unfamiliar with
Professor Herbert but guessed that he must be
a geologist or historian of science. I was
surprised to discover that that impressive
opus was the work of an art historian.
Professor Herbert produced
at least eight works related to the Hitchcocks
between 2008 and 2014. Besides Complete
Correspondence he transcribed two travel
diaries of Orra White Hitchcock, edited an
exquisite reproduction of her watercolor
album, Fungi, Selecti Picti, authored
an article on the artistic inclinations of
Edward Hitchcock in the Massachusetts
Historical Review, and co-authored
biographies of three important contemporaries
of Edward Hitchcock, Roswell Field, James
Deane, and Dexter Marsh, in collaboration with
Sarah L. Doyle and others. In 2011 he and
Daria D'Arienzo, then archivist at Amherst
College, co-authored Orra White Hitchcock:
An Amherst Woman of Art and Science, a
handsome volume that includes a biography of
the artist and a catalog of her paintings and
drawings that appeared in an exhibit at the
Mead Art Museum at Amherst College.
(Bibliographic information for these works is
provided below.)
Long before he became
interested in Edward and Orra White Hitchcock,
Robert L. Herbert was a distinguished
professor of art history at Yale University
where he earned a reputation as one of the
world's foremost scholars on the Impressionist
period. He developed his own distinctive
approach to art history, examining in depth
the lives of the artists and the social and
political context in which they lived and
painted, thus infusing a once sterile field
with flesh and blood. Upon his retirement from
Yale in 1990, Professor Herbert joined his
wife, historian Eugenia Herbert, at Mount
Holyoke College in South Hadley,
Massachusetts. Both retired in 1997 but
remained in South Hadley where he pursued his
interests in the out-of-doors and New England
history. There too he was introduced to Orra
White Hitchcock and her art, then to her
husband Edward and his scientific, religious,
and artistic sentiments.
Professor Herbert scoured
the letters and diaries of Edward and Orra
just as intensely as he had examined the lives
and works of the great Impressionists,
searching for subtle clues to their
personalities. In his introduction to Orra's
travel diaries, he exhibits this talent most
strikingly. Orra, he asserts in the
introduction, was a dutiful mother and wife, a
devout Christian, and a doer of good deeds.
But those hand-written manuscripts, intended
for no one but herself, provide a rare
opportunity to fill out our understanding of
her personality. "Hidden from view until
now," wrote Herbert, "her more
complete self finally emerges from her
diaries."
Orra's wry,
self-deprecating humor comes through on the
first page of her account of their European
trip in 1850. As she settled into a tiny cabin
on their transatlantic steamer in Boston, she
managed to ascend to her tiny upper berth only
with the aid of "a little Yankee
ingenuity" and "a little boosting
from my husband." While a lover of art,
Herbert notes, she paid more attention to the
lavish furnishings of Windsor Castle and
figures of Madame Tussaud's waxworks than to
the classical works of art they saw at the
National Gallery and the British Museum. She
was a good-hearted Christian, to be sure, and
was shocked at the squalid conditions of life
in rural Ireland at the time, but regularly
attributed poverty there and elsewhere in
Europe to Catholicism. She was not immune to
the prejudices of her time, likening the dark
skin of the black workers she saw in Richmond,
Virginia, to the filthy streets they cleaned.
The differences in the
personalities of Orra and Edward, noted
Herbert, were clearly on display in
contrasting letters written to their children
while vacationing on the coast of Maine. Of an
excursion to Plum Beach with a party of
friends, Orra wrote, "There were two
gentlemen with us and we ducked and
spattered each other and had the greatest
frolic you can imagine." Meanwhile her
sometimes saturnine husband, writing of the
same trip, could only report to his children
that he was suffering greatly, first from the
cold on one of the coastal islands, then from
the intense heat back on the mainland. Orra's
cup, it seems, was always half-full; Edward's
was half-empty.
Robert L. Herbert passed
away in Northampton on December 17, 2020, at
the age of 91, just a month before my book
went to press. I immediately decided to
dedicate the book to him—it seemed the least I
could do. After all, hardly a day passed
during the four years of my research that I
did not consult one of Professor Herbert's
works. They were invaluable to me and I will
always be grateful for his scholarship.
References
Herbert,
Robert L. The Complete Correspondence of
Edward Hitchcock and Benjamin Silliman,
1817-1863: The American Journal of Science
and the Rise of American Geology,
transcribed and annotated with an introductory
essay. Amherst College Archives and Special
Collections, 2012. Link
________ and Sarah L.
Doyle. The Dinosaur Tracks of Dexter
Marsh: Greenfield's Lost Museum, 1846-1853.
Mount Holyoke College Institutional Digital
Archive, 2013.
Link
________ and Sarah L.
Doyle. Dr. James Deane of Greenfield:
Edward Hitchcock's Rival Discoverer of
Dinosaur Tracks. Mount Holyoke College
Institutional Digital Archive, 2014.
Link
________. Fungi
Selecti Picti, 1821: Watercolors by Orra
White Hitchcock (1796-1863).
Northampton, Mass.: Smith College, 2011. The
original album is held by Smith College
Special Collections.
________, Sarah L. Doyle,
Joel Fowler, Lynda Hodson Mayo, and Pamela
Shoemaker. Roswell Field's Dinosaur
Footprints, 1854-1880. Mount Holyoke
College Institutional Digital Archive, 2013.
Link
________. "The Sublime
Landscapes of Western Massachusetts: Edward
Hitchcock's Romantic Naturalism." Massachusetts
Historical Review 12(2010): 70-99.
________. A Woman of
Amherst: the Travel Diaries of Orra White
Hitchcock, 1847 and 1850. New York,
iUniverse, Inc., 2008.
________ and Daria
D'Arienzo. Orra White Hitchcock: an
Amherst Woman of Art and Science.
Hanover, NH: University Press of New England,
2011.
February 1, 2021
THE
HITCHCOCK PROGENY: THREE GENERATIONS
In an 1823 sermon
entitled "Duties of Children" delivered by
Reverend Edward Hitchcock in Conway,
Massachusetts, he reminded the youth of his
church that nearly half of them would perish
by the age of twelve (see Chapter 8). He was
not exaggerating. Childhood was a hazardous
time of life in those days; illnesses such as
scarlet fever, diphtheria, typhoid fever,
dysentery, and pneumonia were widespread and
essentially untreatable. Edward and Orra lost
two young sons, a 2-year-old in 1824 and an
infant who died within a few hours of birth in
1832.
The six Hitchcock children
that survived to adulthood lived remarkably
long lives, three into their eighties, well
beyond the average lifespan of Americans of
that period. This may seem surprising
considering their father's lifelong battle
with poor health. Perhaps his children were
fortunate to inherit their mother's vigor and
emotional stability rather than their father's
frailty and mercuric disposition.
As to the Hitchcocks'
twenty grandchildren, seven perished before
the age of six. But those who survived
childhood lived relatively long lives, eight
into their seventies or eighties. As to the
third generation, Edward and Orra's ten
great-grandchildren, nearly all were born
after 1890. There were no childhood deaths in
this generation. Eight of the ten lived longer
than seventy years.
Aside from the scourge of
childhood ailments, the three generations of
Hitchcock descendants enjoyed many advantages.
They grew up in stable homes in prosperous and
forward-thinking communities such as Amherst,
Massachusetts, Hanover, New Hampshire, and
Orange, New Jersey. They were well-educated.
Nearly all the males attended either Amherst
or Yale while the females were enrolled at
Mount Holyoke, Smith, Pratt Institute, or
Cooper-Union. Several earned graduate degrees.
Three male descendants pursued careers as
scientists and college professors, two as
engineers, two as medical doctors, two as
attorneys, two as stockbrokers. At least five
Hitchcock women were teachers, two artists,
one a nurse, and one a social worker.
Several Hitchcock
descendants earned reputations as leaders in
their fields: Edward Hitchcock, Jr., in human
anatomy and physical education, Charles H.
Hitchcock in geology, Jane E. Hitchcock in
community nursing, Edward B. Hitchcock in
journalism, and Charles Hitchcock Allen in
chemistry. Charles B. Storrs served in the New
Jersey state legislature. Dr. John S.
Hitchcock distinguished himself as head of the
Massachusetts Division of Communicable
Diseases during the influenza epidemic in
1919. At least three Hitchcock men served in
the armed forces.
In The Descendants of
Edward and Orra White Hitchcock, I present brief biographical
sketches of each of the couple's thirty-eight
children, grandchildren, and
great-grandchildren. I am indebted to a number
of archives and newspaper for photographs,
obituaries, and other documents which are
attached. Readers who find errors on those
pages or have additional information to offer
are welcome to submit them to me at
robertmcmaster24 [at] gmail.com.
See also The
Hitchcock Legacy Lives On.
GO TO
TOP
EDWARD'S MASSACHUSETTS
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
1830-1833
Edward Hitchcock did nothing
in life by halves. Each new task he undertook,
each new assignment he accepted, he threw
himself into with every ounce of strength he
could muster. We can see this in the
meticulous crafting of his sermons early in
his career, his far-ranging travels in all
seasons as an itinerant preacher, his
intensive preparations for teaching chemistry
at Amherst College, his ambitious pursuit of
several state geological surveys, and his
headlong rush to investigate those enigmatic
fossil footmarks.
This trait in Edward
Hitchcock, this indefatigable force, derived I
believe from several sources within,
intellectual curiosity, ambition, religious
zeal, and a deeply-held conviction that his
health depended on vigorous activity. Of
course, throughout his adult life he was also
convinced that his time was running out, his
death was imminent. Of his "desponding nature"
he wrote to Edward, Jr., late in life, "It
is this trait in my character [that] has
enabled me to do what little I have done as
a literary man."
So it is no surprise to
learn that within a month of receiving his
commission to carry out the first geological
survey of Massachusetts in 1830, Edward
Hitchcock was off and running, notebook in one
hand, mineralogical hammer in the other. Over
the ensuing forty or so months, he visited
every corner of the state, observing,
recording, collecting specimens, and pondering
the implications of his findings for his
notions of geological history and God's plan
for earth. It proved to be a life-altering
experience for Hitchcock and a pivotal event
for American geology (see Chapter 14).
How was it possible, we
might wonder, that he could give up his
college and family obligations for so many
weeks over those four field seasons? The
college apparently was happy to accommodate
him. And Orra's steady hand and even
temperament no doubt kept affairs under
control on the home front. (Orra missed her
husband, of that I have no doubt, but I can't
help but wonder whether his absence may have
made running the household a bit easier!)
In reading Edward's
notebooks from those expeditions, I was
fascinated both by the geological insights
they offered and by some geographic
curiosities revealed along the way. More than
fifty of the state's modern-day municipalities
had not even been incorporated in 1830,
including a number in western Massachusetts:
Holyoke, Chicopee, Agawam, Hampden, and
Erving. The names of several towns have since
changed: Troy to Fall River, Ward to Auburn,
Western to Warren, Gay Head to Aquinnah. And
of course four towns that Edward visited not
far from Amherst, Enfield, Dana, Greenwich,
and Prescott, are no longer, their territories
having been inundated by the waters of the
newly created Quabbin Reservoir in the 1930s.
To get a sense of the
scope and intensity of Edward's first
geological survey of Massachusetts, click on
the map below to see an animation of his
travels.
October 22, 2020
RUTH
SHERMAN WHITE: REQUIESCE IN PACE
The
Hitchcock monument in Amherst's West Cemetery
is one of the largest in the cemetery but by
no means the most visited. That honor goes to
Emily Dickinson, whose grave is situated just
a few feet away from Edward and Orra's. Almost
any time you pass, you're likely to meet one
of Emily's admirers paying their respects, or
perhaps you'll find some small tribute left
for the "Belle of Amherst," a bouquet of
flowers, a lock of hair, or a handmade journal
and pencil offered in the hope that the
poetess might show her appreciation by
inscribing a little verse from the beyond: "Unable
are the loved to die, for love is
immortality."
Anyone
interested in the Hitchcocks will find
Edward's and Orra's names on a tall granite
obelisk nearby along with daughter Mary and
infant son Edward (Little Edward was actually
interred in Conway.) On the plinth is
inscribed a Hitchcock epigram that aptly sums
up the man: "The cross in nature and
nature in the cross."
Not far from the Hitchcock
monument are the graves of Orra's family, the
Whites, marked by a row of badly eroded stones
for her father, several of her brothers, and
one sister, all of whom passed away decades
before Orra. But one grave is missing here,
that of Orra's mother, Ruth Sherman White. And
therein lies a small mystery.
Ruth Sherman was born in
Bridgewater, Massachusetts, in 1763. She
married Jarib White in 1794 and the couple
first settled in Hadley before moving to
Amherst. Ruth gave birth to eight children
between 1794 and 1806. Jarib, a wealthy farmer
and businessman and one of the early
benefactors of Amherst College, died in 1821,
as his stone in West Cemetery attests. But
curiously, his wife's grave is nowhere to be
found.
While doing research
for my book, I sought out information on the
death and burial of Ruth from a number of
sources without success. Even the Amherst Town
Clerk's office had no record of her death. Her
name appears in several places in the
Hitchcock family account book, showing that
she lived with the Hitchcocks or nearby in the
late 1830s (see Chapter 15). But still no
mention of her death.
The mystery was finally
solved by Edward Hitchcock, Jr., in his
memoirs (more on those fascinating volumes in
a future post). "Doc" Hitchcock, as he was
known during his half a century on the Amherst
faculty, writes of attending his grandmother's
funeral at the home of her daughter-in-law,
Caroline White Sprague. Caroline, the wife of
Jay White, lived briefly with the Hitchcocks
in Amherst after her husband's death. In 1829
she married Reverend Daniel G. Sprague; the
couple lived for a time in Hampton,
Connecticut.
I contacted Hampton Town
Clerk Leslie Wertam who located the
hand-written burial record for Ruth White. She
died on November 5, 1839, in Hampton at the
age of 76. The line above her name carries the
death record for the Spragues' 19-month old
son, Henry W. Sprague, who passed away only a
week earlier. Her grave in North Cemetery is
marked by a small, nondescript stone—no words
of praise, no mementos of tribute from
admirers, just a simple inscription: RUTH
WHITE BORN JULY 1763 DIED NOV 5 1890.
The memory of Emily
Dickinson is held dear by many even 135 years
after her death. Edward and Orra Hitchcock
have been honored as well, not perhaps with
the passion of Emily's followers, but by
scholars of history, science, religion, and
art.
But Ruth Sherman White has
never been afforded her due. She was neither a
scientist nor a philosopher nor an artist, so
far as we know. What we do know is that she
devoted a good part of her adult life to
caring for children, first her own, three of
whom died before their first birthdays. Then
she helped care for her grandchildren. And
finally, in the last year of her life, she
traveled from Amherst to Hampton, Connecticut,
to assist in the care of the Sprague children.
It may well be that she succumbed to the same
illness that took little Henry, her
daughter-in-law's son. Whatever the cause of
her death, it is clear that Ruth Sherman White
gave her all for her family.
Requiesce in pace,
Ruth.
GO TO
TOP
October 15, 2020
FREEDOM
OF RELIGION, MASSACHUSETTS STYLE
The Pilgrims, as
we all learned at an early age, came to the
New World to escape religious persecution.
When Massachusetts enacted its first
constitution in 1781, the right to worship
God according to one's conscience was
further enshrined. A few years later the
First Amendment of the U. S. Constitution
guaranteed all citizens the right to their
religious beliefs and prohibited government
interference in religion.
So it might come as a
surprise to learn that, even in Edward
Hitchcock's time some forty years after
enactment of its constitution, Massachusetts
had one official religion,
Congregationalism. In those times the
Congregational church in a Massachusetts
town was referred to as "the meetinghouse."
Not only was it a house of worship, it was
also the seat of town government, the place
where town meetings were held. Furthermore,
the minister's salary was funded by taxes
collected from every resident, believer or
nonbeliever. Thus when Edward Hitchcock was
hired as "Colleague Pastor" in Conway,
Massachusetts, in 1821, the decision to hire
him was made by the church membership, but
approval of his salary had to be secured at
a Town Meeting (see Chapter 7).
With the "Religious
Freedom Acts" of 1811 and 1824, the
legislature did allow members of other
churches to have their Minister's Tax
abated, so long as they could prove they
were supporting that church. In the records
of the town of Conway for the 1820s you can
find page after page filled with statements
of residents attesting to their membership
in another church for that very purpose. See
for example this entry in the records of the
Conway town clerk for 1827:
(Image
source: Genealogical Society of Utah,
1972)
"To whom it may
concern this certifies that Mr. Daniel
Woodward Jr. is a member of the Baptist
society in Ashfield and Buckland and doth
attend publick worship with us on the
Lord's day and doth contribute to the
support of the Gospel with us. Enos
Smith, Pastor of the Church, Buckland
August 17 1827, Recorded Oct 29 1827, By
David Childs town clerk"
In those times there was
no exemption for nonbelievers; by default
their taxes went to the Congregational
church. Just a few years after that entry,
the Congregational church was officially
"disestablished" when the Eleventh Amendment
to the Massachusetts State Constitution was
passed in 1833. Massachusetts was the last
state to do so.
When I was in elementary
school, I was fascinated by long words and
anxious to know the longest word in the
English language. My parents helped me to
find the answer, not an easy task in the
"Pre-Google Era": the longest English word
was antidisestablishmentarianism. Of
course I had no idea what it meant back then
and to be honest, it wasn't until I began my
research on Edward Hitchcock that I came to
understand a little better. In the late
nineteenth century, some activists in Great
Britain began a movement to "disestablish"
the Church of England—they were known as
disestablishmentarians. Soon another
movement arose in opposition to
disestablishment, and naturally it came to
be known as antidisestablishmentarianism.
It must have have been a challenge, fitting
that name on lapel pins, lawn signs, or
whatever devices were used in those days to
promote a political cause. Nevertheless, the
"Antis" prevailed; to this day the Anglican
church is the official state church of the
United Kingdom.
FUNGAL
FORAGING ON CRICKET HILL
One of the most
beautiful works of art by Orra White
Hitchcock was one of her earliest creations.
"Fungi, Selecti Picti" is an album of 100
miniature watercolors of mushrooms and
mosses found by her and Edward in the
forests and fields of their new hometown,
Conway, Massachusetts, in 1821 (see Chapter
7). They found the sheep pastures and
forests of Cricket Hill on the south side of
town especially rich and they visited the
area again and again during that project.
A century and a half
later, the University of Massachusetts at
Amherst was home to two world-renown experts
on mushrooms, Drs. Margaret E. and Howard E.
Bigelow. The couple lived in Conway at the
time. When they hosted mycologists from
around the world, they often took them out
for some recreational fungal foraging.
According to one acquaintance, Cricket Hill
was their favorite destination. Whether the
Bigelows discovered the richness of the
Cricket Hill mycoflora on their own or
learned about it from the work of the
Hitchcocks is not known.
(From
Deane Lee, Conway 1767-1967,
Town of Conway, 1967)
In autumn 1981, my
wife, Nancy Mosher McMaster, then a
graduate student, enrolled in a mycology
course at UMass taught by Margaret
Bigelow. One of the first sites they
visited was Cricket Hill, much of which by
then had been set aside as Conway State
Forest. Professor Bigelow and her students
wandered through the forest collecting
specimens and placing them in large wicker
baskets. Back in the laboratory at UMass,
they immediately dissected, examined, and
drew each fungal treasure before it was
reduced to an oozing, gelatinous mass.
Orra's original album
came to Smith College thanks to the
generosity of the Hitchcock's youngest
daughter, Emily
Hitchcock Terry (see Chapter 27),
and may be viewed in the Smith College
Archives. In 2011 Smith published a
reproduction of the album, Fungi
Selecti Picti, 1821, edited by art
historian Robert L. Herbert.
GO TO
TOP
October 1, 2020
THE
HITCHCOCK HOUSE IN CONWAY
Edward and Orra
Hitchcock moved to Conway, Massachusetts,
in June 1821, within days of Edward's
installation as the junior pastor of the
Conway church. They lived in that town for
four years, and the house they eventually
purchased from John and Nancy Williams
still stands on Whately Road. But that
purchase did not take place until May
1824, as the deed in the Franklin County
Registry of Deeds attests. This raises the
interesting question, where did the
Hitchcocks live for the first three years
of Edward's Conway pastorate?
I have found no specific
references to the Hitchcocks' housing from
1821 to 1824, but I have come across
several hints that suggest that they may
have lived in the Williams house for a
time before they purchased it. In an 1825
letter Edward makes reference to "the
house" in which they lived in Conway,
implying that they lived in just one house
in that town. Furthermore, the deed drawn
up in 1824 makes mention of the
Hitchcocks' well, a hint that they may
already have lived there long enough to
dig a well.
Edward's predecessor,
the Reverend John Emerson (who by the way
was the great uncle of Ralph Waldo
Emerson), lived in a home on Baptist Hill
on the north side of town. That house is
referred to in several places as the
church parsonage, but deeds show that it
was actually owned by Reverend Emerson and
his wife.
In investigating later
ownership of the Hitchcock house I
discovered that while the church never
purchased a home for a pastor in those
days, on several occasions church members
purchased a house that was subsequently
occupied by the pastor and in at least one
instance eventually bought by the pastor.
So it seems possible that John Williams,
who was a church deacon, and his wife
provided that house to the Hitchcocks, or
perhaps agreed to board them, until they
could buy it.
When
the Hitchcocks finally purchased the house
on Whately Road, the records indicate that
they purchased it from John and Nancy
Williams, but made mortgage payments to
one Epaphroditus Champion. Champion was a
wealthy businessman from Connecticut who
had long-time business ties with John
Williams. Williams's journal shows that he
was in debt to Champion and agreed to have
the proceeds from the sale of the house go
directly to Champion.
One other amusing note
has to do with the name "Epaphroditus."
Champion was much admired by John
Williams. When John and his wife had a
son, they named him Epaphroditus Williams.
I spent quite a bit of time trying to
track down Epaphroditus Williams, where he
lived, married, children, date of death,
etc., without luck ¦until I discovered
that shortly after he turned 21 he changed
his name. Who can blame him!
(Note:
Many thanks to Sarah Williams of the
Conway Historical Commission for
assisting me in tracking ownership of
the Hitchcock house. I am also indebted
to Historic Northampton for providing
access to the papers of John Williams.)
HITCHCOCK'S
GIANT BOWLDERS
In the course of my
research I was astonished to learn that in
November 1856 Edward Hitchcock agreed to
undertake a geological survey of the state
of Vermont. He had spent several decades
earlier in life surveying Massachusetts.
Now, at age 63, he had agreed to survey
the Green Mountain State, nearly as large
as Massachusetts and with far more rugged
terrain. Furthermore, three geologists had
undertaken the project before him...all
three died before completing the work.
What, we might ask, was he thinking?
In his final report on
the Vermont project (see Chapters 23 and
24), Hitchcock devotes several pages to
some of the interesting natural features
of the state of Vermont. Prominent among
these are two very large glacial
erratics—one in Whitingham, a small town
on the Vermont-Massachusetts state line,
the other just a few miles away in
Florida, Massachusetts.
Recently I set out to
relocate Hitchcock's bowlders. I soon
learned that just as there are those who
enjoy seeking out very large trees to hug,
there are also big rock aficionados.
Thanks to the miracle of the World Wide
Web, I found that both of Hitchcock's
erratics were well known to modern day
boulder enthusiasts.
My quest began on a
snowmobile trail in the
Atherton Meadows Wildlife Management
Area in Whitingham with a map of the
refuge in hand. Less than a mile north of
route 100, as I approached the highest
point in the refuge, I spotted what looked
at first like the roof of a large house or
barn looming in the distance. As I drew
closer I realized that I was seeing the
top of a boulder, a very large boulder, a
very, VERY large boulder. Soon I was
standing awestruck before the Green
Mountain Giant.
Woodcut from Hitchcock's
Vermont survey report
The Green Mountain
Giant today
In
Hitchcock's words:
"The most gigantic
specimen with which we have met, lies on
the naked ledges on a high hill on the
farm of Jonathan Dix, in the west part
of Whitingham. From this hill we look
westerly into the valley of Deerfield
river, which must be over 500 feet deep
and from the character of the rock,
corresponding to that of the Green
Mountains (a highly micaceous gneiss),
we feel sure that the bowlder was
transported across this valley. Yet its
length is 40 feet; its horizontal
circumference 125 feet; its average
width 32 feet; its cubic contents 40,000
feet, and its weight 3400 tons...Until a
larger bowlder shall be found, we
propose for this one the name of Green
Mountain Giant." (Source: Hitchcock, et
al., Report on the Geology of Vermont. 2
vols. Claremont, NH: Claremont
Manufacturing Company, 1861, p. 59)
Just fifteen miles
southwest of Whitingham and perched on one
of the highest ridges in Massachusetts is
the ironically-named town of Florida. An
unmarked trail leaves route 2 just a mile
or so above the Hairpin Turn. The route is
an old logging road that has been badly
rutted by all-terrain vehicles, but in
less than a mile I had another encounter
of the glacial kind. This "bowlder"
Hitchcock dubbed "The Vermonter" as he
explains:
Woodcut
from Hitchcock's Vermont survey report
The "Vermonter" today
"There is one
bowlder of this granite, however, which
from its size and situation we would
point out, although it has been carried
a little distance over the line into
Massachusetts. Ascending Hoosac Mountain
from North Adams into Florida on the
Greenfield road, and turning northerly
at its top so as to pass near the edge
of the mountain a mile and a half in an
unfrequented path, we come at length, in
the midst of the woods, upon the huge
bowlder of Stamford granite figured
below from a hasty sketch. It lies
nearly all out of the ground, resting on
the ledges of slate beneath the thin
soil. Its height is 15 feet, and it is
76 feet in circumference, weighing by
estimation 510 tons...On its northwest
side rises Oak Hill, which is some 200
feet higher than the bowlder, and where
the granite is in place, from which some
agency has torn it off and transported
it many miles across the intervening
valley 1300 feet deep." (Source: Hitchcock, et
al., Report on the Geology of Vermont. 2
vols. Claremont, NH: Claremont
Manufacturing Company, 1861, p. 57)
That he refers to
"some agency" responsible for carrying
such an enormous boulder a distance of
several miles shows that, even in 1861
when the report was written, Edward
Hitchcock was still unconvinced of
Agassiz's "glacial theory."
It is amazing to me
that these two ancient artifacts are still
intact and surrounded by wild lands. The
landscape in those two locations has
changed little since Hitchcock's time
except, of course, for the forests. In his
day nearly all of southern New England had
been deforested and converted to
pastureland.
If you would like to
visit these two Hitchcock landmarks,
you'll want to locate them on a map using
the coordinates below. The trails are not
marked, and muddy ruts and trees blown
down across the path are all part of the
adventure. Both boulders are visible on
the Google Earth® view of May 10 2014.
Green Mountain Giant: 42°
46' 29.32" N 72° 54' 7.42"
W
The Vermonter: 42° 42'
27.74" N 73° 3' 33.71" W
|
QUICK LINKS
Previous
Posts
November 30, 2023
Was Edward Hitchcock
a Grinch?
September
28, 2023
Who Deserves Credit for the
Vermont Geological Survey?
December 30,
2022
Hitchcock's Dinosaurs
in the News
April 19,
2022
Battle of the Titans: The
Agassiz and the Ecstasy
October 22, 2021
Flattened Pebbles Cleft by
Titan's Sword
September
1, 2021
The Hitchcock Legacy Lives On
July
15, 2021
Cars Ready: The Arrival of the
Railroad Age in Amherst
May 1, 2021
Hitchcock's Basaltic Columns
March 8, 2021
Tribute to Robert L. Herbert
February 1, 2021
The Hitchcock Progeny
December 18, 2020
Edward's Massachusetts
Geological Survey
October 22,
2020
Ruth Sherman White:
Requiesce in Pace
October 15, 2020
Freedom of Religion,
Massachusetts Style
October 8, 2020
Fungal Foraging on
Cricket Hill
October 1, 2020
The Hitchcock House in Conway
September 21, 2020
Hitchcock's Giant Bowlders |