Possible David Boat Image- thoughts???

[JohnDLittlefield]

I ran across this undated image in the Library of Congress (LC-USZ62-131097) of what may be a "David" torpedo boat (I think it is, but some may argue as it has identified as a submarine elsewhere). It's by Alfred Waud, whom I understand was an artist for Harper's Weekly. It's on verso (on the back) of another pencil image of USS Winona. Assuming it is a sketch of a "David," there is no clear association of the two vessels of which I am aware. However, Winona was stationed in Charleston after February 1864, but first spent some time for repair in Port Royal before starting Charleston blockade service. The first Union vessel distribution list that includes Winona is 16 July 1864. In September, Winona deck crews reported seeing a torpedo boat- the report does not specifically say a David-class boat. If the Winona crew spotted a David-craft, it would be the latest citing in Charleston harbor- the latest before this would be late April 1864. Also, if a clear association of the two vessels and the artist can be established, the sketch can be dated within a few months of the time it was made, and the sketch vessel can be identified as a David-class vessel.

So, my questions for you are:
1. How might I try to demonstrate that Alfred Waud was in Charleston at this time.
2. Does anyone know if media personnel were allowed on Union vessels, or would Waud have made the sketch while in Charleston proper?
3. How might I make a stronger association of the two vessels (other than one vessel is sketched on the back of the other) and
3. Has anyone ever seen the logs for USS Winona? If so, where?

AndyHall? Rebelatsea?

 

[Mark F. Jenkins]

I'll take #2 and #4... There was no prohibition against "media" aboard ship, although it was less frequent that traveling reporters would be aboard, since their movements would be rather constrained simply from being on a vessel that might be traveling far and wide; in many cases, one of the officers or sometimes one of the men of the ship would write letters to newspapers back home, a true 'military correspondent.' In the case of the Charleston blockade, I think there was enough traffic to and from that Waud could conceivably have paid a visit, though I don't know enough about him to track him that minutely. As far as #4 goes, it depends on what you're looking for; if you're trying to establish the position of the Winona on a particular date, the log would be helpful, but there's not a lot in the logs other than positional and navigational information, with an occasional short note about unusual occurrences.

 

[JohnDLittlefield]

I'll take #2 and #4... There was no prohibition against "media" aboard ship, although it was less frequent that traveling reporters would be aboard, since their movements would be rather constrained simply from being on a vessel that might be traveling far and wide; in many cases, one of the officers or sometimes one of the men of the ship would write letters to newspapers back home, a true 'military correspondent.' In the case of the Charleston blockade, I think there was enough traffic to and from that Waud could conceivably have paid a visit, though I don't know enough about him to track him that minutely. As far as #4 goes, it depends on what you're looking for; if you're trying to establish the position of the Winona on a particular date, the log would be helpful, but there's not a lot in the logs other than positional and navigational information, with an occasional short note about unusual occurrences.

Great response... somewhat as I expected, but did not know. Thank you very much.

 

[AndyHall]

Waud's other illustrations of vessels done on-site are precisely detailed, and really quite remarkable. This simple sketch of the David-type vessel (I agree with that identification) is somewhat crude and generalized -- something like he might have done based on someone's description, rather than something he actually set out to illustrate.

 

[JohnDLittlefield]

Waud's other illustrations of vessels done on-site are precisely retailed, and really quite remarkable. This simple sketch of the David-type vessel (I agree with that identification) is somewhat crude and generalized -- something like he might have done based on someone's description, rather than something he actually set out to illustrate.

Good point... the sketch of Winona is equally crude.

 

[Mark F. Jenkins]

Alas, Patrick Purcell's This Jolly Little Gunboat about the USS Winona concerns her earlier operations on the Mississippi, rather than on the blockade.

 

[rebelatsea]

Gong back to basics , how do you know it is by Alfred Waud? As Andy said it is not characteristic of either brother.

 

[JohnDLittlefield]

Gong back to basics , how do you know it is by Alfred Waud? As Andy said it is not characteristic of either brother.

Good question - That info comes from the LOC and the style matches other sketches in the collection documented to be by the same artist...
https://lccn.loc.gov/2004660415
I really didn't question that- maybe I should (??). https://lccn.loc.gov/2004660415

 

[rebelatsea]

Good question - That info comes from the LOC and the style matches other sketches in the collection documented to be by the same artist...
https://lccn.loc.gov/2004660415
I really didn't question that- maybe I should (??).

You pre empted my next question - does the sketch match !

 

[JohnDLittlefield]

View attachment 106007 ... if a clear association of the two vessels and the artist can be established, the sketch can be dated within a few months of the time it was made

So, I have reason to think my tentative dating of the Waud sketch (late summer 1864) may be off as I remembered this image from Harper's Weekly in November 1863. The caption says the sketch is from an "Occasional Contributor"... not sure if Waud would have been referred to in this manner. Regardless, note the (erroneous) shared position of the centralized smokestack- a notable similarity.

However, The unpublished sketch shows a movable spar, which suggests a date of the sketch to either pre-late September 1863 (when the movable spar was replaced by a stationary unit and before the attack on New Ironsides which can be seen in the background of the Nov 1863 sketch) or post Oct 28 1863 (when the stationary unit was removed and replaced by another movable spar). Also, Winona was not in Charleston in 1863.
These are the little mysteries that I enjoy so much!

 

[rebelatsea]

So, I have reason to think my tentative dating of the Waud sketch (late summer 1864) may be off as I remembered this image from Harper's Weekly in November 1863. The caption says the sketch is from an "Occasional Contributor"... not sure if Waud would have been referred to in this manner. Regardless, note the (erroneous) shared position of the centralized smokestack- a notable similarity.

However, The unpublished sketch shows a movable spar, which suggests a date of the sketch to either pre-late September 1863 (when the movable spar was replaced by a stationary unit and before the attack on New Ironsides which can be seen in the background of the Nov 1863 sketch) or post Oct 28 1863 (when the stationary unit was removed and replaced by another movable spar). Also, Winona was not in Charleston in 1863.
These are the little mysteries that I enjoy so much!

View attachment 106126

Seen that before! I suspect the artist was told - I need a picture quick, today would be nice!

 

[JohnDLittlefield]

So I spent the morning doing a survey of A.R. Waud sketches dated from April to December 1864 to try and map out his travels and see if he was obviously in Charleston at any point. I found 30 images (there were more, but I didn't see anything to change the basic map of travel). It seems he was made a lot of sketches from various points in Virginia, but was in Georgia in late May/early-June, then returned to Georgia in mid-October. Therefore, he probably passed through South Carolina (and likely Charleston) at least twice, but seemingly three times, in 1864.

Of the 30 dated images, two were from South Carolina. One was of the destruction of Housatonic (Dated 7-17 February 1864) and the other (shown below) is undated and simply titled "Off Charleston." It appears to show New Ironsides, a second large vessel (that appears to me to be a Confederate ironclad), and a small vessel (could it be a David-class boat???). The LOC dates this image to 1863-1864. Based on these images it seems Waud was likely in Charleston during February and again at an unknown date. I feel it is now safe to presume the original post image is in fact of a David-class vessel. The question remains, when was it sketched? Thoughts???

 

[Mark F. Jenkins]

I see New Ironsides in "Off Charleston," but I'm not seeing the Confederate ironclad or the torpedo boat... from left to right, I see a monitor, the New Ironsides, what may be the spires of Charleston from a distance, Fort Sumter, part of the coastline, and what may be Fort Moultrie.

 

[JohnDLittlefield]

I see New Ironsides in "Off Charleston," but I'm not seeing the Confederate ironclad or the torpedo boat... from left to right, I see a monitor, the New Ironsides, what may be the spires of Charleston from a distance, Fort Sumter, part of the coastline, and what may be Fort Moultrie.

I suppose we (meaning I) see what we want to see
You are right; probably a monitor, New Ironsides, and Ft. Sumter in the foreground

 

[Mark F. Jenkins]

Our brains are primed for pattern-matching; it helps us see things that are difficult to see, but also unfortunately yields "false positives" on occasion!

 

[JohnDLittlefield]

This is the image on the front of Waud's "David" sketch- it's labeled "Winona" but clearly isn't. It appears to be a monitor, although I am clueless as to which. I know there were eight servicing Charleston harbor in 1863...
the twin turreted Keokuk (not it), Weehawken, Passaic, Montauk, Patpasco, Catskill, Nantucket, and Nahant. I need to check distribution lists to see which were still hanging out or swapped in and out during 1864.
Can anyone spot an obvious clue that might help ID the vessel in this sketch???
@Mark F. Jenkins @AndyHall @rebelatsea thoughts???

 

[Mark F. Jenkins]

No, not Winona.... actually, I'd question if the sketch was made at Charleston at all, since most (all?) of the monitors there were Passaic class, and that really strikes me as looking more like a Canonicus, particularly from the forward position of the turret, the height and girth of the funnel, and if that's a ventilator shaft depicted just aft of the turret (on the Passaics, they were aft of the funnel). I'll have to look to be sure there weren't any Canonicus-class vessels at Charleston in the very late war period, but I don't recall any off the top of my head.


For comparison: Canonicus-class monitor Mahopac on the James River:

 

[Mark F. Jenkins]

hm... I'll venture a guess based on what looks like an indication of painted bands on the turret and funnel in the sketch: USS Saugus (also shown on the James River):

(The arrangement at the bow is a "torpedo rake" for mine defense and/or minesweeping.)

 

[JohnDLittlefield]

hm... I'll venture a guess based on what looks like an indication of painted bands on the turret and funnel in the sketch: USS Saugus (also shown on the James River):

(The arrangement at the bow is a "torpedo rake" for mine defense and/or minesweeping.)

I'll get into the 1864 distribution lists tomorrow and see what stands out. Thanks Mark.
I have been assuming a correlation between the two sketches and there very well may not be one. Waud spent a good deal of time on the James apparently and may have simply mislabeled a sketch made there.

 

[Mark F. Jenkins]

Another thing that I wondered about-- but have no information on-- was, could it have been possible that Waud made the sketch on or from the Winona? I really doubt that he could have confused the two vessels; the general accuracy of most of his work would seem to argue for something other than a simple mistake.