Tennessee Marble: An Introduction Justin Dothard Independent

Tennessee Marble: An Introduction
Justin Dothard
Independent Study
December 10, 2015
I. What is Tennessee marble, and what qualities endear it as a building stone?
In general, the term “marble” applies to metamorphosed limestone that is
crystalline and polishable. Tennessee marble (also known as Holston Marble) is not
metamorphic (instead sedimentary), but it fulfills the other criteria for colloquial
classification as “marble.” The peculiar, lithic qualities of Tennessee marble stem, of
course, from prehistoric tectonics. During the Ordovician era, (485-443 million
years ago) calcareous remains of organisms like foraminifera, corals, and mollusks
accumulated at the bottom of a shallow sea covering the present-day Tennessee
Valley. With time, those seafloor lime deposits were covered by other sediments,
and during the tectonic movement responsible for the Appalachian Mountains, they
became subjected to intense heat and pressure – pressure so great that calcination
was prevented and calcite recrystallization was enabled. This geological history
explains much about what has made Tennessee marble attractive as a building stone
in modern America: principally its exceptional colors, durability, and heat
resistance (Walls, 1930).
Color. Tennessee marble varies in color from brown (i.e. “cedar”) to red to
pink to grayish white, but it caries a relatively consistent color and composition
within blocks. Sometimes the darker varieties are bespeckled and veined, and the
lighter varieties can contain veins or “stylolites.” The pink and red pigments result
from iron oxides, while the grays and whites come from the remains of the
organisms previously mentioned (Walls).
2
Durability. A significant portion of Tennessee marble’s durability stems from
its fossils and crystallization. Owing to the fact that its fossils “…cross each
other…and are so firmly packed together that it is difficult to start a crack at any
point in the mass” (Wall, 7), Tennessee marble has a high crushing strength that has
tested as high as 19,900 pounds per square inch (a feat “seldom reached by rocks
except granite and trap;” Ferris, 1894, 20). Additionally, the rock’s crystallization
means that it is minimally absorptive. Absorption resistance is important for a
couple of practical reasons. First, water infiltrating a building stone is problematic
in temperate locales where freeze/thaw cycles could enable that water to crack the
stone or loosen its top layer (both of which are called “spalling”). Secondly, porous
stones retain the dirt and soot that collect on them, rather than having those
particulates wash off with rain or mopping. So, less absorptive stones like
Tennessee marble stain less. Tennessee marble has a very close texture where its
crystals are “completely interlocked, leaving no vacant spaces between them”, which
makes it colorfast and resistant to permanent staining (Ferris, 22; Walls, 2).
Heat Resistance. Given its hot genesis, Tennessee marble can resist
temperatures approaching 1200 degrees Fahrenheit before any material damage
occurs to it (Ferris, 28). In fact, its heat resistance exceeds that of granite,
sandstone, limestone, or shale – making it an attractive material for fire-resistance.
The coefficient of expansion of Tennessee marble is less than that of concrete or
steel (Walls, 3), so seasonal expansion or contraction of the material is minimal
(which is again good for reducing cracking).
3
Figure 1. Marble belts of East Tennessee. The slivers on the map denote the Holston marble formation. Walters,
1958.
4
II. How was Tennessee marble extracted and processed in its heyday?
At the Quarry
Extraction. In the earliest American extractions, marble was split from
exposed ledges (in other words, blasted) instead of “quarried.” Often this entailed
the use of hand drills to cut cylindrical holes into the rock, into which explosives
(often powder) were placed. This was, however, a very wasteful manner of
obtaining stone, since a considerable and unpredictable portion of the rock was
broken in the explosion (Walls).
“Hand channeling” became the next vogue of marble extraction -- though it
was an ancient technique. Hand channeling was particularly labor-intensive (since
it required holes to be drilled by hand in rows), but the material savings made up for
the added labor expense. With the industrial revolution came advances like
channeler machines, which utilized of a row of long chisels that drilled a channel in
the stone. First was the steam channeler (famously, that of Sullivan), which incised
vertically. By the early twentieth century, channelers were coming in “electric-air”
and compressed-air variants, and they were capable of making horizontal or
inclined cuts too. Vertical channels were typically cut first, then cross channels, and
then the bottom of the block was perforated (typically by hammer-type drills). By
the mid-twentieth century, however, pneumatic drills had all but replaced
channelers for all quarry incisions. Drill holes would be spaced on average about 2
inches apart (depending on the stone’s characteristics; Walls; Walters, 1958).
5
The next action was to physically break the block away from the formation
by breaking the narrow bands of stone between the drilled holes, a process called
“wedging” and described in detail by Joe Parks Walters in 1958:
Wedging refers to driving tapered steel rods, between two narrow pieces of
steel called feathers, into the drill holes, thereby, causing the marble still
intact between them to crack and break. This is always done with a
sledgehammer operated by human power. Quarry foremen report that often
only a few blows of the hammer are necessary to bring about the desired
break. Wedging is a critical operation in the quarrying of marble. In order to
obtain a uniform break, it is important to have an equal amount of strain. If
the wedges at one end of the block are driven harder than those at the other
end, an irregular break may ensue causing the loss of money. The wedging of
a particular block is usually done by only one man who must make an
attempt to strike his blows with equal force, and by avoiding haste, give the
stone adequate time to fracture (24).
After wedging, the loosened block would be hoisted out by adjacent cranes
(typically steam or electric “derricks,” depending on power availability) and
transported to a mill (Walls).
Figure 2. A pneumatic bar drill being used in a raised position. Walters, 1958.
6
At the Mill
Sawing Blocks Into Slabs. After being transported to the mill, a rough block of
marble would begin its evolution into dimensional material by being cut into a slab.
To achieve this, it was transferred to a gang car and was pushed under a gang of
blades called a “gang saw.” Those blades would be driven back and forth over the
marble while abrasive (usually sand) was applied. “If the saws are fed too fast the
blades bend and cut uneven surfaces, which either ruin the marble slabs or requires
an undue amount of rubbing to remove the wavy lines,” reported James G. Walls
(43). The gang saws would cut no more than 2 inches per hour. A quicker
alternative to the gang saw was a diamond saw, which (at 72” diameters) could cut
through marble 30 inches high at about 10 inches per hour. Carborundum saws
were employed for small cuts (Walls).
Figure 3. Gang saws (Walters, 1958, 60).
7
Coping the Slabs. Slabs, once they were sawn into slabs, needed their edges
“coped” or trimmed. If a mechanical coper was employed, the edges would be true.
At this point the slabs were referred to as “coped stock.”
Rubbing the Coped Stock. For this task, slabs were laid flat on a revolving iron
disk (4 inches thick and 12 to 14 feet in diameter), and sand and water were fed to
the contact between iron and marble. Thereafter, the stock was considered “sand
rubbed.”
Figure 4. Rubbing beds (note the iron disks around which the men are standing). Walters, 1958, 63.
Gritting The Rubbed Stock. Next, sand rubbed cope stock was subjected to the
gritting machine, which brought revolving blocks of various grits (usually a
progression of blocks from coarse to fine grit) to bear on the marble under
perpetually wet conditions. This is what produced a “honed” finish.
8
Buffing and Polishing Honed Stock. Planar surfaces were placed under the
buffer next, which was the same as the gritting machine but for a felt head instead of
a gritting head. A 20” felt head would rotate over the marble already coated with
chromium oxide (or tin oxide), oxalic acid, and water. Molded or carved surfaces
would be polished by hand (Walls).
9
III. How did Tennessee marble rise in popularity, and what was the sequence
of prominent buildings that cemented its reputation?
“Marble” in East Tennessee first made an impression on white settlers in the
late 18th century and early 19th century. Clipped from outcroppings in the Knoxville
region, it made its way into the possession of plantation owner Francis Alexander
Ramsey and Governor John Sevier. The former used it as random rubble for his
home, Swan Pond. The latter, as a Congressman in 1814, showed a sample of the
material to the master carver at the United States Capitol, who in turn pronounced it
“very fine and valuable” (Knowles, 2011, 2).
Figure 5. Ramsey House, or “Swan Pond,” 1797, Knoxville, Tennessee.
10
It likely saw limited adoption as a building stone until developments
precipitated the opening of the first marble quarry in the state: Orville Rice’s
Rogersville quarry, in 1838. Rice, as it turns out, was acquainted with William
Strickland, who after designing the famed Second Bank of the United States (18191824) in Philadelphia, was appointed the Architect of the Tennessee State Capitol
(1845-1859). Strickland – a student of prominent architect Benjamin Latrobe, as
well as a mentor to U.S. Capitol dome-designer Thomas Ustick Walter -- specified
Tennessee marble (i.e. a “cedar” variety) for the columns of the State Capitol in
1845. Likewise, Walter had seen Rice’s stone at a collection at the Washington
Monument, and he subsequently called for the same stone to embellish new rooms
and staircases at the U.S. Capitol Building (including the walls of the U.S. Senate
Retiring Room; West & Knowles, 2013).
Figure 6. Tennessee Senate Chamber, 1845-1859, Nashville, Tennessee.
11
Figure 7. Stereoscopic view of the U.S. Senate Retiring Room, ca. 1860-1880. Source: The Miriam and Ira D.
Wallach Division of Art, Prints and Photographs: Photography Collection, The New York Public Library. "Interior
views, Retiring Room of the U.S. Senate." New York Public Library Digital Collections.
Before the onset of the railroad, obtaining East Tennessee marble was quite
an ordeal and an expense. To start with, the material was heavy (approximately 180
pounds per cubic foot; Walters, 14), and it emanated from what was then a remote
region (due to the Appalachian Mountains and the Cumberland Plateau). For
instance, when Orville Rice sent specimens of his marble to the U.S. Capitol, it left his
quarries by mule teams and wagons bound for river ports. It would then float its
way down the Holston and Tennessee Rivers to Loudon or Chattanooga, where it
boarded a train for Augusta, Savannah, or Charleston. From those ports, it would
have been carried by ocean schooner to the Port of Baltimore, and then shipped by
train once more to Washington, DC (West and Knowles).
12
It could be said that nothing did more to increase the availability and
specification of Tennessee marble than did the efficient means to transport it,
provided by the coming of major north-south rail lines to Knoxville in the mid-
1850s. When the East Tennessee & Georgia Railroad and the East Tennessee &
Virginia Railroad came to Knoxville, these carriers allowed Tennessee marble to be
shipped overland from its source to major American cities and to Atlantic ports.
Given the new pipeline, marble quarrying and milling increased in Knoxville, and
prices reflected good competition and reduced logistical costs. In the process, one
also saw the ascendancy of the pinkish-gray variety (more easily accessible, in Knox
County) as “Tennessee Marble,” rather than the bespeckled, brownish “cedar”
variety (found in more remote Hawkins County; West and Knowles).
After the Civil War, Knoxville was also well positioned politically, since it was
the seat of the single Grand Division that had favored the victorious Union. Likely
one of the rewards for such loyalty was the erection of a new federal Custom House
and Post Office (1871-1874), constructed with local labor and quality, local
materials (thereby an intentional economic boon to the community), and built to an
Italianate design by the office of Alfred B. Mullett, the Supervising Architect of the
U.S. Treasury. True to form, Mullett chose to clad the Knoxville Custom House’s
exterior with Tennessee Marble (which until then had largely been credited as an
interior stone), and he was apparently so impressed by the stone (a pinkish-gray
variety from Knox County), that he remarked that it was “unsurpassed in beauty and
desirability by any marble now in use in this country” (Knowles, 250). Tellingly,
13
Mullett would use the stone again in the St. Louis Custom House – breaking with his
habit of using local materials on his buildings (West and Knowles, 2013).
Figure 8. Knoxville Custom House and Post Office, 1871-1874.
Stones – particularly light-colored ones -- were used more often in public
buildings – most frequently neoclassical ones – once the “White City” debuted at the
World’s Columbian Exposition in Chicago in 1893. Rail stations, municipalities,
institutions, corporations, and elites alike wanted to appropriate a sense of
permanence and European sophistication as part of the “American Renaissance” of
the day, and Tennessee pink and gray marbles were a fitting instrument. Rail
stations like New York’s Grand Central Terminal (1903) and Atlanta’s Macon
14
Terminal (1916) employed Tennessee pink marble flooring (which was a very
popular use for the stone, considering its durability). New Haven’s Federal
Courthouse (1913-1919) was clothed inside and out in pink marble, as was the floor
of San Francisco’s City Hall dome room (1915). But one of the most consequential
applications of Tennessee pink marble was the exterior of J. Pierpont Morgan’s
personal library in New York City (1901-1906).
Figure 9. Main Concourse of Grand Central Terminal Station, New York, 1903. The floor of the main concourse
is Tennessee pink marble. Photo by unknown.
15
Figure 10. Dome Room of San Francisco City Hall, Bakewell & Brown, 1915. The floor and stair is Tennessee
marble, both pink and cedar. Photo by Christian Oz.
The architect of the Morgan Library was Charles Follen McKim, who was a
principal and patriarch of the day’s most highly regarded architectural firm: McKim,
Mead, and White. His client, Mr. Morgan, was one of the wealthiest Americans –
capable of affording nearly any procurable stone – and he spared no expense on his
library (Cotter, 2010). Why (and at whose suggestion) Tennessee marble was
shortlisted as exterior cladding is not entirely known, but it was used by the same
firm for interior work at the Boston Public Library (1887) and at the University Club
in New York (1899; Knowles, 2011), so there must have at least been some
familiarity. McKim was keen to highlight the monumentality and permanence of
this commission -- as evidenced by his costly yet successful push to construct this
16
building with dry masonry (i.e. no mortar between ashlar blocks) – and so obviously
Tennessee marble was viewed as consonant with that time horizon (Broderick,
2010). McKim even sent two representatives from New York to Knoxville to
determine the nature of the supply, and one of them wrote McKim in 1903:
“…the Court House building at Knoxville [i.e. Mullett’s aforementioned
Custom House and Post Office], the single building in which this stone has
been used, has been standing for 37 years, and the arrises [i.e. edges of two
surfaces meeting at an angle] are perfectly straight and true, the color
perfectly preserved, and … no evidence of time is observable” (West and
Knowles, 19).
Figure 11. The Morgan Library, New York City, 1901-1906. Photo by Tony Cenicola of The New York Times.
The Morgan Library is one of McKim’s masterpieces, and plenty of
emulations ensued (even before its completion). Financier James Jerome Hill
bankrolled a public library of Tennessee marble in St. Paul, Minnesota in 1914.
17
Architects Carrere & Hastings reprised the Tennessee pink marble recumbent lions
in front of the Morgan Library with a pair of Tennessee pink marble recumbent lions
(named “Patience” and “Fortitude”) in front of their New York Public Library (19021911), even employing the same sculptor. But perhaps the most famous legacy of
the Morgan Library – from a material standpoint -- is the West Building of the
National Gallery of Art in Washington, DC (1937-1941; Knowles).
In 1937, the National Gallery’s benefactor, Andrew Mellon, worried that
selecting a limestone or a white marble for the building’s exterior (which would
have been appropriate considering gallery’s context in the Federal Triangle) would
be too reflective under what was perceived to be Washington’s generally sunny
climate. His friend Lord Joseph Duveen sent him the following telegram after a visit
to New York:
Just returned from Morgan Library. Color of marble divine. It has lovely rose
tint which [is] so attractive. Sincerely hope Pope can get some (Cannadine,
2006, 576).
John Russell Pope -- the architect of the gallery and coincidentally a former McKim
employee -- duly obtained samples, and Mellon was pleased to authorize the use of
the marble on condition that the darkest pink be employed closest to the ground,
with the blocks’ shades gradually lightening as they climbed higher (culminating in
near white at the dome). This scheme – which was apparently the suggestion of
Malcolm Rice (a Pope employee who would eventually become the Architect of the
University of Tennessee) -- would allow blocks of varying shades from the different
East Tennessee producers – most of them monopolized by the unprecedentedly
large National Gallery order -- to be melded together into a single building façade
18
(Knowles). All told, 800 railcars of pink Tennessee marble were shipped to
Washington, DC from the Knoxville area to clad the West Wing (Cannadine, 2006).
Figure 12. South Entrance of the West Wing of the National Gallery of Art, John Russell Pope, 1937-1941. Note
the progression from darker pinks at the base to whitish pink at the top of the pediment.
The West Wing of the National Gallery met its capacity in only 25 years,
prompting the consideration of an addition in the late sixties. By then, fashion had
moved away from neoclassicism to modernism, yet the durability and colorfastness
of Tennessee marble made its specification an almost foregone conclusion –
especially for the purposes of uniting the East and West Buildings in spite of their
stylistic differences. Andrew Mellon’s heirs contributed the necessary financial seed
19
money, and architect I.M. Pei was hired to design the East Wing. Malcolm Rice, who
had been sent by John Russell Pope to East Tennessee in 1938 to coordinate the
procurement of marble between the various producers, again acted as a marble
consultant to I.M. Pei’s office (Knowles).
At a cost of $93 million, the East Building was the last great commission
involving Tennessee marble. The Tennessee marble industry at the time of the East
Building project had already begun to decline in response to reduced demand.
Today, there is only one supplier of Tennessee marble remaining (the Tennessee
Marble Company in Friendsville, Tennessee), and occasionally there are high-profile
projects (like the First Amendment tablet on the Newseum [2008], for instance), but
what continues is nothing on the order of what has already come to pass. The
abandoned quarries and derelict cutting mills around Knoxville cannot themselves
testify to the unique beauty they have afforded urban centers all across the United
States, but the irony that a natural resource from formerly one of the humblest and
most remote corners of the United States would, with great strain, eventually
enshrine some of this nation’s most sophisticated building programs, this should be
a point of awe and pride.
20
Figure 13. East Wing of the National Gallery of Art, Pei Cobb Freed, 1971-1978.
21
Bibliography
Broderick, Mosette. Triumvirate: McKim, Mead, & White: Art, Architecture, Scandal,
and Class in America’s Gilded Age. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2010.
Cannadine, David. Mellon: An American Life. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2006.
Cotter, Holland. “Let There Be Light, and Elegance: Morgan Library & Museum’s
Restored Building Reopens.” New York Times, October 28, 2010.
Ferris, Charles. “Tennessee Marble as a Building Stone.” The University of Tennessee
Scientific Magazine, June 1894.
Hunt, Marjorie. The Stone Carvers: Master Craftsmen of Washington National
Cathedral. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1999.
Knowles, Susan Williams. “Of Structure and Society: Tennessee Marble in Civic
Architecture.” PhD diss., Middle Tennessee State University, 2011.
Teng, Hai-Chuan. “Marble Deposits and the Marble Industry of the Knoxville Area.”
Master’s thesis, University of Tennessee, 1948.
Walls, James A. “Holston Marble at Asbury, Tennessee.” Master’s thesis, University
of Tennessee, 1930.
Walters, Joe Parks. “The Marble Industry of the Knoxville Area.” Master’s thesis,
University of Tennessee, 1958.
West, Carroll Van and Susan W. Knowles. “Marble Industry of East Tennessee, Ca.
1838-1963.” National Register of Historic Places Multiple Property
Documentation Form. Nashville, TN: Tennessee Historical Commission,
December 2, 2013.
22