Historical geography of the southern charcoal iron industry, 1800-1860

The purposes of this study are to show the changes in the pattern of pig iron production and to determine the role that competition in the iron trade and depletion of timber played in the demise of the southern charcoal iron industry. The study also examines the changing pattern of iron ore and charcoal consumption, size and economic components of the iron plantation, and labor necessary to conduct the industry. The compatibility of the industry and the agricultural regime is demonstrated, and markets for pig iron are identified. These topics are systematically discussed by iron district, including the (1) Virginia, (2) Western, (3) Hanging Rock, and (4) Upland South districts.

The dominant method employed is historical, covering the period from 1800 to 1860. However, a temporal transition into the postbellum period is employed for the Hanging Rock and Upland South districts. The basic sources of data are manuscript records of families engaged in the industry and the manuscript and published censuses. Maps, graphs, and tables are used extensively to give order to the manuscript data.

Pig iron production of the southern iron districts, accounting for 29% of the nation's output in 1840, represented a declining share of U.S. production during the 1840's. The causes and periods of decline differ for each iron district; however, competition in the iron trade was the overriding factor. The primary and secondary data over-whelmingly support the hypothesis that the demise could be largely explained by the inability of ironmasters to compete for markets.

Another cause commonly given for the industry's demise is the depletion of timber. This study, however, presents data to support the hypothesis that depletion of timber was a cause for the failure of furnaces at specific sites, but it was not a principal factor in the regional demise during the antebellum era.

Finally, the study concludes that the success of the southern charcoal iron industry was partly explained by its compatibility with the agricultural regime. In addition to coordinating iron making and farming, ironmasters were engaged in an interchange with the farmer and planter, giving rise to agricultural settlement and development.