I think what has been offered is not only that there were mines in the area, but that many of the First Colonists had iron working in their particular family, i.e. Fischbach, Holtzclaw, Hofmann, Coontz and Otterbach. I think that what you have in this group of people is the knowledge of mines and mining--their fathers, grandfathers, great grandfathers and further back were in this business and they knew it well. At least half of the immigrants had this knowledge, the other half were tradesmen, i.e. carpenters, blacksmiths, window maker, etc. There are at least two that we do not know what their occupation was, who's to say that they weren't miners? I agree that no proof of this is forthcoming, but ya never know. As to the question of the viability of the iron industry in the Siegen area, BC Holtzclaw states: "From the 14th to the 19th century, Nassau-Siegen was on the whole a very prosperous country, with a balanced economy, of which the iron industry was the backbone." He also does discuss the Guilds, in particular the Guild of Smelterers and Hammersmiths: "The Count and the nobility of Nassau-Siegen were at first active in founding such iron-works (water power revolutionized the iron industry in the 13th century), but they very soon passed into the hands of worker-owners. These were banded together in the Guild of Smelterers and Hammersmiths, of which the members mostly lived in the country near their plants, unlike most of the members of the other guilds, who lived in the cities of Siegen, Freudenberg and Hilchenbach. This tended to break down the distinction between the citizens of a city and the peasants, and to induce an independent and democratic spirit among the Siegerlaender which has persisted to this day." He goes on to discuss the fact that the iron works didn't operate all year long, that they depended on water power and charcoal--"Thus the ironworks owners nearly always engaged in farming in addition to their work in the iron industry, and the farmers frequently became part owners of the iron works, through intermarriage. The ironworks also increased the available land or farming, through draining swamps and carrying off the water in their canals. Thus there was a rather balanced economy between farming, iron production and the city guilds, particularly the Guild of Steelsmiths and Toolmakers." "Nassau-Siegen became noted for its iron products, which were exported all over Germany during the 15th to the 18th centuries, in the form of stoves, cannon, and many other smaller articles. In 1555 the Guild of Smelters and Hammersmiths, along with the allied guilds in Siegen, were strong enough to pay 21,000 Gulden to Count William the Rich, on condition that neither the Count nor the lesser nobility would found any further iron works; and that the ironworks existing in that year should not be increased, but should remain in the hands of the owners and their descendants." So, as to the question put forth by John B, I don't think that any one of the First Colony were "miners", but they had knowledge of the mining industry and they must have passed for miners because it appears they were brought here to mine. And they did just that, they built a mine and they mined it. Barb Price In a message dated 11/10/2008 19:06:44 Pacific Standard Time, holtzclaw.research@yahoo.com writes: This is the fifth message in two days that has not gone through. I am resending this. ----- Forwarded Message ---- From: Suzanne Matson <holtzclaw.research@yahoo.com> To: Germanna Colonies <GERMANNA_COLONIES@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, November 10, 2008 7:00:00 PM Subject: Miners and mining John Blankenbaker asked for proof that members of the First Colony were miners. None has been presented. So I would propose that they were not miners. What has been presented is the presence of iron furnaces, etc in or near the home villages of the First Colony. These are two different issues. Yes, there was mining in the Siegen area--but does that automatically mean that everyone from that area was a miner? I don't think so. As an example, both of my grandfathers were farmers.. My father was a business owner and my mother a homemaker--note--neither were farmers. Yes, they were familiar with farming but they were not farmers. I, as a granddaughter, am also familiar with farming since I spent much of my childhood rambling around my grandfathers' farms. I am not a farmer but I am familiar with farming. So everyone in the First Colony could probably have claimed some familiarity with mining but that did not make them miners. I would like to know if, in that time, membership in a guild meant that you actually were working in the mines or did it confer some type of social status--or both. That might help disprove or prove some of the assumptions made about our ancestors. Another example--the Ironmongers of London have long ceased to have anything to do with ironwork because the work moved outside London proper where they had no control. Today, the Ironmongers still exist and is a patrimonial group with limited membership (about 230, I think). Today, they manage their assets-financial and real estate. No mention is made of their various careers and jobs. Assuming that at some point in the distant past, these members had a ironmonger ancestor, it does not necessarily follow that today they would still be working with iron. Suzanne Collins Matson ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GERMANNA_COLONIES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message **************AOL Search: Your one stop for directions, recipes and all other Holiday needs. Search Now. (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100000075x1212792382x1200798498/aol?redir=http://searchblog.aol.com/2008/11/04/happy-holidays-from -aol-search/?ncid=emlcntussear00000001)