in the mid-19th century — revealing the still close connection between the ideals of art and science during this period.^'' In pro- moting a meeting of art and engineering, Tower's text integrates a history of ancient and modern aqueducts and descriptions not only of the building of the Croton Aqueduct but also the beauty of its surroundings and how it complemented them. For example, he not- ed that the clearing of the area around the Dam and the juxtaposi- tion with man-made art had mitigated the wilderness and added to the area's inherent beauty. While some of Tower's illustrations of the Aqueduct are technical plans, the vast majority are picturesque "views" of the main structures along the route, engraved by well known professional artists from his own ink and wash "sketches taken for my own satisfaction ...."^^ Nearly all partake of the same pictorial and verbal rhetoric — he viewed the Aqueduct as an enhancement of its surroundings, balanced in scale with other ele- ments of the landscape and in harmony with the rural activities which took place uninterrupted around it. The prints depict people walking on country lanes, herding cows, driving rustic carts, paus- ing at work to admire the scene, or engaged in rural recreational pursuits, like fishing or hunting.^" Croton Aqueduct at Clendenning Valley is an especially good example of this pastoral format. Tower's initial drawing for the composition^^ included a lone figure; but in reconceiving the illustration for his book, he, or possibly engraver William J. Bennett, added additional rustic figures and several cows, a quintessential pastoral reference^^ (figsures 44 & 45). Characters were also added to the final versions of Aqueduct Bridge for Roadway, also engraved by Bennett, and Croton Aqueduct at Jewell's Brook, engraved by John William Hill. "I gain information and pleasure by talking with the artists who are at work for me ...," Tower wrote to his brother Charlemagne on December 8, 1842.^^ The engravers he employed included Napoleon Gimbrede and Stephen H. Gimber, as well as Bennett and Hill, all well-established in New York. Bennett's watercolor Fishermen at High Bridge (1844, The New York Public Library) and John William Hill's watercolor of High Bridge (figure 48), exhibited at the American Art-Union in 1848,^'' reveal their continued interest in the Aqueduct as subject matter. Most popular engravings and oil paintings of the Aqueduct dis- play an iconographical pattern similar to that of Tower. But indexes of art exhibitions at the Art-Union and the National Academy of Design suggest only a mild cuhosity on the part of artists in fea- tures of the Aqueduct. A number of works, such as those by Tower's engravers Hill and Bennett, are by artists with specific rea- sons to portray the Aqueduct. For example, Robert Havell, who dis- played his painting of the Dam at the National Academy of Design in 1843, lived in nearby Ossining, one of the Aqueduct communi- ties^^ (figure 14). Only a few pictures suggested the massive scale of the figure 48: John William Hill, High Bridge, c.1848, watercolor on paper Courtesy Richard York Gallery, New York, NY. Photo: Ali Elai Aqueduct or its intrusion over its setting. Tower's own image of the Aqueduct Bridge Sing Sing (figure 16) and a similar oil painting by Frederick Styles, Vieu.' of the Arch and Whitson's Crist Mill (Ossining Historical Society) depicted a point where a massive arch carried the Aqueduct was carried over an existing mill. Yet while this new technology seemed to overwhelm the old, it did accomo- date it. Seemingly more intrigued with the Westchester landscape, Tower illustrated the Reservoirs within the city limits in a much more technical fashion, focusing on the design of the structures. During the early years of the Aqueduct's operation, the Murray Hill Distributing Reservoir, pictured on the verso of the official celebra- tion coin, was one of the most frequently depicted features of the Aqueduct. This Egyptian-style structure was designed by Jervis with an eye to both its efficient water function and its public per- ception. The design emphasized the solidity necessary to contain such a vast amount of water; at the same time it harked back to the great achievements of an ancient civilization which had har- nessed water for irrigation purposes. In this vein, the Evening Post remarked appreciatively: This is the most stupendous mass of masonry we have ever seen, or which probably exists in this country .... the walls are strengthened by pilasters on each corner . . . and by one at the center of each side While a few published views, such as Nathaniel Currier's 1842 lithograph View of the Distributing Reservoir on Murray's Hill — City of New York, used scale and stark composition to emphasize its magnitude, others, such as J. Bornet's 1850 lithograph Croton [Distributing] Reservoir (figure 49)