Letter: Russell Beal, Hamilton

Editor:  After reading Margaret Morton’s article “A New Face for History? Mosby Heritage Area Association reconsiders symbol,” it raised a question in my mind.  How do you have a Mosby Heritage Area without Mosby?

It is probably a good idea for the MHAA and other historically related organizations to do some soul searching in the light of recent racially charged events, as to how they may be perceived by the public. Has the MHAA received any negative comments concerning the symbol of the organization (Mosby) that has prompted them to do this, other than Charleston? The article did not say.

As an organization formed around the history of the Piedmont, but specifically named after Col. Mosby and incorporating the specific geographical base of operations of “Mosby’s Confederacy”, how can it now consider divorcing itself from the name or the symbol?

According to the mission statement of the MHAA, which is: “Preservation through Education – to educate about the history and advocate for the preservation of the extraordinary history, culture, and scenery in the Northern Virginia Piedmont for future generations to enjoy”, they have been and are able to study and promote any topic of history and cultural significance that has come to happen in Virginia since the founding of Jamestown.  What’s stopping them?

As for the sign graphic, I have never liked it.  It looks like a high school mascot and is more apropos of how one thinks of Jeb Stuart, rather than Mosby. I think the man astride horse is a fitting logo, but more in the stance suggested by the Jackson statue at Manassas, but without the ridiculous Schwarzenegger-like proportions of that monument. If their Board decides to retire the present logo, then what single, unifying symbol could they come up with to represent the Mosby Area?  There’s the rub.

In my opinion, if they wish to keep an association with the Mosby name, then to me, nothing unifies the Mosby Heritage Area as well as a depiction of Mosby.  Otherwise, it would seem that they would have to scrap the original premise for the organization and would have to come up with some generic name like the Piedmont Historical, Cultural Heritage and Scenic View Preservation Area. It doesn’t have quite the panache as the original.

It will be interesting to see what they decide.

Russell Beal, Hamilton

One thought on “Letter: Russell Beal, Hamilton

  • 2016-02-28 at 10:15 am

    Good letter, and I agree, nothing stops them from touching on any historic aspect of the heritage area.

    Also agreed, that the heritage area was created as the territory in which Mosby operated, and that’s how it was approved. It was all about Mosby, so unless they are going to go back and redo a lot more than the picture…

Leave a Reply