Opening

In September 2004 John Boucher, a Trustee of the windmill, was introduced to Paul Harrison, a retired headmaster, who had come on a visit to the mill with coach party from the Coventry Centre of the National Trust. He explained he was distantly related to the Shores, who had formerly owned the mill, and possessed a painting that his grandmother, Lucy, had formerly had on her kitchen wall. The painting was unsigned, he said, but someone had pencilled on the back “Heage Windmill, possibly by Charles J Voss, about 1910”. However, when Paul said “I’m not sure about that, it doesn’t look like this mill, it only has four sails” John immediately pricked up his ears. Could it be a painting of the mill before 1894, when the windshaft broken and the previous four patent sails blew off and were replaced by the present six? We had been searching for such a picture for years!

A well known photograph of the1894 disaster shows a very disconsolate miller standing amongst the wreckage of his tail winded mill, with bits of the four patent sails strewn around. Careful examination suggests that the cap at that time was a boat shaped cap, which is supported by a rather blurred early photograph taken from some distance away at the bottom of the hill in Nether Heage. John arranged to meet Paul and soon afterwards had the opportunity to see the painting at Paul’s home in Worcestershire.

The watercolour painting on the wall was quite small, only about the size of a modern A4 sheet, but of remarkable accuracy and clarity, clearly very much older than 1910 but also quite clearly Heage Windmill! The artist was obviously a skilled draughtsman, using sharp detailed linework, and it was very nicely coloured as well and provided a detailed view of the windmill. But the biggest surprise of it all was that not only was it Heage Mill with four sails, it had an altogether different type of sail to the ones we had previously been aware of. It recorded a previous generation of sails, probably the ones originally fitted in 1797. Four common sails, furled cloths, windshaft with poll end and sail stocks, boat cap with finial and a curious platform at the rear, and much more. The drying kiln was in good condition, complete with doors and original roof. There were also clear signs that the mill tower had been rendered all over, a common building practice in those days when using inferior quality stone, something we had detected in a survey of mill. All details of which we had not previously been aware!

In the painting, the mill looks to be in a rather run down condition, suggesting that it was by no means new and had already had a good life. Although the sails are complete the mill does not look very active judging from the overgrown narrow state of the only track leading to it. Hardly in regular use by horses and carts! The surmise is that it was painted about 1850, possibly at the time the Shores purchased the mill, and shows it just before it was modernised under the new ownership, and refurbished with new windshaft, advanced design patent sails, and fantail winding.

(Paul kindly agreed to deposit a high quality copy of his picture with the national Mill Archive, while retaining his copyright -www.millarchive.com)

		Description	Comments
1		Sails
	a	The sails are common sails, fastened on to stocks.	The sail frames appear to be rather warped with age, and the weather angles are slightly wrong (note also the shadow of a sail on the cap roof). Assuming that they are drawn accurately (everything else is), the performance of the mill would be impaired which may explain its apparent lack of use at that time.
	b	Sail cloth is furled on the sails.	Suggests mill is in working order.
	c	Stocks are used.	Suggests poll end canister to windshaft, not visible in the picture. (?possibly timber windshaft?)
2		Cap
	a	Boat shape cap, weatherboarded	Note corners of cap trimmed away. Skirt or petticoat vertically boarded with Iron strap around.
	b	Finial to cap	Unusual detail, I only know three others like this on boat caps (Gentleshaw, Norton Lindsey and Swannington), all midlands mills.
	c	Platform at rear, cantilevering out above tail ends of sheers.	Unusual detail, purpose not clear. Has palisaded guard rail or fence around the edge and slatted floor, but does not appear to hold any equipment. This detail is rare, although William Turner’s painting of Halnaker Mill, Sussex, shows it, and Meir Heath Mill in Staffordshire had a somewhat similar platform in conjunction with a tailpole for winding.
	d	Lack of winding mechanism	There does not seem to be sufficient clearance around the mill for tailpole winding, and there is no evidence of a ‘Y’ wheel for chain winding. Could it have been hand winded from rear platform?
3		Tower
	a	Stone had been completely rendered.	Previously suspected to have had some later render on weather face, not anticipated that it was all over. A common practice in local vernacular building to protect inferior quality stone. Presumably lime render – poor quality? – was it also lime washed to give it a white finish?
	b	Masonry showing beneath render	Fairly accurately drawn, correct no. of courses to depth of window.
	c	Windows gritstone casings with iron bars.	Traces of bars run with lead into sockets in the stone remain. Appears to predate fitting of glazed windows. Not clear how openings were weatherproofed.
4		Drying kiln
	a	Generally	Confirms that the shape and proportions of the reconstructed kiln are accurate.
	b	Roofing material	Drawn rather wavering for tiles but too fine for stone flags. Probably tiled, but rather a mystery.
	c	Ridge ventilator.	The small ridge ventilator about one third the way along from the left seems too small for a smoke flue, but there is no other chimney.
	d	Entrance doors and steps	Two doors on east end – full size door to drying floor, small door to basement (for firing??) Flight of steps down to main door must have required much man-handling of grain in sacks.
5		External
	a	Stone flags outside east entrance door.	Confirmation of the buried stone paving found during investigations. Paving still insitu, but now buried again.
	b	Cart way and loading bay in front of east door	Now filled in – no visible evidence remains.
	c	Stone copings and gate forming path to mill door.	These are just discernable in 1894 disaster photograph.
	d	Path or cart track to mill	The divided track (two wheel ruts) appears to go towards the field gate off the picture to the right. The path leading to the mill is single file width and less used. ??This suggests that the mill was little used at the time of the painting.? No deliveries to the mill by cart??