Bradford’s Account of the Wreck.—His Visit to the Scene
of the Disaster.—The Passengers and Crew received at
Plymouth.—Tradition of the Name “Sparrow-Hawk.”—Extracts from
the Work of Amos Otis, Esq.—Recovery and Saving of the Wreck.
We now proceed to give the history of the ancient ship according to the
chronological order of events. The reader’s attention is invited to the
following interesting and important extract from “Bradford’s History of
Plymouth Plantations, A. D. 1626–7,” MS. p. 146:—
“Ther is one thing that fell out in yᵉ begining of yᵉ winter
before, which I have refferred to this place, that I may handle
yᵉ whole matter togeither. Ther was a ship, with many passengers
in her and sundrie goods, bound for Virginia. They had lost them
selves at sea, either by yᵉ insufficiencie of yᵉ maister, or his
ilnes; for he was sick & lame of yᵉ scurvie, so that he could
but lye in yᵉ cabin dore & give direction; and it should seeme
was badly assisted either wᵗʰ mate or mariners; or else yᵉ
fear and unrulines of yᵉ passengers were such, as they made them
stear a course betweene yᵉ southwest & yᵉ norwest, that they
might fall with some land, what soever it was they cared not. For
they had been 6. weeks at sea, and had no water, nor beere, nor
any woode left, but had burnt up all their emptie caske; only
one of yᵉ company had a hogshead of wine or 2. which was allso
allmost spente, so as they feared they should be starved at sea, or
consumed with diseases, which made them rune this desperate course.
But it plased God that though they came so neare yᵉ shoulds of
Cap-Codd [147] or else ran stumbling over them in yᵉ night,
they knew not how, they came right before a small blind harbore
that lyes aboute yᵉ midle of Manamoyake Bay to yᵉ Southward of
Cap-Codd, with a small gale of wind; and about highwater toucht
upon a barr of sand that lyes before it, but had no hurte, yᵉ sea
being smoth; so they laid out an anchore. But towards the evēing,
the winde sprunge up at sea, and was so rough, as broake their
cable, & beat them over the barr into yᵉ harbor, wher they saved
their lives & goods, though much were hurte with salt water; for
wᵗʰ beating they had sprung yᵉ but end of a planke or too,
& beat out their occome; but they were soone over, and ran on a
drie slate within the harbor, close by a beach; so at low water
they gatt out their goods on drie shore, and dried those that were
wette, and saved most of their things without any great loss;
neither was yᵉ ship much hurt, but shee might be mended, and made
servisable againe. But though they were not a litle glad that they
had thus saved their lives, yet when they had a litle refreshed
them selves, and begane to thinke on their condition, not knowing
wher they were, nor what they should doe, they begane to be
strucken with sadnes. But shortly after they saw some Indians come
to them in canows, which made them stand upon their gard. But when
they heard some of yᵉ Indeans speake English unto them, they were
not a litle revived, especially when they heard them demand if they
were the Goveʳ of Plimoths men, or freinds; and yᵗ they would
bring them to yᵉ English houses, or carry their letters.
“They feasted these Indeans, and gave them many giftes; and sente
2. men and a letter with them to yᵉ Goveʳ, and did intreat him
to send a boat unto them, with some pitch, & occume, and spiks,
wᵗʰ divers other necessaries for yᵉ mending of ther ship (which
was recoverable). Allso they besought him to help them with some
corne and sundrie other things they wanted, to enable them to make
their viage to Virginia; and they should be much bound to him, and
would make satisfaction for any thing they had, in any comodities
they had abord. After yᵉ Govʳ was well informed by yᵉ messengers
of their condition, he caused a boate to be made ready, and such
things to be provided as they write for; and because others were
abroad upon trading, and such other affairs, as had been fitte to
send unto them, he went him selfe, & allso carried some trading
comodities, to buy them corne of yᵉ Indeans. “It was no season of
yᵉ year to goe withoute yᵉ Cape, but understanding wher yᵉ ship
lay, he went into yᵉ bottom of yᵉ bay, on yᵉ inside, and put into
a crick called Naumskachett,[4] wher it is not much above 2. mile
over [148] land to yᵉ bay wher they were, wher he had yᵉ Indeans
ready to cary over any thing to them. Of his arrivall they were
very glad, and received the things to mend ther ship, & other
necessaries. Allso he bought them as much corne as they would
have; and wheras some of their sea-men were rune away among yᵉ
Indeans, he procured their returne to yᵉ ship, and so left them
well furnished and contented, being very thankfull for yᵉ curtesies
they receaved. But after the Goveʳ thus left them, he went into
some other harbors ther aboute, and loaded his boate with corne,
which he traded, and so went home. But he had not been at home many
days, but he had notice from them, that by the violence of a great
storme, and yᵉ bad morring of their ship (after she was mended) she
was put a shore, and so beatten and shaken as she was now wholy
unfitte to goe to sea.[5] And so their request was that they might
have leave to repaire to them, and soujourne with them, till they
could have means to convey them selves to Virginia; and that they
might have means to trāsport their goods, and they would pay for
yᵉ fame, or any thing els wher with yᵉ plantation should releeve
them. Considering their distres, their requests were granted, and
all helpfullnes done unto them; their goods transported, and them
selves & goods sheltered in their houses as well as they could.
“The cheefe amongst these people was one Mʳ. Fells and Mʳ. Sibsie
which had many servants belonging unto them, many of them being
Irish. Some others ther were yᵗ had a servante or 2. a peece; but
yᵉ most were servants, and such as were ingaged to the former
persons, who allso had yᵉ most goods. Affter they were hither come,
and some thing setled, the maisters desired some ground to imploye
ther servants upon; seing it was like to be yᵉ latter end of yᵉ
year before they could have passage for Virginia, and they had now
yᵉ winter before them; they might clear some ground and plant a
crope, (seeing they had tools & necessaries for yᵉ same) to help
to bear their charge, and keep their servants in imployment; and
if they had oppertunitie to departe before the same was ripe, they
would sell it on yᵉ ground. So they had ground appointed them in
convenient places, and Fells & some other of them raised a great
deall of corne, which they sould at their departure.”
The historian here details some domestic infelicities of Mr. Fells in
consequence of which the Plymouth Pilgrims
“pact him away & those that belonged unto him by the first
oppertunitie, and dismiste all the rest as soone as could, being
many untoward people amongst them; though ther were allso some that
caried them selves very orderly all yᵉ time they stayed. And the
plantation [149] had some benefite by them, in selling them corne
& other provisions of food for cloathing; for they had of diverse
kinds, as cloath, perpetuanes, & other stuffs, besids hose, &
shoes, and such like comodities as yᵉ planters stood in need of. So
they both did good, and received good one from another; and a cuple
of barks caried them away at yᵉ later end of somer. And sundrie of
them have acknowledged their thankfullnes since from Virginia.”
To the account of the loss of the ship, Freeman’s “History of Cape Cod;
Annals,” &c., appends the following note:
“The beach where this ship was wrecked was thenceforward called
“The Old Ship.” The remains of the wreck were visible many years.”
The January number of the N. E. Historical and Genealogical Register
for 1864 (p. 37) contains an able article by AMOS OTIS, Esq., in
which allusion is made to the tradition that the name of the old ship
was “Sparrow-Hawk.” Mr. Otis speaks of this tradition as uncertain.
We will give the tradition as it is, and leave it to make its own
impression on our readers. A family by the name of Sparrow has long
resided in the close vicinity of the Old Ship Harbor. The first settler
of the name, Mr. Jonathan Sparrow, bought the land, where the family
now live, in 1675. The present proprietor, Mr. James L. Sparrow, states
that it had been “handed down” from father to son that there was an old
ship buried in the sand in Potanumaquut Harbor in the early days of the
colony, and that its name was “Sparahawk,” or “Sparrow-Hawk.”
Mr. Otis remarks, that “the evidence which seems to prove beyond a
reasonable doubt that those remains belong to the ship which Gov.
Bradford informs us was lost in Potanumaquut harbor in the winter
of 1626–7 ... is principally based on the geological changes that
have occurred on the coast, since its discovery. Archer’s account of
Gosnold’s voyage around the Cape, in 1602, and of the appearance of
the coast, is so unlike anything seen by the modern mariner, that his
relation has been considered a myth or traveller’s tale, unreliable and
unworthy of credence. Geological inquiries may seem out of place in a
historical and genealogical journal; but if they do nothing more, they
will verify the accuracy of Archer’s descriptions, and thus aid us in
our investigations of the truths of history.
“The accounts of the wrecked ship in Morton and Prince, are copied
from Bradford. Morton is not careful in his dates, but he informs us
that the master was a Scotchman, named Johnston, a fact not stated
by Bradford. Mr. Prince with his accustomed accuracy, states that a
ship was lost in the beginning of the winter [December], 1626. Gov.
Bradford’s description of the place where the ship was lost, would be
perfectly clear and distinct if the configuration of the coast was the
same now as it was when he wrote. Namaskachet Creek remains, but Isle
Nauset, Points Care and Gilbert, have been swept away by the waves and
currents of the ocean. Where Monamoick Bay was, there is a straight
line of sea-coast; where an open sea then was, now long beaches meet
the eye; and where were navigable waters, now we see sandy wastes and
salt meadows.
“Such remarkable changes having been made in the configuration of this
coast since its discovery by Gosnold, and its examination by Smith, in
1614, is it surprising that the knowledge of the location of “Old Ship
Harbor” should have been lost, or that the readers of Bradford should
have been unable to determine where Monamoick Bay was?
“Prof. Agassiz, of Cambridge, in company with the writer and others,
has recently made a careful geological examination of the eastern coast
of the towns of Eastham, Orleans, and Chatham.... The result was a
verification of the accuracy of Archer’s description of the coast.
“This examination enables me to draw an outline map of the coast as it
was in 1602, and in 1626. I have also a map of the harbors, beaches,
and salt meadows as they were, and as they now are.” [V. map, p. 14.]
In Gov. Bradford’s account, which we have already quoted, he says
that “he landed on Naumskachett creek” on the inside of the bay.
From the fact that the distance from this creek, which now forms
a part of the boundary line between Brewster and Orleans, to the
navigable waters of Potanumaquut is about two miles,—as stated by
Bradford,—while to Nauset harbor, the distance is greater, Mr. Otis
considers it proved “beyond controversy that Potanumaquut was the
harbor into which the ship ‘stumbled.’”
We quote from Mr. Otis, the facts in relation to the discovery:
“On the 6th of May, 1863, Messrs. Solomon Linnell, 2d, and Alfred
Rogers, of Orleans, were on Nauset Beach, and discovered portions
of a wreck. Mr. Linnell was at the same place on the 4th, when no
part of the wreck was visible. This proves that it was uncovered
between the 4th and 6th of May, 1863. When first discovered, it was
partially covered with the marsh mud in which the wreck had been
embedded. On removing some of the mud, they found a quantity of
charcoal, and the appearance of the timbers and planks indicated
that the vessel of which these were the remains had been burnt.[6]
On Saturday, May 9, Leander Crosby, Esq., visited the wreck, and
collected a quantity of beef and mutton bones; several soles of
shoes, probably made for sandals; a smoking pipe of the kind used
by smokers of opium; and a metallic box.”
Dr. Benj. F. Seabury and John Doane, Jr., afterwards visited the wreck,
and found the rudder lying a few feet distant; this they removed, and
it is now deposited in the hall of the Pilgrim society, at Plymouth.
Messrs. Seabury and Doane took measurements of the ship, and public
attention was now drawn to a consideration of the subject.
“The peculiar model of the wreck excited the curiosity of the
people, and although four miles from the village, it was visited
by hundreds, and each one took a fragment as a memento of his
visit. At the time the writer was there the current had swept out
a basin in the sand around the wreck, and it being low tide, every
part excepting the keel could be examined. One striking part was
immediately noticed by everyone,—the long, tail-like projection
at the stern. The oldest sailor never saw a vessel built on
that model, she must have had, to use a nautical expression, “a
clean run,” and have been a good sea-boat.... She had been most
carefully built. The frames were placed side by side.... There
were twenty-three regular frames remaining, or forty-six timbers,
not counting the six at the stern. At the bow several frames were
missing. The planks were fastened with spikes and treenails, in the
same manner as at the present time. Some of the treenails had been
wedged after they were first driven, showing that some repairs had
been made.
“The timbers and planks of the old ship are very sound, there
is no appearance of rot. There are no barnacles upon them, they
are not eaten by worms, and there is no indication that they have
been for any considerable length of time exposed to the action of
the elements. The spikes, bolts and other fastenings of iron have
entirely disappeared, ... rust had gradually consumed them, and
discolored sand indicated the places where the iron once was. The
wreck was embedded in marsh mud and covered deeply in sand. Under
such circumstances air was almost wholly excluded, and oxidation
must have been slow.
“Though called a ship, she had only one mast, and that as shown by
the mortise in the keelson, was nearly midship.”
“In August last, the wreck was again covered with sand, and is
now buried several feet below the surface, where it may remain
undiscovered for ages. Centuries hence some plodding antiquarian
may labor to prove it to be the same I have described in this
article.[7]
“One point remains to be considered. Is the wreck recently discovered
a part of Capt. Johnston’s ship, lost in 1626? The reader will look at
his map. ‘Ile Nawset’ was of the drift formation, hilly, and in some
parts rocky. No part of it now remains. About fifty years ago, a small
portion of it, called Slut’s Bush, had not washed away. The sand on
its shores, and most of which has been washed by the currents from the
north, has blown inward by the winds, covering the meadows within, and
in some places filling the navigable channels and harbors on the west.
In some places the waves of the ocean have swept across the beach, and
transported immense quantities of sand to the meadows in a single tide.”
“The wreck of the Old Ship is on the second lot of the Potanumaquut
meadows.[8] This was always known as the Old Ship lot, but why it
was so called no one could explain. Now the reason is apparent. The
position of the wreck has not probably changed since it sunk in the
place where it now lies. At low tide there are about two feet of water
around it, showing that at high water there was a sufficient depth to
have floated a vessel of seventy tons burthen. Every portion of the
wreck is below the surface of the meadows. These two facts prove that
this vessel was not cast away upon a beach nor on the meadows.
“At the present time a wreck sunk in such a situation would be covered
with sand and mud in the course of a month. Similar causes existed
then, and it is safe to assume that Capt. Johnston’s vessel was covered
up very soon after she was lost.
“Salt meadows do not form on a shore where a surf beats, or where a
strong current exists. While the ancient entrance to the harbor was
open, there was such a current on the west or inside of Isle Nauset,
which prevented the formation of salt meadow near the wreck. After
the closing of the old entrance, the current turned west of Pochett
and Sampson’s islands, and found an outlet through Pleasant bay,
to Chatham harbor, thus leaving a body of still water favorable to
the rapid formation of salt meadows. This view is confirmed by the
Eastham records. That town was settled in 1646, and in the early
division of meadows, the Potanumaquut are not named. As salt meadows
were considered more valuable then, than at the present time, it is
surprising that they are not named till 1750, if they had then existed.
“Records cannot be quoted to prove the antiquity of this wreck, neither
can it be proved by living witnesses; we necessarily have to rely on
other testimony. That the rust had entirely consumed all the iron used
in its construction is evidence of its antiquity. The position of the
wreck in reference to navigable waters, to the salt meadows, and to the
beaches is reliable testimony.
“Now _it is perfectly certain_ that this wreck must have been in its
present position since the year 1750, or 113 years, for since that
date there have been no navigable waters within a quarter of a mile of
the spot where it lies. _It is also certain_ that it must have been in
its present position during all that period, prior to 1750, while the
meadows were forming around it, and on the west. If it is admitted that
those meadows are of recent formation, one hundred years would be a low
estimate, making the whole time 213 years.
“If it be said that the Potanumaquut meadows belong to the older and
not to the recent formation, it proves too much; it proves that the
wreck has been in its present position many centuries—that it is
the remains of an old ship in which the Northmen, or other ancient
navigators sailed.
“The position of this wreck in reference to the salt meadows and to the
beach, is the best possible evidence of its antiquity. If driven there
it must have been by a westerly wind, which would cause a low tide.
Admitting that the vessel of which this wreck is the remains, was, by
some unknown cause, forced on the meadows, how was the wreck buried
below the line of the surface?
“To suppose that she was so buried on hard meadows by natural causes
is an impossibility. That the wreck was there first, and the meadows
formed over it, seems a self-evident truth, and judging from the rate
at which similar meadows have formed, two hundred and thirty-seven
years is not an unreasonable length of time to assign for the formation
of the Potanumaquut meadows, and consequently the length of time that
the wreck of the Old Ship, at Orleans, has remained in its present
position.
“Those who are not aware of the remarkable geological changes that have
occurred on the eastern coast of Cape Cod since its discovery, doubt
the truthfulness of Archer, who was the historian of Gosnold’s voyages.
I have in this article assumed that he was a careful and an accurate
observer, and faithfully recorded what he saw. Great geological changes
make their own records; they leave in the strata and in the various
deposits, the footprints which the scientific student of nature can
trace and follow.
“Cape Cod was discovered by Bartholomew Gosnold, May 15th, 1602, O.
S. He anchored at first near the end of the Cape, which he called
Shoal Hope, but afterwards changed to the name it has since retained.
Afterwards he anchored in the harbor, in latitude 42°. On the 16th
he sailed round the Cape. After proceeding twelve leagues in this
circuitous course, he descried a point of land ‘a good distance off’
with shoals near it. He ‘kept his luff’ to double it, and after passing
it ‘bore up again with the land’ and at night anchored, where he
remained that night and the following day, May 17.
“He saw many shoals in that vicinity, and ‘another point that lay in
his course.’ On the 18th he sent a boat to sound around the point, and
on the 19th passed around it in four or five fathoms and anchored a
league or somewhat more beyond it, in latitude 41° 40′.
“Nothing is named in this account that the most careless observer would
not have seen and noted. When he discovered the first point he was
off Eastham, a little north of the beach where the ‘Three Lights’ are
now located. He saw the danger, and like a prudent mariner kept his
luff to avoid it. The shoal he called Tucker’s Terror, the headland,
Point Care. After passing Point Care he bore up again to the mainland.
This description of the coast is simple and truthful. To determine the
exact position of Point Care, is attended with some difficulty. That it
was the north end headland of the island named by Capt John Smith ‘Ile
Nawset,’ there appears to be no reason to doubt. The only difficulty
is in determining precisely where the north end of that island was
in 1602. The northern end of it, which persons living remember, was
opposite the present entrance to Nauset Harbor. In 1602 it probably
extended half a mile further north, that is, as far north as the low
beach extended, that persons now living remember. John Doane, Esq., now
seventy years of age, was born in the immediate vicinity of Point Care,
his father and grandfather, in fact all his ancestors from the first
settlement, owned the land and meadows between Ile Nawset and the main.
He says that within his recollection Point Care has worn away about
half a mile. When his grandfather was a boy, Point Care extended much
further into the ocean than it did when he was young.”
These are not vague and uncertain recollections. Mr. Doane points to
monuments, and the exact distance that the ocean encroached on the
land within his recollection can be ascertained. He states that fifty
years ago a beach extended from the present entrance of Nauset harbor
half a mile north, where the entrance then was. Within this beach his
father owned ten acres of salt meadows, on which he for several years
assisted him in cutting and raking the hay. Now where that beach was
there are three or four fathoms of water, and where the meadows were is
a sand bar on which the waves continually break, and make Nauset harbor
difficult of access. Within his memory the north beach, connected
with Eastham shore, has extended south one mile, and the whole beach
has moved inward about its width, say one fourth of a mile. Formerly
there were navigable waters between Nauset and Potanumaquut harbors.
It is about a century since vessels have passed through, and about
fifty years since the passage was entirely closed. This is caused by
the moving of Nauset beach inward. Dunes always travel inward, never
outward, let the direction be what it may.
“Mr. Doane says that his grandfather informed him, that when he was
young, a rocky, swampy piece of land, known as Slut’s Bush, was about
in the middle of Isle Nauset; that many berries grew there, and that
he had repeatedly been there to pick them. When the present John Doane
was a lad, only the western edge of this swamp remained. The roots of
the trees and bushes that grew there ran under and between the rocks
and stones, and when the waves undermined the rocks, the whole, rocks,
stumps and roots, settled together. Slut’s Bush is now some distance
from the shore, in deep water; vessels pass over it, and on a calm day
the stumps and roots may be seen at the bottom. The fisherman sometimes
gets his line entangled with them and pulls them up. During violent
gales of wind they are sometimes loosened and driven to the shore.
“Beyond Slut’s Bush, about three miles from the shore, there is a
similar ledge called Beriah’s Ledge, probably formed in precisely
the same manner as Slut’s Bush ledge is known to have been formed.
Six nautical miles south of Point Care, Gosnold discovered another
headland, which he named Point Gilbert. Archer furnishes us with all
the particulars respecting the soundings, the straits, his passing
round it, and anchoring a league or more beyond, in latitude 41° 40′.
We have historical and circumstantial evidence that Point Gilbert
existed in 1602; it united with the main land at James Head, near
Chatham lights. From James Head on its south shore, it extended nine
miles on an east-by-south course, to its eastern terminus, afterwards
known as Webb’s Island, situate where Crabb’s Ledge now is. Cape Care
was worn away by the gradual abrasion of the waves; over Point Gilbert
the sea, during a violent gale, swept, carrying away long sections in
a single day. The inner ledge on the line of Point Gilbert is known as
Island Ledge, and the name indicates that the sea broke over the point
at two places about the same time. Rev. Dr. Morse states that Webb’s
island at one time contained fifteen acres of rocky land covered with
wood from which the early inhabitants of Nantucket procured fuel.[9]
The process which has been described as having occurred at Slut’s Bush
ledge also occurred at Crabb and Island ledges; the stumps and roots of
the trees were carried down by the superincumbent rocks. Mr. Joshua
Y. Bearse, who resided many years at Monamoit point, and has all his
life been familiar with the shoals and ledges near Chatham, informs
me that it is very difficult to obtain an anchor lost near either of
these ledges; the sweeps used catch against the rocks and stumps at the
bottom where the water is four fathoms deep. He also states that after
the violent gale in 1851, during which the sea broke over Nauset Beach
where the ancient entrance to Potanumaquut harbor was, and where the
entrance to Chatham harbor was in 1775, with a force which seems almost
incredible, sweeping away banks of earth twenty feet high, cutting
channels therein five fathoms deep, moving the sea around to its very
bottom, and tearing up the old stumps which had been there more than a
century,—Mr. Bearse states that more than one hundred of these drifted
during that gale to the shore at Monamoit beach, and that he picked
them up for fuel. A part of these were stumps that bore the marks of
the axe, but the greater part were broken or rotted off.
“These old stumps did not grow under the water; they did not float to
the positions from which they were dragged up; they grew in a compact
rocky soil overlying a loose sand. The waves and the currents removed
the loose substratum, and the rocks and the stumps went down together
into the deep water where they are now found. From the place where
Gosnold anchored, a league or more from Point Gilbert, there was an
open sea to the southwest. Monamoit beach, which projects out eight
miles south from Morris island, did not then exist; there was nothing
there to impede navigation.”
[“Prof. Agassiz who is the author of the geological theory which the
accompanying map delineates, furnishes us with the following note,
dated Cambridge, December 17, 1863.
“Surprising and perhaps incredible as the statements of Mr. Amos Otis
may appear, they are nevertheless the direct and natural inference
of observations which may easily be made along the eastern coast of
Cape Cod. Having of late felt a special interest in the geological
structure of that remarkable region, I have repeatedly visited it
during the last summer, and in company with Mr. Otis examined on
one occasion with the most minute care, the evidence of the former
existence of Isle Nauset and Point Gilbert. I found it as satisfactory
as any geological evidence can be. Besides its scientific interest,
this result has some historical importance. At all events it fully
vindicates Archer’s account of the aspect of Cape Cod, at the time
of its discovery in 1602, and shows him to have been a truthful and
accurate observer.—Editor.”]
It only remains to state the facts in regard to the final recovery
and saving of the wreck. Messrs. Leander Crosby and John Doane, Jr.,
assisted by Solomon Linnell, 2d, Alfred Rogers, and others, conveyed
the planks and timbers, at various times, to the upland. One mass,
including the keel and thirteen timbers, was thrown out by the sea, and
was at once secured. The whole was collected together, on the premises
of Mr. Crosby, whence it was conveyed to Boston, and the pieces
restored to their original position, as already related, by Messrs.
Dolliver and Sleeper.
APPENDIX
The publishers of this pamphlet have, in a few instances in the course
of the work, made use of the traditional name, “Sparrow-Hawk.” Perhaps
nice historical accuracy would object to this; but our readers, we
doubt not, will excuse us, on the ground that in speaking of a person
or a ship it is very convenient to make use of some proper name: and
we have, therefore, used the appellation which finds its basis in a
tradition of the vicinity where the wreck was found. (_V._ p. 25.)
The house of Miles Standish at Captain’s Hill, in Duxbury, was
destroyed by fire about the year 1665. In 1856, James Hall, Esq.,
the proprietor of the Miles Standish estate, caused the rubbish to
be removed from the cellar; here he found several pipes, once no
doubt the property of the redoubtable Captain. Two of these have been
kindly loaned by Mr. Hall to the proprietors of the ancient wreck; and
on comparing them with the pipes found in the wreck, they are seen
to be almost exactly alike, even to a series of small indentations
surrounding the top of the bowl. This curious similarity serves to
indicate the age of the ship, and were there no other clew, would
assure us that her date is to be assigned to the time of the Pilgrims.
To remove from the public mind any distrust as to the genuineness of
the relic whose history is related in the preceding pages, we insert
below testimony from various sources, including letters from gentlemen
whose names are widely known and honored.
BOSTON, Oct. 12, 1865.
CHAS. W. LIVERMORE AND LEANDER CROSBY, ESQS.
_Gentlemen_,—It is not surprising that a portion of the public
look with suspicion upon the statement that you have in your
possession the wreck of a vessel which was stranded on Cape Cod
some two hundred and forty years ago. To assist you in removing
such suspicion, which we regard as unfounded, permit us to say,
that after a careful examination of the wreck itself; after
investigating the circumstances of its position and condition when
found, and the traditions concerning it; after collating with
these the several accounts contained in the Histories of Governor
Bradford, Secretary Morton, and Prince, the annalist,—we have been
led irresistibly to the conclusion that the “Old Ship” has the
antiquity which you claim for it, and are of opinion that it is the
identical wreck visited by Governor Bradford in 1626,—as narrated
by him in his history of Plymouth Plantation, page 217. The wreck
we regard as a remarkable curiosity, and well worthy a visit by all
who are in any degree interested in our early colonial history.
NATH. B. SHURTLEFF.
CHARLES DEANE.
RICHARD FROTHINGHAM.
HENRY M. DEXTER.
ROBT. C. WINTHROP.
JOHN G. PALFREY.
RICHARD H. DANA, JR.
WINSLOW LEWIS.
[For the information of persons resident in other States, who may
not be informed in regard to these gentlemen, we would say, that
Dr. Nathaniel B. Shurtleff is thoroughly versed in all matters of
colonial history, is a member of the Board of Overseers of Harvard
College, and also a member of the Massachusetts Historical Society;
Charles Deane, Esq., is a prominent member of the Massachusetts
Historical Society, and editor of Bradford’s “History of Plymouth
Plantation,” which contains the original account of the wreck of
the old ship; the Hon. Richard Frothingham is the author of the
“Siege of Boston,” and of the “Life of General Joseph Warren,” now
in press; the Rev. Henry M. Dexter is Corresponding Secretary of
the N. E. Historic-Genealogical Society—is editor of a new edition
of Mourt’s Relation, and his recent investigations in England and
Holland will, no doubt, throw new light on the history of the
Pilgrims prior to their emigration; the Hon. Robert C. Winthrop is
President of the Massachusetts Historical Society, and the author
of a Memoir of his distinguished ancestor, Governor Winthrop, of
Massachusetts; Dr. John G. Palfrey is the author of a “History of
New England,” and of other works; the Hon. Richard H. Dana, Jr., is
the U. S. District Attorney, the author of “Two Years Before the
Mast,” and the “Seaman’s Friend;” Dr. Winslow Lewis is President of
the N. E. Historic-Geneal. Society.]
The following letter is from a native of Orleans,—one familiar with
its localities,—the well-known President of the National Bank of the
Republic:
BOSTON, Oct. 10, 1865.
MESSRS. CROSBY & LIVERMORE:
_Gentlemen_,—Familiar as I am with Cape names and Cape men, I have,
from the first, felt assured that the wreck exhibited by you on the
Common was what it purports to be; for the testimony of well-known
citizens of Cape Cod came simultaneously with the discovery which
they made. Amos Otis, Esq., Cashier of the Barnstable Bank, I have
long known as a sterling, sound, matter-of-fact man, whose judgment
in what falls under his own observation is not easily misled.
Mr. Otis (aside from the local papers) made the first published
statement of the history and finding of the wreck. He saw the wreck
on the beach, as did also Dr. Seabury, Mr. Drew, and many others,
some of whom I know personally, and others by reputation. I have
no hesitation in affirming my belief, that if human testimony can
prove anything, the wreck you are now exhibiting on the Common, and
which I have seen, was washed out of the Potanumaquut meadows in
1863. That is enough to establish beyond cavil the antiquity of the
wreck. I need not recapitulate the historical statements set forth
in your pamphlet,[10] “The Ancient Wreck:” to my mind, they seem to
point unmistakably to this very wreck, as that of the vessel spoken
of by Morton and Prince, and to which tradition has assigned the
name of “Sparrow-Hawk.” Bradford, who gives full particulars of the
voyage and loss, omitted to mention the name of the vessel. Within
a few years much light has been thrown on the period of English
emigration to the colonies; and it is not improbable that we may
yet learn from English records the name of the ship which Captain
Johnston commanded, and in which Messrs. Fells and Sibsie were
passengers. The name, however, is of little consequence, compared
with the identity of the ship,—and that, I think, is clearly
established by the historical facts as given in your publication
to which I have alluded. Eminent ship-builders who have examined
the frame as now exhibited, are clearly of opinion that it dates
far back in the history of naval architecture. This fact furnishes
additional evidence corroborative of the opinions I have expressed
above.
Hoping that your exhibition will be eminently successful,
I remain your ob’t ser’t,
DAVID SNOW.
The following testimony is from the well-known inventor of the improved
rigging for ships,—a gentleman thoroughly informed in all nautical
matters:
BOSTON, Oct. 21, 1865.
MESSRS. LIVERMORE & CROSBY:
_Dear Sirs_,—I have visited the old wreck, on exhibition, and
although I have not had leisure to examine into its history, yet,
as an amateur ship-builder, I am fully convinced these remains are
of very ancient date, and not a humbug.
I am very truly your ser’t,
R. B. FORBES.
At the last (October, 1865,) meeting of the Massachusetts Historical
Society, the subject of the “old wreck” being under discussion,
Mr. Charles Deane read the following paper, which he had prepared
to show the small size of some of the “ships” used in crossing the
Atlantic, both before and at the time the vessel which we call the
“Sparrow-Hawk,” was stranded on Nauset Beach. Mr. Deane remarked that
the list could have been much extended:
Columbus had, on his first voyage of discovery, three vessels.
“Two of them were light barks, called Caravels, not superior to
river and coasting craft of more modern days.” They are supposed
to have been open, “and without deck in the centre, but built up
high at the prow and stern, with forecastles and cabins for the
accommodation of the crew. Peter Martyr, the learned contemporary
of Columbus, says that only one of the three vessels was decked.
The smallness of the vessels was considered an advantage by
Columbus, in a voyage of discovery, enabling him to run close to
the shores, and to enter shallow rivers and harbors. In his third
voyage, when coasting the Gulf of Paria, he complained of the
size of his ship, being nearly a hundred tons burthen.” (Irving’s
Columbus, Chap. VIII.)
These three small vessels, only one of which was expressly prepared
for the voyage, and was decked (the exact tonnage of neither is
given), carried a company of one hundred and twenty persons,
including ninety mariners.
On Sir Francis Drake’s voyage for circumnavigating the globe, in
1577, his largest vessel was of only _one hundred_ tons burthen,
and the smallest but _fifteen_ tons. The bark in which Sir Humphrey
Gilbert perished, in 1583, was of _ten_ tons only.
Martin Pring made a voyage here in 1603, with two vessels,—one of
_fifty_ tons, carrying _thirty_ men, and one of _twenty-six_ tons,
carrying _thirteen_ men.
Bartholomew Gilbert came over to the southern part of Virginia the
same year, in a bark of _fifty_ tons.
Champlain and Pontgravé sailed for Canada, in the early part of
the seventeenth century, with two vessels, of only _twelve_ and
_fifteen_ tons.
On the voyage to Virginia, which resulted in the first permanent
settlement of the English in the United States, in 1607, the three
vessels which conveyed the colonists, were _jointly_ but of one
hundred and sixty-tons; viz., the “Susan Constant,” the Admiral, of
_one hundred tons_, carrying _seventy-one_ persons; the “Godspeed,”
the Vice-Admiral, of only _forty_ tons, with _fifty-two_ persons;
the “Discovery,” the pinnace, of only _twenty_ tons, with
_twenty-one_ persons. This number of persons included the mariners.
Two of the ships with which Captain John Smith set sail for New
England, in 1615, were, respectively, of _fifty_ and _sixty_ tons.
In a list of ships which sailed for Virginia in 1619, I find one of
_seventy_ tons, carrying _fifty-one_ persons, and one of _eighty_
tons, with _forty-five_ persons.
The “Mayflower” was of “nine score” (180) tons burthen. The
“Speedwell,” which brought the pilgrims from Holland to
Southampton, and which was also intended for the voyage to America,
but proved unseaworthy, was of _sixty_ tons burthen. The “Fortune,”
which brought _twenty-nine passengers_ to Plymouth in 1621, was of
only _fifty-five_ tons. The “Little James,” which came in 1623, was
of only _forty-four_ tons.
It is a marvel to us that persons were willing to venture across
the stormy Atlantic, at all seasons of the year, in such small
craft; and a still greater marvel that so many of these voyages
were successfully accomplished.
The Boston Congregationalist, of Oct. 20, 1865, publishes a condensed
history of the voyage, wrecking, and discovery of the old ship, and
adds:
“We advise all our readers who can make it convenient to do so, to
visit this relic of our Colonial history, and to do so soon, before
its removal from its present place. There is not the slightest
doubt among the well-informed that she is all which is claimed
for her by her exhibitors, no facts of the past being better
authenticated than her record. Even such an imperfect reproduction
as this is, of a ship which crossed the ocean while the Mayflower
was yet on the sea, is a curiosity, to be seen, we take it, nowhere
else in the world.”
FOOTNOTES:
[1] Dr. B. F. SEABURY, of Orleans, who made the measurements for the
first drawings.
[2] Annals, p. 163. See also Morton’s Memorial, p. 89, A. D., 1627.
[3] See Des Barres’ accurate chart of the coast.
[4] In the northwest quarter of the township, on Barnstable Bay, is
Namskeket Creek, which is three quarters of a mile long, and which,
as far as it runs, is the dividing line between Orleans and Harwich
[now Brewster.] Description of Orleans, in 1 Mass. Hist. Coll.,
VIII., 188.—_Ed._
[5] The beach where this ship was stranded still bears the name of
Old Ship, and it is said that some portions of the wreck were to
be seen about seventy years ago. See 1 Mass. Hist. Coll., viii.,
144.—_Ed._
[6] A more close examination of the vessel showed this to be
incorrect. The charred surface of plank was found in close contact
with timbers which had not been burned at all. The inference is,
that the plank was partially charred, while being heated for the
purpose of bending it,—the modern process of steaming, not having
yet come into vogue.
[7] This was not to be, however. For, a few months after, the
capricious sea exhumed her once more, when the wreck was removed
beyond and above high-water mark.
In the winter of 1860–61, in a storm, a new channel of sufficient
depth for fishing-boats to pass out and in, opened in the beach, a
short distance south of where the wreck lay. Through this channel
the tide ebbed and flowed; and such was its effect on the currents
that a cove or indentation was made in the beach nearly opposite
the grave of the Sparrow-Hawk. This indentation became deeper and
deeper, until at length the hull revisited the glimpses of the
day. At the time of this writing, the channel and the cove have
disappeared; in their place is a straight line of sea-beach, and
there are ten feet of sand where the old vessel lay. But for this
accidental opening and consequent abrasion of the beach, the vessel
might, indeed, have remained “undiscovered for ages.”
[8] The first recorded division of these meadows was in 1750.—The
inference is that they were in process of formation up to that
time, but had not become valuable for mowing until that date.
The salt-meadows have a certain frontage along the beach, the
boundaries being usually a stake and stones. These are occasionally
found outside the beach, which has travelled inland. Leander
Crosby, Esq., found one of these, a cedar stake, where the tide
ebbed and flowed. It was marked with the initials, “R. S.”
Doubtless, Richard Sparrow.
[9] See Morse’s Universal Geography, I., 357, ed. 1793.
[10] This refers to our first edition, which comprised the first
thirty-eight pages of this work.
Transcriber’s Notes:
- Text enclosed by underscores is in italics (_italics_).
- Obvious typographical errors have been silently corrected.