Chapter IV: 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.