Wreck at Drs Keys
This is a wreck I found very close to home. Its tight in along the shore at a rocky outcrop called the Drs Keys. As is usual, I found a good few years ago while towing a magnetometer. Its so shallow just 4meters at low tide, that you can see it while snorkelling. Just 3 guns found so far and one anchor. The anchor is so shallow, that you can touch it while snorkelling on the surface. It is right on the very end of the Drs Keys.in just 1 .5 m. I think this is a civil war wreck as a few were lost at St Marys somewhere. Its a good candidate. However Im not sure if the guns look a little later like guns of a George 1st or 2nd period which could point towards the wreck of the Triumph which was lost in1736 but I dont really know for sure as the historical narrative of the loss of the Triumph places her as lost South of the Steval. Maybe the narratives writer, Reverend Troutbeck, misheard the tale which may have been the Steval was south of the wreck. Thin I know but possible as Troutbeck didnt write his book until 60 years after the Triumph was lost. Heres what they are most likely linked to-
After the surrender of Tresco Island to Admiral Blake and the parliamentarian forces on that island in 1651, St Marys Island began to be rendered useless to the Royalists as neither side then had overall command of the main anchorage of St Marys Roads, as shown in a narrative by Sir George Ascue who talks about the benefit to Parliament in the taking of Tresco and Samson in 1651: “The two islands command the road, as well as St Mary’s and the gaining of those two Islands would render St Marys useless to the enemy, besides it would be a speedy means to force St Marys Island to submission…… the men of war belonging to these piratical rocks, will be like mice that run from a falling house, and must be forced to seek a new rendevous. Neither can St Marys exist without them”. Evenso, the Royalists fought on- but with diminishing resolve. Soon after this a Captured Royalist sailor, after questioning aboard Admiral Blakes ship Pheonix, divulged to a Captain Cornelius Evertson, news of the enemy strength on and around St Marys island at that time. This is recorded in the Marinors Mirror: “The Enemies strength to be not above 700 men and probably also that a dejection was spreading among them” The report then went on to show what happened next:- "On the next afternoon a tremendous storm broke, which forced Blakes men of War out to sea, blew down their soldiers tents, and drove ashore as total wrecks two of the enemies best frigates which rode under the hugh hill near their shore to prevent our boats coming in to land there”. All intelligence was passed on to Admiral Blake; who was desperate to take the whole of Scilly back for the Parliament. Only one thing stood in the way of Parliamentarian forces affecting a successful landing on St Marys- and that was the report that the two best ships of the royalist fleet were anchored with their guns covering any vulnerable landing places, ie the beaches which clearly needed more heavily fortifying for obvious reasons. All seemed to be in stalemate in the conflict for control of Scilly at this time but Parliamentarian forces had been sent to retake Scilly, so it was upon them to take the fight from Tresco over to St Marys. However, fortunately for Blake, the severe storm on the 10 th of May which forced his own ships out to sea, was tinged with a silver lining and the possible catalyst which forced the issue; the same storm had also wrecked the two best Royalist vessels which were then reported as ‘riding under the Hew Hill’. (Garrison Hill was once called Hugh Hill or The Hew). This sudden double disasterous loss for the Royalists had tipped the balance in Blakes favour for an invasion of St Marys. It can therefore be argued that this one single wrecking incident spelt the end of Royalist command of Scilly as it is recorded that it- “removed the one last obstacle by sea” -standing in the way of a sea born invasion of St Marys by Admiral Blake. Indeed, shortly after this double wrecking incident occurred, St Marys Garrison did indeed surrender to Admiral Blake. So which Royalist best ships were actually wrecked here? The answer is- we don’t know. Of around a dozen Royalist Warships known to have been here at the time, only a handful have thus far shown up in research. The records show that Blake captured two Royalist ships at New Grimsby. These were the St Michael and the Peter. The St Michael was renamed the Gillyflower and, interestingly, the Peter was renamed the Bryar after being: “captured in Bryher Harbour” So the wrecks were neither of those two ships. A ship named the Royal James also seems to have been operating around Scilly, but this was reported captured in 1654 by the Parliament and renamed the Sorlingues. The Mary, a 24 gun ship that was given to the pirate captain John Mucknell by the Prince of Wales, as a replacement for the loss of the 44 gun ship John in 1645, fled Scilly just before Blake arrived. The Mary was driven ashore at Cartagena by Blake in a later encounter. Another Royalist ship known to be at Scilly at this time was the Crowned lion but she was captured and renamed the Marigold and sold in 1658. All we have to go on is the statement “Best frigates” which means the two wrecked vessels were probably over 20 guns each and/or were relatively new vessels. None of the above ships are recorded as lost at Scilly but there were no doubt other ships in the Royalist fleet as Prince Rupert had sent half his ships here under Vice Admiral John Mucknell to retake and hold Scilly; which they had been doing since 1648. The Royalist ships were more likely to have been foreign. This half of the fleet numbered around a dozen vessels in all but as the Royalists ultimately lost the war, so vast details of their movements and losses etc, went totally unrecorded. Neither is it known on which side of the Hew hill these ships were wrecked but I rather suspect one could well be the remains I have discovered at the Drs Keys; it being originally protecting the landing area between Taylors Island and Rat Island and blown from its anchors into the north side of that rocky out crop. The 3 weapons and 1 anchor I have recorded in very shallow water there (snorkelling depth 2-4meters at low spring tides) is all that remains. However, being in such shallow depth means the wreck must have been heavily salvaged at the time so could heve been a lot bigger. These guns and anchor tell the tale. They are of the correct style to have been from the English Civil period and thus seem to fit the narrative in date and position under the Hew Hill. You can stand on the anchor at low tide.
Gun 3
A COLLECTION OF SHIPS FIGUREHEAD IMAGES
Alessandro Il Grande 1851. Tresco Valhalla collection (TVC)
Award 1861 changed to Valhalla. TVC
Independenza Stern board 1881 TVC
Intrepid Stern board 1847 TVC
Jane Owen 1889 TVC
Lafaro (fish) 1902 & unknown stern board below TVC
Mary Hay 1852 TVC
Oregon 1867 TVC
Palinurus 1848 TVC
Primos 1871 TVC
Thames. 1841 in Tresco Abbey Gardens but not in TVC
HMS Actaeon 1857 Portsmouth Naval Museum (PNM)
HMS Apollo 1805 PNM
HMS Asia 1824 PNM
HMS Bellerophon 1786 PNM
HMS Bellerophon 1824 PNM
HMS Bellerophon Stern 1786 PNM
HMS Black Eagle 1831 PNM
HMS Blazer 1834 PNM
HMS Calliope 1808 PNM
HMS Carnatic 1823 PNM
HMS Centurion 1892 PNM
HMS Espiegle 1900 PNM
HMS eurydice 1843 PNM
HMS Glasgow 1814 PNM
HMS Grampus 1784 PNM
HMS Illustrious 1803 PNM
HMS Madagasca 1822 PNM
HMS Malacca 1854 PNM
HMS Minerva 1820 PNM
HMS Orestes 1824 PNM
HMS Poictiers 1857 PNM
HMS Princess Alice 1844 PNM
HMS Trafalgar 1841 PNM
HMS Victory 1759 PNM
HMS Warrior 1781 PNM
Unknown. Venice Maritime Museum
All below are Cutty Sark Museum in Greenwich unless stated otherwise. There are lots of unknowns in this lot but they have ships names for some
The 'Golden Cherub' is obvious
'Sovereign' is centre front and the 'Rose of Torridge' in red and yellow on the right.
'General Havelock' is left brown face and with the moustache. 'American Officer' is centre top.
The Marianne is in a Brown and Yellow dress The 'Duchess' is in the red top. 'Boadicea' is bottom left corner in the Helmet.
In Red and white is the 'Maud' and behind her is an ethnic fellow from the 'Lalla Rookh' The chap in the brown coat is from the 'Wilberforce' and the lady in the blue shawl is from the 'Augusta Louise'
The dog is from 'Sirius' and 'Boadicea' wears the silver helmet.
from the left- 'Sir Lancelot' then 'Abraham Lincoln' & 'Zenobia' in the brown dress
'Cleopatra' & 'Maud' & 'Lalla Roohk' & 'Augusta Louise'
'Sir Galahad' and 'Omar Pasha' in fez with 'Abraham Lincoln' behind.
'Hunter' looking up with gun . 'Nannie' in white. 'Hiawatha' on the right.
'Cleopatra' in fishscale armour
'Arabella' 'Beda' 'Lady of the Rose' centre and 'Hunter' is right.
Top left corner is from the 'Gladstone'. 'Amphitrite' is naked next to 'Diana' in the grey dress. Then 'Disraeli' in the bow tie and ginger haired 'Old Goody' is far right
'Arabella' & 'Beda' & 'Lady of the Rose'
The lady is from the 'Navarino' Then 'Tantivy' in the red jacket. 'Mr Pitt' is centre front.
The Head of 'Gladstone' is next to the naked 'Amphitrite' & 'Diana' in grey
'Sophie Kirk' is left in the claret dress. 'Gravesend' is far right in red.
In the fez is 'General Gordon'
Huge Figurehead from the 'Spanish Lady' stands next to a much smaller 'General Gordon'
A few unknowns behind 'Spanish Lady'
One of these is the Arm of the figurehead of the ship 'Pluto'
A closer one of 'Lalla Rookh'
'Arabella' & 'Beda' & 'Lady of the Rose' towering above the rest.
So many I couldnt fit them all in. All a bit too cluttered if you ask me. Some hiding behind others. They would look so much better spread out ;and it wasnt like there wasnt much room to do so in the space all around the Cutty Sark!!
Next three images are from the Mersea Island Museum in Essex.
Not sure where this one is?
I dont know where the next 3 are either?
www.shipwreckbooks.co.uk
The Problem with Richad Larn.
I was asked what 'my' problem is with Richard Larn OBE. Well to answer this we have to go way back to 2001 and take it from there. Also- this stuff needs to be recorded or else the misinformation goes on being given out in the books that are continually sold by him everyday. In other words- here is a compilation of incidents whereby I feel projects and myself have been misrepresented. Paranoia? -well judge for yourselves- For me it all started with me placing artifacts from the wreck of the SS Schiller into the local museum here at Scilly. Soon after the items went on display a letter dropped through my door, claiming that Messers Richard Larn & David Mcbride were the legal owners of these artifacts and that I was to hand the material over to them as a result. (Incidentally-Mr Larn was/is a trustee of the afore mentioned institution) Further to this, I was told to stop diving the wreck or be served with an injunction. Now this has always been a free wreck for anyone to dive before- but when they then published in a book entitled 'Shipwrecks of North Cornwall & the isles of Scilly'- that Mr Larn and his associate were legal salvors of this wreck, and that anyone wanting to dive it had to gain their permission to do so beforehand, well this was a step too far. As a result, I chose to fight their claim over the wreck -and- after much correspondence between us- I feel that I had triumphed. My artifacts from the wreck site became my legal property and this gaining legal title to the material signaled an end to the fight. Thus it all stayed on display in the local museum and anyone can freely dive the SS Schiller today. (Sadly, one of my gold coins from this wreck later went missing from the museum. (The trustees say 'misplaced' but I think stolen) and although my loss was compensated-what happened to that coin still remains a mystery. It was the museum that lost out.) -but I have digressed.
We now move on to the Crim wreck. (See my pages for further info on this) All alone underwater I mapped this deep cannon site for over two years and believe that I had produced the first accurate representation of the site since its discovery by Roland Morris in the 1970's. Mr Larn reported in a Museum newsletter that, using a small ROV, he had completed his plan of this same wreck site. My plan had come back from being copied by the Monuments Record Office, with the original copy having been given to the same museum. Now, I know nothing of Mr Larns work on this wreck site. Certainly, I never once saw him visit the site during the two years that I was physically diving on it myself -and I was out there at every window of opportunity; which are limited given the exposed position and depth of this wreck. Personally, I think the capability's of his little ROV were questionable for this type of work -but maybe it did do the job -I dont know. However, the only evidence of his work on this site, that I have actually seen, are thus- Mr Larn published in his book 'Shipwrecks of North Cornwall & the isles of Scilly', that the Crim site contained 15 to 20 cannon. There are in fact 24 guns and 3 anchors. Mr Larn also published an image of some coins that he claimed in his book had come from this very same Crim wreck site. However, I can categorically state that he was mistaken in this too. The coins in his book, in fact came from the wreck of the Earl of Abergavenny which is over 100 miles away in Weymouth bay.
Incidentally, Earl of Abergavenny Wrecksite Project leader, Ed Cumming, still has these same coins in his possession today. Below is an image from Ed of some of those same coins. Ed was not best pleased about his coins being misrepresented by Mr Larn in his book. To be continued......................................................
We now move on to the wreck of the Nancy Packet. This was a very worthwhile and satisfying project that Ed Cumming and I worked at together for a couple of years. We put in a lot of effort; lifted and identified English made items of a late 18th century English wreck that fitted the size and age of the Nancy Packet. We won an award from the Nautical Archaeological Society for our efforts after we published a book about the project. Not long after this occurred, Mr Larn, then wrote a book entitled- 'The Wrecks of Scilly' In that book Mr Larn suggests that he had dived the above wreck site - and that he believed it to be a mid 19th century Dutch ship called the Nickerie. To support his claim, he published a picture of some coins that he says he had recovered from the wreck site. Here is that image-
A few Shipwreck tales on Radio Scilly
http://www.radioscilly.com/island-le...-todd-stevens/
http://www.radioscilly.com/lead-stor...ept-29th-2011/
http://www.radioscilly.com/lead-stor...ept-25th-2011/
http://www.radioscilly.com/lead-stories/shipwrecks-of-scilly-oct-20th-2011/
I was asked what 'my' problem is with Richard Larn OBE. Well to answer this we have to go way back to 2001 and take it from there. Also- this stuff needs to be recorded or else the misinformation goes on being given out in the books that are continually sold by him everyday. In other words- here is a compilation of incidents whereby I feel projects and myself have been misrepresented. Paranoia? -well judge for yourselves- For me it all started with me placing artifacts from the wreck of the SS Schiller into the local museum here at Scilly. Soon after the items went on display a letter dropped through my door, claiming that Messers Richard Larn & David Mcbride were the legal owners of these artifacts and that I was to hand the material over to them as a result. (Incidentally-Mr Larn was/is a trustee of the afore mentioned institution) Further to this, I was told to stop diving the wreck or be served with an injunction. Now this has always been a free wreck for anyone to dive before- but when they then published in a book entitled 'Shipwrecks of North Cornwall & the isles of Scilly'- that Mr Larn and his associate were legal salvors of this wreck, and that anyone wanting to dive it had to gain their permission to do so beforehand, well this was a step too far. As a result, I chose to fight their claim over the wreck -and- after much correspondence between us- I feel that I had triumphed. My artifacts from the wreck site became my legal property and this gaining legal title to the material signaled an end to the fight. Thus it all stayed on display in the local museum and anyone can freely dive the SS Schiller today. (Sadly, one of my gold coins from this wreck later went missing from the museum. (The trustees say 'misplaced' but I think stolen) and although my loss was compensated-what happened to that coin still remains a mystery. It was the museum that lost out.) -but I have digressed.
We now move on to the Crim wreck. (See my pages for further info on this) All alone underwater I mapped this deep cannon site for over two years and believe that I had produced the first accurate representation of the site since its discovery by Roland Morris in the 1970's. Mr Larn reported in a Museum newsletter that, using a small ROV, he had completed his plan of this same wreck site. My plan had come back from being copied by the Monuments Record Office, with the original copy having been given to the same museum. Now, I know nothing of Mr Larns work on this wreck site. Certainly, I never once saw him visit the site during the two years that I was physically diving on it myself -and I was out there at every window of opportunity; which are limited given the exposed position and depth of this wreck. Personally, I think the capability's of his little ROV were questionable for this type of work -but maybe it did do the job -I dont know. However, the only evidence of his work on this site, that I have actually seen, are thus- Mr Larn published in his book 'Shipwrecks of North Cornwall & the isles of Scilly', that the Crim site contained 15 to 20 cannon. There are in fact 24 guns and 3 anchors. Mr Larn also published an image of some coins that he claimed in his book had come from this very same Crim wreck site. However, I can categorically state that he was mistaken in this too. The coins in his book, in fact came from the wreck of the Earl of Abergavenny which is over 100 miles away in Weymouth bay.
Heres the image of the coins that Mr Larn 'mistakenly' used in his book.
Incidentally, Earl of Abergavenny Wrecksite Project leader, Ed Cumming, still has these same coins in his possession today. Below is an image from Ed of some of those same coins. Ed was not best pleased about his coins being misrepresented by Mr Larn in his book. To be continued......................................................
We now move on to the wreck of the Nancy Packet. This was a very worthwhile and satisfying project that Ed Cumming and I worked at together for a couple of years. We put in a lot of effort; lifted and identified English made items of a late 18th century English wreck that fitted the size and age of the Nancy Packet. We won an award from the Nautical Archaeological Society for our efforts after we published a book about the project. Not long after this occurred, Mr Larn, then wrote a book entitled- 'The Wrecks of Scilly' In that book Mr Larn suggests that he had dived the above wreck site - and that he believed it to be a mid 19th century Dutch ship called the Nickerie. To support his claim, he published a picture of some coins that he says he had recovered from the wreck site. Here is that image-
Look familiar?????
As I already stated above- these coins came from the Earl of Abergavenny wreck lost in Weymouth Bay which is nowhere near the Isles of Scilly. Neither Ed nor I were pleased to see these coins being misrepresented in another of Mr Larns publications-especially when they were used in conjunction with a chapter that seemingly attempts to contradict our good work.
Ever since originally writing this page Mr Larn has now updated and revised his book Wrecks of Scilly. The above image has been removed and replaced with another. Funny that! I wonder if he will do the same thing with his other older book which is also incorrect.
Now we move on to the Wheels wreck. This was a wreck site consisting of a cargo of mining equipment that I found with a magnetometer I had borrowed from a good friend named Phil Roberts. This wreck was later deemed so important that it received a protection order from the government. I had spent an awful lot of time measuring, photographing and drawing the cargo of this wreck- in an effort to get it identified. I also lifted a few items to aid with dating purposes. (All items lifted went into the Museum here) All the information I had gathered was then sent to the Tevithick Society in Cornwall. This was done in a further attempt to hopefully help date and ID the wreck itself. My thoughts were that the wreck was post 1830 due to a Porter Trotman anchor that I had found near the site- that anchor was'nt invented until the 1830's. Logical? The Government archaeologists later published their report on the site that the wreck was probably later at around 1850. The Trevithick Society agreed but surmised the possibly of a little later still- at around 1860- Their thoughts being that the cargo was probably replacement parts for worn out items that had been in use in a mine, somewhere around the world-and as some of these items were not even invented until after 1830 it seemed likely that the wreck was post 1850 as it takes time for such heavy cast iron gear to wear out and thus warrant replacement. Again-Logical? Oddly-the Trevithick society expert stated to me that he had had contact from another person who was also trying to identify this same wreck and that that person had said the wreck must be the Padstow lost at Scilly in 1804. (The records only show that the Padstow had an: iron cargo- unspecified) The Trevithick Society member told me that he had said to the person how this could not be the Padstow as elements of the cargo were not invented until after 1830. Not long after these machinations took place Mr Larn published in his book- 'The Wrecks of Scilly' -that this was the wreck of the Padstow lost in 1804. Within the chapter he calls himself - 'an authority on shipwreck research' and that with this particular wreck he 'accepted identification as a professional challenge' Not only do I feel he is utterly wrong about his identification- but his article contains unnecessary and unfair criticism of other peoples work on the wreck, along with other items of false information about the project.
Now we turn to the stern site of HMS Colossus. This was a new part of the wreck that I found while diving alone in May 1999. It was a new area of this famous shipwreck that was not previously known about. I dived the site for two years lifting many artifacts from it. Naturally, I declared the new site to the Receiver of wreck in 2000 and the artifacts all went on display in the local museum at that time. All verifiable. Anyone who was then a trustee of the museum would certainly have noticed my large display appearing ;- where before there was nothing from this famous wreck to be seen -suddenly a vast collection existed in one whole corner of the building . Noticeable to any active trustee one would think? Later, in 2001, other divers came onto the site. Inevitably, more wreckage was uncovered including a twelve foot tall elm wood carving of a classical warrior found by my wife Carmen. The site was then protected in 2001 Any work that occurred on this new area of wreck, after 2001, would not have existed without my initial discovery of this new area of wreckage in 1999 & 2000. However, in Mr Larn's book- 'The Wrecks of Scilly' he talks about the finders of the bow section of this wreck- which is absolutely right and proper. Fair enough!- but when it comes to how the stern area was discovered over 400 yards away from the Bows -as declared by myself in 2000, he skips over this fact completely and extensively writes about the project from 2001 onwards. This is simply his choice- but it leaves me wondering if perhaps there is motive at play. To read my view of this project- www.hmscolossus.co.uk
Now we move on to the latest anchor saga mentioned in earlier posts and in my Colossus page. This was a huge 18th century Royal naval anchor we found in St Marys Roads in summer 2013. At first thought, rightly or wrongly, I concluded that it must have come from the warship HMS Colossus as no other ship of this kind style and age is known to have lost such an anchor in the immediate area. Reasonable? -I thought so! To date I have seen roughly 40 anchors in the area- yet Mr Larn went on Television and in news papers,- saying that our latest find must be an anchor that, in 1967, his comrades in the Royal navy had taken from the Association wreck site (over 6 miles away) and dumped in the area where we found our anchor . Not having previously heard of this particular incident- (and why would I ?) I looked into it and found the event indeed turned out to be true. However, what Mr Larn failed to tell the world - was that he had previously published in his book- 'Admiral Shovels Treasure' that the anchor he was talking about had "later been lifted and taken to the mainland.'' ergo -it could never have been on the sea bed for us to find -so he was contradicting himself!
Whilst it is very flattering having such a famous person, from within the diving world, take such a keen interest in projects I am working on- it would be nicer if his reporting on them was just a little more accurate.
A few Shipwreck tales on Radio Scilly
http://www.radioscilly.com/island-le...-todd-stevens/
http://www.radioscilly.com/lead-stor...ept-29th-2011/
http://www.radioscilly.com/lead-stor...ept-25th-2011/
http://www.radioscilly.com/lead-stories/shipwrecks-of-scilly-oct-20th-2011/
