In 1991, the Australian Navy retrieved a ship’s anchor at Voaden Point (to the north of Cape Sidmouth) in far north Queensland (FNQ). It was later thought to be from Napoleon's Swiftsure. Ben Cropp claimed to have identified the vessel’s remains in 2014.
The French brig Inconstant (1811)
According to Napoleon’s escape ship found off Cape York, Ben had claimed to have found “the long-lost wreck of the ship Napoleon Bonaparte used to escape exile in the 19th century.”
Ben Cropp approaching the anchor of a shipwreck off Sudbury Reef
(Source: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7932421/150-year-old-vessel-Great-Barrier-Reef-shipwreck-hunter-discovered-Napoleon-Bonaparte-escape.html?ito=link_share_article-image-share#i-32c227f2d16814e7)
Further, Ben “says he has found the final resting place of the French-built Swiftsure, which played a crucial role in the life of the first emperor of France, more than 200 years ago.”
According to the web page, the vessel was a small 337-ton brig originally called L’Inconstant, later renamed Swiftsure by the British.
The French brig Inconstant (1811)
So how did the vessel become wrecked off FNQ? According to the web page, “After losing more than 350,000 men in his march on Russia in 1814, Napoleon abdicated as Emperor of France and was exiled to the island of Elba, off the coast of Italy. He later escaped the island in the L’Inconstant, …… In the aftermath of the Battle of Waterloo, the vessel was believed to have been taken as a prize by the British and renamed the Swiftsure.
“It was then put on the England-to-Australia run, and sank after striking coral reef north of Cape Sidmouth, near Coen en route from Sydney to Mauritius in 1829. Wreck salvagers stripped the Swiftsure of all valuables and cargo in 1830, except for its heavy anchor. The ship’s anchor was retrieved by the Australian Navy in 1991* …… but the final resting place of the Swiftsure was believed to be lost to the ages.”
Ben Cropp analysing the anchor of a shipwreck off Sudbury Reef
(Source: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7932421/150-year-old-vessel-Great-Barrier-Reef-shipwreck-hunter-discovered-Napoleon-Bonaparte-escape.html?ito=link_share_article-image-share#i-32c227f2d16814e7)
* (According to Anchor’s away for lesson in Napoleon’s legend, “The cast iron maritime relic, which sits in the garden outside the gym at HMAS Cairns ….. The anchor was believed to have been kept in storage by the Navy for several years before it was added to the garden during the naval base’s redevelopment in the mid-2000s. It now forms part of a compass, with its crown pointing south.” A Kenneth Cole worked as a gym attendant at HMAS Cairns. He said, “I think, at one point, this was supposed to be a squash court before they decided to turn it into a garden.’’)
Kenneth Cole at the anchor
Ben Cropp later “said he had been searching for the Swiftsure for about two years, and located it in about 2m of water on a recent diving expedition. While most of the remains had been buried under shifting sands, he was able to identify the vessel from historic records of where it sank, and ballast rocks and pottery found at the site. ….. I know it’s the Swiftsure, because it’s right exactly where they (the wreckers) were working in 1830.”
According to Napoleon's getaway ship 'found in Qld' , “Mr Cropp made the discovery in November (2014?) ….. The first important discovery came in 1991 when a plane spotted the vessel's anchor. It was recovered and is now in Cairns. Crayfish diver Damien Langley later found some wreckage and pottery shards in shifting sands in the area but not the keel. Mr Cropp says the distinctive line of debris he found is the final piece of the puzzle, corroborating reports in a ship's log from 1830 when an original salvage crew stripped the wreck of its valuables.”
Mind you, all is not what it seems. According to French brig Inconstant (1811), “Inconstant was a Sylphe-class brig, one of 32, launched in 1811 for the French Navy. In 1815, Napoleon used her to escape from exile on Elba. In the 1820s she took part in the war with Spain and later served on the Brazil station. She also served on the French Guiana station. She was broken up at Brest in December 1843.”
As described below, there have been several Swiftsures and, as suggested above, Ben Cropp’s discovery may not be the ex-Inconstant.
According to Drive at 04:45 p.m. (ABC Far North,29 Nov 2023 16:45), Celeste Jordan was a guest on the radio station. Celeste is the principal heritage officer with the Department of Environment and Science, and an expert on Queensland shipwrecks. The radio station was hoping to find out more about the Swiftsure.
“Could this really be the same ship that once spirited Napoleon Bonaparte out of exile some 200 years ago?” they asked Celeste.
Celeste’s response was, “Look, anything is possible in the world of archaeology. However, I was lucky enough to have a discussion with the notable maritime archaeologist, Grant Luckman, and he was very kind in sharing information with me from his forthcoming book on Shipwrecks of the Coral Sea. Essentially, we have two ships here, Inconstant and the wreck of Swiftsure in far north Queensland. Despite what it says on Wikipedia, both were French, built in 1811 and this is where the similarities end. Basically the wreck that we have in far north Queensland of Swiftsure operated out of New York and Glasgow as a privateer from 1812 to 1817, its next recorded in about 1828, doing international trade runs throughout Australia and Asia, and in about 1829 Swiftsure was recorded as being in Tasmania and this is probably where the story of Swiftsure being the renamed vessel Inconstant surfaces. It's likely that the captain was trying to get free beers at the pub in Hobart, aggrandising himself as the captain of such a famous vessel. This isn't the only instance where a ship named Swiftsure is identified as the renamed Inconstant with far more historical occurrences having been recorded for different Swiftsure vessels.”
“So there are other claims around the world of having the Swiftsure sunk somewhere else. Is that what you're saying, Celeste?”
“Well, no …. like people's names, vessels are named the same thing. You know, there could be 4 or 5 different vessels named exactly the same thing. Vessels also get renamed. You know, it was Inconstant. It was then renamed Swiftsure. It then could have been renamed something else. That's just an example. And there are many, many instances of that for all shipwrecks across the across the world, say Ben Cropp did genuinely believe this was Napoleon Bonaparte's Swiftsure or the renamed Swiftsure.”
“And let's just for a minute say that you know that it is. How would that actually be proven without a dive done?”
“Ah well, you have to dive it. And that's that is part of the challenge of this. You know, it's great when we have a vessel's name very clear. Endeavour's a great example of that. Having a ship's bell is also another really good example, except what you get is that historical salvors and treasure hunters generally take the ship's bells as the first thing. We then have to go into other things like vessel dimensions, construction type, cargo, anchor type and other materials like copper sheathing and bolts. And these are the real building blocks to then build that historical research. I'm not even going to go into wooden and metal analysis because I don't want to bore you.”
“So you're reasonably confident based on the account of another maritime archaeologist that this is not the same Swiftsure that carried Napoleon Bonaparte out of exile the first time he was exiled twice. But is there any possibility it could be, or do you think the evidence is stacking up that that's certainly not the case?”
“Well, the French government was kind enough to provide the Queensland Museum of a full vessel record before this even became an issue in ….. 2015. And basically the vessel that was Inconstant was still used by the French Navy right until 1841. And of course this vessel wrecked before that and then Inconstant was decommissioned and broken up in 1842. So while this is a great story, and I really do wish that it was it was true, it just doesn't hold water.”
“The challenge here as well is that even, you know, if this was the fact that the wreckers went through that that part of the reef and Ben Cropp actually found this site after reading an eyewitness account detailing a wreck, a ship that had apparently first broken down and stripped another ship called the Mermaid and then sailed further north to tear apart the Swiftsure, did the wreckers do not only a disservice to, I guess, the people at the time of these shipwrecks, but to people even 100 plus years later that are trying to work out some of these mysteries.”
Figure 1: Picture of Foam anchor. © Commonwealth of Australia (Australian Institute of Marine Science), photographer: Joe Gioffre, 2009.
Figure 2: Foam anchor in 2015. Note the change in position from the 2009 picture.
(Source: "Historic Shipwreck Foam (1893) Survey Report 2015" by Peter Illidge)
“Look, it is a bit challenging. If they had, if they were legitimately allowed to salvage that ship, which is often the case. Foam is a good example in which you know, the salvage rights were auctioned off and they were bought at the time just after the wrecking. It means that we have those records. If it was illegally salvaged at the time, it makes it really hard for maritime archaeologists to be able to identify those vessels that have had that salvage occur.”
Celeste Jordan diving on the Foam
(Image taken by Beck Tite)
(Source: https://scontent.fadl4-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/406530716_652730143683315_342144368848700449_n.jpg?_nc_cat=105&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=dd5e9f&_nc_ohc=lGhnxOSFXY0AX-T0StP&_nc_ht=scontent.fadl4-1.fna&oh=00_AfCh6lh4q7C05rTBl14cxpGUd2exCNeBS1iCDtR--jHUnA&oe=656F18AD)
“….. And there are many (Queensland shipwrecks) Celeste, how prevalent are unidentified shipwreck sites off the Queensland coast?”
“Well look, for instance, we have 1400 wrecks. This includes ship and aircraft wrecks and we've only positively located and identified less than 13%. So that's about 180 vessels. So there's still a lot to find out there.”
“If a diver were to discover a new shipwreck site, are there obligations under the law that they have to adhere to?”
“Absolutely. So both under state and federal law, all wrecks that have been in the water partially or wholly located or unlocated for over 75 years or more, have blanket protection. Therefore, under the Queensland Heritage Act 1992 and the Underwater Cultural Heritage Act 2018, people are obliged to notify either the Department of Environment and Science or the Department of Climate Change Energy. The environment and water of all new discoveries of protected wrecks. It is an offence under both the state and federal laws to interfere with the wreck, as I said, ship or aircraft. This includes taking anything from the site hand fanning, cutting into the vessel in any way or anchoring on it.”
“Well, and so if you're just out there and you come across a shipwreck, you may not know all of that, but some of the things you're describing there sound like they're a little bit more, people do know what they're doing. Is there a concern that with some wrecks in the past and even potentially the present, that people might be trying to take things as mementos or items that they can then boast about or have as keepsakes.”
“Most certainly. In fact, I was out on the Foam* shipwreck site two weeks ago and a copper bolt was clearly taken off the vessel, the wreck of the vessel, and placed on top of a coral outcrop. Like there's no way that that copper bolt could have got there in any other way than somebody interfering with that site.”
* (A report titled "RESEARCH PUBLICATION No. 113 Historic Shipwreck Foam (1893) Survey Report 2015" by Peter Illidge can be found at Historic-Foam-Report.pdf (gbrmpa.gov.au) .
According to the report, "The (Foam) anchor is an admiralty pattern consistent with the period, with iron stock and shackle and no chain attached. The shank is 200 centimetres long with a diameter of 10 centimetres. The stock is approximately 200 centimetres long with a diameter of eight centimetres. The crown has an outside length of 186 centimetres and an average diameter of 10 centimetres. Using the web site http://www.custompartnet.com/quick-tool/weight-calculator a very rough weight was calculated from the measurements at 317 kilograms. According to Beck (Beck 2009), the best bower anchors weighed 355.6 kilograms and were the largest anchors onboard, and the smaller stream anchor weighed 106.6 kilograms. Based on the weight calculation, the surveyed Foam anchor is most likely one of the two best bower anchors. Comparison of the present position and condition of the anchor with archival data presents evidence that may be consistent with two attempts to steal this artefact. The author first dived the Foam anchor in 1982 when it was on top of the large coral bommie near its present position. It is now lying off this bommie. Also, on comparison of the archival photograph of the anchor taken 2009 (Figure 2) to recent pictures in its present situation (Figure 3) it looks to have been moved for a second time. It is unlikely that these movements would have been caused by cyclonic wave action because, on closer inspection of the anchor, it was noted that a piece of rope about 12 millimetres in diameter was attached to the shackle, further supporting the theory that it has been deliberately interfered with. The anchor’s size and design may make it attractive to theft and this risk should be taken into account in the future management of the site. The anchor is over 340 metres from the main wreck site and, though considered an artefact associated with Foam, it is outside the 200 metre Historic Shipwrecks protected zone and therefore does not carry the restriction to access as does the main site. This positioning and the potential attractiveness of the anchor to thieves suggest that moving the anchor to within the 200 metre protective zone or extending the protective zone could be considered. The anchor has already been moved at least twice. Moving it closer to the main site and within the protected zone will not subtract from its provenance but may save it from theft."
“Well it seems as though our mystery may have been solved as to whether the Swiftsure was indeed the one that, you know, carried Napoleon Bonaparte out of exile the first time and into a period known as the Hundred Days. There's a lot of interest in Napoleon's story once again. So as with this this Hollywood movie out at the moment, and in fact, you actually do see the ship that we're talking about here carrying him out of exile in the movie. Given that you don't think it is likely that that is the Napoleon Swiftsure, do you think that there'd be no real interest in actually going and doing an archaeological dig at that site, given how expensive and challenging that work generally is?”
“Look, I think that there would have to be some research questions, really good research questions that would legitimise going out and doing that research. And that's not to say that it isn't, you know, a legitimate to do and answer those questions. We just don't have those research questions right now.”
So, it seems that there are still many questions regarding the wreck site discovered by Ben Cropp. Hopefully more information will come to light soon.
Comments