Ethnographic Arms & Armour - View Single Post - Captain Kidds Treasure 'silver' (?) ingot

Jim McDougall · 22nd February 2025, 02:22 AM

Just thinking in terms if ballast, in the case of this curiously marked lead ingot, and studying the various forms of lead ingots used as ballast in vessels of these times, there were indeed various heavy materials used as ballast.

In many cases it seems that often the ballast had to of course be dumped or removed in order to load cargo, if that be the case. With pirate or privateer vessels perhaps that would not be considered, as they were not particularly involved in trade, though obviously commodities were typically their prize for sale.

In the case of this ingot, we would consider perhaps a vessel dumping ballast for whatever reason.....but if that be the case....where is the rest?
So in addition to the suspicious markings on this example, even more telling is that it is a single bar.

This was hardly indicative of treasure trove, nor of Captain Kidds, nor his Adventure Galley ....not even a ship wreck period.

Often shipwrecks are located because of the pronounced metal target in sonar with the iron cannon which are typically part of the wreckage. Often vessels long lost are located by the finding of cannon.

However in some cases, location of cannon might suggest a wreck site, but often heavy objects and materials have been used as ballast. Old cannon, armor etc. in many cases have served as such. I wonder if these might have been tossed over to lighten load for any reason.

In the case of five cannon found off the coast of Calif. at Goleta(near Santa Barbara) these were revealed on beach when storms cleared sands. There was not however any sign of a shipwreck. It was later found that a ship had foundered in this location in 1830, but was not wrecked and later it was removed and sold. The bill of sale indicated there were 5 cannon, however obviously these had been thrown off to reduce weight ? in moving the vessel out of its grounded situation.

Meanwhile, during the excited investigation of the guns, all manner of hyperbole evolved, up to claiming these were guns from Sir Francis Drakes ship in the 16th century PROVING he had indeed been there!
Later it was found these were 18th century, but indeed from a vessel of around 1830 by testing of hemp residue on several of them.

Just another example of these premature and fantastic announcements on archaeological finds.

22nd February 2025, 02:22 AM	#29
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,100	Just thinking in terms if ballast, in the case of this curiously marked lead ingot, and studying the various forms of lead ingots used as ballast in vessels of these times, there were indeed various heavy materials used as ballast. In many cases it seems that often the ballast had to of course be dumped or removed in order to load cargo, if that be the case. With pirate or privateer vessels perhaps that would not be considered, as they were not particularly involved in trade, though obviously commodities were typically their prize for sale. In the case of this ingot, we would consider perhaps a vessel dumping ballast for whatever reason.....but if that be the case....where is the rest? So in addition to the suspicious markings on this example, even more telling is that it is a single bar. This was hardly indicative of treasure trove, nor of Captain Kidds, nor his Adventure Galley ....not even a ship wreck period. Often shipwrecks are located because of the pronounced metal target in sonar with the iron cannon which are typically part of the wreckage. Often vessels long lost are located by the finding of cannon. However in some cases, location of cannon might suggest a wreck site, but often heavy objects and materials have been used as ballast. Old cannon, armor etc. in many cases have served as such. I wonder if these might have been tossed over to lighten load for any reason. In the case of five cannon found off the coast of Calif. at Goleta(near Santa Barbara) these were revealed on beach when storms cleared sands. There was not however any sign of a shipwreck. It was later found that a ship had foundered in this location in 1830, but was not wrecked and later it was removed and sold. The bill of sale indicated there were 5 cannon, however obviously these had been thrown off to reduce weight ? in moving the vessel out of its grounded situation. Meanwhile, during the excited investigation of the guns, all manner of hyperbole evolved, up to claiming these were guns from Sir Francis Drakes ship in the 16th century PROVING he had indeed been there! Later it was found these were 18th century, but indeed from a vessel of around 1830 by testing of hemp residue on several of them. Just another example of these premature and fantastic announcements on archaeological finds.