barcalongo* / barca longo / barco longo / fragata* one in the same vessel so*

[ivan salis]

well folks thanks to a freind of mine (chagy) forwarding me a bit of info ---"proof"--- I have finally locked down the fact ( which I have long "thought" but needed written "proof of" ---since to think is one thing but to "know" for a fact is another) that the vessel terms for fragata * and barcalongo * are one in the same type of vessel in 1715 terms ---

chagy's info --was a letter about the building of a vessel in 1715 --- " a barco longo o fragata"-- in english--- "a barco longo or fragata "---- barco / barca longo is just a spelling veriant (means the same either way) so barcalongo (used by spotswood) is barca longo (properly ) which is barco longo as well which is used in the other letter "barco longo or fragata" -- so one in the same.

big fat hairy deal right? --- actually yes it is ---because when the 1715 fleet wrecking was reported to havana . cuba by a small life boat sent to havana --its reported that the govenor of cuba (casatorres) ordered a salvage fleet to be gathered up and sent to the site to recover the royal items , gold ,silver and vips * --- 7 balandras (sloop rigged single masters) and one fragata --- (note surely the name of the fragata would have been recorded in the harbor exit log.)

english govenor alexander spotswood in a PS in his letter of Oct 24th noted that a "barcalongo" sent from havana to pick up vip's and treasure was like wize castaway about 40 miles northward of st augustine*

thru the harbor exit logs the name of the fragata should be findible ---once the "name" of the fragata is known -- a "manifest " hunt in the archives should produce a manifest showing what items it was carrying back to spain -- as a fragata class vessel sent from havana to the scene it was most likely sent to see first hand and pick up dispatches from on the scene commanders and whatever royal treasures it could as well as vip's and to rush them back to spain * --fragatas are the type of fast sailing vessels often used as "mail or dispatch boats" ---this would account for her being lost north of st augustine * (nassau sound is about 40 miles north of st augustine --spanish 1715 era fleet items have been found in the sound area) --- thus she was "spain" bound at the time -- she would not have stopped in st augustine --since there had already been "treasure issues" there and so st augustine was placed "off limits" to treasure bearing vessels by order of those in charge of the salvage efforts (the treasure was being taken back to havana---except for the "dispatch boat" which was to carry the word of the disaster back to spain along with whatever royal goods and high dollar items it could get)--plus she was well provisioned before leaving havana sothere was no need to stop in st augustine .

The bottom line is the nassau sound wreck that many folks have wondered over for years---(who or what is she?) --might now have a "name" and a cargo manifest.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Diving for Pleasure and Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[ScubaDude]

Re: barcalongo* / barca longo / barco longo / fragata* one in the same vessel so

So how does this fit in?

Amelia Island Project E-102L: The San Miguel and the Ciervo, two 1715 fleet vessels believed to have been lost in Amelia Lease Project areas, have never been located. We believe one or both of these 1715 fleet vessels wrecked near the south end of Amelia Island Florida in an area protected by the Company's exclusive permits granted by the State of Florida. Details are in the following link to Amelia’s 2002 Report to the State of Florida, and a 1999 Summary of Amelia’s historical research of the San Miguel.

http://www.ameliaresearch.com
Bottom of the page on the "shipwrecks" link.

 

[ivan salis]

wrongo !!! the those vessels were both "original 1715 fleet " vessels * --- plus they are not fragata or "barcalongo" class vessels --( for a long time 1715 fleet era type items have been found in the sound --with there being a couple of missing 1715 era fleet vessels lots of folks thought (in error) that the items had to come off one of those 2 vessels and that one of them was down in the sound ( however in spotswoods letter --he clearly states -- that the "barcolongo" (fragata class vessel) was sent from havana to the fleet wreck sites (thus the vessel was sent AFTER the original 1715 fleet had already wrecked ) and that its purpose was that of "rescue of vip's and treasure recovery" from the 1715 fleet wreck sites and that after doing so , that it had wrecked about 40 miles northward of st augustine (nassau sound). here read for yourself .--- spotswoods letter shows how 1715 fleet items came to be in nassau sound --the recovered 1715 fleet items were upon the fragata / barcalongo-- rescue/recovery-- vessel when it sank in nassau sound. even if its not a "original 1715 fleet vessel "
this vessel was most likely carrying "cherry picked" high dollar value items -- possible royal jewelry and other goodies. --so its a very worth while target salvage wize.

 

[ivan salis]

in the letter spotswoods says -- #1 "barcalongo" type of vessel equal to fragata * #2 sent from havana (as the fragata was as part of a 8 vessel salvage fleet) #3 sent to the wreck sites (thus clearly the "1715 fleet" had already wrecked and it was not part of it but is a "rescue/ recovery" vessel ) #4 he states its mission was to recover VIPs and treasure #5 he says that is is like wise cast away (wrecked) about 40 miles north of st augustine (nassau sound)

this clearly explains how 1715 fleet era items were found over the years in nassau sound * --it was recovered fleet items form the 1715 wrecks aboard the rescue fragata / barcalongo that wrecked in nassau sound -- thus not the san miguel or ciervo.

the sept 20th, 1715 letter salmon from to the king --(many folks when translating "word swap" spanish words for english ones and then read it with out taking into account how the langauge is spoken differantly ) --- a word swap spanish to english would give you " wreckage of a large vessel or vessels was found on the coast north of st augustine" which should "properly" read when translated correctly " there is little doubt that they sank in deep water because wreckage of a large vessel or vessels was found on the shore on the north coast of st augustine.

( note when translating spanish to english the noun/ subject first then the thing about the noun / subject)--- la casa rojo --the house red --- in english would be "the red house" ---- "the coast north of st augustine" in spanish would properly translate to be "the north coast of st augustine"in english -- thus the possible wreckage of the 2 "missing vessels" that sank in deep water was found on the north coast of st augustine.

 

[ScubaDude]

Re: barcalongo* / barca longo / barco longo / fragata* one in the same vessel so

Ignoring who thinks what the vessel type or identity is, what about the Lease and permit area?

Aren't both you and Amelia talking about the same underlying wreck site? The same one that has produced 1715 goods in the past. What was the outcome of their work in that area, or was there ever any work done?

It sounds like your research is ahead of theirs maybe, I haven't lived in it as you have so I don't know.

It's in your backyard, help us out...... Isn't there a marine preserve area or something preventing their work from moving forward?

What is the rest of the present day story? Someone apparently tried to go after it, why weren't they successful?

 

[ivan salis]

yes currently the state has used the "aquatic preserve zone" BS to stall giving permits -- amelia island recovery was issued a " research" type permit by the state (its since lapsed) but then was told no "salvage" permit would be offered for the area (after doing all that work and spernding the money on research) -- what a great offer by the state to a "for profiet" outfit spend a buncha money doing free data research for the state (since the state gets copies of all the data you get in the reports you have to send in )--then they stiff you when its time to get the salvage permit so you can recover your money spent on the research and turn a profiet (talk about dirty dealings -- to issue a "research permit" to a "for profiet" outfit for a area where its legally impossible to issue a money making "salvage permit" according to their own rules )-- "research permits" issued for areas that can not be "legally" issued salvage permits are worse than useless to "for profiet" outfits -- since they are a total waste of "for profiet"salvors time and money being theres no "pay off" or "salvage permit" -- the state hides behind the fact that its a "aquatic preserve zone" thus you might disturb the enviroment by doing a salvage project --- however a few short years ago the state allowed and permitted a beach renourishment project in the exact same area!!!! (talk about a double standard)--plus both past and current sea charts of the area say that the area has constant "shifting sands" so to not trust the channel depths (the shifting sands means its waters are always "turbid" ) ---its game playing 101 by the state. ---frankly I am trying to figger out a way to legally force the issue of a " salvage permit" for the site --if so amelia island recovery would be my first choice of salvage partners for the project -- for several reasons ---- they are locally based and have the right gear for the job --plus they have a past history with the area as well and already have their past on site research in hand --- Ivan

 

[ivan salis]

I'm just a small fry in the feild of research (so far)-- but I do read and study and I got a sharp mind according to most folks. --- Ivan

 

[elle]

Ivan...here is some information that may help you to solve your mystery.

*Admiral Salmon to Philip V, dated from Florida, September 20, 1715 (AIS-Escr. Cam. 55C).

"The number of ships lost are nine and two galleons missing...there is little doubt that they sunk on the high seas and this was proven because wreckage was sighted on the north coast of San Agustin, Florida."

*Casa Torres, Governor of Cuba, to the Viceroy of Mexico, Linares, October 12, 1715 (AIS-Escr. Cam. 1058C).

"We have no news of the other three ships: El Grifon, El Ciervo, and a registered ship of Echeverz named San Miguel that had come to Havana to pick up tobacco."
"...There are now eight boats engaged in the diving operations."

*Casa Torres, Governor of Cuba, to the Viceroy of Mexico, Linares, October 18, 1715 (AIS-Escr. Cam. 1058C).

"Of eight boats engaged in the salvage operation, news reached me only yesterday that one of these boats coming to this port was wrecked due to bad weather at a port named Jaimanita, five leagues from here." (Jaimanitas is another port near Havana, Cuba)
"She was carrying 85 chests of silver and 50 bars of silver, but everything was salvaged from her..."

*Captain Lima in Havana to the Viceroy of Mexico, Linares, October 19, 1715 (AIS-Escr. Cam. 1058C).

"The ship Grifon sailed from Havana the same day as ours and we believe that it had passed Cape Canaveral when the storm began, but we have news from St. Augustine that fragments of a large ship came ashore 15 leagues north of this port."
"...we need further confirmation to know for certain if the Grifon was lost."
(Note the word: Large. This does not refer to a balandra or even a small fragata. Remember the various rescue and salvage balandras were mostly one-masted sailing sloops which drew about 5 to 8 feet of water depending on their load weight. Fragments of a LARGE ship implies a galleon and they thought this large ship was the Grifon.)

*Don Alonso de Armenta in Havana to the Viceroy of Mexico, Linares, October 21, 1715 (AIS-Escr. Cam. 1058).

"...eight schooners were sent and they took most of the survivors back to Havana."
(No archive evidence suggests that any of these eight were going anywhere else except Havana with treasure and survivors.)

*Calendar of State Papers, Colonial Series, America West Indies, Lt. Governor Spotswood of Virginia to Secretary Stanhope, October 24, 1715.
(This is the document Ivan has been referring to and we have all read in completion.)

"...that the Spanish fleet...cast away south of St. Augustine...a considerable quanity of plate is like wise cast away about 40 miles to the northward of St. Augustine..."
(This 40 miles north of St. Augustine is about the same distance as the 15 Spanish leagues as mentioned by Captain Lima earlier.)


I also need to mention that one of the first letters to the King detailing the loss of Flota and Squadron was sent September 19th aboard the French ship, Francisco, from Casa Torres in Havana (AIS-Esc. Cam. 55C). The second letter in detail was sent on an Advice Boat to Spain from Casa Torres in Havana (AIS-Esc. Cam 55C).
The first ships to carry any survivors or treasure back to SPAIN did not leave Havana till the summer of 1716.


The misinterpretation came in on Lt. Governor Spotswood's part. I believe the information given to him had some serious mistakes. The officials at Palmar de Ayz knew about the wreckage north of St. Augustine since September 20, 1715. On October 19, 1715, it was mentioned that 15 Spanish leagues north of St. Augustine, there were fragments from a LARGE ship. Lt. Governor Spotswood must have been told about this wreckage 40 miles to the north which is about the same as 15 Spanish leagues. He then received the story of the ONLY SALVAGE SHIP recorded as being lost. It was going back to Havana when it perished at a port called Jaimanitas.
The archives indicate that none of the eight salvage ships went anywhere else with the TREASURE except back to Havana.
Lt. Governor Spotswood then put these two stories together that he had heard from his English scouts and misinterpreted that a salvage boat went down 40 miles north of St. Augustine (The Nassau Sound-Fernandina Beach-Amelia Island Wreck). What the Governor needed to hear was that a large ship went down 40 miles north because fragments were found somewhat shortly after the famous hurricane of July 30th, 1715 (most likely this is truly the San Miguel because of the 1715 artifacts that have washed ashore over the years), and that a salvage ship went down in Jaimanitas, Cuba, probably sometime around the second week of October, 1715.
Up until October 17, 1715, the Governor of Cuba proclaimed that besides the one ship that perished at JAIMANITAS, all the others were continuing to salvage and survive without incident.


Ivan...I am truly sorry. I have debated for such a long time and have prayed hard whether to write this archival evidence because my intention is never to stop anyone from their dreams. I only want to lend a hand. My heart told me, though, that in order to help you...I would need to inform you of my research. I couldn't just hold all this in when I truly believe there was a mistake done three hundred years ago. It is not your mistake at all...it was a mistake on behalf of the British who messed up their stories of what was truly going on after the hurricane. I think you are the most awesome researcher and firmly believe you should send your resume in to Amelia Research. I think it would be wonderful if you could work on this wreck at Nassau Sound with this company! You deserve to... because all the years I have read your posts....you are enlightening and informative! I apologize again because I know how much this means to you and I would never write my research to hurt anyone....only to try to help. There is nothing I would love to see more than for you to find a ship full of silver plate! Please...I do hope you prove me wrong so you can succeed. If you need any more help...don't hesitate to ask. I will be at the Library of Congress and the Virginia Historical Society next month working on a new project that Luis (Chagy) and I are involved in. If I find anything of importance in the archives concerning your case...I promise to inform you immediately Ivan.
Best of luck,
Laura

 

[Chagy]

Dear Elle,

Thank you for such an amazing and informative post.!!!!

I did spoke to Ivan on the phone a few days ago and I did asked him how did Spotswood's found out about the wreck...How come didn’t the British try to salvage the wreck... I also asked him how come if the VIP were traveling in that vessel there was no salvage attempt by the Spaniards, no letters or any mention at all....The only mention I have ever seen of that wreck is in that letter from Spotswood's

 

[ivan salis]

elle, I alwayslove to chat about 1715 fleet info with a good research minded person -- thanks for your input.

note in the sept 20th. 1715 letter * salmons says -- there is little doubt they sank in deep water --wreckage of a large vessel or vessels was found on the " on the north coast of st augustine*" thus meaning the wrecks sank in deep water off shore but close to st augustine * and debris washed ashore from them ----now if it said " on the coast north of st augustine " to me that means it could be a good bit from st augustine . --- and 39 to 40 miles is a good bit away .

using the old distance of 2.6 miles to the spanish league --15 leagues is equal to about 39 miles* -- spotwoods letter says about 40 miles * --- thats very close (39 /about 40 or a 1 mile differance is within "working" tolerance)

the oct 19th ,1715 letter reads --- wreckage of a large vessel * was found 15 leauges to the "leeward" of this port * (st augustine)--(leeward means a wind direction -- not north or south ) --it could just as easily be south as north (while in this case I do believe it means "north" )-- it could be that 39 miles "south" of st augustine could be a wreck site instead .

the ciervo (the french prize vessel taken for "illegal trading")---is recorded as being a galara -- or galley type rowing / sailing vessel (rowible if no wind or to boost speed) thus it was a type of class type similar to a fragata single masted vessel ala the sketch of "fragata" as shown by chagy (the french prize vessel was taken by echerevz's pataches while he was in porto bello awaiting treasure to be delivered ) the french prize was recorded as mainly hauling 96 tons of brazilwood --the "nao" san miguel was mainly recorded as hauling tabacco (she was cut away from the rest of the fleet on their inbound voyage and was sent directly to havana to load lots of tobacco and later on rejoined the 1715 fleet upon their return to havana on their return trip to spain)-- however being she had spent lots of time in havana (loading tobacco) the chances are great she was loaded to the gills with illegal "smuggled" gold and silver

amelia island research in the past thought "el ciervo" to be the "la francesa" --which records clearly show it was not ---- while the la francesa (a french trading vessel) had travelled with the fleet a bit from south america -- it stayed in port went the 1715 fleet left --- in fact it is recorded that it was the la francesa which left havana, cuba on sept 19th , 1715 headed back to spain with news of the disaster *

by the way records show that the griffon made breast france * and thus was not lost --the differant course she choose to take and the fact that she was not overloaded like the spanish vessels had saved her.

 

[elle]

Yes...Ivan...you are indeed right about a French ship that stayed in port while the Fleet left July 24, 1715.
It was called "El Francisco" and it left for Spain on September 19, 1715. This vessel took back some of the first declarations about the Fleet's tragedy.
You are such a great guy when it comes to research. I look up to you and we could all continue to learn about the 1715 Fleet with your posts!
Hats off, Ivan!

And Chagy...thank you! You made a wise point asking why there was no salvaging done if Nassau Sound truly was a salvage ship that perished on the way back to Spain.
Hats off to you too!

 

[ivan salis]

remember for a vessel to be salvaged by the spanish required that there be spanish survivors to tell of its "where abouts" --no spanish survivors generally meant no salvage * unless the spanish somehow stumbled accross the wreckage ---

its my belief that govenor spotswoods "information" came from english silver raiders --running up and down along the coast from virginia to the spanish silver camps (he like many others had "indercover" dealings with them )---- the english pirate /silver raiders in their travels ran accross the nassau sound wreck site and any "survivors" who unknowingly spilled their guts to the silver raiders about who and what they were (not knowing they were "pirates") once the information was gotten the "suvivors" were not survivors anymore (too bad for them) -- now only the "pirates" had the location of the shipwreck which they then gave or dealt to spotswood --who in his PS in the letter to stanhope --was basically begging for the kings royal "blessing" to plunder the spanish wreck site .

 

[Chagy]

remember for a vessel to be salvaged by the spanish required that there be spanish survivors to tell of its "where abouts" --no spanish survivors generally meant no salvage * unless the spanish somehow stumbled accross the wreckage ---

Dear Ivan,

You are a very smart man..Let’s apply some logic to the story....If you send a vessels full of VIP’s and it doesn’t arrive to its destine wouldn’t you go look for it? If this vessel came from a wreck site (disaster area) wouldn’t it be logical to stop in the nearest port to get supplies and cure the people that needed medical attention? And if it never arrived to the nearest port wouldn’t it be logical to say that it was lost between the place of departure and the nearest port?

 

[mad4wrecks]

And don't forget this deepwater wreck off St. Augustine as a potential 1715 fleet shipwreck:

Seahawk II, Ltd. During May, 1989, R/V Seahawk formed Seahawk II, Ltd.,
a Florida limited partnership ("Seahawk II"), and agreed to serve as the sole
general partner. Seahawk II is structured very similar to Seahawk I except
that the expenses of the Partnership include a payment of 5% of all items
salvaged to a fund for the crew. Seahawk II sold 50 Units at a price of
$30,000 per Unit. During 1989, Seahawk II commenced its proposed business of
attempting to locate deep water shipwrecks in a specific area off the east
coast of Florida, and found what management believed to be a colonial era
shipwreck. This belief was based on, among other things, the opinions of Dave
Moore described below relating to the age of the silver coins and cannons
found on the wreck. A cooking pot and piece of rigging were recovered from
the site in order to perfect the admiralty claim. During October 1990,
Seahawk II conducted a predisturbance survey of this wreck site (referred to
as the "St. Augustine" site) utilizing Harbor Branch Oceanographic
Institution's Johnson Sea-Link manned submersible. During this survey,
approximately 90 artifacts were recovered including two cannons, numerous
cannon balls, and a dozen copper cooking pots. Dave Moore, an archaeologist
who used to be employed by the Company, estimated the cannon is from the
1700's. Dave Moore holds a Masters Degree in Maritime History and Underwater
Research and he has over 10 years' experience in archaeology.

During April 1991, the Johnson Sea-Link returned to the site to continue
work on the shipwreck for 6 days. A good portion of the area surrounding the
ballast pile was uncovered and some timbers and ribs of the ship were exposed
which, according to archaeologist Robert Marx, indicated that the ship was
small in size -- most likely in the 50 to 75 ton range. During this trip, a
number of artifacts were recovered, including 6 Spanish silver coins, three
four-foot cannons, more copper cooking pots, scores of lead musket and pistol
balls, pulley blocks and sheaves and other miscellaneous items. According to
Mr. Moore, the coins date between 1712 and 1714. Mr. Marx has reported to the
Company that he believes that the ship was a small Spanish vessel known as an
"Adviso" or advice boat -- sometimes called a "Patache." One or more of these
ships was usually employed in each treasure fleet with their main purposes
being to carry mail and official communications between the king and
government officials.

 

[ivan salis]

the fragata vessel was loaded at havana with supplies before depating (thus it would not be needing stores ) and if it only took fit healthy vip survivors there would be no need for it to stop in st augustine (any sick or ill would have been sent back to havana or to st augustine to recover before being able to travel onward to spain)-- plus upon arrival all the salvage vessels learned of "treasure issues" going on in st augustine -- basically the church in st augustine was trying to grab up treasure --so st augustine was placed "off limits" for treasure carrying vessels (thus no stopping in st augustine)-- all vessels from then on were to return to havana with the treasure for accounting and later on reshipment of the treasure.

 

[ivan salis]

mad 4 wrecks -- it is that wreck off of st augustine along with the salmon letter --that says " they most likely sank in deep waters as wreckage was found on the north coast of st augustine thus the wreckage found close to st augustine most likely was washed up debris from bob marx deep water wreck site. near st augustine.

as a guess I think it might be the missing vessel "el ciervo" -- a smallish galara / frigate type vessel that was hauling a cargo of wood mainly that broken up at sea most likely due to shifting cargo .

 

[mad4wrecks]

as a guess I think it might be the missing vessel "el ciervo

It certainly could be Ivan.

And I think the point of this thread, the theory that a salvage vessel or a vessel carrying survivors of distinction or nobility from the 1715 shipwrecks sank in the Nassau Sound area has been disproven by the documents and evidence, as presented by Elle and Chagy.

By the year 1715, vessels of all nationalities were plying the Florida straits, coming down from the colonies or returning to Europe from Mexico, South America, Central America, and various destinations in the Caribbean and gulf of Mexico. I never read any archival documentation that stated the nationality of the wreck you keep referring to: the oct 19th, 1715 letter reads --- wreckage of a large vessel was found 15 leauges to the leeward of this port. I would think there were a number of casualties resulting from that terrible hurricane on July 31st, 1715, other than just the Spanish Silver fleet.

If there is 1715 wreckage in Nassau Sound, it came from one of the original ships in the fleet, that departed Havana on July 24, 1715.

 

[ivan salis]

well that means that one of the vessels had to be way off from the rest -- now from what I gather of the 2 missingvessels --one was toting 96 tons of wood --the other tabacco as their main cargos * --the "nao" san miguel never went to the "treasure ports at all" and stayed in havana the whole time loading tobacco -- thus she should have not had the same type of items on her as the other fleet vessels that did go to the treasure ports did. (thus if the vessel in nassau sound) had similar treasure fleet items as those who went to the treasure ports --it has to be the "french prize" who main listed cargo was wood --but it would also have other similar items as the rest of the fleet did. -- the nao san miguel not having gone to the treasure ports would not . (smuggled gold and silver coins yes but not the "trade goods" like chinese plates and such)

its well known that 1715 era spanish treasure fleet items have been found in nassau sound -- now the big question is how did they get there and what vessel brought then there?

the 1715 fleet type items found in the sound over the years and the fact that a letter written on oct 19th, 1715 stated that wreckage of a large vessel was found 15 leauges (39 miles at 2.6 miles per league) to the leeward (thought to be "north") of this port --(st augustine) leads one to think it was a spanish fleet vessel -- one of the missing (2) vessels -- el ciervo or san miguel

I was exploring the ideal that it was possibly a salvage vessel carrying 1715 items had wrecked in the
sound * ( i had heard one had wrecked) but according to the Oct 18th, 1715 letter from Casa Torrres to the viceroy of mexico ---it seems according to the letter that ithe salvage vessel that wrecked ---wrecked in cuba --and that her treasure was fully recovered as well -- darn back to the drawing board

 

[mad4wrecks]

its well known that 1715 era spanish treasure fleet items have been found in nassau sound

I sure would like to see some of these artifacts, even pictures. Are they in a museum up there or in private collections? There was all manner of trading going on between various countries by the early 18th century, so I am curious as to how these objects were identified as being from a Spanish shipwreck.

 

[elle]

Ivan...I tossed and turned sleeping last night.
Writing my archive research on your Nassau Sound wreck yesterday was one of the hardest things I've ever been confronted with because I never want to take away someone's dreams.
When you said "...back to the drawing board," I sincerely hope you mean it because you have so much to offer and much determination in your work.

One thing is for certain, I will not forget you in my shipwreck endeavors, because you have kept the spirit of the 1715 Fleet alive all these years!
Some say that shipwreck salvaging sometimes brings the worst out of people. I am truly determined to defy that principle. I am going to see to it that only positive things and the best possible outcome results from any research of mine in this extraordinary field of shipwreck study. And I know I speak on behalf of Luis (Chagy) too, because he is one of the most sincere and kind-hearted individuals I have ever worked with. There is so much good people can contribute to the world through shipwreck research, salvaging, and preservation.

I promise not to forget you...and any leads I acquire in particular areas of this fleet...I will be extremely happy to share with you.
One aspect I would like to suggest concerns the realm of the pirate world. Hundreds of sloops made their way to the Treasure Coast and I have already read several documents which describe pirate vessels and ones that perished off the Sebastian-Vero Beach area. Imagine finding a true virgin pirate ship that stole or salvaged goods off the 1715 Fleet...and then was destroyed on the offshore reefs! In my estimation, there are dozens of these vessels sitting in the water that have been overlooked by salvagers.

Ivan...please continue researching and keep the bulb lit as an example to all those who dream and ponder the history of the sea. I guarantee one day you will find your pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.

In regards to the research...you have made an excellent point with the term "leeward." Leeward indeed refers to the course in which the wind is blowing. I agree with what you said, that in this case, the direction means north of St. Augustine.

Concentrating on "north coast of St. Augustine" and "on the coast north of St. Augustine," I understand your concern how information is worded. Spanish archive papers I have read relating to Nassau Sound have been put like this: "...large ship came ashore 15 leagues to the leeward (north) of this port (St. Augustine)."
I have learned from researching documents in different languages that sometimes the exact translation needs to be studied and given room for error. The message means one thing but it is for the translator to examine and come to a conclusion as to what the words were truly meant to imply.

Laura