We are told by Wilkins that Morgan gave or sold the chest to Cutler (not Palmer) but it is probable Dan Morgan aka Daniel Morgan (who allegedly descended from Sir Henry Morgan) never existed like Pamela Hardy. Cutler made up these people to fabricate the pedigree notes the furniture pieces came with. I have asked Crow to assist with finding any birth/death records for Morgan or other proof of his existence. I searched some sources and could not find anything. Morgan was said to have moved to Bristol and died in Barnstaple, England in 1932. According to Wilkins he was aboard The Wanderer built in Liverpool in 1891 by W.H. Potter & Sons.
It depends what your threshold for proof is but I have 'proven' the Hardy Chest is fake in the sense of beyond a reasonable doubt.
As I explained, Palmer's private letters to Wilkins confirm the correct sequence of when the Kidd-Palmer maps were discovered, what maps were in certain furniture pieces and who found and sold them, etc. The accounts of Howlett (and Edmunds, who uncritically copied Howlett) are disproven by these letters. The problem is these letters are private and are only published in G. J. Bath's books so not many know about or have read them. Instead many people (lacking access), wrongly believe in Howlett's/Edmunds version. Suffice to say, this is frustrating.
The claim is entirely unsubstantiated and traces back to Anthony Howlett (1958). Howlett refused to provide a shred of evidence. We also know it is erroneous because Palmer in private letters stated it never happened.
I do not think he did. To my knowledge, one of the maps was shown to the expert R. A. Skelton in 1950. This was one year after Palmer died. It was presumably Elizabeth Dick who did this. Whatever Skelton concluded about the map was 'off-the-record' (a private opinion). There was no official investigation or report by the British Museum (Map Room) [note the Map Room of the British Museum transferred to the newly-created British Library in 1973].
As I said, Palmer never consulted with any experts or sent the maps for analysis/testing at the British Museum (Map Room). This is confirmed by private letters he wrote to Wilkins. Palmer also refused in the 1930s and 1940s to sell the maps, even turning down a £3,000 offer for one map (equivalent to well over £200,000 today). Palmer also refused Wilkins permission to photograph or copy the maps by drawing in his 1935 book which explains why Wilkins' drawings are significantly different to all the Kidd-Palmer maps.
You're splitting hairs. The fact is, the charts were tested by the British Museum.
Of the two of us, thus-far I am the only one that has provided Any evidence to support my opinion.
(furniture hardware?). Records do not say whether the desk was off loaded when Kidd arrived back to New York on June 9, 1699, or whether it remained on the St Anthony. I do know that he gave the two French passes to his friend James Emmott around the 12th of June, and Kidd visited Gardeners Island on June 25th or 26th. So he had plenty of time to take his belongings home before being arrested on July 6th. (Exactly 326 years ago today!).
Provence of custody chain is important when claiming any article of Kidds was in Palmers custody. Let alone multiples.
Here is a snippet of a private letter by Hubert Palmer (dated 1937) confirming he did not want one of the maps tested, since he did not want its "secret" presumably in the sense of its clues to find the treasure made public [the letter is in the possession of G. J. Bath]:
I am not and was not upset.
Not accurate and it is clear you are not familiar with Harold T. Wilkins' Captain Kidd and His Skeleton Island, having also earlier said:
I have already explained why he made up the "Mar Del" map. He did not have permission from Palmer to copy the original maps so used his imagination since his publisher wanted a map. In private letters, Palmer complemented him on his fictional Del Mar map. There was no deception involved. It is also obvious that Wilkins drew the "Mar Del" map as it had his name as a copyright on it.
All irrelevant. By the same logic do you believe in dowsing? George Edmunds who you have stated you trust his version of events (concerning the Kidd-Palmer map discoveries), supports dowsing and made pro-dowsing comments in his 1996 book on the Kidd-Palmer charts (I found those out-of-place). Dowsing is a pseudoscience and to be blunt, crackpottery. There is probably a fallacy name for this, where you argue to disregard what someone says or believes in regards to x because they say or believe something in regard to y. I am personally well aware that Wilkins had a plethora of far-fetched, eccentric, and outright erroneous views or ideas on a variety of topics (I own nearly all of his books having collected them for ~20 years) but none of his writings on Atlantis, man-eating plants, ghosts or UFOs etc., are remotely relevant to his writings on the Kidd-Palmer charts. Regardless, unlike his other writings his rather exhaustive biographical book of Kidd and his thoughts on maritime history in general were fairly well-received by scholars and referenced in academic journals at the time.
By "rather a large one", Palmer presumably meant in comparison to the smaller sizes of the other maps. For example, the map found in the bureau (a year before) measured 4.75 x 3.1 inches, so when compared, it is indeed "rather large". According to Wilkins, there was a compartment hidden by four placed nails. Again, you have admitted to never reading Wilkins (1935) so appear to be quite clueless.
You obviously misunderstood the post you referenced. If Wilkins "did not have permission from Palmer to copy the original maps", how can you discredit my statement above, and then confirm you agree I'm correct in your next post?
Wilkins not only believes in UFO's and other nonsense, but his writings are deeply seated in fictional stories. While Edmonds' books are all based on non-fiction.
Here is a snippet of a private letter by Hubert Palmer (dated 1937) confirming he did not want one of the maps tested, since he did not want its "secret" presumably in the sense of its clues to find the treasure made public [the letter is in the possession of G. J. Bath]:
The maps are not authentic Kidd/pirate maps; they were not drawn in the 17th century/early 18th century and have nothing to do with Captain Kidd or the Golden Age of Piracy. You appear to agree? However, the motives of the hoaxer are unknown. The hoaxer (evidence points to Arthur Hill Cutler) could have made them for a number of reasons. Although I often use the word 'hoaxer', I am hesitant to label the maps as 'forgeries' or their maker as a 'forger' since that implies fraud which is by no means clear. Historically, forgery was defined as false making with the intent to defraud (many dictionary definitions include "fraudulent purpose" rather than mere deceit hence forgery is a crime). The hoaxer was undoubtfully engaging in deception/trickery, but what were their intentions? Not all literary or map fakes are/were made fraudulently for financial gain and could have been done for various other reasons: (1) out of boredom and amusement, (2) as part of a social experiment, (3) as a joke, (4) to demonstrate cleverness (extent of how many people could be deceived), and so on. My personal view is Cutler drew the maps himself, faked the Captain Kidd signatures, as well as fabricated the records of ownership of the furniture pieces the maps came with, to trace them back to Kidd or his shipmates but left clues on the maps to a treasure he buried himself. His intention was to thus imitate a pirate treasure map and buried treasure.
I think we are going around in circles. Again, nothing you posted is correct. Skelton only ever examined a single map and this was in 1950 (a year after Palmer died). He looked at the map 'off-the-record' and merely offered a private opinion. The British Museum never gave him approval and has no record or report of the map. He never even said the map was authentic. What he actually said has often been wildly quoted out of context by treasure hunters on the internet. Palmer himself never got any of the maps tested. Howlett had no credentials and was not an expert; his opinion is quite worthless and we know he made many mistakes or rather made up things that had no factual basis as well as made unsubstantiated claims. It is ultimately Howlett (1958) who is unreliable, not Wilkins (1935) concerning the sequence of discovery of the Kidd-Palmer maps, alongside other details since Wilkins account is verified by Palmer's private letters.
It was not possible for Palmer to have brought the map to the British Museum in 1949 since he was in very ill-health before dying that year (he was immobile), so it was almost certainly his housekeeper Elizabeth Dick. However, Barber got the dates wrong by a year. The map was taken to Skelton in the British Museum in 1950, not 1949. Palmer by then was dead. Proof of this is found in a statement published by Helen Wallis from the British Library Map Room in 1974 (quoted by Bath):
The fact Mr. Skelton only ever saw a single map in 1950 is also confirmed by a letter Skelton sent to Rupert Furneaux in June 1965:
Semantics. Mr. Bath agrees the maps have nothing to do with Captain Kidd and are not authentic pirate maps: "I don’t believe the maps had anything to do with the ‘pirate’ Captain Kidd", so in that sense he does admit they are a hoax. I find it amusing you bash Wilkins for his far-fetched views on UFOs but you yourself hold deeply irrational beliefs the Kidd-Palmer maps are authentic maps drawn or owned by Captain Kidd - a crank position akin to Wilkins UFO beliefs.
