Shipwreck: A History of Disasters at Sea

 

 

 

Sam Willis, an expert on naval history, is the author of several books about ships and sailors. The hardcover version of his book Shipwreck: A History of Disasters at Sea was published in 2008. A paperback version appeared in 2015.

 

The main text is divided into six parts, which cover different periods and topics. Each part begins with an introduction followed by three, four, or five cases. The total number of cases is 21. Here is the table of contents:

 

PART ONE: ANCIENT AND DARK AGE WRECKS

** The Kyrenia Ship, ca. 300 BC

** The Intan Ship, ca. 920

** The Skuldelev Ships, ca.1000

 

PART TWO: GALLEONS AND GOLD

** The Mary Rose, 1545

** La Trinidad Valencera, 1588

** The Vasa, 1628

 

PART THREE: BROADSIDES, PIRATES AND WHALES

** The Queen Anne’s Revenge, 1718

** The Battle of Quiberon Bay, 1759

** La Meduse, 1816

** The Essex, 1820

 

PART FOUR: IRON, STEAM AND STEEL

** The H. L. Hunley, 1864

** The Titanic, 1912

** The Endurance, 1915

 

PART FIVE: WORLD WARS

** The Lusitania, 1915

** Scapa Flow, 1919

** USS Arizona, 1941

** The Wilhelm Gustloff, 1945

** USS Indianapolis, 1945

 

PART SIX: NUCLEAR POWER, OIL AND THE ATOMIC BOMB

** The Nagato, 1946

** The Torrey Canyon, 1967

** The Kursk, 2000

 

At the end of the book there is an index.

 

Shipwreck is written in a clear language which is easy to understand. Each case is placed in a historical context. The author explains not only the what, the where and why. He also explains the importance and significance of each case. 

 

The book covers different types of ships and disasters caused by different reasons, such as bad weather, an accident, or a deliberate attack. All 21 cases are well-chosen. In short, this is a good book about naval history.

 

THE FLAWS

Having said this, I have to add that not everything about the book is perfect. There are flaws here and there, and some of them are quite serious. In the following I will explain the flaws I noticed while reading the paperback version published by Quercus in 2015.

 

# 1. There is no bibliography; there are no references. If you wish to know more about the cases covered in this book, you will have to search the internet for additional information.

 

# 2. There are no illustrations. There is not a single map to show the location of the wrecks; there is not a single picture to show what the ships looked like before they were hit by disaster. Once again, I have to say: if you wish to see some illustrations of the cases covered in the book, you will have to search the internet for additional information.

 

# 3. There is a terrible misprint in the table of contents. Part three is about “Broadsides, Prirates and Whales.” How could such a misprint appear in print?

 

# 4. When the Soviet submarine K-19 is mentioned, the author adds the nickname, the Widowmaker (page 292). But this nickname is false. The K-19 was not known by this nickname. The origin of the false nickname is a US movie about the boat which premiered in 2002. The real nickname of this boat is the Hiroshima.

 

# 5. The atomic bombs that were dropped on Japan in 1945 are mentioned in the section about the USS Indianapolis. On page 273, the author says the first bomb was dropped on Hiroshima on 6 August 1945, which is true. On the next page he writes: 

 

“Eight days later another A-bomb was dropped on Nagasaki, which led directly to the surrender of Japan and the end of the Second World War.”

 

Something is wrong here. The second bomb was dropped on 9 August, only three days after the first, not eight days later, as Willis claims. The Japanese surrender was announced on 14 August; it was effective from the next day, 15 August 1945.

 

The author states: “These were two of the most decisive events in world history.” He is right, but since these dates are so important, it is hard to understand why he did not check them one more time. How could he get the second date wrong? And how could his book-editor fail to spot this mistake?

 

# 6. There are several problems in the chapter about the Mary Rose, which sank in the English Channel off the Isle of Wight in 1545.

 

(a) Willis is wrong when he describes the beginning. On page 81, he writes: “The Mary Rose was one of three great ships that Henry built in 1509 to spearhead his new fleet.” In fact, the foundation of the ship was laid in 1510, it was launched in 1511 and completed in 1512. It seems 1509 is the year in which Henry VIII decided to build the ship. But several years passed from the king’s decision until the ship was ready to sail the sea.

 

(b) Willis is wrong when he describes the sinking. On pp. 83-84, he explains how and why the Mary Rose suddenly sank to the bottom of the sea. His explanation is factual. But he fails to mention that there is an ongoing debate about this event. Some scholars offer one reason; other scholars offer another reason; and some believe a combination of several factors led to the disaster. None of this is revealed in this book. 

 

Here are two references:

 

** What Sank the Mary Rose? is a documentary film that was shown on British television (Channel 4) in the year 2000. 

 

** Ghosts of the Mary Rose is a documentary film that was shown on television in 2008 and released on DVD in 2013.

 

(c) Willis is wrong when he describes the rescue operation. On pp. 86-87, he explains that the ship was discovered in 1971 and later raised from the bottom of the sea, but he never tells us exactly when the ship was lifted to the surface. It happened in 1982, but this important date in the history of naval archaeology is never mentioned. How could he fail to mention this important date? And how could his book-editor fail to notice that something was missing here?

 

# 7. There is a problem in the chapter about the Essex, which was attacked and sunk by a whale in 1820. On page 159 Willis writes: 

 

“Accounts of two survivors from the wreck of the Essex have provided us with a remarkably detailed and balanced account of what happened.”

 

When the author mentions two eyewitnesses, I expect him to give us two names. I also expect him to tell us when their accounts were published. But he mentions only one name; the other name is never mentioned.

 

The first eyewitness is Owen Chase (1797-1869), who was the first mate on the Essex. His account, written and published in 1821, inspired Herbert Melville to write the novel Moby Dick that was published in 1851. These facts are mentioned by Willis. But what about the second eyewitness? He is never named. It seems Willis completely forgot about him, even though he devotes eleven pages to the case of the Essex.

 

The second eyewitness is Thomas Nickerson (1805-1883), who was the cabin boy on the Essex. His account was written in 1876, many years after the event. It was sent to another author who was going to help him get it published, but the other author had problems in his life, so he did not keep his promise. The manuscript was abandoned. It ended up in a trunk where it remained for decades. It was discovered in 1960, it was authenticated in 1980, and finally published in 1984.

 

Nickerson’s account inspired Nathaniel Philbrick to write the novel In the Heart of the Sea that was published in the year 2000. None of this is mentioned by Sam Willis. How could he forget to mention the second eyewitness? And how could his book-editor fail to notice that something was missing here?

 

[Philbrick’s novel about the Essex and the whale was turned into a historical movie with the same title that premiered in 2015.]

 

[Into the Deep: America, Whaling & the World is a documentary film which premiered on US television (PBS) in 2010; it is an episode of the long-running program American Experience.]

 

# 8. As stated above, the 21 cases covered in the book are well-chosen, but several important cases are not covered in the book, even though they are highly relevant for the topic. Here is a list of some cases which could and should have been included in this book:

 

(1) Four English war ships went down off the Isles of Scilly in 1707. About 1600 lives were lost.

 

(2) The slave ship Leusden went down off the coast of Surinam in 1738. More than 600 lives were lost. For details about this case, see Slave Ship Leusden by Leo Balai (2014) (sadly, this account is only available on Kindle).

 

(3) The Arctic went down in 1854. More than 300 lives were lost.

 

(4) The Mississippi river steam boat the Sultana exploded in 1865. 1,700 lives were lost. This case is mentioned on page 196 but not explored. Jerry O. Potter’s book about the case was published in 1992. Gene Eric Salecker’s book about the case was published in 1996 and reprinted in 2015.

 

Remember the Sultana is a documentary film which premiered in 2018. For details, see my review of this film posted on this blog in September 2021.

 

(5) HMS Victoria collided with the Camperdown in the Mediterranean Sea in 1893. More than 300 lives were lost. Richard Hough’s book about the case was published in 1959 and reprinted in 2003.

 

(6) RMS Empress of Ireland went down in 1914. More than a thousand lives were lost. Derek Grout’s book about the case was published in 2014.

 

(7) SS Mont Blanc exploded in Halifax Harbour in 1917 and destroyed a whole city. Around 2,000 lives were lost.

 

(8) HMS Royal Oak was sunk by a German U-Boat in 1939. 833 lives were lost. This event, which happened at Scapa Flow, is mentioned on page 250 in the section about the sinking of the German fleet at Scapa Flow in 1919. 

 

H. J. Weaver’s book about the German torpedo attack on the Royal Oak was published in 1980 and reprinted in 2015: Nightmare at Scapa Flow.

 

(9) RMS Lancastria went down in 1940. About 4,000 lives were lost. Brian Crabb’s book about the case was published in 2002. Jonathan Fenby’s book about the case was published in 2006. 

 

For more details, see the following item: 

 

Graham Fraser, “Lancastria: the forgotten tragedy of World War Two,” BBC News, 13 June 2015.

 

(10) MV Goya went down in 1945. More than 6,000 lives were lost.

 

(11) The Andrea Doria collided with another ship in the Atlantic Ocean and sank in 1956. 52 lives were lost. 

 

The Sinking of the Andrea Doria is a documentary film about the case that was shown on US television (PBS) in 2006.

 

(12) The Philippine ferry Dona Paz collided with an oil tanker in 1987 and caught fire. More than 4,000 lives were lost. This case is mentioned on page 296 but not explored.

 

Asia’s Titanic is a documentary film about the case that premiered on the National Geographic Channel in 2009.

 

(13) The Herald of Free Enterprise capsized in 1987. 193 lives were lost.

 

(14) A fire broke out on the Scandinavian Star in 1990. 159 lives were lost.

 

(15) MS Estonia went down during a winter storm in the Baltic Sea in 1994. More than 800 lives were lost.

 

(16) MV Le Joola capsized off the coast of Gambia in 2002. 1863 lives were lost.

  

A COMPARISON

Shipwreck is a good book which covers 21 important cases, but as you can see, there are flaws here and there, and some of them are quite serious. It is obvious to compare this book with another recent book about the same topic: Disasters at Sea by Liz Mechem (hardcover 2009, paperback 2014).

 

In Mechem’s book we find some of the things which are missing in Shipwreck. In the first place, maps show the location of the wrecks. Secondly, pictures show what the ships looked like before they were hit by disaster. 

 

This fact emerges from the subtitle of her book: A Visual History of Infamous Shipwrecks. In addition, there is a bibliography with several books and websites about naval history.

 

Mechem covers more cases than Willis. While Willis has 21, Mechem has more than 60. When I look at my own list of cases that are missing in Shipwreck, I find that seven of them are actually covered in Disasters at Sea.

 

Willis offers detailed information (ca. ten pages) about each case, but he offers only words. Mechem offers not so many words about each case, but to compensate for this she takes care of the visual aspect with maps and pictures.

 

If you are going to buy only one of these books, your choice will depend on what type of book you prefer. Willis has the story, but he has no illustrations. Mechem has a shorter version of the story, but she has a lot of illustrations.

 

CONCLUSION

If you are interested in the history of the world, in particular the history of ships and sailors, Shipwreck is definitely something for you. Since it is a book about disasters, I cannot say you will enjoy it, but I do think you will be able to appreciate it.

 

Sam Willis has written a good book about naval history, but I cannot forget the flaws I have mentioned in this review. I have to remove one star because of them. Therefore I think it deserves a rating of four stars.

 

*****