Introduction to "Defining North Carolina" or How Historians Have Often Failed Us!

 

[In the Galaxy Magazine]: I shall not often meddle with politics, because we have a political Editor who is already excellent and only needs to serve a term or two in the penitentiary to be perfect.

- Mark Twain, a Biography

Also check out: B.C. Brooks: A Writer's Hiding Place: "Quest for Blackbeard" and the "Counterfactual" Politics of the South (bcbrooks.blogspot.com)

Mark Twain’s quote above might well have described the modern Republican Party, which far outnumbers the Democrat Party in criminal indictments and convictions. North Carolina has always suffered from a dominant criminal political conservatism. You might be surprised to learn it began over 300 years ago, first with Barbadians who settled Carolina, and then with Edward Moseley’s criminal “Family” syndicate. Twain was not alone in his assessment. The development of our American democracy in 1776 often brought conservatives and liberals to loggerheads in the attempt to finally realize the “American dream” proposed in the Constitution. We still haven’t reached that point and past historians, enamored with the "Great Men" who dominated our history, have often failed us all!

Carolina politics was an early example into this uniquely American warfare from within that helped shape the Civil War. Many battles have been waged within the colony and state – and, most historians have viewed these conflicts as growing pains – a perhaps divine push towards progress. Still, social progress has stagnated and truly, North Carolina politics has not changed a great deal since Carolina’s founding in 1671. Journalist Rob Christensen viewed North Carolina as “nuanced, multi-layered, and at times contradictory.”^[1] He may have envisioned Jesse Helms when he wrote the title for A Paradox of Tar Heel Politics. Still, his thoughts may have drifted farther back in North Carolina’s history to another man who had as much influence on Tarheel politics in the eighteenth century as Helms did in the twentieth.  Christ’s Hospital’s “Old Blue,” Edward Moseley easily defined Christensen’s notions of the Carolina “big boys,” or powerful Carolina conservatives! He came to Carolina from London, an educated member of an elite family fallen on ill fortunes. English Moseleys encountered uncomfortable religious discord and liberalizing political changes in their Tory empire of Stuart England. Edward left to escape these changes and to seek financial redemption… to build his own empire in a faraway frontier land of massive real potential!

He was a rare element of Carolina’s “Family” political syndicate that did not come directly from a “bedeviled” Caribbean world – a land “beyond the lines of amity” – most originating in Barbados. Excusing crude methods found unacceptable at home in England, America offered outcast conservative gentlemen like Moseley the greatest asset that islanders could only dream about: LAND and massive tracts of it! America was Edward Moseley’s chance to realize the riches that God had divinely ordained for all gentleman of his fiscal ideology after England’s so-called “Glorious Revolution” of 1688 chastised them for their Stuart impudence.

You see, that year, Protestant Dutchman William of Orange replaced the Stuart king James II, dispelling almost forever the Tory or conservative notion of a divine monarch on the throne – Stuarts had one last hurrah under Queen Anne (1702-1713). Yes, she was the last Stuart, but it cannot be ignored that her family influenced America the most, for more than 100 years. Edward Moseley attempted to emulate the habits of his ancestors as they followed Charles I and II and attempted to follow James III in the Jacobite Rebellions – as any Stuart-loving pirate in America! Moseley would carry on his own crude capitalist monarchy in North Carolina and helpd create the political “Paradox” that Christensen saw. 

These “land pirates” – took advantage of a crude swampy wilderness in America from which they might build their own unique – often aggressive – version of a mercantile Utopic kingdom. It must have offered everything of which Moseley dreamed because once he arrived, he never left.

Owing to his duplicitous self-serving methods, Moseley’s controversial actions were barely remembered for a century, but his posthumous reputation encountered a renaissance in the defeated anger of other conservative North Carolinians after the Civil War – searching for icons, heroes of their own martial political caste. Since this bloody conflict, North Carolinians have regarded him as a great champion for the state:

 

Of all the men who watched and guided the tottering footsteps of our infant State, there was not one who in intellectual ability, in solid and polite learning, in scholarly cultivation and refinement, in courage and endurance, in high Christian morality, in generous consideration for the welfare of others, in all true merit in fine, which makes a man among men, who could equal Edward Moseley.

---- Hon. George Davis^[2]

 

While reading this quote, we must keep in mind that the “Hon. George Davis” of Wilmington was once the Attorney-General of the Confederacy. He was not referring to the United States in totality, but to his own “State” (or, perhaps, “country” is the more apt word for Davis’ thinking) of North Carolina.

Most likely, Davis never believed that North Carolina belonged in the United States, even after the war – in fact, he surely did not. This same anti-government Christianized ideology and the veneration of such unlikely heroes dominated Southern Democrats through that war, the cold war of the Janus-faced“Progressive Era,” right up through the 1960s and Civil Rights. For these “Great Men” – compared to John Wayne by one author – “the heroes who best embodied militant Christian masculinity were those unencumbered by radtional Christian virtues.”[3] Militant masculinity linked religion with secular conservatism. In 1968, these early Southern Democrats joined the more comfortably fascist Republican Party. The Republican Party then adopted a similar white evangelist approach in the “Moral Majority” and truly devolved as these conservatives attempted to “Rise Again” and defeat the scourge of Black Power that threatened the master race![4]

The Deep South’s martial – essentially feudal – ideology was recognized quite early by many British writers, one who called America the “Commonwealth of Pyrates” in his book as early as 1724. Englishmen of the eighteenth century and perhaps some today considered “provincials” or Americans to be as “notorious” as Golden-Age pirates. British antiquarian Captain J. H. Lawrence-Archer in the nineteenth century wrote that the young, rebellious, provincial upstart of America was still a pirate or rogue nation and it was apparent in their Civil War. He offered that the king’s pardon of pirates in September 1717 “gave an abiding salvo to the consciences of English desperadoes, (similar to those under the belligerent Federals and Confederates, in the piratical Alabamas, Georgias, and Floridas lately sweeping the high seas).”[5]

Like many ex-Confederates, George Davis elevated a controversial kinsman he then believed was a “Great Man,” or hero to his “State” or “Country.” The man responsible for this early fallacious method of inquiry, Scottish historian Thomas Carlyle, called them “someone who was ‘unmistakably’ sent to earth by God.”[6] The state’s twentieth-century Southern “redeemer” historiography asserted that the byzantine Edward Moseley was, as D.H. Hill said in 1906, “always on the side of the people.”^[7] Hill’s reference did not actually say “against a secular United States Government,” but most of his ilk intended just that sentiment.

Although redeemer narratives still hold great sway among popular history in the state, Edward Moseley’s deeds did not survive as well as others before the Civil War. Then, he enjoyed a brief resurgence. Afterwards, he was again quickly forgotten and we must pose the question as to why that happened. What made Moseley such a difficult subject to explore? What happened to Edward Moseley’s reputation in North Carolina historiography?

Owing to a lingering revolutionary fervor that followed 1776, early American historians tended to elevate their own questionable souls – of course, I’m also thinking of Samuel Adams and his “Sons of Liberty” – to hero status. Essentially a terrorist – but, one for our side – Adams’ pro-American crimes were forgotten. Moseley’s Family also contributed their penchant for conflict to the Revolution. Understandably, American scholars were enamored with their shiny new country and all of its founding members – even the proudly felonious ones.

Dr. Hugh Williamson is considered North Carolina’s first official state historian. One should, however, hesitate to call him a true “historian.” In reality, Williamson was trained as a physician, became a soldier, and then a politician. Arguably, he was not trained for and had little time for history – for truly examining and studying the past in an objective, meaningful way. He was not taught the critical discipline of historical inquiry – the proper methods and theories. Most of these early antiquarians of past recorders and commentators had not, either – especially those of the American South following the Civil War. Williamson possessed similar biases to his friends in the Deep South. “Historians” of the Antebellum Era honed their political polemicism like their Barbadians ancestors before them – upon the blood and sweat of African and Indian slaves. They learned to use the stories of the past as a warrior’s tool to buy and sell people, get someone elected, pass a bill, or destroy an opponent. Like his adopted Family in North Carolina, Williamson served as a U.S. Congressman and House delegate to the Constitutional Convention. These types of men demonstrated perhaps the best fit for Mark Twain’s later impression of the “criminal” politician. As a political polemicist with a flair for the written word, Williamson wrote many “histories” of the state that the more astute professional later regarded as “fake news” – however, most North Carolinians were proud to call him “historian.” He’s still much quoted today – again – mostly within the state!

The physician, lawyer, and politician wrote History of North Carolina, Volumes I and II in 1812, establishing him as the new state’s official authority on history. Winners write history they say and this is absolutely true, though the “history” that they generate is artificial, biased, and invalid. History is supposed to be the scholarly struggle to seek truth – although it has rarely been used in so pure a fashion, especially by politicians with an agenda. Williamson’s writing was carefully sculpted by such agendas and needs of his friends – those in political power at the time – most of whom were members of Edward Moseley’s Family.

Williamson typified the “Great Man” “historian” or antiquarian, as most of those trained in the historical method will recognize the word. Wealthy and educated – again like his Carolina gentlemen friends – Williamson came to the state from Philadelphia to practice medicine in the midst of rebellion and revolution, late in his career. The rest of this state’s history he had to discern or recreate from scattered records and friendly tales of blustering hubris he learned over glasses of brandy with his fellow warriors.  He learned grandiose stories of family pride from conversations in officer’s tents at the battle for Charleston in the American Revolution. Perhaps he heard a few in the halls of the Capitol building in Washington, D.C.

North Carolina’s history has relied upon Hugh Williamson like the history of Golden Age pirates has relied upon an early eighteenth-century cheap dime novel written by a suspicious author, sold on docks and street corners in port cities to the few who could read, and craved a “plucky” tale to pass the time on the Atlantic crossing. I refer, of course, to “Capt. Charles Johnson’s” A General History of the Robberies and Murders of the Most Notorious Pyrates, published in 1724. This book is essentially historical fiction; it makes for great reading, but contains little if any valid opinions or analysis – simply regurgitated bravado. Eminent professor of literature Dr. Manushag Powell’s term for this book is “counterfactual.” Moreover, its author was actually a Jacobite polemicist newspaper publisher in London named Nathaniel Mist, a man who had been jailed repeatedly by government authorities – and who needed money to pay his fines. In other words, Mist was no reputable historical source. As every writer of fiction, he never used citations to support his tales – to demonstrate objectivity – to invite critical inquiry.

Like pirate populists with “Charles Johnson,” we North Carolinians have copied Williamson over and over and over. We spin it a little this way and that, referring to it as a valid historical source. Though more cautious today, we have rarely condemned it in the past, considering it established “truth” on which to build. Remarkably, his tales have essentially survived unscathed – perhaps we are yet reticent to give up the “Great Men” of our history?

Gen. Hugh Williamson’s associations with Edward Moseley’s Family tell the tale. He befriended Gen. John Baptiste Ashe, Jr. of Wilmington, a nephew of Edward Moseley and son of a man who once bailed Moseley out of jail. He served in the American Revolution with Ashe in South Carolina and again in the first two terms as U.S. Congressmen from North Carolina. He knew Ashe’s family well and should have regarded his uncle Moseley at least as well as Gen. Ashe, but even he barely mentions this “incidental” Edward Moseley in his two-volume History of North Carolina.[8] Even an antiquarian like Williamson regarded the accomplished statesman Moseley with suspicion. What he dares to say is brief. Moseley’s reputation must have been “too hot to handle” – even for a conservative gentleman polemicist! Still, his conservative friends had not yet lost a major war and popular refutation of their martial slaving ideology!

Perhaps a bit of light peeked through a few decades later, under a more determined examiner. Reverend and perhaps more astute and honest historian Francis Lister Hawks declared in 1858 that Moseley was "friend of Carey in his rebellion, the opponent of Governor Hyde while he lived, and of Colonel Pollock during the [Tuscarora] Indian war."^[9] The good Reverend Hawks goes on to praise Moseley’s devotion to church affairs and “patriotic” sense of duty, but intuitively questions his motives.

Hawks was not a revisionist, a redeemer, or even sympathetic with the Confederacy. He wrote his history before the Civil War. Even though he was from New Bern, he lived most of his life in Connecticut and New York. He was not inclined toward the latter Southern redeemer polemics or “fake news.” And, he was certainly no friend of Gen. Hugh Williamson.

Hawks accurately accused Williamson of being an amateurish historian, often giving “no reference at all” for his arguments “as was his habit.”^[10] Hawks appeared to admirably rely upon primary evidence for his conclusions – colonial records he studied on his trips home. Hawks saw Moseley much differently than North Carolina’s traditional historians: Hugh Williamson, George Davis, or James Franklin Shinn, the first to brave a short essay on Edward Moseley in 1899. Hawks accurately regarded Moseley as “Hasty in his temperament and resolute in his purposes, he unquestionably, in his moments of excitement, sometimes overstepped the limits prescribed by a sound discretion, and made himself more vulnerable than became a man of his talents and attainments.”[11] He also averred that the records showed “no better impression than that he was a factious man of acknowledged ability, who could find little use for his talents save that of stirring up strife and encouraging contention for ends purely selfish.”[12] Still, the kind and forgiving reverend yet added, “We do not think this was his true character.”[13]

Hawks’ publication, again, preceded the civil struggle.  Two years later, the defeated state grew hardened and bitter. History became an even more pointed weapon, an acrimonious and spiteful tool of political revenge. The political cyclic nature of North Carolina history during the post-war era almost never strayed from the right side of the political spectrum. Its ahistoric monarch – defeated, but not forgotten – remained seated upon a battered throne, patched back together and re-gilt with “Lost Cause” revisionism and more blatant lies. During this time of Southern conservative political dominion, the academic discipline of history well-represented by men like Francis Hawks faded. It was replaced by Williamson’s original state-glorifying brand, like that of John Baptiste Ashe’s descendent Samuel A’Court Ashe, or Waddell, or of many others whose biased rhetoric demanded no argument or criticism, much like today’s Fox News. In this vengeful martial atmosphere, historical truths became malleable objects of stubborn opinion – not fact, but “alternative fact,” or Dr. Powell’s “counterfactual.”

Researchers found that they had to be cautious with Moseley. He did not attain such “Great Man” status until well after 1865 and even then, his reign during the post-war Progressive Era was short. This caution was a complex thing to understand. Moseley reached “Great Man” status artificially; his misdeeds, greed, and war-profiteering left a bad taste in the mouths of even American historians before the War Between the States. His careful criminal methods, however, were not considered quite so distasteful for the losers of the South after that Civil War. These men were eager to redeem their heritage and for “Great Men” and other heroes to defend their “Lost Cause.”

The Carolinas adopted their uniquely Stuart/West-Indian conservative style well from their Barbadian ancestors. This autocratic style later transmitted across the Deep South. Indeed, Carolina was the heart and cradle of the Confederacy. One might expect anyone associated with Carolina’s early growth to figure prominently in Confederate redeemer history as well.

In confident contrast before and after the Civil War, the ex-Confederate George Davis of Wilmington – lately, the Attorney General of the Confederate States – suddenly crowned the forgotten Edward Moseley as a man of “scholarly cultivation and refinement.”^[14] William L. Saunders, alleged leader of the Ku Klux Klan – first man to take the fifth-amendment in a Congressional hearing and editor of the North Carolina Colonial Records – declared Moseley’s “undying love of free government, and his indomitable maintenance of the rights of the people.”^[15] One might wonder to which “government” Saunders had referred: the Union or his formerly defeated Confederacy. Saunders had read the colonial documents. He knew the details in them; the former Confederate soldier-turned politician simply used their words to formulate his own redeemer narratives. Secretary of the Historical Commission, Robert Diggs Wimberly Connor’s Makers of North Carolina History agrees with Saunders and flatters Moseley to the point of incredulity.[16] Conner, in his History, elevated Moseley to North Carolina’s historical “Swamp Majesty,” writing “For forty years Moseley’s biography is practically the history of North Carolina.”[17] He also said that few could deny this fact. “Those who did not hate him adored him,” continued Conner in the arguably Fox News fascistic tone of Tucker Carlson, “An aristocrat by nature, he was a [Southern] democrat by convictions and in practice.”[18]

Historian James Franklin Shinn wrote “Edward Moseley: A North Carolina Colonial Patriot and Statesman” in the Publications of the Southern History Association in 1899. This was largely another revisionist version of Edward Moseley’s life, again depending strongly upon George Davis, who erroneously believed the British Moseley hailed from Princess Anne County, Virginia – in the old capital of the American Deep South – not Britain! Shinn also erroneously argued that Moseley must have lived in Barbados – the original origins of Carolina – for a while before coming to North Carolina. Overall, Shinn defended Moseley, as did Davis, asserting “his good name is seriously damaged only by the obscurity which has lasted too long.”^[19] Davis, in this line, spoke directly to historian Francis Lister Hawks, who famously described Moseley’s aberrant behavior in 1858.

All this sudden praise for Edward Moseley! Still, no one then, or even later, bothered to write a full biography of the man. Odd, isn’t it?

Here, we encounter a twisted, confusing anomaly of our political language. This “democrat” to whom Conner refers was no Democrat of today. Ex-slaving “Southern Democrats” share nothing in common with the South’s disdainfully-viewed “party of African Americans” of today. Southern Democrats were highly socially conservative people of the early twentieth century. They had once enslaved the African, yet wanted “God” written into their Confederate Constitution. Their anti-government Republican cousins of today wanted the federal government “drowned in the bathtub,” as Republican lobbyist Grover Norquist so ineloquently phrased it. They were certainly not the “party of African Americans” of today with whom Democrats are presently associated – indeed, quite the opposite. Their glorified yet defeated Confederacy defiantly resisted social amalgamation into the Union like Republicans today threaten democracy. Their anti-government rhetoric then more ideologically reflected the recent so-called “Moral Majority” evangelicals of Jerry Falwell or today’s anti-democratic Ku Klux Klan, Tea-Party, America First, or MAGA (Make America Great Again) seditionist Republicans who attacked the Capitol on January 6, 2021! Politicians in North Carolina seem to have always hidden their fascist, undemocratic ways behind contradictory labels – again, Christensen’s Paradox.

Republicans of today – like Southern Democrats of yesterday – would have been quite fond of the controversial Edward Moseley. Still, not quite fond enough of Moseley to admit it openly and embarrass themselves. “Possessed of vast estates, of many slaves, and of great wealth,” again continued Conner of Moseley, as if describing a venerated scion of the Mint-Julip-drinking anti-government Confederacy, “a devoted Churchman,” like Falwells “Moral Majority,” he “espoused the cause of dissenters in their fight against the establishment.”[20]

Segregationists – advocates of keeping blacks and whites apart – in North Carolina usually spoke fondly both of God and slavery – often in the same breath, as though their god would approve of their inhumane and unchristian practices. Arguably, this is the way Conner envisioned his defeated Confederacy. Conner poured out “Lost Cause” veneration for Moseley’s wealth and power that literally dripped with worship. And, he asserted States-Rights ideology in his praise. He compared Moseley to great leaders, with “the boldness of thought and of action that people admire,” and “common sense and self-poise… and the honesty of purpose which, regardless of his own interests, made it impossible for him to wink at the usurpations of authority.”[21] Conner glorified Moseley’s wealth, rebellion, anti-government ideas, and slavery in a full page and a half of lionized worship – some 40-50 years after Robert E. Lee’s surrender! Indeed, Moseley and his Family wholly embodied the Southern Democrat’s political point of view with the unspoken caveat of the desire to “rise again.” And, with the establishment of segregation in Plessy v. Ferguson in 1896, the paradoxically-named “Progressive Era” began. The second iteration of the Ku Klux Klan came about in 1915 and numerous statues were erected on courthouse grounds and other government property across the entire South and beyond!

Undeniably, Southern Democrats had given rebirth to their Confederacy – it had, indeed, “risen again.” Historian Heather Cox Richardson even declares as much in her book How the South Won the Civil War: Oligarchy, Democracy, and the Continuing Fight for the Soul of America! And, Edward Moseley finally became recognized as a hero – still, no biographies. The only thing that North Carolinians remember of his accomplishments is his famous map of 1733! We all love the map![22]

Moseley’s reputational resurrection continued to encounter difficulties. Most historians and even those who knew him best – his Family – always remained cautious and slack on detail. Williamson, Davis, and Conner, like Republican propagandists today, spouted praise, veneration, and sickly-sweet rhetoric – few words of actual substance. Even his own family tended to ignore him or mentioned him only in passing. Confederate captain Samuel A’Court Ashe, grandson of Governor Samuel Ashe and a great-nephew of Edward Moseley, in editing the Biographical History of North Carolina, included three generations of the Moore side of the family. Yet, he neglected to include his great-uncle, Edward Moseley in his list of one hundred prominent men of North Carolina. Still, Moseley literally drew the geographical boundaries of Ashe’s home state! Assuredly, his contemporaries would have placed the capable surveyor and statesman Moseley high on that same list – but, these men had been politically and militarily beaten and relied solely upon polemics to get beyond that defeat. They dare not elevate Moseley too highly or risk someone rereading Francis Hawks’ History, thereby losing their base![23] 

Cape Fear author James Sprunt, writing in 1906, speaks of Moseley’s famous map, but diverts around his significantly criminal contributions to the development of Lower Cape Fear. Why, certainly, did even James Sprunt not speak of him? Was it because Sprunt also understood the criminal methods used by Moseley and his Family to gain prominence and steal massive tracts of land in the Lower Cape Fear?

After the Progressive Era, the political landscape changed once again – through economic destruction and utter despair. Excessive capitalistic cycles broke down through three consecutive Republican administrations. Finally, with Republican President Herbert Hoover’s attacks on World-War I “Bonus Army” veterans and Robber Barons’ abuse of the Federal Reserve and the gold standard brought on the resulting Great Depression of 1929. Modern Democratic President Franklin Delano Roosevelt took office after Hoover and dealt the “New Deal,” restoring public confidence. This was despite another rebellion – an oligarchic and fascist attempt to overthrow his presidency in the “Business Plot of 1933” – even before Nazis came to power in Germany![24] After the failure of wealthy capitalists in this first fascist insurrection, they then preferred the former, long-established status quo and Congress helped them by letting this history quietly fade into oblivion. Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s “New Deal” established social programs to help the majority of Americans and the country breathed a sigh of relief. This compares to President Joseph R. Biden’s work to fight the Covid Pandemic and once again save America from the second fascist attempt by Donald Trump to overthrow the United States’ government on January 6^th, 2021! Also comparable to FDR’s democratic work were the more egalitarian “Society” of the Quakers in the Albemarle during the Cary Rebellion, or the establishment of British royal control through the duke of Newcastle in the Brunswick Settlement in the Lower Cape Fear.  

Federal Socialism didn’t stop with Roosevelt, for the people enjoyed their Social Security – the constitutional effort of “promoting the general welfare” of the people. Surprisingly, a Southerner, Lyndon Baines Johnson – though perhaps not a true “Southern Democrat” – accelerated it forward with Civil Rights in 1964, Voting Rights and Medicare in 1965. Johnson has incurred conservative’s verbal wrath ever since. Civil Rights dealt yet another blow against the “Old South’s” formerly segregationist fascist regime and the Wealthy Industrialists of the North who liked cheap labor and their old factory towns. For the old Southern Democrats, however, this betrayal of Johnson’s resulted in great political realignments and more “paradoxical” behavior.

Confederates, or Southern Democrats, traded that now-despised name for one that better reflected their ideology and mood, the rhetorically cleaner – and much more conservative (after Civil Rights) – “Republican.”  “Democrat” remained with those who championed egalitarianism, democracy, socialism, or the rights of all the people. African Americans – with the new rights of a finally-growing democracy – then gained the same power as their former masters! This later term “Democrat” this time better fit the proponents of democracy, don’t you think?

We then elected our first African-American president to two terms. In this fresh cycle of progress, the revived democracy and their truly progressive social views rose to the top again. Again, working Americans nearly triumphed over the wealthy and powerful “Great Men” who once suppressed our democracy and ruled our history from their gilt political thrones.

Still, the old Stuart-Tory-conservative regime did not quietly acquiesce under a progressive pounding. Redeemers were again determined to “rise again” and they fought back in the next administration. They flared their nostrils like the Family did on the west shores of the Cape Fear River in 1733. Again, white-supremacists had just another racist reaction to our first African-American president. This time, however, they are essentially destroying what remains of their political reputation. MAGA and Q-Anon use blatantly ridiculous rhetoric, insanely waiting for the rising of the dead to come back and lead them against the oppressive government! Ironically, these conservatives trashed the reputation of their new designation of “Republican” as they had their old “Southern Democrat.” They exhibited no less than a childish tantrum and attempted another fascist insurrection, 2021 is 1933 like 1733, like 1708! The hits just keep coming!

Thus, stories of this nature can be told once again – social and economic progress and equality may be advanced once again. North Carolina enters that older, nascent realm once again – before the Anglicans came – before the rich slaving Barbadians came – before the Confederates came – before their ideological friend Edward Moseley came. 

This is the history of our struggle as a democratic people, North Carolinians and all Americans – the cyclic high-low process of reflection and repression. The parodoxical politics have a great deal to do with changing demographics – the descent from “white-dominated” or master-slave power dynamics. Truly inspirational, “Moral Mondays” has become a new phrase in our daily vocabulary, like “Me Too” or “Black Lives Matters (BLM).” North Carolinians of the 99% are again rising up and revolting against their wealthy capitalist “betters.” Truly inspirational! It can happen, even here, in the merciless Stuart conservative Paradox of the “Old North State.”

Conservatives like Edward Moseley may now be critically examined once again.  “Great Man” historical bias can be pushed aside once again. We can openly examine Moseley’s crimes – learn why he was ignored before – and, why the reticence to write his biography! “Quakers” are his judges this time! There’s a reason why Donald Trump’s insane MAGA movement is so large: because social historians are beginning to reach the truth and a lot of hateful and embarrassed people don’t want it told.

If history serves any profound purpose, it is this – to inform and reveal humanity’s weaknesses, faults, passions, and potentials. History should never be used to support fascist, anti-democratic attributes – indeed, Nazi Germany’s Adolph Hitler’s book-burning tactics gave us a clue. History repeats itself only because we fail to learn from it – we miss its lessons. It very often becomes the tool of the politician, especially in early paradoxical North Carolina, as journalist Rob Christensen viewed it when he wrote the often humorous and yet, revolting A Paradox of Tar Heel Politics.

Aside from conservative redeemer politics, part of the state’s Moseley problem lay in his completely befuddled origins. Again, no definitive work to date – until now – has ever been produced about the controversial treasurer, surveyor-general, proprietor’s deputy, member of the governor’s council, even briefly acting-governor Edward Moseley. Nineteenth-century political rhetoric forced reality into near intellectual oblivion!^[25]

Such an important historical figure as Edward Moseley, having held numerous offices and producing maps of such value, forming the shape of the state we know today, one should expect numerous historical works devoted to him.  Still, none have emerged, certainly none of any length.

Few historians dare to enter this miry, murky, and mysterious political swamp of North Carolina’s early history. Voluminous extant primary records still reveal Hawks’ “factious man of acknowledged ability” quite unlike the man described by politician Davis, or historians Hill and Conner.[26] This book follows that deeply-explorative new direction despite whatever actual or imaginary dangers may be lurking in the swampy conservative political waters. Hopefully, there’ll be no flying flagpoles or fire extinguishers.

Moseley was not the glorified figure presented by revisionists and redeemers and it must be said! Myth must be dispelled! John F. Kennedy Jr. will not come back to life, no matter how many Q-Anon cultists march in the streets of Dallas, Texas!

Unquestionably, almost the day young Edward Moseley arrived in North Carolina, he began irritating his colleagues, presuming undeserved authority, and catalyzing rebellion. He was young and perhaps impetuous – but also a privileged narcissist who fled to America to find treasure – to rebuild his formerly-wealthy family’s failed finances. He was an educated, but inexperienced opportunistic London youth that, at first, was outmaneuvered by his betters – yet, he enjoyed the opulent gilt trappings of his Anglican church. Truly, Moseley was a talented and opportunistic politician. He played both sides when it gave him advantage. He left few writings of a personal nature. His will of 1749 and several maps and sketches are all that survive of an intelligent, yet greedy, careless, and socially-irresponsible man.

Moseley’s contemporary hometown bard, John Milton described “Satan” in Paradise Lost as a fallen angel who values earthly treasure over all other things.[27] Of course, posterity seldom looks favorably upon a follower of Mammon, greed, or… “earthly treasures.” It could be that in the wilds of early North Carolina, such a conservative gentleman and Mammon devotee from London might capitalize upon resources so effectively and attain such regal status so quickly – as well as the condemnation and reserve of many an historian.

At first, Edward Moseley’s career stalled in the Albemarle’s early colonial backwater politics; however, he did grow and learn. His intellect and fine education aided him to overcome his defeats on the early dividing line determination with Virginia. He may then have successfully sought revenge against a rival – perhaps even had this man killed. He secured coveted positions of power, started an Indian war, and developed two maps of extraordinary value to the colony and state. He also helped to end the life of his brief business partner-turned rival – the pirate Edward “Blackbeard” Thache – retaking control of North Carolina’s colonial markets from rival pirates who would disable his profits. Later, he helped blind British officials from his Family’s illegal actions to usurp the Lower Cape Fear as a separate colony – under their own private authority – as “kings of Cape Fear.” And, by default, he became the most important part of the beginnings of the lucrative port of Wilmington, Brunswick Town’s rival. Through his numerous profiteering ventures, he literally defined the shape of North Carolina, top to bottom. His motives were economic – not morally pure, despite what he might tell his fellow church deacons in Edenton. He truly was a “factious” man of personal profit – a follower of “Mammon” or greed and perhaps helped set the crude capitalist tone for America itself![28]

---

[1] Rob Christensen, The Paradox of Tar Heel politics: the Personalities, Elections, and Events that Shaped Modern North Carolina (Chapel Hill, N.C.: University of North Carolina Press, 2008), 4.

[2] D. H. Hill, “Edward Moseley: Character Sketch,” The North Carolina Booklet, Vol. V, No. 3 (Raleigh, N.C.: North Carolina Society - Daughters of the Revolution, July 1905), 202.

[3] Kristen Kobes du Mez, Jesus and John Wayne: How White Evangelicals Corrupted a Faith and Fractured a Nation (Kindle version) (Liveright Publishing, 2020), 10.

[4] Oh, they warned us. They did. I’m sure you’ve seen the bumper stickers, t-shirts, and patches. As a young boy growing up with family in the Lower Cape Fear, I possessed some of these prideful paraphernalia myself – even had a Confederate flag once! But, I grew up, studied my family’s history, and discovered Christensen’s “Paradox” on my own. I always felt when driving from Fayettevile, where I was born, to Pender County where my mother’s family lived, that there was a subtle, but definite difference to that region.

[5] Captain J. H. Lawrence-Archer, Monumental Inscriptions of the British West Indies (London: Chatto and Windus, 1875), 6; Nathaniel Mist, writing as “Capt. Charles Johnson” in A General History of the Robberies and Murders of the Most Notorious Pyrates (London: 1724).

[6] https://thedecisionlab.com/reference-guide/anthropology/great-man-theory; According to the early-twentieth century and now-defunct “Great Man Theory,” great leaders are born, not made. Leadership traits are inherent and cannot be learned. Great leaders come forward when they’re most needed, in order to become the foundation upon which history is built. Essentially, according to the Great Man Theory, people in positions of power deserve to lead because of characteristics granted to them at birth, which ultimately help them become heroes.

[7] Hill, “Edward Moseley,” 204.

[8] Hugh Williamson, The History of North Carolina, Vol. 1 and 2 (Philadelphia: Thomas Dobson, 1812).

[9] Francis Lister Hawks, History of North Carolina: with maps and illustrations, Volume 2 (Fayetteville, N.C.: E. J. Hale & son, 1858),  556.

[10] Francis Lister Hawks, History of North Carolina: With Maps and Illustrations, Vol. I (Fayetteville: E. J. Hale and Son, 1858), 143.

[11] Hawks, History of North Carolina, Vol. 2, 358.

[12] Ibid., 359.

[13] Ibid.

[14] George Davis, Address Delivered Before the Two Literary Societies of the University of North Carolina, June 6, 1855  (Raleigh: Holden and Wilson, “Standard Office,” 1855), 18; D. H. Hill, “Edward Moseley: Character Sketch,” The North Carolina Booklet, Vol. V, No. 3 (Raleigh, N.C.: North Carolina Society - Daughters of the Revolution, July 1905), 202.

[15] American Historical Association, “Annual report” (U. S. Government Printing Office, 1896), 197.

[16] R.D.W. Connor, Makers of North Carolina History (Raleigh, N.C.: The Thompson Publishing Company, 1911),  38-50.

[17] Robert Diggs Wimberly Conner, History of North Carolina, Vol. I (), 94.

[18] Ibid.; This hinted at Fox News’ fascist tendency to elevate nationalism while quelching criticism.

[19]

[20] Ibid.

[21] Ibid.

[22] Heather Cox Richardson, How the South Won the Civil War: Oligarchy, Democracy, and the Continuing Fight for the Soul of America (Oxford University Press, 2020).

[23] Biographical History of North Carolina: From Colonial Times to the Present, ed. Samuel A’Court Ashe, Stephen B. Weeks, and Charles L. Van Noppen (Greensboro, N.C.: Charles L. Van Noppen, 1905).

[24] See… Jules Archer, The Plot to Seize the White House (New York: Hawthorn Books, 1973).

[25] James Sprunt, Chronicles of the Cape Fear River (Raleigh, N.C.: Edwards & Broughton Printing Company, 1916); Noeleen McIlvenna, A Very Mutinous People: The Struggle for North Carolina, 1660-1713 (Chapel Hill, N.C.: University of North Carolina Press, 2009); Stephen Feeley, Tuscarora Trails: Indian Migrations, War, and Constructions of Colonial Frontiers, Volume 1, Doctoral Dissertation, College of William and Mary, Department of History (May, 2007).

[26] Francis Lister Hawks, History of North Carolina, Vol. 1: Embracing the period of the proprietary government, from 1663 to 1729 (Fayetteville: E. J. Hale & son, 1859), 359.

[27] C. G. Herbermann, E. A. Pace, C. B. Pallen, T. J. Shahan, and J. J. Wynne, editors, The Catholic Encyclopedia: An International Work of Reference on the Constitution, Discipline, Doctrine, and History of the Catholic Church, pg. 580; "Mammon" by Hugh Pope. The Encyclopedia Press, New York, 1913.

[28] See “Mammon” and its importance to early 18^th century capitalism in John Francis, "Chronicles and Characters of the Stock Exchange" (1849), in The Church of England Quarterly Review, Vol. XXVII (London: William Edward Painter in the Strand, 1850), 130-131.

Bahamas Shipping Records 1721-1725

In fishing about the Bahamas shipping records 1721-1725 - did you catch the pun, there? - I came across some familiar names of characters in Virginia, North Carolina, or Bahamian pirate history. 

Of course, the Bahamas are just across the Florida Channel from the Carolinas. It's not far away. And, the Lords Proprietors in England owned both properties by 1671, so... anyway, anyone familiar with pirate history should recognize these names.

There's John Vickers, formerly of York River, Virginia, now sailing from Carolina in John Lovick's 22/29-ton sloop Carolina Adventure. Vicker's made a famous deposition concerning pirates Benjamin Hornigold and Henry Jennings at the Bahamas. Lovick was a commissioner, secretary, later vice-admiralty court judge, and naval collector in Carolina; he also was the first Englishman granted Ocracoke Island, where Edward "Blackbeard" Thache was killed in 1718. Small world, right? It actually was in the early 18th century.

John Vickers in 22/29-ton sloop Carolina Adventure

There's also three former pirates who had surrendered to Capt. Vincent Pearse of HMS Phoenix in 1718. 

One, John Cockram, sometimes with his brother Joseph Cockram, mastered the jointly-owned 30-ton sloop of New Providence Richard & John, not surprisingly owned with Richard Thompson, a trader so infamous as a pirate loot dealer or fence that he was represented on Stars! series Black Sails as Richard Guthrie:

Sean Cameron Michael is a South African actor best known for his role as pirate-fence Richard Guthrie

John Cockram, of course, was the real-life pirate doctor aboard Bermudan-transplant of Kingston Henry Jennings' sloop Barsheba. Jennings was the nut crazy enough to raid Spanish La Florida to steal their gold & silver salvaged from 11 Spanish vessels wrecked in the hurricane of July 30, 1715. Jennings also stole a French prize originally taken by Benjamin Hornigold from Bahia Honda, Cuba! Mentioned earlier, John Vicker's deposition talked about this.

John Cockram, master of 30-ton sloop of New Providence Richard & John

But, before Jennings, Cockram sailed with Hornigold in 1714 to steal Spanish goods off Cuba! Newpapers said "said Cockrum fitted out of Providence with 20 Men upon the Coast of Florida" to steal 2,000 pieces of eight from the Spanish. 

The records in CO 27/12, Bahamian Shipping Lists, 1721-1725 also show former pirate Daniel Stillwell as master of his own 5-ton sloop Happy Return, formerly owned by his father in law.

Daniel Stillwell as master of his own 5-ton sloop Happy Return

Hailing from Jamaica, Stillwell married the daughter of Jonathan Darvill before settling on Eleuthera. Borrowing Darvill’s shallop, he and a small crew (including Darvill’s son) captured a Spanish ship off of Cuba which carried over 11,000 pieces of eight around 1714.

Deputy Governor Thomas Walker of Nassau heard about the attack and as Spain and England had recently concluded a peace treaty, had Stillwell and his crew seized. Lacking authority to try Stillwell locally, he had Stillwell sent to Jamaica for trial. Hornigold had been using Darvill’s sloop Happy Return for his own piracy (and some sources indicate Hornigold had been with Stillwell off of Cuba), and had declared that all the Bahamas pirates were under his protection. He intercepted the ship carrying Stillwell and freed him, returning to Nassau to threaten Walker for interfering.

Incidentally, Thomas Walker and his sons are in these shipping records as well. The Walkers owned and operated the 15-ton New Providence-built sloop Industry. Neal Walker mastered the 20-gun Dover of New Providence. Charles Walker mastered the 10-gun Two Brothers of New Providence.

Thomas Walker operated the 15-ton New Providence-built sloop Industry

Stillwell later sailed as a crewmember aboard Hornigold’s ship. When King George offered a general pardon to all pirates who surrendered before September 1718, Stillwell accepted. He later became a ship owner, purchasing several vessels that operated out of the islands, including his father-in-law Jonathan Darvill’s old Happy Return. He sailed to Jamaica with Braziletto wood to trade for 100s of gallons of Rum to fuel Nassau's many taverns. 

Thomas Terrill also appears as master and owner of 12-ton condemned Spanish sloop Endeavor, which probably carries an interesting story of its own, seeing as how the Bahamas had been raided a couple of times by the Spanish. 

Thomas Terrill as master and owner of 12-ton condemned Spanish sloop Endeavor

Two very interesting ship masters hold great meaning for North Carolina's history. One, for 29 June 1721 was for 50-ton sloop Diamond of London, master Matthew "Higgingbotham." Diamond's owner was Samuel Buck, one of several merchants who negotiated with the Lords Proprietors of Carolina and the Bahamas for a 7-year lease of the Bahamas, beginning in 1717. James Gohier was another one who appears as shipowner in these records.

Matthew "Higgingbotham" of 50-ton sloop Diamond of London

An interesting note on the cargo in Diamond states "European goods as p[er] cocquete." Now, Merriam-Webster's Definition of coquette shows:

1: a woman who endeavors without sincere affection to gain the attention and admiration of men

2: any of several small, tropical American hummingbirds (genus Lophornis) with the males typically having a colorful or ornate tuft of feathers on the head

The first definition would ironically be appropriate, considering the notorious reputation of Nassau with ladies of the night! Still, I hardly think that the women would be listed as "cargo." The 2nd definition of the exotic birds... well, that, too is doubtful. But, birds can be found there, sure.

No, there's another explanation:

19th cent. "cocquet" or order certificate 

These "European goods" probably were men's powdered wigs, or ladies' fancy corsettes and ordered like on Amazon. Diamond simply delivered the order like an 18th century UPS, "p[er] cocquete."

Another name on these shipping records important to North Carolina is master James Wimble of 5-ton sloop Hardtimes, built in South Carolina and later master of Bermudan-built 5 -ton Bonetta. Wimble had been born in Hastings, Sussex, England and came to the Bahamas when it became free of pirates in 1718. 

This man was essentially the prime motivator in the development of the town of Wilmington in North Carolina's Lower Cape Fear. Several mariners had been involved in conceiving the town, including this same surveyor and mapmaker Capt. Matthew Higginbotham, who lived for a while in Brunswick Town, across the Cape Fear River from New Town, Newton, New Liverpoole, New Carthage, or as it was finally known in 1740, Wilmington. 

1733 James Wimble Map of Wilmington area

1738 James Wimble Map of North Carolina

 

An Unwelcome Visit from Pirates!

 

Defense and Cassandra with tender attack Fort Lijdzaamheid on Rio Delagoa (Southeast Africa) circa 30 April 1722

 

 

Occupation of Fort Lijdzaamheid (Fort Agility) & Debauchery of the Pirates: 22 April - 30 June, 1722:

Narrative of Jacob de Bucquoy in his "Zestien Jaarige Reize Naar de Indien," published in 1757, 27-36, concerning the attack and two-month stay of pirates Richard Taylor in 72-gun Defense (formerly Portuguese Viceroy of Goa's vessel, Nossa Senhora do Cabo) and Olivier LeVasseur (La Buse) in 44-gun Cassandra (former East India Company vessel of Capt. James Macrae) and their crews at the newly-built Dutch fort on Rio De La Goa or modern Maputo Bay on southeast shore of Africa.

Narrative broken up for easier reading...

------------------

We lived in the Fort, apart from sickness among our new recruits, and death, in a moderate rest, and feared no foreign enemies: but then often the danger is near, as will appear in the following.

It was on the 11th April [22 April by Gregorian calendar], (a year after we arrived here) that the natives informed us that there were three ships in the Bay, but they had not raised the flags: at once an order was given to ship to the corner [bend] of the River constantly setting out posts to learn what kind of Ships they might be: 

Every day the Natives came to our Fort, with pieces of Indian Lynwaet [lijnwaet; "linen"] for the body, which they said they had bartered from other Ships; What they had left they used for flags and pennants on their canoes and tubes. 

It lasted until the 19th of April [G: 30 April] when the said ships, bearing an English King's flag and pennant, approached the mouth of the River; we could not imagine what this might mean. English King's ships to be seen here in an unknown region, where there was no War, seemed strange, and on Sea Rovers no suspicion [English pirates were usually welcome]; but the outcome soon showed us; what people they behold. 

We prepared our pieces [canon], and enabled us to resist, if they should be against us: to this end we took a crowd of Blacks in the Fort, and led the Hoeker there, to defend us like a Watercastle, meanwhile the approaching ships; as two large ones, one of 72 [Defense], and the other of 44 cannon [Cassandra], plus a Brigantin up to the Lodge [entry building before Fort?]; they were crammed with people, who blew on the Kampanje [trumpets] lustily; then the largest ship dropped anchor and fired a shot in front of the Hoeker and our Fort, and then gave the whole broadside, likewise the other. We did not owe it to the shore, and gave them in the same language [returned fire], but in such a way that with the first volley the largest Pieces shook in the sand, for we had no fixed batteries yet, but loose planks deposited on the sand. We recovered as much as we could, when we saw with amazement that the Hoeker had already lowered the flag, and prepared as a prize. 

 

Jacob de Bucquoy, Plattegrond van Fort Lijdzaamheid on Rio de Lagoa, 1721.

They were still firing steadily with their 12-pounders, loaded with bullets and scrap; all the Blacks rushed over the patisfaden [palisade?], and fled into the woods. We saw that 78 men who were still alive at the Fort, and many of them sick, could not stand this crowd: but it seemed reasonable with the Commande while I was busy getting the Pieces ready to fire. 

As I acted for Opperkonstapel [Chief], I was told that someone had lowered the flag in the hole; This dropping of the flag communicated to the ships that we had surrendered: at once boats full of people came to the shore. Our Chief, Monsr. [Jean] Michel exclaimed "par Dieu wat dat ly wat dat! What that, I said, they have cut the flag in the hole, and we are taken." 

Under this message of Monsieur the people came ashore, four of whom emerged from the heap with pistol in one hand and saber in the other as far as the Lodge [entrance battery?]; Each of them looked with astonishment that so few men had such boldness; while one asked in a gruff voice, Where is the Chief? who answered here, asking them at the same time what kind of people they were? They answer that they were Kings of the Sea and of the World. 

Each was silent and looked at the other, and did not know what the further consequence would be, which we learned shortly. He immediately commanded the people to lay down their rifles, and at once ordered the Chief [acting-Chief Jean Michel] to sail aboard the great ship [Defense]: against which he long protested, [to no avail.] I [Bucquoy] accompanied him, and meanwhile they made sure of their accommodation. 

Round about, and seeing it necessary, they set up sentries, and divided the defenders (whom they immediately disarmed) here and there: while more and more people came ashore for their reinforcements. We left the second, one Jan van de Capelle, ashore, and sailed with the barge from the shore to board the great ship, where the Sea-robbers' flags were waving from the top of the stern and aft. 

When we were on the side of the ship, the Captain [Richard Taylor] stood with a saber in hand, aboard, waiting for us. Monsr. Michel, seeing a Negro approaching from his sight, Did not want him to climb over first; I said that to him [the Chief] that honor belonged, that otherwise I wished to be the first, as he then bid me: so I climbed by a rope, so that there was no stairway, and came over. Monsr. Michel was joined by 6 to 7 men; 

On his behalf we were ordered to follow the Captain who entered a room, and we with him: there we found the whole Assembly in order, with a box of punch in the middle, accompanied by an agreement of Muzyk, according to the English style, immediately wares we sat, or the punch box went round, and then, after the occasion of the country, and our condition, we were asked very accurately, by articles; whereupon Mr. Michel replied. Furthermore, they asked about Victuals [food provisions] for their ships, Water, etc. were available here. 

After we seemed to have satisfied them with a few things, they declared that upon their last visit that they had found a Dutch Comptoir [trading post] here [surprised at the presence of a fort]. They needed a place in these Indian regions, but if they had known this, they would have called upon another; but the matter now being so, it was their custom to lay down the anchors with little effort; Money, Tobacco, and Liquor, were Contrabands, and they were in need of them. 

Then our Victuals and Ammunition came, miraculously, and what more they thought could be of service. For the rest we must console ourselves with fate, and be at peace. 

Here people played merrily and drank about clearly. After an hour or two, my curiosity caught my eye to go downstairs to go between decks; and there to consider their lives; it seemed like a complete Robber's Fair; all the guests sat about their bowls, and drank profusely. Here I found all sorts of nations among each other, even black Negroes. 

Jeder spoke to me, Brother! 

Before and after: so the night ended with us: but it had not gone like this normally; for when they are drunk they live boldly with their captives; the Konstaple [leader; in this case, Richard Taylor] had a heart in the Arm [love of arms?], and the others had dutifully queried [parried] with the Sabers: a steady alarm, frightening the peasantry, and in fear for their lives, that the Second [Chief?], with twenty-one men more, would take flight in secret; chests and treasuries were opened with crowbars, and the well demolished;

In the morning the People [pirates] were divided on the shore and on the ships; and I was utilized to trade Vee [cattle] and Victuals for them. I was quite pleased with this; for whole bales of Lynwaat [lijnwaet; "linen"] were but cut up, and exchanged in pieces, for trifles, of Hoenders [Afrikaans: "chicken"], Fruits, etc.; the barrels of Corals and trifles, like Nuremburg Kramery [haberdashery; British: small items used in sewing, such as buttons, zippers, and thread (see thimble below)], which we had for Negotie [negotiating] at the Comptoir [trading post], everything was now in common. This was riotous and rude. I'm glad to have read the Hellish Fair, but it was one hell of a job. Offending women, drinking publicly drunk, and then inflicting violence on the native, was the same work; 

Briefly they [pirates] were at war with them [natives]; day and night they shot sharply across the plains: the natives grew so bitter, that is to observe the Ships and Vessels and then throw in with their Assegayen [a slender, iron-tipped, hardwood spear used chiefly by southern African peoples], wherewith several [pirates] have already been killed. 

Thimble | German, probably Nuremberg - Metropolitan Museum of Art

A curious case occurred on the birthday of King George the Second [must be the First, b. May 28; Second was b. 11 November and was not yet king (1727)], weekday, when they usually spend boozing and like a Sea-robbers Joyful feast.

Captain Tailor and Captain Labous, beside some officers, sat separately with a Punch bowl, drinking together. Tailor, looking before the Fort about Botree, a Native, standing somewhat to the side of the others, standing near the wood, and looking elsewhere, little thinking that death was so near to him, his Snape [Snaphaan; snaphaunce, or flintlock pistol], which sat beside him, and said to his company: Would you see that Karel [derogatory reference to a native] make a cabriolet [type of one-horse carriage]? they, according to their degenerate natures, said yes: Indeed he aims and shoots him, that he fell to the ground and gave up the ghost after a little thrashing; Having done this, he set the Snaphaan [Flintlock pistol or Snaphaunce] aside again, continued his conversation with the same composure as if nothing had happened, and I never heard him speak of it again.

I am ashamed to inform the reader of the liberality which I saw that day, as much about malking [associating with an untidy woman] as the violent treatment of women in public practice, so as not to introduce vexatious ideas of it into anyone's imagination or memory.

This lasted until the 26th June, when they had their ships ready and clean: As for my interest, I changed my clothes daily; the one took everything from me, and the other gave me a skirt again, or vest: in short I had changed fashion all day long; long, short, wide, and narrow, all was my pass; that which I gained in exchange, I again venerated to those who had not, 'Never have I looked better at the world and life, and learned to know its intemperance and futility; now I had it by experience.

Finally being supplied with Victuals, and being there their time of departing again, they shot a lap, and waved the Black Flag to Pitsjaaren [signal].* By this it was well thought to take the Hoeker as foresailer: but so their great ship [Defense] went 22 feet deep [draught], and in the bay was but 18 feet of water by common cyn [average, measurement?], and knowing that I had drawn the map of the bay [see map above], they beseeched me that I might cast them out in the open sea; that in return they would give 5 bales of Lynwaet [lijnwaet; "linen"] to the people, to sustain life; and the Hoeker, after they had removed the masts in advance, before leaving in the Comptoir [trading post] to us for storage. 

Though I had little inclination to go with them, as they cannot take much on their word, but we were in need. I suggested this to the Chief [Michel], who advised me to do it: but being like a Frenchman, not trusting much with him, I told him that if he were so to me as Chief, and for that I recognized him, to command my self, I was then ready to obey his commands; which he then did in the presence of the rural folk, and the master of Hoeker, a Frans van Haften; thereupon I beg of them 2 or 3 helmsmen to go with my self, to lay the weights and bearings of the deep with barrels, and to mark as marks of course, for their and my assurance; which they approved. We were here for eight days. On the 30th June (J: 11 July) we lifted our anchors, and after the cannon's praise, we bid farewell to Rio de la Goa.

* Pitsjaaren - To make a sign on ship board for giving notice to the other Commanders that a Council of war is to be kept, or something like to be done. [A Compleat Dictionary, English and Dutch, to which is Added a Grammar, for Both Languages, Volume 2 (Amsterdam: K. de Veer, 1766), 639]