Spawn of the sea serpent, 1817
Pursuers of the sea serpent haunting the waters off New England in 1817 were having little luck in capturing the elusive creature. Certainly they received plenty of free advice:
“The Sea Serpent.” Columbian Centinel [Boston, Massachusetts] 3 September 1817 [Wednesday]; p. 1.
A New-York writer, recommends “to catch the Great Serpent at Cape-Ann,”—“To supply him with dead fish well stuffed with arsenic or opium; and that in the latter case, he may be caught napping like old Cerberus.” This is a good suggestion, but unfortunately the serpent prefers live to dead fish; and finds great plenty of the former on his old feeding ground.
(On one of several trips to the land of the dead, the great hero, Heracles, feeds its three-headed watchdog bread sopped in wine, which in some versions of the story knocks that puppy right out.)
And the serpent made itself available, curling up near Half-way Rock on September 6 and unnerving fishermen on September 7:
“The Serpent—again.” Essex Register [Salem, Massachusetts] 10 September 1817 [Wednesday]; p. 3.
The Serpent has again visited us. On Sunday evening, his levee was attended by a large number of citizens. A small boat fishing on Sunday night was very much troubled. The crew state, that he was some hours about them, and that a number of times he was within ten feet of them. It seems that there were swarms or schools of bait around him, and it appears evident that he follows them.
—
Capt Burchmore, who arrived her in the schr. Fame on Saturday, states, that on the morning of that day, he saw the Serpent near Half-way Rock, coiled up in a Serpentine form on the surface of the water.
We also learn that he was on Monday, off Eastern point.
But though the serpent remained uncaptured, a month later a sort of triumph was achieved, as it was announced that progeny of the sea serpent had been slain—surely it was progeny of the sea serpent, given that it had “thirty-two distinct bunches on his back.” The excitement is palpable in this flurry of tiny pieces:
“The Sea Serpent.” Columbian Centinel [Boston, Massachusetts] 1 October 1817 [Wednesday]; p. 2.
In the following articles we have additional and irrefragable evidence of the existence of the equatic, [sic] or amphibious animal which has recently been the subject of much conversation:—
Letter from the Hon. Lonson Nash, F. R. S. to the Hon. David Humphreys, of this town.
Gloucester, (Sabbath evening) Sept. 28, 1817.
Dear Sir—I have the pleasure of informing you, that Capt. Jno. Beach of this place, has in his possession, a young Serpent, that was yesterday killed on the sea shore here, which we have no doubt is one of the young of the American Mammoth Serpent, that has lately visited our harbour; and which justly excited your curiosity and attention. He was killed near Thatcher’s Island, and was making for the sea, when discovered; and was twelve or fourteen feet only from the sea, when killed. He is about three feet and a half in length, and in the largest part perhaps three inches in circumference; and has thirty-two distinct bunches on his back. His upper jaw is entire, and his eyes and nostrils have not been injured. I would describe him more minutely, but presume you will soon see him. Respectfully, Sir, your most ob’t.
LONSON NASH.
Gen. Humphreys.
—
ANSWER
Boston, September 29.
Dear Sir—I arrived in town from New-York opportunely to receive your very obliging letter, respecting the Progeny of the Serpent of the Ocean, and hasten to offer my best thanks for your very interesting information.
I flatter myself that you will hereafter learn, that I have not been deficient in expressing my sense of obligations for your kind and able assistance, in collecting and ascertaining facts on this curious subject of natural history. To your exertions, I consider, the philosophical part of the community more indebted than to those of any other person; and I cannot refrain from particularly repeating my testimony of that important service.
In four communications which I have already made to the President of the Royal Society in London, I think I have succeeded, with your aid, to demonstrate the existence of this heretofore non descript animal. The capture of this young Aquatic Monster, will complete the series of evidence, by becoming a valuable acquisition to the stock of knowledge in zoology, and forever putting an end to the sarcasms and scoffs of the incredulous. In the mean time I wait with impatience his arrival, and pray you to be persuaded of the sentiments of great regard and esteem, with which I remain your sincere friend and humble servant,
D. HUMPHREYS.
Hon. Lonson Nash, Gloucester, (Cape-Ann.)
P. S. In one of my letters to Sir Joseph Banks, I have expressed a belief, that two animals of the same species have been seen in your harbour, on account of the rings discovered on the neck of one and not of the other of them. I understand there are some Fishermen, who accidentally came within a few feet of the Serpent last seen in Gloucester bay, and who are ready to testify they saw those beforementioned, whitish coloured bands round the neck so distinctly, that they could not be mistaken. In this case, it is more than probable, there have been a male and female, of full growth, on our coast. It would be extremely desirable for me to be informed of all the circumstances which attended the capture of the young one—particularly whatever has any relation to his character, temper and movement.
D. H.
—
The President of the Linnæan Society (Judge Davis) has also received a letter from the Hon. Lonson Nash, announcing the capture of this spawn.—He informs that in killing it, the under jaw was broken; but that the upper jaw, with the eyes, &c. are perfect.—It has been preserved in spirits and will be sent to this town.
—
We have received a polite note from John Kittridge, Esq. at Gloucester, communicating similar particulars to the above.
Another letter to the Editor says, “A young Snake was taken yesterday, by a Mr. Colbey, and others, in Lob-lolly Cove, near Thatcher’s Island, where the Monster of the Seas has been often seen. They were so much afraid of him at first, that they used more violence in killing him, than was necessary; and have very much bruised his head. They might by wounding him, have taken him alive. He is now preserved in spirits; and furnishes the most ample confirmation of the existence of the Sea Serpent; and fully justifies the confidence which the Centinel has uniformly maintained of its existence, size, form and properties.”
Another letter says, “I have now in my house, one of the children of the Serpent, or the Devil; for in all my travels on land and sea, I have never seen any snake like this one.”
Other Particulars. At about four inches from the head of this infant Serpent, is a rising protuberance, which is succeeded, until within four inches of the end of the tail, by thirty-one others. His back is of a brownish color, with scales; his belly cream colour, and straight. The cove in which he was discovered is near the light-house on Thatcher’s island.—He was on the beach, making his way to the water, when discovered by two boys who called their father, and they all succeeded in killing him among the rocks and sea weed. The last time the adult Serpent was seen was near this cove. It is conjectured she deposited her spawn in the sand of this beach:—that this has been hatched, and was seeking the water when discovered and killed.
—
Mr. Beach arrived in town last evening, with the Infant Serpent.
We learn from Gloucester, that the persons who killed the young serpent, were Messrs. Colbey and Norwood.
—
We understand, that the Panorama of the harbor of Gloucester, with the great Sea Serpent in it; will be ready for exhibition on Monday next.
How pleased and self-congratulatory they all sound! And how they seem to be experimenting with names to call the sea serpent: the “American Mammoth Serpent,” the “Serpent of the Ocean,” the “Monster of the Seas.” What exactly did they bottle? Perhaps marine biologists can figure that out.
previous: William Lee hides from the sea serpent | next: Portrait(s) of the sea serpent
To “Nineteenth-Century American Children & What They Read”
Some of the children | Some of their books | Some of their magazines
Some works for adults, 1800-1872