©DavidC.Woodman2016

InuitTalesofTerror:ThelocationofFranklin’smissingship

ThediscoveryofthewreckoftheFranklinexpeditionvesselHMSErebusinSeptember2014garneredworld-wideattentionandwell-deservedpraisefortheskillandperseveranceoftheParksCanada-ledteamthatdiscoveredit.Itwasuniversallyattestedthatthepreservednineteenth-centurytraditionsoftheInuitinhabitantsoftheareawereessentialinthediscovery,providingthroughtheirremembrancesthesearchareainwhichthewreckwaseventuallylocated.

ThissummerthesameteamwillreturntothearcticincontinuingpursuitofFranklin'sothership-HMSTerror.Surprisingly,verylittleconsiderationisbeinggiventothecluesembeddedinthesametraditionalnarrativesastothelocationofthatsecondvessel.Thisarticleattemptstoinvestigatethereasonsforthis,andre-evaluatestheInuittestimonyforanycluesthatcouldleadtothediscoveryofthissecondsignificantshipwreck.

TheInuittestimonyconcerningthewreckofHMSErebuswas,ifnotentirelystraightforward,fairlyconsistent.Twoknowngeographicalfeatureswererepeatedlymentionedinrelationtothatshipwreck,GrantPointandO'ReillyIsland,inanareawestoftheAdelaidePeninsulacalled"Utjulik."Asthesetwopointswereapproximatelytwentyfivekilometersapartthisstillleftaverylargeanddauntingareainwhichtosearch,anditwasonlyafterdecadesofpainstakingeffortbyasuccessionofteamsthattheprizewasattained.Asitturnedoutthewreckwasfoundalmosthalfwaybetweenthetwopoints.Perhapsevenmoreimpressiveisthatthedetailsofthewreck,lyingupright,inshallowwater,andalmostintact,aretotallyinaccordwiththeInuitdescriptionsgiven.

IncontrastthegeographicalcluesastothelocationofHMSTerrorarealmostnon-existent.TheInuittestimonycollectedinthenineteenthcenturyconsistentlyrememberedtwoshipwrecks,theoneatUtjulik,theothervaguelyreferredtoaslyinggenerallytothewestofKingWilliamIsland,anislandlargerthanJamaica.Itisclearthatanycasesettingoutasearchareabasedontestimonywillnotrelyonspecificgeographicalcluesbutmustbeentirelycircumstantial,basedonachainofreasoningfromtestimonyconcerningotheraspectsoftheFranklintragedy.

Fig.1FranklinAreashowingabandonmentpositionandpossiblewrecklocations.Erebuswasfoundin2014justsouthoftheindicated“Woodman’ssearcharea”.RoyalCanadianGeographicalSociety

CluesthatcouldleadtothelocationoftheTerrorarelargelyembeddedinstoriesofvisitsmadebyvariousInuithunterstoFranklin’sships.Mosthistorianseitherdoubtthatthesevisitsoccurred,orconcludethattheyrefertotheperiodbeforetheknownabandonmentofApril1848,whentheshipswerestilltogetheroffthenorthwestshoreofKingWilliamIsland.

ThesereconstructionsrelyheavilyontheonlydocumentaryevidencerecoveredfromtheFranklinexpeditionitself–ashortnoteknownasthe“VictoryPointrecord.”Thatnotestatedthat“H.M.ships'Terror'and'Erebus'weredesertedonthe22ndApril,5leaguesN.N.W.ofthis”butmadenomentionofanycontactwithInuitbeforethatdate.Thenoteitself,anunplannedaddendumtoanearlierrecord,couldeasilybeforgivenforomittingsuchdetails,howeverthereareotherreasonstodoubtthatanativevisittotheshipsbeforethattimeoccurred.

Thisisseeminglyreinforcedbytheconsideration,evidenttoSirLeopoldMcClintockthe1859thediscovererofthatrecord,that“nopartofthecoastbetweenCapeFelixandCapeCrozierhasbeenvisitedbyEsquimauxsincethefatalmarchofthelostcrews...noneofthecairnsornumerousarticlesstrewedabout-whichwouldbeinvaluabletothenatives-orevendrift-woodwenoticed,hadbeentouchedbythem.”1

ThistoowasconfirmedbyInuittestimonythatexplicitlystatedthattheyhadnoideathattheFranklinexpeditionhadleftrelicsonthenorthwestcoastuntiltoldofitbythenativesofBellotStrait,whothemselveslearnedofitwhenMcClintock’sexploringpartiesreturnedtohisship.2TheVictoryPointrecordalsoindicatedthattheentire105survivingcrewabandonedthevessels,presumablyintact.Most1 McClintock, The Voyage of the “Fox” (1859), p 276-7. 2 Hall Collection Book B – p 132-3.

historiansconcludethatno-onereturnedandthatallsuccumbedwithinafewmonthsonafutiledeath-marchtowardsthesouth.Thereforeitisconcludedthatthetwoabandonedshipswouldhavebeenlefttothemercyofthemovingice,andindeedthemodernsearchfortheTerrorhasconcentratedontheknownice-driftpatternsfromtheknownlocationoftheabandonmentoffthenorthwestcoastofKingWilliamIslandtothearea,overtwohundredkilometerstothesouth,wheretheErebuswasfound.

ButvoluminousInuittestimonycastsdoubtonthisstandardscenario.InuitstoriesoftheirdiscoveryoftheErebus,whichhavesofarproventobeentirelyinaccordwithwhathasbeenfound,areconsistentinaffirmingthatthatshipwasmannedwhenfirstseen.ThereweretracksofFranklin'smeninthesurroundingsnow,andatleastonecrewmanwasfounddeadintheshipwhenitwaspenetratedbyahuntingpartybeforesinking.Evidenceoflivingcrewstilllivingaboardisoneoftheprimarygoals,alongwithfurtherpossibledocumentation,ofthecontinuingefforttoexploreandanalyzethewreckoftheErebus.

ConsideringtheverifiedaccuracyofothertraditionsconcerningtheUtjulikwreckthepresenceoflivingcrewwhenitarrivedinthesouthmustbetakenseriously.Thissingleconsiderationplacesindoubtthecontentionthattheothership,theTerror,mustlieonthenormaldrift-pathfromthe1848abandonmentposition.ShouldhumanremainsbefoundaboardtheErebus,asindicatedintheInuittestimony,therewouldbeirrefutableevidenceconfirmingare-manningoftheshipsbyatleastaportionofthecrew.ThisallowsconsiderationthattraditionsofvisitstomannedshipsbyInuithunterscouldpost-datethe1848abandonment,andhaveoccurredelsewhere.

InfacttherewastestimonythatemergedfromthearcticlongbeforetheVictoryPointrecordwasdiscoveredthatindicatedthatFranklin’stwoshipswerenotonlyintact,butstillmanned,in1849.ThatyeartheMasterofthewhalerChieftainwasvisitedbyanInukhunterwhoindicatedthattwoshipshadbeen“frozenupforfouryears...[he]andsomecompanionshadbeenonboard…thepreviousspringandtheyweresafe.”3

ThiswouldbeconsistentwithotherInuittestimonythatimpliedthattheircontactwiththeFranklinexpeditionpost-dated1848.Whenreferringtonativevisitstothemannedshipsitwasrecalledthat“thetwowintersthetwoshipswere[beset]wereverycold.TheInnuitsneverknewsuchverycoldweather-therewasnosummerbetweenthetwowinters,”4whileanothertalespokeofvisitsduring“thefirstsummerandfirstwinter,”aphrasethatalsoimpliedalonginteraction.Two“winters”ofcontactbeforetheshipswerefinallyabandoned,i.e.:1848-9and1849-50,wouldimplythatasecondattemptatabandonmenttookplacein1850,andthattoowasseeminglyconfirmedin1854whenJohnRae,thefirsttolearnthelocationofthedisasterandtoreturnsomeFranklinrelicstoEngland,wastoldthatapartyofhuntershadmetretreatingFranklincrew“fourwintersago.”

Alloftheseconsiderationssetanewtimeline,oneassertingthattheshipswereatleastpartiallyremannedafteranabortive1848abandonment,andeitherdriftedorweretakentosomeotherlocationwheretheInuithuntersfoundthemin1849.

3 Great Britain, Parliamentary Papers, Accounts and Papers (1850) vol. 35, no. 107. 4 Nourse, Narrative of the Second Arctic Expedition etc., p 589.

TheinvestigatorwhocollectedmostoftherelevanttestimonywasCharlesFrancisHall,whospentfiveyearsbetween1864and1869livingwiththeInuitandrecordingtheirtalesofKodlunak(European)visitors.Heheardmanyaccountsofnativevisitstoexplorer’sships,anditistruethatitisoftendifficulttodeterminewhichexpeditionisbeingreferredto.Mostoftheencountershaveunderstandablesimilarities-theexplorerscameinsimilarships,usedsimilartechnology,andtheircommanderswereevengivencommonnicknames–ToolooahandAglooka–bytheInuit.Inmanycasesincidentscanbeconfidentlyattributedtothecorrectexpeditionthroughinternaldetailsorcomparisonwiththeexplorer’sownaccounts,butinothersonemustlookfordiagnosticdetails.

HallwasinformedbyahunternamedNeewikeetoothathe“aswellasotherInnuitsvisitedtheshiporships&sawtheKoblunasaboard...MostoftheInnuitsinthatpartofthecountry&neighbourhoodvisitedtheshiporships&afterwardsmovedfarfromthere.AfterthisoneInnuitwentalonetotheshiporships.Thiswasbeforetheshiporshipswascrushedintheice.”5

NeewikeetooalsoshowedHallawatchrecoveredfromaFranklinencampment.Hesaidthat“hetookthewatchoffthedeadbodyofaKob-lu-na...ThiswasonalargeislandnotveryfarfromNeitch-il-le.TheKob-lu-nas&theboatcamefromashipthatwascrushedintheice.BeforehardtimescameupontheKob-lu-nastheInnuitssawtheshiporships.”6

OnApr.13th,1866HallwastoldbyNood-loo-ongaboutoneInukinparticularwhowouldoften“telllonginterestingstoriesabouttheshipshehadseen…&ofthewhitepeopleaboard…ThisInnuitsnameKok-lee-ar-nung…Kok-lee-ar-nung&manyotherInnuitssawAglooka(Crozier)&manyotherwhiteswhileonboardtheshiporships.”Therecurringseemingconfusionwithinthestoriesastowhethertherewereoneormoreshipswillbeexplainedshortly,andwillitselfprovetobeavaluableclue.

Nood-loo-ongaffirmedthat“Kok-er-ling-arnhoweverdidseeAglooka&manyotherKoblunasonboardoftheshipmanytimes.”KokleearngnunwashimselfrepeatedlyinterviewedbyHall,andprovidedthemostdetailedaccountsofavisittothisship.Asproofofhisverisimilitudehe“showedtwospoonswhichhadbeengiventohimbyAg-loo-ka(Crozier),oneofthemhavingtheinitialsF.R.M.C.[FrancisRawdonMoiraCrozier]stampeduponit.”TheeminenthistorianR.J.Cyriax,convincedthatthevisitdescribedcouldnothavebeentotheErebusandTerror,rathertortuouslyattemptedtosidestepthistangiblelinkbetweenKokleearngnunandFranklin'sshipsbyconcludingthathispossessionofaspoon“whichhadunquestionablybelongedtoCrozier,andhisstatementthat'Aglooka'hadgivenittohim,donotprovethat'Aglooka'wasCrozier,northat'Aglooka'inpersonhadgivenhimthespoon.HallfoundrelicsofthelostexpeditionwidelydistributedamongtheEskimos,andKokleearngnun,whowasblind,mayhaveconfusedthespoonwithanothergivenhimbysomeoneelse.”7

AccordingtothenativerecollectionstheinteractionwiththecrewshadbeenprolongedastheInuit“hadtheirtupiksontheicealongsideofhimduringthespringandsummer”andtherehadbeenalarge

5 Hall Collection 58915-N (#7) - PRIVATE JOURNAL - Nov 19, 1865 - Apr 3, 1866, p 351-52. 6 Ibid.7 Cyriax, “Captain Hall and the So-Called Survivors of the Franklin Expedition,” p 181.

jointcaribouhunt“killingsomanythattheymadealineacrossthewholebay.”8ItmustbeadmittedthatHallhimselfhaddoubtsaboutthistestimony.Heremarkedthat“afterhearingthestoryofoldKokleearngnun…IbelievedtheyhadvisitedmanytimesSirJohnFranklin'sshipswhilebesetintheicenearKingWilliam'sLandandtheremethim,CrozierandalltheirCompany.Ittooksomethinglikethreedayswhileencampedontheice...tofindoutthefactthatalltheoldmanandwifehadtoldmewasofCaptainandCommanderRoss.”9

ThisdisregardsmanyofthedetailsofKokleearngnun’sstory–theRosseshadonlyoneship,neverconductedajointhunt,andtheirinteractionwiththeInuitasdescribedintheirownnarrativeswasbriefandconfinedtooneyear.ItisalsocounterindicatedbythedetailthatKokleearngnunhimselfspecificallystatedthattherewere“threeshipsinall-thatisonetheyknowaboutnotfarfromOok-kee-bee-jee-lua(PellyBay)justbeyondCapeBarens[Ross’Victory]&beyondthewestwardofNeit-tee-lik,[twomore]nearOokgoo-lik.”

Inadditiondetailedtestimonyconcerningaspectsoftheships(Victoryhadpaddlewheels,Franklin’sshipshadpropellors),physicaldescriptionsofthecommanders(Crozierwasbald,Rosshadafullheadofhair)etc.amplyrevealthattheInuitwitnesseswerenotconfusedastowhichexpeditionwasbeingspokenof.ThatKokleearngnunknewofthevariousexpeditionsandwasreferringrespectivelytoRoss’VictoryandFranklin’sErebusandTerrorseemsbeyondquestion,eventhoughHallmayhavelaterbeentoldthird-handmixedversionsofvisitstowhitemenincorporatingelementsofbothRossandFranklin.10

Anotherremembranceofthevisitstotheshipsintheicegivesanotherdiagnosticdetail–thedetailofitsdemise. KokleearngnuntoldHallofthedestructionofoneofthetwoships“theoldmanandhiswifeagreedinsayingthattheship…wasoverwhelmedwithheavyiceinthespringoftheyear.Whiletheicewasslowlycrushingit,themenallworkedfortheirlivesingettingoutprovisions;but,beforetheycouldsavemuch,theiceturnedthevesseldownonitsside,crushingthemastsandbreakingaholeinherbottomandsooverwhelmingherthatshesankatonce,andhadneverbeenseenagain.Severalmenatworkinhercouldnotgetoutintime,andwerecarrieddownwithheranddrowned.”11

Thiseventisunknowninthejournalsofanyarcticexpedition,andifitindeedoccurred,asthewealthofdetailandcorroborationattest,itmustcomefromtheoneexpeditionforwhichwehavenorecords–Franklin’s.Cyriaxclearlyrecognizedthedifficultiespresentedbythis,reluctantlyadmittingthat“someoftheofficersandmenmayhavereturnedtotheshipsafterthe1848attempttoreachtheGreatFishRiver,”and“acatastropheliketheonedescribedbyKokleearngnunmayhavetakenplaceafterwards,”althoughheneverthelessconcludedthat“nothinginhisstatementwarrantssofreeaninterpretation.”12

ThisopiniondisregardsthefactthatSirLeopoldMcClintock,whonevermetKokleearngnun,hadbeeninformedtenyearsbeforeHallbyInuitatBellotStraitthat“twoshipshadbeenseenbythenativesof8 Nourse, Narrative of the Second Arctic Expedition etc., p 255-6. 9 Hall Collection, Fieldnotes, 12 July 1866, p 24. 10 Nourse, Narrative of the Second Arctic Expedition etc., p 256. 11 Nourse, p 256-7.12 Cyriax, “Captain Hall and the So-Called Survivors of the Franklin Expedition,” p 181.

KingWilliam'sLand,”andthatoneofthese“wasseentosinkindeepwater.”Anotherhunteraddedthehelpfuldetailthattheship“hadbeencrushedbytheiceoutintheseawestofKingWilliam'sIsland.”HeinformedMcClintock’sinterpreterPetersenthat“hewasnotoneofthosewhowereeye-witnessesofit”tacitlyimplyingthatotherInuitwere.13Theseremembrancesmayexplainwhytestimonyisoftenuncertain,usuallywhentoldbythirdparties,astothenumberofships.Itseemsevidentthatthereweretraditionsofbothoneshipbeingvisitedandoftwo,apossiblereasonwhyRoss’solitaryVictoryissometimesinvoked,butitmaybethatwhatweareindeedhearingarestoriesofvisitstotheFranklinshipsbothbeforeandafterthesinkingoftheTerror.

ItfollowsthatthedramaticcrushingandsinkingoftheTerror(foritisnowknownthattheErebussankupright,gentlyandintact)thatwasreportedtoMcClintockmustpost-datethe1848abandonment,asitsurelywouldhavebeenindicatedintheVictoryPointrecord.Thisnotonlypartiallyvalidatesthe1849accountofavisittoFranklin’stwoships,butisinaccordwithmanyotherInuitstoriesaboutvisitstotheFranklinexpeditionbeforetheymettheirultimatefate.

ThedestructionoftheTerrorbybeingcrushedintheiceandquicklydestroyedwasnotonlydescribedbyvariousInuitwitnesses,itwasalsodescribedbythesurvivorsofFranklin’sexpeditionthemselves.ApartyofFranklin’smenwereencounteredonthemarchbyfourInuitfamilieswhowerehuntingforseal.Thestoriestoldofthisencounter,relayedatdifferenttimesbyalmosteverypersoninvolved,aresoconsistentthattheyareregularlymentionedineveryhistoryoftheexpeditionandbelievedtobeatrueaccount.Althoughusuallyattributedtothe1848march,thedetailsalmostuniversallycontradicttheideaofasingle1848retreatfromtheships.Oneofthemoredramaticoftheseinvolvesthedescriptionbytheleaderoftheretreatingcontingentofadramaticsinking“[he]madeamotiontothenorthward&spokethewordoo-me-en,makingthemtounderstandtherewere2shipsinthatdirection;whichhad,astheysupposed,beencrushedintheice.As[he]pointedtotheN.,drawinghishand&armfromthatdirectionheslowlymovedhisbodyinafallingdirectionandallatoncedroppedhisheadsidewaysintohishand,atthesametimemakingakindofcombinationofwhirring,buzzing&windblowingnoise.Thisthepantomimicrepresentationofshipsbeingcrushedintheice.”14

AgaintraditionalhistorianswereskepticaloftheInuitstoryofthecrushedship.Cyriax,anhonestscholarwhostruggledwithhisbiasagainsttheoraltraditionsremarked“theofficerscommandingthemainbodyaremostunlikelytohaveknownwhathappenedtotheshipssincetheirdeparturefromthem”whichis,ofcourse,trueiftheylefttheshipsbesetfaroutintheiceasattestedforthe1848abandonment.Cyriaxcontinuedthat“itthusseemsevidentthatifthenativesdidconclude,inconsequenceofwhatthewhitementriedtoexplain,thatashiphadsunk,theymisunderstoodwhattheirinformantstriedtodescribe.IadmitthatmorethanoneattempttoescapemayhavebeenmadeandthatEskimosmayhavemetwhitemenafterashiphadsunk,butthereisnoevidenceforsuchanoccurrence.”15

13 McClintock, The Voyage of the “Fox” (1859), p 227.14 Hall Collection, Fieldnotes, book no. 38. 15 Royal Geographical Society, Cyriax Papers 1(a), p 13-14.

Cyriax’scontentionhereisthatthereisnophysicalevidencethatsupportsmultipleattemptsatabandonment,howeverasshownabovethereisampleevidenceintheInuittestimony.OneothercuriousdetailoftheInuitremembrancespracticallyclinchestheargumentastowhichshipsweretheactualsourceoftheabovestories.

Thewhitecommanderofthevisitedshipswasknownas“Aglooka”(strider)totheInuit.Thiswasacommon,andwidely-bestowed,nativenicknameforaEuropeancommander.WeknowthatduringtheParrysojournatIgloolikin1822midshipmanCrozier,whowouldlaterbeFranklin’ssecondincommandandCaptainoftheTerror,hadexchangednameswithasmallboynamedAglooka.OverfortyyearslaterHallinterviewedtheadultAglookawhowasnowknownas“Crozier.”AlthoughsuggestivethefactthatCrozierwasknownasAglooka(Ross,incomparison,wasconsistentlycalledToolooah–Raven),thenicknamegiventothecommanderofthevisitedshipsisnotconclusive.

WhatdoesseemconclusiveisthatHall’sinformants“knewof“Cro-zhar,”whohadbeenan“Esh-emut-to-nar(mateorsomeofficernotsogreatascaptainonParry'sship).”Theywerealsoawarethatthe“sameman,Crozier,whowasatIgloo-likwhenParryandLyonwerethere,wasEsh-e-mu-ta(meaningcaptaininthiscase,theliteralchief)ofthetwoshipslostintheiceatNeitchille.”16IfInuitnevervisitedFranklin’sshipshowcouldtheyknowthis?ItseemsthatthisaccuratethumbnailbiographicalsketchcouldonlyhavecomefromCrozierhimself!ThefactthatthenativesknewthatCrozierhadservedwithbothParryandFranklinisremarkableenough;thefactthattheylearnedthisfromCrozier'sownlips,whileheservedas“eshemuta”ofthetwoshipsintheice,is,remarkable.

Oneoldwomanspokeofhernephewwho“hadseenEg-loo-kawhowasEsh-e-mut-ta(ChieforCaptain)before-oneyearbeforeonboardofhisship...HernephewwenttothisshipontheiceincompanyofmanyotherInnuits.Afterthisvisittothisship,theNeitch-il-leeInnuitsbelievedthattheshiphadgoneaway-gonehometotheKob-lu-nacountry;butthefirsttheyheardwasthatagreatmanyKob-lu-nashadfrozen&starvedtodeath.”17

ThatCrozierwasincommanddoesnotinitselfprecludethepossibilityofapre-1848visittotheshipsforoneofthedefinitivefactscontainedintheVictoryPointrecordinformsusthathehadassumedcommandoftheexpeditionafterFranklin’sdeathonJune11th1847.AgainwethenmustdealwiththefactthattheInuitdidnotknowofthepresenceoftheshipsonthenorthwestcoast,where,asCyriaxremarked,“hadanyEskimosvisitedtheshipsnearthatcoastbeforetheretreattotheGreatFishRiver...theywouldalmostcertainlyhavereturnedtothenorth-westcoastduringthenextfewyearstoseewhetherthewhitemenhadleftbehindanythingworthtakingaway.”18

ThisconsiderationisapowerfulclueastowhenandwheretheInuitbelievedtheshipsfirstcametotheirland.AfterFranklin’slastmensuccumbedtheInuitfoundatrailofskeletonsandcampsitesleadingalongthesouthernshoreofKingWilliamIsland.AstheyfollowedthistrailtothewesttheycameacrossasignificantlocationinmodernErebusBaywheretheyfoundtwoboatsonshoreandthecannibalized

16 Nourse, p 588-90. 17 Hall Collection Notebook 58914-N (#6) 18 Cyriax, p 180.

remainsofsomeofFranklin’sunfortunatecrew.Inmoderntimesthishasbeencalledthe“boatplace.”Andthentheystoppedlooking.

WhydidtheInuitnotcontinuetothenorth,whereawealthofFranklinrelicsawaitedthem?Perhapstheclueliesinanotherstory,toldbytheoldwomanOokbarloo,aboutthesinkingofthesecondship.Ookbarlooconfirmedthat“nearlythewholeofonesideofthevesselhadbeencrushedinbytheheavyicethatwasaboutit,”andshethoughtthatthiswaswhy“theKob-lu-nashadleftitandgonetothelandandlivedintents.”19

Livingashoreintentswouldhavebeenasensiblecourseofactionafteroneoftheshipshadbeendestroyed.TheErebusandTerrorwerenotlargevessels,barelyover30mlong,andwouldhavebeenuncomfortablycrampedfortwocrews.OncetheTerrorwaswreckeditwouldbesensible,atleastduringtheshortsummerseason,totakeanysurvivingmaterialsalvagedfromher,includingherboats,andestablishacampashoreatthenearestpointofland.

AnotherInuitstory,relayedbythewhalerPeterBayne,spokeofjustsuchanencampment.Heheardthat“duringthefirstsummer,”manyofFranklin'smenhadcomeashore,andthatthey“caughtsealslikethenatives,andshotgeeseandducksofwhichtherewasagreatnumber;thattherewasonebigtentandsomesmallones;andmanymencampedthere.”20

Bayne’smentionofa“firstsummer,”echoesKokleearngnun'staleofa“firstsummerandfirstwinter”andagainimpliesalongerinteractionbetweenthenativesandexplorersthanisattestedbyRoss.Hisinformantstoldofvisits“duringthespringandsummerofthefirstyear,andthesummerofthesecondyear,thetwoshipswerefastintheice.”Bayne'sinformantconfidedthat“hehadnotgoneouttotheshipsbutothernativeshad,andhadcampedalongsideforseveraldays.”21

Baynedescribedthelocationofthecamptohavebeen“aboutafourthofamilebackfromthebeach,andaboutthesamedistancesouthofwheretheship'sboatsusuallylanded.”Thislastdetailisanotherclue,forthereisnopossibilitythatship’sboatswouldhavebeenusedtocommunicatebetweentheshoreandtheErebusandTerrorin1846-8,whentheyweretwentyfivekilometersoffshoreandbesetinheavyice.Theimplicationfromtheuseofboatsisthattheshipswereclosetoshorewithatleastsomeopenwateraroundthem.

Againthisisnotdefinitive,althoughtherewasacampatErebusBay,andtwoboats(onsledges)hadbeenleftonshorethere,theBaynestory,whichhehimselflocatedatVictoryPoint(perhapstheonlynamedpointhewasawareof)isonlysuggestive.Weneedastorytoassociatetheships,thetentsashore,andtheboatplacetogether.Andluckilywehaveit.

WerememberthatNeewikeetoorecalledthatmanyInuit,asagroup,visitedthe“shiporships&sawtheKoblunasaboard”andthat“afterthisoneInnuitwentalonetotheshiporships.”22Thisstoryofa

19 Nourse, p 592-3. 20 Burwash, Canada's Western Arctic, p 112.21 Burwash, p 115. 22 Hall Collection 58915-N (#7) - PRIVATE JOURNAL - Nov 19, 1865 - Apr 3, 1866, p 351-52.

solitaryvisitbyanativeisechoedinthefamousstoryofthe“BlackMen.”Hallwasinformedthat“Kok-er-ling-arn[presumablyKokleeargnun]istheInnuitwhowentaboardAglooka's(Crozier's)ship&sawtheblackmencomeoutofaholeforward.Aglookaseeingthathe(Kok-er-ling-arn)wasverymuchfrightenedspoketoamanbyhimwhocriedouttotheblackmenwhentheyalldisappearedwheretheycamefrom.”23

Alongerversionofthisstoryisgiveninfull:

“Bye&byehe[thehunter]wentagaintotheshipallalonewithhisdogs&sledge.Hewentondeck,&agreatmanymen-blackmen-camerightupoutofthehatchway&thefirstthinghe(theInnuit)knew,hecouldn'tgetaway.Thesemenwhowerethenallaroundhim,hadblackfaces,blackhands,blackclotheson–wereblackallover!Theyhadlittleblacknoses,onlysobig:[theoldladyhereputherhandonthebridgeofhernoseshowingthatthenoseswerenotmorethanhalfthelength&sizeofcommonones]&thisInnuitwasverymuchalarmedbecausehecouldnotgetawayfromtheseblackmenbutespeciallywashefrightenedwhentheymadethreegreatnoises[threeroundsofcheersasToo-koo-li-toothinksthesegreatnoiseswere].Whenthreegreatnoisesweremade,theEsh-e-mut-ta(Captain)cameupoutoftheCabin&putastoptoit,whenalltheblackmenwentdownthesamewaytheyhadcomeup.ThisInnuitbelievedthesemenbelongeddownamongthecoals&thattheylivedthere.ThentheCaptaintookthisInnuitdownwithhimintohisCabin&madehimmanypresents,forhe(theInnuit)hadbeenfrightenedso.BeforetheCaptaintookhimdownintohisCabinhetoldthisInnuittotakealookovertotheland,theCaptainpointingouttohimtheexactspotwherewasabigTupik(tent).TheCaptainaskedhimifhesawthetent,&theInnuittoldhimhedid.ThentheCaptaintoldhimthatblackmen,suchashehadjustseen,livedthere,&thatneitherhe(thisInnuit)noranyofhispeoplemustevergothere.AftertheInnuithadreceivedthepresentsthattheCaptainmadehim,helefttheship&wenthome;&hewouldnevergototheshipagainbecauseofthefrightfullookingblackmenthatlivedtheredownintheCoalhole.”24

ItgoeswithoutsayingthatthereisnothinginthejournalsofRossorParrythatcouldrelatetothisverysingularandextraordinaryevent.AfteryearsofconsiderationthescholarRussellPottermakesaconvincingargumentthatthisvisittookplaceduringcelebrationsforGuyFawkesDay.25Whatconcernsusherearetheelementsofavisittotheship(bythistimetherewasonlyone),theassociationwithaclearly-visibletentonshorewheresomeofthecrewlived,andthewarningofdangerthere.

Thislastdetailisperhapsthemosttelling.Somehistoriansconcludethattheofficerwaswarningthehunterabouttheundisciplinedmenashore,andbasedonhisrecentfrighttheofficermighthavebeenusingthatasmotivation,butitcouldbethatthewarningwasspecificallyagainstthetentsite.Ifso,themostlikelymotivewouldbetowarnthehunteragainstinterferingwiththeexpedition’sstoreofgunpowder.Itwasnormalforarcticexpeditions,forobvioussafetyreasons,tolandtheirgunpowderashoreifatallpossible.RosshaddonethisatFelixHarbour,andParryhadsimilarlycachedthepowder

23 Hall Collection #58916-N (a) #8, Booklet Apr. 9th - 14th 24 Hall Collection, journal dated “Dec 6 1864-May 12 1865,” book 6, 281-3. 25 http://visionsnorth.blogspot.com/ Sunday, September 23, 2012 Arctic Blackface

fromthewreckedFuryatFuryBeach,laterinstructingRosstodestroyitlestitharmanyunsuspectingnatives.26

In1854JohnRaehadbeentoldabout“anabundantstoreofammunition,astheGunpowderwasemptiedbytheNativesinaheaponthegroundoutofthekegsorcasescontainingitandaquantityofshotandballwasfoundbelowhighwatermark.”27In1859Gilderlaconicallynotedthat“someshot,bulletsandwirecartidges”werefoundneartheboatinErebusBay,andhiscompanionKlutschakconsideredthatamongthearticlesfound“themoststriking”were“somepiecesofsackinginwhichbulletsandshot,aswellassomepercussioncaps,weretiedup.”28

Thefirstdiscovererofthe“boatplace”atErebusBaywasanativenamedPooyettaandhismemoriesweredetailed.HetoldHallthat“akegofpowderfoundattheBoat&muchofitscontentsemptiedontheground,agunor2foundthere.ThenatureanduseofthesethingsnotknowntoInnuitstilltheysawDr.Raein1854atPellyBay.Poo-yet-tahadseengunsofAgloo-kaatNeitchillebutdidn'tknowthenatureoftheblacksandstuff(powder).AnigloowasblowntoatomsbyalittlesonofPoo-yet-ta&anotherladwhowereafterwardplayingwiththepowdercanisterhavingsomeoftheblackstuffinit.Theydroppedsomefireintothecanisterthroughtheventoropening-theirfacesawfullyburned&blackenedwiththeexplosion-noonekilled-Igloocompletelydemolished.”29

Andsotheclues,admittedlycircumstantial,pileup.TheInuitvisitedtwoships,commandedby“Crozhar”andsawoneofthemcastonitssideandcrushed.Thecrewsatleastpartiallymovedashoretoatentcampnearwhereboatsusuallylanded,whosemaintentcouldbeseenfromthedeckofaship.Therewasgunpowderandammunitionfoundhere,andonehunterwasactuallywarnedbyanofficertoavoidtheplace,unfortunatelyawarningthatwasn’tentirelyfollowed.ThinkingthatthiswaswheretheexpeditionhadfirstcometotheirterritorytheInuitstoppedsearchingforFranklinrelicsoncetheyreachedthisencampmentatErebusBay.

TheclearimplicationisthattheTerrorlies,withacrushedside,inthewatersofErebusBay,withinsightoftheboatplace.AsshowninFig.2thisisslightlytotheeastoftheareaalreadysurveyedbytheParksCanadateam,whointendtocontinuetheir2016surveynorthwardstowardsthe1848abandonmentposition,basedonthenormalicedrift.DespitethemajorroleplayedbyInuittestimonyintheir2014discoveryoftheErebus,andthefactthatalmosteverydetailofthatdiscoveryaccordswiththetraditions,thestoriesretoldabovedonotfactorintheirsearchplans.

In2014thefirstphysicalcluethatledtotheultimatediscoveryoftheErebuswasfoundonasmallisletbyapartyledbyNunavutarchaeologistDr.DougStenton.HealsomadeashortdetourtotheboatplaceatErebusBaytoagainscourthesiteformoreartifactsleftbyCrozier’smen.AshestoodontheshoretherehemighthaveunknowinglybeenclosertothewreckoftheTerrorthanherealized.

26 Sir John Ross, Narrative of a Second Voyage in Search of a Northwest Passage, 111, 194. 27 Rae, “Sir John Franklin and his Crews,” 16-17. 28 Gilder, Schwatka's Search, 156; Barr, Overland to Starvation Cove, 94. 29 Hall Collection, Fieldnotes, book no. 31.

Fig.2AreasurveyedbyParksCanadateamsfrom2011-13.Suggestedsearchareaisinblackoval.

SourcesCited

Barr,William.OverlandtoStarvationCove:WiththeInuitinSearchofFranklin,1878-1880.Toronto:UniversityofTorontoPress1987.

Burwash,L.T.Canada'sWesternArctic.Ottawa:King'sPrinter1931.

Cyriax,R.J.“CaptainHallandtheSo-CalledSurvivorsoftheFranklinExpedition.”PolarRecord4(1944):170-85.

Gilder,WilliamH.Schwatka'sSearch:SledgingintheArcticinQuestofFranklinRecords.NewYork:CharlesScribner'sSons1881.

GreatBritain,ParliamentaryPapers,AccountsandPapers(1850)vol.35,no.107.

Hall,C.F,HallCollection(cat#58909-44-n),Museumofarmedforceshistory,navalhistorysection,SmithsonianInstitution(Washington,D.C.)

McClintock,FrancisLeopold.TheVoyageofthe“Fox”intheArcticSeas:ANarrativeoftheDiscoveryoftheFateofSirJohnFranklinandHisCompanions.Philadelphia:PorterandCoates1859.ReprintEdmonton:HurtigPublishers1972.

Nourse,J.E.,ed.NarrativeoftheSecondArcticExpeditionCommandedbyCharlesFrancisHall.Washington:GovernmentPrintingOffice1879.

Ross,SirJohn.NarrativeofaSecondVoyageinSearchofaNorthWestPassage,andofaresidenceintheArcticRegionsduringtheyears1829-30-31-32-33;withAppendix.2volumes.London:A.W.Webster1835.

RoyalGeographicalSociety,CyriaxPapers1(a),p13-14.