by Mike Dash
NAME RANK MONTHLY PAY
Francisco Pelsaert Upper-merchant 80–100 guilders
Araien Jacobsz Skipper 60 guilders
Jeronimus Cornelisz Under-merchant 36 guilders
Claes Gerritsz Upper-steersman 36 guilders
Frans Jansz Surgeon 36 guilders
? Ship’scarpenter 30 guilders
Jacob Jansz Hollert Under-steersman 24 guilders
Aris Jansz Surgeon’s mate 24 guilders
? Carpenter’s mate 24 guilders
Jan Evertsz High boatswain 22 guilders
Reyndert Hendricxsz Steward 20 guilders
? Constable 20 guilders
? Cook 20 guilders
? Sailmaker 18 guilders
David Zevanck Assistant 16 guilders
Jan Willemsz Selyns Upper-cooper 16 guilders
Pieter Jansz Provost 14 guilders
Harman Nannings Quartermaster 14 guilders
Gabriel Jacobszoon Corporal 14 guilders
Jacop Pietersz Steenhouwer Lance corporal 12 guilders
Rutger Fredricx Locksmith 12 guilders
Coenraat van Huyssen Cadet 10 guilders
* * *
* * *
* * *
Able seamen were paid about 10 guilders a month, ordinary seamen 7 guilders, private soldiers 9 guilders, and ship’s boys 4 guilders a month. Among the sailors and craftsmen, the relative importance of carpenters—who were vital to the integrity of a retourschip in the course of the long voyage east—is particularly striking.
Councils V. D. Roeper, De Schipbreuk van de Batavia, 1629 (Zutphen: Walburg Pers, 1994), pp. 30–1; Henrietta Drake-Brockman, Voyage to Disaster (Nedlands, WA: University of Western Australia Press, 1995), pp. 11–12.
Supply of water JFP 5 June 1629 [DB 125].
“Begun to coalesce . . .” This is supposition on my part, but based on the typical behavior of survivors after a shipwreck. See, for example, the behavior of the Medusa survivors—members of the crew of a French transport stranded off the coast of Mauritania in 1816—described by Alexander McKee, Death Raft: the Human Drama of the Medusa Shipwreck (London: Souvenir Press, 1975), pp. 117–9.
Suffering caused by lack of water Harderwijk MS [R 22–4]; JFP 16 Sep 1629 [DB 145]; Nathaniel Philibrick, In the Heart of the Sea: The Epic True Story That Inspired Moby Dick (London: HarperCollins, 2000), pp. 127–9.
Deaths from thirst Harderwijk MS [R 22]; anonymous Letter of, 11 Dec 1629, published in Leyds Veer-Schuyts Praetjen, Tuschen een Koopman ende Borger van Leyden, Varende van Haarlem nae Leyden (np [Amsterdam: Willem Jansz], 1630) [R 233]. The author says the dead consisted of nine children and one woman.
“Our own water . . .” LGB.
Wybrecht Claasen She presumably came from Dordrecht, like her employer. A very large proportion of people from the town earned a living from the sea, which may explain how the girl came to swim so well. Harderwijk MS [R 22–3].
The breakup of the wreck “Declaration in short [of] the origin, reason, and towards what intention, Jeronimus Cornilissen, under-merchant, has resolved to murder all the people . . .,” JFP nd [DB251], anonymous letter of 11 December 1629, op. cit. [R 233].
“Taken by surprise” Letter of 11 December, op. cit. refers to people “swimming naked through the surf.”
“. . . the wrecking went on . . .” JFP 17 Sep 1629 [DB 145].
Jeronimus comes ashore JFP 17 Sep 1629; “Declaration in Short,” op. cit. [DB 145, 158, 251].
Southeast wind JFP 12–14 June 1629 [DB 129].
The camp The position of the Batavia survivors’ camp was revealed by test diggings conducted in 1992. Green, Stanbury, and Gaastra, The ANCODS Colloquium, p. 111.
There is little in the ship’s journals to indicate how the survivors organized themselves, but the campsites left by the crew of the Zeewijk, another retourschip lost in the Abrolhos (see epilogue), have been excavated, and they offer many clues as to how the Batavia’s men would have set up their camp.
One key feature of the Zeewijk’s camp was the way in which the officers retained control of the supplies salvaged from the wreck of their ship and kept their distance from the men. They pitched their tent on their island’s highest point and kept all the salvaged victuals there. The soldiers occupied a separate site about 100 yards along the beach, but both the common sailors and the petty officers were kept farther away, on the far side of the soldiers’ camp, apparently because they posed a significant threat to the officers’ authority and even their lives.
The example of the Zeewijk survivors also provides some clues as to what happened next. Despite the presence of both the skipper and the upper-merchant, the shortage of supplies meant that discipline was a constant problem on the islands. The petty officers and the seamen sometimes refused to accept their officers’ authority to ration the supplies, and on at least three occasions near-mutinies forced the distribution of stores that should really have been rationed.
The Zeewijk’s officers and the VOC officials, who were outnumbered eight to one by the rest of the survivors, seemed to have solved this problem by forming a loose alliance with the soldiers. Analysis of the animal bones found at the various sites suggests that the retourschip’s troops enjoyed significantly better rations than the petty officers, whose main diet was sea lion. In exchange for these privileges, the soldiers provided an armed guard for the supply tent. Even so, the officers’ authority over the sailors remained extremely fragile. The petty officers retained control of the ship’s boat, and used it to roam freely around the islands. There is no sign that they stockpiled food at their main camp site, and it seems likely that they used their superior experience and skills to catch and eat a good deal of fresh food for themselves.
It seems unlikely that the Batavia survivors’ camp was even this well ordered. The Zeewijk carried no women and no passengers, and the officers stayed on the islands with the men. The Batavia survivors, on the other hand, were a more disparate group and had no natural leaders. If the example of the Zeewijk is any guide, discipline would quickly have broken down and the petty officers would have become almost impossible to control.
The first of the near-mutinies referred to above occurred when the petty officers and common hands forced the distribution of 1.5 aums of wine among the men; on another, “all the rabble as well as the petty officers” ordered an aum of wine to be distributed equally among them, as well as five Edam cheeses, six kegs of salted fish and some tobacco. On the third occasion, the high boatswain, the gunner and the boatswain’s mate took bread and pork barrels from the store and gave each of the petty officers 12 loaves. The officers themselves were not immune to such temptation; one day the longboat was seized by an officer and several petty officers and rowed to a distant point, where the men on board consumed a large quantity of food, drink, and tobacco rather than share it with their colleagues. Finally, when the Zeewijk’s longboat set out for Java, the composition of her crew was decided by the drawing of lots, a procedure insisted on by the men. Boranga, op. cit., pp. 6–9, 31–3, 93–104; Edwards, op. cit., pp. 107–8, 110–2, 118–9.
208 people on the island Anonymous letter of 11 Dec 1629 [R 232].
Water and wine from the wreck JFP 17 Sep 1629 [DB 145].
Store tent There is no mention of such a tent in the available sources, but as such a tent was a feature of practically every shipwreck survivors’ camp, including that of the Zeewijk, it seems safe to assume that there would have been one on Batavia’s Graveyard, too.
Water ration This estimate is calculated from the standard daily ration, which was 3 pints (1.5 liters) of water. R. van Gelder, Het Oost-Indisch Avontuur: Duitsers in Dienst van de VOC, 1600–1800 (Nijmegen: SUN, 1997), p. 158.
Exhaustion of the food supplies Again, there is no explicit mention of this in the journals, but it is my impression that earlier authors have probably understated the effects of food shortages on Batavia’s Graveyard. Even at the end of the mutiny, when the numbers of people on the island had been reduced to
only 50 or so, strict rationing was still in force there (Interrogation of Jeronimus Cornelisz, JFP 17 Sep 1629 [DB 159]), and Wiebbe Hayes and his men were surprised at how gaunt their attackers were (anonymous letter of 11 Dec 1629 [R 233]). Shortages probably began within the first fortnight; the Zeewijk survivors wiped out the sea lion population on their much larger island within 10 days of coming ashore (Boranga, op. cit., p. 34). There were fewer than 100 of them (Edwards, op. cit., p. 103), and the position of the Batavia survivors was surely thus even more desperate. The “seal’s meat” noted as being present in the predikant’s tent six weeks later (Verdict on Andries Liebent, JFP 30 Nov 1629 [DB 244]) probably came from elsewhere, after the party’s mobility had been restored by the construction of the rafts.
“. . . they deferred to him.” This is speculation on my part, but Jeronimus’s outburst on 4 July, when the council defied him (see below), seems typical of a man who had come to expect that his proposals would be obeyed without question.
Cornelisz joins the Council Philippe Godard states (The First and Last Voyage of the Batavia (Perth: Abrolhos Publishing, nd, c. 1993), p. 132, that Jeronimus was never a member of the first ship’s council, but Pelsaert, in his “Declaration in Short,” op. cit. [DB 251], says specifically that the council was “his” on 4 July, i.e., before the dismissal of the first set of councillors and the appointment of Zevanck, Van Huyssen, and Pietersz to the group. Bastiaensz, in LGB, wrote that the under-merchant was “elected chief.” It would, indeed, have been remarkable—given his seniority—if the apothecary had not become the leader of the raad.
Pelsaert’s clothing JFP 19 Sep 1629 [DB 146].
“He seemed to be everywhere . . .” This behavior is inferred from Bastiaensz’s statements and from modern insights into the psychopathic personality (see epilogue). Exactly what the under-merchant really did during this period was not recorded and cannot now be known.
“This merchant . . .” LGB.
Ryckert Woutersz “Declaration in Short,” op. cit. [DB 251]. Jeronimus alleged that Woutersz had spoken up “on the day that the ship Batavia was wrecked”; confession of Jeronimus Cornelisz, JFP 19 Sep 1629 [DB 162]. On the obscure fate of this mutineer, see chapter 9.
Hopes that Ariaen would dispose of Pelsaert and flee to Malacca Interrogation of Jan Hendricxsz, JFP 19 Sep 1629 [DB 164].
Cornelisz’s estimate of the jacht’s crew Summary of the interrogation of Jeronimus Cornelisz, JFP 28 Sep 1629 [DB 153].
The plan to seize the rescue ship JFP 17 Sep 1629 [DB 143]; JFP 28 Sep 1629 [DB 152–3].
Seductive LGB.
Van Welderen’s age Gsbert was younger than his brother, Olivier, who was 22. Verdict on Olivier van Welderen, JFP 30 Nov 1629 [DB 245]
Rutger Fredricx Interrogation of Rutger Fredricx, JFP 20 Sep 1629 [DB 205].
“Appear not to have been approached . . .” There is an evident discrepancy between the number of mutineers said to have been active on the Batavia (not more than 12–15) and the numbers who revealed themselves in the Abrolhos (25–35).
David Zevanck Unfortunately, nothing at all is known of Zevanck’s background. He presumably came from Zevanck (modern Zevang), which is a rural area a little to the north of Amsterdam, but without more detailed information it would be useless—or at least extremely time-consuming—to try to trace his antecedents; nor has anyone yet found his name mentioned in the earlier records of the VOC. It is, indeed, quite possible that he was making his maiden voyage on the Batavia. That he came from a good family is almost certain—on several occasions he is referred to as “Van Zevanck” in the journals, which suggests his family owned some property and had at least pretensions to being counted among the gentry of the Netherlands—but all that can be said with any certainty is that he must have been educated and was probably young.
“Acting very subtly . . .” “Declaration in Short” [DB 251].
The mutineers’ tents Ibid. [DB 252].
“Discouraged the ship’s carpenters . . .” This is interpretation, but it is difficult to imagine what else Pelsaert might have meant by his passing reference to the under-merchant “practising devilish shifts in such a manner as to prevent them going to Batavia.” “Declaration in Short” [DB 251]. In 1727, the survivors of the Zeewijk built quite a large one-masted sloop, the Slopje, from the wreckage of their retourschip and successfully sailed her to Java.
“He said that the number . . .” LGB.
“Nothing but some biscuit barrels” There was also a note written by Pelsaert, which was found tucked beneath a barrel. From this, the survivors learned what they had already guessed; that their commandeur had sailed on to the South-Land in search of water. JFP 6 June 1629 [DB 127].
The naming of Traitors’ Island The derivation of the name is not actually explained in Pelsaert’s journals. For the naming and the location of this island, see Green. et al, The ANCODS Colloquium, pp. 99–100.
The Seals’ Island party The actual figure is nowhere given in the journals but seems to have been 45; 18 men and boys died on the island on 15 July, and 16 women, boys, and children on 21 July, and we are told three boys were captured and about eight escaped. Another estimate does suggest the party was larger—perhaps 60 strong—but this has to be wrong; there must have been about 130 people left on Batavia’s Graveyard when the killings began, if the account of the killings given in JFP is correct. For the larger estimate, see anonymous letter of 11 Dec 1629 [R 232].
Jeronimus’s promise to the people of Traitors’ Island Interrogation of Jan Hendricxsz, JFP 19 Sep 1629 [DB 179].
“Toward the end of the third week of June” Hayes and his men were on the islands about 20 days before finding water (JFP 20 Sep 1629 [DB 149]), landing first on what was later known as High Island and then, when they were unable to find wells, wading across the mudflats to what became Wiebbe Hayes’s Island (LGB). Their signals appear to have been noticed on 9 July, when Pieter Jansz and his party abruptly left Traitors’ Island for the high islands and had to be intercepted by Cornelisz’s men (Verdict on Jan Hendricxsz, JFP 28 Sep 1629 [DB 183]). This would give an approximate date of 20 June for Hayes’s arrival on the High Land itself.
“High Land” The phrase comes from LGB.
“Some of the boldest soldiers . . .” Ibid.
Wiebbe Hayes The baptismal and marriage records of Winschoten, in the Provincial Archive of Groningen, date only to 1646, and the burial registers only begin in 1723; no traces of Hayes’s early life have yet emerged. The files of Winschoten marriage contracts date to 1608, but Hayes’s name does not appear among them. A check on signatures in the surviving solicitors’ records for the period 1624–28 also produced nothing, but Hayes may simply have been too poor and insignificant to have had any need of solicitors. Alternatively, he may not have come from Groningen. “Wiebbe”—pronounced “Webb-uh”—is a Frisian name, which was unusual even for the time and is now obsolescent, so perhaps Hayes and Cornelisz had that origin in common. If he survived to return to the Netherlands, Hayes might have been rich enough to leave more trace of his activities, but no sign of him has yet emerged. There is, for example, no record in the local burial registers of a Wiebbe Hayes ever being buried in Amsterdam.
Hayes known to Cornelisz The under-merchant later wrote to the French mercenaries in Hayes’s party that he had “a particular liking for and trust in Wiebbe Hayes.” His letter was intended to split Hayes’s Defenders, and Cornelisz would have found it important to have retained at least the veneer of truthfulness in setting out his case. It seems unlikely that he would simply have lied outright about their acquaintance, as this would have cast doubt on some of his other statements. Jeronimus to Jean Hongaar et al., 23 July 1629, in JFP 19 Sep 1629 [DB 149].
Jeronimus’s plans for the rescue ship “His procedures,” wrote Francisco Pelsaert, “could neither exist nor be acceptable to God or Worldly Power.” But to Jeronimus they were merely common sense. JFP 3 Dec 1629 [DB 239]. For Cornelisz’s thoughts, see JFP 17–28 Sep 162
9 [DB 143, 153, 160]. On the number of men the jacht would carry, see JFP 28 Sep 1629 [DB 153].
Abraham Hendricx He was possibly, but not certainly, the same Hendricx who had taken part in the assault on Creesje Jans.
“On 4 July . . .” Pelsaert’s “Declaration in Short,” JFP nd [DB 251].
Appointment of the new council Ibid.
“He proved this point immediately . . .” Pelsaert gives 4 July as the date of the sentencing of these men (Verdict on Jeronimus Cornelisz, JFP 28 Sep 1629 [DB 173]), but 5 July as the date of their executions (Verdict on Daniel Cornelissen, JFP 30 Nov 1629 [DB 240]) and also as the day on which Zevanck and the others joined the council (“Declaration in Short” [DB 251]), while clearly implying that the carpenters were sentenced by Cornelisz’s raad. One or other of these journal entries must be incorrect. See also verdict on Hans Frederick, JFP 30 Nov 1629 [DB 244].
The first covert drownings The date of this incident appears to have been 4 July, and not 3 July as Drake-Brockman suggests, which would have put the murders before Cornelisz ordered the execution of Hendricx and Ariaensz. Van Os’s interrogation makes it clear that the murders were ordered on 3 July but not committed until the following day, which probably suggests that Jeronimus knew he was going to charge Hendricx and Ariaensz with theft well in advance. Jan Cornelis was the only Dutchman; he came from Amersfoort, in the province of Utrecht, while Liebent and Janssen, an ordinary private, were Germans and Wensel was a Dane. Interrogation of Lenert van Os, JFP 23 Sep 1629 [DB 186]; verdict on Mattys Beer, JFP 28 Sep 1629 [DB 192]; verdict on Rutger Fredricx, JFP 28 Sep 1629 [DB 206–7]; verdict on Daniel Cornelissen, 30 Nov 1629 [DB 240]. Pelsaert’s various accounts of these killings are somewhat confused. Some state that the men were tied up on the raft, others that they were taken to Traitors’ Island, tied up there, and dragged into the sea to drown.
Murder of Hans Radder and Jacop Groenwald Verdict on Jan Hendricxsz, JFP 28 Sep 1629 [DB 182–3]; verdict on Mattys Beer, JFP 28 Sep 1629 [DB 192–3]; interrogation of Rutger Fredricx, JFP 28 Sep 1629 [DB 205].