The Cultural Anthropological Analysis of the Oral Tradition of Henry Hudson’s New York Harbor Exploration
by
Rik van Hemmen, Maritime Historian
Abstract:
The oral tradition of the introduction of pigs to the northeast coast by Henry Hudson is examined. The examination indicates that the oral tradition is factually correct, and that while there are versions of the story in other settings, those versions are simple cultural transpositions of the original story.
Introduction:
Maritime is often described as long stretches of boredom interruption by instances of sheer terror.These long periods of boredom are often filled with storytelling. Senior crew will relate stories to more junior crew. Some of those stories are parables, some are training illustrations, some are plain silly stories, and some stories describe significant events in history.Cultural anthropology has noted that some stories tend to develop over time with shifts and embellishments, while other stories do not change over time and tend to stick to the original version. There is little scientific consensus as to why some stories change and some don’t. There are examples of incredible consistency over time, and also of rapid shift. This issue has been especially deeply studied with regard to the Gospels where there are both instances of consistency and inconsistency among the Gospels and deep study has noted that there is sufficient similarity between Matthew, Mark and Luke to suggest they have a common source or are records of early oral traditions, while John is an almost independent version. Meanwhile, there remains sufficient inconsistency and hyperbole in the Gospels to leave reasonable doubt as to whether they describe fact or fiction.Unalaska, the largest of the Aleutian chain islands, provides an unusual verification of the accuracy of oral traditions where local oral traditions of the mid 1700’s revolt against Russian fur traders have resulted in the ability to exactly locate combat sites and after excavation to verify the accuracy of the combat descriptions down to the number of killed fur traders and the method of their demise. Henry Hudson’s 1608 AD exploration of presentday New York harbor and Hudson River is described in the surviving log of Henry Hudson’s Chief Mate Rober Juet. In Dutch Anglo maritime storytelling tradition, there is one other event that occurred during that exploration that is not described in Juet’s log. However, due to its exceptional historical accuracy, consistency and detail, cultural anthropologists generally consider it to be historical fact. The same story is often told in other nations’ maritime storytelling traditions in different settings and some versions are even shore based, but intense study has revealed that the Henry Hudson version provides all the historically correct details to indicate it is the proto version of the story.It is noted that while Henry Hudson was English, his employers were Dutch and the crew was mixed English Dutch. Upon the return of the Halve Maen to Europe it first stopped in England. This explains why the story is equally (and identically) preserved in English and Dutch maritime tradition. In this paper the story is retold and summarizes the exhaustive research details that support the conclusion that the event actually occurred during Henry Hudson’s exploration of New York Harbor and the Hudson River. This version is considered to be the most authentic version. It is noted that the typical sailor’s vernacular is preserved in this retelling.
The story begins:
When Henry Hudson left the Netherlands, he was fully victualled for an extended voyage of discovery.Vessels of that era carried live animals that would provide fresh protein as the voyage progressed. The Halve Mean carried a number of young pigs in a pigpen on the main deck immediately aft of the forecastle.
Comment 1: Pigs were fed food scraps, spoiled food and anything that was caught during the voyage (vermin, birds and fish). Pigs, like goats, are omnivorous and therefore were easy to feed. Goats were not as popular at that time. Goats became more popular when coffee and tea became more common where goat milk was used in those beverages. In Hudson’s day shipboard beverages were more commonly beers and ales.
The story continues:
Hudson’s designated search for a northeast passage was unsuccessful, and he decided to explore the mid-Atlantic East Coast where Verrazano had made mention of a possible passage to India, and which was also suggested to Hudson by John Smith of Virginia Company fame.During the passage most pigs were consumed.
Comment 2: At the time in question, pigs were excellent sources of food since almost the entire pig could serve as human food. The term Barbeque (BBQ) is thought to originate from the French where its source is thought to originate from “Barbe a Queue” which referred to a cooking style that went from Beard (barbe) to tail (queue) for human consumption.
The story continues:
When approaching the American East Coast, only one pig remained which happened to have grown to be an extraordinarily large pig.A member of the crew suggested that a cork be inserted into the pig’s ass to see if it would get even bigger.A cork was found, and once inserted did not appear to bother the pig. The pig continued to eat and continued to grow (and bloat) to immense size.When Hudson entered Raritan Bay, they met members of the Lenape tribe at what is now the maritime Highlands of New Jersey.When the Lenape visited aboard the vessel they were delighted and amazed by the enormous pig, and begged to bring friends and family aboard to see the pig, Noting the extraordinary interest by the Lenape the crew set up a standard routine when they traveled up the Hudson river, where for exchange of beaver pelts and corn for the pig the Indians could see and even pet the enormous pig.Meanwhile the pig continues to bloat and grow.
Comment 3: Juet’s log makes no mention of the pig. It is not entirely clear why Juet does not mention the pig and the attention it received from the native population. It is possible that Juet wanted to project a more conventional or even courageous image for the trip up the river, or wanted to convince the readers of the log that the many beaver pelts that they secured during the trip were purchased just for trinkets carried aboard the ship instead of through a more complex exchange which, as later events show, could be dangerous to ship and crew.Generally new world interactions were a random mixture of friendly and unfriendly exchanges. Noting that the lack of unfriendly interactions as recorded in Juet’s log is remarkable (except for the early attack on three crew members in one of the Halve Maen’s small boats), it supports the presence of the pig as an attraction for peaceful exchange. It is significant to note that pigs were an old world animal, and a completely novel animal to American native populations. As such, an enormous pig would be an incredible attraction to the local population.The continued and peaceful presence of Native Americans aboard the vessel can be reasonably expected, based on the fact that the Halve Mean was slow compared to native canoes which could rapidly move upriver and relate the existence of the amazing pig to tribal settlements and explain how they could peacefully examine it through payment of beaver pelts and corn for the pig.Corn is an exceptional pig food, but remarkably, in the early 1600’s this new world food had not yet been fed to pigs. Undoubtedly American corn resulted in further exceptional growth of the pig.During the exploration of the river and bay, there was no need to slaughter the pig because as Juet’s log records, the native population readily provided all types of fresh food including oysters, venison, and turkeys.
The story continues:
When the Halve Maen turned back to sea for its return trip to Europe, the pig had truly grown to gargantuan size. Capt. Hudson directed that the pig to be slaughtered on the return voyage. This posed a problem since the crew was afraid that the moment a knife entered the pig it would explode like a balloon. The best way to relieve that pressure would be to pull the cork out of the pig’s ass, but nobody in the crew was willing to volunteer for that potentially very dangerous task.After a lot of discussion, a crew member suggested that they would train the monkey to pull the cork out of the pig’s ass.
Comment 4: The sudden presence of a monkey in the story, initially may be considered to be a Deus Ex Machina style weakness in the story. Cultural anthropologists less familiar with 1600’s maritime often refer to the presence of the monkey as proof that the story is fictitious. However, the late mention of a monkey actually supports the thesis that the story is factual. The presence of a monkey aboard the vessel of that era can almost be expected and therefore does not warrant early mention. While the species of monkey is not provided, almost certainly the monkey is a Capuchin monkey (The various species of the genera Cebus). Capuchin monkeys are considered to be the smartest and most easily trained new world monkeys. Their interaction with humans is well recorded, most recently as Marcel in the sitcom Friends.Soon after Columbus’ initial contact with Central America, Capuchin monkeys were introduced to Europe and spread rapidly as pets and even as work animals (begging animals). Aboard ships a reasonably trained capuchin monkey provided much needed entertainment and companionship, not just on deck but also in the rigging. Capuchins also are effective as guard animals and can be easily trained to retrieve and deliver smaller tools and supplies, which is of immense help when performing topside maintenance. As such, it would be more remarkable to not have a monkey aboard the Halve Maen. As a new world animal, and noting that trade and travel by native Americans extended across the entire continent, the monkey aboard the vessel may have been of moderate interest to the native population, but would not have been a source of wonder and excitement.
The story continues:
While eastbound across the Atlantic the crew trained the monkey to recognize corks and on command to pull a cork. This took a few days, after which the monkey was considered to be ready.The monkey was put in front of the pig’s ass and raised its little hand ready to pull the cork.The crew retreated to the poop deck.
Comment 5: The term poop deck refers to the elevated deck at the aft end of the vessel. The poop deck sits above the main deck where the pig’s pen was located. The raised deck at the bow is called the forecastle. Oddly the place for the crew to empty their bowels is at the bow. This is why the toilets on a ship are called “heads” as in “ahead”; forward.This makes the term poop deck rather inappropriate, but it will become clear later that there may be an appropriate reason for the term.
The story continues:
One crew member, the cabin boy, was curious as to what would happen and to get a better view, he half hid behind the main mast, much closer to the monkey than the rest of the crew.Captain Hudson gave the command to the monkey: “Pull”The monkey pulled the cork and there was a massive explosion and a tsunami of pig shit that washed across the main deck from bow to stern. The wave of shit hit the poop deck bulkhead and angled upward where the crew watched a curtain of pig shit curl upward for about 30 feet and then collapsed on the poop and main deck. The massive shift of weight from bow to stern resulted in a heavy trim by the stern, where the shit collected on the main deck against the poop deck bulkhead and between the bulwarks.
Comment 6: It needs to be pointed out that the pig was at the forward part of the maindeck, facing forward with the cork and his anus pointing aft. This is not described in the typical telling of the story, but is obvious to the original 17th century listeners noting that animals can also get seasick and generally the possibility of seasickness is diminished by facing forward. The pigpen would have tightly constricted the pig, securing the pig in place during heavy weather and reducing activity allowing the pig to fatten more quickly.With regard to the term poop deck, it is noted that the term exists in both English and Dutch maritime technology. It has been suggested that the term is associated with a vessel “pooping” which refers to the after portion of a vessel submerging. There is no historical data that indicates that “pooping” predates Henry Hudson and, as such, it is more likely that the term “poop deck” originated following the subject event.It is noted that the height of 30 feet has remained rather consistent, but it is unclear if these are British feet or Dutch feet. While these feet are similar in size, the Dutch feet only contained 11 inches.
The story continues:
After the wave of shit, there was a gaseous explosion from the pig which ejected a charge of undigested corn kernels that flew aft where the kernels embedded themselves into the main mast. The effect of concentrated methane nearly made the crew pass out on the poop deck. Fortunately there was no open flame aboard the vessel at that moment, or it would have resulted in a massive gas explosion.The wave of shit had washed the sheets and halyards off the pin bank, and all lines were tangled in a heap on the aft maindeck against the poop deck bulkhead and the bulwarks.This resulted in clogging of the aft bulwark freeing ports, and loss of stability due to excessive free shit surface with the vessel lurching first to starboard and then lurching to port. Slowly the shit drained through the freeing ports and the vessel resumed a more, or less, even keel.The crew descended from the poop deck to the main deck to clean the mess. They used the bilge pump and buckets to wash the deck and under the tangled mess of rigging lines against the poop deck bulkhead they found the cabin boy.At first it was thought he had drowned in the shit, but when they pulled him up, banged him on the back and reach into his mouth to extract the shit, he coughed, hacked out more shit and regained consciousness. He opened his eyes and looked at the crew standing around him and burst into laughter. Not just a regular laugh, but rather a knee weakening completely uncontrolled fit of hysterical laughter. The crew tried to calm him down, threw water in his face, and even slapped him across the cheeks, but he just kept laughing. Not being able to think of anything else they put him in his bunk and let him exhaust himself with laughter until he fell asleep. Eight hours later the vessel had regained some level of seaworthiness and the crew had a chance to satisfy their curiosity about the cabin boy and his uncontrolled laughter.They woke him up and the moment he opened his eyes he once again descended in a fit of uncontrolled laughter. It took a full watch until he calmed down enough to speak at which time the crew asked him: “Cabin boy what is so funny about this horrible event that you have been laughing so hard about?”
Between post laughter hiccups and gasps the cabin boy answered: “You should have seen that monkey trying to get the cork back into the pig’s ass.”
Comment 7: This is where the story ends. There is no mention of the pig or the monkey. In the context of the era, that makes sense, and further supports its veracity and authenticity. The pig was almost certainly slaughtered. Pig slaughter was a common and routine event and, as such, deserved no more of a mention than a crew member’s routine bowel movement. The meat was cooked boiled smoke or salted to remain edible for the rest of the voyage and probably various sausages were also made. Similarly monkeys also were a mostly unremarked presence aboard ships, unless it was an uncommonly capable or beloved monkey. While the monkey displayed sufficient presence of mind trying to replace the cork, the task of removing the cork was not particularly difficult for a capuchin. Noting that it took a few days to teach the monkey to remove the cork it is reasonable to assume that the monkey was no more than an average shipboard monkey and, as such, deserved no further mention in the story, whether he perished or not during the explosion.The above analysis strongly suggests that this version of the story is factual and other versions of the story are mere reinterpretations by later generations with fewer factually authentic details. Noting that the Lenape had very strong and accurate oral traditions, undoubtedly first pig contact would have been part of the Lenape story telling tradition. Research on the story among remaining Lenape unfortunately has not revealed any references to first pig contact. Besides pigs, contact with Western culture also introduced disease and inhumane treatment, which resulted in rapid decline of Lenape culture and the Lenape version of the story must have disappeared into the unrecoverable mist of time.