The final voyage of Beatrice

The ship before 1838

Nielsen identifies Beatrice as a ship built in Québec in 1827, associated with shipbuilder John Bell. The inspection of 21 July 1835 that he cites describes a sailing vessel with a “snow” rig and recorded tonnage of 224 tons, registered in London and employed between Liverpool and Alexandria. This tonnage is a historical registration measurement, rather than the weight of the ship or its cargo. N24 · p. 318LRF

Nielsen associates Whichelo with the ship as master from at least 1830 and dates his ownership to 1834. His study connects earlier voyages with the cotton trade and several Mediterranean ports. He also discusses an 1837 advertisement mentioning “natural history” cases; those words do not identify their contents as antiquities. The original records behind this reconstruction remain to be independently checked here. N24 · p. 318N24 · p. 319

Richard Mayle Whichelo and his son

Nielsen identifies Richard Mayle Whichelo as the owner and usual master. He concludes that Whichelo remained in Alexandria when Beatrice departed in September 1838 and associates command with his son John. Illness and business are explanations suggested by Nielsen; no examined primary document establishes the reason here. N24 · p. 321

Nielsen reports thirteen people in a Malta crew register for a voyage in 1836. The original register has not been independently examined here. It cannot establish the complete crew of the final voyage in 1838. N24 · p. 321MALTA36

Chronology and source status

The unresolved route

The discrepancy between Livorno on 12 October and Malta on 13 October cannot be resolved without supporting evidence. This website therefore does not draw a continuous “proven route” between those ports. The original reports, their dates and the identification of the ship must first be established. V84N24 · p. 322

Nielsen considers incomplete customs registers, indirectly gathered newspaper information and even loss before reaching Malta. These are possible explanations. None establishes a wreck location on its own. N24 · p. 322

What the missing-ship report establishes

The newspaper text quoted by Nielsen states that the ship had not been heard of. Nielsen describes this as confirmation of loss with all aboard. On a strict reading, the quoted text itself is a missing-ship report: it records neither an observed sinking, its cause nor a complete list of casualties. N24 · p. 323

Vyse’s later account reports presumed loss. Nielsen’s quotation from the insurance record indicates that the shipment was treated as lost; the complete original committee entry remains to be independently examined. The precise event at sea is a separate question. V84MINUTES39N24 · p. 323

After the reported loss: the insurance record

Nielsen cites the museum committee meeting of 29 June 1839 and quotes a net cheque of £148 from Francis & Co. as an insurance payment for the sarcophagus lost aboard Beatrice. This is a report through his study. The complete original minutes remain to be independently examined. N24 · p. 323MINUTES39

Vyse’s account appeared in 1840. The later fieldwork and proposed searches have their own documented history.

Places named in the voyage sources