Statek Madre de Deus i jego bajeczne skarby to największy łup w historii Anglii

[Jarpen Zigrin]

Zdobycie przez Anglików portugalskiego statku „Madre de Deus” można przyrównać do wygrania na loterii. W ładowniach okrętu znajdowały się niewyobrażalne skarby, tak duże, że ten łup śmiało można nazwać największym w historii Anglii. Ładunek wart był tyle ile połowa państwowego skarbu Elżbiety I.

 

https://historia.org.pl/2019/12/30/najwiekszy-lup-w-historii-anglii-zdobycze-ze-statku-madre-de-deus-dalo-krolowej-anglii-2000-zysku/

[secesjonista]

Cytuj

 Anglicy honorowo zachowali się wobec kapitana Fernao de Mednonca

 

Ne wiem skąd taka pisownia, w przypadku nowożytnych personaliów istnieją oczywiście różne "lekcje", ale na ogół podaje się: "André Furtado de", a nazwisko to chyba już na pewno jest błędne, czy nie powinno być - "Mendonça". Ten "Fernao" (a właściwie to: Fernão) to chyba zupełnie inna osoba o podobnym nazwisku.

[Jarpen Zigrin]

Nie ukrywam, że na takie uwagi i poprawki liczyłem. Tekst zostanie poprawiony

 

Niestety szukałem potwierdzenia informacji jakoby 2000% miała zarobić Elżbieta I na tej wyprawie, biorąc pod uwagę zainwestowaną kwotę, ale nie znalazłem szczegółów. Podałem to jako ciekawostkę-spekulację.

[secesjonista]

Cytuj

Dowódcami ekspedycji byli George Clifford, Martin Frobisher i Walter Raleigh

 

Podana informacja zawiera dwa błędy.

Otóż dowódcą wyprawy (będącej prywatnym przedsięwzięciem przy wsparciu i akceptacji Korony) był Walter Raleigh - jako admirał, nie było trzech dowódców i zgodnie z regułami stylistycznymi raczej powinien być umieszczony na początku tego szeregu. Formalnie; według większości opracowań; w momencie zawiązania się wyprawy, vice-admirałem był John Burrough vel. Burgh (William Monson uważał, że tę funkcję pełnił Robert Cross, kapitan "Foresight"), a który w ogóle nie został w artykule wymieniony?! O problemach z jego identyfikacją i brzmieniem nazwiska:

"Burgh invariably signed his name as above, but is also invariably called Borough, Burroughs, or Burrowes by his contemporaries".

/"A Voyage undertaken by Sir Walter Ralegh, but he returning left the charge of it to Sir Martin Frobiser, Anno 592", w: "The Naval Tracts of Sir William Monson in Six Books", Vol. I ed. and com. M. Oppenheim, "Publications of the Navy Records Society", Vol. XXII, [London] MDCCCII, przypis na s. 278; por. także uwagi zawarte w nocie biograficznej pióra Johna K. Laughtona w: "The Dictionary of National Biography", 1885 -1900, Vol. 7, ed. L. Stephen, London Smith, Elder & Co, s. 322-323/

 

 Niedługo po wypłynięciu Raleigh zostaje zawrócony królewskim listem i przekazuje dowództwo wyprawy Martinowi Frobisherowi. Kiedy potem statki podzieliły się na dwie części dowództwo nad jedną objął oczywiście Frobisher, a nad drugą właśnie - Burrough. Wspomniany George Clifford nie był dowódcą ale był jednym z głównych udziałowców tego morskiego przedsięwzięcia i najbardziej utytułowanym - jako 3. hrabia Cumberland i 13. baron de Clifford. I właśnie zgrupowanie pod dowództwem Burrougha odpowiadało za przejęcie "Madre de Deus", Frobisher był już wtedy w drodze do Anglii.

"The plan of Expedition of 1592 combined an ambush for the rich carracks of Seville with an attack on the Spanish settlement of Panama. The Adventurers provided thirteen vessels, well equipped; the Queen, two ships of war, 'The Garland' and The 'Foresight'. Next after Ralegh, George Clifford, Earl of Cumberland, was the principal adventurer. Ralegh, himself, was to have the comman of the expedition as Admiral; with Sir John Borough for his Vice-Admiral. Next in command after Borough was Sir Martin Frobisher (...)
When a change of wind at lenght allowed him fairly to set sail, and get out to sea, he was followed by Sir Martin Frobisher, with peremptory orders that the Admiral should instantly resign his post to Frobisher, jointly with Sir John Borough, and should himself return fortwith to the Court. Frobisher, however, like his colleague, was still to act as Ralegh's lieutenant, and to take his orders".

/E. Edwards "The Life of Sir Walter Ralegh", Vol. I "Life", London 1868, s. 146-147/

 

Podobnie inny biograf Raleigha - Patrick Fryzer Tytler:

"Such a spirited detection of the treacherous policy of Elizabeth's great enemy, with the attachment to her person and government which it displays, was highly acceptable to the queen, and disposed her to lend a favourable ear to a proposal of Raleigh for an expedition against Panama, combined with a second scheme for intercepting the Plate-fleet. In this enterprise he imprudently invested hi whole private fortune, and engaged many of his friends; whilst his royal mistress, guided by her own judgment and the counsels of Burleigh, assisted them sparingly. The of the gentlemen adventurers were thirteen, well manned and provisioned; those of the crown, only two men of war, - the 'Garland' and the 'Foresight'. Raleigh was appointed admiral, and Sir John Burg vice-admiral (...)
His arrangements were crowned with succes; for whilst the letter kept the Spaniards at home, dreading a descent, the Indian carracks were allowed to fall into hands of Burgh. One of these the 'Madre de Dios', 1600 tons, was the largest prize at that time ever brought to England, and valued by Raleigh and Sir John Hawkins [chodzi tu o jednego z inwestorów, który był właścicielem statku "Dainty" - secesjonista], the principal adventurers in the expedition, at £500,000".
/tegoż "Founded on Authentic and Original Documents", London and Edinburgh MDCCCLIII, s. 116, s. 118/

 

"All which piles of commodities being by men of approved judgment rated but in reasonable sort amounted to no lesse then 150000 li. sterling, which being divided among the adventurers (whereof her Majesty was the chiefe) was sufficient to yeeld contentment to all parties. The cargozon being taken out, and the goods fraighted in tenne of uor ships sent for London".

/R. Hakluyt "The Principal Navigations Voyages Traffiqes and Discoveries of the English Nation", Vol. VII, Glasgow MCMIV, s. 117/

 

"All theſe Commodities being valued by Men of Judgment, at a reaſonable Rate, amounted to no leſs than one hundred and fifty thouſand Pound Sterling; which being divided among the Adventurers, (whereoſ her Majeſty was the chief) was ſuſſcient to content all Parties".

/"A Cruizing Voyage to the Azores, in 1592, by Sir John Burrough, Knight, in order to intercept the Eaſt India Caraks", w: "A New General Collection of Voyages and Travels: Consisting Of the moſt Eſteemed Relations...in Europe, Asia, Africa and America...", Vol. I, ed. Th. Astley, London MDCCXLV, s. 249/

 

W dniu 3.01.2020 o 6:14 PM, Jarpen Zigrin napisał:

szukałem potwierdzenia informacji jakoby 2000% miała zarobić Elżbieta I na tej wyprawie

 

Na pewno miało być to: "2000%" (?), może raczej: 2000£? Wystarczy sprawdzić przeciętny koszt budowy i wyposażenia statków podobnych do tych, które wystawiła królowa, "Garland" - 660 ton, 330 men. a "Foresight" - 300 ton, 180 men. Faktem jest, że dla królewskiego skarbca nawet to co zostało z cargo po jego rozszabrowaniu było potężnym wzmocnieniem finansowym. Tudzież sięgnąć po relacje wspomnianego Monsona, gdzie można znaleźć wiele szczegółów:

"... on the 29th December, 1591, Burghley notes that Ralegh required, besides 6,000, from the merchants, another of the Quenn's ships as well as 'Foresight', and 2,000 advenced on prize money and pensions due to him. This followed by articles of agreement in the same month with the Lord Mayor and Commonalty of the City of London, in which they protected their interests by covenanting that the victualling and fitting was to be done under the supervision of their agents; that there should be a registrar in every ship, appointed jointly by the Queen and themselves, to keep account of prizes; that they should be empowered to nominate commissioners to act with the Queen's commssioners to deal with prize goods; and that they should not be called upon for more than the 6,000 unless they obtained more from the 1591 prizes. Then the preparations no means so fond of boarding as is usually supposed (...)

whether Burgh really denied the verbal agreement to consort with the earl's ships we do not know, but at any rate Elizbaeth did it for him. Cumberland's fleet had costs him 19,000; Ralegh and his brother adventures had laid out 34,000, and he claimed 57,750. But according to Elizabeth, Ralegh and his partners were to have 36,000, by which he showed that his net loss altogether would only be 2,200, since the London merchants were to be more liberally treated as they were to have 6,000, net profit out of the 36,000 (...) On consideration Elizabeth must have reflected that although Relagh could be ill treated with impunity, it was unadvisable to offend the Earl of Cumberland, and he was granted 37,000, which left him a nadsome profit on his outlay. The London merchants got 12,000 - that is to say, the 6,000 they had subscribed from the 1591 prizes and 6,000 profit; payments of 7,000 or 8,000 were made to Hawkyns and others, and Ralegh got his 24,000 - that is, the 36,000, first proposed, less 12,000 for the City of London. Elizabeth took the remainder, which may have been anything from 6,000 to 90,000, her original subsription in hard cash having been 3,000, of which 1,2000 was devoted to fitting out the Garland and Foresight".

/"The Naval Tracts...", s. 283 przyp. 2 i s. 295/

 

Cytuj

Na mieszkańcach Londynu przywiezione łupy zrobiły oszałamiające wrażenie pokazując naocznie bogactwa orientu

 

Chyba jednak: Orientu...

[Jarpen Zigrin]

10 godzin temu, secesjonista napisał:

Na pewno miało być to: "2000%" (?), może raczej: 2000£? Wystarczy sprawdzić przeciętny koszt budowy i wyposażenia statków podobnych do tych, które wystawiła królowa, "Garland" - 660 ton, 330 men. a "Foresight" - 300 ton, 180 men

 

2000 to zbyt mało, łup zarekwirowany po rabunku wynosił ok. 140 000 funtów. Aczkolwiek cytowany przez Ciebie fragment mówi już, że maksymalnie 90 000 z tego trafiło do Elżbiety.

 

Przyjmując, że dała 3 000 a wyjęła 90 000, to mamy 3000% zysku.

 

PS bardzo dziękuję za wszystkie uwagi!

[secesjonista]

 William Richard Drake w swej relacji (opartej w pierwszej części na: "Letter from Ralegh to the Lord Treasurer, printed in Strype's Annals, Ox. ed. 1824, vol. iv. p. 181") uważa, że w sumie królowa otrzymała zbyt mały zwrot ze swych inwestycji:

"The expedition to which the documents I am about to refer relate, was fitted out principally by Sir Walter Ralegh (who embarked in it the principal part of his fortune), aided by Sir John Hawkins and the city of London; it had the sanctionof a Royal Commission, and was assisted by a contribution from the Queen of two ships of war, the " Garland " and the " Foresight," together with a sum of 3,000, of which however 1,500, was laid out in repairing her Majesty's own ships (...)

When however he thus wrote, he no doubt did so with a view of mollifying Elizabeth's anger; indeed it would appear that Sir Walter's ultimate liberation from confinement was to a certain extent purchased by the bribe he offered to the Queen in reference to the Carrack, for he writes (Strype, vol. iv. p. 180) to the Lord Treasurer from the Tower, pointing out that, assuming the value of the prize at £200,000, the Queen's share would amount to £20,000 only; but he hints that to buy his liberty he would be willing that this £20,000 should be made £100,000 out of his own share. " Fourscore thousand pounds (he writes) is more than ever a man presented her Majesty as yet. Tf God have sent it for my ransom I hope her Majesty of her abundant goodness will accept it."—The value of the prize as it came to be divided was, as we have seen, overrated; but apparently the Queen obtained by the adventure at least £83,600 out of the £141,000; not, it must be admitted, a bad return for her investment, considering that out of 5005 tons of shipping she had furnished but 1150, and out of £ 18,000 in money only £ 1,500".

/tegoż "XVII - Notes upon the Capture of 'The Great Carrack' in 1592", "The Antiquaries Journal", Vol. 33, Issue 2, s. 211/