Talk:HMS Babet (1794)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the HMS Babet (1794) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

France Low‑importance

	France portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ships

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips articles

Military history: Maritime / British / European / Napoleonic era

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	British military history task force
	European military history task force
	Napoleonic era task force (c. 1792 – 1815)

Shipwrecks Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Shipwrecks, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of shipwreck-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ShipwrecksWikipedia:WikiProject ShipwrecksTemplate:WikiProject ShipwrecksShipwreck articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Shipwreck-related priority open tasks:

To Do

Lady Elizabeth (1879)
- Clean up typos Currently working on it-----Completed!
- Improve grammar
- Add any additions if needed Still adding more information
- Discuss desired additions -None

United Kingdom Low‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

I don't know how relevant this might be but I found today a gravestone recording three individuals, a father and his son and daughter. The son was William Bellamy, a leuitenant in the Royal Navy serving on Le Babet "when she foundered in the West Indies", to quote the stone. Strangely, the gravestone records March 1801 as the date the ship sank, rather tahn November, as suggested in the article. I'm going back to the churchyard tomorrow so I can double check, but I'm sure I recorded the information correctly. Mygrum (talk) 21:04, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Babet lost in 1800 but reported as lost in 1801

The Babet with General Knox sailed in September 1800 - see for example page 3 of the Exeter Flying Post 25 September 1800 https://search.findmypast.com.au/bna/viewarticle?id=bl%2f0000103%2f18000925%2f007&stringtohighlight=knox%20babet Based on letters such as at https://archive.org/stream/cu31924028002743/cu31924028002743_djvu.txt "About this time [1801] we got the melancholy account of the loss of the Babet, the ship in which our dear John^ (General Knox) was gone out as Governor and Commander in Chief to Jamaica. Many, many tears did I shed for him, I loved him as a brother, and never, I believe, was there a man so deserving of the regard and regret every- one expressed for him. We long had hopes that the ship was not lost, as it was not seen to go down, but years have elapsed since, therefore no hope can be indiJged, though I am sometimes fool enough to feel some, in spite of my almost conviction that it is impossible they ever should be realised."

and https://archive.org/stream/in.ernet.dli.2015.74800/2015.74800.Secret-Memoirs-Of-The-Courts-Of-Europe-Letters-Written-At-The-End-Of-The-Eighteenth-Century-Vol-Ii_djvu.txt "March 28th. [1801]

Every day takes away part of our hopes ; there are letters by the Jamaica mail, and ac- counts have been received from Honduras and other parts of the island. They have seen nothing of the unfortunate Babet , so that little opening remains but the chances of capture, which I am afraid would have been known before now. The Knox family and Colonel Barry give it up as a lost case. I write illegibly, for my eyes are dim, and every letter appears double. "

I am reasonably certain that some time was spent before declaring the Babet lost.

In February 1801 there were newspaper reports of serious concerns for General Knox who was aboard the Babet. eg Reading Mercury 9 February 1801 page 2 https://search.findmypast.com.au/bna/viewarticle?id=bl%2f0000367%2f18010209%2f003&stringtohighlight=general%20knox

The will of Captain Jemmett Mainwaring was proved in the Prerogative Court of Canterbury on 1 July 1801, a date not comaptible with the loss of the Babet in October 1801.Matilda ^talk 10:41, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]