Welcome back to the Deep Dive. Today we are taking
on one of the most remarkable paradoxes in American
history. We really are. We're talking about a
figure whose entire professional life was just
this high wire act balancing between, you know,
breathtaking scientific genius and and utter
self -destructive chaos. It's an incredible story.
This is a man who charted. 1 ,500 miles of the
Antarctic coastline. 1 ,500 miles. Yeah. He created
navigational maps that were so accurate they
were still guiding American ships through World
War II. Amazing. And his collection of specimens
basically founded the Smithsonian Institution.
Exactly. And yet this is the very same man who
faced court -martial. Multiple times. Multiple
times. He nearly triggered a catastrophic war
between the United States and Great Britain.
And he was, you know, widely regarded by his
subordinates as an autocratic, almost unbearable
commander. So today we are peeling back the layers
on Lieutenant Captain Commodore and eventually
Rear Admiral Charles Wilkes, who lived from 1798
to 1877. It's a story of a scientific visionary
whose immense lasting achievements were just
constantly being undermined by. personal conflict,
diplomatic disasters, and an almost insatiable
appetite for controversy. So our mission today
is to really unpack the sources covering Wilkes'
extraordinary life and try to reconcile these
two opposing forces within him. Yeah, that's
the challenge. We'll focus on his command of
the U .S. Exploring Expedition, the famed X,
which really launched U .S. scientific exploration
onto the global stage. Then we'll turn to his...
pivotal and i mean near catastrophic role in
the civil war trent affair oh absolutely and
finally we'll look at how his complicated legacy
continues to resonate today from the pacific
northwest all the way down to a massive geological
surprise hidden right under the antarctic ice
and here's the paradox we have to keep centered
on as we navigate this deep dive wilkes is gravestone
it's in arlington national cemetery and it proudly
claims right there in permanent stone he discovered
the Antarctic continent. Right. So we have to
ask. How? How did a man who was repeatedly accused
of insubordination, of excessive punishment,
who routinely ignored naval and international
law, how did he manage to become such a uniquely
consequential figure in U .S. naval science and
exploration? It's a profound study in that contrast
between foundational lasting achievement and
these fundamental character flaws. really is.
Okay, let's unpack this monumental life. I think
we had to start at the very beginning, setting
the stage with his early life and how he developed
this very specific expertise that put him in
command of one of the most ambitious scientific
missions in American history. A mission usually
reserved for the most seasoned and politically
unblemished. Line officers. Exactly. Not a guy
like Wilkes. So Wilkes was born in New York City,
1798, and his family pedigree was pretty notable.
Right. He was the great nephew of John Wilkes.
The famous radical politician, former Lord Mayor
of London. Yeah. But his childhood was, it was
quickly marked by a real tragedy. His mother.
His mother, Mary Seton Wilkes, died in 1802.
Charles was only three years old. Wow. That immediately
just throws his upbringing into sharp relief.
Our sources show he was then raised and home
tutored. by his aunt. Elizabeth Ann Seton. Right.
And this wasn't just, you know, a familial arrangement.
This was a crucial intellectual influence. She
was a widowed mother of five, had a strong background
in the liberal arts, and importantly for later,
was fluent in French from her own upbringing.
And that French connection, it proved to be so
much more than just a cultural footnote. It was
a professional game changer for Charles. A huge
one. He became fluent in the language himself.
And this proficiency, it proved incredibly valuable,
not just socially, but strategically. How so?
Well, it allowed him to engage deeply with the
scientific communities in Europe during a long
stay there between 1830 and 1831. That's where
he acquired critical scientific instruments and
a lot of knowledge. And the sources even show
this skill set was still relevant later on, right?
In the Pacific Northwest in 1841. Precisely.
During the North American leg of the Assyrians,
he was guided through the Puget Sound region
by a French -speaking pioneer named Simon Plamondon.
So it illustrates how that early... education
from his aunt, it wasn't just academic curiosity.
No, it became a necessary tool for American expansion
and exploration. So after his aunt's tutelage,
he went on to a more formal education at a boarding
school and then Columbia College, which we now
know as Columbia University. Yeah. But his life's
true trajectory, that was set when he joined
the Navy. He entered the U .S. Navy as a midshipman
in 1818, and then he was promoted to lieutenant
in 1826. But the defining experience, the thing
that really set him apart from a typical career
officer, was his relentless focus on nautical
science. On precision surveying. Exactly. This
all culminated in his meticulous work charting
Narragansett Bay in 1833. And this is where that
meticulous nature, which is really the flip side
of his controversial personality, this is where
it really shone. This survey work, it wasn't
just drawing lines on a map. No, it was about
defining precision in a way the young US Navy
desperately needed. That charting work required
a high degree of technical skill, of mathematical
rigor, and it led directly to his next appointment.
Which was to lead the Navy's Department of Charts
and Instruments. And this small department, which
Wilkes effectively established and managed, is
perhaps his most enduring legacy outside of the
expedition. Because it evolved. It evolved into
two critically important national institutions
that are still central to naval operations today.
The Naval Observatory and the Hydrographic Office.
Wilkes was building the fundamental infrastructure
of American naval science from the ground up.
The significance of that just can't be overstated.
And what's fascinating is the technical standard
he set. He created the benchmark for physical
oceanography that would be maintained and really
built upon by the man who became the first superintendent
of that office, Matthew Fontaine Morey. Yes,
and that connection to Maury is essential for
you to understand the weight of Wilkes' early
career. Maury later earned the title Father of
Oceanography for his work organizing global wind
and current data, which completely revolutionized
sailing. The fact that Wilkes laid the intellectual
and organizational foundation for Maury's later
breakthroughs, it just underscores that before
he was the controversial commander, Charles Wilkes
was the essential visionary infrastructure builder
for American naval science. He gave the Navy
The reliable institutional scientific footing
it needed? He did. And he wasn't just some technician
isolated in a back room either. He was clearly
moving in very influential circles. During the
1820s, he was a member of the prestigious Columbian
Institute for the Promotion of Arts and Sciences.
Right. And we're talking about an elite group
here. It included sitting presidents like Andrew
Jackson and John Quincy Adams. So this political
placement is critical. Because when the call
came for a major national exploration mission,
the first... truly monumental scientific undertaking
the country had ever funded. Wilkes was the man
selected. Despite not having the seniority of
many other captains, he had the naval rank, the
scientific credibility backed by tangible achievements
like those Narragansett charts, and, crucially,
the political connections to navigate the bureaucracy.
Which brings us to the centerpiece of his career,
the United States Exploring Expedition, better
known as the X, which ran from 1838 to 1842.
This was science on a truly grand, almost unimaginable
scale for the young United States. The goal was
to put America on par with the great exploring
nations, you know, like Britain and France. The
sheer ambition is just stunning. The authorization
for this mammoth undertaking actually came from
Congress on May 18th, 1836. It was rooted in
both national pride and some very practical concern.
Very practical. It was about commerce and safety.
So what were those? goals exactly, because this
wasn't just a flag -waving ceremonial trip, was
it? Not at all. The goals were specific and instrumental.
The central mandate was explicitly for the purpose
of exploring and surveying the Southern Ocean,
particularly looking toward the Antarctic continent.
Okay. But critically, it was also focused on
highly practical maritime safety, determining
the existence of doubtful islands and shoals,
and accurately fixing the position of newly discovered
ones. Things that posed a clear hazard to global
shipping routes. Exactly. It's easy for us today
to forget how dangerous sea travel was then.
A doubtful island could sink a merchant vessel
and ruin an entire voyage. Wilkes' role was essentially
to clear the navigational uncertainty from vast
swaths of the globe. Navigational accuracy was
commerce and commerce was national power. Precisely.
And Wilkes was selected for command in 1838 because
of that dual background. His experience in nautical
survey work and his ability to collaborate, at
least professionally, with civilian scientists.
And that civilian collaboration was essential
because the expedition was loaded with a level
of expertise previously unseen in U .S. naval
missions. It was a floating university and museum
collection all in one. The personnel included
multiple naturalists, botanists, taxidermists
to preserve specimens. Artists too, right? Yes,
artists like the illustrator Alfred Thomas Agate,
whose sketches provided crucial visual records,
a mineralogist, and significantly, a philologist.
A philologist. That's a deep cut for a naval
exploration. What was an expert in language and
textual history doing on a ship sailing toward
Antarctica? It speaks to the mission's comprehensive
scope. The philologist's job was to record and
analyze the languages, the dialects, the vocabularies
of the indigenous peoples they encountered across
the Pacific. So this wasn't just mapping geography.
No, it was a full cultural and biological inventory.
They were aiming to capture the human landscape
before Western expansion inevitably changed it
forever. That vision is incredible. And the fleet
itself, it was substantial. Six vessels in total.
The flagship was the USS Vincennes at 780 tons.
Then you had the USS Peacock. the brig USS Porpoise,
the store ship USS Relief, which carried all
the vast stores and equipment, and two smaller,
faster schooners, the Seagull and the Flying
Fish. And on August 18, 1838, they departed from
Hampton Roads, Chesapeake Bay. Kicking off a
four -year circumnavigation of the globe that
would push man and ship to their absolute limits.
Okay, let's trace this incredible, daunting route
of discovery. They started in the deep South
Atlantic before the real work in the Pacific
began. That's right. They started in the Atlantic,
hitting key resupply points like the Madeira
Islands and Rio de Janeiro, before moving south
to the punishing environments of Tierra del Fuego.
And from there? From there, they sailed up the
West Coast, stopping in Chile and Peru. Then
came the vast expanse of the Pacific, visiting
the Tuamotu Archipelago, Samoa, and eventually
making a crucial stop for repairs and provisioning
in New South Wales, Australia. But the real historical
breakthrough, the one that literally cemented
Wilkes' name on the map, that happened in late
1839 and early 1840? Absolutely. The Antarctic
breakthrough. This fulfilled the key mandate
of the expedition. In December 1839, they sailed
from Sydney right into the notoriously brutal
Antarctic Ocean. Which was an incredibly dangerous
undertaking in sailing vessels. Unbelievably
dangerous. And on January 25, 1840, they sighted
the coast of Antarctica west of the Baloney Islands.
This was the definitive moment of discovery.
This gave physical form to the long -speculated
southern continent. Yes, and it led Wilkes to
name the area, appropriately, Wilkes Land. And
this wasn't just some brief, tentative glance
through the fog. This effort was sustained, dangerous,
and scientifically substantial. Oh, it was far
more than a sighting. The expedition charted
1 ,500 miles, or 2 ,400 kilometers, of the Antarctic
coastline. They documented features like towering
ice barriers and landmasses poking through the
ice sheet. So this sustained mapping, this provided
the substantial Irrefutable proof. Irrefutable
proof that Antarctica was not merely an assortment
of islands or a massive floating ice shelf, but
a true continent. This data was revolutionary
at the time. So after that harrowing, freezing
southern journey, they turned back north to warmer
waters. Where did the focus shift then? They
moved through Fiji, and then they spent a significant,
intense period in the Hawaiian Islands between
1840 and 1841. And that stop yielded immediate
and practical results for navigation. and science
in the burgeoning Pacific trade routes. Let's
talk about the North American Lake, because that
often gets overlooked by the dramatic Southern
Ocean narrative. But it was crucial for defining
American territory. It was strategically vital.
In 1841, the expedition extensively explored
the entire West Coast. They were systematically
surveying and mapping the Strait of Juan de Fuca,
the massive expanse of Puget Sound. The Columbia
River. The Columbia River, San Francisco Bay,
and the Sacramento River area. They were literally
mapping what would become the future boundaries
of the United States on the Pacific Rim. And
you find these great... humanizing details in
the source material, things that contrast with
the sheer scale of the mission. The sources note
they held the first American Independence Day
celebration west of the Mississippi River. Yes,
that small detail. It took place at DuPont, Washington
on July 5, 1841, and it perfectly grounds the
grand scientific mission in the context of American
expansion and settlement. It was a projection
of national identity through scientific endeavor.
And following the West Coast, they finished the
circumnavigation. They did. They sailed through
the Elise Islands, which are now Tuvalu, then
pushed on to Borneo, Singapore, the Philippines,
the volatile Sulu Archipelago, back through Polynesia,
around the Cape of Good Hope, and finally reached
New York. on June 10, 1842. So four years later,
having successfully circumnavigated the globe,
and the sources note this was the last all -sail
U .S. naval mission to do so, they had logged
an astonishing 87 ,000 miles. Colossal success,
but it came at an immense cost. They lost two
ships. Right, one of them, the Peacock. On that
notorious bar at the mouth of the Columbia River.
Exactly. And 28 men perished over the course
of the mission. The loss of life and equipment
was just part of the price of venturing into
the truly unknown. But the lasting dividend was
the data. So beyond the Antarctic discovery,
what are the biggest scientific achievements
that still resonate? Well, we can point to several
concrete, practical outcomes. In Hawaii, for
example, they made the first measurements of
the height of the major mountains, including
Mauna Loa, using sophisticated instruments for
the time. And the charts. Yes. More importantly,
for the Navy and for commerce, they produced
incredibly detailed nautical charts of those
coastlines. Our sources confirm these charts
were so accurate and well vetted that they were
still in regular use by naval and commercial
vessels up to World War II. That's incredible
staying power. Nearly a century of reliable navigation
based on Wilkes's 19th century mapping effort.
And then there's the administrative legacy. Wilkes,
despite his volatile temperament, was absolutely
tireless in editing the official scientific reports
afterward. This was a huge undertaking. Immense,
sustained labor. He oversaw the production of
19 massive volumes and 11 atlases between 1844
and 1874. He even personally authored technical
volumes on meteorology and hydrography. And the
narrative of the United States exploring expedition.
The five -volume narrative was published in 1844,
and it detailed everything from ethnography to
the political conditions in the places they visited.
So he was capable of both breathtaking ambition
at sea and this obsessive, meticulous administrative
labor for nearly three decades afterward. It's
almost like he was two different people. That's
the core of the paradox. And the intellectual
legacy, it really culminated in one major institutional
foundation that every American knows today. The
Smithsonian. Precisely. The immense collection
of specimens and artifacts brought back by the
scientists. I mean... James White Dana's foundational
studies on zoophytes, geology, and crustacea
came from this. It was overwhelming. Just the
sheer quantity. The sheer quantity and quality
of this material demanded a proper repository.
That collection led directly to the establishment
of the Smithsonian Institution Collection. We
can say without hyperbole that without Wilkes'
expedition, the Smithsonian as we know it would
fundamentally not exist. He didn't just explore.
He stocked the nation's scientific storehouse.
That's a perfect way to put it. This is where
it gets really interesting, though. Yeah. And
where the sources begin to pivot. We have this
image of the meticulous cartographer, the institution
builder, the visionary. But the moment he stepped
back on U .S. soil, the scientific triumphs were
immediately eclipsed by the shadow of his command.
A professional success, but a personal disaster.
Exactly. The controversy that had been brewing
throughout the four -year expedition, it just
hit the moment they docked. The tension and the
disciplinary issues were so severe that he was
almost instantly court -martialed. The Navy didn't
even wait for the full scientific reports to
be filed before addressing the complaints about
his leadership. So let's detail some of the high
-handed actions that led to this, because they
speak to an autocratic command style that was...
absolutely ruthless, especially when dealing
with indigenous populations. The expedition's
interactions with people in the Pacific were
marked by severity. In Fiji, for example, they
kidnapped the chief Rovadovi, charging him with
the murder of American whalers. This was just
an act of unilateral power projection. Into a
sovereign system, yes. But... The Malolo Island
Massacre in July 1840 is the incident that truly
exemplifies the level of retribution he was capable
of exacting. It's the darkest mark on his record.
It is. Two sailors, and one of them was Wilkes'
own nephew, midshipman Wilkes Henry. They were
killed while they were attempting to barter for
food. Wilkes' response was immediate, punitive,
and overwhelming. He called it swift and severe
retribution. And our sources include testimony
from an old man from Malolo Island who claimed
that some 80 Fijians were killed in the resulting
military assault. This wasn't justice. It was
a military reprisal intended to establish fear
and total submission. And this high handedness
wasn't just reserved for foreign conflict. It
extended to his own crew, often the name of scientific
rigor. The Mauna Loa charting in Hawaii is a
perfect, painful microcosm of his leadership
style. That's a key anecdote. Wilkes needed to
haul a delicate, heavy pendulum up the side of
Mauna Loa to measure gravity, a crucial scientific
task. To do this, he employed hundreds of native
Hawaiian porters. But instead of using the existing,
established footpath, he insisted on trailblazing
his own, much more difficult route. Why? Why
create unnecessary hardship when an easier path
existed? It seems to have been rooted in control,
an insistence on his personal method being the
only correct one. The decision unnecessarily
prolonged the effort, turning a difficult trek
into a dangerous ordeal. And his crew and the
porter suffered for it. Heavily. The sources
describe men suffering from snow blindness, crippling
altitude sickness, and serious foot injuries
because their shoes were being destroyed on the
razor -sharp lava rock. He was willing to inflict
immense avoidable suffering on others to satisfy
his own meticulous yet imperious command decisions.
So the court -martial, upon his return in 1842,
led by charges from officers like the ship doctor
Charles Guyoux, was clearly unavoidable. What
was the scope of that legal challenge? The charges
were comprehensive and serious. The loss of one
of his ships on the bar at the mouth of the Columbia
River, general mistreatment of his subordinate
officers, including verbal and psychological
abuse, and most centrally, excessive punishment
of the sailors in his squadron. And Dr. Gu was
a major witness. A major witness, yeah. Detailing
the abuses from a medical perspective. So wait,
if the allegations were so severe and the evidence
of mistreatment was so clear, especially after
the Malolo incident, what was the outcome? This
is where the political dimension comes in. He
was acquitted on almost all charges, including
the ship loss and the more serious charges of
mistreatment of officers. But not everything.
No. The Navy did find him guilty of one thing.
Excessive punishment of men in his squadron.
It was a formal, public repudiation of his conduct
towards the enlisted men. So he was vindicated
on command decisions, but formally reprimanded
for being a cruel taskmaster. It sounds like
the Navy was struggling to balance the scientific
genius with the administrative headache. They
absolutely were. He was too successful to fully
dismiss. So following the controversy, he spent
nearly two decades, 1844 to 1861, chiefly engaged
in preparing and editing the official reports.
It was almost a form of house arrest for the
brilliant, difficult Offiker. sidelined to administrative
duties while his intellectual output was monetized
by the nation. That's a great way of looking
at it. Okay, let's pause on the man and pivot
back to his greatest enduring positive achievement
at Antarctica. Because despite the courts martial,
the planet still holds his name in highest honor.
Absolutely. The vast region of East Antarctica,
which he defined, is named Wilkes Land after
him. And this naming specifically recognizes
his charting of that 2 ,400 kilometers, that
1 ,500 miles of coast, which provided the substantial
and necessary proof needed to define Antarctica
as a continent. Not just scattered ice -bound
islands. And that distinction providing proof
is so critical to his legacy. He confirmed a
geographical hypothesis. Geographically, Wilkes
-Land is immense. It extends from Cape Horton
to Porcourt -Pas Point, covering a sector that
reaches 2 ,600 kilometers toward the South Pole.
The estimated glaciated area is 2 .6 million
square kilometers. It's a huge chunk of the continent.
And the granularity of their survey work is still
reflected in the names of the smaller regions
within Wilkes -Land. Correct. We still refer
to the Knox Coast, the Budd Coast, the Sabrina
Coast, the Benzar Coast, and the Clary Coast,
sometimes just known as the Wilkes Coast. And
there's a political note here, too. There is.
This territory is formally claimed by Australia
as part of the Australian Antarctic Territory,
but that claim is held in abeyance under the
cooperative framework of the Antarctic Treaty
System, ensuring it remains focused on peaceful
scientific exploration. Now here's where 19th
century exploration intersects with mind -boggling
modern science. Under the ice that Wilkes charted,
modern researchers discovered a geological feature
far older than any human history. This is perhaps
the most incredible twist in his legacy. In 2006,
a team of researchers used sophisticated gravity
measurements taken from NASA's GRACE satellites,
that's the Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment,
and they discovered something massive hidden
beneath the ice sheet, the Wilkes Land Crater.
Okay, for the listener, can you explain briefly
how those satellites can see something hundreds
of feet beneath the ice? Sure. The GRACE mission
used two twin satellites that orbit the Earth,
constantly measuring the distance between them
with extreme precision. When the leading satellite
passes over a region of slightly higher mass,
a massive structure buried in the crust, it feels
a tiny gravitational tug. Pulling it slightly
away from its twin. Exactly. By charting these
tiny shifts in gravity, scientists can essentially
map the mass distribution on the planet. And
this allowed them to see the subtle gravitational
signature of this massive 300 -mile -wide structure.
So they were essentially able to weigh the crust
beneath the ice. And this impact structure is
how old? Truly ancient. The crater is estimated
to be about 300 miles across, and geologists
believe it likely formed about 250 million years
ago, possibly linked to the Permian -Triassic
extinction event. the Great Dying. It just shows
that the territory Wilkes defined holds secrets
far older and on a far more volatile scale than
humanity itself. It puts the entire concept of
the deep dive into a new context. And besides
this continental scale, what else carries his
name? Well, we have Wilkes Island, one of the
three islands at Wake Atoll, named for him in
1923, honoring his charting work in the Pacific.
And in Hawaii, the unique plant genus Wilkesia
is named in his honor. His scientific and geographical
imprint is utterly permanent. So Wilksman's the
1840s and 50s immersed in data, charting the
world and editing his massive reports. Then the
American Civil War erupts and he is suddenly
thrust back into active command. Right back into
the fire. And it was almost predictable that
if you put a difficult man in a high stakes diplomatic
situation, things would explode. And they did.
His rank had risen. He was promoted to commander
in 1843 and captain in 1855. When the war began,
he was given command of the USS San Jacinto with
the mission of hunting down the Confederate commerce
destroyer, CSS Sumter. A standard, if difficult,
mission, which led directly to the near disaster
known as the Trent Affair in November 1861. Give
us the sequence of events. Wilkes learned that
two extremely high -value Confederate commissioners,
James Murray Mason, destined for Britain, and
John Sladell, destined for France, were sailing
to Europe on a British mail packet boat, the
RMS Trent. And these men were crucial for the
Confederacy's plan to gain European recognition
and aid. Absolutely. And this ship, the Trent,
was a neutral British vessel. This is where the
core legal problem arises. He's on a collision
course with international law. Absolutely. The
ship was neutral, but Wilkes, operating on his
own somewhat faulty interpretation of maritime
law, decided to act. He believed that the men,
as official agents of a belligerent power, constituted
embodied dispatches or contraband that could
be seized. From a neutral vessel. So what action
did he take? On November 8th, 1861 he ordered
the san jacinto to intercept the trent he fired
two shots across its bow a clear act of aggression
against a british vessel forcing it to stop and
then he boarded the ship He boarded the vessel,
arrested Mason and Seidel, and took them as prisoners
of war to Fort Warren in Boston Harbor. And while
the northern public saw this as a heroic, patriotic
capture, it was a staggering violation of British
neutrality. And of the accepted legal principle
of freedom of the seas for non -contraband items,
it caused an explosion. Wilkes, whom Bermuda
Media branded the Notorious Wilkes, brought the
United States and the United Kingdom perilously
close to full -scale war. How close did they
actually come to war? What were the stakes? Extremely
close. Britain immediately issued an ultimatum
demanding the release of the commissioners and
a formal apology. And they backed it up with
an enormous show of force. They sent troops to
Canada. They did. The sources note that Britain
dispatched 11 ,000 troops to Canada ready to
fight. diplomatic relations were frozen and the
threat of immediate British intervention on the
side of the Confederacy was real and terrifying.
The political contradiction in the U .S. response
is fascinating. given Wilkes' history. It is
the ultimate paradox. Congress officially thanked
Wilkes for his brave, adroit, and patriotic conduct,
recognizing the intense public fervor for the
capture. But President Lincoln, cooler heads
prevailing in Washington, understood that war
with Britain was a far greater threat than the
escape of two Confederate agents. Lincoln reportedly
said that Wilkes had captured the Confederate
diplomats, but he also captured the Union's neutral
rights, handing Britain a weapon against them.
So he had to disavow the action. Following fierce
diplomatic protests, Lincoln disavowed Wilkes'
action, stating they had to stick to the old
rules and the diplomats were speedily released
in January 1862, easing the international crisis.
So he's lauded by the legislature, but rebuked
and effectively sidelined by the executive branch
to prevent a global conflict. It's hard to imagine
a more volatile set of mixed signals for a naval
commander. It had immediate career consequences.
The Navy placed Wilkes on the retirement list
in December 1861, just weeks after the incident.
But he came back. Incredibly, yes. Less than
a year later, in July 1862, he was promoted to
Commodore on the retired list and reassigned
to duty pursuing blockade runners in the West
Indies. He was too aggressive and too effective
at certain tasks to be totally ignored. even
if he was diplomatically dangerous. And his tenure
as commander of the West Indies Squadron was
where the high -handedness just continued its
relentless escalation. It seems he viewed the
Trent incident not as a near miss, but as a confirmation
that his independent judgment was superior to
naval regulations. Exactly. He viewed himself
as a man above standard rules. And he immediately
drew heavy criticism for failing in his primary
operational task, capturing the legendary Confederate
commerce raiders, CSS Alabama and CSS Florida.
And his own decisions undermined his effectiveness,
right? You mentioned a critical command decision
concerning one of his best ships. That's right.
He retained the powerful USS Vanderbilt, a fast,
high -quality steamship that was perfectly suited
to hunt the Raiders for use as his personal flagship.
Instead of assigning it to the necessary task
force hunting the Alabama. Right. And that decision
later became a major point of contention with
the secretary of the Navy, Gideon Wells. And
beyond the operational failures, his diplomatic
behavior in the Caribbean was atrocious, systematically
undermining U .S. relations with neutral powers.
The sources are clear. Wilkes continually exacerbated
diplomatic relations with every single provincial
government in the region. British, Spanish, Dutch,
French, Danish and Mexican. It was a never ending
stream of complaints generated entirely by his
imperious and autocratic. actions. Give us some
concrete examples of these international law
violations. He was systematically and repeatedly
violating international law regarding belligerent
nations in neutral waters. He was setting up
coal depots on neutral islands without authorization.
He was cited lingering outside neutral ports,
essentially establishing informal blockades,
which was highly provocative. He was treating
the entire neutral Caribbean as an extension
of the Union operational zone. He was the British
authorities. in Nassau and St. George's and the
French and Martinique, they all accused him of
establishing illegal, unofficial blockades. They
suspected he'd been sent intentionally to provoke
them. And even his successful captures caused
problems. Yes. His captures of ships like the
Peterhof, Dolphin and Springbok resulted in diplomatic
objections specifically directed against his
quality of leadership and defiance of international
norms, not just the legitimacy of the prize claims.
And this never ending stream of complaints, as
the sources describe it, ultimately led to his
definitive removal from command. Precisely. The
Union couldn't afford a second major diplomatic
crisis while fighting the Confederacy. He was
recalled in June 1863. The diplomatic fallout,
the sheer volume of outrage coming from every
neutral nation he encountered, was the overwhelming
reason for his immediate removal. But Charles
Wilkes was not a man to go quietly. This conflict
with Secretary of the Navy Gideon Wells escalated,
leading to his final. most comprehensive court
-martial in 1864. Wells had initially supported
Wilkes in some actions, but his patience broke
when he publicly criticized Wilkes in the December
1863 annual report over that decision to retain
the Vanderbilt. And Wilkes, seeing this criticism
in print, reacted violently. He wrote a scathing,
highly critical public response to his superior
officer that quickly found its way into the newspapers.
This was an intolerable act of insubordination.
A court of inquiry was immediately convened,
which led directly to a court -martial in March
1864. What was the full list of charges this
time? It sounds like the Navy was determined
to catalog his entire history of professional
misconduct. It was an exhaustive indictment of
his character and command style. disobedience
of orders, insubordination, disrespect of a superior
officer, disobedience of naval regulations, and
conduct unbecoming an officer. And the verdict.
He was found guilty of all charges. It was the
ultimate professional repudiation. So after the
immense success of the charts, the Smithsonian,
he ends his active career being found guilty
on every count of insubordination. What was the
sentence? He was sentenced to a public reprimand
and suspension from service for three years.
But even in this moment of professional collapse,
the shadow of Lincoln returns. Lincoln intervened
again. He did. President Lincoln, once again
intervening in the affairs of the rogue genius,
reduced the suspension to one year and dropped
the balance of charges. It's almost as if no
one in the administration could decide whether
to salute him or jail him. He was eventually
promoted to Rear Admiral on the retired list
on July 25, 1866, marking the end of his official
service. So what happened in his later life?
Did he find peace in writing? He certainly maintained
his intellectual focus. He returned to his scientific
labor. In addition to his official narrative,
he wrote an autobiography and other scientific
works like Western America, including California
and Oregon and Theory of the Winds. He continued
to process and share the vast store of knowledge
he had gathered. Wilkes died in Washington, D
.C. on February 8, 1877. And his physical resting
place has that final, defiant historical footnote.
He was originally interred at Oak Hill Cemetery,
but in August 1909, the United States, in recognition
of his immense contributions, moved his remains
to Arlington National Cemetery. And that is where
his famous gravestone lies with that proud, if
perhaps contested, declaration. He discovered
the Antarctic continent. A final, lasting claim
to the monumental achievement that defined his
life. Let's discuss the cultural and naval echoes
he left behind, because his personality seems
to have leaked into American folklore, defining
the archetype of the obsessive sea captain. There
is a strong historical speculation that his obsessive
behavior and harsh code of shipboard discipline,
the very traits that led to the court -martials,
may have directly influenced Herman Melville's
characterization of Captain Ahab in Moby Dick.
The driven, uncompromising commander. Exactly.
Wilkes' reputation for a relentless, almost manic
command, regardless of the cost to his men, certainly
fits that literary mold. And whether or not he
influenced Ahab, the U .S. Navy has certainly
honored the explosion. Regardless of the temperament
of the man who led it. Absolutely. Four different
U .S. Navy ships have carried his name. a torpedo
boat, two destroyers in the World Wars, and finally,
the oceanographic survey vessel USS Wilkes launched
in 1969. The Navy consistently honors the legacy
of scientific discovery, implicitly separating
the achievement from the long list of disciplinary
issues. The distinction between the man and the
mission is key to understanding his modern legacy,
which is still being debated in the very communities
that encountered his expedition 180 years ago.
And this brings us right up to the present day.
We see that complex legacy playing out on Bainbridge
Island, Washington, near the waters he charted.
The Captain Charles Wilkes Elementary School
was renamed in 2023 to Alec or Haliltz Elementary
School. And that name change wasn't just administrative,
was it? It represents a contemporary reckoning
with the historical violence we discussed. It
absolutely does. It reflects the mixed public
reception regarding his past actions, particularly
the severity of the violence exacted in the Pacific,
the Malolo incident, and his general high -handed
treatment of indigenous peoples. The renaming
signals a necessary shift. While we acknowledge
his pioneering role, society is now refusing
to valorize the violence and cultural insensitivity
that came with it. So what does this all mean
when we summarize the life of Charles Wilkes?
We started with a paradox, and we end with a
figure who was foundational to the institutionalization
of American science, yet fundamentally incapable
of managing himself or his relationships. He
gave the world foundational, lasting knowledge.
The specimens that built the Smithsonian, the
charts that guided ships for generations, and
the irrefutable proof for the existence of the
Antarctic continent. That scientific infrastructure
and global knowledge outlived all his political
failures, his courts martial, his command controversies.
The sources show a man capable of global feats,
logging 87 ,000 miles, bringing back unparalleled
data, yet who consistently failed in the simple...
management of his own subordinates and in respecting
basic diplomatic relations. It suggests a complete
failure of temperament contained within a mind
of staggering scientific rigor. Wilkes is a perfect
example for you, the learner, of how foundational
knowledge can be a lasting, permanent good, even
when the person who delivered it was deeply flawed,
prone to insubordination, and capable of extreme
documented violence. The critical analysis here
is that we have to separate the quality of the
discovery from the character of the discoverer
to understand his true legacy, a difficult but
necessary process. Despite proving the existence
of the Antarctic continent and creating charts
that lasted into the World War II era, Charles
Wilkes was never far from conflict. And this
leads us to our final provocative thought for
you to consider. Given the discovery of that
immense 300 mile wide, 250 million year old crater
under the ice of Wilkes land, a terrain defined
by cataclysmic impact, we have to ask, was Charles
Wilkes personality truly the anomaly in his time
or was the sheer volatile and unexplored scale
of the territory he sought to define destined
to attract and be defined by such stormy, explosive
and uncompromising characters? That's a fascinating
question. Perhaps the chaos he brought was merely
a reflection of the unbridled. chaos of the world
he was attempting to measure and tame. Something
profound to think about as you navigate your
own deep dives. Thank you for joining us for
this intense look at a truly paradoxical and
foundational American pioneer. We'll see you
next time on The Deep Dive.