Baffled by Baffin

A 400 year mystery

On the morning of 9th July 1612, William Baffin, seafaring explorer and navigator of
the Patience, stood on a small island in Cockin Sound on the west coast of
Greenland. With the sun rising to the east, he watched the moon gradually approach
two plumblines marking his meridian. As the moon reached the meridian, he took an
observation of the sun and after a few calculations became the first ship’s navigator to
record his longitude.

Like most navigators of the time, Baffin had no difficulty in finding his latitude, but,
without an accurate method of timekeeping, longitude was still based on dead
reckoning and guesswork. Baffin’s solution to the longitude problem was quite
ingenious. He knew that from an observation of the morning sun, he could work out
the time it would take to reach its noon position over the meridian. This was a fairly
routine procedure and would be considered of little value in the search for one’s
longitude. Baffin, however, realised that if he could take the observation of the sun
just when the moon was over his meridian, he would have a valuable and unique
piece of information. - the difference in time between the moon and the sun. That
morning, with the sun rising and the moon approaching the meridian, he had the
perfect opportunity to make this observation.
His almanac showed that when the moon had passed over London earlier that
morning, the sun was several hours behind but gaining on the moon by about 48
minutes a day. From his observations, Baffin calculated that when the moon passed
over his position, the sun had caught up the moon by eight of those minutes - a sixth
of the daily rate. Accordingly, Baffin reasoned that he must be about one sixth of the
way around the world from London, ie he was in longitude 60° W or thereabouts. In
fact, Baffin’s longitude was about 53° W; a discrepancy in the region of 190 nautical
miles. This error could have been caused by several variables including an incorrect
observation of the sun, a misaligned meridian or some faulty almanac data. Whatever
the reason, a small error in his measurements or calculations would produce a very
large error in the longitude, but for a pioneering attempt at solving the longitude
problem, it was a promising start. Or was it?

Recently, I was studying Baffin’s journal in the ‘Voyages of William Baffin 1612 -
1622’ edited by Clement Markham and published by the Hakluyt Society. Whilst
checking and reworking his calculations, I was surprised to discover that Baffin had
made a fundamental error. He had overlooked the fact that the time gap that he
calculated was not eight minutes smaller than the one at London but larger. This
larger time gap would only have occurred before the moon passed over London. This
means that the 60° degrees longitude which Baffin embraced was not to the west of
London but to the east; a longitude which placed him safely at anchor in the Ural
Mountains.

In his journal, Baffin writes with considerable detail and clarity. His basic data are
repeated and discussed so are unlikely to be the result of careless transposing by a
third party. His observations were performed with a four foot semi-diameter quadrant
and he had spent the previous day establishing his meridian line with the help of the
sun. He confesses that his method is difficult and troublesome and that there may be
some ‘smalle errour’. Tucked away in his journal, however, is an inaccurate
description of the moon’s movement in relation to that of the sun. “....the moone
cometh to the meridian sooner that day then she did the day before...” But, as any
stargazer knows, the moone always cometh later not sooner! This misunderstanding,
however, does not fully explain why he obtained a larger time gap than the one at
London, and his observations would have to be seriously in error to account for the
discrepancy.

Back on the island in Cockin Sound, Baffin mentions an abundance of herbs which
thecrew of the Patience boiled in beer and which appear to have done them a power
of good. Well, its just a thought, but the true source of the error will probably remain
a mystery. Had he discovered his error, he might well have been dissuaded from
continuing with his efforts, which would have been unfortunate, for on later voyages,
his attempts to find his longitude were successful and he seems to have acquired a
better understanding of the moon’s relative motion. Although I am baffled by Baffin’s
journal, for me, he remains a pioneering navigator and a century ahead of his time.

Tony Crowley