The Iceberg that Sank the Titanic?

Rare photograph of possible Titanic iceberg taken two days before Titanic collision.

40 hours before the Titanic sank, a prime candidate for the iceberg she struck was photographed by Captain Wood of the SS Etonian.

The photograph is captioned "Iceberg taken by Captain Wood SS Etonian in 41°50N 49°50W April 12th at 4pm 1913 (sic) Titanic struck April 14th and sank in 3 hours".

Letter from Captain wood with iceberg photograph and SS Etonian in a gale

While it cannot be proven that the iceberg is the same one that caused the Titanic disaster, it bears striking similarities to sketches drawn by lookout Frederick Fleet, the lookout on duty who first spotted the iceberg, and Joseph Scarrott, an able-bodied seaman.

Captain Wood described the encounter in a letter sent from New York, where the Etonian had docked.

FREDERICK LEYLAND & COMPANY LIMITED LIVERPOOL

SS ETONIAN NEW YORK Pier 59 North River

Dear Billy Tucker, I received the photos you so kindly sent and they are good. It was a great pity the light in the shed was so poor, you might have got the horses. We landed late[?] last Wednesday, but they were not such a fine lot as last. I hope they are all doing well. If you see Dr Kirk give him my best wishes, maybe next year we shall meet again. I am sending you a sea picture The Etonian running before a gale, and the iceberg that sank the Titanic. We crossed the ice track 40 hours before her but in daylight, so saw the ice easily and I got a picture. Best wishes from yours sincerely Captain Wood

SS Etonian

The photographs and an accompanying letter were auctioned by Henry Aldridge and Son, at Devizes on 20 June 2020.

Comment and discuss

Jim Currie

It cannot be possible that less than 2 hours after Titanic hit that iceberg - after 4-30 am that morning of April 15, 1912 - the culprit was not stll nearby in all its glory to be seen by everyone within a radius of 10 miles . It does not matter whether there was or was not a current in the immediate vicinity because everything in the immediate vicinity would have been carried along by that which was effecting it. Sp why wasn't such an obvious candidate mentioned by anyone?The photograph 2 days earlier, purporting to be that of the berg that sank Titanic, cannot be true, it is the wrong shape as described by AB Joseph Scarrott. Not only that but it was about 7 miles NW of the wreck site and would have to have been almost stationary i.e...had only move that distance in 40 hours. - which is 1074 ft/hour. Furthermore: the Photgraph was taken in Gale conditions. A Gale would have moved an iceberg of that shape a very great distance as long as it was blowing. and in the direction it was blowing.And what about the iceberg located 2 miles south of the wreck site 8 hours before Titanic hit her iceberg-where did it go to?Oh what a wonderous web!
Steven Christian

It cannot be possible that less than 2 hours after Titanic hit that iceberg - after 4-30 am that morning of April 15, 1912 - the culprit was not stll nearby in all its glory to be seen by everyone within a radius of 10 miles . It does not matter whether there was or was not a current in the immediate vicinity because everything in the immediate vicinity would have been carried along by that which was effecting it. Sp why wasn't such an obvious candidate mentioned by anyone?The photograph 2 days earlier, purporting to be that of the berg that sank Titanic, cannot be true, it is the wrong shape as described by AB Joseph Scarrott. Not only that but it was about 7 miles NW of the wreck site and would have to have been almost stationary i.e...had only move that distance in 40 hours. - which is 1074 ft/hour. Furthermore: the Photgraph was taken in Gale conditions. A Gale would have moved an iceberg of that shape a very great distance as long as it was blowing. and in the direction it was blowing.And what about the iceberg located 2 miles south of the wreck site 8 hours before Titanic hit her iceberg-where did it go to?Oh what a wonderous web!Yes agree. I've seen many pictures of different bergs that claim to the one. What I'm not clear on though is if that's the only picture of that berg or were pictures taken of it from different angles? Some pictures seem to be that way...same berg, different angles.
Jim Currie

Yes agree. I've seen many pictures of different bergs that claim to the one. What I'm not clear on though is if that's the only picture of that berg or were pictures taken of it from different angles? Some pictures seem to be that way...same berg, different angles.Steven, there is a verbal description of the berg given by AB Joseph Scarrott... he said "I went and looked over the rail there and I saw an iceberg that I took it we had struck. It would be abaft the beam then - abaft the starboard beam.... it struck me at the time that it resembled the Rock of Gibraltar looking at it from Europa Point. It looked very much the same shape as that, only much smaller.... As you approach Gibraltar - it seemed that shape. The highest point would be on my right, as it appeared to me.The Captain Wood photograph was not taken in a Gale. A Gale in that part of the world would have had enormous breakers around the base of a berg and loads of spray. Besides which, the sea would have long white streaks on its surface. The berg in that picture is not the shape of Gibraltar as you approach it. In fact, this is what Barratt was talking about:[ATTACH type="full"]75682[/ATTACH][ATTACH type="full"]75683[/ATTACH]
Samuel Halpern

Sp why wasn't such an obvious candidate mentioned by anyone? Senator SMITH. Did you see icebergs the next morning? Mr. STENGEL. I guess you could. They were all around. You could see them. As soon as we landed down into the water, as soon as we were afloat, you could see icebergs all around, because we thought they were sailing vessels at first, and began pulling this way, and then turning around and going the other way. They were in sight all along the horizon. Senator SMITH. Were you menaced in any way, after you got into the water in this emergency boat, by ice? Mr. STENGEL. No, sir. Senator SMITH. How far away was it from you, apparently? Mr. STENGEL. It was quite a ways, but you could see the outline in the dusk. Senator SMITH. Describe these icebergs. How large were they? Mr. STENGEL. There was one of them, particularly, that I noticed, a very large one, which looked something like the Rock of Gibraltar; it was high at one point, and another point came up at the other end, about the same shape as the rock of Gibraltar. Senator SMITH. How did it compare with size of the Titanic? Mr. STENGEL. I was a good ways off. It was not quite as large as the Titanic but it was an enormous, large iceberg.
Jim Currie

Senator SMITH. Did you see icebergs the next morning? Mr. STENGEL. I guess you could. They were all around. You could see them. As soon as we landed down into the water, as soon as we were afloat, you could see icebergs all around, because we thought they were sailing vessels at first, and began pulling this way, and then turning around and going the other way. They were in sight all along the horizon. Senator SMITH. Were you menaced in any way, after you got into the water in this emergency boat, by ice? Mr. STENGEL. No, sir. Senator SMITH. How far away was it from you, apparently? Mr. STENGEL. It was quite a ways, but you could see the outline in the dusk. Senator SMITH. Describe these icebergs. How large were they? Mr. STENGEL. There was one of them, particularly, that I noticed, a very large one, which looked something like the Rock of Gibraltar; it was high at one point, and another point came up at the other end, about the same shape as the rock of Gibraltar. Senator SMITH. How did it compare with size of the Titanic? Mr. STENGEL. I was a good ways off. It was not quite as large as the Titanic but it was an enormous, large iceberg.Passenger Stengel left in Emergency boat 1 at or near to 1 am when it was pitch dark. yet he swore : " As soon as we landed down into the water, as soon as we were afloat, you could see icebergs all around, because we thought they were sailing
Steven Christian

Steven, there is a verbal description of the berg given by AB Joseph Scarrott... he said "I went and looked over the rail there and I saw an iceberg that I took it we had struck. It would be abaft the beam then - abaft the starboard beam.... it struck me at the time that it resembled the Rock of Gibraltar looking at it from Europa Point. It looked very much the same shape as that, only much smaller.... As you approach Gibraltar - it seemed that shape. The highest point would be on my right, as it appeared to me.The Captain Wood photograph was not taken in a Gale. A Gale in that part of the world would have had enormous breakers around the base of a berg and loads of spray. Besides which, the sea would have long white streaks on its surface. The berg in that picture is not the shape of Gibraltar as you approach it. In fact, this is what Barratt was talking about:[ATTACH type="full" alt="1613314419067.png"]75682[/ATTACH][ATTACH type="full" alt="1613314820946.png"]75683[/ATTACH]Ok. Thanks for the reply. I'll take your word for it as I have never seen an iceberg except from 35,000 ft up. Yes that picture in question certainly doesn't look a gale going on...looks pretty calm. I have been thru a typhoon so I know what a storm at sea is like. It beat the hell out of my ship but at least it wasn't cold.

Open Thread Leave a Reply

The Iceberg that Sank the Titanic?

Rare image taken two days before Titanic sank

Related Articles

Related Ships

Contributors

Comment and discuss

Contribute

Citation