**"Cape Cod Shore Whaling: America's First Whalemen - History of Early American Whaling Industry | Perfect for History Buffs & Maritime Enthusiasts"**

Frankly, there wasn't enough information on the subject to warrant a book to be published. Take away the first ten pages (title, acknowledgements, contents etc, which were strangely given page numbers instead of roman numerals as is standard practice), the many worthless and often random illustrations (15 pages, most of which were of stranded whales, none of which represented the species, the North Atlantic right whale, Eubalaena glacialis, targeted by Cape Cod shore whalemen), and the notes, bibliography, and index (30 pages), and you have a "book" (I use this term loosely) of only 73 pages. Ok, now you have the actual content of the book. But, wait. You have another problem. There are three terms used interchangeably in this book: drift whaling (the utilization of stranded whales, which isn't actual whaling), shore whaling (the active pursuit of whales from rowing boats launched from shore), and whaling (the hunting of whales). Now, as the title claims, the men of Cape Cod were America's "first" whalemen, right? Well, no. In fact, this is far from the truth. By misleading the reader the authors make it seem as if Cape Cod shore whaling began by 1640, and was well established by the 1650s. They do this by using the three terms defined above interchangeably, making it seem as though shore whaling in Cape Cod preceded whaling on Long Island (which supposedly began as early as 1650, and not later than the 1660s), when really they're only speaking of drift whales in both instances. If you want to include shore whaling by the Dutch in present day Delaware (1632-33) and that of the Basques in southern Labrador (1530s), then it becomes obvious that the men of Cape Cod were not America's first whalemen. Even if you leave these two groups out of the picture, and only include whaling done by English colonists in the present day United States, you still have the above-mentioned shore whalemen of Long Island (1650, 1668), as well as those of Narragansett Bay (1662), Navesink and Sandy Hook (1668, 1678), Ipswich Bay (early 1670s), and Delaware Bay (ca. 1683). The earliest date the authors give for active shore whaling is 1678. They also quote the same authority, Secretary Edward Randolph, as saying that there was a "great quantity of whale oil made in Plymouth Colony" in 1676, which may or may not indicate active shore whaling. Here, again, is a problem. Their first source, Starbuck (1878), quoting Secretary Randolph, gave the date as 1688, not 1678, yet the authors distinctly say "two years" after 1676. Another source (which these authors also used!), Reeves et al (1999), gives the date as 1688 as well. The year 1676 may be another mistake, but I don't have their other source to confirm this. If you take away the part of the book that speaks only of drift whaling (which, as I stated above, isn't really whaling), than you have a "book" only half as long, perhaps less. They would now have enough to write a paper, not a book. It appears as though the authors shoved as much information on Cape Cod shore whaling (which, apparently, isn't much) into this work just so they could have their names on a book. They also seem as though they want the men of Cape Cod to be the first whalemen, even if they have to change the definition of whaling to do so. In other words, they lied. The book appears as if it was written for children at times. They state the same exact information several times, as if the reader isn't able to remember anything more than a few pages ago. For example, on page 31 they state: "(Brayley's [sic] is a sand dune named for Braley Jenkins, a cranberry grower, lying north of Big Thacher Island.)". Then on page 61, we learn that "[Braley's is a sand dune named for Braley Jenkins, a cranberry grower. It lies north of Big Thacher Island.]". I learned at least three times that "bricks and charcoal" remain on the sites of former whaling stations on Sandy Neck. It almost seemed as if every time the term blackfish was used the authors told me that it referred to pilot whales, Globicephala melas and G. macrorhynchus. I also learned that "whalebone" was a term applied to baleen on numerous occasions. I can't remember ever reading a book that had so many one sentence paragraphs. It seems as though the authors couldn't figure out a way to get certain information into the "book," so they just threw a sentence here and there. This book is a prime example of why "whaling historians" (if that's what you can call either author) without a good, general knowledge of whaling history and a good, firm understanding of cetology (the study of cetaceans, or whales, dolphins, and porpoises) shouldn't publish a work of any sort on whaling history. Apparently the authors don't know the difference between a Bowhead whale (Balaena mysticetus) and the three species of Right whale (E. glacialis, E. japonica, and E. australis), nor do they know the difference between a porpoise and a dolphin. They refer to dolphins as "porpoises" in the historical sense, yet fail to inform the reader of this. The worst blunder was their reference to the now extinct Atlantic gray whale as the Atlantic blue whale, two very different species. Only someone with a very weak knowledge of cetology would make such a dumb mistake. Their mistakes on whaling history outside Cape Cod are fewer. Using the very unreliable Mark Kurlansky as a source, they state that the Basques began whaling in the New World because "whales grew scarce" in the Bay of Biscay. This has been known to be false for over two decades. Ironically, one of their own sources (Right Whales: Past and Present Status) includes a paper on Basque whaling (Aguilar 1986) that shows Basque whaling in the Bay of Biscay actually peaked at the same time as whaling expeditions were being sent to the New World! In their notes (n. 28, p. 100) they confuse the common name of species with their scientific names, thus proving once again their non-existent understanding of even basic zoology.And, finally, if I haven't covered enough, the authors strangely misspell whaling historian and scientist Randell Reeves' name Reves at least three times. Apparently their editor(s) is incompetent as well.There's absolutely no reason to buy this book. Don't even bother borrow it from a library, unless you want to know about every whale and dolphin (pilot whales are dolphins you know) stranding that ever occurred on Cape Cod.