Fox

Cap'n Enigma, that's exactly what I meant, I should have said "using the scale on the opposit side of the same face of the instrument". Am I sure about what about the cross-staff? Yes. Bourne was writing before the invention of the back-staff, so he can't possibly have meant anything other than cross-staff. Davis wrote "the Sea Compass, Chart and Cros-staff, are instruments sufficient for the Seamans use: the Astrolaby and Quadrant being Instruments very uncertain for Sea-Observations." Then later on "...with the help of your Cross-Staff, Quadrant, or Astrolaby, but the Cross-Staff is the only best Instrument for the Sea-mans use". Later still he describes the method of using a cross-staff: As you can see, that's the method of using a cross-staff, not a back staff. There is some debate about the order of Davis's achievements during his period of semi-retirement in the 1590s, but I think it's pretty certain that he wrote The Seaman's Secrets before he developed the backstaff. Later editions of the book make mention of the backstaff, but the early editions do not.

Where period texts (Davis's Seaman's Secrets, Butler's Dialogues, Bourne's Regiment for the Sea etc) deal with the practicalities of navigation rather than the mathematics they tend to talk about using two instruments, one to check the other. Personally, if two readings do not agree I tend to try a third (in fact, the more people taking sightings the better). One of the interesting things about period texts is the differences in preference for instruments. Butler, for example seems to have preferred an "astrolobie" - though I have a feeling that the section dealing with navigation in his dialogues was actually lifted verbatim from Mainwaring the pirate's works. Davis on the other hand, undoubtedly the greatest navigator of his age, says that the cross-staff is the only instrument worth using, though he does acknowledge the existence of others... Of course, he wrote the first edition of The Seaman's Secrets before he invented the back-staff. Bourne too favoured the cross staff over the astrolabe, except when the sun was too high for the practical use of a cross staff. However, Bourne does make one very interesting point in his Regiment for the Sea. He suggests that when using an astrolabe (or "Sea-ring" as he terms it) the result should be checked for accuracy by taking another reading using the same instrument, but using the scale on the opposite side of the instrument.

Good point GoF, My living history pilot's kit consists of 3 astrolabes, a quadrant (2 if you count a minature), a davis quadrant, a cross staff, (for the later periods) a sextant, a terrestrial globe, a celestial globe, 2 sandglasses, a log line, a lead line (though that now lives in the boat), oh, 2 compasses (d'oh, how could I forget them?), a traverse board, a couple of books of charts and several loose ones, 2 books of tables, several sets of dividers, a couple of protractors, and probably other stuff I've forgotten. For when I'm playing a surveyor on land I also have a thoedolite, a chain, and a pair of fathom sticks in addition to the above. I don't have e-photos of it all to hand: My traverse board and small sandglass One pair of dividers, a book of tables and a protractor copied from the Mary Rose My celestial globe, copied from a 17th century example in the NMM

Just a small word of warning, the Newgate calendar is littered with errors and dubious "facts" for the early period (like the GAoP...). Nothing serious, just things likes names and dates...

That is absolutely the least meaningful and most arrogant excuse for what are frankly atrocious manners ever invented. It is quite possible to give short, brusque replies (or not reply at all if your time is that valuable) without deliberately insulting people. Try it sometime. True, one might say the same of your arguments. However, as I said before, arguments have been advanced for both points of view. I respect other board members enough to allow them to form their own opinions based on the arguments already presented. Now, would you care for a drink?

I wouldn't want to be accused of misquoting. The initial comment from Cap'n Enigma which sparked this furious debate was, and I quote: Later on in the argument Cap'n Enigma did move the goalposts by going on to specify that he was only talking about mariners' astrolabes. Recently he has moved them again by revealing that far from "never", he is actually talking about a specific time frame. Just to clear that up. Now, Cap'n Enigma. I have built 5 different wooden astrolabes, and I own 2 metal ones. I have used them on several trips on both sailing and motor vessels in the English Channel, the North Atlantic, the Irish Sea and the North Sea. Weather conditions have varied from beautiful to, well, too poor to take readings. Of course, we read regularly of ships going days without taking sightings because of weather conditions, though I'm sure your fine astrolabes are perfect for taking sightings even in the most adverse conditions. I have one further question for you. Is there a reason you're so damn rude to people? I mean, you've implied both that I am a liar and that I bore you (not to much to keep you coming back though...), you've quite blatantly stated others' ignorance. Are you so insecure that you can't hold a debate without resorting to insulting people? Were you bullied as a child? I'd like to know your reasons for thinking that the astrolabe was made obsolete in the 18th century by the back staff and octant. As I'm sure you know, the backstaff was invented in the 16th century, so if it made the astrolabe obsolete surely it didn't take 200 years? And it must have enjoyed a very short favour, since the backstaff was made obsolete in the 18thC by the Campbell sextant. Either way, since your original statement was that astrolabes "were never used aboard a vessel" your challenge should include astrolabes of any period. In fact, the very fact that both you and I have used wooden astrolabes aboard vessels actually makes your original statement wrong. If Pete Straw has some information about 19th century wooden astrolabes then of course it's valid to the discussion! I'd be interested in seeing Pete's 19th century astrolabe, but after that it pretty much seems to me that we've exhausted the information available at present. Cap'n Enigma has given us a run down of his experiences and has given us a quote showing...well, I'm not quite sure what it shows... I've given a run down of my experiences, various people have contributed information about famous navigators using wooden astrolabes, and many people have engaged in heated debate about the interpretation of all that evidence. It seems to me that until anyone comes up with new information (at which time I shall gladly rejoin the fray) all we're doing is arguing and re-arguing the same points and getting nowhere. SO, Readers of this topic. The evidence has been presented by both sides, and has been interpreted by both sides. It is up to you how you think about that evidence. I for one have no wish for endless repetetive nastiness so I'm going to step back until new information is presented. FOLKS make your own minds up. Anyone think that's unfair? Good.

Whenever I'm in Brighton I pop in there and salivate (I only live 30 mins away), but I'm gonna have to hold up a few more petrol stations before I can afford to shop there. I remember a couple of years back they had a 17th century stone bow which I gave serious thought to pawning all my possessions to buy. Maybe I'll rob the place and flog the gear on ebay, but there's something not quite right about armed robbery in a gun shop...

Do you mean the sole? My sandals have only 1 thickness of sole leather but it's too thin for me really. I recommend 2 thicknesses of sole leather, or 1 layer but with a couple of layers of thinner leather on top. Virginia sounds good, let me find my suitcase...

I tried earlier to find a picture of the Hamburg sandal but couldn't. A cobbler friend of mine had a sketch of it in an archaeological report which he used as the basis for my sandals. However, here is a photo of one of my sandals. My sandals are curved, but only very slightly. I believe the original Hamburg sandal was also curved but I couldn't swear to it - however, the guy who made them trained as an archaeologist before turing to re-enactment cobbling as a pastime so it's unlikely he would make such an elementary mistake if they were not. It's funny you should talk about hot cobbles and suchlike - I find my sandals most useful for keeping my better shoes dry when the ground is churned up and muddy I gotta move to where you live!

I don't see any reason at all why period sandals should all have been rope. I know of at least one pair from Hamburg(?) made of leather, though they date from the 15th century. A mate of mine made me a pair of rope sandals based on a simplified version of the Hamburg sandals (which were quite complex), and they are very comfortable, though the leather sole could do with being thicker. If you can push a needle through rope, why not have a go at making your own?

Firstly, thankyou Cap'n Straw for saving me from writing a long reply myself (which I must own would have been less long and less eloquent). Secondly, if there are any mediums present would they mind having a chat with de Gama and Magellan and telling them that their astrolabes are inauthentic? Thirdly, Cap'n Enigma, lighten up! If you'd made the very sensible argument "metal astrolabes are far better than wooden astrolabes, both in terms of ease of use and of robustness (is that a word?), so would have been the preferred tools of GAoP navigators" then everyone would have sagely nodded and thought what a sensible chap you were. On the other hand by blustering about that wooden astrolabes were never used on board ships you've just made yourself look a bit daft. May I ask something? In all your wide experience, how many times have you tried using wooden astrolabes? I mean, you tell us that you've used metal ones all over the place, and I'm sure they've worked well for you, but how many wooden ones have you used and how were they constructed? Finally, Cap'n Straw again, you wrote: Unless that's a typo you'd better apologise twice. Sextants would be absolutely fine for late 1700s living history.

As I've said before, an astrolabe is not the best instrument for sighting stars anyway IMHE, but I HAVE used a wooden astrolabe (more than one in fact) at sea for solar sightings and achieved very satisfactory results. What part of that do you not get? Or are you suggesting that I'm spinning a yarn? In which case, pistols at dawn it is, I'll let you nominate the place True, it may be, BUT a planispheric astrolabe is ten times more affected by the wind than a mariner's astrolabe (due to its solid construction), so if you reckon that Magellan was able to use a wooden planispheric astrolabe at sea then you can really have no sensible objection to the possibility of using a wooden mariner's astrolabe - though I have every faith that you will find one. One might also add that a wooden astrolabe as used on land by de Gama will be just as affected by wind as a wooden astrolabe used on board ship, thus the real problem for de Gama was the heaving of the deck. Since the heaving of a deck will affect wooden and metal astrolabes to the same extent one might just as well use a wooden instrument as a metal one. That is of course, if one accepts that de Gama knew what he was about when it came to the practical aspects of navigation - and I'm inclined to.

LMAO, you just can't let it go can you?! I'm gonna assume that "slippery long- tongued merchant " doesn't refer to anyone we know. On the one hand you could take your 8" brass astrolabe and try to read the tiny degree markings, or on the other hand you could take your 18" wooden astrolabe, properly weighted if you like, and well oiled to minimize the effect of the damp, and read the considerably larger and quite likely more accurate scale (or is Capn Enigma going to tell us that small instruments are always more accurate?). I've used both wooden and metal astrolabes (and other instruments) on land and at sea, and as I've stated before have attained similar levels of accuracy and innaccuracy with both. Incidentally, whatever instrument one is using it's always best to use several others as well and compare the results. Only a suicidal fool would rely on the reading of one instrument. BUT, to answer Duchess's query, wooden astrolabes, and other instruments need to be looked after, and the wood needs to be kept oiled. Properly looked after a wooden astrolabe will remain accurate throught its reasonable working life.

I'm pretty sure that the Admiralty court records aren't online (oh woe is me!), but there is at least one piracy trial in the online Old Bailey records. If you search for Richard Coyle you should find it (thanks Gosse!). I believe there are a couple of other mentions of piracy, BUT for some reason their search engine doesn't pick them up; I found them while searching for other stuff and to be honest they weren't anything very exciting to the pirate researcher, just passing comments so insignificant I can't even remember what they were.

I've just had an email from Steve Millingham of Pewter Replicas. He does still make astrolabes but only to order. They are working to the extent that they can be used for demonstration etc, and are probably the ideal thing for re-enactors (since they were in fact designed for re-enactors in the first place). The good news is that they sell for £35 (that's $63.66) + p&p All this has inspired me to have a crack at making a metal astrolabe (hey, I did a theodolite last year, an astrolabe must be easier!) If it works I'll have the jigs etc so I'll be able to offer quotes on metal ones too.

All a mariner's astrolabe does, indeed all most period navigational instruments of that type (quadrants, Davis quadrants, octants, cross-staffs, even sextants) do is measure the angle between two points. Generally for navigational purposes this is the angle between either a particular star and the horizon, or the sun and the horizon. For inshore navigation the same instruments (except a quadrant) can be used horizontally to measure the angle between two features on the land for triangulation purposes. So, what needs to be "tuned" are the tables one uses to work out what the angle read by the instrument means. A 17th century astrolabe will work fine in the 21st century, but 17th century declination tables will not.

Bangs Head on table I think it's pretty clear that Cap'n Enigma is attempting to engage me in a flame war (I've done this...you don't know what you're talking about...oops, I've done that thing you specifically asked me not to again...) and frankly I can't be bothered with that. This Foxe ain't biting today. Cap'n, if you'd like to discuss this like gentlemen then fine, but if you wanna flame then try someone else. The first wooden astrolabe I made was a copy of a 19" 17th century mariner's astrolabe in Brixham museum (it's now been lent somewhere else, Falmouth I think), and I believe there are a couple in the NMM (I'm fairly sure that's where I came across the lead weighted one.) I respect your experience Cap'n, please have the good grace to accept mine. I have used both wooden and metal astrolabes at sea and have enjoyed a similar degree of success with both. Some wooden ones gave me a spot on reading, others were wildly out. Same goes for metal ones. FWIW, I find that a quadrant or cross-staff is infinitely better suited to celestial navigation than an astrolabe anyway, and vice-versa for solar navigation. The bottom line; whether wooden or metal, an astrolabe is a infinitely more authentic than a sextant for GAoP period living history. If you're interested in a wooden astrolabe (or other instrument) then drop me a line, if you're only interested in metal ones then happy hunting (and let me know if you find an affordable one). Since Cap'n Enigma has built several (presumably metal) astrolabes, perhaps he could offer us a quote or suggest an alternate supplier?

Having built several astrolabes and used them at sea myself I can assure you that a: wooden astrolabes DO work at sea and on land, and that b: given that some astrolabes were 2ft or so across you REALLY want a wooden one from time to time. I have also come across wooden astrolabes with a sheet of lead around the bottom edge for weight. There's nothing either impractical or inauthentic about wooden astrolabes if made and used properly and sensibly. You make a good point, but to say never (in bold no less!) is, in my experience, pretty wide of the mark I'm afraid :)

It's a japanned card hat (as worn by the crew of HMS Tribune to name but one vessel). The basic hat shape is made of card about 3/16 inch thick, which is then laquered, painted (or tarred in this case) and laquered again. I painted the design on before the second coat of laquer and bound the brim to protect it. The result is that the brim is about 1/4 inch thick. Thanks John, I hadn't tried that site. Unfortunately my pc seems to have given up reading PDF files so I've emailed them. SOMEBODY must do the buttons I want!

First off, I was only pointing out the inauthenticity of sextants for those who might be horrified to learn that their gear wasn't quite right. If you're happy with 1750s gear as part of your pirate kit that's absolutely fine by me. And generally speaking yes, sextants are much cheaper and more easily available. Principally I think the problem is that none of the companies who make these repica instruments (Saunders and Cooke, Stanley of London etc) make mariner's astrolabes rather than the much more complex astronomical astrolabes. Mariner's astrolabes would be much cheaper than sextants if anyone made them! However, if you did want to go more authentic I can think of a couple of places you might try. Steve Millingham used to sell a pewter mariner's astrolabe for about £40, it's not illustrated on his website but it would be worth emailing him to see if he still does them. Incidentally, he also does a fantastic Universal Ring Dial for a very reasonable price. If you preferred to go wooden (yes, they had wooden instruments, often the particularly large ones were just too heavy to use if made in metal), I can sell you one, but I do only make to order. In addition to astrolabes I have also done in the past quadrants, cross-staffs, beautiful slate protractors copied from the Mary Rose, sounding leads, and various other bits and bobs. Like I said, everything is made bespoke so I can't offer quotes off the top of my head, but I'm pretty reasonably priced. I have also seen Hadley quadrants for under £100, but I don't know who the supplier is I'm afraid. Hope that helps.

Since it's been mentioned twice on this board and once at an event in the last little while can I just point out (for those who are authenticity minded only) that sextants, at least those we commonly come across, are not period for the GAoP, they were developed by Captain Campbell RN in the 1750s. An octant, Hadley quadrant, Davis quadrant, plain quadrant, cross-staff or astrolabe would be a fine and useful alternative. For me the top ten list for male sailor portrayal would have to be: 1. Shirts. You can borrow most essential kit, but it's often advisable not to borrow a shirt off anyone in Bonaventure. There's often a good reason why their owners aren't wearing them! 2. Breeches. Borrowing breeches is only marginally safer. 3. Hat. Everyone should own a hat and they are a valuable anti-sunstroke device, but there's always spares knocking about. Breeches shirt and hat constitute the absolute minimum acceptable gear for male Bonaventure members to wear at events. 4. Seaman's smock. Not necessarily fashionable wear, but definitely authentic (if made to a simple pattern) for several centuries (15th-20th at least, possibly earlier). 5. Eating gear. A trencher, bowl, knife, spoon and drinking vessel are definitely a boon. If you have a trencher and tankard you can live without a bowl. Likewise a sheath knife (#8) can double as an eating knife if necessary. Keep them all in a: 6. Ditty bag/snapsack. Ideal for keeping living history gear in, but until you've acquired living history gear it also serves to hold wallets, car-keys, cigarettes, cell-phone and all those other things you haven't learned to let go of yet. Just make sure you keep is fastened. 7. A Stick. It sounds daft, but I don't feel dressed without a stick. Many period pictures show sailors with canes or light cudgels so we know they're authentic for all and they have so many uses. They're an ideal first weapon, you can swagger about with them feeling important, you can sling your ditty bag from them over your shoulder... the list is endless and if you nip into the woods you can pick one up for free. Bugger this, they should be #1! 8. Knife, and belt to keep it on. For the active re-enactor a decent knife is unbelievably useful. Ideally it should be accompanied by a sharpening stone as a blunt knife is dangerous. 9. Shoes. As a sailor you can go barefoot, but it's not always the most comfortable thing to do. 10. Wet/Hot weather gear (depending on prevailing conditions at events). If you do a lot of events in the baking heat then a thin singlet or sleeved waistcoat is desirable. If on the other hand it's always cold and wet then a warm coat is a must. Or a tarred smock. :)

Yeah, we got some groovy "Twatting-the-French" events on his year, apart from Festival of the Sea we're doing a couple of other small events plus Sheerness Trafalgar weekend (where Victory was moored on her return from the battle) and hopefully the actual Trafalgar weekend on HMS Trincomalee. Early next year we're doing Nelson's funeral events in London. Busy time ahead, plus of course it's the 400 year anniversary of the only honest man in Parliament in November. The flag is that of Thomas Anstis which is described as a Union flag with flaming balls in each quarter. The grenadoes are my interpretation of "flaming balls"

That would be the Tarkin of the comfy slippers? Most of the best films are! Why do I get the feeling I'm gonna kick myself really hard when you tell us where the quote is from? Shaun of the Dead UK DVD has a short ad libbed extra with Simon Pegg as Michael Caine and Nick Frost as Sean Connery, and they're both brilliant.

So you don't subscribe to the school of thought that says having a copy of The Man Who Would be King on DVD is more important than sending kids to college then? A towel hook, I ask you, THEY COULD GO ON THE FLOOR! Have you seen "The Man Who Would be Shaun" on the Shaun of the Dead DVD extra features. (A film, I might add which stars our very own Tall Paul). Nope, your quote's got me stumped.

Thanks guys, I'll check out Jas Townsend. The USMC button is pretty similar, but I think the USN button should have the same design as the front of my USN sailor's hat Since I'm planning an undress coat I may actually just go with plain flat brass buttons if I can't get the right USN ones. In the RN of the period uniform regs were more what you'd call... guidelines, so I'm assuming that the USN of the same period took the same attitude. Then the same coat can be used for a whole host of other stuff too. Would be nice to find the right buttons though, might even make it a dress coat if I can.