MarkG

It's often hard to tell from period engravings, but are we sure we are talking about short waistcoats and not jerkins? The cut of the one in the picture, especially the pockets, just seems to scream 19th C to me. Even the shortest of the pics in Foxe's collection does not show anything above the waistline. I see several that could be either waistcoat or jerkin but all extend below the belt line.

Hawkyns

I think that a sleeved, short waistcoat was common among sailors from late in the 17th century well into the 18th century. You can see this in several period pictures including the ones of Anne Bonny and Mary Read dressed as men (with cleavage). The one of Blackbeard wearing a thrum cap might also be a sleeved waistcoat.

All it takes is once in a boat in a longer waistcoat and you see why they wore shorter ones.

So, Captain Spike,

Understand the powder horn issue. But what if we use apostles instead of cartridges? I really don't like screwing with cartridges and always shoot the the apostles, sans powder horn if needed.

It's really just a cartridge in a closed bottle. Suttler John made them...

-- Hurricane

The problem with shooting from a horn is that a spark can set the whole thing off. The chargers in a bandoleer (the term apostles is 20th century) have one charge each, the same as a cartridge so they are at least as safe as cartridges. I think that the rules allow loading from a measuring tube and these should count the same. Personally, I think that they are safer. I'v seen priming flasks blow without setting off the bandoleer. If a charge should go off while you are loading, you have a good chance of the flash being directed away from your hand by the charger. I don't expect much protection from some newsprint.

Mark

I take it that a blunderbuss is a more of a GAOP weapon than a tool of the Buccaneers?

Not at all. They predate the Buccaneer period by decades. The main difference is the lock. It would not be my first choice for land battles since it has a shorter range than a musket.

Mark

So, I have a foc'sle.

and even cooler is that it is inside a reproduction 17th century ship!

What I don't have is documentation either written or drawn about what this wonderful little area on the the vessel is supposed to look like.

About the vessel, she is a 42 ton square rigged topsail ketch circa the 1670s. She's small, around 75' in overall length and 53' on deck. Used for coastal trading work here in the new world, travelling as far out from Charlestowne as Barbados and as far north as Massachusetts. Now back to the foc'sle, architectually she's not all to large, but has two larboard and two starboard berths and a ladder betwixt them that opens to the forward hatch, some room forward and aft of that and thats all she wrote.

Anyway here is a picture of what it looked like completely empty.

http://www.facebook....photo.php?pid=3 ... =217401146

I would love to find some documentation about how I could dress out this area on the ketch, but if all you have are "period suggestions" then I'll take those as well.

Thanks in advance

Yr hmbl srvnt

CJ

You need to make a field trip to Jamestown and check out their ships. The Godspeed is about your size. The Dove at Saint Mary's CIty is a bit smaller but well outfitted.

Mark

As a sailor, I've been through quite a few 'mishaps' as well. It comes with the territory. From being dismasted (which really sucks, btw), to going aground 4 times on three different sailboats (various boats and circumstances...I wasn't driving for any of them and there was no major damage), to blowing out numerous sails. At least in all my experience, none of the crew were seriously injured, though part of that was luck when our J-35 mast went by the board. A lot of problems can be solved by proper planning and preparedness. I'll point out some things from your own story to prove a point. This is meant as helpful criticism, so learn from it.

First, some things you did right:

-You took a class to learn how to sail. This is great, though when you are done, you should still realize that you're a beginner (which it sounds like you did).

-You checked the weather forecast. Many people who get in trouble go out when it's a great day, but crappy weather is expected to move in. In your case, it was unexpected, which happens.

-You went to a lake without much traffic. This could be good or bad. Good in the sense that there's fewer people to worry about hitting, generally more room to maneuver, etc. Bad in that there's also fewer people to help if they see you in distress.

-You assessed the situation and made a judgement call to return to the dock when the conditions were worsening. This was still before it became an 'emergency' situation.

-You saw and responded to two seperate emergencies: first the trees and then the rocks. From what it sounds like, the boat made it back with minimal damage (although I'd really check out that leak in the centerboard trunk). A sail can rip at any time. Sometimes it just less conveniant than others. You used the oar to minimize the impact.

-You had a backup means of propulsion. Sure, a motor is nice and easier, but not absolutely necessary. Sometimes people forget that the wind can die completely and are stuck out there. When there's too much wind, oars aren't generally that useful.

OK, now a couple of bad things:

-You went out without much experience. I don't know the extent of training you got at the class, and they vary greatly, so I'll just assume that you got the basics of sailing. Not necessarily basics of good seamanship. Also, usually classes use their own boats for training, so familiarization with your own boat doesn't happen.

-You weren't familiar with your boat. It was brand new, had a centerboard that stuck (quite a major problem)

-You began by going down wind (whether or not it was intentional). In general, it's a lot easier to go downwind than up wind, and if something goes wrong, especially beginners trying a new boat, it's generally better to drift back to, or at least by the dock where you can try to signal someone on shore. Obviously, this is general and depends greatly on the geography.

-Lack some gear. It's good to have safety gear onboard such as flares, an anchor, a sea anchor or drogue, an extra sail (usually more for bigger vessels), etc. Though it wasn't mentioned, I'm assuming you had the common sense to wear, or at least have available, lifejackets.

-Too hasty to get the boat in the water and go sailing. This, by your own admission, may have been the biggest mistake. Take the time to go over your boat, get familiar with it, and make sure everything works. Chances are, everything onboard has some sort of useful purpose. If you don't know what it's for, how it works, or even what it is, ASK SOMEONE!!! Check not only to see if it works, but also that it's in good repair. An old sail or frayed line can turn into a nightmare. It doesn't mean you need to throw these things out, as they have their purpose, but it's something you should be aware of. Never use old rope as the major lines (i.e. haliard, sheets, downhaul/furling line, or any other line that gets used often or is vital to the operation of YOUR boat).

Other things to think about:

-It's a good idea to file a sailing plan with a friend, relative, neighbor, coworker, etc. so that if you don't return and check in by a certain time, they can worry and call in help for you. MAKE SURE YOU CHECK IN WITH THEM WHEN YOU RETURN! Also, make sure they know where you went, and what your boat looks like.

-Cell phone...good and bad. Up here in Alaska, they usually don't work too far from a town. There are always areas of bad reception, so it's not good to rely on them for an emergency. It's not a bad idea to have one, though. Make sure it's in a waterproof container and will float!!!

-Have a radio. A radio can come in very handy when calling for help, especially to other boaters.

-Try finding someone knowledgeable that will go out with you on your boat, or at least look over your boat with you and explain what everything is and what it's for.

-Sometimes, things just happen. Do whatever you can to protect 1) your safety, 2) safety of others, 3) safety of the boat. Usually, if you protect the safety of the boat, the other two fall in line. When things do happen, have a plan to fix them. Constantly think about and talk with your crew about what you would do if ____ happens (just about anything can go wrong, just fill in the blank). In the Coast Guard, we run drills all the time. We require most commercial vessels to run drills as well. You don't need to make it too formal, but practice in picking up a Type IV floataion device, or an EXTRA life jacket is good. Not only is it good to be familiar with what to do in case of a man overboard, it helps you get better at handling the boat and can be a lot of fun.

-Prevention is always the best remody. In our Commanding Officer's standing orders he states that "seamanship is the ability to stay out of a situation that needs it". Adding to that, as I said earlier, sometimes things just happen.

Overall, it sounds like you didn't really enjoy it, but have one heck of a sea story as a beginner. Get back out there. Lots of things will come with experience. You don't need to get far from the dock many times to just get familiar with the boat, tack it, practice a man overboard (hint, once you get a little better, one of you should be the 'man overboard' and just sit back and stay out of the way-don't actually jump overboard). Even with all the nasty storms, dangerous situations, large waves, high winds, lost sails, lost gear, etc., I still go sailing. However, after each bit of new experience, even the nice days that go as perfect as they ever can, I learn something new that can help me the next time.

Fair Winds,

Coastie

Most of that safety equipment is required - things like life jackets, distress signals, and an anchor. I have a big duffel with these that I always throw in my boat. I usually point this out and ask if anyone wants to wear a lifejacket (my wife often does).

For a small boat, I consider a paddle and/or oars important. For a larger boat, you need a motor. Either way, you have to have some means of maneuvering if you get into trouble.

Not that I count as anything more than a beginner, also.

Mark

I need a surname for alphabetical arrangement.

Gist

Thanks.

I don't suppose that any one of you could set up a web cam at the Hide for at least one night could you? Maybe even set one up on the fort wall? I know that there are several businesses in Key West that share a web cam page; perhaps they might help? Hurricane, might this fall into your professional sphere?

It's not even time for PiP yet and I'm already suffering from withdrawal.

Is there WiFi on the beach? Without that a web cam is tough.

Mark

Mickey Souris (michaelsbagley) - Columbus, Ohio (Near no sail-able body of water as well)

You could probably add my wife too...

Kate Souris (Kate_souris) - Columbus, Ohio

Don't forget my wife, Jennie, and me - also of Columbus, Ohio.

Mark

anyway, back to the subject at hand, they ARE tiny ships, i saw the santa maria in columbus, i'd be hard pressed to go out on a small lake or river in that size boat, much less the atlantic ocean. those guys were manly. or forced....

The Santa Maria was the largest of the three. Ships were rated in tons (according to how many tuns could fit in their hold). The Santa Maria was a bit over 105 tons. Ours was designed around this and can hold around 105 tons. The Nina and Pinta were smaller - around 65 and 70 tons or 2/3s the capacity of the Santa Maria. Also, they were caravels and the Santa Maria was a nao (ship). Caravels were often lateen-rigged and had much less superstructure. The quarterdecks were much smaller and they had no cabins.

However, most pirate ships were fairly small. The Santa Maria is larger than most pirate ships. The sloop was the favorite of pirates and 100 tons was the usual upper end for sloops.

Funny thing - not long after the Santa Maria was christened, a woman came on board, looked the ship up and down and announced, "My son crosses the Atlantic in boats a lot smaller than this."

Mark

"I don't think that the British government was supplying small arms, just a warship that Morgan managed to blow up. Remember that he never had a warrant for invading cities. His papers were for raiding Spanish shipping and he exceeded his authority (which is why he was arrested and sent to England)."

Since Morgan is my specialty, I couldn't let this one slide.

Quoted from his Letters of Marque dated 20th of April 1669:

"And also for preventing the intended Invasion against this place, you are hereby fully authorized and required, in the case that you and your Officers in your Judgement find it possible, or feasable to land and attain the Town of St. Jago de Cuba, or any other place belonging to the Enemies, where you shall be informed that Magazines and Stores for this War are laid up, or where any Rendevous for thir formes to Imbody, are appointed and there to use your best endeavours for the seizin gthe said Stores, and to take, kill and disperse the said forces."

Morgan did have authority to attack towns. He ran into problems with Panama because a treaty had been signed between England and Spain. He was arrested, never imprisoned and was then knighted and returned to Jamaica as acting Governor. Hardly a punishment for a criminal. In fact, Morgan was "arrested" to appease the Spanish.

As an interesting side note, Morgan is the first person to ever successfully sue for libel, against that wonderful sot, Exquemelin. Much of his musings on Panama were unsubstantiated, since it was doubtful he was ever at the front lines, being a surgeon and too highly prized in such a capacity to risk death or injury. Some contend he wrote the piece because he was angry and having to miss the action.

Though modern history likes to rewrite his role, he was a patriot who protected Jamaica with all the will, resources and power he could muster and it was never successfully attacked by the Spanish, French, Dutch or anyone else because of his actions.

-- Hurricane

I stand corrected on the scope of his warrant (it's been a long time since I read a biography of him). Am I completely mis-remembering or did he exceed his authority on at least one expedition?

Anyway, my main point was that the English government was not equipping him with firearms. Do you know of anything to the contrary here?

Mark

I think there are two distinctions to be made here. First is that I wouldn't count out the matchlock so easily. Yes, doglocks were being imported to Port Royal and probably to some other ports, but when? Early buccaneer or late buccaneer? Looking at the production from England, I'd have to say that the early buccaneer period, say the period of Myngs, and you are far more likely to see matchlocks. By '72, the percentage would have changed, but the the matchlock would still be represented. Remember that while the independent buccaneers would get hold of doglocks and even french flintlocks whenever as they could, Morgan was being supplied by the British government, which was still firmly in the era of the matchlock. The Glorious Revolution was still a matchlock war, manuals were still being written for matchlock troops, and the last ones were not withdrawn from line regiments until the early 1700's. So it is safe to say that equipment being supplied, especially concerning that colonial supply tended to be whatever was left in the armouries, would still have consisted of a reasonable proportion of matchlocks.

Also, the one weapon that is being ignored in this discussion is the miquelet. It was the Spanish firelock of choice well into the 18th century. Captured Spanish arms would be miquelets (and matchlocks), not French locks or English locks. There should be a percentage of miquelets in any buccaneer group.

Second, I disagree with you about the appearance of the doglock, Hurricane. The English doglock of the mid century period had a side acting sear, not the rotating sear of the French lock. The lock plate was longer and thinner, looking far more like a matchlock lock plate, from which, indeed, some of them may have been converted. There is a definite visual difference.

I suppose it depends on what you are doing. Tendency among modern reenactors is to have the fanciest, most up to date musket, that is available. We can afford it, for the most part, and we have the advantage of 350 years of hindsight onto which worked best. Historically, though, it depended what you could afford, capture, or be issued. The choices, for the average no name, were not so many. I'd certainly like to see more variety in the weaponry at any given event, instead everybody carrying top of the line, state of the art, shiny weapons, that they likely would never have been able to afford.

Hawkyns

Good point about the miquelet. There aren't many repros of those out right now so we tend to overlook them.

I don't think that the British government was supplying small arms, just a warship that Morgan managed to blow up. Remember that he never had a warrant for invading cities. His papers were for raiding Spanish shipping and he exceeded his authority (which is why he was arrested and sent to England).

Morgan's troops were not army regulars. They were volunteers who signed on for a share of the wealth. They provided their own weapons. Armies were still carring matchlocks because they were cheap but individuals were willing to get the best piece that they could afford. A musket was a major investment and, for reasons I already gave, matchlocks are poor weapons for hunting. The extra utility of flint pieces made them worth the extra cost.

Undoubtedly some of the men with Morgan used whatever they could get their hands on. The lure of easy money would have inspired some people to outfit themselves and sign on but these must have been in the minority.

I will admit that I am extrapolating from New England and Virginia inventories where fling pieces outnumbered matchlocks by quite a bit by the 1660s but the Caribbean was at least as wealthy as New England so they should have been able to afford similar weapons.

Mark

This is a beautiful weapon,but be warned it is about 30" OL...I purchased one and being short in stature it had the feel of a blunderbuss.....I gave it to a friend that was 6'5". Great gun but not for short people. Just sayin'.

Remember, it's a cavalry pistol. The originals were kept in holsters hung from the saddle.

Mark

I know we have touched briefly on this topic but what sort of firearms would Morgan and his lads carried with them on thier various raids? I know the Spanish relied upon matchlocks but would the Buccaneers favored wheellocks, doglocks, or flintlocks (or a combo of these and others)?

Probably a combination of Wheellocks, snaphaunses and doglocks. Matchlocks had a lot of disadvantages and the colonies made the switch to better weapons sooner than European armies.

The biggest drawback of matchlocks was the match. This burns at around a foot and hour. That means miles of rope would be needed for a large force and it had to be imported from Europe. Spanish troops garrisoned at a major port might not think that this was a problem but Buccaneers would have difficulty getting enough rope. Even some European countries had trouble getting enough match. Sweden switched to an early form of snaphaunce in 1620 because of match shortages.

Also, the Buccaneers were recruited from hunters and matchlocks are poor weapons for hunting. You have a smelly match that has to be adjusted every few minutes and, again, you have to carry a lot of match. In contrast you can carry a flint weapon cocked and ready to fire.

Mark

The captain of the Mercury crew may have to be a bad-ass sometimes if someone is doing something that could get us not invited back. Equally, the crewe is going to have to listen and follow them.

To quote Patrick, "There is no Captain."

That said, Hurricane is absolutely right. Patrick's comment about me 'getting along really well with people' not withstanding, I will not brook any sailor getting out of line. This is not to say that I'm not a patient fellow, but endanger a life or risk harm to the fort or property belonging to others and you'll hear from me nose to nose. Those awake and sober enough to hear me on my third night at PIP in 2005 will tell you that I don't mince words.

For those not in the know, I discovered some attendees that year attempting to climb parts of the fort that were closed to the general public due to safety reasons. They were climbing banisters (made mostly from brittle pvc pipe) in an effort to get up the fort walls in the dark. They were not only damaging the railing, but risking their quite foolish young lives in the process. They were not part of our crew at all, but this didn't stop me from putting on my prison warden face and giving them one very sound verbal thrashing, and none too quietly. They were putting themselves in harm's way, damaging fort property and risking the very future of our attendance. Needless to say, they never came back. I didn't even see them the next day. I reported the infraction and the damages to the railings to Harry, and he agreed that we were better for seeing the back of them.

Still, these infractions tend to be the exception, not the rule. I have seldom had to raise my voice, and only a few times ever to stop an act that would harm someone or weaken our good graces with the park. I have witnessed many crew members of different groups policing themselves and using the casual caution that makes PIP so pleasant year to year. Even those of us who have stubbornly disagreed at times online and in the public, tend to fall into a mutual understanding that allows the event to run smoothly.

These cautionary posts creep up on the Pub every year just before and after the event. It's a good sign that we care so much about the festival to caution one another about such things as safety, rules, property and the like. It's a good sign that we're all thinking about such things before PIP and reflecting and observing aloud afterward. This sort of well intended mindset keeps us all on our toes. It also displays that we have a good share of common sense, respect and an attention to details. If there were no rules, we'd probably just make them ourselves.

At PIP, as on any ship, the life and well being of any sailor is in the hands of every other sailor. Watch each other's back. Lend hands. Laugh long.

-William Brand

Quartermaster of the Mercury

So basically we need some safety-minded people to keep an eye on the camp and keep people from being stupid.

Mark

It's too bad they can't sail to this part of the inland. Not only would I love to see them (although apparently they sailed up the Ohio a month ago, and I was too busy to drive the two hours to see them then), it would be spectacular to see them with a copy of the flagship we have here.

They are going back down the Ohio in a couple of weeks. Want to catch them at Gallipolis on the 21st or 22nd?

Mark

CBS News has a story on shooting anvils.

Anvils Fall from Sky (No Cartoon Coyotes)

Video (with ad) here.

Mark

Holy Crap!?!...just bought...and recieved the Lg Lock.....its only bout TWICE as big as i thought it was...!?!?!

maybe the word...."LG"....should have been a give away??

That or the measurement.

No one bought the smallest of the three. We can relist if someone will buy it.

Mark

Despite the obvious setbacks of not attending PIP this year, I will be fulfilling the promise of making the Mercury flag, or more to the point, Tracy has agreed to make it by hand. All praise Tracy. I also spoke with Fayma earlier today and made the necessary plans to ship the flag and other things to her. She'll see that it gets to the right people, so prepare to serve under the dark jack of the Mercury.

This is a little off-topic but this flag reminds me of New England tombstones. Many of these featured a flying deaths-head. The book In Small Things Forgotten has great chapter on the evolution of these death's heads through multiple generations of headstone carvers.

Here's a typical tombstone from 1680.

Mark

Well, you haven't totally missed it. Some of the auctions are still going on at this point. You can see them here.

We just posted some more items.

We've raised over $300 for the Santa Maria so far.

Mark

Say...no one has bid on Jabber...

For those of us wanting to just write a check, to whom do we write it and where do we send it? (I've been told it's a 503c, so doing so is tax deductible.)

We already relisted it.

Selling it directly would be complicated. If you wrote a check to the ship then they would have to reimburse us for postage. If you wrote the check to us then it would be hard to prove that it was for charity. This is taken care of in the auction because we have a letter from Linda authorizing us to hold an auction on the ship's behalf.

However... we can probably take some small unsold items to PIP and save postage.

Mark

Tomorrow is the last day to bid on a lot of the first batch of items in the auctions. A lot of these items are still going for well under their value! So now is the time to start bidding. I'm surprised no one has bid on the blue hand knit cap! You can barely buy machine knit caps in 100% wool for that little anymore never mind a hand knit one!

The cap is here. It's just the thing to wear on a windy day when your tricorn keeps blowing off of on a sailboat with a boom that can knock your hat into the water.

We will be adding some more items tomorrow but the best stuff is already posted and ending soon.

Mark

The problem will be that all reenactors will be judged as a class - you can reenact for years without any accidents or mishaps but because someone else fails to take proper precautions your activities are regulated. Secondly, what reenactors do is perceived as a luxury by the masses and the "regulators." Lip service is given to the importance of studying and experiencing history but when push comes to shove a large segment of the public sees reenactors the same way they see LARP members - we are engaging in a hobby that we enjoy but what value do we add that justifies people getting their legs broken?

Was it reenactors who fired the cannon? I don't think that the article said. Some historic sites have staff members fire their cannons and muskets regularly.

When a reenactor does something dumb, the news coverage usually says so. As Hawkyns pointed out the official story already has unlikely details. The easy way out for the fort would be to blame a reenactor. Since they didn't, I think that a staff member was at fault.

Mark

Not all items are up yet, But here is a convenient link for those who care to browse or bid early. More items to be added over the next few days.

We just added more items and lowered the price on others.

Mark

My wife is tired of telling people that she sprained her knee on the stairs. She's going to start saying that she was hit by a ramrod fired from a cannon.

Mark

From what I have read, the metal Marlinspike was invented in the mid to late 19th century to be used in the splicing of metal cable, though it is also used on fiber rope. It essentially replaced the instrument previously used in splicing fiber rope called a "fid". The earlier fid is made of wood, is not as slender as a marlinspike, and doesn't work well with metal cable/lines. That's about all I know, if that's of any help. I do not have any information on the transition from fid to marlinspike vi-a-vi decorative knot making.

Dictionary.com gives the origin of the word as going back to 1620-30. It is used differently from a fid. A fid is useful when you are splicing. A marlinspike can do this but it is also useful for teasing tights knots open.

Mark