# Age of Sail question **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [March 24, 2009, 12:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/age-of-sail-question/490531 "2009-03-24T00:14:48Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Princhester](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3e96dc/32.png) [@Princhester](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Princhester)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2009, 1:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/age-of-sail-question/490531/21 "2009-03-24T13:34:55Z")
> [@MarcusF](#): > > \*\*Princhester \*\*- 14 inches is the figure I remember. I’ve found one [on-line reference](http://www.julianstockwin.com/Life_Aboard.htm)but I don’t know how authoritative it is. One point to support the 14 inch figure is that 2 x 21 inches = 42 inches would be the width of a modern single bed. Not that cramped! Actually a quick google turns up references saying 15 inches, 17 inches, 16 inches, 19 inches and 21 inches. Maybe not very standardised. ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2009, 1:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/age-of-sail-question/490531/22 "2009-03-24T13:38:22Z")
William Golding’s _To the Ends of the Earth_ is an interesting look at life aboard a British warship in the Age of Sail. The movie is pretty good, too: [http://www.amazon.com/Ends-Earth-Benedict-Cumberbatch/dp/B000NJL4QC/ref=sr\_1\_1?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1237901551&sr=1-1](http://www.amazon.com/Ends-Earth-Benedict-Cumberbatch/dp/B000NJL4QC/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1237901551&sr=1-1) To overgeneralize: space was extremely limited, food was crappy, discipline was harsh and hygiene was poor. It’s no wonder the Admiralty resorted to press gangs to snag anyone who might be able to serve as a sailor - imagine being grabbed in the street by a bunch of sailors, dragged off to sea and kept away from home perhaps for years - and all legal, too! [Impressment - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impressment) ---
**Author:** ![Labrador\_Deceiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7c8e57/32.png) [@Labrador\_Deceiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Labrador_Deceiver)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2009, 1:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/age-of-sail-question/490531/23 "2009-03-24T13:43:36Z")
> [@Zsofia](#): > > You need a lot more men to run the guns than you would if you were just sailing the ship. It wasn’t “extra” people in the sense that the gun crews were obviously sailors, but you didn’t actually need that many sailors to sail the thing. That many men weren’t needed on a merchant ship, but the maneuvers needed to be performed very quickly in a Royal Navy ship. Instead of sending just a few men out on an arm, they could send 5 times as many and have the sails trimmed in a fraction of the time. ---
**Author:** ![MarcusF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/67e7ee/32.png) [@MarcusF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MarcusF)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2009, 1:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/age-of-sail-question/490531/24 "2009-03-24T13:46:43Z")
> [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](#): > > It’s no wonder the Admiralty resorted to press gangs to snag anyone who might be able to serve as a sailor - imagine being grabbed in the street by a bunch of sailors, dragged off to sea and kept away from home perhaps for years - and all legal, too! [Impressment - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impressment) Nowadays states just call it “conscription” or “selective sevice”:dubious: ---
**Author:** ![MarcusF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/67e7ee/32.png) [@MarcusF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MarcusF)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2009, 1:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/age-of-sail-question/490531/25 "2009-03-24T13:53:41Z")
> [@Princhester](#): > > Actually a quick google turns up references saying 15 inches, 17 inches, 16 inches, 19 inches and 21 inches. Maybe not very standardised. I’m not surprised\< ! \> It surely must have varied from period to period and ship to ship. Perhaps the 14 inches was the absolute minimum ever allowed. I’ll try and check some of my reference books when I’m home. ---
**Author:** ![MichaelQReilly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/df705f/32.png) [@MichaelQReilly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MichaelQReilly)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2009, 1:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/age-of-sail-question/490531/26 "2009-03-24T13:55:48Z")
I believe the Royal Navy officially allotted 18’ for each man’s sleeping hammock. Although in practice it was more because at any given time, a certain portion of the crew would be on watch. However, to the general question, yes, sailing ships were massively crowded. ---
**Author:** ![MichaelQReilly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/df705f/32.png) [@MichaelQReilly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MichaelQReilly)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2009, 2:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/age-of-sail-question/490531/27 "2009-03-24T14:04:01Z")
> [@MichaelQReilly](#): > > I believe the Royal Navy officially allotted 18’ for each man’s sleeping hammock. Although in practice it was more because at any given time, a certain portion of the crew would be on watch. However, to the general question, yes, sailing ships were massively crowded. Duh: Read then post. I see I was beat to it and that 14" was the correct number. :smack: ---
**Author:** ![Sailboat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sailboat/32/461_2.png) [@Sailboat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sailboat)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2009, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/age-of-sail-question/490531/28 "2009-03-24T15:10:10Z")
Lacking machinery and electronics, a lot of men were used for things like keeping lookout, taking in and letting out sail (requiring a lot of people), and various menial labor tasks like caulking and swabbing. Men might even be used from time to time as ballast, typically standing at the windward rail while the ship was heeling in strong wind. Also, in battle, there would be men assigned to repair duty, musketeers in the tophamper (okay, I just wanted to use a nautical word), gunners, powder monkeys, and various other combat-related duties – but you’d still need people to handle sails and rigging, and probably a lookout or two would be smart. Plus, not to put it delicately, on a warship you need extra crew to take over duties from people who will be killed or wounded in battle. Sailing ship warfare was profligate with the lives of crew. John Keegan (in _The Price of Admiralty_) makes the point that, despite all the talk about sinking and burning ships, black powder & sail warfare was mostly an exercise in crew-killing, not “ship-killing.” Few battles were won explicitly because one side had a lot of extra idle hands aboard, but plenty of battles were decided by crew casualties. So yes, these ships were crowded. ---
**Author:** ![brad\_d](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/50afbb/32.png) [@brad\_d](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brad_d)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2009, 3:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/age-of-sail-question/490531/29 "2009-03-24T15:59:10Z")
> [@Sailboat](#): > > John Keegan (in _The Price of Admiralty_) makes the point that, despite all the talk about sinking and burning ships, black powder & sail warfare was mostly an exercise in crew-killing, not “ship-killing.” I’m under the impression that in many (most?) engagements of the time, _sinking_ the other ship wasn’t generally the goal - _capturing_ it was. Especially if it was a merchant ship operating for the other side - the prize money paid out for such things was pretty significant. Ships were valuable items, and while it was possible to eventually blow a ship to matchsticks with the weapons of the day that usually involved such carnage among the crew that it would give up long before that happened. Instantaneous catastrophic damage that would sink a vessel outright wasn’t that easy to achieve - more commonly an accumulation of damage, the loss of one or more masts, and the death of many of his crew would cause a captain to strike his colors and surrender rather than fight an increasingly-lopsided battle to the bitter end. Boarding an opposing ship and subduing its crew in hand-to-hand combat wasn’t unusual, and sheer numbers were certainly an advantage in such a situation. When one did capture another ship, typically a sizeable chunk of the capturing ship’s crew would transfer over to the new acquisition to (a) sail it, and (b) keep the unfriendly crew under wraps. Factors like this encouraged staffing men-of-war with crews quite a bit larger than the minimum needed to operate the sails and guns. ---
**Author:** ![Damfino](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Damfino](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damfino)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2009, 6:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/age-of-sail-question/490531/30 "2009-03-24T18:46:00Z")
> [@Jolly\_Roger](#): > > \2 years ago in Amsterdam I went aboard a repilca of an old sailing ship. It was scaled to make more room for the hold. etc. But even then the Captain’s quarters were tiny. (ridiculously so, it destroyed the illusion. You cpouldn’t stand up in it..at least I couldn’t and I am just under 6 feet tall). \ The Duke of Clarence, the future King William IV, served in the Royal Navy. He obtained special permission for Royal Navy officers to drink the Loyal Toast while seated, since they were apt to knock their heads on the deck above when they rose to toast the King. ---
**Author:** ![Declan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ecae2f/32.png) [@Declan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Declan)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2009, 9:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/age-of-sail-question/490531/31 "2009-03-24T21:56:02Z")
> [@Sailboat](#): > > Plus, not to put it delicately, on a warship you need extra crew to take over duties from people who will be killed or wounded in battle. Sailing ship warfare was profligate with the lives of crew. John Keegan (in _The Price of Admiralty_) makes the point that, despite all the talk about sinking and burning ships, black powder & sail warfare was mostly an exercise in crew-killing, not “ship-killing.” Few battles were won explicitly because one side had a lot of extra idle hands aboard, but plenty of battles were decided by crew casualties. I would imagine as well to supply prize crews for ships taken in battle. Declan ---
**Author:** ![UncleRojelio](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/unclerojelio/32/3160_2.png) [@UncleRojelio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UncleRojelio)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2009, 10:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/age-of-sail-question/490531/32 "2009-03-24T22:06:22Z")
> [@brad\_d](#): > > Ships were valuable items, and while it was possible to eventually blow a ship to matchsticks with the weapons of the day that usually involved such carnage among the crew that it would give up long before that happened. Instantaneous catastrophic damage that would sink a vessel outright wasn’t that easy to achieve - more commonly an accumulation of damage, the loss of one or more masts, and the death of many of his crew would cause a captain to strike his colors and surrender rather than fight an increasingly-lopsided battle to the bitter end. I just finished reading [_The Billy Ruffian_](http://www.amazon.com/Billy-Ruffian-Bellerophon-Downfall-Napoleon/dp/158234468X/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1237931980&sr=8-1) (highly recommended, BTW) in which Cordingly states that it was very rare to sink a warship in the course of battle. In all the years of the Napoleonic Wars, some ships-of-the-line were purposefully burnt, some where driven onto rocks, and some exploded, but only a handful actually sustained enough damage to sink. ---
**Author:** ![MarcusF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/67e7ee/32.png) [@MarcusF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MarcusF)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2009, 11:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/age-of-sail-question/490531/33 "2009-03-24T23:58:19Z")
Going back to the crew of HMS Surprise I’ve found a breakdown of the complement of a 28 gun 6th rate (in _[The Wooden World, An anatomy of the Georgian Navy](http://www.amazon.co.uk/Wooden-World-Anatomy-Georgian-Navy/dp/0006861520)_, by N A M Rodger). As given in Master & Commander the total complement is 200, made up of: 1 Captain 1 Lieutenant 6 Warrant Sea Officers (the Master, Boatswain, Gunner, Surgeon, Carpenter, and Purser) 6 Inferior Warrant Officers (the Chaplain, Cook, Surgeon’s Mate, Master at Arms, etc) 28 Petty Officers incl 2 Master’s Mates and 4 Midshipmen (plus the Captain’s Clerk, Gunner’s Mate etc, etc) 5 Idlers (the Sailmaker’s Crew and Carpenter’s Crew) 20 Servants 4 Widows’ Men (No, I don’t know what they were!) 91 Seamen 38 Marines (1 Lieut, 1 Sgt, 1 Cpl, and 35 marines) This is actually from the period of the 7 Years War in the 1750s so it may have changed by 1812 when Captain Aubrey was captain of the Surprise and I strongly suspect a ship was rarely up to full strength. The same book gives the 14 inches to the hammock figure for a 74 of the same period but, unfortunately, does not give a source. ---
**Author:** ![yabob](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yabob/32/2821_2.png) [@yabob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yabob)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2009, 12:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/age-of-sail-question/490531/34 "2009-03-25T00:14:53Z")
Widow’s men were fictional sailors maintained on official ships complements. So called because their wages went to the widows of deceased seamen. Wiki has an article on the practice: > **[Widow's man](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Widows%27_man)** > > A widow's man was a fictitious seaman kept on the books of Royal Navy ships during the 18th and early 19th centuries so that their pay and rations could be redistributed to the families of dead crew members. This financial arrangement helped keep widows from being left destitute following the death of their seafaring husbands. > The number of widows' men on a ship was proportional to the ship's size. A first-rate might have as many as eighteen, while a sixth-rate might have only three. The ratio ... ---
**Author:** ![Ring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Ring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ring)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2009, 1:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/age-of-sail-question/490531/35 "2009-03-25T01:40:45Z")
If you want to, in detail, _see_ what it was like get Biesty’s _Cross Sections Man-Of-War._ It blew me away. Absolutely stunning. > **[Amazon.com: Stephen Biesty's Cross-Sections: Man-Of-War: 9781564583215: Richard...](https://www.amazon.com/Stephen-Biestys-Cross-Sections-Man-War/dp/156458321X)** > > Amazon.com: Stephen Biesty's Cross-Sections: Man-Of-War: 9781564583215: Richard Platt, Stephen Biesty: Books ---
**Author:** ![Ring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Ring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ring)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2009, 1:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/age-of-sail-question/490531/36 "2009-03-25T01:44:18Z")
Or Stowaway. > **[Stephen Biesty's Incredible Cross-Sections Stowaway!: Windows: Biesty, Stephen:...](https://www.amazon.com/Stephen-Biestys-Incredible-Cross-sections-Stowawa/dp/156458903X)** > > Stephen Biesty's Incredible Cross-Sections Stowaway!: Windows \[Biesty, Stephen\] on Amazon.com. \*FREE\* shipping on qualifying offers. Stephen Biesty's Incredible Cross-Sections Stowaway!: Windows > [@](#): > > The detail and depth of layering in the information is astounding. Each deck shows different aspects of life aboard ship, and each section (fore to aft) shows different conditions (in port, in battle, etc.) that the sailors could experience. There are terrific narrations and pronunciations, all in British dialect. Each role aboard ship from Admiral to Cook is outlined in journal style. The art is just as good as that in the book; if you know and like Biesty’s work, you’ll not be disappointed. The animation is amusing and pulls no punches about the brutality of shipboard experience, from the condition of the food to the rigors of combat. Be forewarned: naval battles see their share of severed limbs, splinter wounds and drowning men, ---
**Author:** ![dropzone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dropzone/32/7515_2.png) [@dropzone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dropzone)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2009, 2:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/age-of-sail-question/490531/37 "2009-03-25T02:04:58Z")
> [@Sailboat](#): > > John Keegan (in _The Price of Admiralty_)… Wish I had the book handy for exact numbers, but Keegan makes that point that **just** _HMS Victory,_ carrying 100 guns, outgunned Napoleon’s artillery at Waterloo, not even taking into account the enormous size difference between the guns. IIRC, he said that it wasn’t until the _Dreadnoughts_ and their ilk that a single ship packed the same throw weight as a broadside from a Ship of the Line. Fifty guns per side, 100 guns if shooting from both, and a minimum of four guys per gun WHILE maneuvering under sail = One hell of a lot of men. ---
**Author:** ![Superfluous\_Parentheses](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8edcca/32.png) [@Superfluous\_Parentheses](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Superfluous_Parentheses)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2009, 2:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/age-of-sail-question/490531/38 "2009-03-25T02:07:32Z")
> [@Sailboat](#): > > Plus, not to put it delicately, on a warship you need extra crew to take over duties from people who will be killed or wounded in battle. Sailing ship warfare was profligate with the lives of crew. John Keegan (in _The Price of Admiralty_) makes the point that, despite all the talk about sinking and burning ships, black powder & sail warfare was mostly an exercise in crew-killing, not “ship-killing.” Few battles were won explicitly because one side had a lot of extra idle hands aboard, but plenty of battles were decided by crew casualties. I believe survey has been mentioned in this thread, but on long trips and back **scurvy alone** could kill off 30% or more of the crew, and definite protection against it (i.e. getting vitamin C in fresh fruit/raw meat/saurkraut) was only generally accepted in the late 18th century). ---
**Author:** ![Sailboat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sailboat/32/461_2.png) [@Sailboat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sailboat)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2009, 2:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/age-of-sail-question/490531/39 "2009-03-25T02:37:38Z")
> [@brad\_d](#): > > I’m under the impression that in many (most?) engagements of the time, _sinking_ the other ship wasn’t generally the goal - _capturing_ it was. I suppose I should clarify – I _believe_ Keegan was addressing a particular fad among historians for arguing about exactly when “ship killing” replaced “man killing” as the principal means of victory at sea, and some historians’ tendency to explain Nelson’s victories as “ship killing” because he “broke the line from windward” – a re-evaluation with which Keegan did not agree (holding that Trafalgar was a man-killing battle and, as you said, that sinkings were rare). ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2009, 3:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/age-of-sail-question/490531/40 "2009-03-25T03:03:26Z")
> [@robby](#): > > I was an officer on a _Los Angeles_-class nuclear submarine back in the 1990s, and junior sailors still routinely “hot-racked.” Typically, three sailors on different watches shared two racks (i.e. bunks). U.S. submarines operate using three 6-hour “watches” (i.e. three rotating shifts), so one of the three sailors will always be on watch, and the other two can sleep. > > Some of the racks even had curved adaptors on the bottom so that they could be strapped on top of stowed torpedoes! My brother slept in these. Saved him from hot racking - though it screwed up his rest if they were moving torpedoes around. He served on the USS Boise and Tucson in the mid-90s. Were either of these your boats? I visited both - it’s like living under a car hood. Very different from my nice roomy CG. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/age-of-sail-question/490531.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/age-of-sail-question/490531.md?page=3)