breadth, as her beam of 47 ft. must have rendered her somewhat of a tub in shape. When we compare her with a modern ship of war, the difference is startling; against the 1,546 tons of the Britannia we have to-day war ships such as the Cæsar, Hannibal, &c., of 14,900. Wollett's engraving of the naval engagement off La Hogue, in France,' shows the build of ships of war of the period (that is, so far as we may rely on the correctness of B. West's drawing). The engagement took place under command of Admiral Russell, on board the Britannia, against the French, in 1692, about four years after our MS. was written. Of the Royal Charles, which appears in our MS. as a first-rate, I am able to insert an illustration, thanks to the courtesy of Messrs. Sampson Low, Marston, & Co., who used the plate in Clowes' Royal Navy, vol. ii. Our list shows that this ship was built in 1673, carried 100 guns, was 131 ft. long, 424 ft. wide, and of 1,441 tons burden. She at one time served as Prince Rupert's flag-ship. The original sketch by a Florentine artist, DellaBella (born 1610, died 1664), gives a good idea of the elaborate decoration of the stern of a ship of the period, a feature which is well shown in the illustration of the (?) Victory.3 Speaking of such vessels, a recent writer1 says:"antique-looking ships, short-bodied, high-sterned, snub-nosed, the bowsprit thrust up at a sharp angle, and carrying a tiny mast with a square sail at its extremity. A modern seaman would gaze amazed at the spectacle of a seventeenth-century fleet, luffing clumsily into line, or trying to claw to windward. And yet the fighting quality of these clumsy fleets was of a very high order." A word as to the cost of ships of war in those days. We find the Royal Sovereign, one of the largest ships in James the Second's navy, cost £29,840--to-day our large men-of-war are said to cost over £1,000,000. Another point of interest suggested by this part of our MS. is the perpetuation of ships' names; for instance, the 1 This engraving was exhibited at the meeting. 2 Exhibited at the meeting by Mr. G. Patrick. 3 Kindly lent by the publishers of Mr. Clowes' book. 4 The Rev. W. H. Fitchett, in Cornhill Magazine, Feb., 1898. It name Royal Sovereign was used so early as 1485. occurs in this list, and there is a ship of the same name in the English navy to-day. Prince Battenberg's Men of War Names (1897) gives dates of the first use of the following names, which our MS. shows were used in the 17th century, and the same names are in use in our present navy. Britannia (1682), St. George (1622), Neptune (1664), Victory (1560), Triumph (1561), Eagle (1650), Royal Oak (1663), Cambridge (1666), Edgar (1668), Swiftsure (1573), Defiance (1590), Dreadnought (1573), and many more. The oldest ship named in our MS. is the Victory (built in 1620), a name which reminds us of Nelson's flag-ship, now resting on the waters of Portsmouth Harbour after an existence of 133 years. I would note the Sedgemore-named, no doubt, in honour of James the Second's victory over the unfortunate Duke of Monmouth on July 6th, 1685. This vessel seems to have enjoyed but a short existence built in 1687, she was lost in St. Margaret's Bay, Jan. 2nd, 1689.1 The name Harwich appears in our MS. to a ship of 987 tons, built in 1674. This name reminds me that, about 1676, Silas Taylor, alias Domville, who was keeper of the King's stores at Harwich, and a lover of antiquities, made many MS. notes which were amplified by Samuel Dale in his History and Antiquities of Harwich and Dovercourt, published in 1730. Amongst a mass of antiquarian matter in his book we find reference to various ships built in the town in the 17th century. He describes the Harwich thus : "A very beautiful Ship and swift Sailer . . . . with Balconies and Galleries, partly imitating the setting off of some of the French Men of War . upon whom in her Name his Majesty [Charles II.] was graciously pleased to honour this Borough." Hannay refers to this ship as being built by Sir Antony Deane after the model of the Superbe, a French ship of 74 guns. 1 Clowes' Royal Navy, vol. ii, p. 535 (1898). 2 Short History of the Royal Navy, p. 332 (1898). That she proved satisfactory is evident, as Pepys in 1675 wrote, "The Harwich carries the bell from the whole fleet, great and small." But, alas! she was wrecked near Plymouth in 1691. Taylor also mentions the Fan-Fan (which is included in our MS. as a sloop of 33 tons burden), and gives a rather interesting account. She seems to have been one of two sloops intended to clear small enemies from the sands before Harwich Harbour," then much infested with small Dutch pickaroons. When, in 1666, we were at war with Holland, the English fleet, under command of Prince Rupert and the Duke of Albemarle, was near by Harwich, while the Dutch fleet lay off the harbour under command of Admiral De Ruyter. A letter written to King Charles II. by the English commanders tells us of the plucky impudence of the captain of this little Fan-Fan. On Thursday morning [July 26, 1666], it being very calm, and the Enemy to windward of them, a small new Sloop of two Guns, built the other Day at Harwich, made up with his Oars towards the Dutch Fleet and drawing both his Guns to one side, very formally attacked De Ruyter, (in the Admiral's Ship of Holland) and continued this honourable Fight so long, till she had received two or three Shots from him between Wind and Water; to the great Laughter and Delight of our Fleet, and the Indignation and Reproach of the Enemy." The ships Tiger, Marigold (4th rates), Date Tree, and Orange Tree (5th rates), appear in our list without any particulars, but from other of Battine's MSS. we learn that these vessels were "taken from the Turks," which may mean from the coasts of the Mediterranean. Clowes' Royal Navy tells the fate of many of the ships in our list: some were wrecked, some burnt, and some taken by the French; among the vessels captured by them were the Elizabeth, Grafton, Hampton Court, Mary Rose, Nonsuch, Portsmouth, and Constant Warwick. The great storm of Nov. 1703, probably the most terrible from which England ever suffered, in addition to the destruction it wrought on land, destroyed the 1 Adm. Letters iv., 161, quoted in Eng. Hist. Review, xii, p. 699. |
