Deadeyes

[Gregory]

I'm reading through the book " Legacy of a Ship Model " by Rob Napier .  

Something I noticed, and have seen on other contemporary models, is that the deadeyes are almost spherical  .

Does anyone know if this was just a modeling convention, or if actual practice ever consisted of deadeyes shaped like this? 

[Bob Cleek]

I believe you are correct. My understanding is that the earlier hand-made deadeyes had convex faces and the later machine-made deadeyes had flat faces. It was believed that the convex-faced deadeyes were favored as the better form, but cost considerations prevailed. My copy of The Rigging of Ships: in the Days of the Spritsail Topmast, 1600-1720, By R. C. Anderson, a common reference work on the subject, isn't immediately handy at the moment, but my online research resources indicate that the subject is addressed on page 93 of that book. I'm sure a period wonk can give you the whole story on the question. 
 

 

 

Edited February 17 by Bob Cleek

[Dr PR]

R. C. Anderson's "Seventeenth Century Rigging" (Model & ALlied Publications, Ltd., England, 1974, page 50) says:

 

"The diameter of the dead-eyes should be about 1/2 that of the mast to which they belong. They should bulge in the middle and go quite thin at the edge; modern machine-made dead-eyes are usually much too flat faced."

[allanyed]

FWIW James Lees gives the following information on page 168 in The Masting and Rigging of English Ships of War:

The thickness was slightly more than half their diameter, which was  1 1/2 times the circumference of the shroud or stay.   The groove round the deadeyes fitted to the chains was as wide as the link of the chains, those that fitted the shrouds or stays were the diameter of the appropriate shroud or stay.  However when shrouds were turned in the cutter-stay fashion, the groove was a little wider to take both parts of the shroud.  The depth was half the diameter of the rope or link.     

 

The circumference of the lower stays was 1/2 the diameter of the mast and the shroud was 0.6 that of the stay.

Allan

 

Edited February 18 by allanyed

[Mark P]

As a piece of interesting trivia, the earlier name for these items was 'dead men eyes'. This was especially apt when they were triangualar rather than round, making the resemblance to a skull face more obvious. 

 

All the best,

 

Mark P

[Bob Cleek]

17 hours ago, Dr PR said:

R. C. Anderson's "Seventeenth Century Rigging" (Model & ALlied Publications, Ltd., England, 1974, page 50) says:

 

"The diameter of the dead-eyes should be about 1/2 that of the mast to which they belong. They should bulge in the middle and go quite thin at the edge; modern machine-made dead-eyes are usually much too flat faced."

You found it! I went looking for my copy of The Rigging of Ships: in the Days of the Spritsail Topmast, 1600-1720 and found my 1935 (first?) edition of Seventeenth Century Rigging and checked it first and found his reference there as well.  My copy of "Spritsail Topmast" is somewhere in the piles of modeling books that I'm somewhere in the interrupted and long-delayed reorganization of my library. One of these days, I've got to get that job finished.  

[Dr PR]

Bob,

 

I was looking for my copy of "Spritsail Topmast" - but can't find it - when I came across Anderson's book!

 

Now I am wondering if I actually have "Spritsail Topmast." I have picked up many books about ships and ship modelling over the years from used book stores (when there were such things) and maybe I just thought I had that book.

[Bob Cleek]

8 hours ago, Dr PR said:

Bob,

 

I was looking for my copy of "Spritsail Topmast" - but can't find it - when I came across Anderson's book!

 

Now I am wondering if I actually have "Spritsail Topmast." I have picked up many books about ships and ship modelling over the years from used book stores (when there were such things) and maybe I just thought I had that book.

 

Phil,

 

I've got the same problem.  In the days before the internet, I'd spend long lunch hours (an advantage of being self-employed) scouring the dusty, musty back stacks of used bookstores for maritime reference books and amassed quite a collection for what were at that time amazingly inexpensive acquisitions by today's standards. The pickings were good because I live in the San Francisco Bay Area and maritime books were far more common in this major seaport than elsewhere far from the sea. Now I spend the same amount of time online searching for used books, but it lacks the tactile enjoyment of the old brick and mortar used bookstores and the odds of finding a treasure the bookseller undervalued are practically nil because it only takes them a minute to Google a used title and see what it's selling for these days.

 

The bookshelves which took up every available space in the house and then the piles of un-shelved books started exceeding the limits of my dearly beloved's patience. Fortunately, I have a large workshop and office building on the property and will be framing in an additional drafting room and library into which all the bookcases will be moved, I've got about 35 running feet of six-foot-tall bookcases that will be about three-quarters full of books when all is said and done. The "silver lining" is that there isn't a whole lot of "must have" old classic references that I haven't already found over the years. The "downside" is that there seem to be a lot more new ones coming out in recent years than there used to be and they are harder to find used at "bargain basement" prices.  I, too, find myself now and again trying to remember whether I have a particular volume or not. I am sure, though, that I do have a first edition of Anderson's "Spritsail Topmast." It's a little dark blue or maybe black covered hardbound book that requires a magnifying glass to read the drawing notations. 

 

I've been collecting naval architecture, maritime-associated trades, and ship modeling books and periodicals for a bit over fifty years now. Friends marvel at how many I've amassed, but it's really not been difficult at all. Picking up just a book a week on average for fifty years totals 2,400 books and, in my case, I've been lucky enough to have a friend or two for various reasons passed their collections on to me along the way. The younger modelers today have it so much easier than we did in this respect. Before the internet, we were pretty much on our own when it came to research resources, and we had to have a shelf or three of books to provide access to the essential information that is now contained in one or two of the newer comprehensive reference works published in the last twenty or thirty years. Moreover, most of the "old classics" are now readily available to modelers in trade paperback reprints while we had to scrounge. long out-of-print used hardcover editions. 

 

You can never have too many books or too many tools. He who dies with the most toys wins!  

 

Edited February 18 by Bob Cleek

[ferretmary1]

Bob - Just a suggestion - in your 'spare' time, start cataloging your books for the sake of your 'dearly beloved'.  That way your spouse or family won't have the arduous task of having to sort through them all some day.  A lot of great libraries end up in a dumpster because the owner's family was too overwhelmed to deal with it.  If there are certain books that you want to go to certain people, put an index card inside the book with a note that says "Please give this book to .......", and list their contact information.  Let your family know that some of the books have such cards inside, so they know to check for them.  Every year we deal with family members trying to figure out what to do with books and models left behind by a parent or spouse.

 

Mary

[popeye2sea]

My edition of 'Spritsail Topmast' has the information for deadeyes in the section for the standing rigging of the fore and main mast starting on page 93.

 

Regards,

Henry

[Bob Cleek]

8 hours ago, ferretmary1 said:

Bob - Just a suggestion - in your 'spare' time, start cataloging your books for the sake of your 'dearly beloved'.  That way your spouse or family won't have the arduous task of having to sort through them all some day.  A lot of great libraries end up in a dumpster because the owner's family was too overwhelmed to deal with it.  If there are certain books that you want to go to certain people, put an index card inside the book with a note that says "Please give this book to .......", and list their contact information.  Let your family know that some of the books have such cards inside, so they know to check for them.  Every year we deal with family members trying to figure out what to do with books and models left behind by a parent or spouse.

 

Mary

 

An excellent suggestion, Mary, but I have no intention of "crossing the bar" before she does!  

 

Doing exactly as you suggest has been on my "to do" list for some time now. I also have rescued more than a few books from the dumpsters over the years, to be sure. The same principles apply to tools. I do have a habit of keeping the sales receipt for books in the book itself, which could be helpful to some extent, but while I've never "lost money" on a book, I've seen a lot of them lose substantial value when someone came out with a reprint of a highly desireable reference volume, as seems to happen with a fair degree of regularity these days. I plan to at least put "post it" notes with the date and value in the ones I know ought to be particularly valuable. I have no idea how to deal with the tools. I've got a few that most wouldn't have any idea what they were for and others that, well, I wasn't particularly forthcoming with her about how much they cost when I purchased them...  

 

[ferretmary1]

My husband doesn't plan to die until he has all of his models built.  Looking at the stacks in his workshop, I think he will live to be 355 yrs old!

I know my beads and gemstones will go in a dumpster if I die first.  He has no interest in rehoming my stuff.  😜

[Gregory]

Dead.  Deadeyes..  I guess we're still on topic..😁

[Bob Cleek]

1 hour ago, ferretmary1 said:

My husband doesn't plan to die until he has all of his models built.  Looking at the stacks in his workshop, I think he will live to be 355 yrs old!

I know my beads and gemstones will go in a dumpster if I die first.  He has no interest in rehoming my stuff.  😜

Don't kid yourself. He'll hock the family jewels the first chance he gets and use the money to buy more models to support his habit. Those kit junkies are all the same!  

[Bob Cleek]

51 minutes ago, Gregory said:

Dead.  Deadeyes..  I guess we're still on topic..😁

What's a little thread drift among friends?  

[wefalck]

Started catalogueing all my books nearly years ago. I am currently at no. 3514. Not all maritime though, lots of art books, 19th century engineering,  and literature as well. Sadly we had to give most of my parents' library of another 3500 or so.  I always carry a pdf of the latest MS Excel spreadsheet on my telephone in case I run across something interesting in a used bookstore - prevents me from buying duplicated.

 

I largely stopped buying pre-1900 books in recent years (with some exceptions), as much of it is now available as digital copies. Saves money and space on my overflowing bookcases (30' x 8').

 

BTW. Everything that is marked with a 'B' in this list is an original hardcopy: https://www.maritima-et-mechanika.org/maritime/maritimebibliographies/maritimebibliography.pdf.

 

But that was actually thread-drift. Back to the original question:

 

By the middle of the 19th century, blocks and deadeyes were virtually flat on the surfaces. They were much easier to machine that way. Block- and deadeye-making machines were basically the first template-controlled lathes and milling-machines.