Introduction of royal yards to the Royal Navy

[Mark P]

Greetings Fellow Modellers!

 

Does anyone out there have knowledge of the introduction of royal yards and sails in the Royal Navy?  The 'Sovereign of the Seas' had them in 1637,  but she was an early exception.  James Lees,  in his 'Masting & Rigging' says that they were introduced for the fore and main masts in 1779,  then states that the general introduction of royals on all masts was in 1790. 

 

I am researching at the moment,  prior to scratch-building a model of 'HMS Tremendous' a 74-gun ship launched in 1784.  This falls between the two dates cited by Lees,  so presumably she would have royals on the fore and main masts;  the problem is that Lees is not specific in saying which classes of vessel had royals from 1779;  maybe it was only first and second rates?

 

If royals were fitted on the fore and main masts of all ships from 1779,  why would they then need to be 'generally introduced' at a later date?  They would only then need to be added to the mizzen mast if already present on the other masts.

 

Can anyone point me to examples of usage or relevant texts in the period between these two dates.  Steel is too late.

 

Many thanks for any suggestions/pointers

[druxey]

I think that 1784 is way too early for royals in the Navy, despite Lees' assertion that they were introduced 1779. I suspect close to the turn of the century would be realistic. Phoebe, 1795 (NMM SLR0585) has royals, as has Impregnable c.1800 (SLR0610). However, a frigate of 1805 (SLR0346) does not carry royals, showing that royals were not yet adopted universally.

[Mark P]

Thank you Druxey;

 

Your reply chimes with my instinct.  I have not noticed royals on any of the models I have looked at,  and I feel that they belong in the same era as the flying jibboom and its sail.  It was only when I noticed Lees' assertion that I considered the likelihood of them being fitted. 

 

As I would suspect that frigates would be amongst the first vessels to be fitted with royals,  it is useful to know that even in 1805 they were not universal to such ships.

 

Many thanks!

 

On a different topic,  I notice that your picture is of a ship's boat,  and looks like a very neat piece of work.  Can you tell me how you make the shell or framework,  on which to build the planking.  I know of several methods,  and as I have yet to try any of them,  I am interested in others' opinions and methods (Whilst I am researching and drawing my chosen vessel,  I am making the cannon & ship's boats)

 

Once again,  many thanks for any advice.

 

Mark P

[cardely]

Hello there, I have come across several sources emphasizing the lag of what was authorized behind the contemporary practice.

 

As I can recall, Harland's Seaman ship, the "Line of battle" in Conway's history of ship, and Henderson's "Frigate", and a PhD treatise called "frigate captains of Royal navy 1793-1815" (downloaded for free from google), all have mentioned or indicated the use of royals years before formal authorization by RN, particularlly by frigate captains commanding detached forces out of the supervision of their commodores.

 

Also, in "Rigging of period ship models" a 36-gun frigate of 1785 is with simple royals (witj no clewlines) on all three. But this book clearly dipects an idealized model, with sails both over and under the bowsprit...

 

Similarly, in the "74 gun ship", it is plainly stated the only reason to include the bowsprit in the text is that it is established by the navy, although in reality it had fallen out of the comtemporary use.

 

So it is really up to one's own choice, as long as he has good reason to believe it.

[Mark P]

Hi Cardely,  and many thanks for taking the time to reply.  I think that I will follow my own instinct,  and omit royals,  just have flagpoles above the top gallants.

 

Can you tell me what is the full title and publisher of the '74 gun ship' which you mention,  as I am not familiar with this,  and it sounds just like the sort of book I should add to my reference library.

 

Once again,  many thanks.

 

Mark P

[cardely]

These are English translation of Jean Boundriot's 74-gun ship in 4 volumes, published some 3 decades ago, although not out of print, now only availible from UK, the accompanying pictures are awosome, the descriptions are to the last detail.

 

ISBN vol 1: 2-903178-14-3; vol 2: 2-903178-15-1; vol 3 2-903178-16-X; vol 4 odered, en route to China.

 

If you want to save money, I have the electronic version of first 3 vol., you can leave an e-mail address, I will create a private link for you from my netdisk, but I cannot guarantee free access from abroad China...

[Mark P]

Dear Cardely;

 

Thanks for the information;  I had forgotten about Boudriot.  I will be visiting the Caird Library at the Maritime Museum next week,  and I will take a look at their copy to see what it is like.

 

Many thanks,

 

Mark P

[mtaylor]

Be careful.  The 74-gun ship deals with French ships of a given period.  They did many things differently than the British.

[Mark P]

Dear mtaylor;

 

This was my thought also.  I have seen enough draughts of French vessels to know that they were very different,  and generally more lightly built than British equivalents.  As I have never seen his publication,  I just was not sure if Boudriot dealt exclusively with French ships,  or if he also covered some British ones. 

 

I thank you for saving me the trouble of looking through the Museum's copy;  I have a list of things to look at already,  and little enough time to do it in.

 

Many thanks,

 

Mark P

[mtaylor]

No problem, Mark.   Boudriot's books are well worth the time and money if have an interest in seeing how things were done by the French.  I don't have the 74-gun series but I would love to read it just "because". 

[Mark P]

Dear mtaylor;

 

I notice that you are building a model of Licorne;  maybe it is not the same vessel,  and having regard to your experience you are probably already aware of it,  but as part of my research,  I have spent a long time looking at the NMMs collection of 'as built' draughts,  and there is a drawing of 'Licorne' (1755) there,  as captured in 1778.

 

Kind regards,

 

Mark P

[mtaylor]

Mark,

 

That's the one.    Taken in as HMS Licorne and as I've discovered, it apparently have a major rebuild at some point as the "as bullt" is different then drawings "as captured'. 

[Mark P]

Hello again;

 

Again,  you are probably aware of this,  but just in case it might be new information,  the NMM website catalogue note says against the 'as captured' draught that Licorne was docked at Portsmouth on 17th September 1778,  and was undocked on 2nd November the same year.  As this is only six weeks it is not enough for a major refit,  but some changes must have occurred during this time.

 

Kind regards,

 

Mark P

[mtaylor]

Mark,

 

PM Sent so we don't hijack this topic.  I'm aware.   

[Force9]

Robert Gardiner in his recent history of frigates using NMM ship models notes that the royal poles became standard on frigates in 1779 (and the flying jib boom in 1794).  It is likely that they were commonly utilized prior to becoming standard issue.  As noted, the royal yards were usually set "flying"... Rigged from the deck and hoisted into position without buntlines.  Sometimes they would be tied to the upper shrouds for storage (I think I've seen that on at least one model - can't recall where...).

 

EG

[Mark P]

Hi EG;

 

Many thanks for your message.  The information is helpful,  especially as I have Gardiner's book.  I will take a look at it again.

 

I too have seen references to royal yards being lashed to the upper shrouds for storage,  although I haven't yet seen it on any models.  Such a method certainly seems sensible.

 

Once again,  many thanks.

 

Mark P

[michaelpsutton2]

One of the earliest models i know of showing royals is the Fair American in the Naval Academy Museum. Although the date of thaqt model is by no means certain. The lengths for royal are given in the tables of my 1790 Steel's.

 

On would think that Royals began to be used as "kites" in the 1770's and were formalized in the next decade. The first royals were set flying. That is the hoisted to the top of the topgallant pole pretty much like a flag with no parrel to hold it tight against the mast. The yard would not have had braces either.

[Mark P]

Hi Michael;

 

Many thanks for your reply.  I think that I will construct my model with long pole topgallants on the fore and main masts,  and have a royal yard lashed to the topgallant shrouds. 

 

I was not aware of an edition of Steel from 1790;  I thought his earliest was 1795.  Is this 'Elements of mast-making and rigging'  or something else?

 

If it is from 1790,  then his comments will be relevant to my vessel.  I shall be at the NMM on Tuesday,  and I will check out their copy (the list of Steel's works is several pages long in the Library catalogue,  and it is sometimes difficult to know if two entries are referring to two different books,  or the same book under its sub-title)

 

Kind regards,

 

Mark P

[druxey]

Enjoy the Caird Library, Mark!

[jbshan]

Boudroit:  74 Gun Ship covers one ship which he put together from a multitude of sources.  It is a generic ship design.  The full work is, as stated, in four volumes, weighing about 25 pounds, and the last time I looked, the set cost, used, from $563 to $1473.  It is certainly worth looking at, if nothing else to see the work of a master.  To prove you've read them, you have to report back on what the ship's boy is doing outboard of the catheads in I believe it is the third volume.

Royals:  Early royals were indeed set on a long pole head t'gallant mast and properly called t'gallant royals.  They were set flying, no lifts or braces and sheeted to the t'gallant yard.  They were stowed along the shrouds, with the butt on the lower mast top.  Large and later ships set them from a fidded royal mast and they were called royals.  Certainly fair weather sails, they had no reefing mechanism and could only be brought in and struck.  If you see a painting showing long pole heads to the t'gallants on a ship, she COULD have carried them, though it is not proof.  Once royals became common, skysails began to be carried by some extremely tall ships, in the same manner.

Fair American model:  The rigging on this model was done in the 1920s shortly after the model was acquired by Mr. Rogers.  There is written documentation stating that this was the case, by the man who did the work.

[michaelpsutton2]

You can imagine that the royal yards were introduce gradually. By this I mean early on they were lash up affairs made with spare spars. There was almost certainly a period when they were set "flying" with no braces or clue lines and were taken down poles yards and all instead of being furled.

 

Think about the gunter skysails on the USS Constitution early in the 19th century as compared to the permanent ones on McKay's and Webb's clipper 25 years later. It is a maturing and refining process at work.

[Sailor1234567890]

I was in France earlier this year at the maritime museum in Toulon. I picked up 3 of the 4 volumes. They didn't have volume 3 in English. If I ever come across it, I'll probably grab it. I think I paid something like 500 Euro for the three books. They were new and still in the plastic wrapper they came in. They had some well thumbed examples of French versions of it and all of them in French new but were unfortunately missing the 3rd English volume.