Research Results
Page 4
James C. Bender has some
documents from the Dutch archives that he is transcribing and translating.
As some of this information has not been previously published, this seemed
worth making available, rather early in the analysis process.
Rotterdam Ships on February 26, 1652
James C. Bender
The Rotterdam document
from February 26, 1652, it turns out, has all of the measurements in
12-inch feet (a marginal note). While most lists assume that all
measurements are in Amsterdam feet that are divided into 11 inches, and
are about 283 mm in length, the 12-inch feet are Rhineland feet, measuring
308 mm. This actually explains a great deal, as the dimensions listed in
this document would mean that these ships would be very small for the
armaments listed.
The Society for Nautical
Research publication, Lists of Men of War, in the Dutch section, lists
dimensions as if they were all of the same measurement system. There is a
mixture, as we see here, of Rhineland (Rijnland) feet and Amsterdam feet.
G. C. Dik's book points out that the Dutch flagship, built in 1665, the
Zeven Provincien, was measured in Rotterdam feet of 282.3 mm. I had
thought that the Rotterdam foot was equivalent to the Rhineland foot, but
this was obviously wrong. A nice side effect of applying the conversion
for Rhineland feet to Amstedam feet to the ships in this list is that they
now line up with the known "charters" for their contemporaries.
We shall compare the
Rhineland and Amsterdam measurements (broadly rounded) for representative
ships from the list:
Brederode, 53 guns
| Rhineland
length: |
132
ft |
Amsterdam
length: |
144
ft |
| Rhineland
beam: |
32
ft-4 in |
Amsterdam beam: |
45
ft |
| Rhineland
depth: |
13
ft |
Amsterdam depth: |
14
ft |
Gelderland, 40 guns
| Rhineland
length: |
118
ft |
Amsterdam length: |
125
ft |
| Rhineland
beam: |
28
ft |
Amsterdam beam: |
30.5
ft |
| Rhineland
depth: |
12.5
ft |
Amsterdam depth: |
13.5
ft |
Princess Roijaal Marie, 34 guns
| Rhineland
length: |
114
ft |
Amsterdam length: |
124
ft |
| Rhineland
beam: |
27
ft |
Amsterdam beam: |
29.5
ft |
| Rhineland
depth: |
12
ft |
Amsterdam depth: |
13
ft |
Princess Louise, 36 guns
| Rhineland
length: |
110
ft |
Amsterdam length: |
120
ft |
| Rhineland
beam: |
26
ft |
Amsterdam beam: |
28.25
ft |
| Rhineland
depth: |
11.5
ft |
Amsterdam depth: |
12.5
ft |
Dolphijn, 28 guns
| Rhineland
length: |
110
ft |
Amsterdam length: |
120
ft |
| Rhineland
beam: |
25.5
ft |
Amsterdam beam: |
27.75
ft |
| Rhineland
depth: |
12.5
ft |
Amsterdam depth: |
13.5
ft |
Gorcum, 30 guns
| Rhineland
length: |
106
ft |
Amsterdam length: |
116
ft |
| Rhineland
beam: |
25
ft |
Amsterdam beam: |
27.25
ft |
| Rhineland
depth: |
10
ft |
Amsterdam depth: |
11
ft |
Gelderland, 20 guns
| Rhineland
length: |
100
ft |
Amsterdam length: |
109
ft |
| Rhineland
beam: |
23
ft |
Amsterdam beam: |
25
ft |
| Rhineland
depth: |
8
ft |
Amsterdam depth: |
8.75
ft |
There are many Rotterdam
ships that these general dimensions, in the various lists, so we need to
apply the same conversion to those, as well. The ships built in the First
Dutch War building program (the two 30-ship programs) are probably all
measured in Amsterdam feet (or the nearly identical Rotterdam feet of
282.3mm), so we need not apply any conversion there. For example, the new
Dutch fleet flagship, built by Rotterdam, the
Eendracht, 150 feet long, 38 feet in
beam, and 15 feet in depth, is probably best assumed to be in Amsterdam
feet. The conversion between Amsterdam and Rotterdam feet is about a tenth
of one percent, so we can probably neglect the difference.
Another consequence of
this is that the Aemelia
drawing needs to be revised, as the assumption was that the Aemelia
measurements were in Amsterdam feet. The Aemelia
was known to be of the same (or similar) dimensions to the Brederode,
so there will be replcement drawing, in due time.
|
READ ABOUT:
BACK
UP
