Name (required):

  Expression ^{(Optional mood/title along with your name) Examples: (happy, sad, The Joyful, etc.) help)}

  E-mail address (optional):

* Type your message here:
>Ruyter > >Neither the 1653 "<b>Instructions for the better >ordering of the fleet in fighting</b>" issued by the >Generals at Sea (Blake, Deane and Monck), nor the Duke >of Yorks 1665 "<b>Instructions for the better ordering >his majesty's fleet in time of fighting</b>" (which >were largely a re-issue of the above) include a >stipulation as to distance between ships. > >Both merely contain a requirment "<em>...to bear up >into his [flagships] wake, and grain upon severest >punishment.</em>" (or equivalent). Grain in this >context meaning in line with and ahead of, the >opposite of wake. > >By 1665 this had been extended to include that ships >of the three squadrons "<em>...are to make what sail >they can to come up and put themselves into the place >and order which shall have been directed them before >in the order of battle</em>" > >You should also bear in mind that during the >Anglo-Dutch wars a line of battle was a new form of >fighting and the lines would be rather >higgledy-piggledy rather than nice straight geometric >shapes. > >Cy > >>>Calculating that in the Battles of 1653 there where >>>some 100-120 ships forming a line, taking 30 meters >>>length to each ship, I estimated that there were some >>>50 meters on average between two ships. >> >>The line of battle as the common fighting formation >>had not been developed yet in 1653, and the fleets did >>not include 200 ships apiece, so there were no >>200-ship lines of battle. Battles with 100 ships in >>line were rare. According to Carl Ballhausen, <i>Der >>erste englische-holländische Seekrieg, 1652–1654, >>sowie der schwedisch-holländische Seekrieg, >>1658-1659</i> (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1923), >>hull counts for some battles were: >><b>Kentish Knock, Sept. 28/Oct. 8, 1652</b> >>English: 66 of at least 10 guns >>Dutch: 67 of at least 24 guns >>(Pemsel*: Each fleet "about 65") >><b>Portland, Feb. 18/28 to Feb. 20/Mar. 2, 1653</b> >>English: 83 (Pemsel*, 70) >>Dutch: 62 (Pemsel*, 70) >><b>Gabbard Bank, June 2/13</b> >>English: Not in my notes (Pemsel*, 115) >>Dutch: 98 (Pemsel*, 104) >><b>Scheveningen, July 31/Aug. 10, 1653</b> >>English: 114 (Pemsel*: Monck has "over 100") >>Dutch: 112 (Pemsel*: 82) >> >>*Helmut Pemsel, <i>A History of War at Sea</i> >>(Annapolis: Naval Institute Press, 1975). >> >>The English developed the line ahead formation during >>the war of 1652–53; the Dutch were using it by the war >>of 1665–67. But already the fleets had gotten smaller >>as ships had gotten larger. Data from Pemsel, <i>op. >>cit.</i>, his dates are all new style or Gregorian >>calendar. >><b>Lowestoft, June 13, 1665</b> >>English: 109 >>Dutch: 103 >><b>Four Days, June 11–14, 1666</b> >>English: 70, but with 20 detached, and some losses >>before they joined >>Dutch: 84 to start, later reinforcements replaced >>damaged ships or those that had used up their >>ammunition >><b>St. James's Day, Aug. 4, 1666</b> >>Both "about 90" >> >>Fleets were even smaller in the next war, so the lines >>at Lowestoft were probably the maximum for the age of >>sail. I believe that the admirals in the centers of >>their lines could not see the ends ahead or astern.

Notice: Copies of your message may remain on this and other systems on internet. Please be respectful.