A brief note before I travel I finally found the drawing which is shown as a detail on the front page of the Artitec.nl VOC project web page. The picture is from the Willem van de Velde de Oude drawing of the Battle of Livorno, which is at the Rijksmuseum. I had thought of doing a painting, and was looking for the complete view, showing masts and sails. Have a happy Thanksgiving

The Dutch building programs from 1653 The Dutch initiated discussion of a 30-ship building program in late 1652. By early 1653, the plan was finalized. The genesis of this plan was the realization, after the Battle of the Kentish Knock, that the Dutch were outmatched by English warships. While the typical Dutch ship had a lower tier composed of 12-pounder guns, the English typically had culverins (18-pounder guns) on the lower tier. For the smaller frigates, the lower tier probably had a mixture of culverins and demi-culverins (9-pounders). The larger English ships probably had a mixture of demi-cannons (32-pounders) and culverins. The largest English ships probably had cannon-of-7 on the lower tier (42-pounders). Lt-Admiral Tromp wanted more of the largest ships, but Amsterdam blocked that from happening. Instead, the building program was mostly composed of smaller ships. There were three charters approved: Length: 150 feet Beam: 38 feet Hold: 15 feet Height between decks: 8 feet Length: 136 feet Beam: 34 feet Hold: 14 feet Height between decks: 7-1/2 feet Length: 130 feet Beam: 32 feet Hold: 13-1/2 feet Height between decks: 7 feet The planned originally approved for each admiralty was: Rotterdam: 1-150ft ship and 4-130ft ships Amsterdam: 4-136ft ships and 6-130ft ships Zeeland: 2-136ft ships and 3-130ft ships Noorderkwartier: 2-136ft ships and 3-130ft ships Friesland: 2-136ft ships and 3-130ft ships The totals, by type were: 1-150ft ship 10-136ft ships 19-130ft ships What was ultimately built did not actually conform to this plan very closely, but this was what was planned. This information is my rendering of what Dr. Johan E. Elias had to say on p.114 from De Vlootbouw in Nederland in de Erste Helft Der 17e Eeuw 1596-1655, Amsterdam, 1933. I hope to publish an English translation of this book, with commentary and corrections, as this is an extremely useful book.

Blogging, when no one knows you are there I keep on blogging about what I think is "good stuff", despite the fact that very few people even know that I am here, and what I am doing. My goal is to post information that I would have been really excited to find, before I got access to the Nationaal Archief, in Den Haag. My initial package was actually from Rick van Velden, in his role at "The Missing Link". The most exciting piece was this list, dated 26 February 1652, from the Rotterdam Admiralty. This was a revelation, as the document clearly stated that the dimensions were given in Maas feet, consisting of 12 inches per foot. The usual way of measuring 17th Century Dutch ships was the Amsterdam foot, divided into 11 inches per foot. The consequence of the Maas foot revelation was that many, if not all, of the traditional dimensions for Rotterdam ships in 1652 were misunderstood. While the is usually listed with the following dimensions:

Length: 132 feet

Beam: 32 feet

Hold: 13-1/2 feet The reality is that these are Maas feet. The dimensions, in Amsterdam feet, are something like:

Length: 144 feet

Beam: 35 feet

Hold: 14 feet-8 inches An Amsterdam foot was about 283.1 mm while a Maas foot was about 313.9 mm (According to The catalogue of the Dutch Navy Model Collection) The next package was journals. There is one from Witte de With, in 1646. Another is Jan Evertsen's, from 1652-1653. Another is Pieter Florissen's, from a similar period. I also have some journals written by Isaak Sweers from 1650 to 1652. He had been with Johan van Galen, in the Mediterranean Sea, operating against the North African pirates. After that, I received, on microfilm, a series of documents entitled "Staet van Oorloge te water", each one for a different year. I have the documents for 1628, 1629, 1631, 1633, and 1654. The 1654 document is a classic, as this formed the basis for Vreugdenhil's list from 1938, published by the Society for Nautical Research. Eventually, I contacted Jan Glete, after I had seen his reference to the "Directies ter Equipering van Oorlogschepen, 1631-1657". Prof. Glete very kindly sent me copies of his notes from 20 years ago, from the Nationaal Archief. I asked if Rick van Velden could find them. He did, over a period of time. There were a few things he was not able to locate. However, there were also a few manuscripts that he found that Jan Glete had not seen. This fall, I received two more copies of "Staet van Oorlog te Water" for 1654 and 1633. The 1633 manuscript has a cover page in a very fine hand, calling itself: "Staet van Oorlogh te Water voor den Jare 1633". This is probably the most readable page of all those I have received.

The weekend I expect to be offline between Thursday morning and Sunday night, over the weekend. I had hoped to take my laptop home to Texas. That seems not to be a possibility, as the screen seems to have gone out. If I had to demonstrate that my laptop worked, while travelling, I wouldn't be able to do it.

4 April 1653

From pages dated 4 April 1653, there is information about two ships which have been mentioned in published sources and one ship that has not. The ships all, evidently, were hired by the Amsterdam Directors. One of the three was lost in the catastrophic storm at the end of October 1653 (the Koning David).

The manuscript, very unfortunately, does not mention the ships' captains. The only captain we know is Captain Vogelsang, from the Koning David. Several sources mention his name.

Many lieutenants in early 1652 ended the war, commanding ships. Frederick de Coninck's lieutenant was Dirck Hendricksz.Vogelsang, so that could well be the man who commanded the Koning David. In early 1652, Dirck Vogelsang was lieutenant of the Groote Vergulde Fortuijn.

Here is the data for the three ships mentioned on 4 April 1653:

Koning David Length: 124 feet Beam: 29 feet Hold: 13 feet Height between decks: 7 feet

28 guns: 12-12pdr 8-8pdr 6-6pdr 2-3pdr

Keurvorst van Keulen Length: 131 feet Beam: 30 feet Hold: 13-1/4 feet Height between decks: 7 feet

34 guns: 18-12pdr 10-8pdr 4-6pdr 2-3pdr

Schacht den Harculus Length: 120 feet Beam: 28-1/2 feet Hold: 13 feet Height between decks: 7 feet

28 guns: 10-12pdr 10-8pdr 6-6pdr 2-3pdr

The Schacht den Harculus is the only one of the three ships which has not been previously mentioned in published sources. The Keurvorst van Keulen was called the Elector of Cullen in an intelligence report published in "Thurloe".

I was interested that the Schacht den Harculus carried two less 12pdrs than other 28-gun ships and compensated by carrying two more 8pdrs. This seems strange as there were smaller "28's" that carried the same armament as the Koning David.

I would translate this name as Staff of Hercules. The name is hard to read, but I am quite certain about both "Schacht" and "Harculus". The "den" is written almost as shorthand, and is vertically oriented, between the other two words. I could be mistaken, by my Afrikaans-speaking friend, who reads Dutch literature, agrees that "den" is very plausible.

Gerrit van Lummen's ship

I have not seen this in any published source, but from multiple documents from the "Directies ter Equipering van Oorlogschepen, 1631-1657", we have detailed information about what ship Gerrit van Lummen commanded.

From an undated document that mirrors what was published in the First Dutch War, Vol. I for the Amstedam Directors, I first knew what ship he commanded.

His ship was the Neptunis (the archaic spelling). His lieutenant, at that time, was Jan Danielsz. van Luijck.

The dimensions for the Neptunis are:

Length:	138 feet
Beam:	32 feet
Hold:	13 feet
Height between decks:	7 feet

(this is from a document from 12 March 1652).

The armament was 34 guns:

4-24pdr brass belonging to the State 12-12pdr 6-8pdr 6-6pdr 4-4pdr 4-3pdr (this totals 36 guns and is from a document from a document dated 8 November 1652--National Archives 1.03.02 Inv. nr. 8)

Drawing ships I am back to drawing ships for use as "pieces". Right now, I am working on a 136-foot Dutch ship drawing. I finally finished my Brederode drawing and drawings for the East Indiamen, Prins Willem and Vogelstruis. The Prins Willem belonged to the Middelburg Chamber of the VOC, while the Vogelstruis belonged to the Amsterdam Chamber. The Prins Willem dimensions are: Length: 170 feet Beam: 38 feet Hold: 18 feet The ship carried 40 guns at the Battle of the Kentish Knock. This is my best estimate: 4-24pdr 20-18pdr 10-12pdr 6-8pdr This is derived from what Herman Ketting published in his book about the Prins Willem. The 76-gun ship, the Oranje, Bastiaan Centen's ship at the Battle of Lowestoft, was of similar dimensions. The Vogelstruis was a smaller ship, as Amsterdam concerned about getting ships over Pampus, the sandbars that had to be crossed. These are my estimates: Length: 160 feet Beam: 38 feet Hold: 18 feet

Dutch losses at Scheveningen-10 August 1652 The Dutch lost about 10 ships at the Battle of Scheveningen. The Zeelanders lost 4 ships: Sunk: Hollandia, 38 guns - Captain Adriaan Banckert (formerly Jan Evertsen's flagship) West Cappelle, 28 guns - Captain Claes Janszoon Sanger Burnt: Eendracht, 24 guns - Captain Andries Fortuijn Blown up: Zeeuwsche Leeuw (Wapen van Zeeland) - Cornelis Evertsen de Oude Amsterdam lost 3 ships: Sunk: Hollandia, 32 guns - Captain Evert Anthonissen Dolphijn, 32 guns - Captain Gerbrandt Schatter Omlandia, 30 guns - Captain Marten Schaeff Rotterdam: Captured and burnt: Rosenkrans, 42 guns - Captain Jan de Haes (ex-English Garland) Friesland: Sunk: Zevenwolden, unknown number of guns - Captain Fredrick Stellingwerf VOC (unknown chamber): Sunk: Mercurius, unknown number of guns - Captain Pieter de Bitter There is a possibility that the Middelburg Directors' ship, the Bonaventura, the captured English Anthony Bonaventure, was also captured and burnt. My main source on this, Dr. Johan E. Elias, in Schetsen uit de Geschiedenis van ons Zeewezen, Vol.V, p.201, is silent on the matter. There is mention of this possible loss in The First Dutch War, Vol.V. The English very much wanted to eliminate the two captured English ships being used by the Dutch. There is a Willem van de Velde de Oude drawing that indicates that the Nassau or Huis van Nassau was sunk, but Dr. Elias, on p.202, in a note, clearly states that the Huis van Nassau survived the battle.

Scheveningen vs. the Gabbard

Witte de With, De Ruyter, and Jan Evertsen were determined to prevent another collapse, like what happened at the Battle of the Gabbard, in June 1653. They had felt like Tromp had lost control of the battle, and that the situation had turned into chaos. In the ensuing rout, the English captured or destroyed many ships. At Scheveningen, after Tromp's death, the Dutch understood that they were losing the battle. Instead of a rout, de With and his fellow admirals formed a rear-guard, and kept he losses and damage down, from what they could have been.

There is some indication that the Dutch had also fought in a line, although not in as disciplined manner as the English. The Dutch apparently had the advantage of the wind, at the beginning of the Battle of Scheveningen (also called Ter Heide), and attacked first. Like the English, the Dutch also broke the English line.

The results of either side breaking the line were less dramatic than what happened in the latter 18th and early 19th Centuries. To take advantage of breaking the enemy's line, you must concentrate on the ships on either side of the break, with several ships against one.

The Dutch usually practiced concentration and mutual support, but in this case, they kept their line intact, so that breaking the opponent's line did not have any dramatic effect. The main result of the four "passes" were that the smaller and more lightly armed Dutch ships accrued accumulated damage until they were not able to continue the battle.

More about the Hendrick de Raedt Pamphlet The reason why I want to obtain a copy of pamphlet written by Hendrick de Raedt is that my understanding is that there is a list of the ships in Tromp's fleet for the operation to the Shetlands, in July to August 1652. Such a list would be invaluable, even if there are only captain's names. If there were ship names, the list would be priceless. The other thing that I dearly want is a more authoritative list of ships with Tromp at the Battle off Dover, on 29 May 1652. There is Ballhausen's list, but Ballhausen has no credibility. I must confess that I am using Ballhausen's list simply because there is no alternative.

Something Interesting After I found out about the ability to search the 10 museum/archive sites in the Netherlands, I found something interesting. I guess that I had seen a reference to this, but now I know how to find it. B1959 Maritiem Museum Rotterdam Pamflet 55 Lyste, Van de Schepen van Oorloge Onder het beleyt van den Admirael Marten Harpersz. Tromp, En op den 4 Augusty 1652 Hendrick de Raadt (Raedt) Hendrick de Raedt (as it was spelled in 1652-1653), commanded an Amsterdam Directors' ship, the Swarte Leeuw: Captain Hendrick de Raedt Length: 130 feet Beam: 28 feet Hold: 13-1/2 feet Boven: 6-1/4 feet 28 guns: 4-12pdr brass of the State, 8-12pdr, 8-8pdr, 6-6pdr, 2-3pdr Crew: 110 In early 1652, his lieutenant was Robbert Pietersz.

Late Summer and Autumn Storms I'm not sure that very many people have realized that the late summer and autumn storms in the late 16th and through the 17th Century were caused by a "mini-ice age" (you might call it, "global cooling"). The following are examples:

the storm that destroyed approximately half of the Spanish Armada in 1588

the storm that scattered Lt-Admiral Tromp's fleet, in his voyage to the Shetlands in July 1652

the storm that heavily damaged Witte de With's fleet, upon returning from Norway in late October 1653

"The Great Storm" in November 1703 (we are coming up to the anniversary) The damage caused by the storm in 1653 was worse than the worst of their defeats in battle. Perhaps, later in the day, I can list the lost ships. It is worth noting that the general climatic trend, over the last 30,000 years, or so, has been to warming. We can only hope that it will continue, as moderate warmth is better than ice. We know that North Africa, about 10,000 years ago was green and lush. By 5,000 years ago, the land had become arid, similar to the present situation. We need to realize that the we are at the mercy of the Sun. The geological evidence is that the Sun warms and then cools, seemingly in cycles. I had read that the mini-ice age had started about 900 AD, and continued to the early 1700's. The only thing that I have seen that contradicts that is that during the Middle Ages, grape growing records seem to indicate that the climate was warmer then, than it is now.

Hollandsche Mercurius A very good information source about the First Anglo-Dutch War are the 1652 and 1653 volumes of the Hollandsche Mercurius. The only problem with it is that it is not reliable. With so little information remaining (only in comparison with what has been lost), we cannot ignore this source. Most of the interesting lists were republished in The First Dutch War. In Volume I, there is a list of Dutch warships in service, seemingly about June 1652. There are many problems with this list, as there are even references to events from June 1653. Earlier this year, when I received documents about the Amsterdam Directors' ships hired in 1652 and 1653, I was chagrined to find that one of them was misnamed in the published list. The list calls him "Jan Deyckers". In fact, his name was Jan Maijkers (this is shown in multiple documents). His ship was d'Alexander. The specifications were: Length: 131-1/2 feet Beam:    27-3/4 feet Hold: :     13 feet 28 guns: 12-12pdr 8-8pdr 6-6pdr 2-3pdr The crew was 95 men.

Gorcum/Gorinchem Here is more from the 1654 list. Dimensions in Maas feet: Length: 106 feet Beam: 25 feet Hold: 9-1/2 feet 30 guns: Brass 2-light 15pdr 6-light 5pdr 6-6pdr Iron 12-12pdr 4-6pdr Dimensions in Amsterdam feet: Length: 116 feet Beam: 27 feet Hold: 11 feet Again, these are from the Weber and Van Foreest book about the Four Days Battle. As usual, due to measuring differences, there is not a constant mapping between the dimensions in Maas feet and Amsterdam feet.

Prinses Louise I was just starting to step through my copy of "Staet van Oorlogh te water voor den Jaere 1654". The classic dimensions given for this ship were: Length: 110 feet Beam: 26-1/2 feet Hold: 11-1/2 feet This makes the ship seem to be very small. As I have said before, these are the measurements in Maas feet. What are apparently accurate dimensions in Amsterdam feet are given in Weber and Van Foreest's book, De Vierdaagse Zeeslag 11-14 Juni 1666, on page 189. These are: Length: 120 feet Beam: 28 feet-4 inches Hold: 12 feet-6 inches This is in Amsterdam feet of 11 inches. An Amsterdam foot is approximately 283 mm. The Maas foot is about 12/11 x's the size. The armament in July 1654 is known, and is likely to be what was carried during the First Anglo-Dutch War: 36 guns Brass: 2-light 24pdr 4-light 12pdr 10-chambered 12pdr 4-chambered 5pdr Iron: 16-12pdr I would be interested to know if anyone would know the weights of the more obscure sort of Dutch guns, such as some of these. I am also interested in Dutch gun inventories that show weights. G. C. Dik's book about the Zeven Provinciën has such an inventory.

The Hoop I got excited when I saw the reference (again) to the Dutch captain Dirck Pater and the ship, the Hoop. The reference is on page 363, Vol.V, of The First Dutch War. After the Battle of Scheveningen, ship, the Hoop, commmanded by Dirck Pater, had two dead and three wounded. I have been looking for information about ships named Hoop, from Amsterdam. The only problem is that the ship commanded by Dirck Pater was the Blauwen Arent. The Blauwen Arent was an Amsterdam Directors' ship. Length: 127 feet Beam: 28-1/2 feet Hold: 12-1/4 feet Height between decks: 6 feet-10 inches In early 1652, Dirck Pater's lieutenant was Hendrick Hendricksz. Hon. The Blauwen Arent carried 28 guns: 4-brass 18pdr belonging to the State 8-12pdr 8-8pdr 6-6pdr 2-3pdr In early November, 1652, the crew consisted of 105 men.

English 2nd Rates I was really surprised how "high-charged" the James, and the other Jacobean and Carolean 2nd Rates were (the old Great Ships). For example, the James (as it was called during the First Anglo-Dutch War, and before), was a three-decker. There were only two complete tiers of guns, but there was a complete upper deck. According to Frank Fox, there were 13 gun ports on the lower tier, 12 on the upper tier, 3 ports, forward and 6 aft, above that. There were also 2 ports above that. That would accommodate 66 guns, which is what the James had at the end of the First Anglo-Dutch War. There were the three decks, a quarterdeck, forecastle, and poop. The head rails were low enough to allow a gun to fire forward from the beakhead bulkhead, on either side of the bowsprit. I just finished a drawing based on the Van de Velde drawings for the James, which is why this was brought to my attention.

Jonas en de Walvisch

I have seen several references to a Dutch ship called Jonas en de Walvisch. That seems to have stemmed from a misreading of an document, or something that was simply mistaken. There were clearly two distinct ships. One was the Amsterdam Admiralty ship commanded by Joris de Colerij (there are many spellings of his name: de Taullery, de Caulery, for example), called the Jonas. The reference for this is on page 202 of Schetsen uit de Geschiedenis van ons Zeewezen, Vol. V, by Dr. Johan E. Elias.

There was another ship, belonging to the Amsterdam Directors, commanded by Abraham Verleth, called the Walvisch. The Walvisch carried 30 guns and had a crew of 110 men. The reference for this is a note on the next page (page 203) of the same volume.

This work is an important source of information about the First Anglo-Dutch War. The only problem may be that I have not seen a library copy in the U.S., although there is bound to be. I have a very poor copy, in paper, that is falling apart, and a very nice hardbound copy. Apparently, the work is available in the Netherlands, if you will look in one of the used and out-of-print book search web sites.

--Jim Bender

A Question

I have conflicting data about several captains and their ships. One is that regarding Claes Janszoon Sanger.

Claes Jansz. Sanger and the West Cappelle

Claes Jansz. Sanger commanded the Zeeland Admiralty ship, the West Cappelle. in August 1653, he was part of Michiel De Ruyter's fleet, engaged in convoying duties in the Channel. There is one list that calls his ship, the "Galjas van Middelburg".

Captain Sanger and his ship fought through the war, until the Battle of Scheveningen. Quite clearly, he was an English captive at the end of the battle. As a matter of policy, the English burnt any ships they captured in this battle.

Yet, in the "Staet van Oorlog te Water voor den jaare 1654", Captain Sanger and his ship are listed. As late as the Battle of Lowestoft, in 1665, a ship named West Cappelle was present.

I guess the most likely scenario is that the 1654 list is mistaken, and the West Cappelle of 1665 is a new ship. I would welcome input on this question.

Our New Look I would like to know how you like our new look. I must admit that no one may have seen our old look, so you probably have nothing to compare against. Our website is very visible in Google. Try searching for "Rotterdam Admiralty", for example. I have hopes that eventually, "Anglo-Dutch-Wars.blogspot.com" will show up, prominently, in Google, as well. I intend to continue posting relevant and new information, as well as talking about "how to" topics. --Jim Bender

De Zeven Provinciën

This is an exercise I did in response to an inquiry about the crew for the Zeven Provinciën. I know that on June 7, 1673, the ship had a crew of 530 men. Of those, 492 were sailors and 38 were soldiers. (The reference is: p.785, from Het Leven en Bedrijf van den heere Michiel de Ruyter, by Gerard Brandt, published in 1687, at Amsterdam. I have a facsimile copy. The title means: "The Life and Actions of the lord Michiel De Ruyter" (pronounced like it was De-Rowter) My best guess about the crew is:

Gun crews	258
To carry powder for all guns	23
To fill and hand powder for all guns	10
Surgeon and men hold	7
Carpenter and his men	5
Purser and his men:	3
Men for the small shot:	74
Men to stand by the sails:	80
Men for the boats and tops:	32

I would welcome better information, and a source for Dutch crew composition.

Drawing Methods

I wanted to talk about how I am doing drawing. Frank Fox constantly says that when doing a ship drawing, do an "inboard profile" first. That is, draw a cut-away of the deck and equipment arrangements, in the interior. From this, you can then do a "real" exterior drawing. This applies to any sort of warship, sailing or 20th Century.

I am currently sketching the deck and gunport arrangements, and then do the exterior drawing on top of that (in pencil). I ink that and erase the "helping lines" with a kneaded eraser.

Another tip is that I make heavy use of scanner, graphics program, and printer. When I have a well-proportioned ship, I will copy that in the graphics program (after scanning). I turn on grid lines with 0.1 inch spacing. Then, I will "resample" to resize the drawing. Note that I am just using a copy, not the original image. I will scale the drawing to the size I want, and then do a "print preview" to check the size. I use the Corel PhotoPaint 8 graphics editor, and it provides such a feature. It shows size information in inches. I can then adjust my scaling, if I did not get the results I wanted.

Another feature of the print facility, is that I can size the picture, by adjusting percentages. When I do that, the sizing is not done in the image but in the printing.

Once printed, I turn over the sheet and place it on my "light table". In my case, it is homemade. I have a 1/4 inch sheet of plexiglass lying over the space between two plastic rolling carts with drawer. I set a light underneath. When turned on, I can see through the paper to draw. I draw the position of the main deck. I then measure the deck height and draw the upper deck (where applicable) and then do a forecastle and quarterdeck. Larger ships will also have a poop.

Next, I start drawing gun ports from the rear. I draw one and then allow my spacing between ports. I do that until I get near the bow, where I leave extra space and show the forward-most port, reduced in width, as it is angled towards the bow.

I place the upperdeck guns in the spaces between the lowerdeck ports.

I will post some examples, soon. --Jim Bender

The Latest

I am currently progressing on my set of English ships drawings (3rd and 4th Rates). I will put links to them in the next few days.

I have a 3rd rate, similar to the Speaker and a 4th Rate frigate similar to the Tiger.

Ship Drawings

Tonight, I am working on English ship drawings. Again, the purpose is to use them for laying out battles, to gain a better understanding.

I have a template for ships like the Garland, Bonaventure, and Leopard (the Jacobean and Carolean Middling ships). The Garland was captured by the Dutch at the Battle of Dungeness (30 Nov 1652), while the Bonaventure blew up at the Battle of Leghorn (4 March 1653). The Dutch used the Garland, renamed Rosenkrans, at the Battle of the Gabbard (2 and 3 June 1653) and at the Battle of Scheveningen (Ter Heide-31 July 1653). The Rosenkrans was retaken by the English and burnt, at Scheveningen.

The Rosenkrans was armed with 20-18pdr and 22-12pdr guns. Her captain was Jan de Haes, who was captured by the English at Scheveningen. The Rosenkrans belonged to the Rotterdam Admiralty (the Admiralty of the Maas or Maze).

The armament is given in note 4) on p.58 of Schetsen uit de Geschiedenis van ons Zeewezen , by Dr. Johan E. Elias, Vol. V, 1928.

The St. Jeronimus

By the way, the St. Jeronimus information was from Jan Glete's notes from a document from 12 March 1652, in Amsterdam. I have assumed that this was the Medemblick Directors ship, until I found out otherwise. This seems to be a page not found by the Nationaal Archief, but which Jan Glete had seen in the early 1980's, when he was doing research.

There is another page that I would very much like to have, but which was not found, dated 30 March 1652, that lists some ships:

Weesp

Advise Jacht (?)

Adrnsom (?)

Colburg

Zutphen

Harderwijck

Harderin

I have great hopes for this list, as if there are only names, that probably means that there could be the captains' names listed on the manuscript. That is the real point of interest, that would potentially aid in building the orders of battle for the First Anglo-Dutch War.

By the way... (Updated)

In case it wasn't obvious, the ship information that I posted is Dutch. The information is part of Drs. Rick van Velden, and the staff at the Nationaal Archief, in Den Haag, found for me.

Most of the Directors ship information that I have is about ships belonging to the Amsterdam Directors.

From Prof. Glete's notes, I also have dimensions for the St. Jeronimus, which belonged to the Medemblick Directors (in the Noorder-Kwartier).

I believe that her captain was Jan Pieterszoon Eenarm.

In early 1652, the St. Jeronimus carried 30 guns and a crew of 110 men.

The dimensions are:
(Dutch-style, with "width" instead of beam and
"hold" instead of "depth")

Length:
116 feet
Width:
28 feet
Hold:
11 feet

In November, 1652, the St. Jeronimus was paid off, as the crew refused to go to sea in her, due to her poor state of repair.

Contact E-Mail

To contact me, send e-mail to: comments@kentishknock.com

Dutch Ships

This information is from the "Directies ter Equipering van Oorlogschepen, 1631-1657"

Dimensions are all in Amsterdam feet (about 283mm)

20 January 1653


The ship St. Michiel
Length:  120 ft
Width:     27-3/4 ft
Hold:       13 ft
Height between decks:  6-3/4 ft

28 guns: 
10-12pdr
8-8pr
8-6pdr
2-3pdr


The ship St. Pieter

Length:  123 ft
Width:     28ft-3in
Hold:       12-1/2 ft
Height between decks:  6-1/2 ft

28 guns:
10-12pdr
8-8pdr
8-6pdr
2-3pdr

I suspect that the 12 and 8pdrs were mounted on the main deck, while the 6pdrs were probably on the quarterdeck. I have thought that the 2-3pdrs could have been on the forecastle. If anyone has information about this, I would be very interested to know. --Jim Bender

Sailing Warship List

There is a good site for information about sailing warships. I have been a contributor of information to this site. This is the link to the site: Sailing Warships List 17th to 19th Century

Current Work

I'm currently working on a set of drawings that are intended to be reduced to 100 feet per inch. The drawings that I am currently doing are at 25 feet per inch. The drawings are profile drawings for use as "game pieces" (so to speak). I compose 8-1/2 x 11 inch sheets that are printed on index (110 lb) stock. I cut them out and fold in half to make a "tent". The ship's bow is to the left and there is text on the back.

The purpose is to be able to lay out, on the floor, the ships involved in a battle. My current focus is on the First Anglo-Dutch War. I have lost interest in actually using these for wargaming. I find that using a sailing naval war computer simulation is more interesting. Alex, who is Russian, suggested the Age of Sail II-derived software called "Privateer's Bounty". I have been able to handle a fleet up to 42 ships, so far (on a PC with a 1.4GHz processor with a GB of RAM).

I will be posting information that I have found from archival sources in the Netherlands. I am also indebted to Prof. Jan Glete, in Stockholm, for his kind help.

I am currently looking for someone in the Netherlands who would be willing to do some research for me (a little bit at a time).

Again, my web site is:

http://www.kentishknock.com

-- Jim Bender

A New Blog

This is the launch of a new blog devoted to the discussion of the Anglo-Dutch Wars, primarily. The Baltic wars, including the Battle of the Sound, in 1658, are also likely to be discussed. This is a related site to www.kentishknock.com, which has been our primary way of publishing artwork and research results. We would welcome inquiries and information.