NOTES AND NEWS

gested, with due regard to the tools and skills at hand, that the development shows an inter- action between decreasing forests and a demand for more and bigger ships. This can be seen by the way plank keels have turned into girders, outer bottoms have changed and frame com- ponents have proliferated. Allthis has happened, so now one works towards fuller interpretations, but much depends on further reports of finds.

Certainly there was no need to slight the interim report of the Cattewater find. This had to be produced at short notice as the wreck was in need of protection, At least something was published. With the wreck reasonably safe, we can look forward to a more learned treatment. Would, one wonders, the recent re-excavation at Brigg have taken place if an initial report had not been made.

Happily, the spread of nautical interests are wide. If there are those ready to study dates, then I am free to look at shape. This is what

A glossary for nautical archaeologists Between them, nautical archaeologists can offer every sort of accomplishment imaginable, but each with its own set of terms. Without this common interest, they might never have to communicate with each other, or so rarely, as not to want more than someone to interpret. While this may serve for the rarer skills, those involved under the main headings of archae- ology, diving and nautical studies must com- municate with each other regularly, so require a common and unambiguous glossary of terms. Such a glossary would have to include all words that could be wrongly used or taken, not only by those of other skills, but of their own.

The case for a glossary was discussed at the Symposium on Boat Archaeology held at the National Maritime Museum at Greenwich in September 1976. It was broadly agreed that there was a need; both for a concise glossary as soon as possible and for a comprehensive work as a longer term project. It was thought that the glossary should be in English, but to aid under- standing and eventual translation, illustrations should be used. Although those attending the symposium were well qualified by the roles they had played in nautical archaeology to judge; we should also have the views of others who might benefit from these glossaries, the shorter version in particular. Though there is less urgency to decide on the fuller work, it would be appreciated if those with ideas would let the editor or me have them soon. There are

~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~

divers see, only needing some idea of period to tell them what not t o touch. While watching some large rafts being built recently, it occurred to me how little this really meant. Certainly they are not in any important stream of de- velopment; but they exist and stand every chance of being ‘found’ in the future, when neither dating nor typing is going t o be of value alone.

For some time yet there will be more people finding wet timbers than there will be those capable of assessing them. Each one ought t o get all the attention it merits, and this involves a wide range of capabilities. With so much to do, one must get the divers even more inter- ested in nautical archaeology; so let’s not warn them off by being at cross purposes.

Eric McKee, 5 Albemarle Villas, Plymouth PLI 5QZ

many problems in compiling a glossary, and to provide a basis for comment, some of these are described below.

The glossary would give specific meanings to a preferred list of terms; so that writing based on it would only have to define new terms, which if usage so justified could be included eventually. The choice and definition of every term calls for care if the ground is to be covered without the publication taking too long or becoming too big. The definitions will have to come from reliable sources and there will have to be good reasons for departing from that in the New English Dictionary. This journal is as good a place as any t o settle diffi- cult points, but this stage must not be too pro- longed. A target date for publication should be set, one that can and will be kept.

Seamen and shipbuilders have not always been consistent in their use of words, so that it sometimes looks like they meant t o confuse landsmen. It is not surprising that some of the latter think that nautical jargon should be avoided and everyday words used instead. This sounds fine until one finds that while one can get away with upstairs and downstairs and even front end, one i s in a fix over Poor, ceiling and Zedge. However one does it a list of defined terms has to be worked out; and it is likely to be harder t o devise new ones than to select those we already have. One of the aims of nauti- cal research, and maybe of archaeology too, is

253

NAUTICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, 6.3

t o find the words men used about their ships. Nautical usage is potentially exact, and its imagery offers one more way t o a better under- st anding.

It is not a case of choosing which of the three main groups’ vocabularies should be in the glos- sary, but deciding on the set of terms that will prove most useful t o all three. Between them this journal‘s readers should be able to suggest what reliable glossaries already exist and whether they might be combined into one. At the Symposium a purely nautical one was favoured; and this may well be so, if good div- ing and archaeological glossaries can be found.

Considering just the nautical terms for the moment; there have been many dictionaries published since Sir Henry Mainwaring’s Sea- man’s dictionary of 1625. Excellent though many of these are, they really only hold good for royal and large ships in their own periods. Access to such books may not be easy, and even if one had the fortune of having a shelf full of them, one still has t o choose the right one and inform one’s readers accordingly. Though there is a lot t o be said for writing in the correct terms of the period; but what does one do for lack of one, or in the case of an illiterate boat? Nor does a reprint of any of these classic dictionaries meet the case; if we chose the Mainwaring, for instance, we would find no words for what by then was forgotten or not yet invented. If there is a dictionary that might meet our requirements ready made, it would be a great help t o be told about it, as my own search has failed to discover one.

This included the New English Dictionary, which is too bulky, and on down to the Con- cise Oxford Dictionary, as one we are likely t o own. Picking out 25 useful looking terms from my own card index, I have tried to assess the adequacy of the Concise Oxford’s definitions for the purpose we have in mind. The reader might like to test a few t o see how far or not we agree. bank-no keel-yes bilge-yes abaft-yes harping-nil dog-yes mould-no joggle-no cleat-fair ribband-yes fair-no pay -fair navel-no gudgeon-no station-no fay-nil tilt-yes rabbet-no inwale-nil partner-yes lee-yes wale-nil scull-yes limber-yes carling-nil.

(Yes means that the definition is adequate, albeit over brief, fair-that some editing is necessary, no-that it misleads and nil-

that there was no entry.) As no list of terms has been compiled, this can not be a repre- sentative sample; but it looks as if this solution is not yet even a stopgap t o our problem.

There are some common terms which could be useful if past lack of care had not blurred their true meanings. It is hoped, with the help of the glossary, that the effort of re-defining them would be repaid. Firstly, the groups, sorting on size, into which water transport can be divided: ship, boat, vessel and craft; and then the seminal groups from which they could have developed: raft, bundle, basket, skin, plank, plate, dugout, moulding, etc. There are a great number of terms referring t o specific types like: allege, alveus, amphiprorae, aque, etc. These are so numerous and some so hard to define, that they might be better excluded. One would like to find clear definitions for all the principal uses to which water transport can be put; terms such as: coaster, lighter, ten- der, ferry, etc., as one suspects once more that meanings vary.

Some terms have changed their meanings in recorded times, often due to changing designs and practices. A transom used t o be one of the transverse timbers set on the sternpost, but has now become to mean a transverse board, the gunwale has nearly as many definitions as there have been nautical dictionaries, so what started off as a strake of thick stuff in a ship is getting to be the position in a boat, that roughly corre- sponds t o her sheerline. Terms like these call for thought. While they can’t be left out, one does not want in the shorter version a four page entry, however interesting, like the one for board quoted in the Mariner’s Mirror, 44: 190.

Changes occur in the meaning of terms from place to place, time to time and from one type to another. It is for discussion that we should not attempt to cater for all of these; but start with, say, the terms normally used for and about ships and boats early in the 19th century, as this was about the high tide mark of the development of wooden vessels. It would then be necessary to draw attention to major de- partures that occurred before and after. For example, the medieval foot-waling and the more recent ceiling in so far as only the latter was structural; or the steel tank top centre line strake, which is what became of the keelson. In the shorter version it looks as if the sources of the terms and their definitions will have to be limited to written ones, and this means London and the major centres of shipping; leaving dialect variations, which were usually only spoken, for the larger work. Occasionally,

2 54

NOTES AND NEWS

the local term is the only English one for the job; like kabe from the Shetlands for the Norse type of grommeted oarlock.

One of the benefits offered by a glossary is a chance to adopt a standard spelling for terms that are regularly spelt several ways. Rove, roove, and ruff as well as strake, streak and stroke are cases where the first spelling is probably the most common and preferable. In the case of treenail, trenail and trunnel the first two are popular, but it is the third that comes closest to a correct one for pronuncia- tion. Should pronunciation be shown? If instead, we are to speak-as-we-spell, is treenail outlawed?

If the glossary is to be manageable, some limits will have to be laid down. For a start, let it be proposed that the terms should fall into one of the following categories: Class - by group or use of a vessel,

Description - of her form or abilities, Building - materials, processes and tools, Components - of a vessel, Propulsion - methods and gear, o r Operations - manoeuvres, position in or rela-

The exclusion of terms to do with commerce, navigation and other aspects of shipping is not final and may be challenged.

The National Maritime Museum and the Society for Nautical Research are taking action on these glossaries. If their efforts can be com- bined with those of the readers of this journal, this will lead to an important step forward in nautical archaeology. Please let us have your views.

tive to her.

Eric McKee 5 Albermarle Villas, Plymouth PLI SQZ

255