Pritchard, James; From Shipwright To Naval Constructor - Iowa State ...

14 James Pritchard
the Seven Years' War, Chefd'escadre Maximin de Bompar displayed "a
violent prejudice" against the design of the newly proposed Le Languedoc
of eighty guns. Bompar insisted that the prime characteristic of
any flagship was strength to protect its squadron rather than speed. In
comparison to Le Foudroyant, laid down fourteen years before, the new
ship, though of the same class, was 8 feet longer at the keel and 2 feet
broader amidships. Whereas, in the past, first-rates, mounting 100-
116 guns, possessed keel-lengths of no more than 176 feet, Le Languedoc's
builder proposed one of 180 feet.63
Innovations also upset conservative elements among naval administrative
officers. Some did not understand what was happening. They
viewed changes from the terms and clauses of 1689 with apprehension
and sometimes interpreted constructors' innovations as insubordination.
The intendant at Rochefort during the early 1750s, Sebastien
Lenormant de Mezy, mirrored such fears and attitudes. In his opinion,
the search for speed led builders to give warships the proportions and
characteristics of frigates. Ships of the line, he claimed, were losing
their tightness and their ability to carry heavy ordnance and large sail
areas, and their keels displayed a tendency to hog or arch. Height of
lower gun decks above the waterline and heaviness of scantlings were
sacrificed to speed and grace. New ships could not carry their lower
batteries on second and third voyages; they had to be constantly rebuilt
in order to last. By seeking to increase firepower, constructors lost for
new frigates their qualities of fineness, lightness, and speed, and they
assumed the characteristics of ships of the line.64 Similar complaints
came from the intendant of Toulon. Charles-Marin Hurson criticized
constructors who ignored the experience of seagoing officers by charging
that they paid too much attention to their own preoccupation with
"gracefulness and speed, without insisting enough on robustness and
ease of different manoeuvres which they know only by theory."65
Nevertheless, because naval constructors and senior administrators
and naval officers met in the arsenals and clashed in councils of construction,
they gained an appreciation of each other and of the benefits
to be obtained from professionalization, and thereby the former began
to move into the fringes of polite, educated society to the relatively new
position of engineer. These social and administrative developments,
rather than the theoretical inquiries of academicians, were crucial
63Toulon, Archives de la Marine (hereafter Toulon), Serie 1A', 214, ff. 29-9', 48
Comm" Gen' Dasque to Duc de Choiseul, March 28 and May 2, 1762.
6Bibliotheque nationale, n.a.f., no. 126, "Memoire sur le service, et l'administration du
Port, et arcenal de la marine a Rochefort," pp. 132-35.
65Toulon, S6rie 1A', 214, Hurson to Choiseul, March 28, 1762.