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

Recommendations

Info

The Professionalization of French Naval Shipbuilders though the whole question of superiority is highly subjective, we may still ask how French warships acquired the qualities so admired by contemporaries. Earlier positivist historians claimed that the superiority of French warships followed government initiatives to import technology and sponsor scientific research into shipbuilding problems during the latter part of the 17th century.1 But cause and effect were assumed. Just how these enterprises led to superior ship construction has never been made clear. Military and naval requirements in the 16th and 17th centuries demanded growing scientific awareness and technical ability among executive and administrative personnel in the armies and navies of European powers.'2 But there can be no assumption that the demand was met or that utilitarian concerns necessarily improved the application of science to war making and to the impedimenta of war. According to John U. Nef, war does not stimulate progress in the sciences or technology but rather retards it.13 William H. McNeill, however, claims quite the reverse; military demands on the British economy, especially for iron production, did much to shape later phases of the Industrial Revolution.14 But McNeill refers to technology, and, when science was applied to gunnery, navigation, and even to naval education, little improvement occurred.15 On the other hand, the French met with such success in the matter of ship design and warship construction that they can be said to have established the profession of naval architecture. How and why the French achieved such envied and often-imitated quality in their warships during the first half of the 18th century demands explanation. Several historians have emphasized the absence of connections be- "John Fincham, A History of Naval Architecture to which Is Prefixed an Introductory Dissertation on the Application of Mathematical Science to the Art of Naval Construction (London: Whittaker and Co., 1851), pp. vii-xxviii, provides a classic illustration. '2Frederick B. Artz, The Development of Technical Education in France, 1500-1850 (Cambridge, Mass., 1966), pp. 40-55, provides a useful introduction to the topic and to the early literature. '3J. U. Nef, Western Civilization since the Renaissance: Peace, War, Industry and the Arts (New York [1950] 1963), pp. 220-21. '4William H. McNeill, The Pursuit of Power: Technology, Armed Force, and Society since A.D. 1000 (Chicago, 1982), pp. 211-12. '5A. R. Hall, Ballistics in the Seventeenth Century (Cambridge, 1952), pp. 158-59, concludes that, far from an example of early science being directed by utilitarian considerations, ballistics served only as a mirror reflecting much of the most advanced scientific thought; its application to the art of war awaited the engineering revolution. On naval education, see Roger Hahn, "L'Enseignement scientifique des gardes de la marine au XVIIIe siecle," in Enseignement et diffusion des sciences en France au XVIII' siecle, ed. Rene Taton (Paris, 1964), pp. 547-58. 3
4 James Pritchard tween science and technological change.'6 Others specifically concerned with the history of shipbuilding have identified nontechnical determinants as obstacles to technical progress. Richard Unger disputes the common opinion that shipwrights' lack of scientific knowledge was the primary cause of similarity between warships and cargo vessels before the 17th century. He shows clearly that differentiation existed throughout most of the Middle Ages and that it was international chaos at sea and increasing incidence of piracy in the 16th and early 17th centuries, rather than shipwrights' ignorance, that constrained specialization.'7 Two recent accounts of naval shipbuilding suggest, however, that superior French-warship construction was due to the early development of scientific education for naval constructors. But the authors employ an unsatisfactory, traditional, three-stage view of the technical development of naval architecture: first, shipwrights built with neither plans nor mathematical calculations; second, builders drew plans but, as yet, made no use of calculations; and, third, engineers both designed and computed on the basis of theoretical principles and mathematics.18 Such an interpretation both continues to assume that progress followed the application of science to war making and ignores the fact that superior construction occurred while shipwrights remained in the first and second stages of development. This article rejects the standard view that French excellence and perceived superiority in naval shipbuilding during the 18th century were due to governmental efforts to import technology and foster the 16See A. R. Hall, "Science, Technology and Warfare, 1400-1700" in Science, Technology and Warfare (n. 3 above), pp. 3-24. Also J. R. Hale's "Commentary," ibid., pp. 25-32, which supports Hall's argument; also T. S. Reynolds, "Scientific Influences on Technology: The Case of the Overshot Waterwheel, 1752-1754," Technology and Culture 20 (April 1979): 270-95. For a strong statement on the connection between science and technology, see A. E. Musson and E. Robinson, Science and Technology in the Industrial Revolution (Manchester, 1969), esp. pp. 10-59. '7R. W. Unger, "Warships and Cargo Ships in Medieval Europe," Technology and Culture 22 (April 1981): 233-52. See also G. M. Walton, "Obstacles to Technical Diffusion in Ocean Shipping, 1675-1775," Explorations in Economic History 8 (Winter 1970/71): 123-46; and F. C. Lane, "Progres technologiques et productivite dans les transports maritimes de la fin du Moyen-Age au debut des temps modernes," Revue historique, no. 510 (1974), pp. 277-302. Both point to economic rather than international political factors. '8L. Denoix, "Charpentiers, constructeurs, ing6nieurs de vaisseaux," Academie de Marine, 1954-1955, 1: 5-18; and Paul Gille, "Les lcoles des constructeurs," in Le Navire et l'economie maritime du Moyen-Age au XVII' sicle, ed. M. Mollat (Paris, 1958), pp. 161-76. The article by Martine Acerra, "Les Constructeurs de la marine, XVIIe-XVIIIe siecles," Revue historique 273 (1985): 283-304, appeared after this essay was accepted for publication and hints at something more than the traditional emphasis of scientific training on constructors in its conclusion.
Page 1 and 2: From Shipwright to Naval Constructo
Page 3: 2 James Pritchard First, historians
Page 7 and 8: 6 James Pritchard could compute in
Page 9 and 10: 8 James Pritchard of foreign techni
Page 11 and 12: 10 James Pritchard A second importa
Page 13 and 14: 12 James Pritchard sional knowledge
Page 15 and 16: 14 James Pritchard the Seven Years'
Page 17 and 18: 16 James Pritchard in 1727.69 Inter
Page 19 and 20: 18 James Pritchard even though they
Page 21 and 22: 20 James Pritchard mathematics defi
Page 23 and 24: 22 James Pritchard that the candida
Page 25 and 26: 24 James Pritchard from trial and e

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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?