“Ignorance of the crosscatharpins is not necessarily fatal. Explanation almost certainly would be.”
Patrick O’Brian.
The cliché goes that there are two types of people – those who believe that there are two types of people and those who don’t. There are no doubt many more than two types of types of readers of nautical fiction. Nevertheless my guess is that as it applies to jargon, there may indeed be only two types.
The first type, and probably the smarter of the two, are those who read the jargon and let the words wash over them like a breaking wave, catching what they can in context but not caring too very much if they understand the finer points of rigging an eighteenth century ship, or, as is often the case in Patrick O’Brian’s books, the lost art of English suet puddings with exotic names like “drowned baby” and “spotted dick”. Their approach is like that of reading the more technical sub-genres of science fiction, where one need not necessarily understand quantum physics to enjoy the story. (Indeed, I suspect too much understanding of the science might get in the way.)
The other type of nautical fiction reader is the jack-tar wannabe, the rigging/sailing/quarterdeck wonk who will take the time to look up the obscure bit of jargon. Unless one plans on sailing on a square rigger (an activity I would encourage if at all possible) there may not be any great benefit in understanding all the terminology. Even if you do plan on sailing on a square rigger, it might not help.
Which brings of to the case of Patrick O’Brian and his crosscatharpins. In several of his books, Jack Aubrey goes on at some length regarding the virtue of crosscatharpins. Despite O’Brian’s warning that an explanation of catharpins might be fatal, I charged ahed. I knew from checking Falconer that catharpins were for tightening the shrouds, particularly the futtocks, to allow the yards to be braced closer to the wind.
For most sane folks we have already traveled far further into arcana than anyone might wish to go. Then again, for a rigging wonk this is just a warm up. I now had a reasonably good idea of where catharpins would be rigged and I was looking forward to seeing for myself. I was sailing as volunteer crew on the replica of the HMS ROSE with a group of fellow Patrick O’Brien afficiandos and would have the opportunity to climb the rigging and to see for myself.
It took only a few minutes aboard to understand that my search for catharpins would come to naught. In the 19th century the rigging of the futtocks, which had been rigged directly to the lower shrouds, were now rigged to an iron or steel futtock band, giving the top greater stability and strength. The shift from iron or steel from hemp shrouds made catharpins unnecessarily. As I looked up at the ROSE’s steel shrouds and futtock stays, I knew my quest for catharpins would be limited to within the pages of books. Even on a replica frigate they were mere relics of the past.
Catharpins I think I understand. But I was completely mystified when Aubrey commanded his crew to “scandalize the foretops’l yard” (in HMS SURPRISE chapter eight). He was making sail at the time, so “scandalize” must in some way increase the drawing power of the foretops’l. Can you tell me the meaning of “scandalize”?
I realize that this is a very old post of yours, so I wonder if you every did get to meet cat harpings in person so to speak. We have not one, but two sets of cat harpings on the Kalmar Nyckel. Namely, the regular cat harpings and the running cat harpings. The shrouds were replaced recently, so the running cat harpings were not replaced and she just has the one set on each mast right now. They aren’t crossed, and I seriously doubt that crossing them would gain much, at least for our rig.
I don’t know why cat harpings so fascinate readers of Patrick O’Brian, but they were a topic of considerable discussion on an email list where I participate. I happen to have photographs of our cat harpings because I photograph every thing about my current berth (new cameras do that to one).
This picture shows them, with the fore topsail, fore course, and fore bonnet set: http://picasaweb.google.com/Kujakupoet/KalmarNyckelVoyages#5477499468226283826
Here’s a closer view: http://picasaweb.google.com/Kujakupoet/KalmarNyckelUpriggingMaintenance#5453809702019081410
From Widipedia – “Scandalize – To reduce the area and efficiency of a sail by expedient means (slacking the peak and tricing up the tack) without properly reefing, thus slowing boat speed. Also used in the past as a sign of mourning.” We mourned the loss of a shipmate on the Star of India today by scandalizing her yards.
I have a mast 34m high and 400 lbs for which I want to increase strength in high wind conditions. It is secured to the deck by the guide wires (think shrouds) which attach to the mast at approximately 10m intervals running up, and spread in 4 directions. I am an avid Patrick O’Brian fan and was hoping to apply the good Captain’s cross catharpins to this problem, but it sounds like you’re saying this would do little. Do you have any suggestions for what I could try?
Landlubber here, just delighting in O’Brian’s writing.
One of my favorite quotes: “a trifle slow, perhaps, and he had seen her miss stays; but a careful stowing of her hold to bring her by the stern might make a world of difference, and cross-cat-harpins; Charles Loveless had no notion of cross-cat-harpins, still less of Bentinck shrouds.”