Bonden

14. Piracy vs Privateering The difference between piracy and privateering is mainly a legal one, as at sea, the motivations – getting wealthy and famous - and the actions – preying on merchant vessels - were quite similar. The privateer’s activity, carried out under the appropriate letter of marque, was lawful under the law of nations, while piracy was the first international crime to be recognized and punished. While the crew of a privateer captured by an enemy warship or privateer benefited from the status of prisoner of war and could not be sentenced to death, the crew of a pirate could be hanged immediately. (Captain Kidd on the gibbet, Wapping, 1701) In some trials, it was sometimes difficult for the court to bring the proof of the illegal character of the activity of a predator of the sea, who could produce a forged letter of marque or extend its scope through a broad interpretation of its terms or contest legal issues. The trial of the famous Captain Luke Ryan (1750-1789)( Luke Ryan: Premier Privateer - Journal of the American Revolution (allthingsliberty.com)), an Irish/French privateer (and former smuggler) captured by the British Navy, was exemplary in this regard. He first received a letter of marque from Britain and, after his ship was seized as a smuggler by the Revenue service, he escaped to France where he was commissioned by the US Ambassador in France, Benjamin Franklin. In two years, he captured dozens of British and Irish merchants around British coasts. He was finally betrayed and captured by the Royal Navy and put on trial in 1782 for high treason and piracy. He contested to be a treacher and a pirate as he claimed to have the French nationality and a lawful letter of marque. The court rejected his arguments and he was sentenced to death but was granted a royal pardon and released from prison in 1784.

13. Managing prisoners – the ‘cartels’ When the captor ransomed the prize’s master, the crew of the captured ship would left aboard the prize. They would be sent to an agreed destination as prisoners of war in their own ship, used as a “cartel ship”, under a ‘cartel agreement’ signed by both captains (captor’s and prize’s). The prisoners would be exchanged in port with prisoners of the captor’s nation, through the intermediary of a prisoners agent. Cartel ships were, in the law of nations, a ship used on ‘humanitarian voyages’, in particular to carry communications or prisoners between belligerents (Cartel (ship) - Wikipedia). Any ship used as a cartel was under protection against to (re-)capture, unless it engaged in commerce or warlike acts like carrying official dispatches or messengers. The prisoners were under the obligation not to engage in hostilities towards their captor. If they re-captured the cartel ship they would have no right to salvage and the owner of the vessel would have no right to reclaim his ship (Cartel (ship) - Wikipedia). During the Napoleonic wars, the treatment of French prisoners on prison ships was so harsh (following the decision of Napoleon to refuse to send English prisoners of war home and to leave French prisoners in English custody) that the prisoners of cartels would plan to escape at all costs. An example of cartel ship re-taken by the prisoners is the recapture of the Prince cartel in 1802 by French prisoners (see The Great Escape of 1802: French Prisoners of War Take Over The Prince - Port Towns and Urban Cultures).

12. Ransom In some circumstances, the capture of a prize was source of complication for the captor. Far from a friendly port, it was risky to send the prize with a prize crew, as it could be recaptured (see point 8 above). Or, making up a new prize crew could have depleted too much the captor’s crew, if some prizes had already been sent to port with prize crews. And if the captor had already many prisoners of war aboard (from other prizes), taking more could be simply impossible or difficult because of the limited provisions, with no friendly port at proximity. By the latter part of the 18th century, a legitimate alternative recognized by the law of nations was, for the captor, to sell the prize back to her captain who would pay a ransom either in cash or, more often, with a bill of exchange, to be drawn on the ship owner(s)[1]. The ransom was calculated taking into account the value of the cargo. A copy of the bill of exchange was given to the former master of the prize. It was a safe conduct against any new capture by the captor’s Navy or its allies. In some cases, the master of the prize was kept as hostage on the captor’s ship as a guarantee for the payment. And the captured ship could be seized in any port where the captor could find her. The advantage of the ransom alternative was that the cruise range could be considerably extended, even oversea. A disadvantage was that the ship value was lost. And sometimes, the ship owners refused to pay the bill of exchange, especially when the released ship could be sent in remote areas, away from the captor’s reach (like whalers in arctic hunting grounds). [1] A bond was also signed by the (former) master of the prize to the captor, as a personal guarantee of the payment of the bill. If the ship company/owner refused to pay the bill, the master was obliged to pay himself the sum indicated on the bill.

11. Neutrality and Nationality Neutral nations – not at war or allied with one of the belligerents – had the right to continue their accustomed trade under the maritime law of nations, however subject to 3 belligerent’s superior rights: a) the right to halt and inspect b) the right to confiscate military supplies and contraband intended for the enemy and c) the right to blockade. Those principles were quite difficult to apply in prize courts. A question was to identify the neutrals, as the nationality criteria were different from today. In the 18-19th centuries, a merchant was considered as a national of the nation within the borders of which he had a business place. So, following the outbreak of war, a merchant had the choice to stay within the borders of the nation at war and become a belligerent’s national merchant (under its protection and subject to trade rules of that nation), or leave and become a neutral (protected as neutral). As Petrie puts it, “the ingenuity of belligerents in evading the penalties of the law of nations through pretended neutrality, false papers, quick title transfers, and a myriad of other devices, made up the principal business of the prize courts during the last century of fighting sail” (p. 163).

10. The Fate of the Prize and her Cargo When they were condemned as good prize, the ship and her cargo were sold and the court held proceeds : - to the satisfaction, first, of neutral claimants (cargo shippers in particular) who could intervene before the court during one year and one day (consequently, the prize money was only paid to the captor one year after condemnation !) - for distribution, second, to the captor’s sovereign and crew (in accordance to domestic rules in force). Complications came when neutral cargo was found in an enemy ship, or enemy cargo in a neutral ship… Without going into details, the position of Britain was : a) lawful goods of a friend found on board an enemy ship had to be restored to its owner; b) goods of the enemy found on board a neutral or friend ship, could be taken. The position of other nations (FR, US, RU, Scandinavian nations) was that the nationality of the ship is presumed to be stamped on her cargo (‘free ships make free goods’).

9. Before the Prize Court The proceeding before the prize court was designed to avoid unnecessary delay and risks for the cargo. The first question discussed before the court was to determine whether the captured ship was a prize or not ? This question was decided promptly and based only on: a) the ship’s documents and b) testimony of members of both crews (these were interrogated under specific procedure and separately to avoid any mutual influence; their testimony was then transmitted with the ship’s documents to the prize judge). Only when documents presented to the court raised questions impossible to resolve quickly, was further evidence admitted. That crucial question could be resolved in three ways: o if the judge found that the chase was not a good prize but that the captor had legitimate causes of suspicion, the chase was released immediately without financial compensation; o if the judge found that the chase was not a prize and that the captor’s suspicion was unwarranted, the captive was entitled to immediate release but also to a judgement for damages against the captor… o if the judge found that the chase was a good prize, the judge “condemned” the ship and her cargo (remember, this is a legal proceeding against a ship, not against a person). Here under the building of the Admiralty Court (Doctors Commons) in London

8. Recapture ‘en route’ to the Prize Court A prize could be recaptured with the prize crew on her way to the port by the enemy. In such case, persons and cargoes seized by the enemy were restored to their original status. The fact is that it occurred often (during the American War of 1812, of 1500 British merchant ships captured by the US Navy, 750 of them were recaptured by the Royal Navy or British privateers). The merchant ships re-captured were reverted to their original owners and “the re-captors could not make prize of them”. But the owners had to pay to the recaptor a financial reward, generally a share of the value of the ship and her cargo (this charge was called by the prize courts a “military salvage”). Prisoners of war aboard a prize could stage an uprising and overthrow their captors (the prize crew). Thus, the choice of a prize crew was difficult and risky (if too many men were allocated to the prize crew, the privateer lost its fighting and manoeuvrability capacities; if the prize crew was too limited, then the risk of a successful uprising of the prisoners would increase).

7. Selection of the Prize Court The prize had to be sent to a port with a prize crew. This would be decided by the master of the captor, according to te proximity of the port, the condition of the chase, the chance to be intercepted by the enemy, etc., but also, under prize law, according to the convenience of the prize’s owners or cargo shippers who might appear in court as claimant against the condemnation of their ship/cargo. As put by D. A. Petrie, “A flagrant disregard for the convenience of claimants could result in a loss of the prize in court and an assessment of damages against her captors”. Great Britain had a High Court of Admiralty in London (in the ‘Doctors’ commons’, see here under the picture and the map) and Vice-Admiralty Courts in its colonies all over the world. Other nations (American, Dutch, French, Spanish) had no such ‘external’ courts but used to designate their own judges on allied territory (for instance, Benjamin Franklin was US minister plenipotentiary in Paris, and also a judge for prize captured by American privateers and brought into French ports).

6. Multiple Captors In some cases, several predators, in squadron under the command of a senior officer (Navy) or in ‘wolf pack’ (privateers) were involved in a chase. Several ships may have been engaged during the chase (that could last for days). If the chase surrendered to one of these ships (called the ‘actual captor’), the question raised of how to divide the prize money between all protagonists. As D.A. Petrie puts it, “the general rule [in the Navy] was to divide the proceeds among all captors vessels that were in sight at the same time the chase lowered her national flag, the universal signal of surrender. Apportionment was based on the relative “force” of each vessel, being the weight of the cannon balls that each could fire, or on the size of their crews.” Of course, this rule caused much controversy and prize litigation in court between the officers involved (who was or was not in sight at the very moment the prey surrendered). Among privateers, the rules were the same, unless a different arrangement had been contracted by the hunters before the cruise. If a naval vessel (from the same country as the privateer) was in sight, she could claim a part of the prize. But when a privateer witnessed the capture of an enemy ship by a naval vessel, it was more difficult to claim anything to the Navy (except if help had been granted to capture the prize).

5. Geographical Limits Predators were not allowed to chase in neutral waters (= 3 miles from neutral shore), even in ‘hot pusuit’. But of course, in enemy territorial waters, hunting was a fair game and many actions took place in enemy coastal waters.

4. After the inspection After the inspection, the master of the captor gave his opinion to determine whether the prize was a national/ally/neutral engaged in legal trade or an enemy vessel benefiting from a license to sail or a protection (eg a scientific expedition; Cook benefited from such protection). In such case, the captor had to release the captured ship and her crew. If a non-enemy merchant was engaged in illegal trade or transport activities (eg trade with the enemy, running blockade, transporting enemy troops, carrying contraband, etc.), it could be considered as a possible prize and sent with a prize-crew to the port where it could be submitted for adjudication to the prize court. The crew of the prize could be transferred on the captor. The captain or mate of the prize and one or two crew members had to stay on the prize ship to be heard separately by the court. When the prize was not a neutral merchant but an enemy vessel, the captor had the right to: - Remove the crew of the prey to place them under guard on his ship - Remove the stores and guns of the chase for his own use - Negociate with the captain of the chase (as agent of the owners) “a ransom agreement by which the chase would be released in exchange for a promise to pay a ransom sum” - Abandon the chase, when expecting bad weather or a battle. (TO BE FOLLOWED: 5. Geographical Limits 6. Multiple Captors 7. Selection of the Prize Court 8. Recapture ‘en route’ to the Prize Court 9. Before the Prize Court 10. The Fate of the Prize and her Cargo 11. Neutrality and Nationality 12. Ransom and long-distance privateering 13. Managing prisoners – the ‘cartels’ 14. Ports 15. Piracy vs Privateering)

3. The Inspection Any enemy war ship could be captured and sent to port before a prize court for adjudication and condemnation as a prize. However, the most valuable prize were merchant ships with high revenue cargo. Any ship of a belligerent maritime nation had the right to halt and inspect friend, neutral or enemy merchant ships (but not neutral navy vessels). A boat was sent from the predator (Navy vessel or privateer) to the chase with an officer and max. 1 other person (in addition to the oarsmen). Inspection was carefully regulated by law : the officer had the right to: - Examine all the ship’s documents (registry, logbooks, journals, bill of lading, muster roll, seapass, etc.) - Interview the captain, officers and crew (separately) to confront their testimonies - Inspect all open parts of the ship - Require the master of the prize to accompany him aboard with all papers to allow the captor’s captain to verify the paper himself.

2. The Chase Once commissioned, privateers had to gather as much intelligence as they could on their prey, in order to reduce the risk of illegitimate prize and bad encounter : - Local trade routes - Predominant kind of traffic - Nationality of the merchant men in the area - Presence of any ship of war in the area - Etc. When a strange sail was sighted and when risks were not too high, the captain decided to chase it. Vessels were free to fly the flag of another nation (including their enemy) or no flag at all. The predator would signal to the prey to bring her bow into the wind, heave to and await inspection (signaling occurred through signal flag, trumpet or, after raising the national colors, firing a warning shot). Firing a gun under false colors could lead to an adverse decision in prize court.

1. The Letter of Marque and Reprisal Non naval vessels could capture an enemy merchant ship only if they were commissioned by a letter of marque and reprisal by the competent authority. We already gave some info above in a former thread on privateer’s career (supra).

Sea-Legends : the Prize Game Rules Hi everybody, As the privateer’s career was all about capturing prizes, I think it is interesting to give an insight on the rules of this quite dangerous cat and mouse game. We could imagine that such game was quite simple: capturing any unprotected enemy merchant ship anywhere and taking it back to a friendly port to sell it and its cargo. Actually, prize law was very complex and implied the intervention of specialized courts to enforce the prize game rules, the violation of which could lead a captain swinging at the yardarm – for piracy. Indeed, the difference between privateering and piracy was as thin as the paper of a letter of marque… In a simulation/RPG game like SL, introducing a simplified version of the most important rules would, imo, give not only an accurate representation of the privateer’s career but also an additional thrilling dimension to the gameplay, as there were many uncertainties about the legality of some prizes – especially with neutral nations, which played a double game with enemies – and heavy consequences for the captain and the privateer’s owners when a prize claim was rejected. I read a fascinating book on this topic: D. A. PETRIE, The Prize Game, Lawful Looting on the High Seas in the Days of Fighting Sail, Berkley Books, NY, 1999, 212 pp. The author summarizes in an annex all the most important legal rules of the prize ‘game’ and gives fascinating illustrations of various aspects of it, from the management of prisoners to the use of prize courts in foreign countries and the letters of marque and reprisal, using many contemporary sources including the proceedings of the trials. You can also find interesting explanations on prize law on a wiki webpage (with the usual caution as regards wiki sources) : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prize_(law) (this article refers often to Petrie’s book) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prize_money (this article is very well referenced, using many sources but does not refer to Petrie’s book) Here is a summary of the most interesting rules for SL, as they are presented in the annex of D.A. Petrie, that is in a chronological sequence, but with additions and changes of my own with informations from the main chapters or from other sources. Remember that those rules were applicable to both Navy ships and privateers, with minor differences. (HMS Blanche and French frigate Pique captured as a prize – source: Wikipedia/prize law)

Hello everybody Here are nice detailed plans of a typical frigate (HMS Surprise/French l'Unité) with the structure of the hold and its compartments (source: https://www.ctbasses.com/misc/BruceTrinque/surprise.html) Cutaway view The orlop deck and the hold The lower deck The upper deck The quarterdeck and the forecastle From Bruce Trinque's website: " Notes on sources: As mentioned above, the basic plans for the real HMS Surprise still exist; they can be found at my Ships of Jack Aubrey website. The longitudinal section above is drawn from these plans, influenced by Brian Lavery's rendering of them to be found in Patrick O'Brian: Critical Essays and a Bibliography (WW Norton, 1994). The deckplans are of my own creation, guided by what is revealed in the longitudinal plan and actual plans of two Royal Navy frigates featured in two of the "Anatomy of the Ship" volumes (published in the UK by Conway and in the US by Naval Institute Press): The Frigate Diana by David White and The 24-Gun Frigate Pandora by John McKay and Ron Coleman. The portraits used for the Surprise's officers, with one exception, are taken from the 1805 engraving by W. Reynolds of the officers of HMS Centaur engaged in the capture of Diamond Rock. In several cases these portraits were modified to better fit the officers of the Surprise. The exceptional portrait is that of Surgeon S. Maturin, the original of which is rumored to hang in a Doylestown, Pennsylvania, restaurant: I have it on good authority that the image is authentic. The quotes used to illuminate the various detail descriptions are drawn from Patrick O'Brian's various Aubrey-Maturin novels, giving preference to The Ionian Mission where feasible, but also borrowing from other volumes where appropriate. Bruce Trinque Amston, CT March, 2006 "

(transfered from the discord chat) Hi devs, As regards the hold management, is the detailed chart shown on your blog (winter update), with data on density and volume, the only way to manage the hold in the game ? In reality, the captain and the master (or the master only) decided the arrangement of the hold when the ship was in port or moored to be re-supplied, if necessary by going around the ship by boat to check the trim of the ship by eye only. There was no automatic calculation of the effect of arrangement on the trim (with %) as shown on the blog. Could it be possible to provide at least an option in the game where the captain has to make his own guesses or can only get a rough estimation by the master of the effect on the trim ('Sir, in my opinion, more weight would need to be put in the bow if you want the ship to be more …" etc.) ? I think also that, rather than volumes of specific stores, the types of container (casks, bags, boxes, nets,...) and their sizes were most important to consider for hold management, considering the dimensions of each compartment in the hold. This option would require from the captain to test the effect of the arrangement by trials at sea and to change the arrangement when back to port, after the trials. And again, it would be interesting to keep into account the structure of the hold and the dedicated compartments (sail, ropes, bread bags, powder, etc.) in it in fighting and merchant ships. An idea could be to get the 3D plan of the ship's hold and to be allowed to arrange the different stores in it by dragging (virtual) casks, barrels, bags, etc. in the different compartments shown in the plan, with comments of the master if the captain asks for it. It could be also interesting to have an option in which the master manages this alone, according to his skills. At sea, the only way to change the trim would be to move shots from bow to stern (or cannon) and vice versa and to re-arrange the hold when casks are emptied by water-food consumption. It is a nice aspect of ship management imo. Hold of the HMS Victory Hold arrangement (each type and quantity of store are detailed) La Recherche French stable barge 12 guns, 1787 Formerly 20-gun La Truite Source (hi-res and more drawings) : http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/2100-la-taverne-du-corsaire/?p=141434

Hi devs, A small question about the first entry in the SL blog (the Clerk): what kind of texts and litterature did you use to feed the Clerk ? Only contemporary accounts, newspapers and logs ? Or also present naval fiction literature ? As regards the captain's orders (getting under way at port, setting the course, tacking, clearing for action, beating for quarters, etc.) and the dialogues between the player/captain and his officers (officer of the watch, master, etc.), it could be nice to feed the Clerk with chosen excerpts from realistic naval fiction, like Hornblower, Jack Aubrey and Thomas Kydd series. It could be very immersive to hear our watch officer shouting orders to tack after I decided it… Example: from Foster's Hornblower and the Hotspur, chap III: "Slack water now, sir", announced Bush. "First of the ebb in ten minutes. And anchor's hove short, sir". "Thank you, Mr Bush". (…) "Mr Bush!" said Hornblower. "Get the ship under way, if you please. Set a course to weather the Foreland". "Aye aye, sir". (…) "Stand by there, at the captstan," he [Lieutenant Bush] ordered. "Loose the heads'ls. Hands aloft to loose the tops'ls." Etc. If this kind of orders and dialogues were recreated that way or close to it by the Clerk, immersion and realism would be greatly enhanced. I don't know however if copyrights are necessary to feed the Clerk with such literature (well, at least Hornblower series should be now in the public domain, shouldn't it ?).

Changing the trim should be done after the first cruises - the first being devoted to discovering the characteristics of the ship and the effect of the actual arrangement of the hold. It should be adjusted back in port, where the ship was stable and still. At sea, at the beginning of a cruise, when the hold is crammed with stores and casks, it was very difficult to make major changes in the hold arrangement. Trimming could however be changed by moving the guns (with tackles, out of their carriage) and/or roundshots aft and fore. It was possible to move several tons fore and aft with such system, without being obliged to change all the hold's arrangement. As the stores were consumed, more room was available for changes in the hold arrangement. A nice description of this operation can be found in "Hornblower and the Hotspur" (chap III).

+1 The loading log should indeed be established by the player himself by experience, with the help of the master, having the plan of the hold compartments and knowing the volume and weight of stores. The captain would assess himself the effect on the vessel's draught and stability. At least this could be an option.

Hi Another book by Lennarth Petersson is dedicated to "Rigging period fore-and-aft craft" (https://www.amazon.com/Rigging-Period-Fore-Aft-Craft-ebook/dp/B00SGC4XES). Excellent reference to recreate the rigging of a British naval cutter, an American schooner and a three-masted French lugger ! I already had his amazing book on rigging a square-rigger (https://www.amazon.com/Rigging-Period-Models-Step-Step/dp/1848321023) and this is an excellent complement. Very clear illustrations (drawings) and belaying plans are provided, no boring texts, illustrations are enough. Good source of inspiration to recreate the functional rigging of unrated ships in SL imo. (Excerpts from the book on square-riggers) http://modelshipbuilder.com/e107_files/public/1507365751_1929_FT28822_parrals.jpg

Merchant marine (main source of inspiration : Brian Lavery's Nelson's Navy, The Ships, Men and Organisation 1793-1815, p 269 ; Julian Stockwin's Kydd series (specially The Admiral's Daughter and Treachery); on convoys: p 305; illustrations: Baugean, Les Petites Marines) The merchant navy is of crucial importance in SL, as it will be our main target as privateer captains. It will be also central in the smuggler’s career, as smugglers were nothing but merchant traders breaching the trade and fiscal rules… The merchant service was indeed under strict rules to protect domestic trade and to disrupt enemy trade (much different from the free market rules of today !). Some laws required for instance, in Britain, that all trade with British colonies be carried out via British ports, in British ships and with a quota of British seamen in the crew. This had severe consequences, a.o., on the trade between the British Antillas and the new independent US colonies. From 1785, the American traders could be legally captured as prizes by the Royal Navy and British privateers. The monopoly of commerce granted to the East India Company restricted British trade with this part of the world. The trade in the Mediterranean was subject to government licences, etc. By wartime, the merchant traders were compelled by law to travel in convoys, which were as slow as the slowest ship of the convoy. Only the ships fast and well-armed enough could travel on their own. The types of merchant shipping varied according to the region. We can distinguish: - The coastal trade (eg in Britain the coal trade, manufactured goods, farm products, raw materials, passengers, etc.); this trade had to be run in ‘standing’ (protected coastal) convoys, under the escort of one (sometimes two) hired small armed vessels (brig, sloop) under the command of a lieutenant; Collier brig (Victor Mays) Collier brig discharging Coastal traders in Mediterranean - The long-distance trade (trade with the colonies; triangular (slave) trade; trade with the Baltic/Northern Europe; trade in the Mediterranean (Italy, Turkey,…)); the long-distance convoys were run monthly to their oversea destinations; they were however less frequent than coastal convoys; the y had to take into account the monsoon and hurricane season ; they were escorted mostly by one warship or by a small squadron of ships of the line helped by frigates; Convoy, Bay of Biscay, 1805 (Victor Mays) (East Indiamen, Wiki) (Le Boullongne, 1759, Compagnie française des Indes) - The trade in estuaries and inland waterways (coal, manufactured goods, fresh/dry food, etc.) - The fishing industry (including whalers); it could be local fishing or long-distance fishing/whaling (Greenland, Iceland, etc.); whale oil could be very profitable (13 whales killed by the Lady Jane in 1813 brought £12.000 of profit) - In wartime, the transport of troops and military supplies by private merchantmen. The convoys were organized, in Britain, through the distribution to the merchant captains of a convoy signal book printed by the Admiralty and issued to the escort commander. The commander issued an order of sailing for the merchantmen, usually a rectangle or a diamond made up of columns of ships. The escort ship(s) was (were) placed around, preferably windward of the weathermost column, in order to be able to intercept quickly any predator. The ships were operated by large companies (like the E-India company) but the ownership of the ships was often distributed among the middle classes through a share-system. The ship was divided in a number of shares (usually 16 or 32) and thus could be owned by more than one person or company. The merchant ships were quite small : most of them were between 80 and 500 tons. In 1796, in the British merchant service, there were only 157 ships of more than 500 tons and more than 11.000 were less of 100 tons, out of 15.996 vessels on the register. By 1807, 259 ships were over 500 tons and 14.000 were of less than 100 tons, out of 22.646 vessels on the register. Most of them were square-rigged: ship rigged (3 masts) for the heaviest (> 250 tons), brig- or sloop-rigged for the others. British merchant brigs (above and here left: Portsmouth; right Perseverance) The largest were the East Indiamen, divided in 3 broad classes (500, 800 and 1200 tons) and carried guns (1200 tons: 38 x 18-pdrs: 800 tons: 32 x 18-pdrs). The ships had a rather square mid-section, to carry more goods. (East Indiamen, Wiki) There was, however, a huge variation in the rig and ship types according to the regions. The different seas were charaterized by specific trade vessels of all kinds of rig. In the merchant navy, the chain of command was much simpler than in the Navy. The officers of a merchant ship were: - The captain : he was protected from impressment and responsible for the ship and its cargo - The master: his social status varied: in coastal /short distance trade, he needed little education and relied on local knowledge; on high sea trade, he was better educated (he was often the son of the merchant class), with navigation skills, high social status and considerable power over the crew - The first mate: he was the equivalent of the first lieutenant, responsible for the accounts and protected from impressment; he needed the skills of the captain (had to take over in the event of the captain’s death) - The second mate: much less educated, he was not protected from impressment; he had to be capable to take charge of the watch and supervised seamen’s work. - The seamen: they were better treated than seamen in warships (who became jealous of them) and searched for by Navy pressgangs (if not protected: some were protected from impressment, eg seamen from the Greenland whale fishery); they were also better paid than in the Navy; 4 types were recorded: apprentices; foreigners; men rejected for the King’s service; protected seamen. The crew was much less numerous than in warships (1 man/20 tons in a merchant ship; 1/3 tons in a warship). This would be the chain of command in smugglers’ ships I guess. In the East-India Company, the officers were generally well educated and of higher social rank.

Hi everybody, As regards money ("gold"), I would also suggest to limit its use in the game to more or less the way it was used in reality during the period. For privateers, the money was invested by the ship owner or a group of ship owners, seldomely by the captain himself. Of course prize money was his main objective, but he was dependant on the budget granted by his sponsor for arming his ship (unless he was lucky and rich enough and decided to cruise for himself and received his own letter of marque). In a Naval career, the captain could use his own (prize) money to improve his cabin, buy extra things (high quality powder, fine food and spirits/wine, fresh paints, a nice sword, fine cloths, etc.) but he had not to pay himself for the whole fitting/arming of his ship or to pay his officers and crew of course. So, unlike in NA or in Ultimate Admiral AoS I would not use 'gold' in SL beyond the ways a contemporary captain could earn it (mainly from his family; from his own pay; from prize money and investments) and use it (for personal expenses or in Investments). To reward the captain and make him progress in his career, honor, fame, authority and experience would be more realistic to use than only money. Well, famous frigate captains got often very rich and it would be fun to recreate the way they could amass a fortune, but gold should not be the unique currency and the unique way to progress. For instance, a very famous/lucky/gifted privateer captain had no problem to be financed and to get a nice ship by a ship owner or a group of them, because of his reputation, not directly because of his fortune (even if he could fancy up his ship and armament with his own money). On the other,hand, it could be nice to introduce in the game the possibility for a captain to hire a prize agent, in charge to represent him in prize court and to manage/invest his money (in a more or less honest way and with more or less success, like did Jack Aubrey's agent... ;-)). Reversal of fortune could also be nice to introduce, for instance when an investment was too risky or when the prize was not legal and the court condemned the captain to pay for the damage done.

However, the game is still in (very) early development, alpha tests will begin only in 2021

Hi thorman, you will find all the info on https://www.sea-legends.com/buy