In the Royal Navy served a mixture of different kinds of sailors. There were volunteers, impressed sailors and fishermen, prisoners, sometimes slaves and lascars (Asians). Mostly below their thirties, in the Myth of the Press Gang, using a statistical sample, reveals that almost eighty per cent were volunteers, coming half of them from England. This is explained due the possibility of bounties and price money, but also because of the possibility of a job from inland people and social ascends. Such evidence contrasts with the prevailing point of view that crewmembers were impressed men, force to serve due to their seamanship.
Such blend of races and origins was due to the increasingly bigger empire and the demands of the service, especially …show more content…
In his article Brunsman describes the scarcity of skilled seamen due to several factors occurring at the same time. From the supply perspective, sailors were in high demand in the merchant navy, which pay them better, so the lower the number of available seamen, the higher the salaries and thus, the lower the probability of volunteering and the higher the likelihood of desertion.
From the demand perspectives and the sheer size of the Royal Navy with sail ships which required many hands to be manned, the sheer distances between the colonies to England and the high mortality (especially in the Caribbean) due to sicknesses and enemy action pulled the demand for skilled labour. It could not be covered completely, so the Admiralty was forced to use impressment and/or using black sailors/lascars. Furthermore, Britain depended heavily on sea trade to generate tax revenue for financing any war effort. In practical terms, that meant that the Royal Navy could not interfere too much on recruiting/impressing merchant sailors, as this could spell ruin on trade and/ or alter the delicate social equilibria in the …show more content…
In a nation which claims to protect freedom against the absolutism, the use of press gangs to search and retain qualified (or not so) sailor for service is a thorny issue. Also, to swallow that seamen population were unwilling to volunteer in big numbers was not politically correct. On top of that, the social consequences, (impressment widows, poor relief or poor health of the affected personnel) are tough to assimilate. Thereby, there is a natural tendency to mask or downplay such recruiting method. Conversely, adversaries (Americans) had the political incentive of magnifying the opposite.
In his two articles, Isaac Land suggests warns about the validity of the assumptions taken in previous studies. Much of the argumentation or justification provided is not in agreement with the context: naval officers were not willing to write down on the books the real number of imprisoned sailors. Such “white lies” was both beneficial to the men and the ranks, and thereby, questions the validity of the registers. Land also suggest that the statistics taken could be dubious validity and biased, as the number of reported riots did not account for the total number (to avoid embarrassment) nor account for the passive resistance/avoidance of the sailor
Such blend of races and origins was due to the increasingly bigger empire and the demands of the service, especially …show more content…
In his article Brunsman describes the scarcity of skilled seamen due to several factors occurring at the same time. From the supply perspective, sailors were in high demand in the merchant navy, which pay them better, so the lower the number of available seamen, the higher the salaries and thus, the lower the probability of volunteering and the higher the likelihood of desertion.
From the demand perspectives and the sheer size of the Royal Navy with sail ships which required many hands to be manned, the sheer distances between the colonies to England and the high mortality (especially in the Caribbean) due to sicknesses and enemy action pulled the demand for skilled labour. It could not be covered completely, so the Admiralty was forced to use impressment and/or using black sailors/lascars. Furthermore, Britain depended heavily on sea trade to generate tax revenue for financing any war effort. In practical terms, that meant that the Royal Navy could not interfere too much on recruiting/impressing merchant sailors, as this could spell ruin on trade and/ or alter the delicate social equilibria in the …show more content…
In a nation which claims to protect freedom against the absolutism, the use of press gangs to search and retain qualified (or not so) sailor for service is a thorny issue. Also, to swallow that seamen population were unwilling to volunteer in big numbers was not politically correct. On top of that, the social consequences, (impressment widows, poor relief or poor health of the affected personnel) are tough to assimilate. Thereby, there is a natural tendency to mask or downplay such recruiting method. Conversely, adversaries (Americans) had the political incentive of magnifying the opposite.
In his two articles, Isaac Land suggests warns about the validity of the assumptions taken in previous studies. Much of the argumentation or justification provided is not in agreement with the context: naval officers were not willing to write down on the books the real number of imprisoned sailors. Such “white lies” was both beneficial to the men and the ranks, and thereby, questions the validity of the registers. Land also suggest that the statistics taken could be dubious validity and biased, as the number of reported riots did not account for the total number (to avoid embarrassment) nor account for the passive resistance/avoidance of the sailor