by the jib-boom. The square spritsail, which could not be trained
fore and aft, and was of feeble effect in keeping the ship’s head from
turning to windward, has been replaced by the jib. The spritsail
yard (which continued in use till after 1850) has disappeared and
has been replaced by the spritsail gaffs, two fixed spars which slope
downwards and help to support the “jib-guys,” the lateral supports
of the booms. For a time, and after the use of spritsails had been
given up, the spritsail yard continued to be used to discharge the
function now given to the gaiis (see Smyth, Sailor’s Word-Book,
sub voce). The changes in the mizzen have an obscure history.
About the middle of the 18th century it ceased to be a pure lateen.
The yard was retained, but no sail was set on the forearm. Then
the yard was given up and replaced by a gaff and a boom. The
new sail was called the spanker. It was, however, comparatively
narrow, and when a greater spread of sail was required, a studding sail
(at first called a “driver”) was added. At a later date
“spanker” and “driver” were used as synonymous terms, and
the studding-sail was called a “ringtail.” The studding-sails are
the representatives of a class of sail once more generally used. In
modern times a sail is cut of the extreme size which is capable of
being carried in fine weather, and when the wind increases in strength
it is reefed—i.e. part is gathered up and fastened by reef points,
small cords attached to the sail. Till the 17th century at least
the method was often to cut the courses small, so that they could
be carried in rough weather. When a greater spread of sail was
required, a piece called a bonnet was added to the foot of the sail,
and a further piece called a drabbler could be added to that. It is
an example of the tenacious conservatism of the sea that this
practice is still retained b the Swedish small craft called “lodjor”
in the Baltic and White gea. It will be easily understood that no
innovation was universally accepted at once. Jib and sprit topsail,
lateen, mizzen and spanker, and so forth, would be found for long
on the sea together.,
The history of the development of rigging is one of adjustment. The size of the masts had to be adapted to the ship, and it was necessary to find the due proportion between yards and masts. As the size of the medieval ship increased, the natural course was to increase the height of the mast and of the sail it carried. Even when the mast was subdivided into lower, top and top gallant, the lower mast was too long, and the strain of the sail racked the hull. Hence the constant tendency of the ships to leak. Sir Henry Manwayring, when giving the proper proportions of the masts, says that the Flemings (i.e. the Dutch) made them taller (“taller” and “taunt” were for long used to mean the same thing) than the English, which again forced them to make the sails less wide. A tall sail could not be cut so wide as a lower one without putting an excessive strain on the mast. He says that the Flemings found an advantage in working to windward, but that they “wronged” (i.e. racked) their ships. The English preferred a less lofty mast and a wider spread of sail.
It is very difficult to say what changes in the proportions of masts and yards took place in English ships between the early 17th and the 19th centuries. The difficulty arises largely not only from insufficient knowledge of the earlier period, but from the fact that a scale was fixed only after trials, and by degrees. Manwayring, for instance, when giving the proportion of the topmasts to lower masts, says: “The topmasts are ever half so long as the masts into which they belong; but there is no absolute proportion in these, and the like things, for if a man will have his mast short, he may the bolder make his topmast long.” In some respects the change was certainly slight. In the early 17th century, in England at least, the length of the mainmast was fixed by taking four-fifths of the breadth of the ship and multiplying by three. Two centuries later the method was to take the length of the lower deck and the extreme breadth, add them together, and divide by two. If we take a 74-gun ship of about the year 1820, which was 176 ft. long on the lower deck and 48 ft. 8 in. wide, she would have, by 'the system then used, a mainmast of 112 ft. Manwayring’s system would have given her one of 117 ft. But in the proportions of the masts to one another there was a change. In the 17th century the foremast was four-fifths of the main, and the bowsprit was of the same length as the foremast. In the 19th the foremast was eight-ninths of the mainmast, while the bowsprit was seven-elevenths of the mainmast in the largest ships, and three-fifths in the others. When we come to the relative proportions of masts and yards the difficulty increases, for the standard was not the same. The seamen of the 17th century calculated the length of the mainyard not by the size of the mast but by the length of the keel. The mainyard, which was the standard for the others, ought according to “the best and most absolute” estimate to be five-sixths of the length of the keel. But Manwayring again explains that “the proportion is not absolute.” If it was followed, the yards of a 17th-century ship must have been rather longer than in a vessel of a hundred and fifty and two hundred years later, when the mainyard was eight-ninths of the mainmast, and a regular scale was fixed throughout. Even so Manwayring’s warning that “the proportion was not absolute” must be borne in mind. Changes were constant. The development of the famous American clippers made a considerable one. So has the growth of the vast four- and five-masted iron sailing ships of recent days. Individual captains have fitted ships according to ideas of their own. It has always happened that extra sails have been invented and set by ingenious devices for particular purposes. One large sail requires more men to handle it than several small ones. For this reason it is .that in recent times the topsails of merchant ships have been divided into upper and lower, with a great loss of beauty, but an increase of convenience. To the same cause, the wish to economize in the size of the crew, is to be attributed the introduction of machinery for reeling sail from the deck, which is also an easier and a safer process than going aloft to reef them by hand. In a general way it may be said that the development of the rigging has been towards establishing a fair balance between the fore and after spread of canvas. Until the jib was invented in the 18th century, a ship which was sailing on the wind was subject to a disproportionate pressure aft. If she was at all given to “griping”—that is to say, inclined to turn head to wind (and all ships are liable to have ways and manners which are mysterious in origin and not seldom incurable), the mizzen-sail could not be used, for if it had been she would never have been “out of the wind.” Therefore when close-hauled (sailing with the wind on the side and somewhat from before her centre) she lost the use of part of her sail. The spritsail which could not be trained fore and aft was no use “on the wind.”
A few words may be added concerning the tops. In the earlier form of ships the top was a species of crow’s nest placed at the head of the mast to hold a look-out, or in military operations to give a place of advantage to archers and slingers. They appear occasionally as mere bags attached to one side of the mast. As a general rule they are round. In the 16th century there were frequently two tops on the fore- and mainmasts, one at the head of the lower, another at the head of the topmast, where in later times there have only been the-two traverse beams which make the cross trees. The upper top dropped out by the 17th century. The form was round, and so continued to be till the 18th century when the quadrangular form was introduced. In quite recent times the military tops of warships have resumed the circular form.
Authorities.—The present writer is indebted to Admiral Sir Cyprian A. G. Bridge, G.C.B., whose practical acquaintance with the older type of sailing ship as well as with the modern steamship makes his authority specially valuable, for the correction or confirmation of the technical details in the above article. Among the literature of the subject, reference may be made to the following works: Sir Henry Manwayring, The Seaman’s Dictionary (London, 1644); Darcy Lever, The Young Sea Officer’s Sheet Anchor (London, 1808); Sir George Nares, Seamanship (Portsmouth, 1882); Vice-Admiral Edmond Paris, La Musée de marine du Louvre (Paris, 1883). (D. H.)
RIGHT ASCENSION, in astronomy, that co-ordinate of a
heavenly body defined by the angle which the meridian passing
through it makes with the prime meridian through the vertical
equinox (see Astronomy).
RIGHTS OF MAN AND OF THE CITIZEN, DECLARATION OF, a sort of manifesto issued in 1789 by the Constituent Assembly in the French Revolution, to be inscribed at the head of the constitution when it should be completed. It stated the fundamental principles which inspired the revolution. Historians have traced a connexion with the declarations
of rights which preceded the constitution of some of the states
of the American Union, especially of Virginia, but the situation
in France at the time, and the influence of the writings of the
philosopher made the proposal for such a statement very natural.
The declaration overturned the political and social principles
upon which the existent régime stood. It has served as a
base for modern civil legislation and is still a force in European
history. The final text voted by the Assembly was accepted by
the king on the 5th of October 1789, at first conditionally, then
with modifications. It contains a preamble and 17 articles.
They proclaim and define political equality and liberty in its
various manifestations, determine the character of the law
and the conditions of its application, and state at the same
time the restrictions upon the individual will which are necessary
