John Harland wrote:I hate to have to disagree with both John and Bertil Sandahl, but the original of the term "carvel" has been pretty well established since Sandahl wrote his comprehensive work on Middle English. In the form that we would recognize it, it first appears in northern European languages to describe flush planking in the late 14th/early 15th century, at the same time that Iberian caravelas started visiting northern ports on a regular basis. When northern shipwrights started building ships with flush planks (c. 1430-1440) they referred to the new ships as "carvel-built" or just as "carvels" (or its equivalents). The Dutch "karviel-nagels" referred to by Sandahl are derived this way. In late medieval Dutch, "karviel" or "karveel" referred to boats built in this new way, and was the same word applied to ships coming from Portugal or Britanny with salt and wine. It may have entered English via the Dutch, but the origin is ultimately the small seagoing craft of the Iberian coast.
I don't want to get into this deeply, since few people in the Group have much interest in etymology, but here a couple of thoughts. The ultimate expert on early English maritime terms, Dr Bertil Sandahl, thoroughly discusses 'carvel-nails' and 'clench-nails' on pp. 136-8 of Volume 1 of Middle English Sea Terms. He suggests that in this case, 'carvel' rather than being related to the southern European vessel of that name, is related to Dutch of 'karviel-nagel', 'kaviel-nagel' and other variants. This word is in turn related to Spanish 'cavilla' (cabilla), a peg, pin, or belaying-pin, and to French 'chevillot' belaying pin, and 'cheville', 'pin'. In Middle Dutch, we find other spellings 'kovien-nagel' (Swedish 'koffernagel').
On the matter of clinker planking, it is almost always caulked, either with tarred animal hair or moss. In Nordic ships, the caulking (usually hair) is laid into a groove in the seam when the planks are assembled, while in cogs and other Low German craft, the caulking is driven into the interior side of the seam, above the nails (there is a relatively wide overlap).
One reason that clinker was abandoned for large vessels in favor of carvel was purely a matter of expense. Eliminating the thousands of clinker nails (rivets) reduced the expense considerably. Something like 20% of the material cost of a cog (which only had clinker sides) was in the iron for it, mostly clinker nails, according to building accounts from the Netherlands in the late 1200s. Wood could also be used more efficiently, as carvel construction did not depend on such high quality wood and it could be more efficiently sawn from the log into plank. Not to mention the savings in labor from not having to drill and drive all the clinker nails. In boatbuilding practice, fitting clinker planks is not appreciably harder or more time-consuming than it is in carvel construction - the total amount of contact surface is about the same - and most of the other tasks are about the same in terms of time and difficulty, but eliminating the rivets saves a great deal in material and labor cost. These savings were more dramatic in larger vessels, and so it is no surprise that carvel construction first took hold in big ships and then trickled down to smaller craft. In Norway, clinker continued in use in bigger vessels until the early 20th century, when it became clear that it was not compatible with diesel engine power (rivets don't take the vibration so well).
Also, from Joel.B.SanbornThe carvel ship with filled clinker frames is often referred to as the Woolwich Ship, found just before WWI during construction of a power station at the site of the old Woolwich Dockyard in London. It is thought to be Sovereign, built in 1485 and rebuilt at about the same time Mary Rose was being built. It appears that the frames from the original ship were reused in the rebuild (the ship had a reputation as an especially good sailor), with the joggles dubbed down and filled out with little wedges. There is a publication in Mariner's Mirror about the ship, but I cannot put my hand on the specific reference at this moment!
A side note:
There is at least one instance in the record, perhaps it was Mary Rose, in which the frames excavated show signs of having been originally clinker, then at some point the notches were dubbed off and the hull planked in carvel fashion.
Another side note:
Some of the largest clinker built ships, built before 1400 or so, rivaled HMS Victory in size, and were planked with three or four layers of clinker plank. Try patching a hole in that sucker!
The multi-layer clinker planking is found in one ship, Henry V's Grace Dieu,
the wreck of which still lies in the Hamble above Portsmouth and can be seen at
very low tides. It was recently investigated by the archaeologists from
Southampton University, and for those in the UK, there was a Time Team episode
about it. It was one of several huge ships built for Henry's French war, and
saw little service (there was no need for it, and it did not sail well). Other
known big clinker ships of the 15th century are all single-planked, although
none are anywhere near as large as Grace Dieu.
{Fred Hocker}
Back?