It is astonishing to discover that the majority of 18th-century seamen were incapable of swimming in an era in which the vast, unforgiving oceans served as both a battleground and a highway. This paradox appears to be almost counterintuitive; however, a closer examination of history reveals a complex web of factors that were intricately interwoven with the maritime lifestyle of the era.
The myth of the swimmer seaman
Initially, it is necessary to debunk the romanticized notion of the sailor as a master of the oceans who is equally adept at swimming and sailing. The actuality was quite the opposite. In addition to serving as workplaces, frigates, merchant vessels, and ships of the line were residences for personnel that frequently numbered in the hundreds or dozens. The sea was their source of sustenance, but it was also a hostile environment in which survival depended on the collective rather than the individual.
Superstition was a substantial factor. Seas were perceived as enigmatic and frequently malevolent entities. An antiquated maritime superstition posited that individuals who were capable of swimming were more likely to attempt to flee during a shipwreck, thereby tempting fate or even causing their shipmates to abandon others in a state of panic. Swimming was occasionally actively discouraged in order to preserve order and discipline in the event of a calamity, as this conviction was so deeply ingrained.
Further, the equipment of an 18th-century marine was not suitable for swimming from a practical standpoint. Swimming would be not only challenging but also perilous due to the weight of heavy woolen clothing, leather boots, and equipment such as blades or tools that would slow him down in the water. The time spent learning to swim was also time that was diverted from the acquisition of the more critical skills of navigation, combat, or sailing, which were essential for the survival and efficacy of a ship.
Swimming was not a consideration during the construction of the ships. The purpose of their construction was to float, carry, and battle, not to be abandoned for a swim. The probability of survival in the water was low as a result of the immense distances from land, the risk of hypothermia, and the cold temperatures. In the event of a ship's sinking, the primary objective was to remain aboard the vessel or in lifeboats, rather than to attempt to navigate the water independently.
Furthermore, the job responsibilities on a ship were frequently hazardous. High in the rigging, men were responsible for the management of gunpowder and cannons, as well as the handling of weighty sails. Falls, explosions, and injuries were frequent occurrences, and a man's ability to swim would not necessarily protect him from such dangers.
Finally, it is imperative to evaluate the socio-economic background of numerous seafarers. The lower classes, where education and leisure time were scarce, were compelled to serve in large numbers. Swimming was a skill that was not universally taught or valued; it was a luxury of time and opportunity that many did not have.
Swimming was not recognized as a valuable skill for sailors until the 19th century, when organized swimming clubs and a change in maritime safety procedures were introduced. For example, the Royal Navy would subsequently promote swimming lessons, acknowledging the potential life-saving advantages.
So, the 18th-century seaman's inability to swim was a result of a combination of practicality, superstition, the nature of their responsibilities, ship design, and socio-economic factors. This historical quirk serves as a reminder of the evolution of survival strategies over time, as well as the impact of technology and culture. What was once a counterproductive talent has now become an essential one for those who are willing to navigate the unpredictable seas.