Talk:Row galley

Gunboat?
I don't know if there's much point in keeping a separate article for this type of craft. Going by the descriptions in the individual articles, this appears to be a pretty standard gunboat.

Peter Isotalo 21:20, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Still not galleys
I've been working on the article galley for quite a while. The work right has been on hold for a while, but I have already added a lot of material and corrected plenty of misconceptions. This includes a "Definition and terminology"-section that discusses the use of the term "galley" in the sense that was used primarily by the earliest US Navy. What's clear is that these vessels aren't defined as galleys in the existing literature on the history of galleys. The term "galley" or "row galley" remains in use in histories of the US Navy itself, but it is absolutely meaningless to actually define these craft as galleys. And it also seems that the separation of the two categories Category:Galleys of the United States Navy and Category:Row galleys of the United States Navy really have no business staying separate.

I brought the issue up at the latest renaming of US Navy ship categories, for example. This included an examination of how standard US Navy histories themselves as well as more general references deal with the issue. Despite a very obvious lack of consistency in the usage of "galleys" and "row galleys" in the literature, and their even more obvious lack of likeness to "genuine", Mediterranean-style galleys, the "galley"-category was added to Category:Galleys by an editor who participated in the category discussion. So I'm guessing a consensus discussion is in order.

How do we deal with this problem? Is the suggestion in the thread above, to simply identify these craft as a variant of gunboats, a workable solution? Are there any valid arguments for keeping "galleys" and "row galleys" separate? And how do we make sure that these US Navy gunboats aren't constantly confused with Mediterranean-style galleys?

Peter Isotalo 17:20, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, I also created the "Galleys" category, full disclosure there. ;) Here's the thing though - if the U.S. Navy itself calls its vessels "row galleys", isn't it WP:OR for Wikipedia to decide that they are not? - The Bushranger One ping only 20:44, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Agree wholeheartedly with Bushranger. It would be like saying that what the Army says to be a tank isn't actually a tank. Buggie111 (talk) 01:14, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * A tank is a type of craft/vehicle, not a term. This article is really about archaic US Navy nomenclature than anything else. I don't see any relevance in the comparison.
 * Peter Isotalo 13:54, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

As coincidence would have it, I just happened to be reading The Jeffersonian Gunboat Navy by Spencer Tucker. During the ARW there were two terms used for these ships. One was "gondola" (apparently not to be confused with the gondolas of Venice) and the other "galley" but he makes no mention of "row galley." Tucker is basically comparing "gondola" and "galley" as ancestors of "gunboats" that appeared during Jefferson's time as president. However, I too have seen the US Navy using all three names: "gondola", "galley", and "row galley." at random. Most of these terms are found in the various articles contained within DANFS. What needs to be said though is that I've found Tucker's works to be a bit sloppy and often lacking in full explanations. He tends to gloss over descriptions that really should be explained completely for clarity. Brad (talk) 03:48, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I actually have less of a problem if we used "row galley" consistently. It would be a minimal safeguard against confusion with actual galleys. My biggest concern is the separate categories for galleys/row galleys/gondolas. As Brad points out above, there is clearly no consistent definition of the terms, and they appear to be used interchangeably for the same rough category of craft. The categories should be merged as soon as possible.
 * When it comes to the issue of original research, then we have to take into consideration secondary sources in general. Modern historians hardly ever use terminology the same way it was originally used, and in a pre-modern setting, this is usually futile, since no real standardization existed. The US Navy was as far as I understand not alone in using the term "galley" to refer to gunboats and other oared fighting craft, but that doesn't mean that modern historians consider anything with bow/stern-mounted cannons and oars to be galleys.
 * Sources that describe these craft in a more general context do exist, and they don't categorize them as completely unique types of craft. Here's a summary of Karl Heinz Marquardt, "The Fore and Aft Rigged Warship" in Gardiner & Lavery (1992, p. 64) that I wrote for galley:
 * "During the American Revolutionary War and the wars against France and Britain the US Navy built vessels that were described as 'row galleys' or simply 'galleys', though they actually were variants of brigantines or Baltic gunboats."
 * To describe terminology surrounding galleys, I also referenced a passage in Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships (volume 4, p. 516) that discusses ship types. As far s I can tell, it was in agreement with Marquardt. Unfortunately, I can no longer find the reference on Google Books.
 * Peter Isotalo 13:54, 26 December 2011 (UTC)


 * The biggest flaw in the "call them gunboats" argument is that these were row-powered ships, not sail as most gunboats of the time would have been. and "Row gunboat" would be WP:OR/WP:SYNTH (one or both) making up a new title for sure. - The Bushranger One ping only 19:53, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I think you've gotten some really, really bad information concerning gunboats of the decades around 1800. They're frequently mentioned in works on oared vessels of war (like Anderson's Oared fighting ships), usually as a craft that inherited the tactical role that was previously filled by galleys. Gunboats would use their sweeps in battle, but would naturally set sail when high maneuverability was not important. But the whole point of their design (floating gun platforms with seating for as many rowers as it will fit), is to allow them to move regardless of wind conditions. Why else would they be designed like huge rowboats? Here are some images of contemporary gunboats to illustrate the point.
 * I also recommend that you check out the article on USS Philadelphia (1776). Then compare it with USS Lee (1776), USS Savannah (1798) and USS Beaufort (1799) (all described as "row galleys" or "galleys). And then there's USS Marietta (1803), which has conveniently enough been classified as both gunboat and row galley.
 * But we're still veering off track a bit, and I'd like to stress that I'm in favor of consistent usage of "row galley". I've never urged us to "call them gunboats" nor that we should rename the article to the silly tautology "row gunboat" (eventhough I managed to find it in DANFS). I'm merely stressing that their classification and design attributes should not be influenced by confused and antiquated terminology.
 * Peter Isotalo 22:38, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Category merger
So do are there any reasons not to join the "galleys" and "row galleys" of the US Navy into the same category? We can leave the detailed description of these vessels to those who wish to the homework on that, but it seems obvious that the two terms are mere synonyms.

Peter Isotalo 01:06, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
 * If we're discussing Wikipedia categories instead of 'categories of ships', that needs to be done at CfD, not here... - The Bushranger One ping only 01:11, 5 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm talking about about moving articles from one category to another. The deletion of the leftover category is a mere technicality.
 * Peter Isotalo 01:24, 5 January 2012 (UTC)