478 HISTORY OF MARINE ARCHITECTURE.

regard to their own, which will be easily discernible on referring to the RoyalPrince.

The annexed representations of the ships of Spain, of France, and of Holland,are copied from drawings made by Vandevelde, as is supposed, on good authority,,about the year 1670. The difference between them, allowing for that peculiarityof ornament which sufficiently distinguishes those of one country from another,is so extremely trivial, that were they not particularised in this respect, theship of war, built at Amsterdam, might, on many accounts, have been mistakenfor one constructed at Cadiz. The principal distinguishing point, independentof those ornaments, was merely, that the ship of the Hollanders was of greaterforce than that belonging to Spain, of the same nominal rate ; but this wasmerely because the latter country did not then aspire so much to the characterof a maritime power as the former. France approached much nearer to themin this particular; for by exchanging the emblem of liberty for that adopted byFrance; and the collar of knighthood, it might puzzle even a curious enquirerto appropriate each structure properly to the country which produced it.

Far different, however, was the case with respect to Britain. From the verycommencement of the century, that peculiar mode of construction which united,in great measure, the principles of Marine Architecture, as practised by othercountries, into one point of view, began to wear off, and ere the conclusion ofthe reign of James the First, became totally exploded. The opinion naturallysuggested itself to her artists, that a circular, or curved form, was much betteradapted to the resistance of an heavy sea, than that which was practised by hercotemporary rivals, and the representation of a ship of Britain, from a drawingof the same artist, will point out the difference so sufficiently, as to renderany farther comment or description unnecessary.

But while an absurd adherence to ancient customs, is on one hand con-demned, with respect to other countries, it would be unfair not to point out,that Britain, on her part, was equally as strenuous in adhering to some prin-ciples which were scarcely less absurd, and which France, as well as Holland,were in some instances prudent enough to reject. The chain-plates, whichin the infancy of Marine Architecture had been fixed extremely low, were,by the artists of those countries which had judgment enough to discover thedefect, raised to a more proper and effectual position. Holland, with the restof the united provinces, and France, placed them above the upper tiers oftheir two-decked ships; while Spain and Britain obstinately persevered not

only