Family Life and Sea

¶ … permissive attitude towards London sailor-town exist during the 1850-1860, and how did it change during the 1900-1910?

The main Theories Fronted

Although the marine community came from diverse backgrounds, the seafarers ashore had acquired a debauched image long before the 16th Century. The seafarers have won the appraisal of researchers for their role since then. According to Lee[footnoteRef:1], seafarers had delinked themselves from the usual expected bonds and roles in society as otherwise expected of all humans. They were believed to be vulnerable to being misled and were believed to be strangers to the civilized, polite norms of contemporary human decorum. Once seafarers went ashore, they were inclined to being irresponsible beings. They could engage in drunkenness as of habit. They practiced little restraint in general. The seafarers most likely committed many other ills while at sea. The lack of societal control that normally provides a steadying influence meant that the sea-men easily fell to the temptations of alcoholism and prostitution[footnoteRef:2]. [1: Robert Lee, "The Seafarers' Urban World . . . " 23] [2: Ibid, 24]

In general terms Sailortown was a cosmopolitan zone with varying cultural diversity. It had a clear diaspora space, yet it was most renowned for the revelry. It had numerous dancehalls, theaters for the low class, music halls, and several other recreational spots. The docking locations were well known vice centers. 6 Other port towns such as Liverpool and Hull had a high number of licensed premises of similar nature in 1841. Most of these premises were located near the quays and docks. It has also been observed that as far as relationships on shore were concerned, they only survived as long as the money lasted[footnoteRef:3]. Prostitutes in bare chest and bare head in London sought to gain from the excesses of the sea farers. Girls as young as 14 years were involved in the vice. Indeed, Liverpool Sailortown was filled with marauding prostitutes. Cardiff visitors at Tiger Bay had the luxury and broad range of choice when it came to the selection of harlots. They could choose a prostitute from a race of their choice. Antwerp was the center of fetish encounters between women while even Klongtai, as small as it was, was a hub inhabited by numerous whores[footnoteRef:4]. Sea fairing was generally regarded as young man's activity. The entry age was relatively low. The wastage rate was significantly high; a trend that was attributed to the lack of life experience by the young men, coupled with lack of training in any specialized field[footnoteRef:5]. In the later years of the 17th and the 19th C, the crew aboard the sailing ships always had a significant number of apprentices. Even among whalers, it was agreed that sea fairing was a lifelong occupation that required elaborate training. The career was not attractive to sailors beyond their middle ages. In America, the median age for sea fairing in the early part of the 19th century was only 25 years. This area was dominated by young people. Most of these young people left the trade after an average of 10 years. Before 1870, in Denmark, the distribution of seafarers based on age was eye-catching. It is reported that three quarters of such sailors were below 30 years. In the port of Stavanger in 1876, the median seafarer age was reported to have been 26.2 years. In the ports of Germany, sea faring was largely seen to be a transition from youth and marriage. In such ports as Hamburg in Germany, the sailor group between 20 and 30 years constituted 53.8%[footnoteRef:6]. It followed expectation that since most of the sailor crew was still young and unmarried, they inevitably sought female company at the first opportunity. The irregular and deviant behavior observed among them including drunkenness, and bad temperament was just part of the behavior that could only be expected from a group like that. Generally, they were limited to the quayside spatial horizons. They could be spotted in the brothels close to the dock area, or other entertainment places within the proximity of sailor town. [3: Gordon Jackson, Hull in the Eighteenth Century: A Study in Economic and Social History (London, 1972), 187] [4: Supra, note 1, 25] [5: Leslie Hughes Powell, The Shipping Federation. (Shipping Federation, 1950), 56] [6: Supra, note 1, 26]

Seamen could only feel comfortable around fellow seamen. There are accounts that indicate the presence of sea men who may not have been part of the crew. They shared lodging, amenities, and even the other excesses while at sea. It was common for pirates to travel together in groups while at sea for protection purposes. English seafarers abroad also followed suit. Seamen also embraced the idea of hospitality towards others. It was also noted that during such situations, kinship and friendship were regarded highly. Some seamen formed fixed relations with those who provided boarding for them. Indeed, when and if such seamen enjoyed a cozy relationship with their hosts, they would return the same hostelry whenever they travelled. Indeed, it was observed that seamen often remembered their hosts in their wills. Those in main port cities such as London were more commonly seen on such documents.

Thus, despite the liberal nature of the seamen mentioned above; as viewed from one perspective, according to Lee[footnoteRef:7], owing to the fact that seafarers were mostly found in the central part of sailor town, the hardship that came with seafaring was not unknown to the local populace. Seafarers were not reported to have caused trouble within ports or other local residential locations. The seamen were largely embedded within their families and sea networks. The idea of being irresponsible young members of the crew was a lie that was mooted by the ship owners to easily transfer blame for any liability to the crewmembers, and effectively avoid or limit such liability to the families of the crewmembers or their dependants thereof. [7: Ibid, 27]

Commonly, the view of the urban life as led by sea farers was viewed from the perspective of studies done on large ports. Thus, smaller anchorage ports have been ignored. Consequently, the life of seafarers has not been analyzed from an accurate social, cultural, and familial perspective. Seafarers are commonly treated as a unique group with their own cultural face. It is assumed that the group's urban influence was expressed within restricted but self-sufficient maritime corners; with the view of their lives ashore shaped by consistent images of a masculine camaraderie. The gratification of physical prowess along with the persistent hold to the existence of a maritime life and world set in a distinct and unique cultural formation[footnoteRef:8]. [8: Ibid]

This essay examines the considerations stated above. As pointed out in the arguments above, the permissive view of sailor town in London between the 1850s and 1860s and the subsequent transformation that occurred in 1900 to 1910 is a subject worth examining in this paper.

Sailortowns: Composition of the Population

Maritime commerce greatly influenced European urbanization. Statistical reports show that by 1850, 40% of all major urban cities across the globe were seaports with an average of 100, 000 inhabitants. This scenario held true until mid-20th C. when port-based cities began to be eclipsed by industrial cities and rise of other commercial on large scale[footnoteRef:9]. While the port city demographic history can be accurately seen only through considering their regional locations and their distinct position in an urban hierarchy, the rise of the main business ports in the 19th century in Europe was significantly influenced by a marked overreliance on immigration. Indeed, the development of such major cities was a hallmark of prosperity, a buoyant economy full of employment opportunities and the chance of acquiring immense wealth. [9: Robert Lee, Configuring the city: 94]

The elites in such major cities as Liverpool, London, and Glasgow earned large incomes from even the early 18th century. It would be erroneous to imagine that the elite merchants always sought a unifying trade policy or even that internal difference s did not deter the adoption of specific interests. It has become evident that elite merchants frequently operated in a cohesive fashion. The urban elite from Bristol belonged to various denominations. There is no evidence of any discrimination against any religious minorities. A separate and distinct association represented the collective interest of the owners of the ships, irrespective of whether it was in Liverpool or Cardiff. After the issuance of a new charter in 1695, the main merchants demonstrated a united front[footnoteRef:10]. When the chamber of commerce was put up in Liverpool in 1851, there was a marked show of cooperation between the merchant groups. This was contrary to the popular belief that it was not possible for the groups to meet and agree on any common cause. [10: Ibid, 102]

There is a clear and urgent need to examine the role of the elite merchants in port cities. This is necessitated by factors such as the underlying uncertain nature of the trading activities, the failure risk, and the disproportionate influence on immigrant merchants. Such merchants often came from diverse communities from each individual port city. So far, along these lines, it seemed difficult to forge a form of unity under the circumstances. It was harder to unite in port cities as opposed to other urban entities owing to the high risk of failure of entrepreneurial ventures, and the overreliance on immigration.

The environment for doing business in the 19th century was one of distrust and moral deviance. Most of the firms only lived for a short while. Merchants were more prone to the risk of bankruptcy compared to other careers[footnoteRef:11]. Isolated firms operated under seamless information web including credit and contract that existed in a pronged string of favor and responsibility. The development of cohesive merchant elite was dependent on establishing a unifying business norm that demonstrated the common attitudes and a sense of goodwill and aspirations. Such congeniality and commonality of causes can be accrued only through interpersonal content efforts and friendship. A common culture in a business community helped to cut down on costs of business transactions and made it easier to make business decisions easily. Such an eventuality is made possible by better information flow. It also helped to build trust and motivate the merchants. [11: Mark Casson and Mary B. Rose. Institutions and the evolution of modern business . . ., 1-8.]

The Character of seafarers and mariner communities in sailortown London

Sailortown is an area of broad cultural contact and a clearly defined space in the diaspora. Sailortown was known for its uninhibited revelry practices and an array of dancehalls, music arenas, and theaters for the low class. Dock areas were widely seen and believed to be locations where all vice proliferated. The traditional worldview of seafarers has been influenced and reinforced by several factors. Indeed, most of the ports had a notorious if distinct Sailortown that served as the focal point of the life at sea. Prostitutes barely covering their breasts sought to relieve the seafarers of their money. It is recorded that even the 14-year-old girls were experienced in the immoral activities carried out[footnoteRef:12]. [12: Supra, note 1, 25]

Mariners lived a clearly distinctive life in identifiable communities. Waterfronts characterized smaller ports. The location settlement layout was concentrated around the sea harbors. However, larger settlement areas such as Newcastle and London also had identifiable maritime regions. The stained image of Wapping and Rotherthine [footnoteRef:13] that emphasized the difference that existed between mariners and the local populace in vicinity demonstrated that the mariners were not only physically separate but also differed culturally. It is observed that even in major cities like London, mariners were clearly distinguishable from the rest of the population of the city. It must be noted, though that, seamen and their kith and kin did not always dominate port towns. Shipping was widely influenced by a wide range of service trade and ancillary. [13: Andrew Gritt, "Representations of Mariners and Maritime Communities", 2]

Most of the negativity and the evidence against mariners therewith and their communities originates from the large ports; the Tyne ports and London, in particular. It has been reported that it was possible to pick out tiny enclaves of the unique and distinct mariner communities. Descriptions of the locations picked from the time's literature shows a real social and physical rift that widely served as both cause and effect of the mariner mentality and conduct. A guide to Newcastle provided by a "stranger" and published in 1828 seemed to desist from encouraging people from visiting the alleys and courts stretching along the quayside. It went on to warn that these places did not provide any attractive sights or activities for both the locals and foreigners[footnoteRef:14]. [14: Wm. Parson and Wm. White, History, directory and gazetteer of the Counties of Durham and Northumberland (2 vols, Newcastle, 1828), i. cxxxix.]

Generally, the public held mariners in low esteem. However, the perception changed for the better in 1830s on both sides of the Atlantic via a cultural reaction. Earlier on, the media and other public commentaries portrayed mariners as irresponsible people. They were also widely believed to be irreparable and a danger worth fearing. One of the commentators, Daniel remarked that Mariners had a way to be violent in all their disposition. He went on to remark that the mariners whored excessively, spend violently, drink violently and do all things violently. He concluded that they were violent fellows who did not deserve to stay on dry land with the rest of the people. Thus, they were meant to live at sea[footnoteRef:15]. Separately, such views are not objective observations of mariners. They are just as biased and prejudicial as the street views that had been crafted by persons with ulterior motives. Yet, it is possible for these views to be rationalized. However, there must be a clear distinction between the descriptions of the behaviors of the mariners and the perception of their useful input while at work. [15: Anthea Trodd, "Collaborating in Open Boats" 201-225]

The Sea Farer's Lifestyle

There has been persistent effort in the last decade to try and reconstruct the image of the seafarers on all fronts; economic, social and political. The age and marital status of the seafarers has been re-viewed. The effect of the changing technology including the transition from sail to steam and the accompanying mechanization of the cargo handling procedures was also included in the image rebranding and mindset shift. Indeed, seafarers never belonged to a single homogenous group; not even in the sailing age[footnoteRef:16]. The time spent at sea in by English sailors in the 16th century varied; based on the type of trade in which the sailors were involved. They could spend from a couple of weeks to three years if the sailor was an employee of the East India Company. In the latter case, while the average sailing period between Middelburg and London between 1610 and 1700 ranged from 238 to 257 days, there have been instances when one could be away from home for a period of 10 years[footnoteRef:17]. [16: Cheryl Fury, "Elizabethan seamen:" 1-40] [17: Ibid]

The shift of technology from sail to steam occurred differentially and happened on the basis of port and at national level. A fresh group and category of seafarers emerged. There were trimmers and firemen in this evolution. Gradation of classes was also observed within the labor force associated with maritime operations. When the regulation happened, the arrival times also became more predictable and reliable. The shipping activities also became better scheduled. Seafarers also established more content with their families[footnoteRef:18]. In summary, the invention and introduction of steam engine to the sailing community, shortened the voyage times. Tram ships were also enabled to undertake longer voyages and avoided the habit of returning to the homeport. [18: J. Edwards and P. Holm, "North Sea Ports and Harbours" 229]

The life of a sailor at sea has consistently demonstrated a variation. For example, sailors employed on long voyage ships, coastal merchant vessels, river traffic, or estuarial areas that make up the various, distinct sectors of the fishing operations[footnoteRef:19] showed marked differences. The life of the urban non-maritime world was always influenced by the shifting patterns, timing and magnitude of innovation technologically. Other notable influences included more innovation, gender redefining of maritime roles, and the rise and decline of European trade markets and the general globalization process. An in-depth analysis of the wider shipping evolutions presents the necessary guidelines for examining, afresh, the seafaring image; that it is for young unmarried men; that has lived on people's minds for so long yet stereotypical in nature. The stereotype still lives on that seafaring is a profession meant for young unmarried men inclined to sowing their wild oats afield, and pursuing an extravagant lifestyle while at port[footnoteRef:20]. In the sailing age, few men over forty years ventured in sailing. Part of the reason is that accidents at sea tended to deplete the older cohort. Still, in the 20th century, many men married in their late 20s. This was more likely to be the case among those who did not intend to make seafaring a long-term career. [19: Supra, note 1, 29] [20: Ibid, 30]

The advent of steam power marked a matching upscaling of the age range of the seafarers. A good number of sailors decided to marry. Although seafaring could have retained a notable lifecycle stature, over 46% of all seafarers in Britain in 1891, either were married or had once been married. Another significant proportion of those employed in the coastal trade or homes was above the age of 45 years[footnoteRef:21]. The proportion of older seafarers in such countries as Canada remained low at below 20% in the later years of the 20th century, but in other places such as Yarmouth, heads of household were registered seafarers. Family life among sea farers appeared to stabilize with the advent of steam ships from the middle of the 19th century onwards. The old image of the life of a seafarer in urban places was a reflection of maritime presence in some ports, the changing pattern of trade, operating levels and the evolution of varying and specialized vessels. The larger ports of international stature were home to a range of seafarers based on origin nationality and ethnicity[footnoteRef:22]. Approximately 11, 000 seafarers were registered in the sea port of Liverpool. Four decades since, seamen still represented only a small (3.9%) of the total population in Liverpool. Yet, the consistently increasing range and volume of trade drew seamen from across the globe, usually, in large numbers. The early 1860 saw the number of sailors that passed through Liverpool hit over 60 000 every year. In the 1880s, over 500 ships from Scandinavia docked at Mersey annually. These activities released over 10, 000 sailors into the local urban community[footnoteRef:23],[footnoteRef:24]. [21: Burton, "Counting Seafarers," table 5] [22: Supra, note 1, 31] [23: Hugill, Sailortown, 104.] [24: Maurice Rooke Kingsford and William Henry Giles Kingston. The Mersey Mission to Seamen, (Abbey Press, 1957) 35]

12, 000 seamen were registered in London in 1891 but over 200, 000 sailors passed through the port annually. Two thirds of this population were London residents. Their knowledge of the urban surroundings would possibly have been different from a sailor from overseas just landing at the Victoria Port for the first time[footnoteRef:25]. [25: Ibid]

Life ashore was made harder by the harsh realities of maritime service. Local conditions or temporal polices also undermined the traditional life of seamen[footnoteRef:26]; Even when ships were on wind sail, the opportunities for sailors to spoil themselves in the excesses of overdrinking and other vices were limited. Most of the available time was either spent loading ships or offloading cargo. In most cases, sailors were allowed off the sea only for short periods ranging from a week to 10 days after the docking of a ship. Pocket money was very modest, and the liberties allowed infrequently. [26: Supra, note 1, 32]

On the other hand, the life of the seafarers was not restricted to sailortown influences of those of the nearby locations. The view that seafarers did not venture beyond the precincts of sailortown is informed by the maps spread around by the Scandinavian Mission in the Liverpool area to seamen who were visitors in the area and other passer by immigrants. The maps only had information on the system of docks and the surrounding locations[footnoteRef:27]. The maps also contained information on the major shipping lines, the preferred boarding houses and the Nordic consulates. [27: Ibid, 33]

The Family and the Next of Kin among Sea Farers

The sailors who returned to their home port were located to be found within an identifiable family framework. Many of the young sailors went back to rejoin their family once they completed each assignment at sea[footnoteRef:28]. It was assumed that he unmarried sailors would spend up to three months annually with their families. It was expected that these young people would align to the norms of their family or the relatives at whose homes they put up. The amount of time seafarers spent at home varied significantly irrespective of whether they were married, single, or widowed. [28: Peter H. Fricke, "Seafarer & Community" (Taylor & Francis, 1973) 98.]

Generally, the relationship between sailors and the seafaring occupation and family life has can only be termed as having been immersed in a sea of problems. Indeed, ballads composed in the 18th century frequently warned young beautiful maids from getting married to sailors. Indeed, the long absence of the head of the family only made family life lonely and abnormal. A sailor was relatively poorly skilled in heading their household. The irregular wage also rendered family life less fun and full of uncertainty. The worst came when the bread winner passed away. It only meant that the family was consigned to destitution[footnoteRef:29]. Coastal life was believed to offer many chances for steadying one's life and home but it was widely believed that seafaring allowed required ingredients to break homes. Many sailors abandoned the seafaring business with the intention of establishing normal families. The pharmaceutical industry is said to have recognized and targeted the wives of seafarers as potential substantial markets for anti-depression pills. It was widely believed that seafaring represented an act of severing family links, and causal to significant distress[footnoteRef:30]. In some circumstances, some ship owners allowed mariners to take their wives with them on voyages. [29: David Cordingly, Women Sailors and Sailors' Women (Random House, 2001) 182.] [30: Supra, note 1, 36]

However, it must be pointed out that such a favor was only preserved for masters and not the common mariner. Ethnographic and oral evidence reaffirms how the wives of mariners came to adopt independent lifestyles. These are the circumstances that bred a category of women that were commonly referred to as the 'no-nonsense' types. These women demonstrated a strong individual character and assertiveness. Even with these accounts, it is still not easy to assess the family life of seamen in a precise and clear historical context. It is still equally difficult to assess the validity of the common traditional interpretation of the role they played in kin and family networks[footnoteRef:31]. One of the main reasons for this tendency is that the family was largely the unit of production on the coastal community front. In this environment, young women were significant sources of labor. In port town on the other hand, a range of employment vacancies determined the role of family variously. Seafaring had an identifiable domestic cost to it. One such incurrence is the absence of husbands who were more occupied with their maritime activities. In fact, seafaring had never been a safe occupation for those with family raising prospects. The sea trips were also risky by their very nature. There was an increase in the competition for shipping on international routes that included the emigrant trade in North America. The working conditions were deteriorating. The losses at sea increased substantially and, indeed, became a major concern for stakeholders[footnoteRef:32]. The risks involved in seafaring were nothing new but the death of husbands at sea had profound negative effects on the affected families. Widows were to engage in income earning activities. This trend started in the informal sector before expanding to other sectors. Children were kept in orphanages while the women sought a means of livelihood. [31: Ibid, 37] [32: Kirby and Hinkkanen, Baltic and the North Seas, 235]

The wives of the seamen were forced to device means of independently surviving the long absence of their husbands. They took housework chores for pay including washing clothes, nursing children and other domestic work. Some of them even started begging on the streets. However, these women are noted to have maintained their pride in marital status. Reports also reveal that the kinship networks of such women provided them with a lot of support. Indeed, social networks have traditionally been a means of support through difficult situations and the port city families were not an exception; the tight bonds between the maritime families that experienced common problems further reinforced their role[footnoteRef:33]. Although maritime careers presented many challenges, evidence from letters, and other correspondence between the sailors and their wives shows that, they maintained a notable bond of love between them. It is further noted that seafarers took the responsibility to protect their families seriously. One cannot really draw conclusions on the intimacy levels in such families. no studies have focused on individual ports. However, the little data available suggests that their reproductive lives were not affected seriously by the constraints of maritime employment. Estimates show that the 4866 British sailors who died at sea left three children on average[footnoteRef:34]. Therefore, the family structure of the seamen was not different from the rest of the population. Consequently, the problems within families and the intra-family complications should be analyzed on a broader guideline that shows the trends for the long-term; in domestic and life at sea. [33: Jennine Hurl-Eamon, "The Fiction of Female Dependence and the Makeshift Economy of Soldiers", 485] [34: Richard Lawton, "The components of demographic change in a rapidly growing port-city:" 108.]

How Seafarers lived at Sea

In order to deconstruct the life of the seafarer in an urban place, critically, and to examine the validity of the known interpretations it is paramount to look at two attributes which have been consistently linked to the conduct of sailors ashore. One of them is the likelihood to engage in alcoholism, and the inclination and preference for short-term sexual relationships with prostitutes that have been termed as predatory. One indisputable fact is that many seafarers spend the time they got away from sailing to visit inns and brothels for recreational purposes. Therefore, the reputation of these seamen as heavy drinkers was a common perception even before the 16th C. Drinking excessively was widely known to be part of the seafarer's lifestyle. Brawls that emanated from heavy drinking by sailors were a common scene in Backs in Bristol in the 18th century. Such drunks were also commonly observed frequently staggering out of bars and dockland areas in London around the 1860s and 1870s[footnoteRef:35]. Heavy drinking was still considered an endemic problem; an occupational disease among sailors. [35: Supra, note 16]

Several scholars have already challenged the stereotype that sailors were heavy drinkers by default. The scholars point out that the view is misplaced, and, a vilification of the state of affairs[footnoteRef:36]. They also point out that the persistence of the view that sailors were drunks is a manifestation of the failure to analyze the state of affairs in the wider socio-political and cultural context, and report the facts. Such analysis of the realities and true patterns of alcoholism was lacking both in Britain and abroad. In fact, it is erroneous to assume that there was necessarily a relationship between drunkenness and seamen. Some of the mariners, including the fishermen in Aberdeen were what came to be known as compete teetotalers. Many homes owned by sailors enjoyed immense popularity. [36: Supra, note 23, 104 and 150]

However, drunkenness as reportedly perpetrated by seafarers was linked closely with crime. It was both an instigating agent and a reason to fall victim. Victims were often statistics of those robbed by women, referred to as the 'women of the gutter'. It is still debatable whether sailortown can be regarded as an urban center of world stature but it was, undoubtedly, a known spot for petty crime that is reminiscent of urban centers. This tendency was a known and recognized trend in ports worldwide including Liverpool where most of the arrests were because of assaults on partners and associates. Assaults were also common against the police and strangers using the public street. Most of them were directly linked to drunkenness[footnoteRef:37]. The traditional image of seafarers still needs to be examined from a wider context of urban crime. Indeed, the latter years of the 18th century were the prime period for opportunistic crime. Towns with a large number of casual employees were reported to experience high levels of such crime. These were not necessarily seafaring communities. [37: Supra, note 1, 57]