What is the Black Pearl?

[frostytheplebe]

I have always been a big fan of naval and maritime history and enjoy being able to identify ships... so far I've been able to I.D. most of the ships out of POTC... except one... The Black Pearl...

The other ships are as follows:

HMS Dauntless- Ship of the Line (two gun decks)

HMS Interceptor- Brig

Flying Dutchman- Given the shape this ship was in... its hard to tell for certain, but she appears to be an old Galleon from the mid 1600s.

HMS Endeavor- Man of War (Three or more gun decks).

My friends and I cannot come to a consensus on this one, the type of ship. One of them believes her to be a Brig of War, my brother believe (worst guess of all) that she is a small frigate... I know frigates as one of the most famous is a museum in my hometown (well... a super frigate anyway).

My guess: Looking at her size and sail configuration, she's a Merchantman. Given her armorments, possibly a larger model known as an East Indiaman... but I'm not sure...

Thoughts?

 

[QuailPilot]

I thought a brig was the jail in a ship(Wait...do you mean brigadine?)...

I think that the Black Pearl is a kind of galleon. A

on a side note, I actually had the privilege to sail, for a couple hours, on the Lady Washington (the Interceptor)

You know what they (the sailors) classify their ship?

Medium sized merchant ship.

 

[Andrewas]

IIRC, the background of that ship is that she was a merchantman of the East India Trading Company, sunk when Sparrow refused to trade in slaves, then refloated by Davey Jones and renamed the Black Pearl.

 

[frostytheplebe]

I thought a brig was the jail in a ship(Wait...do you mean brigadine?)...

I think that the Black Pearl is a kind of galleon. A

on a side note, I actually had the privilege to sail, for a couple hours, on the Lady Washington (the Interceptor)

You know what they (the sailors) classify their ship?

Medium sized merchant ship.

I hate to say this, and I do not intend any offense, but it seems you do not know the first thing about Maritime/Pirate history. (Please do not get angry, I do not mean to insult you. Permit me the next few lines and I'll set the record straight.)

You are thinking Brig as in holding cell. Brigs are larger versions of the Brigantine. Some were used as prison ships, but then again so were many other cargo vessels.

In real life, yes the Lady Washington is in fact an old style merchant vessel, but she was repainted and refitted to appear as a Royal Navy Warship.

The Black Pearl is most definitly not a Galleon of ANY kind. How do I know?

1. Galleons are large, and usually rather slow vessels outfitted for either military service or cargo. By the 1700s (POTC era) most of these large vessels had been replaced by more favored ships like Merchantmen or Cargo Fluytes. So if the Black Pearl was a Galleon, it would be from another time, 15-1600s and probably be around 100 years old.

2. There is NO record of any pirate using anything the size of a Galleon as a warship. Most favored Pinnaces, sloops, and Brigantines. Fast, shallow draught, and easy to hide. The only pirate who really dared use anything larger was Captain Teach (AKA Black Beard). His ship, the Queen Annes Revenge was a Dutch style cargo Fluyte which he had retrofitted with extra deck guns known as Blunderbusts, added sails, and more cargo space. Historically, because of its armorments its classified as a Frigate, but this is inaccurate.

3. Pirates required fast ships over more heavily armed ones. Any pirate foolish enough to try to take a Royal Navy Frigate or Ship of the Line... which there is no record of, would either been killed pretty quickly by hordes of crack marines, or if they succeeded, would be hunted from one end of the world to the other by the Navy they took that ship from, as that navy would spare no expense to get the shp back.

 

[QuailPilot]

you know what...I forgot to edit my thing. I looked it up in one of my book immediately after posting and saw that I was wrong.

I actually used to know a lot about ships and pirates during that time...just haven't used that knowledge for a looooooong time.

So your right about the classes. I never really payed attention to the ships in the movie, and was trying to remember what I didn't really see.

 

[frostytheplebe]

you know what...I forgot to edit my thing. I looked it up in one of my book immediately after posting and saw that I was wrong.

I actually used to know a lot about ships and pirates during that time...just haven't used that knowledge for a looooooong time.

So your right about the classes. I never really payed attention to the ships in the movie, and was trying to remember what I didn't really see.

It happens, believe me I know. I'm considered an expert when it comes to Maritime stuff, I studied such under a Professor who's great grandfather was a rum runner and one of the most brilliant men in the field I've ever known. I've been studying it all my life, ever since i was like three years old when my grandmother used to tell me stories of "Pegleg Pete." Since then its been an obsession, and I have the artifacts and models to prove it. I can give detailed Bios on most pirates and Identify most ships, so when one comes along that looks somewhat of a cross between classes (most pirate ships), and I can't ID it, its a little unnerving. Because most of them are converted and retrofit ships, Pirate vessels can be difficult to classify sometimes.

Also, when I saw Jack Sparrow's Father, I thought they said his name was Teach (Teek). Thus immediately assumed "Black Beard!" He fits the description of BB almost perfectly, except his beard was on fire. Imagine how disappointed I was to see that it was actually spelled Teague.

 

[McGruff]

Endeavor- Man of War (Three or more gun decks).

And not one solitary gunner took the initiative to touch off his cannon while they were being riddled?

 

[LeHah]

Its a comic book written by Mark Hamill.

 

[ChrisReid]

Or what you get when you surround one piece with six starflowers.

 

[frostytheplebe]

And not one solitary gunner took the initiative to touch off his cannon while they were being riddled?

You know the very same thing pissed me off, that ship was more then a match for both vessels. She had at least 4 times the guns on one side alone then the Black Pearl. The worry would be the Flying Dutchman, but she only had two, Im not sure how magically impervious she was, but as Wil Turner said, "If she can be outrun then she can be defeated."

That ship should have been able to knock out those two without much problem, would she have been damaged? Yup, probably crippled with guns being fired from both sides, but she could have easily won.

 

[Quarto]

You know the very same thing pissed me off, that ship was more then a match for both vessels. She had at least 4 times the guns on one side alone then the Black Pearl. The worry would be the Flying Dutchman, but she only had two, Im not sure how magically impervious she was, but as Wil Turner said, "If she can be outrun then she can be defeated."

That ship should have been able to knock out those two without much problem, would she have been damaged? Yup, probably crippled with guns being fired from both sides, but she could have easily won.

Well - so much for your claim to be an expert in maritime matters .

Stats don't win battles. History is filled with dozens upon dozens of naval battles where the weaker side won simply by being the first to strike - or by having the better commander. In this particular case, the battle took place at point-blank range, and the pirates happened to be the first ones to open fire. Indeed, the what's-her-name simply didn't open fire at all - so she couldn't possibly defeat the pirates .

And why didn't the crew open fire without orders? Well, as the self-proclaimed expert in martime matters, you should know very well that no sailor on a naval vessel ever would. You're not permitted to make such decisions when all your knowledge about what's going on comes from what you can see outside, through the gap between the cannon muzzle and the hull of your own ship - for all you know, there may be an extremely important reason why your commander's decided not to open fire yet, and by opening fire, you can sabotage the entire battle plan (since others might also fire at that point, and since it'll be some time before your cannon is reloaded and ready to fire again). And the Navy also had all sorts of punishments to discourage such stupidity - being keelhauled isn't something invented in pirate movies.

Of course, one may wonder why none of the officers above deck tried to take charge when it was clear their commander was effectively out of action - but they didn't, and that's that. It just goes to show how important it is to have a commander who doesn't panic or freeze.

 

[Red Coat]

Stats don't win battles. History is filled with dozens upon dozens of naval battles where the weaker side won simply by being the first to strike - or by having the better commander. In this particular case, the battle took place at point-blank range, and the pirates happened to be the first ones to open fire. Indeed, the what's-her-name simply didn't open fire at all - so she couldn't possibly defeat the pirates

Or really any kind of military battle is filled with smaller forces beating larger ones through tactics, training, etc. Although just because you fire first doesn't mean you'll win, the French (And Spanish) fired first at Trafalgar but that didn't change matters.

And why didn't the crew open fire without orders? Well, as the self-proclaimed expert in martime matters, you should know very well that no sailor on a naval vessel ever would. You're not permitted to make such decisions when all your knowledge about what's going on comes from what you can see outside, through the gap between the cannon muzzle and the hull of your own ship - for all you know, there may be an extremely important reason why your commander's decided not to open fire yet, and by opening fire, you can sabotage the entire battle plan (since others might also fire at that point, and since it'll be some time before your cannon is reloaded and ready to fire again). And the Navy also had all sorts of punishments to discourage such stupidity - being keelhauled isn't something invented in pirate movies.

I don't think anything more really needs to be said. Quarto is right. The commander could be waiting for the oppertune moment as apart of his plan, or has been ordered not to fire their cannons unless under extreme duress, or some other situation. Although I do doubt that last one.

Cheers,

Red Coat.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Look up "Black Swan", and see if there is a connection.

 

[McGruff]

So if the Captain had regained hit wits and muttered "fire" how would the orders be passed along to the gunners and crew in those days? It's not like there was an intercom system to transmit commands, and it would be inefficient and delayed for shouts to be passed along all the way down the ship. The situation would probably change before the last guy got the news.

In the movie situation, wouldn't the order be given to the gunners to open fire on the pirate ships as soon as a good shot presented itself - with plenty of notice before they got within range?

 

[Edfilho]

So if the Captain had regained hit wits and muttered "fire" how would the orders be passed along to the gunners and crew in those days? It's not like there was an intercom system to transmit commands, and it would be inefficient and delayed for shouts to be passed along all the way down the ship. The situation would probably change before the last guy got the news.

In the movie situation, wouldn't the order be given to the gunners to open fire on the pirate ships as soon as a good shot presented itself - with plenty of notice before they got within range?

No.





Although this is a movie about Squid-faced pirate-lichs who command subamarine wooden ships and the Kraken too, just for laughs.

Oh, and dead people keep coming back just like that.

And most of the characters are zombies. There is even a ressurected zombie pirate captain with a zombie pirate monkey. From hell.


So, yeah, the whole chain-of-command thing is pretty much not the least bit important.

 

[McGruff]

Yeah, but the crew in question weren't undead half fish pirate monkeys from hell, therefore they would rely on a command structure of some sort during combat.

Besides, it was more of a hypothetical question regarding the same situation in real wooden ship warefare.

Oh, and somehow I completely missed what killed the Kraken in the movie???????????

 

[frostytheplebe]

Well - so much for your claim to be an expert in maritime matters .

Stats don't win battles. History is filled with dozens upon dozens of naval battles where the weaker side won simply by being the first to strike - or by having the better commander. In this particular case, the battle took place at point-blank range, and the pirates happened to be the first ones to open fire. Indeed, the what's-her-name simply didn't open fire at all - so she couldn't possibly defeat the pirates .

And why didn't the crew open fire without orders? Well, as the self-proclaimed expert in martime matters, you should know very well that no sailor on a naval vessel ever would. You're not permitted to make such decisions when all your knowledge about what's going on comes from what you can see outside, through the gap between the cannon muzzle and the hull of your own ship - for all you know, there may be an extremely important reason why your commander's decided not to open fire yet, and by opening fire, you can sabotage the entire battle plan (since others might also fire at that point, and since it'll be some time before your cannon is reloaded and ready to fire again). And the Navy also had all sorts of punishments to discourage such stupidity - being keelhauled isn't something invented in pirate movies.

Of course, one may wonder why none of the officers above deck tried to take charge when it was clear their commander was effectively out of action - but they didn't, and that's that. It just goes to show how important it is to have a commander who doesn't panic or freeze.

I beg your pardon? That was a rather flippant comeback when I'm just trying to shed some light on particular areas! Thank you very much btw. For your information, I did know that. When i say someone should have taken initiative, i meant the officers. I do agree that the actual gunners should take no initiative, but protocal onboard British warships is very clear. When the CO is out of action, physically or mentally, it is the next officers required duty to take command.

Also, why was Cutler Beckett in Command? He was a noble Lord, NOT a naval officer. Admiral Norington had been in command of the Endeavor working for Beckett, Norington's 1st officer should have been next in line.

Oh and keel hauling was illegal in the British Navy at that point, which is one of the factors that sparked the Mutiny on the Bounty.

I am also aware of several battles being won due to either the ever powerful element of surprise and/or first strike.

However, almost your entire argument is completely irrelevant as the officers on the Endeavor SAW both the Black Pearl and the Flying Dutchman coming with more then aple time to react. Given that the cannons would have already been loaded and prepared to engage. There was no surprise, and should have been no first strike given to the Pirates, if you know anything about that particular type of Man-o-War, the Endeavor should have easily been able to hit first as her forward cannons are stationed in a way that they can fire an angled shot. Had the Endeavor had a real naval captain, experienced or otherwise, it would have been an easy win for the EITC. The only part of your argument i agree with is the part about having better officers aboard... or at least having ones that could actually think for themselves at least a little. But instead they stood there starring.

This is exactly why pirates NEVER allowed thier ships to go broadside with a naval warship, they would have been cut to ribbons easily.
#1 Pirate ships were almost never equipped with strong war cannons, theres were usually smaller designed to knock out sails, the rudder, and the crew. Suprise or not, ship to ship, gun to gun, no pirate stood a chance against a full royal navy warship. Which is exactly why there is absolutly no record of any pirate taking one on and living to tell the tale. Read Black Beards biography, his is a perfect example of a pirate meeting his end being hunted down by such ships.

Yeah, but the crew in question weren't undead half fish pirate monkeys from hell, therefore they would rely on a command structure of some sort during combat.

Besides, it was more of a hypothetical question regarding the same situation in real wooden ship warefare.

Oh, and somehow I completely missed what killed the Kraken in the movie???????????

They never really get into the how that much. Cutler Beckett ordered Jones to kill his "Pet" Jones had no choice.

 

[Quarto]

I beg your pardon? That was a rather flippant comeback when I'm just trying to shed some light on particular areas!

My "flippant" comeback was due to you arbitrarily proclaiming yourself an expert, and then going on to talk nonsense. As a general rule, I strongly dislike it when people try to argue that they must be right because they're experts - and whether or not you intended it, that's exactly how you came off sounding. It actually took a lot of self-control on my part to prevent myself from going on to point out all the other trivial points on which you were completely wrong - and I'm not even anywhere near to being an expert in these matters .

In short - if you have something to say about a subject, say it... but let your facts and arguments speak for themselves. Don't try to back it up with nonsense like "and I studied under a wise old man whose great great grandfather was a sea turtle, so I know all this" - it'll only come back to bite you in the ass .

When the CO is out of action, physically or mentally, it is the next officers required duty to take command.

What it comes down to, however, is that they didn't. That's all there is to it .

Also, why was Cutler Beckett in Command? He was a noble Lord, NOT a naval officer. Admiral Norington had been in command of the Endeavor working for Beckett, Norington's 1st officer should have been next in line.

Well, whatever the reason, he did end up in command. Perhaps he decided that at this point, he can't trust anyone else. Perhaps he simply didn't have any other officers experienced enough to take command of the entire fleet. It doesn't matter, because whatever the reason, that's simply how the story went.

Oh and keel hauling was illegal in the British Navy at that point, which is one of the factors that sparked the Mutiny on the Bounty.

You're grasping at straws here to prove your "expertise" again. Indeed, I didn't know keelhauling was illegal "at this point" in the Royal Navy, but then again I couldn't have possibly cared less, since it was completely irrelevant to my argument . Keelhauling was merely an example of how severe disciplinary punishments could be - it makes no difference to me one way or another whether it was actually done at that point, or whether some other punishment was being used.

That said, though, I must say, I'm mighty curious. You say keelhauling was illegal at this point - but at which point would this be exactly? Last I checked, none of the Pirates films ever give us an exact date. Based on the ships being used, we could estimate them to take place at various points during the 18th century - but, in my opinion, the original film's storyline and locations imply a much earlier time, with the bottom limit being the capture of Jamaica by the British. Of course, the subsequent films completely muddy this up, but they don't exactly help us establish a clearer timeframe - instead, they simply help reinforce the points that Pirates has a fictional setting that exists outside of real history.

However, almost your entire argument is completely irrelevant as the officers on the Endeavor SAW both the Black Pearl and the Flying Dutchman coming with more then aple time to react. Given that the cannons would have already been loaded and prepared to engage. There was no surprise, and should have been no first strike given to the Pirates, if you know anything about that particular type of Man-o-War, the Endeavor should have easily been able to hit first as her forward cannons are stationed in a way that they can fire an angled shot.

Again, you're talking only to show your knowledge, and embarassing yourself in the process - all of this is irrelevant . The film very clearly acknowledges that the officers of the Endeavour see what's happening and have time to react - it also very clearly acknowledges that they're unwilling to do anything without their commander's orders. Whether this is because they're shocked, stunned, surprised, or stupid is debatable, but it still comes down to the fact that you're wasting your breath telling us all about the Endeavour's amazing stats and capabilities .


BTW, in answer to your original question - you may be interested in noting that Wikipedia claims the Black Pearl was an East Indiaman - though given the complete untrustworthyness of Wikipedia in fandom-related matters, this is probably completely irrelevant. Still, that's probably as close as you're going to get to identifying her, because ultimately, she's a Movie-class ship, designed by production designers who don't mind in the least mixing a galleon with a fluyt or a frigate if it gives them the effect they're looking for .

 

[Edfilho]

Yeah, but the crew in question weren't undead half fish pirate monkeys from hell, therefore they would rely on a command structure of some sort during combat.

Besides, it was more of a hypothetical question regarding the same situation in real wooden ship warefare.

McGruff,
All my talk about zombies was a funny way of saying "it's a movie". It's also a fantastic (in the original sense of the word) movie, one with little regard to verisimilitude.

Things happened that way because it's written in the script

 

[Red Coat]

Also, why was Cutler Beckett in Command? He was a noble Lord, NOT a naval officer. Admiral Norington had been in command of the Endeavor working for Beckett, Norington's 1st officer should have been next in line.

Probably because he felt his presence was necessary. Armies and Navies were once led by men that were of noble birth, and acquired the position through their birthright and not merit. Mind you, in our historical sense, the British only allowed trained-officers to take command of armies or just military forces in general, starting with the New Model Army around the 1650s and furthered with the doctrines of the British Army after the 1700s.

In the movie sense however, history doesn't matter too much. As Quarto pointed out, not only does the storyline not give it a time (Although with the Red Coats and markings, you'd think it was around 1700-1800, around then perhaps) but film makers in general, will do anything, chop and change ships, give them unrealistic cannons, make the world's finest naval crews look ineffectual, whatever, so long as it adds to the story. If they get the desired affect with a small band of Pirates beating the world's best sailors and getting a Ship of the Line, then why would they care?

At the end of the day, being serious about a movie that is obviously, not meant to be taken seriously, putting it blankly, is just plain stupid. It wasn't designed to be realistic, hell it's got strange sea-creatures and mythical elements, why would it be realistic?

But to go back to what I was originally saying, if the movie directors feel it's best for the story if a Lord takes control of a Royal Navy squadron, then that's the end of that. It's all for the effect.

BTW, in answer to your original question - you may be interested in noting that Wikipedia claims the Black Pearl was an East Indiaman - though given the complete untrustworthyness of Wikipedia in fandom-related matters, this is probably completely irrelevant.

It's completely untrustworthy anyway. What are you talking about? Haha!

Frosty, don't get me wrong buddy, I wouldn't mind having a chat about naval warfare with you, particularly of old (Napoleonics, etc) but bringing a serious element to a movie that shouldn't be taken as such, is a bit silly. Don't you think?

No offence intended by the way, mate.

Cheers,

Red Coat.