Talk:Capture of Cyane

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- B-Class-1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- B-Class-2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- B-Class-3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- B-Class-4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- B-Class-5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no Associated task forces (nations and regions): British military history task force United States military history task force

Stephen Decatur commmanded Constitution from May 1803 to October 1804, per the official USS Constitition Museum website. Charles Stewart was commmanding the last engagement of the War of 1812 and the battle noted in 1815, as noted in this after action report by that officer. The current article looked as if it were lifted from this letter and is likely false. The name of the British ship also appears to be inconsistent: "Cyane" is also seen in the after-action report. Are we talking of a second, earlier Cyanne? --Spencerian 18:24, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Actually the source is this http://www.history.navy.mil/docs/war1812/const7.htm

I've removed your tag. I've reviewed my sources... Perhaps you should take up your case with the U.S. Navy and the U.S. National Archive. In the future perhaps I'd use a bit more caution before throwing those kind of accusations around given how well this battle is documented... Tirronan 05:45, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

I did some checking while I was reverting changes to the minutes of action by AWB... the National Archive and USN Historic website changed their tune. Charles Stewart was the Captain at this time and Captain Decatur enclosed the report among other reports he was sending the the Deptartment of the Navy at that time and thus the confusion. My mistake and that of the two contributors appologies all around. Tirronan 14:25, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cyane 34-gun frigate?

Cyane was rated a 22-gun ship in the Royal Navy, she was not even rated a frigate (see Rif Winfield: British Warships in the Age of Sail 1793-1817, pp 235/236; Robert Gardiner, The Naval War of 1812, p 95). Levant was a flush-decked sloop-build ship, rated a 6th rate with 20 guns. Although both ships mounted more guns than they were rated, their actual rating does say a lot of their relative strength. A British 32-gun frigate, which mounted 42 guns was a much more larger ship than Cyane, so you can't call Cyane a 34 gun frfigate! When you describe Cyane as a "34-gun frigate" and Levant as a "21-gun ship" you have to describe Constitution as a 53 gun frigate, because she mounted that number in 1815 (30 x 24-Pounder, 22x32-Pounder carronades, 1x24-Pounder, source: Donald Canney, Sailing Ships of the US Navy, pp 32-33)! Whe should stick to the official ratings, because both sides did so in 1812-1815.--Galab 16:44, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Actually at times USS Constitution mounted upwards of 55 guns HMS Leander (rated at 55 guns) was constructed in response to Consitution and her sisters. The problem you run into is that I have seen Cyane rated anywhere from 22 to 34 guns. Short of traveling back in time I am not sure where that leaves us. I don't have a problem calling her a sloop or a frigate but I sure wish I didn't have so many contradictory sources. Tirronan 21:44, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

No, I do not think, i run into that problem ;) Cyane was rated a 22-gun ship as long as she served in the Royal Navy, from her launch until her capture. She was a member of the Banterer-Class and all ships of this class were rated 22s. When you use other rating the Americans gave her after her capture, we indeed run into a problem: Then we have to say - to be consequent - that Endymion 40-gun fought against the President 60-gun, because President was rated a 60-gun ship in the Royal Navy. But this would overestimate the Presidents force in relation to Endymion. When you describe Cyane during her fight as a 34-gun ship, she would be vastly overrated in relation to Constitution (and all other ships). She was a very tiny ship, and it can be said, that even Levant was the better warship, because the was not significantly lesser armed, but she was build to better design for ships of this force. The victory Constitution achieved here, was not that remarkable in that she won against two ships, as ist has been described in many sources - and as her captors had done in 1815. Remarkable was her Commander's skill in handling to capture both at once. The modern historian Robert Gardiner writes: "Although the British had a slightly larger aggregate weight of metal at short range, in the absence of any modern command and control system, it would be impossible to co-ordinate any simultaneous attack that could turn that superiority to practival advantage. The Constitutions 24-pounders main battery could defeat either ship with great ease, and Stewart's only problem was how to take both." (...) "There is no finer example than Stewart's defeat of these two ships, in which he used his advantages to maximum effect, so it is doubly regrettable that his report empahsied the enemy's 'divided and more active force, as also their superiority in the weight and numbers of his guns' rather than pointing to his considerable tactical feat in taking both".

Leander, btw. was rated a 60-gun ship!--Galab 16:23, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Neither ship was anything close to Constitution and as I have said I don't take issue with rating her at 22 guns. Steward did however really did give a master's sailing lesson in how to use a large ship against 2 smaller vessels. Constitution had a choice crew as well, being considered a "Lucky" ship. Our seamen were no less supersitous than the British and I am sure that her crew had an effect on how well the ship sailed and handled in this battle. USS Chesapeak would have the devil's own time getting crew in comparison. Tirronan 19:12, 5 October 2007 (UTC)