Brian Whatcott wrote:
On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 18:49:51 GMT, Peggie Hall
wrote:


Brian Whatcott wrote:

This is certainly the explanation most often cited: but it lacks one
feature for full credibility: on ships of the line, there were
heads, and these often were placed at the bows.
While the bows is plural, the head (of a ship) is always singular.

You're not going far enough back in history, Brian...the first toilet
facilities on vessels pre-date the first century AD...Noah's ark prob'ly
had 'em.

By the time there were "ships of the line" in the 15th, 16th centuries,
there were even water closets--wooden "boxes" that even had flush water
reservoirs and trap doors that opened to the sea in the captain's
quarters and some other officers'/"guest" quarters which were in the aft
end of the ship. However, the crew's toilets were still in the bow--not
holes in the hull, but wooden planks with holes in 'em extending from
the bow and projecting below the figurehead...the crew had to climb over
to get down to 'em...and on small ships, they were dangerously close to
the waterline. On larger ships such as Nelson's "Victory" they were
higher and safer.



Peggie,
I am enjoying this poo-poo thread (unbelievably!) so don't take this
as the kind of defencive come-back, with which I am sure you are as
familiar as I am.

I did not put my point quite succinctly enough in a prior post:

"Heads" for pooping in are often plural: the heads of small barrels
or buckets can also be plural, but the head of a vessel is invariably
singular, is it not?

Brian W


Because that's where the "figurehead" was located...............

Say what you want about her, but she really knows her ****...

Capt. Jeff

Brian Whatcott wrote:

"Heads" for pooping in are often plural: the heads of small barrels
or buckets can also be plural, but the head of a vessel is invariably
singular, is it not?

Today we tend to think of the head as just one device...two heads as two
devices. But that wasn't always true. So I think you're confusing the
multiple holes in the board mounted on the the head of the ship with
multiple toilets--multiple separate devices. Think instead in terms of
an outhouse...it may be a 2-, 3- or even 4-holer...but it's still just
one (singular) outhouse. So too was the board with multiple holes
mounted on the bow--or at the head of--the ship.

Btw...Sir Thomas Crapper didn't invent the flush toilet, either.

--
Peggie
----------
Peggie Hall
Specializing in marine sanitation since 1987
Author "Get Rid of Boat Odors - A Guide To Marine Sanitation Systems and
Other Sources of Aggravation and Odor"
http://www.seaworthy.com/store/custo...0&cat=6&page=1

On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 20:07:45 GMT,
Peggie Hall wrote:
Paul wrote:
Capt. Neal,
What's your problem? .

Neal's problem is, he's had a crush on me for years...and he's never
matured past the age when boys pulled girls' hair to let 'em know they
like 'em. Please don't feed him...it's like feeding a dog table
scraps...just encourages him to keep begging for more.



That's kindof a poor comparison... for the dogs...

--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
"Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist
the black flag, and begin slitting throats."
H.l. Mencken

On Sat, 02 Apr 2005 03:15:47 GMT, Peggie Hall
wrote:

Brian Whatcott wrote:

"Heads" for pooping in are often plural: the heads of small barrels
or buckets can also be plural, but the head of a vessel is invariably
singular, is it not?

Today we tend to think of the head as just one device...two heads as two
devices. But that wasn't always true. So I think you're confusing the
multiple holes in the board mounted on the the head of the ship with
multiple toilets--multiple separate devices. Think instead in terms of
an outhouse...it may be a 2-, 3- or even 4-holer...but it's still just
one (singular) outhouse. So too was the board with multiple holes
mounted on the bow--or at the head of--the ship.

Btw...Sir Thomas Crapper didn't invent the flush toilet, either.


Ah, you can support the connection between ship's head and
sanitary head, because, in your view, there is not properly a plural
sanitary term in nautical use: "heads"

Got it!

:-)

Brian Whatcott Altus, OK

Brian Whatcott wrote:

Ah, you can support the connection between ship's head and
sanitary head, because, in your view, there is not properly a plural
sanitary term in nautical use: "heads"


Brian...you're WAAAAY overthinking it! It's actually a VERY simple
concept: bow of boat aka the vessel's "head"...plank extending from
"head" of vessel...sailors who came to think of the need to visit it as
"using the head"...resulting in that name being given to all future boat
toilets regardless of location.

IMO, the origin of the name "bridge" for a vessel's command center is
far more entertaining.
--
Peggie
----------
Peggie Hall
Specializing in marine sanitation since 1987
Author "Get Rid of Boat Odors - A Guide To Marine Sanitation Systems and
Other Sources of Aggravation and Odor"
http://www.seaworthy.com/store/custo...0&cat=6&page=1

On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 19:48:38 GMT, Brian Whatcott wrote:

On Sat, 02 Apr 2005 03:15:47 GMT, Peggie Hall
wrote:

Brian Whatcott wrote:

"Heads" for pooping in are often plural: the heads of small barrels
or buckets can also be plural, but the head of a vessel is invariably
singular, is it not?

Today we tend to think of the head as just one device...two heads as two
devices. But that wasn't always true. So I think you're confusing the
multiple holes in the board mounted on the the head of the ship with
multiple toilets--multiple separate devices. Think instead in terms of
an outhouse...it may be a 2-, 3- or even 4-holer...but it's still just
one (singular) outhouse. So too was the board with multiple holes
mounted on the bow--or at the head of--the ship.

Btw...Sir Thomas Crapper didn't invent the flush toilet, either.


Ah, you can support the connection between ship's head and
sanitary head, because, in your view, there is not properly a plural
sanitary term in nautical use: "heads"

Got it!

:-)

Brian Whatcott Altus, OK

Brian,
If I may offer a little more clarification to this perplexing question.g When
I was serving in the Royal Navy in the early 50's it was my experience that the
terms "head" and "heads" were used interchangeably. One could go to the head or
the heads and everyone knew what was meant. In a couple of ships in which I
served, the layout of the heads, yes, there were two sets, one port and one
starboard, both right up in the bow, were not a great deal different from the
old sailing ship days, except it was no longer necessary to perform ones act in
the open. The layout consisted of a trough just above knee height which served
as the urinal, this trough then dropped down and continued beneath about 6
stalls. Sea-water was pumped continuously into one end, ran down the trough and
exited through a hole in the hull. Sea-boats had to be careful not to get under
the out-flow. One source of amusement was to bunch up a page of a news-paper,
light it and drop it into the trough when all the stalls were full. It was
advisable to beat a hasty retreat after doing so.g
This URL will show you just how the heads looked on HMS Victory, Nelson's
flag-ship at the Battle of Trafalgar, as you will see from the picture and the
explanation, this is situated in the bow section of the ship.
http://www.stvincent.ac.uk/Heritage/...ory/heads.html

The last modern war-ship I was on for a visit had flush heads, such luxury we
could only dream about.g

Jan
"If you can't take a joke,you shouldn't have joined"

On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 01:54:48 -0400, Jan
wrote:

On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 19:48:38 GMT, Brian Whatcott wrote:

//

Ah, you can support the connection between ship's head and
sanitary head, because, in your view, there is not properly a plural
sanitary term in nautical use: "heads"

Got it!

:-)

Brian Whatcott Altus, OK

Brian,
If I may offer a little more clarification to this perplexing question.g When
I was serving in the Royal Navy in the early 50's it was my experience that the
terms "head" and "heads" were used interchangeably. One could go to the head or
the heads and everyone knew what was meant. In a couple of ships in which I
served, the layout of the heads, yes, there were two sets, one port and one
starboard, both right up in the bow, were not a great deal different from the
old sailing ship days, except it was no longer necessary to perform ones act in
the open. The layout consisted of a trough just above knee height which served
as the urinal, this trough then dropped down and continued beneath about 6
stalls. Sea-water was pumped continuously into one end, ran down the trough and
exited through a hole in the hull. Sea-boats had to be careful not to get under
the out-flow. One source of amusement was to bunch up a page of a news-paper,
light it and drop it into the trough when all the stalls were full. It was
advisable to beat a hasty retreat after doing so.g
This URL will show you just how the heads looked on HMS Victory, Nelson's
flag-ship at the Battle of Trafalgar, as you will see from the picture and the
explanation, this is situated in the bow section of the ship.
http://www.stvincent.ac.uk/Heritage/...ory/heads.html

The last modern war-ship I was on for a visit had flush heads, such luxury we
could only dream about.g

Jan
"If you can't take a joke,you shouldn't have joined"


Ah yes: a ship of the line had heads both forward and aft, of varying
sophistication. The only disappointment with this interesting URL is
that there is no mention of buckets.
At all!

:-)

Brian Whatcott

Thanks,
that makes sense.
/Lars J

On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 11:57:56 GMT, Brian Whatcott wrote:

On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 01:54:48 -0400, Jan
wrote:

On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 19:48:38 GMT, Brian Whatcott wrote:

//

Ah, you can support the connection between ship's head and
sanitary head, because, in your view, there is not properly a plural
sanitary term in nautical use: "heads"

Got it!

:-)

Brian Whatcott Altus, OK

Brian,
If I may offer a little more clarification to this perplexing question.g When
I was serving in the Royal Navy in the early 50's it was my experience that the
terms "head" and "heads" were used interchangeably. One could go to the head or
the heads and everyone knew what was meant. In a couple of ships in which I
served, the layout of the heads, yes, there were two sets, one port and one
starboard, both right up in the bow, were not a great deal different from the
old sailing ship days, except it was no longer necessary to perform ones act in
the open. The layout consisted of a trough just above knee height which served
as the urinal, this trough then dropped down and continued beneath about 6
stalls. Sea-water was pumped continuously into one end, ran down the trough and
exited through a hole in the hull. Sea-boats had to be careful not to get under
the out-flow. One source of amusement was to bunch up a page of a news-paper,
light it and drop it into the trough when all the stalls were full. It was
advisable to beat a hasty retreat after doing so.g
This URL will show you just how the heads looked on HMS Victory, Nelson's
flag-ship at the Battle of Trafalgar, as you will see from the picture and the
explanation, this is situated in the bow section of the ship.
http://www.stvincent.ac.uk/Heritage/...ory/heads.html

The last modern war-ship I was on for a visit had flush heads, such luxury we
could only dream about.g

Jan
"If you can't take a joke,you shouldn't have joined"


Ah yes: a ship of the line had heads both forward and aft, of varying
sophistication. The only disappointment with this interesting URL is
that there is no mention of buckets.
At all!

:-)

Brian Whatcott

Probably because the only use for buckets was for doing laundry, fire-fighting
or carrying water and other items from one location to another such as the
galley.g The layout shown was common on all ships, not just "ships of the
line". With different degrees of sophistication, the head area of a frigate,
which was not a ship of the line, would be more spartan than the "Victory", the
same area in a sloop, barque, cutter or a transport would be on a similar level
as the frigate, however, buckets were never used as relief stations, or to be
more forthright "crapping in".bg A great deal depended on the size of the
ship, the smaller the ship, less room, less room, less sophistication. A ship of
the line was the largest thing afloat at that time, and even in the "Victory",
you have to watch your head as there is little head-room (pun intended) for the
average person to-day.

Jan
"If you can't take a joke,you shouldn't have joined"