 Welcome everybody. This is an odd sort of event because it's the experimental phase of the brave new world of the King's maritime history seminars where we were using the power of technology to get speakers from around the world to give us to give us some talks. So thank you to everybody online and the few people who have come in in person to this King's maritime history seminar. I'd like to welcome you all on behalf of the London unit here in the Department of War Studies in the School of Security Studies at Keynes. We are your hosts and it's the British Commission of Maritime History, of course, who have organized this event as always and with the support of the Society for Nautical Research for which we're very grateful and Lloyd's register. Tonight I'm really pleased to introduce Dr Sam McLean who is just an all round good chap who was not just that he is that but he's more he's graduated PhD from King's. Recently exactly and has been plying his trade as a mariner as I understand it on the Great Lakes, which is all very exciting which is something that I'd like to catch up with him about some time he's also been busy doing all sorts of historical work for global maritime history and working with documents and in a way that I will pretend to understand nor do I need to because he's here to explain it all to us. It does look exciting and so I will, I don't think I've forgotten anything else so I will without any further to hand hand over to you with our thanks Sam. Well, thank you. Thank you for having me. It's very nice to be able to join this seminar series once more, albeit from several thousand kilometers and several time zones away. Today I'm talking I will be talking about my ADM eight database project and some of the more recent things that I have been doing with it. The first thing I will be doing is talking a little bit about the ADM eight is a series of manuscripts. Then I'll be talking about the database product project and the documents, there'll be a short introduction to the database itself. A very short look at the basic functions of the research tool that I've created. And then I'm going to have a more lengthy discussion of. Well, basically I have a bunch of really interesting graphs, I think, to show everybody. I hope that everybody in the room can sit closer to the front so they can see and I hope that I will suggest that everybody who is on their computer will probably want the full screen on your best screen. Because I will be zooming in on the graphs as much as I can. So in 2017, after I finished my PhD, I realized that there'd be no practical way for me to continue working on. I argued that the Royal Navy had a Westminster model constitution and I just, I had moved home to Canada so I couldn't continue working on that project. So I came up with the idea of the ADM eight database after I received photos of volumes one and two from David Davies, who to whom I own many things. So he is both photographer and the hand model, you'll see in several the images later. The point of the ADM ADM eight database is to make the volumes more accessible to researchers. So what I think that is in transcribing the reports and putting them online, but more importantly, both at the conception of the project and to the useful research tool was to put the the strengths of a database to work and allow researchers to access and organize the information within ADM eight differently, more coherently and more easily than could just be achieved using the documents themselves in person. So what is ADM eight. It is a series of Admiralty manual script documents that are held at Q. I will put the first one on the screen. Hopefully, you can see that now. These are list books that contain several different types of reports. At the moment, the the prime me and my colleague Larry Herzl who are who is doing a lot of the transcription we're focusing just on the deploy what we call deployment reports. And so these are monthly reports or monthly or every two weeks or every so often of where the ships in the Royal Navy are. What ships are in service where they are what they're doing. Who's the captain, those kinds of things. Now I don't know when these volumes were actually created or bound up. If I may present David Davies suspicions as probably early 19th century under Thomas Corbett, who is responsible for the Corbett volumes and other resources. I think they seem to be copies of reports, although I might be incorrect. They are not perfect copies by any means. Often things are scratched out, or there are notes adage documents afterwards and there's also some issues with the with the documents that I'll be describing later. So, exploring the ADM eight documents. The one that we're focusing on the moment is what we call a deployment report. So in the first and second volumes, there are about 300 individual documents or reports total. At the moment we are focusing on the on the deployment reports because they are approximately 250 of the 300. We have 159 reports live in our database on the website that can be accessed by researchers and about 154 of those I believe are deployment reports. Now the deployment reports come in a number of different structures and styles, some with more information, some with less. The styles or tend to go on for a certain period of time and then change. Some changes last longer than others. I'm only going to show you two different structures of deployment report, mainly because if I showed you all of them it would take forever. Now all these deployment reports contain listings of the ship name and captain name. Other fields that are often included include men, guns, right, left tense date and service date cleaned station where at present and where laid up or where paid off. Often reports will have up to two location categories but no more than that. So, up on the screen we see the first one this is a report from February of 1673 so actually it's February of 1674. And this is one of the more basic structures for a deployment report as, for example, it doesn't have a tenants and it doesn't have rate. And here it has says how employed, but in the database we use that as station. So this is one of the simpler reports. So I'm just trying to figure out here we go. So this, as I'm showing you now hopefully you can see is a second type of deployment report. As you can see it has different categories. So guns is no longer there, but it has at least on the left side it has where at present and station design, which are both location categories. And on the right side, you can see that it has a completely different structure called in ordinary met not many reports have lists the ships that are in order are in ordinary or out of service. And so this is from August of 1674. However, I wanted to show you this one just as you can see some of the some of the differences. I've actually had to rewrite the way that the database works recently so that we can more accurately show the different different structures in our reports. Now, there are some weaknesses in the data in terms of creating or looking at social networks. The first is that the information listed per ship is quite limited, especially when it comes to the number of officers that are named per ship. The most I've ever seen is two captains and three left tenants, but often it is a captain and a left tenant, or just a captain or just a left tenant depending on what's going on. So this provides a, not very little information, but it provides I'd say the minimum amount of information needed to try to construe connections between officers, as I'll be showing you later with the graphs. Now, there's also some other issues with the volume itself. For example, there's errors in transcription. There's one fellow who shows up quite a few times called Edward Wheeler. Unfortunately, I can't find any proof either in ADM 1010 or ADM 1015, which are officer lists. And I actually also asked David Davies and we asked Peter Lefebvre about whether he exists. There isn't. It's interesting that there is a number of these issues is 20 or 30 lines where this name Edward Wheeler pops up, but we have no proof that he actually existed as an officer. And there's also another issue with miss miss bound pages, particularly in volume one, where in the middle of 1674 a random page shows up, which actually belongs into actually should be in 1678. So I've only noticed that one but there is some issues which can prove can prove to be challenging for researchers looking at the database or looking at the documents rather. Thankfully, we're able to sort it out and the information is stored correctly in the database. So about the database itself. So as I mentioned we have 159 live reports about 154 of the murdered deployment reports. So the database has is not just to the functions of the database are trying to make it so that researchers can look as as many different types of information as possible. So to that end we have the four basic tables in the database, which are reports, individuals or officers, ships and locations and locations are not just places but they also include duties and stations and tasks such as attending the queen or fishery convoy and things like that. Now, the reports, the report table has a list of all the reports in the database, which will eventually be all the reports in that in the manuscripts and all their critical data. Below that in the second level is what I call sections, and that refers to the section table allows us to accommodate parts of reports that have different structures that use different columns, so that the. Below the minimum number of column columns necessary. Below that each type of report whether it's ship deployment reports, or fleet report fleet list reports, or if it's waging wage and status reports or things like that. Each different type of report has its own table, so that each line of each report is transcribed individually and recorded individually. Below that, as each line from each report is transcribed and stored in the database. There are also created these secondary lines called officer service records and locations deployed lines, and what they allow me, allow us to do is every time an officer, or rather, for every officer that is mentioned in a line in a in a report, an officer service record is created for every location that is mentioned in a single line in a report. A location line is created. So that way we have a record for every law every location and every officer mentioned in every line. So in the database, there are 486 individuals in the database, 32 of them are shipwrites and the other 454 are all officers. There's 477 different ships, and there's 163 different locations and duties. So in the secondary lines, this is where the numbers really get quite large. So in just looking at the deployment lines for the, that main type of report. So over 154 reports, there is 1335 rows. For the officer service records over those 159 reports, there's 11,635 rows. The locations deployed rows, the mentions of locations, there's 10,058 rows. So I'm just going to quickly show you the basic functions of the database. So here we can see the first primary function, which is viewing an entire report. This is a report from December of 1683 entitled the present state of his majesty's fleet under the command of the Lord Dartmouth. And you can see here in the main, the first thing you can see is a map, which shows the location, all the locations that are mentioned in the report, and you can zoom in and out. Below that you have the data for the, the information for the report itself, including all the transcribed lines. And then at the bottom, you have a photo of the photo of the page that the we were transcribing from. So if you look into this, you can also look at individual locations. So this one is for the straights, which is pretty important and as you see there's a thousand six 1,656 lines that mentioned the straights. You can also look at individual officers. And the page here is for cloudly shovel. You can also look at all the locations where the lines that include clubs the shovel mentioned those locations. And you can also look at the, all the lines mentioned from all the different reports for for various ships. I've chosen the bottom venture just because I like the name. And so here's all for example, all the deployment reports, all the wages service time reports, all the reports, all the lines from the status reports, all the lines from the fleet lists, and at the bottom. Showing all the different locations. So it was my intention originally that to for people to go beyond this and to do more advanced research on the database that they would get in touch with me propose something that they'd want to do. I would then code it like do the computer coding because I've done all the computer coding for this. And then I would put it on the website and make it available for anyone to use. I realized quite quickly that this was impractical, both from perspective of putting too much of a load on the host of the website and also I just don't have the time to deal with that. And so what I have decided to do is we're going to be making the database freely available freely available to people who want to download it, and then go at it with whatever programming language and analytical tools that they want to under a license of course. So, what I'll be talking about for the rest of the rest of the presentation is that I have been doing a somewhat more advanced bit of research, looking trying to look at social networks, or at least that was the original idea. So what I'm talking about today is one example of this, I use the programming language are to create graphs from lists of relationships that I downloaded from the website. I need to think Daniel Simeon of McGill and the province of Manitoba for helping me with our and he sped spoon fed me enough code to get me jump started so that I could create the graphs and do a bit of analysis. I would like to say that what I'm doing what I've done and what I'll be showing you today is not particularly complicated. It is really sort of the first level of things that that can be done using our, and the specific software uses our studio. And there are definitely more complicated things. However, I am not at that stage yet. This seminar was billed as being about social professional networks and that's how I began. I wanted to find out who or how many officers each officer worked with both serving on the same ship and serving on the same station. However, I realized that while I could create lists of who served with who without the sort of the kinds of sources that are in the UK, I just couldn't come up with any kind of real solid analysis of social networks. However, I've realized that the data that I do have from my database is quite useful and I could create graphs that would show that would illustrate the connection between officers. First, I guess as I said serving on the same ship, then on the same station. So, for this will be looking at the years 1673 to 1687. Those are the years that I have data. That's for the same ship. And for a same station data. I'm looking at the year 1675 1687. And the difference there is that I wanted to avoid the big fleet in 1673 just because it has a number of complications, and also frankly, because the documents are more, or rather are less regular in 1673 1674. There are large holes in the data from in those years, whereas the, we've basically transcribed everything from 1675 until the end of 1687. So those are, there is much more data there to be used. I'll be showing you three, three kinds of graphs. The first is a direct relationships graph, and that is everybody who shows up in the data is on the screen. There is a line between them and anyone they have a relation and established relationship with according to the data. So these are quite complex. The second type of graph I'll be showing you is a minimum spanning tree, which is explained to me as being the six degrees of Kevin Bacon kind of graph. They show the most basically there, it's about networks in that case, so that even if people aren't directly connected, you can see how people are connected via others. And the third, the third kind is a bar chart that will show how many officers had how many relationships for each year that I'll be looking at. Unfortunately, I cannot provide any more direct mathematical explanations for these because they're a little bit over my head. But I'm, I am working on that I'm just graph theory is not one of my strong points. I do have to say that these numbers should not be taken as sort of the absolute reality. So many captains and captains in attendance being recorded in the data, many more individuals who are important, don't show up until they are pointed to these offices. For example, John Benbow doesn't show up at all in the data I have, because he wasn't promoted until I think six and 88. So it, that said, the number of complex, the number of relationships, the connections, the complexities should be regarded as being as on the lower side of what the connections are the still indicative of the general shape and of the general level of complexity as as things change year to year. So I'm going to switch back over to the graphs. So I'll be presenting a bunch of different information for each graph to put these in context I hope that you can see I'll try to where I can I'll be zooming in to make the name is more readable. So this is the same ship direct relationships graph for 161673 to 1687. You see, there, it is. There is not really that many connections between officers, which is what I found a little bit surprising and there's quite a few that are completely isolated and by themselves. So, in this graph, there's 291 officers shown 480 individual relationships. So the numbers are Anthony Hastings at 14 and clouds we shovel at 13. And the most common number is 84 is sort is rather the most common number of relationships is one, and that's held by 84 people. So here's an example of the minimum spanning stream you can see that the fleet really is quite connected. Although it's of there's a lot of one to one and there is still quite a few people isolated around the edges. So here's the bar graph, so that you can see how at least in same ship relationships, there very much is an emphasis on lower number of relationships rather than higher. I will be making all of these graphs and images available available to anyone who wants to look at them in detail. So if you're interested, please let me know and I'll send you a link to a Google Drive. So moving from the same from same ship the same station will be starting in 1675. And so for the minimum spanning trees, I added labels for stations and I edit some of the graph to shorten some of the lines to make the images easier to zoom in on. So the actual arrangement of lines and connections are from a function called minimum standing tree in I graph, which is part of our. And so I did not mess with that anyway. So this is the direct relationships graph for 1675. I'm just trying to go back to my information. So in 1675, there are 69 officers shown in this graph. In the records, there was 70. So one person is not in this graph. The total number of relationships is 1838. The highest number of connections is 99, which belongs to Jonathan Waltham. And he went to the Deppford catch and he went to a lot of a lot of different places, serving in the streets and Marseille the downs Deppford Portsmouth breast, and he also escorted the hearing congoys. So the most common number is a is a two relationships by seven people you can see there's that one big group in the middle. As we go to the minimum spanning tree and I'll zoom in a bit. I think that the big group in the center is the straights. And there's also in the northeast corner there's also another group from the streets, and in the southeast corner there's another group that's Sally and the straights. My, I can't fully understand or can't fully explain why individual stations are separated out like that except that my understanding is for example in the middle group it's those those individuals have a better connection with with Arthur Herbert. Whereas in the other group, they are more connected to each other. I will say that people in the center of these clusters are not because they're particularly important. It's because they have the lowest alphabetical order in their first names. So you'll often see Arthur Herbert and Benjamin Walters and people like that in the center of groups, just because they basically each group has sort of an equal mathematical weight, and the program has gone with the person with the first name alphabetically. And you can see here is the bar graph showing the distribution of the number of connections with that spike on the right side for the higher numbers. So this is the the direct relationships graph for 1676. I just have to go back to my data. So in this year there was 63 officers shown in the graph out of a total of 66. The total number of relationships is 1236 and the highest number of connections is 72 for James Dunbar. And then I'm sorry I just hit the wrong key and I lost all my data. Which happens, especially I should explain I have three different monitors that I'm using. And so I'm trying to skip back and forth between the left screen and the right screen so I can make sure that everything all the screens move at the right time. All right so in 1676 the highest number was 72 for James Dunbar. Interestingly, he only shows up in the records for January, February, November and December. And first he was a lieutenant on the Newcastle which paid off coming home from the streets and then in November he went back out with as a lieutenant of the Charles galley, which is a frigate. As you can see here the streets is in the middle of the group and clearly is, it is the most important of the Royal Navy's deployments, and everybody seems to be connected through there, and through Benjamin Walters, as well. I can see that there's the downs down the bottom right hand corner, currency Jersey and I think Bill bow, Portsmouth. Moving clockwise here, then the Sally the downs Jamaica 10 years, more Jamaica, Newfoundland 10 years and Newfoundland and Virginia. One really interesting thing that I found out is that there's often ships going between North Africa and Newfoundland. I don't know why those two things are connected other than probably the trade winds, but that is a recurring theme that shows up. So the most, the most common number of connections in 1676 is 16, which 10 people have. All right in 1677. This is a really interesting one for me you have 104 officers shown at a total of 107 you have 3846 connections total. The last graph is that you're starting to get three distinct little communities here. One here, one in the middle, and one here, plus all this, all these extra things around the periphery. And that is because we're starting to have a fleet, not just a large deployment at tangers in the streets but also one in the downs and the narrow seas. The highest number of connections here is 146 by Robert Wilford. He too was left tenant on two different ships, first on the adventure under Sir Richard Ruth, which paid off. And then on the Newcastle which headed back out under Augustus the Holstein. And you can see that you have. So this group here is tangers in the streets on the left. And you see Newfoundland and the streets. And these two clumps on the right hand side top and bottom, they are for the, the around the downs, Ireland and the narrow seas. And then you also have a group here on the right hand side which is assigned to the streets as well. And so here's the distribution you can see that there's peaks on the left and the right for the lowest and highest numbers but mostly it's the largest peak is in the middle for the numbers of connections. 1679 to me it's an absolutely fascinating year. It's the year 128 rather will not skip that. This is the most complex and the highest number of officers. I have this listed as French War scare. So I'm going to zoom in a bit just because it's really interesting when you get in there. So the total number of officers is 224 rather there's 224 in the graph out of 225. So there's 5,532 officer direct relationships, which is far more than any other year. And you can see there is really four communities here. There's this group here. You have this group here, which is so they're very much connected there. This is the fleet in the downs and the channel. And then you have the straights group over here, and another group that is more closely connected the streets. And also the, the things around the periphery are very much reduced. So the highest number of connections is 410 for two gentlemen called John Elliott and John Polia or Polly, I think. Elliott was the captain of the fire ship castle, which served in the channel the Portsmouth and then the straights and Polly was the captain of the fire ship and Christopher, which did something very which had a very similar program for the year. And the channel fleet is sort of in the middle there. And then the straights are the two clumps on the on the two sides. Plus the various other deployments connected mostly rather than connected largely through the straights. This time they're connected mostly through the channel. And the most common number of deployments in this year was 240, which was 13 people. There were a lot of different spikes there. Now in 1679. There's 50 fewer officers there's only 174 in the graph and four in the documents who do not make it into the graph. There's 10,534 relationships. So only 40% as many direct relationships as there were in 1678. As you can see, the constellations around the around the periphery are more complex. When we zoom in. We can see that, although the two main groups are still very much there. The intervening communities are now much simpler. In fact, it's only four individuals, John Mundan Richard Mundan and two others whose names are kind of blocked. I will mention them in a second. So the highest number of connections. I'm gonna flip now I'm gonna flip over to the minimum spanning tree. The number of connections is 274 with Richard Mundan, and John Mundan and William Pooley, who are those fellows in the center have 272. All three of them served together on the fourth rate St. David. They're in the straights, the North and the downs, which is how they have so many connections they were connected to both fleets. The other fellow in the middle is John Crofts who was a lieutenant on the swan and the Oxford, mostly on the channel in the channel. But because he was on two ships he had a lot of different connections. The most common number of connections is in this year is 140 and you can see there's that huge group of spikes in the middle, and then very, very little on either side. So in 1680, we go back to what it looked like in the earlier 6075 1676, where you sort of have these groups in the middle with that's the straights, plus a lot more complexity around the outside. Now there's only 118 officers in this graph. There's 122 in the document so four were not shown. There's 5152 direct connections, which is half as many as the previous year. The highest number is 166 held by two officers. You will not be surprised to hear that they were Arthur Herbert and Benjamin pool captain and lieutenant of the Bristol. Francis Wheeler was also a lieutenant of the Bristol. Actually, he's in the records for this year is Edward. But in September of 1680 he gets to, he gets promoted to command the non such so he doesn't have as many connections as Herbert and pool. So here you have again this the straights are broken up into two sections. But you can see there's very much more emphasis on the other stations and on the other duties than there were in 1678 and 1679, including here for example, the Balaga convoy. And you've got the herring convoys and turkey convoys on the bottom as well. And again is the the mode rather the most common number of connections for this year are 86 and 60, which each have seven officers, but 160 also has nearly as many with six. So here's the graph for 68 first graph for 1681. And this year there were 97 officers so 20 fewer than the previous. Again, the, there were four not shown so the total officers for this year is 101. The number of relationships is 2864 so it's almost half the previous year. The highest number of connections is 116 for James story and and Robert Wiseman. Again, you won't be surprised to hear that they were the captain and lieutenant of the Antelope. And they also moved around a lot they were in the straights coming home. So they were at the straight to the beginning of the year and then came back to England. They were at the downs Portsmouth in the channel, the soundings Plymouth, Newfoundland, and then in December of 1681 they were deployed back to the streets. And you can see here, the streets is again in the center with many connections to that and Arthur Herbert again in the middle. So it's Arthur Herbert is not just in the streets, but he's in the channel. And so which is why so many of those groups around the outside have channel as, as part of what they're connected to. So the most common in 1681 was 88 people. Sorry, 88 connections, which eight people had. And you can see where that spike was but also there's a big spike on the left side for about, I think that was four connections. There is again, on these outer stations, more people being deployed to these outer stations and they have smaller numbers of connections. In 1682, it's almost as if the straights is becoming less and less important over time. Because yes, while there is a big clump over here. And that's where Arthur Herbert is. There's also other clumps which are at least almost as important and much more complexity in the in the relationships between the other stations. So the total number of officers in the graph in this year is 91. The officers in the document are 98. So there's seven who were single on a ship. There's seven officers in the documents who were not working with anyone else who were on their ship. The total number of relationships is 966. And the highest number of connections is 46. So the total number of connections the highest number of connections, they're both dropping precipitously at these at this point. So Matthew Elmer had the highest number. He's the captain of the Tiger Prize. And the reason that it's only one person and not to like the previous few years is because he had three different left tenants during 1682. And here the most common at this point is only five, which 15 people have. And you've seen this in the minimum spanning tree here, while the straits is still in the middle and connected to everything. The other deployments are very much gaining more importance and doing and have more people sign for example, Ireland over here, Deppford. The Grandville columns shows up for the first time doing this, doing a surveying the straits and Turkey, Ireland in 10 years, Jamaica, the herring fishery, herring fishery, canary convoi and for and gentlemen over here by themselves in the turkey convoy. In the bar graph here you can see that big spike on the left hand side. And there's very much where in previous years, there was lots of people who had lots of connections and big fleets that is simply not true anymore. So in 1683 things change again. These two fellows down here by themselves just you can see, and there's these complicated, less complex arrangement of satellites around the outside, but they are very much joined to this big fleet, which I'm going to zoom in on. So how complicated the arrangements are there. There are so many interconnections there, there is barely any white space. 1683 is abandoning 10 years. There's actually fewer officers in the graph this year only 85 per total. And there's only a total of 86 in the documents. However, there's 3000 total relationships, which just shows how many of those officers were involved with that big fleet. So here which I've labeled Lord Dartmouth Squadron. The highest number of connections is 116 for Henry Pressman and Corbett Pelham, who are captain of the tenant of the Bonaventure. They were part of the turkey convoy, then Portsmouth and spithead, then Lord Dartmouth Squadron, then 10 years and then Salie. You can see here that every it really is Lord Dartmouth Squadron is really dominating everything and everything else seems to be connected to him. So the mode in this in this year is 100 which is held by 11 people, which is fascinating just given that it's so much higher than the previous year. If you look at the bar graph, you see that it's very much almost two sets of data on the right hand side, you have the bars representing the people who were involved with Lord Dartmouth fleet. And on the left hand side, you have the bars representing people who are only tangentially involved or not involved in 1684. We have a graph that kind of looks like Prince Edward Island. You can see that there's a while there is on this left left side here, there is some kind of community there and again another one here that there is more going on where people are separated. For the first time think you have actually two different sizable groups of people completely off by themselves. And so it is this year is labeled as James is back because James all the Duke of York is back at the Admiralty. In the minimum spanning spanning tree graph, we can see that the straights obviously while the straights is still present, Sally is becoming at least as important. And so is this is sort of this group that I'm circling here with random McDonald in the center is the channel debt for Grandpa Collins is here because he was also in the channel men surveying. And then here we have Portsmouth debt for Chatham, often the left hand corner it's Jamaica and the Caribbean. And the fellows over on the right by themselves were at Chatham. So in 1684. There's 75 total officers, sorry 75 officers in the graph, a total of 80 so five aren't shown. There's only 808 total relationships. The most common number of connections is 70 for Randall McDonald, who I pointed out. He's here in the middle of this group here. He was the at this point the captain of the Greyhound, the sixth rate, and he started the downs channel and then Sally. The most common number of connections is 24, which is held by 10 people. And it's just it's as if, without the straights and without 10 years. That big focus for the Royal Navy has been very much reduced. And here in the bar graph, you can see that the higher numbers are almost absent. But on the left, left hand side you have those two series of spikes showing connections and sort of many of the officers have had somewhere between two and 40 connections or where the bigger numbers are. I promise there's only a few more years left. So in 1685, we're back to one big clump in the middle with a more complex series of arrangements and satellites around the outside. So there's actually more officers in service this year there's 79 in the graph and 88 total so nine not shown at nine is actually the biggest difference between the number of officers in the documents number of officers in these same station charts. The total relationships is 2308. So again because we have that big clump which will be a big group of ships, we're going to have that higher number of higher relationships. The highest number is 106 held by three different people. The first two are Francis Wheeler and William Cornwall captain and lieutenant of the tiger, which Richard answer wrote so eloquently about in Master Shipwright secret. And they served in Newfoundland the straights the downs channel Scotland and Chatham. And the third person was Richard Dravenian who is the captain of the yachts auditos, which at this point wasn't Holland the channel that for the river Thames, your myth your myth fishery and line. And you can see in the in the in the special of the minimum spanning tree that the channel really is taking the biggest priority. So this group here is the channel. This one here is New England Virginia Chatham Sheerness and the Caribbean. Here is Portsmouth and Jamaica Portsmouth with connections to Jamaica. And this group over here sell a is North Africa and so that's very much reduced reduced importance than it was before. And the most common number of connections in this year is 14 for six people. So in 1686, the penultimate year, right here's our bar graphs you can see that the real that the most important spike is on the left with the lower connections. Although there's also a sort of mound on the right which shows, I'm going to say that shows the connections within the fleet. So in 1686, we have total 65 officers in the graph out of 74 so nine are not shown. There's a thousand 286 total relationships. The highest number is 88 from capital sorry it's Thomas Buckley. I can't I don't know what pronouncing that one right. Lieutenant of the Oxford. First the Oxford then the sapphire, and he served in New England, the down slash channel Scotland, sending taking soldiers to Scotland, the hope the downs Portsmouth spithead and Sally. And of course you can see here that Chatham's off by itself. Again, Grenville Collins, honestly shouldn't be in this graph because he's off by himself doing coastal survey, but yet there he is. So Sally is the group on the sort of the northeast corner here. That is Sally and Plymouth and some connections to Jamaica. Here we have more of Sally so Sally is really taking over in terms of the most important deployment in North Africa for the Royal Navy at this point. And over on the left here you have Virginia Portsmouth channel down Scotland. So the most common number in this in this period is actually 72 connections, 62 connections and 42 connections, which is five with five offers each, which suggests to me that there were different groups, but that people were moving around between the larger groups. So the final year is 1687. Again, we go back to the one big group one big fleet with then it's almost like tranches of satellites going off to here that again there's the two different groups off by themselves doing they're completely doing their own thing. So in this final year we have, oh, sorry. The other thing I did want to say by 1686 is that it's two more officers in the graph than 1676 and yet 50 more connections. Yet on the other hand it's also five fewer officers than 1685, but there's less than half the connections. So that is, it's just showing showing the importance of the absence of those larger groups. Again, sorry with 1687. This is the final year of the graphs I'll be showing you. We have again that one big group and then the series of connected orbits of officers going further out. It's the total number of officers is 76. Sorry, there's 76 in the graph total of 83 so seven are shown. There's 1422 connections total. The highest number of connections are 80 for Frederick fruit and George means the captain of the swan, and they serve in the channel the down the downs Sally Plymouth, the downs once again, and then they were sent to Bermuda. So in the spanning tree graph, you can see that the channel and the downs is really taking over as the main deployment. Here's a Portsmouth this group down here. Virginia is off is also distinct and over here. And you can see the other various duties that were that had priority. There's a couple of new interesting things that showed up here. One is the Florida wreck, which you can see in here. John Narborough is back in service going to Florida to pillage some ships there. Unfortunately, he dies when he goes there. But that is just interesting thing. I haven't seen that and anything like that in any other charts and the other one is pirate hunting to flurry. The several ships were sent to hunt down the Marquis de flurry who was a French privateer licensed by the King of Poland. And he often had safe haven and Malta. It seems that we're only ever managed to catch him because he ended up an Austria after that. I've actually put a link in the chat to an article in JSTOR for anyone's interested. It seems like a very, a fairly interesting fellow. So anyways, again here you have a fairly globular connected area in the middle which is that channel fleet with the, the branches offer for the various stations, and Sally is less important at this point. And it seems there very much has been a reversal in the priorities from where in the 1670 late 1670s, the straight Sally 10 years Algiers were more important than the channel by 1687. It's very much the other way around, not that that's really a surprise. We knew this. Here is the bar graph for 1687 you can see that again it's this split kind of formation where you have a number of spikes on the right hand side. And that'll be those people representing those people connected with the channel. And on the left hand side you have the much higher spike. So the most common number in this in this period is six held by eight people. And you can see that also the lower number of connections really takes priority here when you have these distinct distinct and separate and smaller deployments. So just a few quick conclusions. It seems quite straightforward that the best way to accumulate a lot of connections is either to be part of a big fleet for extended amount of time, or better, two fleets. If you decide to a small vessel to get sent to lots of places and does lots of interesting things. That's not news, but it's really interesting to me to actually see that in the graphs, where you can see where people are placed in the various types of graphs, and the way that they're they have connections. Absolutely surprised to see, especially with the same station graphs that they included the vast majority of officers who are actually listed in these years in the ADM ADM eight data. Based on my impressions from reading single month or not even sometimes it's more than one report a month, but based on my impressions from reading individual reports in succession. I thought it would be a somewhat smaller percentage of officers showing up in those graphs. Something are on the order of 60 or 70% rather than not only missing one or two people or seven. So my queries pulled down distinct relationships. So that each relationship for each year. Each relationship between each officer was captured twice, because it's a to b and b to a. I'm very curious how I think my next step would be, if I took the did the queries again, I would pull it down so that the number of repetitions of each relationship would be included. So that the weight and sort of the weight of each relationship could be incorporated into graphs. I would very much like to see how those graphs changed when when relationship weight was included. At this point that's above my level of skill with our, I'm gonna have to do a lot more investigation into the into the available functions and the math to see how to make that work. I'm also, I think with these annual tranches of reports. I think it gets some very interesting and very evocative and I hate to use illustrative but it's a great word very illustrative changes between year to year to year in the various graphs that I think show very provide really good visual context for how the Royal Navy's deployments changed. I think I would love to know how much I'd have to break it down to see the seasonal deployments and how things change more even more granularly. I mean one idea is I could set up all do graphs for each of the 155 reports and set them up as a video, but the thought of that worries me at the moment. But that is one ambition. I guess my final point for now is that in terms of the actual information. It's not news that 10 years in the streets was so incredibly important to the Royal Navy, particularly 1675 1683. I mean for me, there is a real difference between understanding that and knowing it, you know, knowing the patronage chains and knowing who served there and what kind of importance they had later and seeing in the graphs in the data, how many lines were shaped through the streets were shaped through 10 years through Sally. And, you know, just just as a further point of that. Now, of the of the total 10,058 station deployment lines 16,000 1656 were for the straight so full 16.4% of individual lines mentioned the streets. And this just adds even more weight to how important 10 years, and the streets was to the Royal Navy during this period. And that is my, I have, I do have one more graph that I want to just throw up there. And it is a graph. It's a scatter plot that shows the, well the blue is the number of officers in the graph, and the red is the total number, total number of relationships in each graph. The number of illustrates how the complexities change year to year, where particularly 1678, where the red is above the blue. And in 1683 where you have the number of officers declining, but because of Lord Dartmouth sleep the number very much does the total number of numbers very much does jump. So thank you very much for very patiently putting up with all of my graphs. And just thank you very much and I will be ready to answer questions. Thank you very much. Very, very good. Thank you. I hope that some of you have something to drink. I think we're way ahead of you. And it's probably know I thought I was going to put to say it's noon in Canada, wherever you are in Canada. But well then. Yeah, no, thank you very much. I mean there's fascinating insight into what you're, what you're doing do you want to, you want to keep these up or, or. I can, I can put myself on the screen. It's a good reminder to me, you know, that of my own limitations. And some of the reasons why I don't do quantitative history and, and so on because so much of this is, is, is beyond my, my, my abilities. But I'm very, very impressed. One does a couple of things one might be women's last name into Prince Edward Island because I didn't recognize. I didn't recognize it abstract. Okay, very, very, very good. And just remind me if you would, you know you talk about relationships, you said this at start so it is, it is my lack of concentration but, but to find again what a relationship is. And therefore what lots of them means what's the significance of somebody having lots and somebody having fewer relationships with me. So, the way that we define I define our relationship is, or rather how we count relationships is going. So what I did is I pulled up all the service, the officer service record lines for a single report. And any time in any instance, where two officers were on this either on the same ship in the same month, or in the same station, had the same location mentioned for them for their location in the same month. I counted that as a relationship. They were. Relationship might be putting it slightly heavy but the connections. And I have said relationship substitute connections and that's probably, or potential connection, and that is a more. That doesn't that takes out the emotional and political aspects of relationship. Okay, these are potential places where officers could have interacted, maybe not to maybe not intensely but right. Right. Yeah, so it's potential as much as it's anything and it's, it's proximity. And that's what you're but that's what you're measuring into somebody with lots of relationships was in a was in a busy. Yes, for someone to have lots of contacts, lots of potential potential proximity to other officers, which I would then suggest has potential proximity for sharing ideas, sharing experiences, sharing discussions. Right. So sharing books, for example, sharing books. Yeah, so we can see how this this could lead to, to all sorts of different things. Okay, if there's anybody at home with any questions, I think, I mean there's the q amp a function. And you're also just welcome to, and I think this is best really is just to put your hand up and then we'll unmute you and you can do anonymize yourself and you can you can speak directly to to to Sam. Gathering those spots, I wonder, I mean, it's, I should know, I should know the website. It's much better than I do, but I'm wondering if I could ask you about, you know, some of the challenges in terms of a getting permissions to do this and and be how, how to raise the profile and get the traffic that would make you know that all of this all of this work. I mean, and the enormous amount of work really that's what I should have commented on first and the enormous amount of work that's gone into this is extraordinary and a real statement about you really. But how do we get the traffic on to this that all of your work deserves. The traffic is was for this way so I'm, I don't know how many people were there but in 2013, I was at a conference in Greenwich, and I sat on a book on a panel with Justin Ray, and he had this website he started and I joined and I kind of took it over after a while. At least, Justin and I worked very well together, but in 2017 we changed, we, we split our we went our own different ways for various reasons, mostly because he had a number of issues that he had to deal with medical issues so he was frankly had a lot more important things or important things to deal with. Well I was mucky around with the website. And so it's not the thing with traffic is that we are. We don't have the profile of say the. It just slipped out of my head, not the privateer pages project. But that that big project that's England and Germany where they got all the money to digitize privateers papers and things. I think it's the privateers papers project. Like we don't have, I don't have any funding for this project so it's, this is something that Larry hurts all and I and a couple other people have been doing entirely in our own time. So we don't have, we don't have the backing of, you know, universities, and those kinds of funding agencies to give us the profile to get the page views. But frankly that's okay because we only have 159 documents live at the moment. But I also don't think that to be quite frank, if one other person finds us useful in whatever research they're doing then it's all and that it is entirely worth it. I know that this, like this database which I intend to release publicly as soon as possible. And I'm also going to write up a document on the various errors in an ADM 8 volume one. I know that like for example those will be much more useful than any to anybody else than say my PhD thesis was. So I think that these can be real useful tools for anyone who comes to study the, you know, not necessarily the next generation but whoever else is coming next to study the Royal Navy in this period. You know, to be honest, you know, I was talking to David Davies before I moved to England and without him, you know, without you Alan without David Davies without Peter Le Fay people like that. I could not have done a tenth of what I did. And so I'm just trying to create a tool so that the people who come next, have it a little bit easier. Well, I mean, about permissions permissions I do need to answer that. So permissions is a little bit of a bifurcated question when it comes to the, the information itself it's under, there is crowd I think copyright in terms of putting the information online. So that's the problem because it's that we have access to it, we can make it available. The stickier problem was in getting permission to put the photos online. So clearly I mean obviously I had permission to share David's photos. He'd very generously gave that permission immediately with the National Archives, I had to, they were not in any way in opposition to the idea, mainly because it's David's photos, not theirs. So that that is a big point for copyright. But I did have I did write a letter, I can't remember which panel or committee it was, it was to. But I did have to write a letter to the National Archives asking their permission to share photos of the documents that they hold, which they granted pretty quickly without without any complaint without any criticism. Not even questions it was just, here's the project. I mean I think that there is no, no monetization here at all is probably a significant point of why they were so willing. But I mean I have had no problems getting permission to put up the photos. I know there would be other issues for example if I tried to post any photos from the National Museum of the Royal Navy. I know that they'd have issues with that, because it's in their researcher form. And again there's also stuff with care where certain things aren't are in privately held and are not to be shared. But with 80 and mate Admiralty stuff. I have not encountered any issues whatsoever. Excellent. I'm really glad to hear that. Can you see that. If I don't be in the chat, I will pull the chat. No it's the Q&A. It's Alan Anderson, more of a comment. It seems like this is a project the funding which would be of interest to a variety of possible sources. And well it follows up from what you just said to me. Are you going to try to get funding I guess. I'm going to say that because I just noticed that yesterday there was an ad on Twitter for that I for the pierce all fellowship, which I have now figured out I am now at what seven months beyond the date for. I thought about it a couple years ago I looked at a lot of different possibilities. I was highly discouraged one because of citizenship. I'm not American, and I'm not British slash European. So that automatically disqualifies me from a lot of funding. And the other thing is that I'm not, I'm not in a postdoc I'm not employed by you know I don't work at a university. So therefore I'm not. I haven't found anything that is open to funding projects like this the sort of like real money, substantial amounts of money. I have talked to the society for nautical research and a couple of those organizations, but I haven't. There is some potential there but it is, it is complex. It is not going to count on anything. That said, if anybody is interested in funding, providing some funding for this project. They should talk to me privately and we can certainly discuss it. That's hope so. Okay there's a question here in the room. Professor Murphy. I sympathize with you because if you're an independent search, it's very, very difficult to get any funding from established funding. That's a fact, because you're not in the university sector, you can be an absolutely genius, but you're never going to get any money from the established funding. I sympathize with you. That's a comment. Did you hear that? I did and I appreciate it. Yeah, I have never, I have not had any delusions about my chances of getting funding from funding bodies. Let's put it that way. Well, if you carry on doing it, doing the good work then, you know, while we're all hopeful. And Alan couldn't, yeah, Alan, you couldn't hear the comments, so yeah, sorry, I'm not quite sure how this works. So it was Hugh Murphy asked, just making a comment, empathizing with Sam's plight here when it comes to funding, because when you're not in a university, if you're not established at a university, it's very, very difficult for academic funding bodies to recognize. It's a problem. It's a problem that we all, that we all recognize or something. Yeah, and that was, that's where that that was. Right. Okay. People are allowed to stick their hands up. I think I would see them if they were there and David Davis has and I'm going to allow you. Should I expect some tomatoes coming my way. No, I don't know. That's a private joke between David and I. Really. Yeah, I think David you're free to, you're free to speak. Okay, can you hear me. Yes. Excellent. Okay, good. Very nice to hear your voice, by the way. Okay, and yeah, yeah, I'm going to see it. I'm going to call them name checks to start with them and your check will be in the post. I mean, I will certainly want to have a look at this, this material and a bit of depth and look at the graphs and so on and go through them. But I mean, I think, as you say, I mean it's so crucially important, you know, all periods of naval history arguably, I mean, particularly in this period to understand who serves with whom. And when and where, I mean, all right, we know about particularly the connection between Tangier and 1688. That's very sort of long established, but I think there are all these additional refinements that can be made to that I mean that these are clearly very, very important. I mean, I think it's important to bear in mind that they actually cut both ways. Yes, all right, if people serve together, we know they socialize together and all these sorts of things we've got we've got evidence for that. But of course, they also fall out with each other they argue with each other and that isn't something that's going to be reflected in graphs I mean it's very often not reflected in in any form of evidence but the more we've got about who is where and when with whom. I think it, as you've said yourself I mean this is a starting point you can go on from this to make all sorts of analyses that are hopefully going to, you know, clarify a lot of the complexities of naval history in this period. You know, I mean I'm like Alan given my computer skills are nowhere near your league I am very very impressed and very grateful so thanks very much indeed. I'll thank you it's I mean, obviously I owe so much to you and I very much appreciate always everything that you're very enthusiastic enthusiastic support of everything I do. It's not just like who I really want to create thing. God knows I'll never, I can't foresee a point where I'll get the England to come look at the sources and the paperwork again in person. I honestly I just, I can't foresee that point. I'm hoping that at the very least that I can throw up spanners and things that people who are there who have better access to the to the sources and the documents might be able to raise questions for other people to go chasing off. I mean the thing about the connections that I mean it just occurred to me that not only should I have a list of who served together, but also who was who were serving at the same time and never serve together. Because I think that is an interesting set of things to raise about what their relationships. I mean, they may have had relationships. I mean also the other is, there's nothing here that addresses on shore relationships at all. And so I think it'd be really interesting to see have a list of for each officer, who they serve at the same time as, but they never served with either on the same ship or on the same station. And to see later what kind of relationship they may have had or not, because I think that that is also a fascinating thing, especially when it comes to the glorious revolution and what comes after that. Yes, well I think, yeah, I think like David, we're all we're all appreciative of the of the work that you're doing Alan Anderson. I think you've overestimated my ability to to direct university funding but I certainly appreciate the sentiment. I think it is on the dot closing time. So Sam you've you've done an excellent job of introducing this to the, well to the enormous. Not just work that you've done but to the enormous potential of work that can be done and thanks to you. And so I suppose it's just up to us here in attendance there's many, many of us and on behalf of the whole sort of maritime history community thank you for all of your efforts and thank you. Thank you for tonight so I think everybody at home silently I'm sure we'll join me in clapping and and you know it's the only thing to do. Thank you.