Builder's Old Measurement

King Edward I levied the first tax on the hire of ships in England in 1303 based on tons burthen. Later, King Edward III levied a tax of 3 shillings on each "tun" of imported wine, equal to £119.59 today (using the last year of Edward III's reign, 1377, as the base year). At that time a "tun" was a wine container of 252 gallons weighing about 2,240 lb (1,020 kg), a weight known today as a long ton or imperial ton. In order to estimate the capacity of a ship in terms of 'tun' for tax purposes, an early formula used in England was:

${\displaystyle {\text{Tonnage}}={\frac {{\text{Length}}\times {\text{Beam}}\times {\text{Depth}}}{100}}}$

where:

• Length is the length (undefined), in feet
• Beam is the beam, in feet.
• Depth is the depth of the hold, in feet below the main deck.

The numerator yields the ship's volume expressed in cubic feet.

If a "tun" is deemed to be equivalent to 100 cubic feet, then the tonnage is simply the number of such 100 cubic feet 'tun' units of volume.

• 100 the divisor is unitless, so tonnage would be expressed in 'ft³ of tun'.[1]

In 1678 Thames shipbuilders used a method assuming that a ship's burden would be 3/5 of its displacement. Since tonnage is calculated by multiplying length × beam × draft × block coefficient, all divided by 35 ft³ per ton of seawater, the resulting formula would be:

${\displaystyle {\text{Tonnage}}={\frac {{\text{Length}}\times {\text{Beam}}\times {\frac {\text{Beam}}{2}}\times {\frac {3}{5}}\times {0.62}}{35}}}$

where:

• Draft is estimated to be half of the beam.
• Block coefficient is based on an assumed average of 0.62.
• 35 ft³ is the volume of one ton of sea water.[2]

Or by solving :

${\displaystyle {\text{Tonnage}}={\frac {{\text{Length}}\times {\text{Beam}}\times {\frac {\text{Beam}}{2}}}{94}}}$

In 1694 a new British law required that tonnage for tax purposes be calculated according to a similar formula:

${\displaystyle {\text{Tonnage}}={\frac {{\text{Length}}\times {\text{Beam}}\times {\text{Depth}}}{94}}}$

This formula remained in effect until the Builder's Old Measurement rule (above) was put into use in 1720, and then mandated by Act of Parliament in 1773.

• Depth to deck

The height from the underside of the hull, excluding the keel itself, at the ship's midpoint, to the top of the uppermost full length deck.[3]

• Depth in hold

Interior space; The height from the lowest part of the hull inside the ship, at its midpoint, to the ceiling that is made up of the uppermost full length deck. For old warships it is to the ceiling that is made up of the lowermost full length deck.[3]

• Main deck

Main deck, that is used in context of depth measurement, is usually defined as the uppermost full length deck. For the 16th century ship Mary Rose, main deck is the second uppermost full length deck.[4] In a calculation of the tonnage of Mary Rose the draft was used instead of the depth.[5]

The British took the length measurement from the outside of the stem to the outside of the sternpost; the Americans measured from inside the posts. The British measured breadth from outside the planks, whereas the American measured the breadth from inside the planks. Lastly, the British divided by 94, whereas the Americans divided by 95.

The upshot was that American calculations gave a lower number than the British. For instance, when the British measured the captured USS President, their calculations gave her a burthen of 1533​⁷⁄₉₄ tons, whereas the American calculations gave the burthen as 1444 tons.[6] The British measure yields values about 6% greater than the American.

The US system was in use from 1789 until 1864, when a modified version of the Moorsom System was adopted.[7]

• Thames Measurement

Look up burthen or tun in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

• "Concerning Measuring of Ships", The Sea-Man's Vade Mecum, London, 1707. pp 127–131.
• "Of Finding the Tonnage or Burthen of Ships, &c.", David Steel, The Shipwright's Vade-Mecum, London, 1805. pp. 249–251.
• "Burthen", or "Burden", William Falconer's Dictionary of the Marine, London, 1780, page 56