Introduction: The Role of Masters in the Age of Sail

The above quotation is from the evidence of a Tyneside shipowner, William Richmond, before the 1847 committee examining the future of the Navigation Acts. Since he was a keen protectionist, the bright picture he painted of Finnish ships and masters was certainly influenced by his conscious and unconscious fears. At the same time, the statement indirectly emphasizes the importance of the master: his qualities and skills were not only reflected in the outward appearance of the ship but also in many cases decisively affected its economic success.

In the present maritime world, the master may be regarded as a highlyskilled employee, a foreman or a chief of personnel. He may manage everyday work fairly independently but all important business decisions are made by the owners or managers. Yet before the era of the telegraph and liners he had far wider powers and responsibilities, at least in the long-distance trades…Not only did he manage the ship, he also had an important say in managing the business. Thus, he frequently decided things which today fall outside his province, such as freight contracts and the ship's expenses in foreign ports. Indeed, he was more like a manager than a foreman. This role was particularly important in deep-sea trading, in which a vessel might be away from its home port for several years. In such cases, the entire managerial system was of necessity very different than modern practices.

In this essay I will examine the system of management during the “heyday of sail” using the Finnish merchant marine as a case study. While it can hardly be argued that Finland was a typical maritime country - it was situated too far from the major oceans for that - it was engaged in the cross-trades in faraway waters.