Fenegas

[Chagy]

Can anyone tell me how many pounds are in a fenega of cacao

Thank you...

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

How to Research for Treasure Hunting and Metal Detecting From Lead Generation to Vetting - Grab it through Amazon!

[Panfilo]

The fenega is a Spanish unit of volume and it equals 1.6 bushels. As one bushel is equivalent to 32 quarts you can easily convert to any other volume. Remember this is not a weight but a volume unit so it doesn’t matter if you have a fenega of cotton or of lead, it’s the same. Pounds is a unit of weight so you have to convert one to the other using the specific gravity of cacao to calculate. Water has a specific gravity of one (1) but to give you an approximate answer Chagy here is my answer: I must though make an assumption that one cup of cacao and one cup of wheat weigh somewhat the same, not sure but it can give a rough estimate, not an exact one. One bushel of wheat yields enough wheat flour for 90 one pound breads so one fenega= 1.6 bushels= 144 one pound breads. So my approximate answer is that one fenega of wheat weighs 144 pounds which needs to be corrected by the factor of difference between cacao and wheat. Hope it helps some.
Panfilo
http://www.parks.ca.gov/pages/485/files/agriculture_grist mill.pdf

 

[FISHEYE]

The fanega seems to have became a unit of mass only in the New World. In the 19th century, it was a unit of mass in the cocoa trade, approximately 51 kilograms (except in Maracaibo, where it was approximately 44 kilograms). In Havana, it was both a measure of capacity (approximately 109 liters) and mass (approximately 92 kilograms).

Source:
http://www.sizes.com/units/fanega.htm

 

[elle]

Panfilo,
How are you?
I got 102.4 pounds based on one bushel being 64 pounds,
and since it is 1.6 bushels for one fenegas.
You are right that this is a wheat calculation (dry weight), but estimate is close to what Luis needs.

p.s. Panfilo, I've searched for La carta esferica movie for months and no one has it.
I will have to wait till it comes to the Foreign Film section.
Thanks again for recommending it!

 

[Chagy]

Thanks guys….I came up with 132 pound so I guess I was close. This is what I am trying to figure out but it doesn’t add up.

I am reading this document:

Solo sabemos su capacidad de carga de 90 toneladas, puede calcularse que el tonelaje bruto podría haber sido de aproximadamente 220 toneladas, longitud de de quilla 90 pies, eslora total 110 pies, manga 23 pies, calado 10 a 12 pies.

This document mentions that the vessel has the capacity to carry 90 tons but it says in the manifest that it was carrying 1,824 fenegas de cacao, 35 quintales de madera tintorea that would add up to 248 tons?

 

[FISHEYE]

They carried more contraband then what was orginally on the manifest.

 

[Chagy]

John,

I know that, my question is.. could a vessel that has the capacity to carry 90 tons be carrying 248 tons?

 

[elle]

Yes, it was possible and no ballast was needed.

 

[ivan salis]

if one carried contaband cargo instead of ballast stones --a legally "registered" 90 ton cargo vessel **** could carry much more than its allotted 90 tons of cargo -- if one is going risk loss of the vessel and severe punishment for "smuggling" with the risk of getting caught -- one would often risk " heavily" overloading the vessel to the max as well. --to maximize ones "profiets" for the risk taken.

 

[Chagy]

Guys, guys, guys…I will explain more…. the vessel was traveling from Venezuela to Puerto Rico and the back to his home which was an Island. It wasn’t going to stop in Havana so it was a good opportunity for smuggling. The vessel only has 11,000 pesos register in the manifest but the survivors had 20,000 pesos with them. Now if it has the capacity to carry 90 tons and it has a register cargo of about 248 tons of cacao… its already carrying 158 tons over its cargo capacity how much more could it be carrying in contraband?

 

[ivan salis]

there might be 2 sets of books ( a dummy set" and a real set )-- the "offical "ones say she a 90 ton vessel carrying 90 tons of "cargo",==the other is the "real books" listing what shes really got onboard * 248 tons ---- the excess cargo 158 tons of "untaxed" (cocoa) is the contraband * a royal 1/5 tax had to be paid on all things shipped going out bound back to spain -- so it might have been being moving "excess" off the books cargo ( No royal taxes paid on them) to puerto rico to be later on smuggled back to spain by others

--much like a modern drug smuggling "fishing" trawler might bring a vessel full of drugs off the states and tranship the dope to another vessel that was "inbound" to the states --smuggling vessels often made lots of money for doing such "deals"

as a "registered" 90 ton vessel -she offically reports that shes carrying 90 tons of cocoa and royal 1/5th taxes are paid on that "amount" of cargo as they leave south america ( say 18 tons of cocoa value )-- when in fact she is actually carrying 248 tons of cocoa (taxes of 1/5th would be about 50 tons of cocoa value) a 32 ton of cocoa value --smuggling profiet -- by this --"off the books" overloading of the vessel --cargo wize. in PR the goods are just transhipped back to spain and the papers from venuzula show that the royal taxes were "paid" upon departure from there

 

[cuzcosquirrel]

If the pies mentioned are the foot measurements for the legnth, depth and width of the hold, when compared to other naos, it would be rated at about 200 tons.

I got out a chart in Schurz from 1724 and looked at it again:

Legnth of deck Legnth of Keel Beam Depth of hold Number of guns Tonnage

88 73 25 13 20 199

102 85 29 15 30 303

 

[Colombiapictures]

There is very often confusion about the tons of a vessel. It probably goes back to the origins of the name Ton.
Ton from tonel, from barrel.
A ship's hold had a certain volume. This volume could hold so many barrels of water or wine or whatever. Now, barrels do not pack very tight. There is a lot of space between because the barrel has a an odd shape. This shape is so because it is the only way that strips of wood could be joined together to make a waterproof container. Quite an art actually.
So a ship was taxed not by it's dead-weight, but by the size of it's cargo hold, the measure being barrels.
Still in modern times this system is being used. Engine space and living quarters, fuel tanks etc. do not make part of the cargo space and therefore the tonnage of the ship.
So a ship with a dead-weight, that is the actual weight of the empty ship if put on a scale, of 1000 tons, can carry several thousand tons of cargo. It depends how it is built.

CP