ROWTNG STYLES. 173 



writer of the * Principles of Rowing/ was unquestionably im- 

 bued with the old fashioned doctrines. Now, of the six 

 races rowed on the Thames in the old fashioned racing boats, 

 Cambridge won no less than five. The Oxford crews, who 

 rowed in a style more nearly resembling that now rowed by 

 the most successful crews (though scarcely ever inculcated in 

 verbal instructions), were not only beaten in every race save 

 one, but in three cases were beaten out of all reason. Half 

 a minute was the amount by which Cambridge won in 1845 > 

 but in 1836 (certainly over a longer course) they won by one 

 minute, in 1841 by one minute and a quarter, and in 1839 

 by nearly two minutes. No wonder that when outraged 

 boats came in Cambridge oarsmen were loth to modify a 

 style which had gained them so many and such striking suc- 

 cesses. Nor did it greatly matter, when this happened in 

 1846, whether the style of rowing was modified or not. The 

 first specimens of outrigged racing boats occupied a sort of 

 half-way position between the old-fashioned inrigged craft 

 and the exceedingly light, keelless boats now used. Thus, 

 during the seven races rowed in the earlier form of outrigged 

 boats, success was pretty equally divided between Oxford 

 and Cambridge. In one race Oxford won on a foul ; of the 

 other six Cambridge won three, and Oxford also won three. 

 But since the present form of racing boat was adopted (in 

 1857) Oxford has been almost as successful as Cambridge 

 had been in the first nine or ten races. In 1857 Oxford won 

 easily; in 1858 Cambridge won, but the stroke of the 

 Oxford boat could use but half his strength, the forward or 

 working thole of his rowlocks having been bent outwards by 

 a wave which caught his oar before the race began. (The 

 outriggers and rowlocks were shown to me at Searle's boat- 

 house a few days after the race, and there could be no ques- 

 tion that the chances of the Oxford boat must have been 

 seriously impaired by the accident) In 1859 Cam- 

 bridge sank, and, though she was four lengths behind when 

 this happened, there can be little doubt she would have won 

 but for the original cause of the disaster a wave which had 



