Waldemar

I have re-read and re-transcribed the first part of the script. Could you please take a look again? Der Weise Hundt bedarff 12 Stück von 4 oder 5 tb eisen. Auff diese Weise seindt die Schife mit Stücken von nethen zue besagen [besäen?]. English translation: The "Weisse Hund" requires 12 guns of 4 or 5 pounds of iron [roundshot]. In this way the (arrested) Dutch ships with guns are to be sowed [ie. outfitted with more guns making them suitable for the naval service]. Does it make sense to you? Cheers, Waldemar

Must say that I am very glad with the outcome, otherwise impossible to achieve alone. Many thanks again for your help. ... and for your information (in case you would be curious) – this very ship, „Weisse Hund“, together with some others, was ultimately lost to the other side of the conflict four years later, in 1632, upon falling of the naval base at Wismar, until then held by the Imperial forces. Greetings, Waldemar

Uwe, your translation concerning galleys was truly a breakthrough. I have rearranged it a bit in order to get crystal clear meaning. I need you now to check if my understanding of your translation is correct or otherwise. And it is considered to arm the galleys with another 24 guns (besides the guns already on other ships), in order to repel numerous smaller (enemy) vessels, and also to seize useful goods (from the enemy). Cheers, Waldemar

Uwe – many, many thanks for your help. I could not even imagine that the task would be so hard. Perhaps some more historical context is in order: The Dutch (war)fleet was considered an ally, and it actually came later this year to successfully remove the seaborne blockade of the trading harbour city. On the other hand, a few individual Dutch and English trading ships were seized and confiscated, for the „illicit“ trade with the other side of the conflict. „Weisse Hund“ was one of these confiscated Dutch ships, and subsequently put into naval service (some of these arrested ships were later returned to its original owners, but in such cases the ships' guns were kept). The exact name of „Weisse Hund“ is happily known from other, official documents. Some of these arrested ships had few guns, some not at all. Some were (structurally) fit for naval service, some not. Now I am trying to combine Uwe and druxey suggestions with the above facts, and of course would be happy to get even more ideas from you.

Many thanks for your input, druxey, so much more as I’m close to getting a headache. Perhaps this interpretation could be better: „White Dog/White Hound“ requires 12 guns shooting 4 or 5 pounds of iron [shot]. On this „White Dog“, meaning one of the ships with guns from Netherlands. And the way to provide 24 lacking guns for the galleys, is removing larger cannons from the smallest ships and the old prizes. Please make any critical comments.

. Hello, I need you to check my translation of an ancient, ships related German text: My transcription: „Der Weise Hundt bedarff 12 Stück von 4 oder 5 tb eisen Auff diese Weise Hundt die Schife mit Stücken von nethen zue besagen undt ist zue ehr arhten daß man auf den galehen bey 24 Stücke nohmal bedarfe das man von den Schifen so kleinest samt der zue gebrauchen Beute weg großere Stuckerin zue stellen werden“. … and an attempted translation: [The ship] „White Dog” needs 12 [artillery] pieces of 4 or 5 pounds [of] iron [shot] for this „White Dog”. There are talks of an approaching armed fleet from the Netherlands, [and] that for the galleys it is still needed 24 [artillery] pieces, [and] that from the smallest ships and from the old prizes bigger [artillery] pieces will be taken off. Historical context: This is a fragment of a spy report from 1628, created for, and actually sent to the opposite side of the war-conflict. Please feel free to make any plausible corrections. Thank you in advance, Waldemar

. These are gratings (actually right half of them), turned 90 degrees around its symmetry axis.

Gratings turned around by 90 degrees?

Alex, thank you very much for the translations of these ancient, obscure terms. So (im-)patiently waiting for the rigging installation on your model. And nice, neat job of aligning the wales with the hull's strakes. How did you make your wales black?

Steven, I have re-read your finely researched log and it seems there is general consensus on the halyard issue. Only 'smaller' rigging details need clarification. For example – what are rize (rixe, strixe), mentioned in the 15th-century manuscript? There are two of them, each with a length of 5 times the yard circumference, and both of the ties' thickness. And they are somehow connected to the yard. Bellabarba interpretation is not quite convincing (see #67, left), and I feel they are slings, as this layout hopefully makes everything logic. But perhaps you have other ideas, which you may share here...

Alex: Beauty taking shape... Fine, neat job. Steven: Both pictorial and archaeological evidence is described in the mentioned book (although not specifically for the 15th century, but for earlier period), and even comparisons with more modern, non-European practices are made. There are some graphical samples below: Reconstruction of the multi-sheave block excavated from Port-Vendres 2 shipwreck (c. AD 42-48), based on the measurements given by Carre (1983: 41) Block RG1, probably the upper block from the foremast halyard system of the Serçe Limani shipwreck (11th Century, c. 1025) Period/Date: 5th–6th century AD; Medium: Mosaic; Origin: Kelenderis, Turkey Period/Date: Byzantine, 5th-6th century AD; Medium: Graffito; Origin: Corinth, Greece Period/Date: AD 600-630; Medium: Graffiti; Origin: Monastery (Kellia) 80 km SE of Alexandria Period/Date: AD 880–883; Medium: Manuscript; Origin: Byzantine Period/Date: 9th century; Medium: Manuscript; Origin: Chalki Island, Turkey Actually, this book is a thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy found in the public-domain area. I think I would not violate any right by sending this work by e-mail, especially for non-commercial use. Your wish (and e-mail address) is only required. Richard Julian Whitewright, Maritime Technological Change in the Ancient Mediterranean. The invention of the lateen sail, 2008 Volume One – 16.1 MB Volume Two – 56.6 MB Or: https://www.academia.edu/562936/Maritime_Technological_Change_in_the_Ancient_World_The_invention_of_the_lateen_sail_Volume_One and: https://www.academia.edu/562943/Maritime_Technological_Change_in_the_Ancient_World_The_invention_of_the_lateen_sail_Volume_Two

Upon consulting still more works and sources (of which one of the most informative was the book Maritime Technological Change in the Ancient Mediterranean: The invention of the lateen sail by Richard Whitewright), my hopefully final, graphical interpretation of the unclear XV-century manuscript can be seen below. At last I am quite happy with this arrangement, and this is what I intend to apply to my Mataro model. Many thanks for help to you Alex and Steven. Of course still curious of your – perhaps different – solutions. As an aside, lifting the main yard on a large ship could take as long as one hour...

Fine, thank you Alex. Good you made your choices. And remember to show us your building progress.

An extension of the theme, suitable for larger ships. Its drawback – disagreement with medieval shipbuilding manual, which allows only twice the mast length above the deck for the ties. Alex, I can only hope it does not bother you. Waiting eagerly for your next entries...

Oh no, Steven... You have utterly ruined my perception of medieval clothing and behaviour... But more seriously – your conclusion concerning those ties may be regarded as proven by the medieval shipbuilding treatise itself. At least according to Bellabarba's interpretation: there are unquestionable lifts (mantichi), there are ties (manti, amante) and there is what is called rize, which he interprets as collars fixed permanently to the ties. This is shown in the diagram below: Having said that, I almost hesitate to advance yet another hypothesis (born while having your remark in mind), in which ties (manti/amanti) are used for both hoisting the yard and serving as lifts, as illustrated in the drawing as an alternative setup. This alternative layout has some advantages: – it is hopefully still coherent with somewhat unclear medieval manuscript description, – it is compatible with ALL extant iconography, in a sense that ties/jeers/halyards are never depicted on the pictures (thanks Steven for sharing this important observation), – it follows the Mataro model arrangement, or at least does not contradict it, – it provides some practical advantages: after fixing the yard by means of a sling, the ties could be easily operated as lifts even manually (besides other, optional lifts perhaps), thus freeing the windlass/capstan for some other activities, – last but not least, it is perhaps the simplest, yet hopefully functional arrangement one could imagine. And a drawback: obviously no mechanical advantage is provided by rope tackles (only by windlass/capstan levers), unless halyard is allowed after all. Again, feel free to make critical comments.

Agree 100%. Those ties and halyards are notoriously elusive on the period iconography, and your explanation for this phenomenon is the most convincing.

Perhaps this diagram taken from Bellabarba work may be of some use, although it must be admitted that it is of limited value without the accompanying text (unfortunately, too long to quote here). However, one could imagine, that most of the illustrated rigging, which is operated directly by hand (ie. without help of additional devices like capstans or windlasses), would be comfortably attached on the halfdeck level, just as it is seen in fact on the Mataro model itself or on so many contemporary pictures. Works dedicated to the Mediterranean rigging would be certainly of help too. Alas, I do not have too many of them.

Thank you Steven. Woodrat has done exceptionally fine and original job, although I am still not fully happy with some minor points, related mainly to the winding gear arrangement. And already seen your fine collection, a lot of useful stuff indeed. Besides, I try to rely on textual descriptions of the XV century Italian manuscript(s), which are so closely relevant to the Mataro model. In truth, these are the starting points and also the final benchmark, as it is known for sure they were written by a professional. This is quite an etymological mess, but upon consulting some other sources, notably Instrucción náutica (1587) by Diego García De Palacio, my current understanding of the Italian XV-century manuscript is best explained by the following diagram (only partly in line with the Bellabarba interpretation, which is perhaps the most detailed so far). If all this gear would be placed on the main deck behind the main mast, the capstan could easily serve the ship's anchors too, being on the same level with hawseholes. Feel free to make critical comments.

😄 Not even my Bermuda sloop model, made only some 15 or 20 years ago, and found lately in the basement. As to the calcet, true again, and – fortunately – we are not confined to guesswork only. It seems that it was then a common Mediterranean feature (in contrast to Northern rig), irrespective of the sail type. Referring again to Sergio Bellabarba work: Be that as it may, my ultimate goal is to find the correct/probable/workable/simplest configuration of the winding gear, suitable for a smaller, late medieval round ship. Unexpectedly hard work...

After some browsing… The book Sailing Ships of War 1400–1860 by Frank Howard seems to be the most explanatory on this specific subject so far (at least among the books at hand). While mostly Northern (English) practices are described, they are – on the other hand – strictly based on the first hand written contemporary accounts. Unfortunately, the relevant text, together with its explanatory diagrams, is too long to quote here. But in short, the earliest main yard halliard blocks/ramheads/knights could have originally only two sheaves, creating very simple halliards indeed.

Alex: Beautiful shapes and workmanship, thank you for that. Please do not stop... Steven: Happilly, I can read French, but many thanks again for your generous offer. Instead – as you are very well versed in period evidence – I need you to comment on the 'halyard or no halyard' issue: There are two sheaves in the attachable masthead (calcet) in the Lomellina vessel, for what must be a double tie, and there are only two sheaves in the knighthead too. First, one would expect that a main yard halyard would 'typically' need more sheaves than just two. More important, however, that it is expressly stated in the round-ship section of the Italian manuscript, that the main yard tie is connected directly to the windlass or capstan (sguindazo). Only small lateen-rigged mizzen yard has a halyard, perhaps on its being operated by hand solely (on this, see S. Bellabarba, The square-rigged ship of the Fabrica di galere manuscript). How would you interpret this evidence from the Lomellina wreck? For the sake of clarity, there is also a diagram below.

In reality, this above deck capstan asks more questions than it answers. Cargo loading? Yard bracing? Steering-wheel forerunner? Something else? At this place, it does not appear perhaps on any other known ship. One-time experiment? Wish to know too...

Steven, you have opened the Sesame's gates . The publications on the Lomellina shipwreck are especially enlightening... Many thanks.

Originally I thought it superfluous here, but now it seems perhaps not out of place to quote the right proportions of a Mediterranean round-ship taken from the XV-century Italian manuscript(s). They are in perfect harmony with prof. Gerritsma estimations and hopefully they may be useful for those wishing to build a carrack with correct proportions, as suggested by Ab. They come from the work by Sergio Bellabarba, The square-rigged ship of the Fabrica di galere manuscript. This is one of the most valuable works on XV-century shipbuilding, as it covers in great detail many technical aspects not found elsewhere, including rigging (clear diagrams!).

This is the best explanation so far, Alex. Are you going to make these fixings?