The San Marco mosaic ship c. 1150 by Louie da fly - 1:75

[Louie da fly]

No I haven't. Sounds worth trying -if I can get a gentle current.

 

Steven

[BANYAN]

Looks good Steven.  Another method I've heard of is to use small weighted bags (filled with sand or the like) - make the bag from scrap cloth to size.  The natural bellying of the bag sort of coincides with the bellying of a sail.  I have not tried it myself, simply passing on a tid-bit I've read somewhere.  I've also heard of the method suggested by Druxey; either should work I think.

 

cheers

 

Pat

[Louie da fly]

OK - another question. I've just been looking at video of the caravel reconstruction Notorious and she only has a single block at the clew of each sail. Check out the footage.

 

 

 

There's another video up of a caravel reconstruction under sail, but it doesn't show very much.

 

 

So am I doing too much by having a pair of blocks at each clew? Should I remove one of them and simplify the rig? Particularly as my model is an early vessel with what we should probably assume was an unsophisticated rig? Unfortunately, contemporary  representations without exception don't show what's happening at the clew, so are no help at all.

 

And single-masted lateeners aren't much help either, as it's what happens with the fore and middle masts I'm particularly uncertain about. Except perhaps to make me think I've made the blocks for the sheets too big anyway.

 

Steven

 

 

Edited September 6 by Louie da fly

[Ferrus Manus]

You should simplify the rig. Only one sheet would make tacking the yard simpler, and because the yard swings in front of the mast on a medieval lateener, all lines must be swung around the mast and shrouds. Check out how I rigged my Portuguese caravel. You should have a hook on the one sheet block and an eyebolt and cleat setup on both sides, but only one will be used at a time. The idea of using multiple sheets for a fore-and-aft sail originates with the invention of staysails almost 500 years later. I highly doubt the use of double sheets ever happened on lateeners especially in this era. 

Moreover, I doubt the use of vangs would make much of a difference, even though I used them on my caravel. The vangs would not be as effective at positioning the yard as the braces/tacking tackle would be. If vangs were used, the blocks would not be positioned right up against the yard. There would be a section of standing line between the blocks and the yard to allow them room to move. Also, vangs would make more sense further forward on the yard, as that gives them the ability to tack the yard to a greater angle. 

To make a long story short, I would redo most of the rigging of each sail aft of each mast. The lifts and parrels look perfect and the fore rigging makes sense. 

Edited September 6 by Ferrus Manus

[Ferrus Manus]

Also, the loosened shrouds on the lee side of the masts are an accurate detail I have almost never seen correctly depicted in lateeners before. This makes me want to do another caravel kit at some point. 

[Louie da fly]

Thanks for that, Ferrus. This ties in with what I was thinking. I'd already all but decided to reduce the blocks at the clew to a single one per sail.

 

What's the thought with the hook on the block? Is the idea to hook it into one of those rope coils on each side of your caravel's deck, depending on what tack you're on? I'll have to give that one some thought.

 

Good point about the vangs - I'd thought "vangs at the extreme ends of the yards  = greater turning force." But (and I have noticed these things further down the yard in both contemporary pictures and in photos) that presupposes unlimited sideways space at deck level to pull the yard to the side. Which of course there isn't. So further down is better after all. And the pendant (the standing line) between the yard and the block is borne out by both photos and near-contemporary (only 140 years later) images.

 

Thanks for the comment regarding the loosened shrouds on the lee side. I got that (of course!) from Björn Landström's superb explanation in his book The Ship.

 

Steven

 

PS: By the way, one thing this build has taught me is that I need to put more forethought into belaying points before I start building, not just say "ah, that should be enough"and hope it turns out ok. So many belaying points, even on a (fairly) simple lateener.

Edited September 7 by Louie da fly

[Ferrus Manus]

What I'm saying is that you could do it either way. You could either have a hooked block and an eyebolt on each side, or two running ends tied to a rail like I have on my caravel. 

Here's a good view of the first option: 

This would belay to a cleat or the rail itself instead of a pin. The issue of belaying points is a lot more precise and critical on a lateener than on a square-rigger. I would keep all belaying points inside the profile of the shrouds if possible. I don't even start making up rigging elements until I know exactly where everything belays and on what. I could tell you where every single rigging line on the Reale belays only because I have paced around the ship for hours at a time determining that. 

While you're at it with replacing a good chunk of the rigging on your model, you might want to go back and make a new fore yard and sail. I saw you talk about how you wished you hadn't made the fore and main yards and sails the same size, as the foremast is significantly larger than the main. I think you wouldn't regret doing any of this as it would make your model look significantly more accurate to contemporary sources. 

I have had to rip out sails more times that I would like to admit. 

Edited September 7 by Ferrus Manus

[Louie da fly]

3 hours ago, Ferrus Manus said:

You could either have a hooked block and an eyebolt on each side

In fact I'll be having a block and tackle on each side, but using toggles to join them to the sail, not hooks.

 

3 hours ago, Ferrus Manus said:

While you're at it with replacing a good chunk of the rigging on your model, you might want to go back and make a new fore yard and sail.

Nope. I've already made my decision on that. It's not worth the extra work for something I don't find particularly bothersome.

 

BTW, regarding the vangs, though there are certainly a good number that are part-way down the yard, there are also quite a few well-observed contemporary representations showing them right on the extreme end.

  

 

So I'm happy to leave them where they are for this model, and will simply do it differently next time.

 

Steven

[Ferrus Manus]

4 minutes ago, Louie da fly said:

not hooks

The hook goes on the lower block that's attached to the eyebolt. Your model inspires me to get my hands on another medieval lateener kit and make it as accurate as possible. 

 

By the way, how do you turn off autocorrect on MSW? 

Edited September 7 by Ferrus Manus

[Louie da fly]

1 hour ago, Ferrus Manus said:

he hook goes on the lower block that's attached to the eyebolt.

Yes, that's what I thought. But a rope loop and a toggle do the same job and are a very Mediterranean solution.

 

No idea about turning off auto-correct. Go to the How to use the MSW forum - **NO MODELING CONTENT**  section on the home page and ask. A moderator will almost certainly be able to help. That's what that section's for.

 

Steven

[Mark Pearse]

On 9/7/2024 at 6:39 PM, Louie da fly said:

What's the thought with the hook on the block?

Hi Steven

 

This comment is possibly not relevant to this build, but might be useful - & it relates to Couta boats, & I recall you built one so at the very least it should be interesting. They still use the traditional setup for jib sheeting: sheets tied off to a horn cleat. They have one black & tackle sitting loose in the boat, hooks or strops on the ends. When tacking, the jib hand gets the sheet on manually at the horn cleat; then they use the block & tackle to get the sheet on hard, then take up the slack in the jib sheet on the horn cleat; remove the block & tackle & put away for the next tack. So they only need one tackle, not one each side of the boat. 

 

I checked Youtube, & this video shows it for about 2 seconds at 0:46 

 

 

 

Edited September 9 by Mark Pearse

[Louie da fly]

Thanks, Mark. I'll need to look at this a few times to get my head around it (that's the way my mind works, I'm afraid.) Yes, it might not be appropriate to this build, but ten again it might.

 

Steven

[Louie da fly]

I've been working on rope coils. Until a moment ago I thought I'd made and put in place all I needed, but I've just become aware there are still a few more to do. So many coils, and I realise (again) that I didn't provide enough belaying points. But I've got so far now that I can't go back and fix that. It just has to be a learning experience for next time. By the way, note the nice catenary curves on the tackle for the slackened-off leeward shrouds.

 

My coil-making has improved as I've gone along. The first ones were okay, but not brilliant. The latest ones are pretty good, if I do say so myself. Problem is, unless you're looking for them, they're not terribly obvious. I could have saved myself all that hassle and the model would have hardly looked different. But I would have known . . .

 

And I solved (sort of) the issue of the sheet blocks on the weather side. I've tied one end of each sheet to a belaying point (I said there weren't enough!) with a coil on the free end, and the block (with a loop at the top to take a toggle) between the two. (You can see one of these blocks just below the gold clothespeg.)

 

And I've completed and weathered the anchors: neglected and rusty, as befits a not terribly-well maintained merchant vessel.

I had a bit of a research problem with these anchors - the only contemporary picture showing anchors at all is also from Saint Mark's, and shows three anchors at the bow - which could be quite believable - the technology for big heavy anchors hadn't yet been developed, so I can believe they made do with several smaller ones. BUT they're shown hanging off the gunwales by the cables, not catted. I find this difficult to accept. Interestingly, the cables appear to be looped around something at the gunwale and hanging outside the hull. Hmmm .  . .

The nearest other representations of anchors in time are about 200 years later, and who knows what developments in maritime technology took place in the interim. However, I find the suspension method much more believable, and that's the configuration I'll be following (though I have based the anchors on the ones in the mosaic).

 

                     

        1362 from the church of San Pietro in Ciel d'Oro, Pavia, Italy.                 1336-38 Arch of St Peter the Martyr, Church of Sant'Eustorgio, Milan, Italy.

 

And here is one of the anchors temporarily in place.

Steven

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited Tuesday at 02:17 AM by Louie da fly

[Thukydides]

What you said of rope coils is true of so many details on a model ship. Most will not notice them. That being said I do think that though people don't consciously notice them they may in the aggregate grasp the higher overall quality of the model for all those extra details.

 

In any case as you pointed out, you will notice which is really what matters.

 

Fantastic work.

[Glen McGuire]

I love the rusting effects on the anchors.  That's a nice touch and very well done, Steven.

[BANYAN]

Nice job Steven, looks good.  WRT belaying points, some lines could be brought to the same point.  This is especially true for all the lines used to control the sail being brought to a common belaying point so that a sailor could grab them in hand all at once (as all those lines needed to be worked togeher).  Not sure if applicable tour build but would make an appropriate story/yarn?

 

cheers

 

Pat

[Louie da fly]

Thanks everybody for the likes.

 

Thanks particularly to Thukydides (and yes,I know who the original Thukydides was -a very appropriate name!) and to Glen. By the way, once I have those anchors properly located and catted, I intend to put rust streaks down the hull as well.

 

Banyan, I must have been in the middle of my post when you sent yours, so I didn't see it. I'd agree abut 'common' belaying points, and in fact I've been forced to do this on the model whether I wanted to or not. But I wasn't thinking about the idea of having more than one rope that work together to be grabbed at the same time. Maybe for next time.

 

Steven

Edited Monday at 02:10 AM by Louie da fly

[Mark Pearse]

It's a great pleasure to see the model coming together, & I really like the ageing you've done (to the boat...).

[Louie da fly]

Well, you learn something new every day (if you're not careful!).

 

Today, whilst working on the blocks to control the side rudders I discovered something I'd missed. The best depictions of mediaeval Mediterranean blocks I know of are in the carvings from  from the church of San Pietro in Ciel d'Oro, Pavia of 1362 and the Arch of St Peter the Martyr, Church of Sant'Eustorgio, Milan of 1336-38 as shown in post #463 above. Only 200 years or so wrong for my model, but in this business you take what you can get.

 

But look at the way the blocks are connected to the tackles they relate to. No strops! Instead, the ropes go through holes in the blocks themselves.

 

Just like the blocks on my earlier dromon build, which I based upon actual archaeological finds from even earlier (5th and 11th century AD) Byzantine ships, except that the earlier ones were simple rectangular prisms ("blocks" if you will - so that's where the name came from!) 

 

From a 5th century AD wreck found in the silted-up Harbour of Theodosius of Constantinople (modern Istanbul) during the Yenikapi archaeological dig.

 

The Spanish Cantigas de Santa Maria of 1252-80 appears to show blocks of the same type:

Unfortunately the level of detail shown in the above two carvings is extremely rare in contemporary representations. 

 

I can see the reason this kind of block went out of use - that hole could just 'pull out' under the forces the block was subjected to. Better to use a strop. But when did the changeover occur? Fascinating. Looks like I'm going to have to scroll through my picture collection and see if I can gather more evidence on all this.

 

In any event, I've realised all the blocks I've so far put on this model are probably incorrect. Not that I'm prepared to change them now - it'll just have to be another learning experience. But I've made a start on new ones for the rudders, in line with what I've discovered.

 

    

 

Before I did all this I was all set to add the blocks to the rudders. I'd looked at the fixings for them shown on the Arch of St Peter the Martyr (above) and they made sense. I was going to make metal straps around the rudders - one for the forward-pulling tackle (which lowers the rudder) and one below it for the aft-pulling tackle which raises it. Then I had another look at the mosaics I've been working from, and which I think should be my first port of call for such things. In the rare depictions of the tackles in the mosaics they seem to be tied to the rudders. You can see one just below the aftercastle (the rudder is raised and is horizontal). The other one I'm ignoring, as it seems to be connected to the bow of a small boat, not to the rudder, in what I hope is simply an artist error.

This is backed up by another near-contemporary illustration, of St Ursula by Paolo Veneziano (active by 1333, died after 1358) showing the tackle fixed to the rudder with rope lashings.

I began by temporarily gluing one of the rudders resting on its supporting through-beam so that the tiller was in the helmsman's hands (well, as well as I could manage it). I drilled a small hole through both through-beam and rudder shaft and put a brass pin through the two of them so they'd stay aligned together. Once I had the alignment worked out I took the rudder off again and put the two lashings on it, with a little loop at the business end of each one for the rope connecting it to the block. Note the first photo below shows it at that stage - I'm not very chronologically consistent with my photo-taking.

 

 

The pin would be replaced in due course with a wooden peg that would be trimmed off and painted to be invisible when it was all finished.
 

Then I bethought myself and came to the conclusion that a single rope should be lashed around the rudder and connect the block to it. So I removed it, preparatory to doing it that way instead (no photo I'm afraid).

 

And I've fully attached the starboard anchor and added weathering - rust where the flukes of the anchor rest against the ship and some salt residue and green marine growth where the cable is held. The rust didn't show up enough on the first try, so since I took these photos I've added  to it.

 And some more marine growth along with the salt residue where the water is pumped out amidships. I think I need to revisit the green - it's not very convincing yet.

Steven

Edited Wednesday at 10:19 PM by Louie da fly
Changed wording for clarity

[JacquesCousteau]

This is a really incredible and original build! I've greatly enjoyed watching it come together, and have learned quite a bit about medieval shipbuilding along the way. That's very interesting about the blocks, for example. Also, if you're going to revisit the green weathering, I wonder if more of a gray-brown with a green tint would work? I know very little about weathering, but my sense is that algae and the like dries pretty quickly into a much duller color once it's no longer submerged.

[Thukydides]

Fantastic, I love it when you find these fun historical details. For me finding these sort of things is as much as part of the fun as building the model.

[Louie da fly]

First, thanks everybody for the likes.

 

JacquesCousteau I'll have a look at that idea. So far my colour-mixing hasn't come up with the colour I need. I still need to do some more experimenting.

 

Thukidides, I agree totally. I find half the fun is in the research.

 

Steven