Santa Sofia by Ferrus Manus - Heller - 1/75 - PLASTIC - Another theoretical reconstruction.

[Ferrus Manus]

Time for another mid-15th century Medieval ship. 

This is, once again, going to be based around Heller's "Nina". 

This is actually from Heller's set of Columbus's ships, and is a special edition. However, it is the same exact kit I did in January. 

I managed to get it for only 10 dollars at the local hobby shop, because whoever had it before me glued the hull halves together (and actually glued them together perfectly, mind you!) However, that's all he did. Otherwise, the kit is complete and unstarted. 

I'm going to start this log off by saying there will be some significant modifications/additions to the kit. For one, I have some things I want to do with the deck fittings and anchors. Secondly, all the rigging will be of my own design (as always) and I have a desire to make all my own blocks. The masts and yards will be made from wooden dowels/skewers (I see you Steven) and there will be some other miscellaneous sprucing up of the kit. This includes cleats, rails and other belaying points. 

Here's the ship as she sits now: 

Let's start with the deck. The deck planks are a bit long and thin by Late Medieval standards, but as far as I'm concerned, acceptable. The hull planking is also like this. 

What isn't acceptable is the hatches. I've known since I cracked open the box for the first version of this kit that the hatches were inaccurate to what they would have looked like at the time (see the Mataro Carrack and the carrack from Botticelli's Judgement of Paris). 

At some point between my construction of the Elisabetta and now, I actually realized that the hatches aren't just inaccurate, they're unusable. It's obvious that each hatch consists of eight removable panels, and in between those are timbers integral to the hatch design. No one, not even a child, could fit in between those timbers at 1/75th scale (more on the scale later). 

So, I came up with this idea: The aft hatch is going to be for "people", and the forward hatch for "stuff". The "people" hatch will fit the contours of the kit-provided hatch mostly, and consist of two removable, longways panels and nothing in between. The "stuff" hatch will be covered with two longways panels consisting of three boards apiece, also with nothing in between. 

The frame of the "stuff" hatch: 

The Mataro model shows a similar arrangement, except the hatch is covered with a cloth: 

 

[Ferrus Manus]

@Louie da fly @GrandpaPhil @Isaiah @kirill4 @Baker

[Baker]

4 hours ago, Ferrus Manus said:

@Louie da fly @GrandpaPhil @Isaiah @kirill4 @Baker

Good luck 

[Louie da fly]

Going to be interesting.

 

Steven

[Doreltomin]

Hi Ferrus Manus, are you sure about the cloth thing on the Mataro model? I agree with you that on the real thing there certainly would be a tarpaulin secured above some carefully trimmed planks, but on the model I would daresay there's no cloth there, only a piece of wood!

[Ferrus Manus]

Hi @Doreltomin, your assessment on the Mataro hatch cover is 100% correct. From that angle, it becomes apparent that the hatch cover is carved from a single piece of wood. While the structure of my hatch is almost identical to the structure of the Mataro Carrack's hatch, the hatch cover is entirely different. 

This is the hatch cover I designed: 

The six interior planks comprise two panels that are held together by two cross-planks apiece. Lifting each hatch cover panel would be akin to lifting a heavy household door- doable via a two-man effort. The four holes will accept ringbolts for the panels. 

My guess is that one of three things are true about the Mataro's hatch cover: 

1. The carved piece over the hatch is meant to represent a tarpaulin. 

2. The carved piece is an inaccurate repair from centuries later.

3. The shipwright who made the model didn't care about depicting the hatch cover accurately. 

My guess is either 1 or 2 are correct, as the shipwright went to otherwise great lengths to ensure the construction of the ship was accurate to a real carrack. Either way, a single-piece carved hatch cover would have been impossible to lift by less than 6-8 men without using tackles. 

Depictions of medieval ship hatches (and other deck details in general) are unbelievably rare. Here's one that's just a hole in the deck: 

That being said, the idea of just making deck planks removable lends itself to the idea of multiple panels for the hatch cover. 

To be honest, I don't know where modern replicas/models/reconstructions of Medieval ships get their sources for the almost ubiquitous multi-plank hatch cover. 

Edited December 12 by Ferrus Manus

[Louie da fly]

22 hours ago, Ferrus Manus said:

Depictions of medieval ship hatches (and other deck details in general) are unbelievably rare.

Yes, unfortunately the Botticelli Judgment of Paris picture (and, for that matter his Punishment of Korah - he just seems to recycled the same ship) is the same - no hatch covers.

 

I read somewhere that the 'pierced' hatch covers made of criss-cross battens were a fairly late development, intended to allow gunsmoke to disperse. But I don't know what evidence that conclusion was based on.

 

The 'removable planks' idea - I think Viking ships used that technique (don't quote me, I'm not sure), and I first saw it on a model of Woodrat's. Unfortunately the information just isn't out there as far as I've been able to find. Contemporary images hardly ever show ships from a helpful angle, and if they do, the hatch is often shown without a cover - oh, look! another one that's no help at all . . . no cover on the hatch. I feel like the guy leaning over it - frustrated.

Andrea di Bonauito de Firenze - Conversion of st ranieri Camposanto of Pisa - mid 14th century after a 13th century Giotto original

 

And is this a hatch cover or a coffin? (sorry, I don't know the source)

And is this a multi-plank hatch cover? Or something completely different?

1475-85 by 'Master W with the Key' - Netherlands?

 

And how about this one? 1514-1515 Le_combat_de_la Cordeliere by Pierre Choque bnf btv1b525080522

and archaeology so far has been no help as almost all wrecks are missing the upper works. However, the Black Sea wrecks might be a worthwhile source of information, as they seem to be pretty much intact - maybe the hatch covers are intact, too. Might be worth following up.

 

Steven

 

Steven

Edited December 12 by Louie da fly

[Ferrus Manus]

Steven, this is why I will neither die nor rest until an intact carrack wreck is found, or at least one that sank fully on its side, preserving at least half of it. 

I wouldn't be surprised if everyone's idea of what a medieval ship's hatch looks like is completely based on later ships:

No solutions come from the Gribshunden or Okant Skepp wrecks either- I place more faith in the Okant Skepp to yield results mostly down to how perfectly preserved the ship is. 

Edited December 14 by Ferrus Manus

[Ferrus Manus]

In the past few days, I painted the cargo hatch and made up the second, crew hatch and rectified Heller's lousy excuse for mast partners. 

The planks for the secondary hatch lie on a flat plane, instead of one that is slightly curved. 

[Doreltomin]

Nice touch, @Ferrus Manus! Also @Steven: unfortunately, the hatches are the first to pop up when a ship sinks as air from inside the hold pushes them out, so all the wreck footage I have seen so far including the promising "Okänt Skepp" which is from the "right" century to this  topic here have just an empty hole with no traces of cover! 

[Ferrus Manus]

The hatches and mast planks are resting atop the kit-supplied deck. Everything is painted in its (mostly) finalized form. I might add some more grime around the edges of the deck. 

If I can continue pulling off this level of painting, we might have a halfway presentable and halfway accurate model by the end of this. I actually remember being halfway done with the hull of my Sao Paulo by this time in the build. 

[Louie da fly]

16 hours ago, Doreltomin said:

unfortunately, the hatches are the first to pop up when a ship sinks as air from inside the hold pushes them out, so all the wreck footage I have seen so far including the promising "Okänt Skepp" which is from the "right" century to this  topic here have just an empty hole with no traces of cover! 

[Ferrus Manus]

Minor progress, but enough to warrant a post. 

I made and glued in the ring bolts, and glued the hatch assemblies and the mast planks into place. 

Moving on, we will be starting on the hull painting. I would like to expand on the actual paintwork present on Late Medieval caravels and other Mediterranean lateeners. For clarification, Santa Sofia will be essentially a work boat (mostly fishing) and will not bear the colors of Portugal on either flags or sails. The vessels owned by a monarch/state could reasonably be assumed to have been a minority in any waters of any time period. 

Edited December 19 by Ferrus Manus

[Ferrus Manus]

The painting of the ship continues... 

I kind of wanted to make it look like the Mataro Carrack, minus about 400 years' worth of aging. 

[Ferrus Manus]

At some point before the introduction of the quarterdeck I will have to go back and fill/sand the injector pin marks in the stern railings. 

[Ferrus Manus]

I fixed and repainted the stern railings, then I temporarily put in everything I could for this picture- the mast, quarterdeck, and forecastle deck. 

Previously, I installed the two main belaying rails for the ship, on both sides of the amidships section. I will install another, smaller pair immediately behind the forecastle. I want to discuss the arrangement of the deck furniture before moving on to potential shroud arrangements. Firstly, I used the two futtock riders that were supposed to go at the break of the quarterdeck to create a set of guiding rails for the mainmast. That way, I could adjust the rake of the mast while ensuring proper alignment. I did not intend to use the pieces as intended, so I reused them. 

 

Secondly, I want to talk about the two holes in the deck. There are two holes on either side of the mast partners that were originally intended to accommodate a pin rail. This obviously wouldn't have existed on a mid-15th century caravel, or any lateener for that matter. Anyway, I need a way to cover them up, and I came up with several options. Firstly, I could install two bilge pumps over them. My only issue with this is that the ship would likely only need one. Secondly, I could offset the halyard knight to cover one of the holes, and make a smaller knight for the parrel tackle to cover the other hole. The offset of the halyard knight would make no sense in the absence of a mizzen stay, so I compromised between the two. Over the port side hole will go the ship's single bilge pump, and over the other will go the parrel knight. The halyard knight will go between the aft hatch and the mast partners, on the center line. 

 

While the rigging of the ship is a long way off, I would like to at least discuss the shroud arrangements, as they will affect the deck arrangement. The only issue is that contemporary depictions of shroud lines on caravels do not show the tackles. Most of what we know about caravel shrouds come from lateeners before and since, and contemporary square-rigged ships. Last time, I simply went with the standard lateener shroud tackle approach. There would be no issue with doing it that way this time, but I might want something more interesting. Should I go with the standard approach, there would be no need for deck ringbolts to accept a whip. Should I decide on two pairs of whip-and-tackle shrouds, there would need to be four ringbolts on the deck. 

 

I'm sure Steven has some answers as to whether that seems reasonable in light of archaeological and pictorial evidence. I'm sure caravel rigging was not standardized at that point.