Iberian (Basque) Atlantic Whaler ca. 1550 — as, dos, tres…

[Waldemar]

 

Although the extremely important wreck of a mid-16th century seagoing ship built in the Basque region of Spain has already been studied in great detail and presented to the public in the comprehensive, multi-volume monograph The Underwater Archaeology Red Bay. Basque Shipbuilding and Whaling in the 16th Century, published by Parcs Canada in 2007, nevertheless, the following presentation will not be a repetition of the material contained therein, but rather to complement certain omissions or even a different interpretation of this archaeological find. In a nutshell, the aim of this exercise is to recreate and present the method of designing a ship in terms of its geometrical conception, an issue that is fundamental to naval architecture and yet so little understood today for the early modern period.

 

Somewhat retrospectively, it can already be said that the Red Bay Vessel is an example of the then classic proportion as, dos, tres (breadth : keel length : total length = 1 : 2 : 3), recommended by authors of numerous works of the period, and applied in this particular case in a very literal, astonishingly precise manner.

 

Apart from the main proportions of the ship, no less important from the point of view of the history of naval architecture is the method used to form the shape of the hull, and taking into account its specific details. In this ship, one of the widespread Mediterranean methods of hull forming was used, which, nota bene, was also adopted at about this time in England, and was still used there in its generic form in the first decades of the 17th century, before being creatively developed into the more sophisticated ways generally referred to today as English moulding.

 

 

Archaeological model of the wreck of San Juan, the Basque whaling ship, scale 1:10 (Parcs Canada)

 

 

 

Shapes of the ship's hull reproduced by applying the found method of designing the vessel:

 

 

 

 

 

In addition to the monograph of the wreck itself, which may be not available to everyone, much interesting material regarding the hull structure of the shipwreck can also be found in the provided below publication by Robert Grenier, The Basque whaling ship from Red Bay, 2001 (public domain).

 

Grenier Robert - The basque whaling ship from Red Bay - 2001.pdf

 

 

 

Edited December 14 by Waldemar

[Martes]

Extremely sleek and elegant hull form, even accounting for a very deep flat tuck.
In a design sense she is a small carrack?

[Waldemar]

 

1 hour ago, Martes said:

In a design sense she is a small carrack?

 

The general proportions (as, dos, tres) do indeed correspond to what is usually referred to as nao or carrack, but already the way the hull shapes are formed is more universal and was employed for a variety of vessel types of a very different proportions. In fact, it is most suitable for long galley-type vessels.

 

As a curiosity I will also say that the length-to-width ratio of this ship at the height of the waterline is only about 2.8 : 1, and apparently these vessels were able to cross the ocean successfully and in both directions . Thanks precisely to these quite pointed hull lines. However, at the expense of payload capacity...

 

Edited December 15 by Waldemar

[Doreltomin]

You bet it's an extremely sleek and elegant hull form!

 

It may not seem evident today, but during the15th century the Basques were the most advanced in terms of hull design and navigation onto the unfamiliar (for other Europeans) waters of the Atlantic, and one of their most advanced boats was called a "txalupa" - that's precisely from where our name "shallop" comes in all languages!

 

Also trying to answer your question about "a small carrack". I have been long been puzzled by this name, which sounds so distinct of any common European language, be it of Romance or Saxon origin. It was only later when I accidentally stumbled upon the name of a Crusaders' stronghold that I came to guess the origin of the word. The place was  called "Krak des chevaliers" and was given in 1142 to the Knights Hospitaller by Raymond II, Count of Tripoli and it fell in 1271 to the Mamluk Sultanate after a 36-days long siege. The name "krak" itself comes from the Syriac language (Has nothing to do with today's Syria except of the geographic area; it comes straight from the language used by the old Phoenicians and, while called "Aramaic" it was precisely the language used by Jesus and all his disciples).

 

So in this Syriac language the word "krak" means a fortress ready to withstand a siege therefore my own theory is that after the fall of the said fortress into the Muslim hands, which actually ended any dream of European domination in the area, instead of calling krak a fortified city, they slowly started to call krak a fortified ship, prepared for war. Remember at the time the distinction between warships and merchants was muddled and probably if need arose, they could have taken any merchant available and prepare her for battle.

 

So in some respects, to my eyes a krak/carracca/carraque/carrack is what we would call today a warship and not specifically a type of ship, as the ships at the time were called nao/nau/nave/navire (all coming from the Latin navis) in the Mediterranean area. So what we have here, being a Basque whaler, I would daresay would not be properly called a carrack as it is not intended to go to war.     

 

Waldemar, sorry for my digression, but I felt it had to be told! Now bringing it back to our sheep, that is going to be another VERY interesting journey which I will follow with much interest!

[Alvb]

50 minutes ago, Waldemar said:

 

 

The general proportions (as, dos, tres) ... In fact, it is most suitable for long galley-type vessels.

 

 

Am I misunderstanding something?

As, dos, tres doesn't sound like a long ship to me.

[Waldemar]

 

 

40 minutes ago, Doreltomin said:

Waldemar, sorry for my digression, but I felt it had to be told! Now bringing it back to our sheep, that is going to be another VERY interesting journey which I will follow with much interest!

 

Thank you, @Doreltomin. Interesting and erudite posts are always welcome .

 

[Waldemar]

 

4 hours ago, Alvb said:

5 hours ago, Waldemar said:

 

 

The general proportions (as, dos, tres) ... In fact, it is most suitable for long galley-type vessels.

 

 

Am I misunderstanding something?

As, dos, tres doesn't sound like a long ship to me.

 

 

5 hours ago, Waldemar said:

The general proportions (as, dos, tres) do indeed correspond to what is usually referred to as nao or carrack, but already the way the hull shapes are formed is more universal and was employed for a variety of vessel types of a very different proportions. In fact, it is most suitable for long galley-type vessels.

 

[Alvb]

Ok, you explain your passage, which I don't quite understand, with this very passage. 

Not very helpful, don't you think?

[Waldemar]

 

3 hours ago, Alvb said:

Ok, you explain your passage, which I don't quite understand, with this very passage. 

Not very helpful, don't you think?

 

Indeed, the difficulty in understanding is not helpful probably in any venture. And it's nice that you also seek some help here .

 

[Waldemar]

 

 

[Waldemar]

 

The diagram shown above is almost self explanatory and in principle does not require any extensive comments. It contains the basic design assumptions necessary for the subsequent stages of the ship's hull design. At this first stage, the design sequence for this vessel would look more or less like this:

 

— the length of the hull (between the posts) was set at 40 cubits, or their equivalent of 80 feet,

— this length was then divided into eight equal parts of 5 cubits (10 feet) each,

— the sum of the two rakes, fore and aft, was set to 3/8 of the length of the hull, in a mutual ratio of 2 : 1, leaving 5/8 of the length of the hull for the keel,

— the position of the master frame is half the length of the hull, just behind the middle line (see diagram),

— the group of so-called pre-assembled frames includes a total of 14 sub assemblies, for which 1/4 of the length of the hull was provided, asymmetrically in respect to the middle line (see diagram),

— the garboard strakes, integrated into the keel, occupy 4/5 of the keel length, starting from the beginning of the keel,

— the number, height and rise of the decks, fairly standard for the era, have a direct effect on the height of the two posts, as well as on the angle of the sternpost.

 

Edited Thursday at 07:12 PM by Waldemar

[Waldemar]

 

Conceptual frames

 

The longitudinal position of the structural group of pre-assembled frames defined at the same time the position of the three main conceptual frames — master frame, fore quarter frame and aft quarter frame. In this way, that the position of the master frame fell in the middle of this group and both quarter frames at its extremities (see diagram). As a result, the position of the master frame is correspondingly set back from the pre-determined position of the actual middle line of the entire length of the hull. For perfect geometry, the run of the decks must also be adjusted accordingly, bringing it into line with the new position of the ‘middle’ of the hull.

 

In passing, it may also be added that the length of the structural keel (without the vertical scarfs connecting it to the adjacent components of the keel assembly) has already been determined symmetrically to the new position of the ‘middle’ of the hull, i.e. to the position of the conceptual master frame. The structural keel, relative to the design keel, is shorter at its aft end by the length of the heel piece and, in contrast, slightly longer at its fore end, by encompassing the stem post in its design/geometric sense (see diagram).