Lugsail vs. Lateen Sail, Junk vs. Caravel

[longshore lubber]

Hello,

the longshore lubber I am, I have a few questions

1. When and by whom were the lateen and the lugsail invented?

2. Which sail is the better one: lugsail or lateen sail?

3. Which sail combination is the better one: lugsails (as with junks) or lateen sails plus square sails (as with Columbus' flotilla)?

4. What do you think of the picture below and the inherent comparison it makes? Do you think the difference of quality between Columbus' and Zheng He's ships was a big as the difference in quantity suggests? Or is the pic partly or even entirely misleading as to the respective qualities of the ships?

http://www.amazon.de/gp/reader/0521838355/ref=sib_dp_pt/302-9327768-0974441#reader-link


I am asking these questions because I feel there has recently been a surge of 'revisionist' historical literature which has downgraded West European and upgraded Eastern, especially Chinese, navigation. The mainstay of this reinterpretation are

a) direct versus-comparison and
b) a habit of comparing the time of the Chinese discovery with when it happened in Western, usually, as it is postulated, as adaptation and not independently made invention.

(To get a feel of what I mean: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junk_%28ship%29 )

Now, to be honest I am beginning to get annoyed by this approach, but if those people speak only the historical truth and the Chinese junk was indeed superior over European sailing vessels for a long time and even after 1492, then be it. So, what is your opinion?

[George.]

I have little to say about the junk rig - others here know far more than I do.

But as far as Lateen rig and Caravel, first of all, forget Colombus. Think Portuguese, and Arab.

The origins of the lateen, or "Latin" rig, are somewhat lost in time, but it most likely first appeared in the Arabian Sea, and its originators and developers were Arabs - although they were pre-Islam Arabs. Ancient Greeks and Romans, as well as Phoenicians, Carthagenians, et al, only used square sails - some depictions on vases show their vessels, with tacks, sheets, braces, bowlines, amnd the works.

The lateen rig was much better to windward, and was adopted by medieval Europeans - including the Portuguese, who got it straight from the Arabs who once ruled the Iberian peninsula. They developed the caravel as an exploration ship - a vessel capable of long ocean voyages, yet able to beat to windward if it found itself embayed, or simply too far downwind. Once routes and wind patterns were known, they sent naus - square rigged on fore and main mast, lateen rigged on the mizzen, for obvious reasons, and able to carry much more cargo - meant for conquest and commerce (guns were as heavy as a hold full of pepper).

Perhaps the apogee of the caravelas was the caravela redonda, or "square-rigged caravel" - square sails on the bowsprit and foremast, lateens on the main, mizzen, and spanker - a hybrid able to carry up to fourteen "bombardas", or early naval guns, into battle, and up to one hundred and eighty "toneis" - literally "casks", but the obvious root of the word "tons" - of cargo, as well as twelve "bombardas" - closer to carronades than to guns, really, being wheel-less and only effective at close range, or against fixed targets like Indian cities...

As for old Chris, where would he be without his Basque pilots, his probable trips to Canada with Basque whalers and cod fishermen, and blind luck. He was the original consultant - he didn´t know where he was going, when he got there he didn´t know where he was, but he got funding for three more trips.

Sailing from Cadiz to the Bahamas is cake. Sailing from Lisbon to Calicut, by way of Bahia and the Cape, that is real navigation. Columbus completely screwed up his navigation. Bartolomeu Dias and Vasco da Gama were able to record accurate latitudes and LONGITUDES (!) for their entire route, and Cabral´s fleet - the second to India, the one that "conquered" it - had a Royal Astronomer on board, who actually wrote back with a tentative regiment for the Southern Cross... ;)

[P.I. Stazzer-Newt]

George. how did you miss that one. The linking of Brazil, the Junk rig, and the most famous american ever under sail.

http://www.humboldt1.com/ar/literary/sloc1_00.htm

[George.]

I would never miss Slocum and his canoe, Newt - I own a canoe which is a tiny descendant of the "Liberdade".

But that was in the late 19th century. By then, lateen had evolved into gaff - ID would have never taken it there, BTW. ;)

I am talking about the 16th century, and late 15th, and years before. SamF may disagree with me, if he ever comes up to the orlop, which I doubt, but the Arabs invented the lateen, and developed astronomical navigation (as opposed to DR and blind luck), and handed it off to the Portuguese, who had a brief moment of glory before being supplanted by the Dutch and English as masters of the art - back then, it was fifteen decades instead of fifteen minutes...

[Ian McColgin]

I think as you study rig evolution you'll find that the Chinese balanced lug with battens evolved independently of the European balanced and standing lug rigs.

No one rig is so perfect as to be best for all hulls in all conditions. The lanteen, made ubiquitious in miniature by the Sunfish, is a lovely and weatherly rig for a type of cargo carrier, but it really needs the spar to leeward to sail well. This requires a strong crew to man-handle the thing.

The Chinese lug, on the otherhand, can be worked to almost anysize boat and the number of successful adaptations to quite diverse hulls just after WWII shows that its a general rig of such diverse possible locations for centers of effort and weight and stress that it may be the most readily employed rig type.

Neither the various lugs nor lanteens can go to weather with a fore and aft rig - marconi or gaff - that has a nice poserful luff.

[Thorne]

See if you can pick up a copy of Leather's _Sprit and Lug Rigs_ , it will address some of your questions. There is no overall "better" trad sailing rig -- it all depends on the boat, the waters, the hull design, and many other factors.

I think that, in general, boatbuilders and owners are taking a wider "world-view" on all sorts of things, including sail rigs. Nothing wrong with that -- it just **begins** to balance the Euro-centric blinders we have worn for so long. That said, i'm working on a spritsail for my dory right now -- THERE'S a trad Euro rig for you!

;0 )

[longshore lubber]

Thanks for your very informative replies. :)

Do you think the dimensions given below (400 ft. long, 150 ft. wide) for Zheng He's junks are realistic and do you think that the reverse engineering of a 36 feet long rudderpost to a hull lenght of around 500 feet (!!) is correct?

The Ming account of the voyages that followed strains credulity: "The ships which sail the Southern Sea are like houses. When their sails are spread they are like great clouds in the sky." Were the reported dimensions of the biggest galleons -- over 400 feet long by 150 wide -- gross exaggerations? If accurate, these dimensions would signal the biggest wooden ships ever built. Only the mightiest wooden warships of the Victorian age approached these lengths, and several of these vessels suffered from structural problems that required extensive internal iron supports to hold the hull together. No such structures are reported in the Chinese sources. However, in 1962, the rudderpost of a treasure ship was excavated in the ruins of one of the Ming boatyards in Nanjing. This timber was no less than 36 feet long. Reverse engineering using the proportions typical of a traditional junk indicated a hull length of around 500 feet. (http://bluejives.typepad.com/burp/2005/07/admiral_zheng_h.html)

As I said, I am not into boat constructing, but I am sceptical about the dimensions of the junk since I read in Mott, Lawrence: The development of the rudder, AD 100-1600. A technological tale, p.8 that "the Roman grain ship, the Isis, which was over 1,000 tons burden (Casson, 1971: 184-8), would have quarter-rudders measuring over 18 meters in length and weighing well over 14 metric tons each. A significantly smaller vessel of only 375 tons burden birden, such as the Madrague de Giens wreck (Pomey, 1982, 146, fig. 7), would still have required a rudder approximately the size of that found at Nemi" which measured 12 meters in length.

Or is it that with comparing stern-rudders and quarterpost rudders I am comparing apples with oranges?

[George.]

I wonder to what extent rudders or steering-oars, as opposed to the sails, were the dominant force in turning such huge ships. Portuguese naus of the 16th century could not maneuver under rudder alone, except for small course corrections. Hell, Dalia cannot be fully maneuvered under rudder alone if she is under full sail.

I think that in order to do the reverse engineering one would have to have an understanding of the rig...

[Thorne]

Apples and Oranges, certainly.

You seem to be looking for definitive answers to very complex marine archaeology questions -- I'd say you're unlikely to find 'em anywhere outside of a book.

Websites like this one may be too general for the sort of information you seek -
http://www.cronab.demon.co.uk/china.htm
http://www.unc.edu/courses/rometech/public/content/transport/ships/merch_03.html

A stern rudder for a junk would have much of the length above water to reach the extremely high poopdesk, and a quarterpost rudder would be mounted much closer to the water along the gunwale of a very different hull design. Length may not be nearly as much an issue as leverage and/or steering ability, as George points out above.

http://geogweb.berkeley.edu/GeoImages/Semans/junk.gif
http://www.unc.edu/courses/rometech/public/Images/ship_diag3.GIF

[longshore lubber]

Thanks again.

Is there by chance any forum of the history of navigation, ships and shipbuilding?

(I am currently looking for info on the Maltesian lead hulled carrack Santa Ana, built 1522, a pretty modern ship of its time, with mill, garden and forgery)

[George Ray]

The Last Sailors - The Final Days of the Working Sail.
During a two-year voyage, Neil Hollander and Harald Mertes filmed a vanishing breed of sailors and craft. In this fascinating and evocative programme, the filmmakers succeed in capturing the spirit of a bygone era when men set out under sail to explore and trade.

Narrated by: Orson Welles, 'The Last Sailors' 'is about the men who, with their ancient craft, still harness the wind and the sea for their livelihood'.

***************************

Amazon has two vendors w/used VHS for $20 / new is $40:


English DVD (PAL format):
http://www.beckmanndirect.com/Sailing_TheLastSailors.html

USA VHS Tape:
http://bennettmarine.com/store/view_product.php?cat_id=32&page=1&product=A308WS


**************************************
**************************************

Basil Greenhill:
Basil Greenhill (http://www.guardian.co.uk/arts/news/obituary/0,12723,951459,00.html) was a highly regarded maritime historian, who in addition to a number of important books (http://www.allbookstores.com/browse/Author/Greenhill,%20Basil), turned the National Maritime Museum (http://www.nmm.ac.uk/) in Greenwich (the one outside London, not the Connecticut one) from an obscure institution into one of the great museums


http://www.allbookstores.com/author/Basil_Greenhill_p2sd.html

[George.]

Is there by chance any forum of the history of navigation, ships and shipbuilding?



The WBF, of course. :D

Seriously, there are quite a few of us here who take an interest in historical discussions.

Tell us more about this Maltese carrack. A carrack is the equivalent of a Portuguese nau, or Spanish nao. Great ships for carrying cargo and guns along trade-wind sailing routes. For exploration work, caravels were to be preferred - more weatherly and shallower draft.

[skuthorp]

Found you an interesting course
http://nautarch.tamu.edu/class/anth689-kc/689rigging.htm
Maybe they do it on line?

[longshore lubber]

Tell us more about this Maltese carrack.

That kind of encouragement is exactly what I wanted hear! :D

Here are some links in different languages, the first in French is the most extensive:

http://www.darse.org/article.php3?id_article=27 --> go to "Santa Anna", see pics

Summary: The Santa Ana was launched in Nice, France, by the Knights of St. John (which later became the Maltesians) the very day its fortress Rhodes was conquered by the Ottomans in 1522! It had big 50 cannons and numerous maller ones manned by Maltesian gunners. The Santa Ana could take on up to 50 galleys simultaneously and was hailed as the best ship of its time and the most precious the Knights ever built.

On board was a chapel, a reception hall, a small garden with trees and plants and a mill and an oven where daily fresh bread was baked. It even had a forge, working day and night with three smith.

The relevant part (Cette caraque était recouverte de plomb en dessous de la ligne de flottaison, ce qui rendait la coque parfaitement étanche) says that "this carrack was covered with lead below the wate line, what makes the hull perfectly leak-proof.

This lead a 19th century English military captain to believe that the Santa Anna was the first ironcald ship ever which, according to the French author, is a bit of a stretch, since the fact that the Santa Ana was covered "only" below its water line with lead, shows that the lead was fixed to make the ship proof against water not cannon balls. Otherwise, the French author reckons (see bold text), the whole hull would have been covered with lead.


So far this web site. Jochen Brennecke , however says in his monumental Geschichte der Seefahrt (history of navigation) on p.138, in a paragraph entitled "The first ironclad ship", that "out of its six decks the two most lowest are covered with lead and bronze nails. But in particular the hull under water is armoured with lead plates" ("Von den sechs Decks sind die beiden untersten mit Blei beschlagen und mit Bronzenaegeln versehen. Vor allem aber hat man das Unterwasserschiff mit Bleiplatten gepanzert").


Summa summarum that makes the whole underwater hull covered with lead plus a third of the hull above the waterline, if I am not mistaken. To me the Santa Ana therefore looks like a hybrid type, with the lead cover fulfilling a double role: one to protect against mussles and wood worms, the other against cannon fire. Otherwise covering the hull above the waterline with lead wouldnt have made much sense.


More links:

http://www.darse.org/v1/archeonavale/santanna.html
http://www.holiday-malta.com/resort/malta/village/valletta/harbourofvalletta.htm -> only one in English
http://susi.e-technik.uni-ulm.de:8080/Meyers2/seite/werk/meyers/band/12/seite/0661/meyers_b12_s0661.html


My questions are:

- What parts of the hull were covered by lead - 'only' the underwater hull or also the outside of the first two stories? And why lead and not, say, bronze or iron?

- What was in your opinion the lead for or better against? Was is primarily meant as protection against the rottening of the hull or was it also intended as armour against cannon balls? Could it even ve called the first ironcald ship ever as some sources actually do?

- How innovative would you deem such a ship in the 16th century? Was the lead planking of the Santa Ana really an unprecedented innovation or was metal used before on ships?

Thanks in advance!

[Thorne]

Again I suspect that you are looking for the sort of "definitive" answers that only an author can give in a book -- which is often a platform for opinions rather than balanced scientific results.

Question 1 - Don't know, haven't seen the ship's hull. Lead is cheap, easily worked, won't rust. Think of lead as "period epoxy"...

;0 )

#2 - worms, worms, worms. Unlikely that they could make it seamless enough to really reduce leaks much, particularly when the hull worked under stress. Unless the lead sheathing was outrageously thick, not against cannon shot -- which was largely stone at this time. This answer is totally dependent on #1, as you can't shoot cannonballs under water, so if used against worms, no good against shot. Not an ironclad in any way.

#3 - Don't know, more of a question for an opinionated marine archaeologist. If metal was used before, not an innovation.

[Geoffrey Harris]

I just ran across this thread and, though I usually content myself with lurking, could not help chiming in. I just came from a renaissance history class in which the picture at the top of the thread was presented as absolute fact. Without getting into a discussion of whether history, in moving away from eurocentrism, has swung too far, let me say that many professors seem unable to recognize that maritime history is an actual field and not just a part of the medieval or renaissance or reformation or whatever period too marginal to devote much attention to. In class today I was subjected to a film hosted by someone who can pinpoint a building to within a half century just by looking at the architecture, but evidently sees nothing wrong with a forty ton caravel propelled by a dipping lugsail suitable for maybe a 35 footer which is FULL ABACK and a sizable diesel at a good 12 knots. They also portrayed a chip log and thought it was very quaint. I am certain they would be shocked if they knew how recently it had been in general use.
On a slightly different note, don't junks have pole masts? What kind of spar material would have been available in China at the time? I am not sure they could have built masts of that height, unless they had a very sophisticated way of building made spars.

[George.]

Not sure chip logs are all that recent - I believe one was found in the wreckage of Henry VIII's warship, and pilots of the time certainly had means to accurately estimate speed.

[PeterSibley]

Geoffrey, i think it very likely an Imperially sponsored fleet would have access to any materials it needed.Multiple masts of say 100 foot would seem adequate.

[Geoffrey Harris]

George-- not arguing the time of inception for chip logs at all. What I wanted to emphasize is how recently they were the primary means of determining speed. I think my professor thought their use had been discontinued many centuries ago.
Now that I think of it I guess made masts were in use before epoxy using just woolding and timber joints.
Here's an idea, working off the Jester concept. What about a 30 or so foot Norse style lapstrake double ender, with a full battened lug rig? Actually I can see this working on a 12 foot hull as well, with maybe a canting windsurfer type mast.

[Rick Starr]

The Chinese were and are masterful at engineering--they made an accurate clock (critical for navigation) about 400 years before anyone else IIRC, then burned it. So much of what fascinates us about eastern history concerns our parallel development. But let's not forget that the parallel limiting technologies existed for both cultures more or less simultaneously, if independently, as well.

[Tom Hunter]

Wooden ships that big were not built in the west because the wood on this side of the world is not strong enough to build a hull that big.

Either the Chinese had access to wood with structural properties similar to steel, or the ships were not that big. Or maybe they kept building ships that experienced structural failure.

Maybe they found a rudder post for a ship that was built so big that it did fail? Who knows? Its unlikley that the Swedes were the only ones to build a Vasa.