Ibrahim wrote:
> Jefferson wrote:
>>ibrahim wrote:
>>
>>>Rereading the postings about technology levels in Qaiyore, and wikipedia 
>>>articles on naval technology.  According our most recent discussions, 
>>>transport technology in Qaiyore is 15-17.  The more sophisticated 
>>>seafaring societies being at 17, with "COMPASS, LATEEN SAIL (sailing 
>>>into wind), Double-masted Ships, & STERN POST RUDDERS (for steering)". 
>>>
>>>Level 18 includes 3-masted ship (excluding carracks and caravels 
>>>therefore from Qaiyore), so the most advanced sailing ship available 
>>>would be a 2 masted sailing vessels, be they Arab style dhows or 
>>>two-masted galleys with oars.
>>
>>This is one of those places where the Aria development scale is screwy. 
>>Stern-post rudders actually postdate 3-masted vessels by a good deal, and 
>>the galleon used a steering oar not a rudder.  The rudder mention can 
>>probably be replaced with frame construction replacing shell construction, 
>>though I don't recall exactly when this development took place.
>>
>>I was also under the impression that carracks and caravels _were_ 
>>two-masted ships.  Certainly the portuguese exploration vessels were 
>>two-masted vessels, whatever they were called.
> 
> I guess the line is blurred here.  The sources i looked at talked about 
> 3 masted carracks and caravels, and were the prelude to heavier galleons 
> etc.

Since it looks like Qaiyore is right on this dividing line I'll check my 
references and get back to the group on this.

>>>Asking this as I'm currently trying to work out manpower requirements 
>>>for the Kaeirean fleet, and there is a significant difference between 
>>>oared galleys with two masts, and multiple masted sailing ships without 
>>>oars.
>>>
>>>And in hindsight, sails probably won't completely overtake oar-power
>>>until the advent of gunpowder.  Thus I suspect that most Midsea fleets
>>>are dominated by predominantly oar-powered ships.
>>
>>The Midsea is an inland sea, and the ships which travel it can be built 
>>much more lightly and cheaply than those intended to travel the outer 
>>oceans.  I also don't see any strong seafaring nations to promote the 
>>building of heavier ships generally suitable for the outer oceans.  Without 
>>the requirement for the heavier (and more expensive) construction 
>>three-masted vessels and stern-post rudders will be a long time coming. 
>>However, this doesn't preclude the existence of the sophisticated keels and 
>>rigging we associate with three-masted vessels.
> 
> So we're probably talking about two-masted ships being the standard for 
> the more complicated ships in the Midsea?

I would say so.

>>(Oops, I just remembered the Ka'Shari, who _do_ build ships for the outer 
>>oceans.  So heavier vessel types would be quite possible', though expense 
>>probably keeps many from being built.)
> 
> You're right.  They're probably the ocean going equivalent of science 
> fiction's generation ships" - huge, sturdy and designed to last (not to 
> mention house whole clans).  I have the image of one of those Victorian 
> hulks in mind when thinking about the Ka'Shari ships... I can't imagine 
> the outer oceans to be very calm places.
> 
>>Regardless of the availability of galleys, most trade will be carried by 
>>sailed vessels.  Galleys are warships and hardly ever bothered with more 
>>than one mast.  However, galleys are not the only form of warship, and are 
>>only practical with a sufficient supply of slaves.  While "ram and board" 
>>galleys are more effective, the Romans proved against the Carthaginians 
>>that boarding from sailed vessels can also win naval battles.
> 
> Galleys were used by Venice in the 13th-15th century, and by other 
> nations in the same period.  I understood it to be they were only dealt 
> the final deathblow by Portuguese sails developments as a result of 
> Portugal's travels between the Atlantic and the Indian Oceans.  In the 
> Venetian case, much of the state fleet, as well as the much larger 
> number of private vessels, were small, light galleys (1 row of oars with 
> 3 rowers) with 2 masts.  The oarsmen were combinations of criminals, 
> slaves and paid rowers (i think the employed rowers were more for the 
> state fleet during times of war).

First let me say that I'm not up on Venice, but they were unusual in a 
number of ways.  (These way might be analogous to Kaeir's situation.  I 
can't say.)

Galleys can be useful in trading situations where what you are paying for 
is speed of transport instead of the goods transported.  Galleys can also 
be useful in situations where winds are regularly variable or contrary.  So 
a few trading galleys wouldn't be unusual, but they also wouldn't be a big 
proportion of the non-military fleet.

Most seafaring nations (prior to the 19th century) kept a large number of 
ships in dry-dock when not at war.  I seem to recall that Venice kept about 
90% of its wartime fleet in dry-dock.

In our world it was actually gunpowder more than sail that killed the 
galley.  Without gunpowder or outer ocean trade routes the war galley would 
have survived much later.

> The Venetian example is the main reason why I talked about oared galleys 
> over sail-only ships.

But keep in mind that the Med. had the ongoing Christian-Muslim conflict to 
supply large numbers of slaves.

> A fleet of forty light galleys (using the Venetian example above, which 
> had 120 oars) would require some 28000 rowers to power them.

I get 14,400 (minimum).

> Such a 
> number, even if tempered by convicted criminals and the vague possiblity 
> of salaried rowers, still would necessitate a huge number of slaves.  
> And a thriving Midsea-wide (probably Qaiyore-wide, slaves usually coming 
> from the periphery not the core) slave industry, with important 
> political, social and economic (not to mention moral/religious) 
> implications.

Yes, and its been established that the slave trade is marginal on Qaiyore.

>>So, as I hope you can see, the distinction of sail vs. oar isn't quite as 
>>clear cut as most people think.
> 
> I must confess that military and technological history isn't really my 
> forte in any way, shape or form.  A dominance of sails would certainly 
> make manpower less of an issue though .
> 
>>The presence of magic aboard a ship also changes things, giving an 
>>effective ranged attack.  Even if the vessel without a mage is more 
>>maneuverable and can close, it will be taking damage before it manages to 
>>do any.  I imagine the domination of Parglug in the southern MidSea is 
>>based on the regular presence of priests of Marmdal aboard their sea craft.
> 
> Weather-magic and battle-magic would be of strategic importance, 
> therefore, to seafaring nations.  I can imagine such nations investing 
> in the education of sorcerers with such abilities, just as nations in 
> Earth invested in navigation schools and maritime schools.

Few nations in this time period are that forward looking.  Excepting 
Sedonia and Mir most nations probably use some sort of apprenticeship 
system to get mages for the warcraft.  (And then complain about too few 
mages, mages cost too much, etc.  :) )




----------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, send mail to celandra-off@phoenyx.net.