Comments on JRC-1138 (moif's primary blog): The Battle of Lepanto

Thats odd, my comment doesn't register on the main...

2006-05-11T17:08:00.000+02:00

Thats odd, my comment doesn't register on the main page.

Comments are always welcome!With regards to the qu...

2006-05-11T16:02:00.000+02:00

Comments are always welcome!

With regards to the questions. My understanding of the galleasses is that they had oars but not nearly enough to make them as fast as standard galleys. When these ships were merchant vessels this was not a factor, but once they were converted to warships, they had to be towed if there was not enough wind or else they couldn't keep up with the fleet.

The galleass seems to be one of those class of ships that defies description because there just weren't that many of them made and those that were, were all different. Some are described as having an upper gun deck where as others had guns in between the rowers.
As you say, the biggest guns pointed forwards but that was more often than not true of the later ships of the line.

I haven't much of an idea as to how heavy the broadside from a galleass was. In the initial Turkish advance at Lepanto, the six forward galleasses put down enough fire to sink two Turkish galleys outright but this means nothing without knowing the range. (I need more books)

The Turk archers were one of the factors I missed out. They were indeed effective and in most accounts I've read are considered the next best thing the Turks had (the Jannissaries being the best). By all accounts the Turks almost won the battle by a combination of out flanking feints and superb archery, but were defeated, rather quickly, by superior firepower and the Spanish soldiers ferocity. The battle only lasted five hours.

I'm now looking for accounts of a major battle which featured carracks against galleys... any idea's?

Excellent account - but I've a few comments. Due t...

2006-05-11T15:40:00.000+02:00

Excellent account - but I've a few comments.
Due to lack of time and (for some reason) a pitifully slow connection today, I'm not putting in sources. Anybody reading this should take it with a whole heap of salt. Nevertheless:

Christian galleys carried more guns than Turkish ones; about 5 : 3. I'm not sure about weight / quality / rate of fire / accuracy.
Galleass had their heaviest guns facing forward. Positioning them broadside suggests that lots smaller guns were expected to be more useful than a few large ones, which sounds reasonable.
Galleass incorporated thicker timbers than galleys, possibly enough to resist hostile fire (guns might well have been far inferior to later ones that could penetrate ships' hulls).

And the questions:

I seem to remember reading about why the galleass were towed (as they *had* oars, even if they favoured sail). Does anyone remember this?
Turks used (relatively) numerous archers. These could engage at a great distance, but I suspect that archers were not overwhelmingly effective against whatever light protection a galley crew could use. Christians could have engaged at closer range (as, all things being equal, they had larger / heavier boarding crews), or possibly used firearms that could penetrate galley superstructures (but this could be a bit early).

Oleg