Galleys of the 17th Century | SLICE 

Interresting. Thanks

Not just in Malta but also in Rhodes. This is what brought both Mehmed II and Suleyman to Rhodes in the first place. The Knights were harassing Muslim ships.

Yes it was. Most of the rowers in Europe were prisoners or slaves. Instead of the death sentence or imprisonment, they would send people to the galley. Some prisoners would even hurt themselves so they wouldn't get the galley sentence since they'd be no use.

They generally did not evacuate the enslaved rowers, who were chained to their bench. Quite often they went down with the ship and were drowned. If a ship was stricken, there was a possibility that some of the enslaved rowers could be unchained. Those of the same religion as the victors might be freed, those of the same religion as the defeated would merely experience a change in masters, not necessarily for the better. A humane exception would be the Sultan at Lepanto, who ordered his Christian rowers under the bench, figuring that if he lost, it was Allah's doing.

@@warreneckels4945 okay but wouldn't they get in the way of the fighting when boarding or being boarded? The soldiers on the ship's just tried to work around them as cramp as it is?

@@relpmat i thinks oarsmen were pretty much like a sailor some slaves couldn't perform it as well as a well trained men And I'm pretty sure they were doubled as fighters as well

@@dolsopolar though I am not an expert in history. I am almost certain they didn't double up as fighters. The whole point of the galley way of rowing by putting up to 5 men on 1 oar is that they only need 1 experienced rower to control the oar while the others adds power. It is a highly inefficient way to row as every additional men on the oar have diminishing returns. However, it was more cost efficient as you don't pay slaves. Also if they were to double as fighting men they would have all been armed with weapons/armour and training while also having a high chance of mutiny and desertion in battle. So I doubt it.

@@relpmat The issue on oarsmen doubling as fighters differed among the different Mediterranean powers. Venice was famous for using only free citizens as rowers, and these ciurni made excellent secondary fighters as long as they were not too tired from rowing. This also meant that Venetian galleys were mostly rowed "alla senzile", with just one man for every oar, which although requiring greater skill only achievable with well trained crews of free men also allowed for greater efficiency and stamina during a cruise. The Ottoman Turks also relied heavily on freemen as rowers, although their rowers were often conscripted villagers who were unlikely to join a fight. They also have their most important galleys manned by volunteer Arab rowers though, which make good light infantry like the Venetians. The Barbary pirates attached to the Ottomans generally had slaves rowing their bigger galleys, but their smaller galliots were often all rowed by fighting men. Spain, as well as her Italian client states and France, on the other hand relied the most on slave and convict rowers, who obviously could not be expected to fight. This meant that these western galleys were mostly rowed "alla scalocio", with multiple men per oar like shown in the video, which was less efficient over long periods of time and make them unsuitable for long cruise under oars. You can read more about it here: www.angelfire.com/ga4/guilmartin.com/Galley.html www.angelfire.com/ga4/guilmartin.com/Lepanto.html

I also wonder how they get close to the light cannon ship with more guns and range. This type of ship might use in a tight area where it needs high mobility to outmaneuver bigger ships and ram into a blind spot.

Unrelated, but ramming actually made a comeback during the second half of the 19th century because of iron clads and just how resistant to cannon fire they were, and a one off incident during a battle between the Austrians and Italians.

Yea they got the ramming part completely wrong. Ramming pretty much was out of the vogue by the Middle Ages, with galley battles being decided entirely by boarding actions. Later cannons came into the scene as well. Also yes by the 17th century galleys were very much secondary warships, used for coastal patrols, raids and as prestige vessels. The main fighting was done by sailing ships with guns.

Thanks for providing the historical insight regarding slaves as rowers, etc. In the video it is stated that 255 men would be required to row. I would think that the number of slaves would be greater than the number of guards. An uprising would have been a hard thing to quell unless discipline was maintained strictly. The slaves must have been shackled with strong chains and the guards must have whipped them without mercy.

Free rows was always ehe most common way of rowing in Venice I'm 1571 was no exception, maybe later it was all Prisoners or slave but at least till the late 16th centruy Venice prodomitly used free rowers

@@fnansjy456 Venice was the exception at Lepanto. Shortly afterward even Venice was using slave rowers, at least I've been told by a history professor. By then the Caravels and other sail dominant vessels made expensive difficult to manage rowers unnecessary.

Source that pre christian and pre Islamic Mediterranean used freemen?

@@Someone-by6jmAs far as the Greeks, Thucydides, "The History of the Peloponnese War." As to the Romans, from "Wikipedia" "The bulk of a galley's crew was formed by the rowers, the remiges (sing. remex) or eretai (sing. eretēs) in Greek. Despite popular perceptions, the Roman fleet, and ancient fleets in general, relied throughout their existence on rowers of free status, and not on galley slaves. Slaves were employed only in times of pressing manpower demands or extreme emergency, and even then, they were freed first."